Evaluating the success of large-scale, integrated information systems through the lens of IS-impact and IS-support

This study proceeds from a central interest in the importance of systematically evaluating operational large-scale integrated information systems (IS) in organisations. The study is conducted within the IS-Impact Research Track at Queensland University of Technology (QUT). The goal of the IS-Impact Track is, "to develop the most widely employed model for benchmarking information systems in organizations for the joint benefit of both research and practice" (Gable et al, 2009). The track espouses programmatic research having the principles of incrementalism, tenacity, holism and generalisability through replication and extension research strategies. Track efforts have yielded the bicameral IS-Impact measurement model; the ‘impact’ half includes Organisational-Impact and Individual-Impact dimensions; the ‘quality’ half includes System-Quality and Information-Quality dimensions. Akin to Gregor’s (2006) analytic theory, the ISImpact model is conceptualised as a formative, multidimensional index and is defined as "a measure at a point in time, of the stream of net benefits from the IS, to date and anticipated, as perceived by all key-user-groups" (Gable et al., 2008, p: 381). The study adopts the IS-Impact model (Gable, et al., 2008) as its core theory base. Prior work within the IS-Impact track has been consciously constrained to Financial IS for their homogeneity. This study adopts a context-extension strategy (Berthon et al., 2002) with the aim "to further validate and extend the IS-Impact measurement model in a new context - i.e. a different IS - Human Resources (HR)". The overarching research question is: "How can the impacts of large-scale integrated HR applications be effectively and efficiently benchmarked?" This managerial question (Cooper & Emory, 1995) decomposes into two more specific research questions – In the new HR context: (RQ1): "Is the IS-Impact model complete?" (RQ2): "Is the ISImpact model valid as a 1st-order formative, 2nd-order formative multidimensional construct?" The study adhered to the two-phase approach of Gable et al. (2008) to hypothesise and validate a measurement model. The initial ‘exploratory phase’ employed a zero base qualitative approach to re-instantiating the IS-Impact model in the HR context. The subsequent ‘confirmatory phase’ sought to validate the resultant hypothesised measurement model against newly gathered quantitative data. The unit of analysis for the study is the application, ‘ALESCO’, an integrated large-scale HR application implemented at Queensland University of Technology (QUT), a large Australian university (with approximately 40,000 students and 5000 staff). Target respondents of both study phases were ALESCO key-user-groups: strategic users, management users, operational users and technical users, who directly use ALESCO or its outputs. An open-ended, qualitative survey was employed in the exploratory phase, with the objective of exploring the completeness and applicability of the IS-Impact model’s dimensions and measures in the new context, and to conceptualise any resultant model changes to be operationalised in the confirmatory phase. Responses from 134 ALESCO users to the main survey question, "What do you consider have been the impacts of the ALESCO (HR) system in your division/department since its implementation?" were decomposed into 425 ‘impact citations.’ Citation mapping using a deductive (top-down) content analysis approach instantiated all dimensions and measures of the IS-Impact model, evidencing its content validity in the new context. Seeking to probe additional (perhaps negative) impacts; the survey included the additional open question "In your opinion, what can be done better to improve the ALESCO (HR) system?" Responses to this question decomposed into a further 107 citations which in the main did not map to IS-Impact, but rather coalesced around the concept of IS-Support. Deductively drawing from relevant literature, and working inductively from the unmapped citations, the new ‘IS-Support’ construct, including the four formative dimensions (i) training, (ii) documentation, (iii) assistance, and (iv) authorisation (each having reflective measures), was defined as: "a measure at a point in time, of the support, the [HR] information system key-user groups receive to increase their capabilities in utilising the system." Thus, a further goal of the study became validation of the IS-Support construct, suggesting the research question (RQ3): "Is IS-Support valid as a 1st-order reflective, 2nd-order formative multidimensional construct?" With the aim of validating IS-Impact within its nomological net (identification through structural relations), as in prior work, Satisfaction was hypothesised as its immediate consequence. The IS-Support construct having derived from a question intended to probe IS-Impacts, too was hypothesised as antecedent to Satisfaction, thereby suggesting the research question (RQ4): "What is the relative contribution of IS-Impact and IS-Support to Satisfaction?" With the goal of testing the above research questions, IS-Impact, IS-Support and Satisfaction were operationalised in a quantitative survey instrument. Partial least squares (PLS) structural equation modelling employing 221 valid responses largely evidenced the validity of the commencing IS-Impact model in the HR context. ISSupport too was validated as operationalised (including 11 reflective measures of its 4 formative dimensions). IS-Support alone explained 36% of Satisfaction; IS-Impact alone 70%; in combination both explaining 71% with virtually all influence of ISSupport subsumed by IS-Impact. Key study contributions to research include: (1) validation of IS-Impact in the HR context, (2) validation of a newly conceptualised IS-Support construct as important antecedent of Satisfaction, and (3) validation of the redundancy of IS-Support when gauging IS-Impact. The study also makes valuable contributions to practice, the research track and the sponsoring organisation.

Extending and validating the is-impact model in Saudi Arabia : accounting for computer network quality

Organizations from every industry sector seek to enhance their business performance and competitiveness through the deployment of contemporary information systems (IS), such as Enterprise Systems (ERP). Investments in ERP are complex and costly, attracting scrutiny and pressure to justify their cost. Thus, IS researchers highlight the need for systematic evaluation of information system success, or impact, which has resulted in the introduction of varied models for evaluating information systems. One of these systematic measurement approaches is the IS-Impact Model introduced by a team of researchers at Queensland University of technology (QUT) (Gable, Sedera, & Chan, 2008). The IS-Impact Model is conceptualized as a formative, multidimensional index that consists of four dimensions. Gable et al. (2008) define IS-Impact as "a measure at a point in time, of the stream of net benefits from the IS, to date and anticipated, as perceived by all key-user-groups" (p.381). The IT Evaluation Research Program (ITE-Program) at QUT has grown the IS-Impact Research Track with the central goal of conducting further studies to enhance and extend the IS-Impact Model. The overall goal of the IS-Impact research track at QUT is "to develop the most widely employed model for benchmarking information systems in organizations for the joint benefit of both research and practice" (Gable, 2009). In order to achieve that, the IS-Impact research track advocates programmatic research having the principles of tenacity, holism, and generalizability through extension research strategies. This study was conducted within the IS-Impact Research Track, to further generalize the IS-Impact Model by extending it to the Saudi Arabian context. According to Hofsted (2012), the national culture of Saudi Arabia is significantly different from the Australian national culture making the Saudi Arabian culture an interesting context for testing the external validity of the IS-Impact Model. The study re-visits the IS-Impact Model from the ground up. Rather than assume the existing instrument is valid in the new context, or simply assess its validity through quantitative data collection, the study takes a qualitative, inductive approach to re-assessing the necessity and completeness of existing dimensions and measures. This is done in two phases: Exploratory Phase and Confirmatory Phase. The exploratory phase addresses the first research question of the study "Is the IS-Impact Model complete and able to capture the impact of information systems in Saudi Arabian Organization?". The content analysis, used to analyze the Identification Survey data, indicated that 2 of the 37 measures of the IS-Impact Model are not applicable for the Saudi Arabian Context. Moreover, no new measures or dimensions were identified, evidencing the completeness and content validity of the IS-Impact Model. In addition, the Identification Survey data suggested several concepts related to IS-Impact, the most prominent of which was "Computer Network Quality" (CNQ). The literature supported the existence of a theoretical link between IS-Impact and CNQ (CNQ is viewed as an antecedent of IS-Impact). With the primary goal of validating the IS-Impact model within its extended nomological network, CNQ was introduced to the research model. The Confirmatory Phase addresses the second research question of the study "Is the Extended IS-Impact Model Valid as a Hierarchical Multidimensional Formative Measurement Model?". The objective of the Confirmatory Phase was to test the validity of IS-Impact Model and CNQ Model. To achieve that, IS-Impact, CNQ, and IS-Satisfaction were operationalized in a survey instrument, and then the research model was assessed by employing the Partial Least Squares (PLS) approach. The CNQ model was validated as a formative model. Similarly, the IS-Impact Model was validated as a hierarchical multidimensional formative construct. However, the analysis indicated that one of the IS-Impact Model indicators was insignificant and can be removed from the model. Thus, the resulting Extended IS-Impact Model consists of 4 dimensions and 34 measures. Finally, the structural model was also assessed against two aspects: explanatory and predictive power. The analysis revealed that the path coefficient between CNQ and IS-Impact is significant with t-value= (4.826) and relatively strong with â = (0.426) with CNQ explaining 18% of the variance in IS-Impact. These results supported the hypothesis that CNQ is antecedent of IS-Impact. The study demonstrates that the quality of Computer Network affects the quality of the Enterprise System (ERP) and consequently the impacts of the system. Therefore, practitioners should pay attention to the Computer Network quality. Similarly, the path coefficient between IS-Impact and IS-Satisfaction was significant t-value = (17.79) and strong â = (0.744), with IS-Impact alone explaining 55% of the variance in Satisfaction, consistent with results of the original IS-Impact study (Gable et al., 2008). The research contributions include: (a) supporting the completeness and validity of IS-Impact Model as a Hierarchical Multi-dimensional Formative Measurement Model in the Saudi Arabian context, (b) operationalizing Computer Network Quality as conceptualized in the ITU-T Recommendation E.800 (ITU-T, 1993), (c) validating CNQ as a formative measurement model and as an antecedent of IS Impact, and (d) conceptualizing and validating IS-Satisfaction as a reflective measurement model and as an immediate consequence of IS Impact. The CNQ model provides a framework to perceptually measure Computer Network Quality from multiple perspectives. The CNQ model features an easy-to-understand, easy-to-use, and economical survey instrument.

User expertise in contemporary information systems : conceptualization, measurement and application

The development of user expertise is a strategic imperative for organizations in hyper-competitive markets. This paper conceptualizes opreationalises and validates user expertise in contemporary Information Systems (IS) as a formative, multidimensional index. Such a validated and widely accepted index would facilitate progression of past research on user competence and efficacy of IS to complex contemporary IS, while at the same time providing a benchmark for organizations to track their user expertise. The validation involved three separate studies, including exploratory and confirmatory phases, using data from 244 respondents.

Participation index : improved measure of transport related social exclusion?

Although transport related social exclusion has been identified through zonal accessibility measures in the recent past, the debate has shifted from zonal to individual level measures. One way to identify disadvantaged individuals is to measure their size of participation in society (activity spaces). After reviewing existing literature, this paper has found two approaches to measure the activity spaces. One approach is based on the time-geographic potential path area (PPA) concept. The size of the PPA has largely been used as an indicator to the size of potential activity spaces and consequently individual accessibility. The limitations of the PPA concept have been identified in this paper and it is argued cannot be applied as a measure of social exclusion. The other approach is based on individuals’ actual travel activity participation called actual activity spaces. The size of actual activity spaces possesses a good potential measure of social exclusion. However, the indicators to measure the size of actual activity spaces are multidimensional representing the different aspects of social exclusion. The development of a unified approach has therefore been found to be important. This paper has developed a participation index (PI) using the different dimensions of actual activity spaces encountered. A framework has also been developed to operationalise the concept in GIS. The framework, on the one hand, will visualize individuals’ actual travel behaviour in real geographic space; on the other hand, it will calculate the size of their participation in society.

Arabic translation, adaptation and modification of the dialysis symptom index for chronic kidney disease stages four and five

Background Symptom burden in chronic kidney disease (CKD) is poorly understood. To date, the majority of research focuses on single symptoms and there is a lack of suitable multidimensional symptom measures. The purpose of this study was to modify, translate, cross-culturally adapt and psychometrically analyse the Dialysis Symptom Index (DSI). Methods The study methods involved four phases: modification, translation, pilot-testing with a bilingual non-CKD sample and then psychometric testing with the target population. Content validity was assessed using an expert panel. Inter-rater agreement, test-retest reliability and Cronbach’s alpha coefficient were calculated to demonstrate reliability of the modified DSI. Discriminative and convergent validity were assessed to demonstrate construct validity. Results Content validity index during translation was 0.98. In the pilot study with 25 bilingual students a moderate to perfect agreement (Kappa statistic = 0.60-1.00) was found between English and Arabic versions of the modified DSI. The main study recruited 433 patients CKD with stages 4 and 5. The modified DSI was able to discriminate between non-dialysis and dialysis groups (p < 0.001) and demonstrated convergent validity with domains of the Kidney Disease Quality of Life short form. Excellent test-retest and internal consistency (Cronbach’s α = 0.91) reliability were also demonstrated. Conclusion The Arabic version of the modified DSI demonstrated good psychometric properties, measures the multidimensional nature of symptoms and can be used to assess symptom burden at different stages of CKD. The modified instrument, renamed the CKD Symptom Burden Index (CKD-SBI), should encourage greater clinical and research attention to symptom burden in CKD.

High body mass index is not a barrier to physical activity: Analysis of international rugby players' anthropometric data

Recent data indicate that levels of overweight and obesity are increasing at an alarming rate throughout the world. At a population level (and commonly to assess individual health risk), the prevalence of overweight and obesity is calculated using cut-offs of the Body Mass Index (BMI) derived from height and weight. Similarly, the BMI is also used to classify individuals and to provide a notional indication of potential health risk. It is likely that epidemiologic surveys that are reliant on BMI as a measure of adiposity will overestimate the number of individuals in the overweight (and slightly obese) categories. This tendency to misclassify individuals may be more pronounced in athletic populations or groups in which the proportion of more active individuals is higher. This differential is most pronounced in sports where it is advantageous to have a high BMI (but not necessarily high fatness). To illustrate this point we calculated the BMIs of international professional rugby players from the four teams involved in the semi-finals of the 2003 Rugby Union World Cup. According to the World Health Organisation (WHO) cut-offs for BMI, approximately 65% of the players were classified as overweight and approximately 25% as obese. These findings demonstrate that a high BMI is commonplace (and a potentially desirable attribute for sport performance) in professional rugby players. An unanswered question is what proportion of the wider population, classified as overweight (or obese) according to the BMI, is misclassified according to both fatness and health risk? It is evident that being overweight should not be an obstacle to a physically active lifestyle. Similarly, a reliance on BMI alone may misclassify a number of individuals who might otherwise have been automatically considered fat and/or unfit.