Quantitative and qualitative approaches to information systems evaluation

Information systems (IS) research has enfranchised established disciplines such as computer science, operational research, organizational behavior and management. Unfortunately, however, it has not been able to establish itself as a discipline in its own right, even though it is regarded as valid applied research and being a proponent to business process change. Nonetheless, its teaching and research have continued relentless as an independent study area from its origins at the University of Minnesotta, which in 1968 launched the first Information Systems academic programme and research centre (Nolan and Wetherbe, 1980). Such teaching programmes and research centers are now burgeoning worldwide even though in recent years interest has leveled our following the .com era. The adoption of information technology (IT) and IS offer many organisations the opportunity to reap a wide variety of strategic, tactical and operational benefits. Many of these benefits are suitable for inclusion within traditional accountancy frameworks however it is the intangible and non-financial benefits, together with the indirect project costs that often complicate the justification process. As a result, many companies are finding themselves unable to assess the full implications of their investments in new technology thus, amounting to an appraisal process limited to the analysis of those benefits and costs financially quantifiable. Despite enormous investments in IS infrastructures, organizations have not al-

[1]  Zahir Irani,et al.  The Propagation of Technology Management Taxonomies for Evaluating Investments in Information Systems , 2000, J. Manag. Inf. Syst..

[2]  Zahir Irani,et al.  Transforming failure into success through organisational learning: an analysis of a manufacturing information system , 2001, Eur. J. Inf. Syst..

[3]  Shona M. Morse,et al.  Assessing the value , 2006 .

[4]  Guy Paré,et al.  Matching information technology and organizational structure: an empirical study with implications for performance , 1995 .

[5]  Theophanis C. Stratopoulos,et al.  Does successful investment in information technology solve the productivity paradox? , 2000, Inf. Manag..

[6]  Richard L. Nolan,et al.  Toward a comprehensive framework for MIS research , 1980 .

[7]  Erik Brynjolfsson,et al.  The productivity paradox of information technology , 1993, CACM.

[8]  R. Dué,et al.  The Productivity Paradox , 2018, The Productivity-Inclusiveness Nexus.

[9]  Z. Irani,et al.  Assessing the value and cost implications of manufacturing information and data systems: an empirical study , 1998 .

[10]  Kaj Grønbæk,et al.  CSCW challenges: cooperative design in engineering projects , 1993, CACM.

[11]  R. Hirschheim,et al.  Analysing information systems evaluation: another look at an old problem , 1998 .

[12]  S. Roach Services under siege--the restructuring imperative. , 1991, Harvard business review.

[13]  Zahir Irani,et al.  Information systems evaluation: navigating through the problem domain , 2002, Inf. Manag..

[14]  Steven Jones,et al.  Understanding IS evaluation as a complex social process: a case study of a UK local authority , 2001, Eur. J. Inf. Syst..