IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ids/ijitma/v1y2002i2-3p143-167.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Framework for the evaluation of an information system

Author

Listed:
  • Z. Irani

Abstract

Manufacturing Resource Planning (MRPII) systems offer many organisations the opportunity to reap a wide variety of strategic and operational benefits. However, even though many of these benefits are suitable for evaluation within traditional accountancy frameworks, it is the intangible and non-financial benefits, together with the indirect project costs, which complicate the justification of Information Technology (IT) and Information Systems (IS). As a result, many companies are finding themselves unable to assess the "full" implications of their MRPII investments, thus amounting to an appraisal process limited to the benefits and costs financially quantifiable. This therefore questions the predictive value of those justification processes that make use of traditional appraisal techniques. As a result, many companies are forced to adopt one of the following strategies: (i) a refusal to undertake IT/IS projects whose benefits and costs are not financially quantifiable; (ii) invest in IT/IS projects as an "act of faith"; or, (iii) use "creative" accounting as a method of passing the budgetary process. This paper reviews the published literature and offers a taxonomy of investment appraisal techniques, together with their inherent limitations when used as part of an MRPII justification process. The author then presents a conceptual framework for the evaluation of IT/IS investments in manufacturing, with a particular focus on MRPII. The proposed framework: (i) distinguishes the different types of justification processes necessary; (ii) accounts for the selection of the most appropriate technical specification and supplier(s); (iii) identifies human and organisational issues; (iv) acknowledges the limitations inherent in traditional appraisal techniques; (v) suitably places the implementation process within project evaluation; and (vi) integrates a feedback mechanism to ensure that when the system has been implemented, a management review assesses whether the planned project objectives have been realised. Finally, the paper concludes with those implications associated with the development of a descriptive MRPII evaluation framework.

Suggested Citation

  • Z. Irani, 2002. "Framework for the evaluation of an information system," International Journal of Information Technology and Management, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 1(2/3), pages 143-167.
  • Handle: RePEc:ids:ijitma:v:1:y:2002:i:2/3:p:143-167
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.inderscience.com/link.php?id=1193
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ids:ijitma:v:1:y:2002:i:2/3:p:143-167. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sarah Parker (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.inderscience.com/browse/index.php?journalID=18 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.