Discrepancies between desired and perceived measures of performance of IS professionals: Views of the IS professionals themselves and the users

Evaluation of IS professionals is difficult. Measures are seldom fully defined and suffer from the inability of a user to consider differences between expectations and perceptions of performance. In addition, expected levels of performance and perceived levels of performance depend on the satisfaction of each group of stakeholders. Discrepancy theory leads one to expect that satisfaction is highest when performance matches expectations. To explore this gap in different groups, a sample of users and a matched sample of IS professionals was investigated in order to determine the relationship between the performance gap and satisfaction with the system on the part of the users and careers on the part of the IS professionals. Larger gaps were found to be associated with poor satisfaction in both samples. Additionally, each group had a different set of expectations, indicating that the measures did not represent the same expectation or meanings to different stakeholders. Thus, management should strive to promote uniform understanding of the measures employed in IS professional performance evaluation by all stakeholders and manage expectations according to the metrics selected.

[1]  W. Mobley,et al.  An evaluation of precursors of hospital employee turnover. , 1978, The Journal of applied psychology.

[2]  Bill C. Hardgrave,et al.  Assessing information technology personnel: toward a behavioral rating scale , 2004, DATB.

[3]  Carol Stoak Saunders,et al.  Measuring Performance of the Information Systems Function , 1992, J. Manag. Inf. Syst..

[4]  William J. Kettinger,et al.  Perceived Service Quality and User Satisfaction with the Information Services Function , 1994 .

[5]  Wanda J. Orlikowski,et al.  A Short Form Measure of User Information Satisfaction: A Psychometric Evaluation and Notes on Use , 1987, J. Manag. Inf. Syst..

[6]  Jack J. Baroudi,et al.  The impact of job performance evaluations on career advancement prospects: an examination of gender differences in the IS workplace , 1995 .

[7]  Kurt R. Linberg.  Software developer perceptions about software project failure: a case study , 1999, J. Syst. Softw..

[8]  Sammy W. Pearson,et al.  Development of a Tool for Measuring and Analyzing Computer User Satisfaction , 1983 .

[9]  James C. Anderson,et al.  STRUCTURAL EQUATION MODELING IN PRACTICE: A REVIEW AND RECOMMENDED TWO-STEP APPROACH , 1988 .

[10]  Richard Harris,et al.  SMIS Members: A Membership Analysis , 1982, MIS Q..

[11]  Gary Klein,et al.  A Discrepancy Model of Information System Personnel Turnover , 2002, J. Manag. Inf. Syst..

[12]  Gary Klein,et al.  Performance ratings and importance of performance measures for IS staff: the different perceptions of IS users and IS staff , 2000, IEEE Trans. Engineering Management.

[13]  E. A. Locke,et al.  A theory of goal setting & task performance , 1990 .

[14]  Wayne M. Wormley,et al.  Effects of Race on Organizational Experiences, Job Performance Evaluations, and Career Outcomes , 1990 .

[15]  Blake Ives,et al.  The measurement of user information satisfaction , 1983, CACM.

[16]  Peter M. Bentler,et al.  EQS : structural equations program manual , 1989 .

[17]  L. Cronbach.  Statistical tests for moderator variables: flaws in analyses recently proposed , 1987 .

[18]  Gary Klein,et al.  User evaluation of information systems: by system typology , 1999, IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. Part A.

[19]  Gary Klein,et al.  Seeking consonance in information systems , 2001, J. Syst. Softw..

[20]  R. P. McDonald,et al.  Structural Equations with Latent Variables , 1989 .

[21]  L. Cronbach.  Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests , 1951 .

[22]  Timo Saarinen,et al.  An expanded instrument for evaluating information system success , 1996, Inf. Manag..