Information Technology Reference
In-Depth Information
We use the Updated D&M model in a basic explorative study to assess two
e-government systems in Flanders. The efficient implementation of governmental
IS is an explicit policy goal of the Flemish government (Belgium). The two IS are
considered as failed, according to policy notes that they did not meet user expecta-
tions. As we use an IS success model to assess failure, it is necessary to clarify the
“opposite” effect of the factors of the Updated D&M model. This means if the
presence of a factor encourages success, the lack of it encourages failure (Gichoya,
2005). In this line of reasoning, it makes sense to assess causes of IS failure along the
dimensions of a success model. The more we learn about these causes, the more we
can aid managers in their quest for IS success (Petter, Delone, & McLean, 2013).
As such, the main research questions are as follows:
◾
RQ1. Can the Updated D&M model be used to assess the causes of failure of
two cases in a G2G e-government context?
◾
RQ2. If so, how complete is this model for assessing the causes of failure of
two G2G e-government cases?
The rest of the chapter is structured as follows: Section 8.2 motivates our choice
for the Updated D&M model. Section 8.3 describes the methodology. Section 8.4
investigates whether the Updated D&M model can assess the causes of failure of
two e-government cases and, if so, how complete this assessment is. Results are
discussed in Section 8.5. We conclude in Section 8.6.
8.2 the Updated D&M Model
Researchers have developed numerous models to look at IS success/failure (Dörr,
Walther, & Eymann, 2013; Rana et al., 2013). Some widely discussed models are
the Technology Acceptance Model (Davis, 1989), the Unified Theory of Acceptance
and Use of Technology (Venkatesh, Morris, Davis, & Davis, 2003), the (Updated)
IS success model (Delone & McLean, 2003), and the variance model of IS success
(Seddon, 1997).
The Technology Acceptance Model and Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use
of Technology focus mainly on acceptance of IS at a personal level, (non)acceptance
is not the equivalent to success/failure, but a precondition. Delone and McLean's
IS success model and Seddon's variance model take a broader perspective; they aim
to explain IS success/failure. Ten years after Delone and McLean launched their
model, they made an update. Today, the majority of IS researchers has switched
to the updated version of the D&M model. The (Updated) D&M model is cited
in thousands of publications and validated in more than 300. The Seddon model
is much less investigated; we will use the D&M model in this chapter (Petter,
DeLone, & McLean, 2008; Sørum et al., 2012).
Search WWH ::
Custom Search