IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/pai/wpaper/15-17.html

Automating and Informating: Roles to Examine in Technology’s Impact on Performance

Author

Listed:
  • Edgardo Bravo Orellana

    (Universidad del Pacífico)

Abstract

Information quality and system quality are considered key factors in determining the usefulness of systems. However, prior studies have yielded mixed results. This article holds that the system’s assistance (the degree of the assistance provided by a system through its two roles: automating and informating) mediates in this relationship and may help to explain such mixed results. Furthermore, it holds that the system’s level of intervention (the degree to which technology participates in carrying out the tasks) is another key factor in determining its usefulness, especially through the automating role. Data from 246 users filling different hierarchies and functional areas were collected. Results show that information quality and system’s level of intervention explain usefulness through both roles. System quality explains usefulness through the informating role, but not through the automating role. The factors’ differentiated effects through each role may help managers to establish more effective criteria and priorities in the different stages of an information system’s life cycle.

Suggested Citation

  • Edgardo Bravo Orellana, 2015. "Automating and Informating: Roles to Examine in Technology’s Impact on Performance," Working Papers 15-17, Centro de Investigación, Universidad del Pacífico.
    • Handle: RePEc:pai:wpaper:15-17
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://repositorio.up.edu.pe/bitstream/handle/11354/1092/DD1517.pdf?sequence=4
    File Function: Application/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Radhakrishnan, Abirami & Zu, Xingxing & Grover, Varun, 2008. "A process-oriented perspective on differential business value creation by information technology: An empirical investigation," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 36(6), pages 1105-1125, December.
    2. Arun Rai & Sandra S. Lang & Robert B. Welker, 2002. "Assessing the Validity of IS Success Models: An Empirical Test and Theoretical Analysis," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 13(1), pages 50-69, March.
    3. William H. DeLone & Ephraim R. McLean, 1992. "Information Systems Success: The Quest for the Dependent Variable," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 3(1), pages 60-95, March.
    4. Peter B. Seddon, 1997. "A Respecification and Extension of the DeLone and McLean Model of IS Success," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 8(3), pages 240-253, September.
    5. Othman Boujena, 2009. "The benefits of sales force automation : A customer's perspective," Post-Print hal-00565468, HAL.
    6. Viswanath Venkatesh & Fred D. Davis, 2000. "A Theoretical Extension of the Technology Acceptance Model: Four Longitudinal Field Studies," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 46(2), pages 186-204, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Nripendra P. Rana & Yogesh K. Dwivedi & Michael D. Williams & Vishanth Weerakkody, 2015. "Investigating success of an e-government initiative: Validation of an integrated IS success model," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 17(1), pages 127-142, February.
    2. Kwahk, Kee-Young & Ahn, Hyunchul & Ryu, Young U., 2018. "Understanding mandatory IS use behavior: How outcome expectations affect conative IS use," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 38(1), pages 64-76.
    3. Udo, Godwin J. & Bagchi, Kallol K. & Kirs, Peeter J., 2010. "An assessment of customers’ e-service quality perception, satisfaction and intention," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 30(6), pages 481-492.
    4. Kamilah Kamaludin & Kamil Zaki Kamaludin, 2017. "User Acceptance of the Human Resource Information System: A Study of a Private Hospital in Malaysia," International Review of Management and Marketing, Econjournals, vol. 7(2), pages 207-217.
    5. Gjoko Stamenkov & Zamir Dika, 2016. "Bank employees’ internal and external perspectives on e-service quality, satisfaction and loyalty," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 26(3), pages 291-309, August.
    6. Abdesamad Zouine & Pierre Féniès, 2014. "The Critical Success Factors Of The ERP System Project: A Meta-Analysis Methodology," Post-Print hal-01419785, HAL.
    7. Nurlia Dewi & Willy Abdillah & Muhartini Salim & Slamet Widodo, 2021. "The Role of Leadership in Implementation Public Information System of Local Government Institutions in Indonesia," International Review of Management and Marketing, Econjournals, vol. 11(6), pages 1-9.
    8. A. Maes & G. Poels, 2006. "Development of a user evaluations based quality model for conceptual modeling," Working Papers of Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, Ghent University, Belgium 06/406, Ghent University, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration.
    9. Sharath Sasidharan & Radhika Santhanam & Daniel J. Brass & Vallabh Sambamurthy, 2012. "The Effects of Social Network Structure on Enterprise Systems Success: A Longitudinal Multilevel Analysis," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 23(3-part-1), pages 658-678, September.
    10. Yogesh K. Dwivedi & David Wastell & Sven Laumer & Helle Zinner Henriksen & Michael D. Myers & Deborah Bunker & Amany Elbanna & M. N. Ravishankar & Shirish C. Srivastava, 2015. "Research on information systems failures and successes: Status update and future directions," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 17(1), pages 143-157, February.
    11. Ugljesa Marjanovic & Milan Delić & Bojan Lalic, 2016. "Developing a model to assess the success of e-learning systems: evidence from a manufacturing company in transitional economy," Information Systems and e-Business Management, Springer, vol. 14(2), pages 253-272, May.
    12. Kim, Changsu & Oh, Eunhae & Shin, Namchul & Chae, Myungsin, 2009. "An empirical investigation of factors affecting ubiquitous computing use and U-business value," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 29(6), pages 436-448.
    13. Jani Merikivi & Antti Salovaara & Matti Mäntymäki & Lilong Zhang, 2018. "On the way to understanding binge watching behavior: the over-estimated role of involvement," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 28(1), pages 111-122, February.
    14. Nripendra P. Rana & Yogesh K. Dwivedi & Banita Lal & Michael D. Williams & Marc Clement, 2017. "Citizens’ adoption of an electronic government system: towards a unified view," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 19(3), pages 549-568, June.
    15. Sylvie Michel & Radouane Abdoune & Arnaud Lacan & Marc Ohana, 2025. "L’évaluation des Systèmes d’Information dans le secteur des assurances : le rôle déterminant de la qualité de l’information," Post-Print hal-05438591, HAL.
    16. Akter, Shahriar & Wamba, Samuel Fosso & D’Ambra, John, 2019. "Enabling a transformative service system by modeling quality dynamics," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 207(C), pages 210-226.
    17. Morteza Ghobakhloo & Sai Hong Tang, 2015. "Information system success among manufacturing SMEs: case of developing countries," Information Technology for Development, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 21(4), pages 573-600, October.
    18. Vu Thi Thanh Binh & Nhat-Minh Tran & Manh-Chien Vu, 2022. "The Effect of Organizational Culture on the Quality of Accounting Information Systems: Evidence From Vietnam," SAGE Open, , vol. 12(3), pages 21582440221, September.
    19. Yi-Shun Wang & Shin-jeng Lin & Ci-Rong Li & Timmy H. Tseng & Hsien-Ta Li & Jia-Yang Lee, 2018. "Developing and validating a physical product e-tailing systems success model," Information Technology and Management, Springer, vol. 19(4), pages 245-257, December.
    20. Brown, Susan A. & Venkatesh, Viswanath & Kuruzovich, Jason & Massey, Anne P., 2008. "Expectation confirmation: An examination of three competing models," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 105(1), pages 52-66, January.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:pai:wpaper:15-17. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Giit (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/deiuppe.html .

    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.