The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
A Comprehensive Model for Assessing the Quality and Productivity of the Information Systems Function: Toward a Theory for Information Systems Assessment
Abstract
Information Systems (IS) managers are under increasing pressure to justify the value and contribution of IS expenditures to the productivity, quality, and competitiveness of the organization. This paper examines the need for IS assessment and suggests a comprehensive IS assessment framework linked to organizational performance using existing IS assessment theory as a base and incorporating measurement concepts from other disciplines. The existing models of IS success are updated to include the emerging IS success dimensions of service quality and work group impact and provide a comprehensive method for organizing the various measures of IS success. In addition, many new measures from recent research are presented to supplement the lists supplied by previous research. Additional research is suggested to advance the IS assessment contingency theory. Such a theory has the potential to contribute to the quality and productivity of the IS function and the larger organization by providing feedback to manage and improve the IS function to better meet the needs of the organization.Request access from your librarian to read this article's full text.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
SERVQUAL: A multiple-Item Scale for measuring consumer perceptions of service quality
Parasuraman, A., Berry, L. L., & Zeithaml, V. A. (1988) · Zenodo · doi:10.5281/zenodo.14579729 · Cited by 21,118
Information Systems Success: The Quest for the Dependent Variable
DeLone, W. H., & McLean, E. R. (1992) · Information Systems Research · doi:10.1287/isre.3.1.60 · Cited by 10,697
The productivity paradox of information technology
Brynjolfsson, E. (1993) · Communications of the ACM · doi:10.1145/163298.163309 · Cited by 2,604
An Assessment of the Contingency Theory of Management Information Systems
Weill, P., & Olson, M. H. (1989) · Journal of Management Information Systems · doi:10.1080/07421222.1989.11517849 · Cited by 351
Cited by
The DeLone and McLean Model of Information Systems Success: A Ten-Year Update
(2003) · Journal of Management Information Systems · doi:10.1080/07421222.2003.11045748 · Cited by 11,791
Assessing the Validity of IS Success Models: An Empirical Test and Theoretical Analysis
Rai, A., Lang, S. S., & Welker, R. B. (2002) · Information Systems Research · doi:10.1287/isre.13.1.50.96 · Cited by 1,611
Garrison, G., Wakefield, R. L., & Kim, S. (2015) · International Journal of Information Management · doi:10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2015.03.001 · Cited by 250
Evaluating the use and impact of Web 2.0 technologies in local government
Sivarajah, U., Irani, Z., & Weerakkody, V. (2015) · Government Information Quarterly · doi:10.1016/j.giq.2015.06.004 · Cited by 152
Application of Web 2.0 Technologies in E-Government: A United Kingdom Case Study
Sivarajah, U., Irani, Z., & Jones, S. (2014) · 2014 47th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences · doi:10.1109/hicss.2014.280 · Cited by 25
Metadata
- Authors
- Myers, B. L., Kappelman, L. A., & Prybutok, V. R.
- Venue
- Information Resources Management Journal
- Publisher
- IGI Global
- Published
- 1997-01
- Volume
- 10
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 6-26
- ISSN
- 1040-1628 (ISSN-L)
- 1533-7979
- OpenAlex
- W2082529226
- Cited by
- 369
- References
- 4
- FWCI
- 7.69
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.