NOT ALL OF THE RESEARCHERS HAVE ATTEMPTED to critique or modify the D&M IS
Success Model. Some have developed and proposed alternate frameworks for measuring
IS effectiveness. Grover et al. used an alternative, theoretically based perspective
(theory of organizational effectiveness) “to build a theoretically-based construct
space for IS effectiveness which complements and extends the [DeLone & McLean]
IS Success Model” [13, p. 178]. Based on unit-of-analysis and evaluation-type context
dimensions, the authors created six IS effectiveness categories. The six effectiveness
classes are infusion measures (i.e., “organizational impacts” in the D&M IS
Success Model), market measures (not covered in the D&M IS Success Model), economic
measures (i.e., “organizational impacts”), usage measures (i.e., “system use”),
perceptual measures (i.e., “user satisfaction”), and productivity measures (i.e., “individual
impact”). Their framework considers “system quality” and “information quality”
to be antecedent effectiveness constructs, whereas the D&M IS Success Model
considers them to be important dimensions of success itself. In summary, the Grover
et al. [13] IS effectiveness framework serves to validate the D&M IS Success Model from a theoretical perspective and suggests an area for extension, namely, market
impacts. We include market or industry impacts in our updated model described later
in this paper
NOT ALL OF THE RESEARCHERS HAVE ATTEMPTED to critique or modify the D&M ISSuccess Model. Some have developed and proposed alternate frameworks for measuringIS effectiveness. Grover et al. used an alternative, theoretically based perspective(theory of organizational effectiveness) “to build a theoretically-based constructspace for IS effectiveness which complements and extends the [DeLone & McLean]IS Success Model” [13, p. 178]. Based on unit-of-analysis and evaluation-type contextdimensions, the authors created six IS effectiveness categories. The six effectivenessclasses are infusion measures (i.e., “organizational impacts” in the D&M ISSuccess Model), market measures (not covered in the D&M IS Success Model), economicmeasures (i.e., “organizational impacts”), usage measures (i.e., “system use”),perceptual measures (i.e., “user satisfaction”), and productivity measures (i.e., “individualimpact”). Their framework considers “system quality” and “information quality”to be antecedent effectiveness constructs, whereas the D&M IS Success Modelconsiders them to be important dimensions of success itself. In summary, the Groveret al. [13] IS effectiveness framework serves to validate the D&M IS Success Model from a theoretical perspective and suggests an area for extension, namely, marketimpacts. We include market or industry impacts in our updated model described laterin this paper
การแปล กรุณารอสักครู่..
