Linking Theory and Practice: Performing a Reality Check on a Model of IS Success

The issue of ‘rigour vs. relevance’ in IS research has generated an intense, heated debate for over a decade. It is possible to identify, however, only a limited number of contributions on how to increase the relevance of IS research without compromising its rigour. Based on a lifecycle view of IS research, we propose the notion of ‘reality checks’ in order to review IS research outcomes in the light of actual industry demands. We assume that five barriers impact the efficient transfer of IS research outcomes; they are lack of awareness, lack of understandability, lack of relevance, lack of timeliness, and lack of applicability. In seeking to understand the effect of these barriers on the transfer of mature IS research into practice, we used focus groups. We chose DeLone and McLean’s IS success model as our stimulus because it is one of the more widely researched areas of IS.

Conceptualising use for information systems (IS) success

This thesis conceptualises Use for IS (Information Systems) success. While Use in this study describes the extent to which an IS is incorporated into the user’s processes or tasks, success of an IS is the measure of the degree to which the person using the system is better off. For IS success, the conceptualisation of Use offers new perspectives on describing and measuring Use. We test the philosophies of the conceptualisation using empirical evidence in an Enterprise Systems (ES) context. Results from the empirical analysis contribute insights to the existing body of knowledge on the role of Use and demonstrate Use as an important factor and measure of IS success. System Use is a central theme in IS research. For instance, Use is regarded as an important dimension of IS success. Despite its recognition, the Use dimension of IS success reportedly suffers from an all too simplistic definition, misconception, poor specification of its complex nature, and an inadequacy of measurement approaches (Bokhari 2005; DeLone and McLean 2003; Zigurs 1993). Given the above, Burton-Jones and Straub (2006) urge scholars to revisit the concept of system Use, consider a stronger theoretical treatment, and submit the construct to further validation in its intended nomological net. On those considerations, this study re-conceptualises Use for IS success. The new conceptualisation adopts a work-process system-centric lens and draws upon the characteristics of modern system types, key user groups and their information needs, and the incorporation of IS in work processes. With these characteristics, the definition of Use and how it may be measured is systematically established. Use is conceptualised as a second-order measurement construct determined by three sub-dimensions: attitude of its users, depth, and amount of Use. The construct is positioned in a modified IS success research model, in an attempt to demonstrate its central role in determining IS success in an ES setting. A two-stage mixed-methods research design—incorporating a sequential explanatory strategy—was adopted to collect empirical data and to test the research model. The first empirical investigation involved an experiment and a survey of ES end users at a leading tertiary education institute in Australia. The second, a qualitative investigation, involved a series of interviews with real-world operational managers in large Indian private-sector companies to canvass their day-to-day experiences with ES. The research strategy adopted has a stronger quantitative leaning. The survey analysis results demonstrate the aptness of Use as an antecedent and a consequence of IS success, and furthermore, as a mediator between the quality of IS and the impacts of IS on individuals. Qualitative data analysis on the other hand, is used to derive a framework for classifying the diversity of ES Use behaviour. The qualitative results establish that workers Use IS in their context to orientate, negotiate, or innovate. The implications are twofold. For research, this study contributes to cumulative IS success knowledge an approach for defining, contextualising, measuring, and validating Use. For practice, research findings not only provide insights for educators when incorporating ES for higher education, but also demonstrate how operational managers incorporate ES into their work practices. Research findings leave the way open for future, larger-scale research into how industry practitioners interact with an ES to complete their work in varied organisational environments.

Understanding the phenomenon of IS success in China through the lens of the IS-Impact model

This 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, 2006). IS-Impact 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 Sedera and Chan, 2008). Track efforts have yielded the bicameral IS-Impact measurement model; the “impact” half includes Organizational-Impact and Individual-Impact dimensions; the “quality” half includes System-Quality and Information-Quality dimensions. The IS-Impact model, by design, is intended to be robust, simple and generalizable, to yield results that are comparable across time, stakeholders, different systems and system contexts. The model and measurement approach employ perceptual measures and an instrument that is relevant to key stakeholder groups, thereby enabling the combination or comparison of stakeholder perspectives. Such a validated and widely accepted IS-Impact measurement model has both academic and practical value. It facilitates systematic operationalization of a main dependent variable in research (IS-Impact), which can also serve as an important independent variable. For IS management practice it provides a means to benchmark and track the performance of information systems in use. The objective of this study is to develop a Mandarin version IS-Impact model, encompassing a list of China-specific IS-Impact measures, aiding in a better understanding of the IS-Impact phenomenon in a Chinese organizational context. The IS-Impact model provides a much needed theoretical guidance for this investigation of ES and ES impacts in a Chinese context. The appropriateness and soundness of employing the IS-Impact model as a theoretical foundation are evident: the model originated from a sound theory of IS Success (1992), developed through rigorous validation, and also derived in the context of Enterprise Systems. Based on the IS-Impact model, this study investigates a number of research questions (RQs). Firstly, the research investigated what essential impacts have been derived from ES by Chinese users and organizations [RQ1]. Secondly, we investigate which salient quality features of ES are perceived by Chinese users [RQ2]. Thirdly, we seek to answer whether the quality and impacts measures are sufficient to assess ES-success in general [RQ3]. Lastly, the study attempts to address whether the IS-Impact measurement model is appropriate for Chinese organizations in terms of evaluating their ES [RQ4]. An open-ended, qualitative identification survey was employed in the study. A large body of short text data was gathered from 144 Chinese users and 633 valid IS-Impact statements were generated from the data set. A generally inductive approach was applied in the qualitative data analysis. Rigorous qualitative data coding resulted in 50 first-order categories with 6 second-order categories that were grounded from the context of Chinese organization. The six second-order categories are: 1) System Quality; 2) Information Quality; 3) Individual Impacts;4) Organizational Impacts; 5) User Quality and 6) IS Support Quality. The final research finding of the study is the contextualized Mandarin version IS-Impact measurement model that includes 38 measures organized into 4 dimensions: System Quality, information Quality, Individual Impacts and Organizational Impacts. The study also proposed two conceptual models to harmonize the IS-Impact model and the two emergent constructs – User Quality and IS Support Quality by drawing on previous IS effectiveness literatures and the Work System theory proposed by Alter (1999) respectively. The study is significant as it is the first effort that empirically and comprehensively investigates IS-Impact in China. Specifically, the research contributions can be classified into theoretical contributions and practical contributions. From the theoretical perspective, through qualitative evidence, the study test and consolidate IS-Impact measurement model in terms of the quality of robustness, completeness and generalizability. The unconventional research design exhibits creativity of the study. The theoretical model does not work as a top-down a priori seeking for evidence demonstrating its credibility; rather, the study allows a competitive model to emerge from the bottom-up and open-coding analysis. Besides, the study is an example extending and localizing pre-existing theory developed in Western context when the theory is introduced to a different context. On the other hand, from the practical perspective, It is first time to introduce prominent research findings in field of IS Success to Chinese academia and practitioner. This study provides a guideline for Chinese organizations to assess their Enterprise System, and leveraging IT investment in the future. As a research effort in ITPS track, this study contributes the research team with an alternative operationalization of the dependent variable. The future research can take on the contextualized Mandarin version IS-Impact framework as a theoretical a priori model, further quantitative and empirical testing its validity.

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.

Formative and reflective measurement and validation mismatch in survey research : an archival analysis of information systems success constructs 1985-2007

The generic IS-success constructs first identified by DeLone and McLean (1992) continue to be widely employed in research. Yet, recent work by Petter et al (2007) has cast doubt on the validity of many mainstream constructs employed in IS research over the past 3 decades; critiquing the almost universal conceptualization and validation of these constructs as reflective when in many studies the measures appear to have been implicitly operationalized as formative. Cited examples of proper specification of the Delone and McLean constructs are few, particularly in light of their extensive employment in IS research. This paper introduces a four-stage formative construct development framework: Conceive > Operationalize > Respond > Validate (CORV). Employing the CORV framework in an archival analysis of research published in top outlets 1985-2007, the paper explores the extent of possible problems with past IS research due to potential misspecification of the four application-related success dimensions: Individual-Impact, Organizational-Impact, System-Quality and Information-Quality. Results suggest major concerns where there is a mismatch of the Respond and Validate stages. A general dearth of attention to the Operationalize and Respond stages in methodological writings is also observed.

Validating the IS-Impact model : two exploratory case studies in China and Malaysia

For over a decade, IT expenditure in China and Malaysia has shown a significant increase, as organisations in these countries are increasingly dependent on information systems (IS) for achieving strategic advantages and business benefits. However, there have been numerous reports of dissatisfaction with IS, and in some cases the effectiveness of the information systems have yet to be reviewed. Two exploratory case studies reported in this paper are the first phase of an overall research in validating the IS-Impact model introduced by Gable, Sedera and Chan in two countries: China and Malaysia. This validation research aims to produce a standard measuring model across different contexts. The purpose of this paper is to present preliminary findings from two exploratory case studies, attempt to test the feasibility of the research design and to investigate applicability of the IS-Impact model in Chinese and Malaysian organisations. Twenty-nine respondents from a Chinese private company and seventeen respondents from a state government in Malaysia were involved in these studies. Findings indicated that most of existing IS-Impact measures are applicable in the study contexts, however, there are some new measures informed by the respondents. Feedback from the case studies also suggested necessary modifications to the Mandarin instrument.

Assessing information systems success models : empirical comparison (Research in Progress)

Information System (IS) success may be the most arguable and important dependent variable in the IS field. The purpose of the present study is to address IS success by empirically assess and compare DeLone and McLean’s (1992) and Gable’s et al. (2008) models of IS success in Australian Universities context. The two models have some commonalities and several important distinctions. Both models integrate and interrelate multiple dimensions of IS success. Hence, it would be useful to compare the models to see which is superior; as it is not clear how IS researchers should respond to this controversy.

Extending the IS-Impact Model into the higher education sector

The study addresses known limitations of what may be the most important dependent variable in Information Systems (IS) research; IS-Success or IS-Impact. The study is expected to force a deeper understanding of the broad notions of IS success and impact. The aims of the research are to: (1) enhance the robustness and minimize limitations of the IS-Impact model, and (2) introduce and operationalise a more rigorously validated IS Impact measurement model to Universities, as a reliable model for evaluating different Administrative Systems. In extending and further generalizing the IS-Impact model, the study will address contemporary validation issues.

Validating the IS-Impact Model At Queensland University Of Technology (QUT): Part A

The overall research aims to develop a standardised instrument to measure the impacts resulting from contemporary Information Systems (IS). The research adopts the IS-Impact measurement model, introduced by Gable et al, (2008), as its theoretical foundation, and applies the extension strategy described by Berthon et al. (2002); extending both theory and the context, where the new context is the Human Resource (HR) system. The research will be conducted in two phases, the exploratory phase and the specification phase. The purpose of this paper is to present the findings of the exploratory phase. 134 respondents from a major Australian University were involved in this phase. The findings have supported most of the existing IS-Impact model’s credibility. However, some textual data may suggest new measures for the IS-Impact model, while the low response rate or the averting of some may suggest the elimination of some measures from the model.

Validating the IS-Impact model in Australasian universities

This paper presents a novel study that aims to contribute to understanding the phenomenon of Enterprise Systems (ES) evaluation in Australasian universities. The proposed study addresses known limitations of arguably the most significant dependent variable in the Information System (IS) field - IS Success or IS-Impact. This study adopts the IS-Impact measurement model, reported by Gable et al. (2008), as the primary commencing theory-base and applies research extension strategy described by Berthon et al. (2002); extending both theory and the context. This study employs a longitudinal, multi-method research design, with two interrelated phases – exploratory and confirmatory. The exploratory phase aims to investigate the applicability and sufficiency of the IS-Impact dimensions and measures in the new context. The confirmatory phase will gather quantitative data to statistically validate IS-Impact model as a formative index.

IS-impact utility and intuitiveness : a rigorous approach to relevance

The study proposes to test the ‘IS-Impact’ index as Analytic Theory (AT). To (a) methodically evaluate the ‘relevance’ qualities of IS-Impact; namely, Utility & Intuitiveness. In so doing, to (b) document an exemplar of ‘a rigorous approach to relevance’, while (c) treating the overarching study as a higher-order case study having AT as the unit-of-analysis, and assessing adequacy of the 6 AT qualities, both for IS-Impact and for similar taxonomies. Also to (d) look beyond IS-Impact to other forms of Design Science, considering the generality of the AT qualities; and (e) further validating IS-Impact in new system organisation contexts taking account of contemporary understandings of construct theorisation, operationalization and validation.

Validating the is-impact model in the Malaysian public sector

This research is one of several ongoing studies conducted within the IT Professional Services (ITPS) research programme at Queensland University of Technology (QUT). In 2003, ITPS introduced the IS-Impact model, a measurement model for measuring information systems success from the viewpoint of multiple stakeholders. The model, along with its instrument, is robust, simple, yet generalisable, and yields results that are comparable across time, stakeholders, different systems and system contexts. The IS-Impact model is defined as “a measure at a point in time, of the stream of net benefits from the Information System (IS), to date and anticipated, as perceived by all key-user-groups”. The model represents four dimensions, which are ‘Individual Impact’, ‘Organizational Impact’, ‘Information Quality’ and ‘System Quality’. The two Impact dimensions measure the up-to-date impact of the evaluated system, while the remaining two Quality dimensions act as proxies for probable future impacts (Gable, Sedera & Chan, 2008). To fulfil the goal of ITPS, “to develop the most widely employed model” this research re-validates and extends the IS-Impact model in a new context. This method/context-extension research aims to test the generalisability of the model by addressing known limitations of the model. One of the limitations of the model relates to the extent of external validity of the model. In order to gain wide acceptance, a model should be consistent and work well in different contexts. The IS-Impact model, however, was only validated in the Australian context, and packaged software was chosen as the IS understudy. Thus, this study is concerned with whether the model can be applied in another different context. Aiming for a robust and standardised measurement model that can be used across different contexts, this research re-validates and extends the IS-Impact model and its instrument to public sector organisations in Malaysia. The overarching research question (managerial question) of this research is “How can public sector organisations in Malaysia measure the impact of information systems systematically and effectively?” With two main objectives, the managerial question is broken down into two specific research questions. The first research question addresses the applicability (relevance) of the dimensions and measures of the IS-Impact model in the Malaysian context. Moreover, this research question addresses the completeness of the model in the new context. Initially, this research assumes that the dimensions and measures of the IS-Impact model are sufficient for the new context. However, some IS researchers suggest that the selection of measures needs to be done purposely for different contextual settings (DeLone & McLean, 1992, Rai, Lang & Welker, 2002). Thus, the first research question is as follows, “Is the IS-Impact model complete for measuring the impact of IS in Malaysian public sector organisations?” [RQ1]. The IS-Impact model is a multidimensional model that consists of four dimensions or constructs. Each dimension is represented by formative measures or indicators. Formative measures are known as composite variables because these measures make up or form the construct, or, in this case, the dimension in the IS-Impact model. These formative measures define different aspects of the dimension, thus, a measurement model of this kind needs to be tested not just on the structural relationship between the constructs but also the validity of each measure. In a previous study, the IS-Impact model was validated using formative validation techniques, as proposed in the literature (i.e., Diamantopoulos and Winklhofer, 2001, Diamantopoulos and Siguaw, 2006, Petter, Straub and Rai, 2007). However, there is potential for improving the validation testing of the model by adding more criterion or dependent variables. This includes identifying a consequence of the IS-Impact construct for the purpose of validation. Moreover, a different approach is employed in this research, whereby the validity of the model is tested using the Partial Least Squares (PLS) method, a component-based structural equation modelling (SEM) technique. Thus, the second research question addresses the construct validation of the IS-Impact model; “Is the IS-Impact model valid as a multidimensional formative construct?” [RQ2]. This study employs two rounds of surveys, each having a different and specific aim. The first is qualitative and exploratory, aiming to investigate the applicability and sufficiency of the IS-Impact dimensions and measures in the new context. This survey was conducted in a state government in Malaysia. A total of 77 valid responses were received, yielding 278 impact statements. The results from the qualitative analysis demonstrate the applicability of most of the IS-Impact measures. The analysis also shows a significant new measure having emerged from the context. This new measure was added as one of the System Quality measures. The second survey is a quantitative survey that aims to operationalise the measures identified from the qualitative analysis and rigorously validate the model. This survey was conducted in four state governments (including the state government that was involved in the first survey). A total of 254 valid responses were used in the data analysis. Data was analysed using structural equation modelling techniques, following the guidelines for formative construct validation, to test the validity and reliability of the constructs in the model. This study is the first research that extends the complete IS-Impact model in a new context that is different in terms of nationality, language and the type of information system (IS). The main contribution of this research is to present a comprehensive, up-to-date IS-Impact model, which has been validated in the new context. The study has accomplished its purpose of testing the generalisability of the IS-Impact model and continuing the IS evaluation research by extending it in the Malaysian context. A further contribution is a validated Malaysian language IS-Impact measurement instrument. It is hoped that the validated Malaysian IS-Impact instrument will encourage related IS research in Malaysia, and that the demonstrated model validity and generalisability will encourage a cumulative tradition of research previously not possible. The study entailed several methodological improvements on prior work, including: (1) new criterion measures for the overall IS-Impact construct employed in ‘identification through measurement relations’; (2) a stronger, multi-item ‘Satisfaction’ construct, employed in ‘identification through structural relations’; (3) an alternative version of the main survey instrument in which items are randomized (rather than blocked) for comparison with the main survey data, in attention to possible common method variance (no significant differences between these two survey instruments were observed); (4) demonstrates a validation process of formative indexes of a multidimensional, second-order construct (existing examples mostly involved unidimensional constructs); (5) testing the presence of suppressor effects that influence the significance of some measures and dimensions in the model; and (6) demonstrates the effect of an imbalanced number of measures within a construct to the contribution power of each dimension in a multidimensional model.

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.