
Volume 9 Issue 1 / Mar 2006
pp1‑43
Editor: Dan Remenyi
Editorial
Although the community of Information Systems scholars who are interested in Information Systems evaluation is not especially large it is certainly diverse. This is once again demonstrated by the range of papers published in this edition of the Electronic Journal of Information Systems Evaluation.
The five papers in this edition range across subjects as diverse as Using Value‑at‑Risk for IS/IT Project and Portfolio Appraisal and Risk Management through A Process Capability Approach to Information Systems Effectiveness Evaluation to Stock Price Reaction to Investments in Information Technology: The Relevance of Cost Management Systems. Furthermore this edition again demonstrates the geographic spread of the interest in this field.
Looking at these papers from the point of view of locating a common theme we are once again reminded that organisations tend to have many problems with Information Systems evaluation and that not all of these problems are to do with choosing an evaluation technique. Perhaps at the heart of the Information Systems evaluation conundrum is the question of who should be responsible for the evaluation process. The debate as to whether this is better performed by Information Systems people or by others is indeed an on‑going one and perhaps does not lead itself to a simple answer. But whether or not this important issue is left in the hands of the Information Professional or given to others the support of top management is clearly essential. And the problem is that this top management commitment has been known from the very earliest days of computerisation. Maybe the Information Systems community has not tried hard enough to ensure top management commitment?
The five papers in this edition range across subjects as diverse as Using Value‑at‑Risk for IS/IT Project and Portfolio Appraisal and Risk Management through A Process Capability Approach to Information Systems Effectiveness Evaluation to Stock Price Reaction to Investments in Information Technology: The Relevance of Cost Management Systems. Furthermore this edition again demonstrates the geographic spread of the interest in this field.
Looking at these papers from the point of view of locating a common theme we are once again reminded that organisations tend to have many problems with Information Systems evaluation and that not all of these problems are to do with choosing an evaluation technique. Perhaps at the heart of the Information Systems evaluation conundrum is the question of who should be responsible for the evaluation process. The debate as to whether this is better performed by Information Systems people or by others is indeed an on‑going one and perhaps does not lead itself to a simple answer. But whether or not this important issue is left in the hands of the Information Professional or given to others the support of top management is clearly essential. And the problem is that this top management commitment has been known from the very earliest days of computerisation. Maybe the Information Systems community has not tried hard enough to ensure top management commitment?
Share this item:
Look inside Download PDF (free)
Abstract
This paper makes the case for adopting a risk measure from the finance sector for ISIT project and portfolio evaluation. The proposed value‑at‑risk approach constitutes a well‑tested approach in high‑risk environments, especially banking, and reports the expected maximum loss (or worst loss) over a target horizon within a given confidence interval. Value‑at‑risk is computed using either an analytical, parametric approach, or resorting to simulation, either based on historical samples or Monte Carlo methods. The main advantages of using value‑at‑risk measures are that they are methodologically consistent with modern ISIT evaluation approaches like real options, that they offer possibilities for management and assessment of ISIT project portfolios, and that the results are easy to interpret.
Share this item:
Look inside Download PDF (free)
Abstract
While defining or measuring the effectiveness of the information systems (IS) function has proven complicated, further effort on refining IS assessment is essential for the effective management and continuous improvement of both the IS function and the organisation. In addition, an effort to investigate the relationships among the established IS assessment tools to better reconcile their existing differences is warranted. This paper aims to clearly differentiate the notions of 'Software' from 'Information Systems'. A new IS assessment model is proposed to provide a more holistic view on how IS quality may be assessed by means of a process capability understanding of evaluating IS effectiveness within the organisational context.
Keywords: Information systems quality, Information systems effectiveness, Assessment, Software process maturity, Process capability
Share this item:
Shaun Pather, Dan Remenyi, Andre de la Harpe
Look inside Download PDF (free)
Abstract
The business community in the past decade has been characterised by debate over the value or effectiveness of e‑Commerce and how this type of technology needs to be implemented. During this period the business world has witnessed many examples of failures of Internet based business. There is little doubt that the high failure rate in Dot.Coms had much to do with misconceptions regarding the ease with which e‑Commerce could be implemented. Unrealistic expectations caused tried and tested business rules to be abandoned as hyperbole over took sound business sense. Although it is clear today that the Internet and the Web can facilitate business processes to add value to organisations, this technology has to be managed with considerable care. This paper reports on a case study conducted in kalahari.net, a well known South African e‑Tailing business. This case study highlights several valuable lessons to do with the evaluation of an e‑Commerce investment and how to ensure its success. Specifically the case study closely examines aspects of kalahari.net's IS management policy, and identifies a set of preliminary e‑Commerce success dimensions.
Keywords: e-Business, e-Commerce, Internet business, web-facilitated business, Information Systems Management, business evaluation, IS success
Share this item:
Narcyz Roztocki, Heinz Roland Weistroffer
Look inside Download PDF (free)
Abstract
The identification of conditions and factors under which investments in Information Technology (IT) can be expected to yield tangible returns is the subject of many productivity studies. Event study methodology, which examines the reaction in the stock price to announcements of different types of IT investments, is one approach to this kind of research. In the research presented in this paper, we use event study methodology to investigate the effect of cost management systems on payoffs from IT investments. The motivation for our research is based on the assumption that companies possessing reliable cost management systems, such as Activity‑Based Costing (ABC), are less likely to make expensive mistakes when investing in IT. Furthermore, the companies that use ABC and thus know the costs of their operation, are better able to single out those IT projects which positively impact the bottom line and competitiveness. In our study, we use a sample of three companies that are adopters of ABC, to examine the impact of 81 IT investment announcements on stock prices.
Keywords: Activity-based costing, cost management systems, event study methodology, information technology productivity paradox
Share this item:
Look inside Download PDF (free)
Abstract
This article describes a proposal for a framework to evaluate and compare enterprise models. It suggests three major categories for grouping the model evaluation criteria: syntactic, semantic and pragmatic analysis. The paper draws on a wide literature to present a large selection of criteria and to operationalise their measurement by means of several possible metrics. As an empirical validation test, a selection of metrics for eight of the criteria has been calculated for fifteen large enterprise models. Their interpretation supports the usefulness and validity of the overall framework. Various attempts at deriving a composite overall quality score are discussed, but there is less confidence in the validity of this approach.
Share this item: