Quality Evaluation Models - High Level Models and Methodologies for Information Systems - page 93

s perception as to whether or not the system will
effectively be applicable to his/her job.
Output quality refers to how well the system performs the tasks that it will be
used for, which makes this element conceptually close to that of perceived use-
fulness; however, output quality is speci

Job relevance regard the user '

cally related to a process of measurement
where the user, if faced with multiple options, will opt for the one which appears to
have the better output quality.
Result demonstrability is the degree to which it is easy to demonstrate the
possible positive gains that the system can bring, thus making it more ease for users
to have an idea and form a certain perception of its usefulness.
Finally, perceived ease of use retains its place from TAM, as “ the less effortful a

system is to use, the more using it can increase job performance ” (Venkatesh and

Davis 2000 ).
Experience is the moderator variable within this model, as experience will affect
change within the system uence and cognitive pro-

cesses alike can be substantially impacted as the user gains experience with the
system. This is closely related to voluntariness, because if the system

' s use. The effect of social in

' is use is

mandatory, obstacles to first time use can be overcome, and actual experience with

the system will become the predominant criterion. However, not all variables of the
model are necessarily affected by experience, and in particular, image and per-
ception of social status gains can persist if the whole organization continues usage,
regardless of the user ' s personal experience with the system (Venkatesh and Davis

2000 ).
TAM2 allows managers to have a more accurate perception in terms of users '

behavior when it comes to technology acceptance. In comparison with TAM, this
model has a greater interpretative and descriptive capacity (Javidnia and Nasiri
2012 ). However, it has been argued that

it omitted attitude to use due to weak
predictors of either behavioral intention to use or actual system use

“

” (Tung et al.

2008 ).

6.4 The Web of System Performance (WOSP)

In 2003, researchers Whitworth and Zaic outlined a new model that attempted a
more systemic approach to the issue of IS performance, using general systems
theory as a starting point. In this approach, IS performance draws from the same
principles and laws of other systems in other

fields, such as biology or physics. In
fact, it draws from the observation that IS seem to develop and behave much like
biological systems, by the laws of evolution. The authors named this model the web
of system performance, or WOSP.
The central concept is that of interaction between system and environment, and
system performance is de ned as “ how successfully it interacts with its environ-

ment and if that use continues over an acceptable period of time. Furthermore,

there are three aspects that compose the environment and are relevant to determine

”