Development of the Readiness and Success Model for Assessing the Information System Integration

Abstract

This study 1 reports how to combine a technology readiness model within an information system (IS) success model in the context for assessing the readiness and success factors of an IS integration. As it is indicated by many IS studies, that most of the IS models are developed by adopting, combining, and adapting the previous ones. The researcher developed the model based on the input-process-output logic and the processional and causal model of the IS success models. The developed model was structured within nine variables and 44 indicators. The influence paths among the variables were presented by 23 links. In respect of the research implementation, the author has also broken down the model into its assessment instrument level. However, the model development study may have limited to the used assumption set and understanding of the researcher, it may contribute theoretically, in terms of a new model proposition. Besides that, the development transparency and the proposed model and its data collection instrument may be the practical consideration points for the further studies.

Readiness and Success of Ubiquitous Learning in Indonesia: Perspectives from the Implementation of a Pilot Project

“…However, the coefficient of determination of user satisfaction was above the moderate threshold level (approximately 0.401), but the seven paths were rejected in this study. This is inconsistent with Delone and Mclean's [43] processional and causal dimension of the model development [40,44]. The researchers predict that it may relate to the study phenomenon itself, the data used, or the instrument of data collection.…”

“…About 150 respondents were chosen for the survey and 3 for the interview. With respect to the research program, the researchers developed the research model ( Figure 1) by adopting and adapting Subiyakto's [39,40] ISRS model in the third phase of the study.…”

“…Excluding DIS→SVQ, the findings are consistent with Subiyakto's [39] study. In contrast, the negative influences are inconsistent with the basic theory [25,40] used in the model development. This may relate to the compulsory use of the system [44,72,73].…”

“…In this study, Subiyakto's [39,40] information system readiness and success (ISRS) model was adopted and adapted in the context of u-learning implementation performance ( Figure 1) in terms of continuous model development [41,42]. The model itself was developed by combining Delone and McLean's [43] IS success (ISS) model and Parasuraman and Colby's [25] technology readiness index (TRI) model [39,40].…”

“…McLean's assumption, which combined the logic of communication [46] and information influence theories [47], the ISRS model was proposed by adopting the above-mentioned logic and combining it with Parasuraman and Colby's [25] readiness constructs. Subiyakto [39,40] explained that the combination assumption was developed by considering the essential issues of stakeholder readiness in IT/IS projects [12,[16][17][18][48][49][50][51] referring to the input-process-output (IPO) logic of Davis and Yen's [52] information processing theory and the process logic of Kellogg's [53] model development theory. The readiness constructs of the TRI model [25], namely, optimism (OPT), innovativeness (INN), discomfort (DIS), and insecurity (INS), were then placed in the input dimension of the ISRS model.…”