Information Technology Reference
coupled to conditions, for example, “they will use it if they do not develop an own
system,” “if the municipal council agrees,” or “if they are happy with the changes.”
In IS research, use is seen as a precursor of success (Petter et al., 2008). In 2014,
a maximum half of the questioned municipalities really intend to use the IS under
study. What went wrong?
8.4 Data Analysis
8.4.1 The Updated D&M Model and the RSD
We analyze the collected data by using the Updated D&M model as theoreti-
cal lens. To appreciate the level to which a factor contributes to success/failure,
we relied on how often a factor was spontaneously mentioned and the proportion
of these responses that indicate an aspect as problematic or not. When the large
majority of respondents indicated that they were dissatisfied about a certain factor,
we scored it as low. Because the six main factors are quite general, labeling them as
causes of failure would not be very informative. For each factor that seems to score
low, we therefore identified the main underlying causes for that factor. Table 8.2
provides an overview. Each factor is concluded with the identification of the main
underlying causes of failure (abbreviated C1.1 to C1.6).
Analysis of the factors suggests a negative influence on net benefits. The major-
ity of municipalities does not experience the IS as a tool to make their work more
efficient. They struggle with technical issues (C1.1) and experience a lack of end-
user support (C1.3). Time investments (C1.2) appear to outweigh net benefits. A
lack of net benefits appears to be caused mainly by a lack of purpose (C1.4), the
option for cheap and quick alternatives (C1.5), and a bad reputation (C1.6). By
analyzing the data along the factors of D&M, six main causes of failure could be
detected. The Updated D&M model not only gives insight in six causes, it also
seems to point out the consequences of this failure: poor information quality and
low actual use.
8.4.2 The Updated D&M Model and the ECREMOS
We follow the same procedure to analyze the causes of failure of the ECREMOS.
Table 8.3 identifies the causes (abbreviated C2.1 to C2.6) per factor.
By analyzing data along the factors of D&M, six main causes of failure could
be detected. The causal interaction of these factors points to a negative influence
on net benefits; ECREMOS scored low on system and information quality (C2.1-
C2.5). This negatively influences (intention to) use and user satisfaction. A low
intention to use caused by a lack of purpose and a low user satisfaction because of
the absence of feedback (C2.6) made ECREMOS unpopular. However, it was used
in 2013 by 114 of the 130 questioned municipalities. Because many municipalities