TABLES 1 THROUGH 6 IN THE 1992 ARTICLE [8, pp. 65–83] listed the numerous success
measures within each success category that had been used in previous empirical
studies. We called for “a significant reduction in the number of dependent variable
measures so that research results can be compared” [8, p. 80]. Since then, several
studies have developed and tested survey instruments, which measure one or more of
these six success constructs.
Based on a comprehensive literature review, Mirani and Lederer [32] developed a
33-item instrument to measure organizational benefits derived from IS projects. Their
measurement framework consisted of three categories of organizational benefits: strategic,
informational, and transactional. The proposed instrument was empirically tested
in a survey of 200 IS managers and systems analysts. The results showed strong
evidence of discriminant validity. Further analysis identified three subdimensions for
each of the benefit categories. Strategic benefits were further subdivided into competitive
advantage, alignment, and customer-relations benefits. Informational benefits
included information access, information quality, and information flexibility
subdimensions; and finally, transactional benefits included communication efficiency,
systems development efficiency, and business efficiency subdimensions. We believe
that validated instruments, such as this, that measure IS benefits are an important
contribution to IS success measurement.
In a conceptual paper, Martinsons et al. [30] suggest an adaptation of the Kaplan and
Norton “Balanced Scorecard” (BSC) [23] approach for the measurement of organizational
performance. The BSC consists of four performance perspectives: the financial
perspective, the customer perspective, the internal business process perspective, and
the learning and growth perspective. Applied to an IS context, the authors propose a
balanced IS scorecard to include a business-value measurement dimension, a userorientation
dimension, an internal-process dimension, and a future-readiness dimension.
The authors then suggest specific measures related to each IS BSC dimension.