Abstract
IS Performance Management Systems seem to be the right solution for the CIO and IS department’s problems, but they are not so widespread in companies due to the difficulties that companies have in the design and implementation process. This paper attempts to address this issue by investigating what factors affect the design and implementation of IS Performance Management Systems and how these factors influence their shape in terms of IS performance dimensions and measures. The majority of previous studies dealing with this issue sought to develop an algorithm for selecting the appropriate dimensions and measures. This scope implied clarity and a willingness to pursue organizational goals and that only one appropriate set of dimensions and measures exists for a company. This paper points out how it is arduous to define such an algorithm because several “soft” factors, e.g. climate and private goals, affect the final shape of IS Performance Systems.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Neely A (1999) The performance measurement revolution: why now and what next? Int J Oper Prod Manage 19(2):205–228
Perego A (2006) I.S. performance management e misure dell’IT in azienda. In: Proceedings ItAIS, Milano
Gable G, Sedera D, Chan T (2008) Re-conceptualizing system success: the IS-impact measurement model. J Assoc Inf Syst 9(7):377–408
Weill P, Olson MH (1989) An assessment of the contingency theory of management information systems. J Manage Inf Syst 6(1):59–85
Saunders CS, Jones JW (1992) Measuring performance of the information systems function. J Manage Inf Syst 8(4):63–82
DeLone WH, McLean ER (1992) Information systems success: the quest for the dependent variable. Inf Syst Res 3(1):60–95
Myers BL, Kappelman LA, Prybuto VR (1997) Comprehensive model for assessing the quality 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, Hershey, pp 94–121
Sugumaran V, Arogyaswamy B (2004) Measuring IT performance: “Contingency” variables and value modes. J Comput Inf Syst, Winter 44(2):79–86
Mahmood MA, Becker JD (1985) Effect of organizational maturity on end-users' satisfaction with information systems. J Manage Inf Syst 2(3):37–64
Davis GB, Hamann JR (1988) In-context information systems assessment: a proposal and an evaluation. In Bjorn-Anderson N, Davis GB (eds) Information Systems Assessment: Issues and Challenges. Elsevier Science, North-Holland, pp 283–296
Harris SE, Katz JL (1991) Organizational performance and information technology investment intensity in the insurance industry. Organ Sci 2(3):263–295
McKeen JD, Guimaraes T, Wetherbe JC (1994) The relationship between user participation and user satisfaction: an investigation of four contingency factors. MIS Q 18(4):427–451
Premkumar G, King WR (1994) Organizational characteristics and information systems planning: an empirical study. Inf Syst Res 5(2):75–109
Scott WR (1977) Effectiveness of organizational effectiveness studies. In Goodman PS, Pennings JM (eds) New perspectives on organizational effectiveness. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, pp 63–95
Zmud RW (1979) Individual differences and MIS success: A review of the empirical literature. Manage Sci 25(10):966–979
Francalanci C, Galal H (1998) Information technology and worker composition: determinants of productivity in the life insurance industry. MIS Q 22 (2):227–241
Tippins MJ, Sohi RS (2003) IT competency and firm performance: is organizational learning a missing link? Strateg Manage J 24(8):745–761
Banker RD, Bardhan IR, Lin S, Chang H (2006) Plant information systems, manufacturing capabilities and plant performance. MIS Q 30(2):315–337
Tanriverdi H (2006) Performance effects of information technology synergies in multibusiness firms MIS Q 30(1):57–77
Bardhan IR, Whitaker J, Mithas S (2006) Information technology, production process outsourcing and manufacturing plant performance. J Manage Inf Syst 23 (2):13–40
Rai A, Patnayakuni R, Seth N (2006) Firm performance impacts of digitally-enabled supply chain integration capabilities. MIS Q 430(2):225–246
Weill P (1992) The relationship between investment in information technology and firm performance: a study of the value manufacturing sector. Inf Syst Res 3 (4):307–333
Perego A (2008) The role of IS performance management systems in today’s enterprise. In D’Atri A (ed) Interdisciplinary aspects of information systems studies. Springer, New York, pp 233–240
Schein EH (1987) Process consultation, 2. Addison-Wesley, Reading
Baskerville R, Wood-Harper AT (1996) A critical perspective on action research as a method for information systems research. J Inf Technol 11:235–246
Susman G (1983) Action research: a sociotechnical systems perspective. In: Morgan G (ed) Beyond method: strategies for social research. Sage, zewbury Park, pp 95–113
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2010 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Perego, A. (2010). The Evaluation of Information Systems: Lessons Learned from Practice. In: D'Atri, A., De Marco, M., Braccini, A., Cabiddu, F. (eds) Management of the Interconnected World. Physica-Verlag HD. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-7908-2404-9_38
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-7908-2404-9_38
Published:
Publisher Name: Physica-Verlag HD
Print ISBN: 978-3-7908-2403-2
Online ISBN: 978-3-7908-2404-9
eBook Packages: Business and EconomicsBusiness and Management (R0)