IS Success Evaluation: Theory and Practice



The assessment of Information Systems (IS) effectiveness and its contribution of business value to the firm has been widely debated among both business scholars and practitioners. However a robust and complete model with which to evaluate IS Business Value that practitioners can apply in their companies does not exist. As scholars’ research has been unable to define quantitative and perceptual measures to assess the efficiency of IS, the issue of evaluating IS effectiveness remains unresolved. This lack of knowledge increases the difficulties companies face in the evaluation of IS Performance and in closing the perceptual gap that exists between IS management capability and the management capability of other company departments. Notwithstanding these challenges, the criticality of the issue leads companies to launch IS Performance Management Systems (PMS) implementations even though they cannot appropriately evaluate the results in economic terms. Firms are therefore very interested in improving their understanding of IS PMS design, implementation and evaluation processes. Furthermore, they seek guidance to help them during the critical challenges they will face and to exploit experiences and knowledge of other firms. This chapter contributes to the knowledge in the IS PMS field by bringing evidences and witnesses from the reality and providing companies with recommendations to facilitate the design and implementation processes and to improve their chances of success.


Business Process Information System Project Team Management Control System Balance Scorecard 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Bourne M, Franco M, Wilkes J (2003) Corporate Performance Management. Measuring Business Excellence 3(3):15-21CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ferreira A, Otley D (2009) The design and use of performance management systems: An extended framework for analysis. Management Accounting Research 20(4):263-282CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Otley D (1999) Performance management: a framework for management control systems research. Management Accounting Research 10:363–382CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Kaplan R (2009) Measuring Performance (Pocket Mentor). Harvard Business Press, BostonGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Miranda S (2004) Beyond BI: Benefiting from Corporate Performance Management Solutions. Financial Executive 20(2): 58–61Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Perego A (2006) IS Performance Management e misure dell’IT in azienda. Proceedings of the Xth Italian Chapter of the Association for Information Systems ItAIS, Milan, Italy, 26th-27th OctoberGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Gartner (2009) Gartner EXP Worldwide Survey of More than 1,500 CIOs Shows IT Spending to Be Flat in 2009. Press Release. Online at page.jsp?id=855612, Accessed 21 April 2010
  8. 8.
    Gable GG, Sedera D, Chan T (2008) Re-conceptualizing System Success: the IS-impact Measurement Model. Journal of the Association for Information Systems 9(7):377-408 9. Solow RS (1987) We’d better watch out. New York Times Book Review.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Brynjolfsson E (1993) The Productivity Paradox of IT. Communications of the ACM 36(12):66-77CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Brynjolfsson E, Hitt L (1996) Paradox Lost? Firm-Level Evidence on the Returns to Information Systems Spending. Management Science 42(4):541-558CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Lee B, Barua A (1999) An Integrated Assessment of Productivity and Efficiency Impacts of Information Technology Investments: Old Data, New Analysis and Evidence. Journal of Productivity Analysis 12:21-43CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Brynjolfsson E, Hitt L (2003) Computing Productivity: Firm-Level Evidence. Review of Economics and Statistics 85(4):793-808CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Melville N, Kraemer K, Gurbaxani V (2004) Information Technology and organizational Performance: an integrative model of IT Business Value. MIS Quarterly Review 28(2):283-322Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kohli R, Grover V (2008) Business Value of IT: an essay on expanding research directions to keep up with the times. Journal of the Association for Information Systems 9(1):23-39Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Deveray S, Kohli R (2003) Performance Impact of Information Technology: is actual usage the missing link? Management Science 49(3):273-289CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Soh C, Markus ML (1995) How IT Creates Business Value: A Process Theory Synthesis. Proceedings of the Sixteenth International Conference on Information Systems. Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Weill P (1992) The relationship between investment in Information Technology and firm performance: a study of the value manufacturing sector. Information Systems Research 3(4):307-333CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    DeLone W H, McLean E R (1992) Information Systems Success: The Quest for the dependent variable. Information Systems Research 3(1):60-95CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Pitt LF, Watson RT, Kavan CB (1995) Service quality: a measure of Information Systems effectiveness. MIS Quarterly 19(2):173-188CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Grover G, Jeong SR, Segars AH (1996) Information Systems effectiveness: The construct space and patterns of application. Information & Management 31:177-191CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Seddon PB, Staples S, Patnayakuni R, Bothwell M (1999) Dimension of Information System Success. Communication of AIS 20(2):2-39Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Cameron KS, Whetten DA (1983) Some conclusions about organizational effectiveness. In: Cameron KS, Whetten DA (eds) Organizational effectiveness: a comparison of multiple models. Academic Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Rai A, Lang SS, Welker RB (2002) Assessing the validity of IS success models: an empirical test and theoretical analysis., Information Systems Research 13(1):50-69Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Sabherwal R, Jeyaraj A, Chowa C (2006) Information System Success: individual and organizational determinants. Management Science 52(12):1849-1864.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Kaplan R, Norton D (1996) The balanced scorecard: translating strategy into action. Harvard Business School Press, BostonGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Martinsons M, Davison R, Tse D (1999) The balanced scorecard: A foundation for the strategic management of information systems. Decision Support Systems 25:71-88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Neely A (1995) Performance Measurement system design: theory and practice. International Journal of Operations and Production Management 15:80-116CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Myers BL, Kappelman LA, Prybuto VR (1997) Comprehensive Model for assessing thequality and productivity of the Information System Function. Toward a Theory for Information Systems Assessment. In: Garrity E, Sanders L (eds) Information Systems Success Measurement. IDEA Group Publishing, HersheyGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Perego A (2008) The Role of IS Performance Management Systems in today’s enterprise. In: D’Atri A et al.(eds) Interdisciplinary Aspects of Information Systems Studies. Springer.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.SDA Bocconi School of ManagementMilanItaly

Personalised recommendations