an examination of erp user satisfaction in taiwan

7/25/2019 An Examination of Erp User Satisfaction in Taiwan

1/17

Ly-Fie Sugianto and Dewi Rooslani Tojib

Volume 1, Number 2, December 2006

239

Modeling User Satisfaction

With an Employee Portal

Ly-Fie Sugianto

Senior LecturerClayton Faculty of Information Technology, Monash University,

Building 63, Clayton Campus, Monash University, Victoria 3800, Australia

[email protected]

Dewi Rooslani Tojib

Ph.D. Candidate

Clayton School of Information Technology, Monash University

Building 63, Clayton Campus, Monash University, Victoria 3800, Australia

[email protected]

ABSTRACTUser satisfaction with general information system (IS) and certain types of information

technology (IT) applications has been thoroughly studied in IS research. With the

widespread and increasing use of portal technology, however, there is a need to conduct a

user satisfaction study on portal use -- in particular, the business-to-employee (b2e) portal.

In this paper, we propose a conceptual model for determining b2e portal user satisfaction,

which has been derived from an extensive literature review of user satisfaction scales and

the b2e portal. Nine dimensions of b2e portal user satisfaction are identified and modeled:

information content, ease of use, convenience of access, timeliness, efficiency, security,

confidentiality, communication, and layout.

Key Words:b2e portal, conceptual model, content validation, staff portal, user satisfaction


2/17

Modeling User Satisfaction with an Employee Portal

International Journal of Business and Information

240

1. INTRODUCTION

The integration of the Internet into all business aspects within organizations has

profoundly altered the business process between an organization and its employees. In the

past, the intranet has been a facilitating tool for the workforce. With the availability and

increased of portal technology, however, a growing number of organizations realize the

strategic imperative of integrating web-based IS to support the workforce. Portal features,

such as personalization, a self-service model, and collaboration, are conducive to increased

productivity and work efficiency.

A b2e portal uses a web-based interface to access personalized information,

resources, applications, and e-commerce options. Through the Internet connection,

employees can access a range of internal and external information from their desktops,

notebooks, or mobile devices. They are provided with relevant proprietary information

displayed in a password-protected setting. In addition to reducing the information overload,

a staff portal provides a number of benefits to both organizations and employees, such as

reducing organizational costs for human resources, improving corporate communication,

and improving employee productivity (see Tojib, 2003, for details). As more applications

are integrated into the portal, its role as an employee support system becomes more

dominant.The b2e portal has received fairly extensive attention in the business literature (for

example, BEA white paper, 2002; Cruz, 2000; Deimler and Hansen, 2001; Geib, 2003;

Oracle, 2000). Several organizations, including Boeing Co., Shell International, General

Motors, and Ford Motor Company have made large investments to develop portals for their

employees (Bannan, 2002). However, very little attention has been given to measuring the

effectiveness of employee portals in delivering their intended benefits. Among the myriad

measures employed to assess IS effectiveness, end user satisfaction is one of the most

widely used (DeLone and McLean, 1992). Furthermore, since the success of b2e portals is

determined by the extent to which they satisfy the portal users requirements (Musgreave

and Porter, 2002), measuring user satisfaction with these portals is an important area of

research.

Our review of the literature on user satisfaction shows that no study has specificallyexamined user satisfaction with the b2e portal. The existing user satisfaction scales in the

IS field are considered inappropriate for measuring satisfaction with b2e portals for several

reasons. First, embedded within the b2e portal are technologies with functionalities that

are distinct from those employed within the end user computing (EUC) or transactional

data processing (TDP) environment; that is, search and retrieval processes, work flow

systems, on-line self-service applications, and collaboration tools (Tojib, 2003). Second, it

is evident from the IS literature that past studies barely touch on the patterns or processes

that users employ to collaborate with each other (Ong and Lai, 2004), an important

function which can be facilitated by the b2e portal.

The purpose of this paper is to address this gap in the literature and explore the

development of a conceptual model of user satisfaction with the b2e portal. The

organization of this paper is as follows. Section 2 describes a review of past usersatisfaction studies, followed in Section 3 by a discussion of the domain identification of

user satisfaction with the b2e portal construct. In Section 4, the theoretical and practical


3/17



241

implications of the research are presented. Section 5 outlines the limitations of this

research, the conclusions derived from the empirical findings, and future research

avenues.

2. USER SATISFACTION WITH B2e PORTALS

2.1 Definition of User SatisfactionThe definition of user satisfaction has evolved with the changes in the IS

environment (Simmers and Anandarajan, 2001). Early research on user satisfaction was

conducted in the TDP environment (for example, Bailey and Pearson, 1983; Ives, Olson,

and Baroudi, 1983), in which users interact with the computer indirectly with the assistance

of an analyst or a programmer (Ong and Lai, 2004). User satisfaction has been defined as

the extent to which users believe that the information system available to them meets their

information requirement (Ives, Olson, and Baroudi, 1983, p. 785). Subsequent research on

user satisfaction has been conducted in the EUC environment (Doll and Torkzadeh, 1988),

in which users interact with the computer directly, through application software, to enter

information or produce reports (Wu, Wang, Chien, and Tai, 2002). In this context, user

satisfaction has been defined as an affective attitude towards a specific computer

application by someone who interacts with the application directly (Doll and Torkzadeh,1988, p. 261).

The b2e portal operates in a web-based environment. However, the way in which

users interact with it is similar to how they interact with computer applications in the EUC

environment. Once a user successfully accesses the portal, he or she can perform tasks

without consulting computer analysts or programmers unless technical problems occur.

Thus, we can safely adapt the Doll and Torkzadeh (1988) definition and define user

satisfaction with a b2e portal as an affective attitude towards the b2e portal by an

employee who interacts with the portal directly.

2.2 User Satisfaction Studies

Because user satisfaction has been a priority on the IS research agenda for almost

twenty years (Haga and Zviram, 1994), it is one of the most widely researched topics in theIS field (Harrison and Rainer, 1996). It is not surprising, therefore, that, since the 1980s,

numerous conceptual and empirical studies have been devoted to establishing a standard

user satisfaction scale. A thorough review of the past user satisfaction studies has identified

three broad streams of research. The first group measures user satisfaction with the overall

IS/IT systems (for example, Bailey and Pearson, 1983; Ives, Olson, and Baroudi,

1983).The second group focuses on end user satisfaction with a certain type of IT

application (for instance, Doll and Torkzadeh, 1988). The third group focuses on end user

satisfaction with a web-based information system (for example, Muylle, Moenaert, and

Despontin, 2004; Otto, Najdawi, and Caron, 2000).


4/17



242

2.3 User Satisfaction with Overall IS Systems

Bailey and Pearson (1983) first attempted to develop a semantic differential scale to

measure user satisfaction with general IS in a TDP environment. Thirty-nine items

contributing to user satisfaction were identified based on a review of 22 studies of the

computer/user interface (Bailey and Pearson, 1983). In a follow-up research, Ives, Olson,

and Baroudi (1983) tested the Bailey and Pearson (1983) scale for its reliability and

validity. Their findings suggested retaining 33 items for evaluating user informationsatisfaction. Furthermore, they attempted to produce a shorter version of this scale through

the application of factor analysis. The results showed that the revised model consisted of

three factors: EDP staff and services, information product, and knowledge and involvement.

These factors are measured by 13 items (refer to the paper for these). Later, Baroudi and

Orlikowsky (1988) reaffirmed the reliability and validity of the Ives, Olson, and Baroudi

(1983) short-form scale through a psychometric evaluation.

Since then, many other researchers have used Bailey and Pearson (1983) and Ives,

Olson, and Baroudi (1983) scales when measuring user satisfaction with overall IS

systems. Some researchers adopted those two scales (for example, Mahmood and Becker,

1985; Raymond, 1987; Montazemi, 1988; Foley and Newman, 1988; Bergeron and Berube,

1988; Anderson, 1989; Iivari and Karjalainen, 1989; Iivari and Ervasti,1994). Others

adopted them, depending on the purpose of their research (for example, Khalil and

Elkordy,1999). Very few researchers of IS (for example, Baronas and Louis,1988; Nath,

1989) developed their own scales to measure overall user satisfaction.

2.4 User Satisfaction with Specific IT Applications

The availability of low-cost desktop PCs, the decentralization of IT development

policy, and the availability of user-friendly software applications in the late 1980s and

early 1990s have led to the proliferation of the EUC environment (Powell and Moore, 2002;

Downey, 2004). Recognizing the changes in the IT environment, researchers argue that the

available user satisfaction scales are inappropriate for the EUC environment in which end

users develop and/or interact directly with specific applications (Doll and Torkzadeh,

1988). Doll and Torkzadeh (1988) were the pioneers in developing and validating the firstEUC satisfaction scale which focused on measuring user satisfaction with a certain type of

IT application. This scale is based on a factor model consisting of five first-order factors

(i.e., content, accuracy, format, ease of use, and timeliness) measured by 12 items.

After the publication of Doll and Torkzadeh (1988), a large number of researchers

adapted or adopted their measuring of user satisfaction with a certain type of IT application

(for example, Glorfeld and Cronan, 1992; Seddon and Yip, 1992; Palvia, 1996; McHaney

and Cronan, 1998; Downing, 1999; McHaney, Hightower, and Pearson, 2002; Zviran,

Pliskin, and Levin, 2005). Furthermore, those who developed new scales had also

considered the works of Bailey and Pearson (1983) and Ives, Olson, and Baroudi (1983) as

their reference scales (for instance, Barki and Huff, 1985; Wan and Wah, 1990; Igbaria and

Nachman, 1990; Seddon and Yip, 1992; Lawrence and Low, 1993).

2.5 User Satisfaction with Web-Based IS


5/17



243

In the 1990s, there were significant changes in IT, especially with the rapid

growth of the Internet. During this period, an increasing number of organizations exploited

and created business opportunities via the Internet (Liao and Cheung, 2001). Furthermore,

the widespread use of Internet technology enabled the development of web-based

information systems. In the field of user satisfaction, some researchers attempted to

develop new scales or used or adapted available scales to measure user satisfaction with

web-based applications. Those who developed new scales are Ho and Wu (1999); Cho and

Park (2001); Huang, Jin, Yang, and Chiu (2004); Muylle, Moenaert, and Despontin (2004).

The Doll and Torkzadeh (1988) scale seems to be still in favor as a measure of user

satisfaction with web-based IS (for example, Otto, Najdawi, and Caron, 2000; Simmers

and Anandarajan, 2001; Xiao and Dasgupta, 2002; Abdinnour-Helm, Chaparro, and

Farmer, 2005) although certain modifications are required to make it relevant to a web-

based environment.

3. CONCEPTUAL MODEL

3.1 Domain Identification

The preceding section outlines the findings of our literature review on the topic of

user satisfaction. From the review, we conclude that at present there is no establishedtheoretical framework for measuring user satisfaction with the b2e portal. A theoretically

grounded model of user satisfaction with the b2e portal necessitates a careful review of the

existing general user satisfaction scales and extant literature. The aim of this review is to

identify the domains of user satisfaction with the b2e portal.

Two widely accepted scales for measuring user satisfaction in IS research -- those

of Bailey and Pearson (1983) and Doll and Torkzadeh (1988) -- were carefully examined.

In addition, for domain identification purposes, we also considered six other scales

measuring user satisfaction with specific IT applications, such as data warehouse (Chen et

al., 2000), b2e benefit systems (Huang et al., 2004), asynchronous learning system (Wang,

2003), Internet shopping (Cho and Park, 2001), knowledge management systems (Ong and

Lai, 2004), and website (Muylle, Moenaert, and Despontin, 2004). Finally, since the

interface medium of the b2e portal is typically a website, we also examined three otherscales to determine the extent to which they are related to the domain in question: web site

quality (Loiacono, Watson, and Goodhue, 2002); internet shopping site quality (Yoo and

Donthu, 2001), and web portals service quality (Yang et al., 2005).

A rigorous study of those scales identified a range of dimensions contributing to

user satisfaction with general IS and certain types of IT applications, as well as end user

perception of the quality of websites and web portals. These dimensions were then grouped

into three main categories: information quality, system quality, and system design quality.

Information quality and system quality are two major perspectives that have been widely

examined by a large number of IS researchers when developing end user satisfaction

models (Bailey and Pearson, 1983; Doll and Torkzadeh, 1988; Yang, et al., 2005). System

design quality is another perspective that is increasingly being examined when developing

research models of user satisfaction with websites (Yoo and Donthu, 2001). As a portal

employs a web-based interface, it is important to investigate the system design quality


6/17



244

when developing a model of user satisfaction with the b2e portals. Other factors that do not

fall into these three categories were excluded from further investigation.

Observation of the wide range of dimensions revealed that the naming of

dimensions that contribute to user satisfaction is a challenging exercise. Some researchers

use different dimension names but they essentially have identical meanings. For instance,

the factor ease of use (Doll and Torkzadeh, 1988; Cho and Park, 2001; Muylle, Moenaert,

and Despontin, 2004; Yoo and Donthu, 2001) is similar in meaning to the factor learner

interface (Wang, 2003), as well as the factor usability (Chin, Diehl, and Norman, 1988;Yang, et. al, 2005). Thus, it was necessary to group dimensions that are different in name

but similar in meaning (shown in the Appendix) and create a common name for each

dimension group.

Furthermore, we conducted a thorough examination of extant literature to identify

themes pertinent to user satisfaction with the b2e portal. To facilitate the review process,

we used two broad criteria:

1. The dimensions must be used in most measures of user satisfaction with

various type of IS and IT applications. We believe that dimensions that have

conceptual and empirical relevance to most general user satisfaction scales can

be appropriately included in the b2e portal user satisfaction domain.

2.

The dimensions must be theoretically associated with the b2e portal

environment.

Although the features and content of b2e portals may vary from one organization to

another, their primary characteristics are the same regardless of their applications in the

portals. As can be seen in the portal packages offered by vendors, both large (for example,

Plumtree Software, Viador, SAP Portals, Hummingbird, Oracle, and PeopleSoft) and small

portal vendors (for instance, Workscape and ProAct) offer b2e portal solutions with

identical characteristics: the portal must be accessible at any time with Internet connection;

it must incorporate a single log-on procedure; provide role-based content to each employee;

enable employees to undertake more tasks electronically with the integration of self-service

applications; and, act as a medium of communication between the organization and its

employees as well as between employees and their colleagues. Thus, we considered these

major characteristics when investigating dimensions of b2e portal user satisfaction.Careful examination of the above criteria and characteristics resulted in the

identification of nine dimensions of b2e portal user satisfaction (as illustrated in Figure 1):

information content, ease of use, convenience of access, timeliness, efficiency, security,

confidentiality, communication, and layout. Each of these nine dimensions is discussed in

the following paragraphs.


7/17



245

Eu1.Eun

Ly 1..Ly n

Ca1Can

Ic1Icn

Cm1Cmn

Ts1Tsn

Ef1..Efn

Cf1..Cfn

Sy1.Syn

Ease of Use

Layout

Convenience of Access

Information Content

Communication

Timeliness

Efficiency

Confidentiality

Security

User

Satisfaction

with

B2E Portal

Figure 1. Conceptual Model of User Satisfaction with b2e Portal

3.2 b2e Portal User Satisfaction Dimensions

Convenience of access.Employees must be able to access the portals with Internet

connection regardless of time and location (Melville, 2004). The accessibility of a b2e

portal through the Internet connection makes it convenient for employees who spend more

time out of the office during work hours, or those who work remotely from home. These

employees could be updated on company news and at the same time perform their work

and personal tasks by accessing the portal. Thus, in this study, convenience of access refers

to the ability of the portal to be accessed at any time, anywhere, through intranet, Internet,and mobile devices.

Ease of use. Ease of use is the most important dimension for portal users, given that

employees are generally required to use a b2e portal in their daily activities. This view is

also supported by Dias (2001), who stated that portal users should be able to easily locate

and access the right information, with minimum training. In this study, ease of userefers to

the extent to which the portal is perceived to be user-friendly. This includes ease of

navigation, training issues, feeling of being in control, andlearnability.

Timeliness. Portal users require information on demand fairly quickly, or the

information becomes obsolete (Rushinek and Rushinek, 1985). Since delayed response

time may cause lower user satisfaction and poor productivity (Hoxmeier and DiCesare,

2000), it is very important to ensure that portal users are satisfied with portal response time.

Thus, timeliness will increase user satisfaction and the absence of timeliness will decreaseuser satisfaction with the b2e portal. In this study, timelinessrefers to the portals ability to

deliver requested information within a reasonable response time.


8/17



246

Efficiency. End users satisfaction with the system is likely to increase if they

believe that using the system will increase their performance and productivity (Mawhinney

and Lederer, 1990; Vlahos and Ferratt, 1995). In other words, end users believe that, if the

system could assist them in improving their performance and productivity at work, the

system is useful to them. Furthermore, since perceived usefulness has the strongest impact

on end user satisfaction (Calisir and Calisir, 2004), it is worthwhile to investigate whether

this dimension is in fact a domain in user satisfaction with the b2e portal. In this study,

efficiency refers to the ability of the portal to assist employees in performing their tasksbetter and faster, streamlining work processes and thereby improving their productivity.

Confidentiality. The integration of employee self-service (ESS) applications into the

b2e portal enables electronic self-submission and self-retrieval of their personal

information. Hence, privacy and confidentiality issues become a serious concern in the on-

line b2e portal environment (Vernon, 2002; Yang et al., 2005). The ability of the portal to

maintain the confidentiality of employees personal information is likely to be associated

with user satisfaction. The dimensionconfidentiality is defined as the ability of the portal

to provide a sense of assurance that any personal information retrieved or submitted from

and through the portal will not be misused by authorized users.

Security. The security dimension in this study was intended to encompass the

security aspect of the portal access, such as the ability of the portal to ensure a secure

access to all applications and facilities provided. Hence, this dimension includes issues

relating to the security breach of the portal, such as data theft, which will increase in

proportion to the number of organizations storing their personnel files electronically

(MHRIS, 2002).

Communication. Ong and Lai (2004), Wang (2003), and Yang et al. (2005) found

that the ability of the system to enable system users to interact with others influences user

satisfaction. In the b2e portal context, the portal acts as a medium of communication

between organizations and their employees as well as between employees and their

colleagues (London Financial Times, 2002). Thus, the ability of the portal to act as a

communication medium for employees may be an important indicator of user satisfaction

with the b2e portal. In this study, communication refers to the extent to which the portal

could mediate interaction (i.e., information sharing and collaboration) between employeesand their organizations as well as between employees and their colleagues.

Information content. In previous studies, this dimension has typically been

measured in terms of its accuracy, relevancy, currency, and reliability (for example, Doll

and Torkzadeh,1988; Bailey and Pearson, 1983; Ong and Lai, 2004; Yang et al., 2005;

Chen et al., 2000; Muylle, Moenaert, and Despontin, 2004). In this study, information

content is referred to as the relevancy, accuracy, currency, and reliability of information

presented to each employee, based on his/her role in the organization.

Layout.This dimension was derived from Chin, Diehl, and Norman (1988); Cho and

Park (2001); Huang et al. (2004); and Loiacono, Watson, and Goodhue (2002). These

researchers have confirmed the importance of system design quality in measuring user

satisfaction with IT applications. Given the role a portal plays as the interface between the

employees and the organization, effective portal design must be seen as a prerequisite forsuccessfully implementing b2e initiative. This view is supported by Muylle, Moenaert, and

Despontin (2004), who state that effective website design is needed to ensure the success


9/17



247

of instituting an e-commerce initiative. Thus, an attractive and aesthetic portal design may

be an indicator of user satisfaction with the b2e portal. In this study, layoutis referred to as

the design of the interface and display of the information.

4. EMPIRICAL TESTING AND DISCUSSION

The conceptual model presented in this paper is the result of our preliminary work. Wehave been engaged in research to develop a reliable and valid scale for measuring user

satisfaction with the b2e portal. The scale has been constructed based on the conceptual

model described above. This model has undergone content validation following Lynn

(1986). Furthermore, an online questionnaire1was used as a method of data collection for

the purpose of performing an exploratory and confirmatory study.

A total of 302 responses were collected. These responses were then randomly split

into two parts: 145 cases were used for the exploratory study and the remaining 157 cases

were used for the confirmatory study. The demographics of the survey respondents are

shown in Table 1.

Table 1: Demographics of Survey Respondents (N = 302)

Item Exploratory Study Confirmatory Study

Gender

MaleFemale

Percentage (%)

34.565.5

Percentage (%)

39.560.5

Age

18-2526-3536-4546 and above

9.029.729.032.4

6.432.527.433.8

Job Categories

Academic staffResearcherGeneral staff

24.86.9

68.3

25.58.3

66.2

The exploratory study was performed for the items using 145 sample cases of portal

users in Australian universities. Factor rotation and extraction resulted in 22 items in five

interpretable and stable factors: usefulness, confidentiality, ease of use, convenience of

access, andportal design.

The confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was performed using 157 sample cases

from b2e portal users at Australian universities. Our final model for the scale is an 18-item

1Questionnaire items maybe obtained from the authors upon request.


10/17



248

scale of the above five-factor model: confidentiality, ease of use, portal design, usefulness,

andconvenience of access (see Figure 2). Results of the factor loading of items in the final

scale are reported in Tojib and Sugianto (2007). The evolution of the model from the

conceptual stage to the revised version, after going through content validation, to the final

model after going through construct validation, is reported in Sugianto and Tojib (2007).

INITIAL CONCEPTUAL MODELEMPIRICAL MODEL

Efficiency

Communication

Information Content

Timeliness

Layout

Ease of Use

Confidentiality

Security

Convenience of Access Convenience of Access

Confidentiality

Ease of Use

Portal Design

Usefulness

Figure 2. Conceptual Model and Empirical Model of Portal User Satisfaction

With regard to the theoretical contribution this study makes to the learned

community, we believe that this is the first study attempting to operationalize the user

satisfaction construct into conceptually distinct indicators that can be observed and

assessed. In our study, we test the convergent and discriminant validity of the scale againstexisting scales, such as the EUC scale (see Tojib and Sugianto, 2007, for details). Our

findings suggest that researchers should not rely on the standard user satisfaction scales

when measuring user satisfaction with web-based applications, as certain types of web-

based IS might have distinct characteristics that are not addressed in the standard scales.

An investigation of the relationships between the construct and other variables, such as job

satisfaction and employee loyalty, would be useful for understanding the impact of the IS

environment.

The findings of this study also provide some implications for practice. An

organization may administer the B2EPUS scale to investigate its own b2e portal

performance and identify areas of weaknesses. The scale can also be adapted or

supplemented to fit specific needs; for example, when an organization wishes to measure

the extent to which the portal delivers the intended benefits, or when an organization plansto create a workplace that is conducive to and supports employee satisfaction and

productivity.


11/17



249

5. CONCLUDING REMARKS

The review of the user satisfaction literature shows that, currently, no studies exist that

measure user satisfaction with the b2e portal. This paper presents a conceptual model that

formulates nine dimensions determining user satisfaction with the b2e portal. The model

forms the basis for a new scale to measure user satisfaction with a staff portal. Our research

findings serve as the groundwork for expanding research on user satisfaction studies within

a web-based environment. Such studies are important considering that the web-based

system is the common platform employed in todays organizations. With the convergence

of Internet technology and wireless technology, such a system will become even more

predominant. Hence, studies of user satisfaction with portals are worth investigating to take

better use of the available technology.

Some limitations of this study include the sample population we used when

collecting the data using an on-line survey of employees from Australian universities.

Although these employees were b2e portal users, confirming that they generally possess

characteristics of the typical b2e portal users, they were nevertheless not entirely

representative as they were mainly derived from one specific industry. Furthermore, the

sampling method may have potential bias since a sample of willing respondents may not be

generalized. Therefore, future research could utilize the scale with new data sets in othercontexts. Researchers could perform cross-cultural validation using different large samples

from different industries for greater generalization of the scale. Future avenues for this

research could also address the establishment of a relationship between the proposed

construct and other constructs, such as user participation and user productivity.

APPENDIX:

Dimensions of User Satisfaction Model

No. Group Factor Source

Information Quality

1 Information Content Content Doll and Torkzadeh (1988)

Knowledge content Ong and Lai (2004)Usefulness of content Yang, et al. (2005)

Adequacy of information Yang, et al. (2005)

System output Nath (1989)

Accuracy, format, preciseness Chen, et al. (2000)

Information

Huang, et al. (2004)Bailey and Pearson (1983)

Reliability Bailey and Pearson (1983)

Currency Bailey and Pearson (1983)

Completeness Bailey and Pearson (1983)

Informationcomprehensiveness Muylle, et al. (2004)

Relevancy Bailey and Pearson (1983)Information relevancy Muylle, et al. (2004)


12/17



250


Information comprehensibility Muylle, et al. (2004)

2 Format of output Format of output Bailey and Pearson (1983)

Format Doll and Torkzadeh (1988)

3 Volume of output Volume of output Bailey and Pearson (1983)

System Quality

4 System accuracy Accuracy

Huang, et al. (2004)

Bailey and Pearson (1983)Doll and Torkzadeh (1988)

5 Timeliness TimelinessDoll and Torkzadeh (1988)Bailey and Pearson (1983)

Response/turnaround time Bailey and Pearson (1983)

Website speed Muylle, et al. (2004)

Processing speed Yoo and Donthu (2001)

Response time Loiacono, et al. (2002)

6 Ease of use Ease of useDoll and Torkzadeh (1988)

Cho and Park (2001)

Ease of use Muylle, et al. (2004)

Ease of use Yoo and Donthu (2001)

Learner interface Wang (2003)

Ease of understanding Loiacono, et al. (2002)Intuitive operation Loiacono, et al. (2002)

Usability Chin, et al. (1988)

Usability Yang, et al. (2005)

Knowledge manipulation Ong and Lai (2004)

7 Flexibility Flexibility Bailey and Pearson (1983)

8 Usefulness Information fit to task Loiacono, et al. (2002)

Perceived utility Bailey and Pearson (1983)

Fulfillment of end users needs Chen, et al. (2000)

9 Convenience Convenience Huang, et al. (2004)

Convenience of access Bailey and Pearson (1983)

Accessibility Yang, et al. (2005)

10 Security Security Huang, et al. (2004)Security of data Bailey and Pearson (1983)

Security Yoo and Donthu (2001)

Trust Loiacono, et al. (2002)

11 System efficiency System efficiency Nath (1989)

12 System capabilities System capabilities Chin, et al. (1988).

System characteristics Nath (1989)

13 Personalization Personalization Wang (2003)

Personalization Ong and Lai (2004)

14 Knowledge map Knowledge map Ong and Lai (2004)

15 Communication Learner community Wang (2003)

Knowledge community Ong and Lai (2004)

Interaction Yang, et al. (2005)

16 Hyperlink connotation Hyperlink connotation Muylle, et al. (2004)

17Languagecustomization

Language customizationMuylle, et al. (2004)


13/17



251


18Tailoredcommunication

Tailored communicationsLoiacono, et al. (2002)

System Design

Quality

1 Layout Interface Huang, et al. (2004)

Screen Chin, et al. (1988).

Site design Cho and Park (2001)Entry guidance Muylle, et al. (2004)

Website structure Muylle, et al. (2004)

Layout Muylle, et al. (2004)

Aesthetic design Yoo and Donthu (2001)

Visual appeal Loiacono, et al. (2002)

2 Innovativeness Innovativeness Loiacono, et al. (2002)

REFERENCES

Abdinnour-Helm, S.F., Chaparro, B.S., and Farmer, S.M. 2005. Using the end user computing

satisfaction scale to measure satisfaction with a website, Decision Sciences 36(2), 341-363.

Anderson, E.E. 1989. The implementation of information systems for workers: a structural equationmodel, Information and Management 16(4),171-186.

Bailey, J.E., and Pearson, S.W. 1983. Development of a tool for measurement and analysing

computer user satisfaction, Management Science 29(5), 530-545.

Bannan,K.J. 2002. If you build it (right) they will come, EContent,from:http://www.econtentmag.com/Articles/ArticleReader.aspx?ArticleID=774andIssueId

=121, accessed 2 May 2003.

Barki, H., and Huff, S.L. 1985. Change, attitude to change, and decision support systems success,Information and Management 9(5), 261-268.

Baronas, A.M., and Louis, M.R. 1988. Restoring a sense of control during implementation: howuser involvement leads to system acceptance, MIS Quarterly 12(1), 111-123.

Baroudi, J.J., and Orlikowski, W.J. 1988. A short measure of user information satisfaction: Apsychometric evaluation and notes on use, Journal of Management Information Systems

4(4), 44-59.

Bea Systems, Inc., 2002. Lowering costs and increasing employee productivity through employeeportals, White Paper: Bea Systems, CA..

Bergeron, F., and Berube, C. 1988. The management of the end user environment: an empiricalinvestigation, Information and Management 14(3), 107-113.

Calisir, F., and Calisir, F. 2004. The relation of interface usability characteristics, perceivedusefulness, and perceived ease of use to end-user satisfaction with enterprise resource

planning (ERP) systems, Computers in Human Behaviour 20(4), 505-515.


14/17



252

Chen, L., Soliman, K.S., Mao, E., and Frolick, M.N. 2000. Measuring user satisfaction with datawarehouses: an exploratory study, Informationand Management 37(3), 103-110.

Chin, J.P., Diehl, V.A., and Norman, K.L. 1988. Development of a scale measuring usersatisfaction of the human-computer interface, Proceedings of the ACM CHI 88 Human

Factors in Computing Systems Conference, pp.213-218.

Cho, N., and Park, S. 2001. Development of electronic commerce user-consumer satisfaction index(ECUSI) for Internet shopping, Industrial Management andData Systems 101(8), 400-405.

Cruz, M. 2000. Plugging into B2E solutions, Computer Reseller News, 913, pp. 114-118.

Deimler, M.S., and Hansen, M.T. 2001. The On-Line Employee. Perspective on e-Commerce,Boston: The Boston Consulting Group.

DeLone, W., and McLean, E. 1992. Information systems success: the quest for the dependentvariable, Information Systems Research 3(1), 60-95.

Dias, C. 2001. Corporate portals: a literature review of a new concept in information management,International Journal of Information Management 21(4), 269-287.

Doll, W.J., and Torkzadeh, G. 1988. The measurement of end-user computing satisfaction, MISQuarterly 12(2), 259-275.

Downey, J.P. 2004. Toward a comprehensive framework: EUC research issues and trends (1990-2000), Journal of Organisational and End User Computing 16(4), 1-16.

Downing, C.E. 1999. System usage behaviour as a proxy for user satisfaction: an empiricalinvestigation, Information and Management 35(4), 203-216.

Foley, T.J., and Newman, M.A. 1988. An empirical study of user satisfaction with amicrocomputer-based campus wide information system, Proceedings of the ACM-SIGUCCS XVI, pp. 91-100.

Geib, B. 2003. Managing employees through portals. New Straits Times (Malaysia) 7 February.

Glorfeld, K.D., and Cronan, T.P. 1992. Computer information satisfaction: a longitudinal study of

computing systems and EUC in a public organisation, Journal of End User Computing 5(1),27-36.

Haga, W.J., and Zviram, M. 1994. Information systems effectiveness: research designs for causalinference, Journal of Information Systems 4, 141-166.

Harrison, A.W., and Rainer Jr., R.K. 1996. A general measure of user computing satisfaction,Computers in Human Behavior 12(1), 79-92.

Ho, C-F., and Wu, W-H. 1999. Antecedents of customer satisfaction on the Internet: an empirical

study of online shopping, Proceedings of the 32nd

Hawaii International Conference onSystem Sciences,pp. 1-10.

Hoxmeier, J.A., and Dicesare, C. 2000. System response time and user satisfaction: An

experimental study of browser based application, Proceedings of the Association ofInformation Systems Americas Conference, Long Beach, CA.

Huang, J.H., Yang, C., Jin, B.H., and Chiu, H. 2004. Measuring satisfaction with business-to-employee systems, Computers in Human Behaviour 20(1), 17-35.


15/17



253

Igbaria, M., and Nachman, S.A. 1990. Correlates of user satisfaction with end user computing: anexploratory study, Information and Management 19(2), 73-82.

Iivari, J., and Ervasti, I. 1994. User information satisfaction: IS implementability and effectiveness,Information and Management 27(4), 205-220.

Iivari, J., and Karjalainen, M. 1989. Impact of prototyping on user information satisfaction during

the IS specification phase, Information and Management 17(1), 31-45.

Ives, B., Olson, M.H., and Baroudi, J.J. 1983. The measurement of user information satisfaction,Communications of the ACM 26(10), 785-793.

Khalil, O.E.M., and Elkordy, M.M. 1999. The relationship between user satisfaction and systemsusage: empirical evidence from Egypt, Journal of End User Computing 11(2), 21-33.

Lawrence, M., and Low, G. 1993. Exploring individual user satisfaction within user-leddevelopment, MIS Quarterly 17(2), 195-208.

Liao, Z., and Cheung, M.T. 2001. Internet-based e-shopping and consumer attitudes: an empiricalstudy, Information and Management 38(5), 299-306.

Loiacono, E.T., Watson, R.T., and Goodhue, D.L. 2002. WebQual: A measure of website quality. InK.K. Evans. and L.K. Scheer (eds). Marketing Theory and Applications, Vol 13: Chicago:American Marketing Association.

London Financial Times. 2002. Understanding B2E. 31 May: 2, pp. 8, 10, 11.

Lynn, M. 1986. Determination and quantification of content validity, Nursing Research 35(6), 382-

385.

Mahmood, M.A., and Becker, J.D. 1985. Effect of organizational maturity on end-users' satisfactionwith information systems, Journal of Management Information Systems 2(3), 37-64.

Managing Human Resources Information Systems (MHRIS). 2002. How to combat growing risk ofHRIS data theft, 2002(6), 6-8.

Mawhinney, C.H., and Lederer, A.L. 1990. A study of personal computer utilization by managers,Information and Management 18(5), 243-253.

McHaney, R., and Cronan, T.P. 1998. Computer simulation success: On the use of the end-usercomputing satisfaction scale, Decision Sciences 29(2), 525-536.

McHaney, R., Hightower, R., and Pearson, J. 2002. A validation of the end-user computingsatisfaction scale in Taiwan, Information and Management 39(6), 503-511.

Melville, S. 2004. B2E portals: enhancing the employee experience. The Online HR for Business,downloadable from http://www.hrmanager.com.au/index.cfm?

wUPub_Id=38andwUIss_Id=148andwUArt_Id=321, accessed 15 April 2004.

Montazemi, A.R. 1988. Factors affecting information satisfaction in the context of the smallbusiness environment, MISQuarterly 12(2), 239-56.

Musgreave, J., and Porter, G. 2002. Brace for second wave of internet revolution. London FreePress, 24 June: 10.

Muylle, S., Moenert, R., and Despontin, M. 2004. The conceptualization and empirical validation ofwebsite user satisfaction, Information and Management 41(5), 543-560.


16/17



254

Nath, R. 1989. Are frequent users more satisfied? Information Processing andManagement25(5),557-562.

Ong, C. S., and Lai, J.Y. 2004. Developing a scale for measuring user satisfaction with knowledgemanagement systems, Proceedings of the 37thHawaii International Conference on System

Sciences, pp.1-10.

Oracle Corporation. 2000. Oracle B2E. White Paper, California.

Otto, J.R., Najdawi, M.K., and Caron, K.M. 2000. Web-user satisfaction: an exploratory study,Journal of End User Computing 12(4), 3-10.

Palvia, P.C. 1996. A model and scale for measuring small business user satisfaction withinformation technology, Information and Management 31(3), 151-163.

Powell, A., and Moore, J.E. 2002. The focus of research in end user computing: Where have wecome since the 1980s? Journal of End User Computing 14(1), 3-22.

Raymond, L 1987. Validating and applying user satisfaction as a measure of MIS success in smallorganizations, Information and Management 12(4), 173-179.

Rushinek, A., and Rushinek, S. 1985. The effects of sources of applications programs on usersatisfaction: An empirical study of micro, mini, and mainframe computers using aninteractive artificial intelligence expert-system, Proceedings of the 21stAnnual Conference

on Computer Personnel Research, pp. 118-125.

Seddon, P., and Yip, S-K. 1992. An empirical evaluation of user information satisfaction (UIS)measures for use with general ledger accounting software, Journal of Information Systems6(1), 75-92.

Simmers, C.A., and Anandarajan, M. 2001. User satisfaction in the internet-anchored workplace: Anexploratory study, Journal of Information Technology Theory and Application 3(5), 39-53.

Sugianto, L.F., and Tojib, D.R. 2007. In measuring satisfaction with b2e portal,Monash BusinessReview, April 2007 (forthcoming).

Tojib, D.R. 2003. The use of the business to employee (b2e) portal in the workplace: A preliminaryinvestigation. Unpublished Honours Thesis, Monash University, Victoria, Australia.

Tojib, D.R., and Sugianto, L.F. 2007. The Development and Empirical Validation of the B2E PortalUser Satisfaction (B2EPUS) Scale,Journal of End User Computing, --,--. (To appear)

Vernon, M. 2002. Understanding b2e, Financial Times (London), 31 May: 10.

Vlahos, G.E., and Ferratt, T.W. 1995. Information technology use by managers in Greece tosupport decision making: Amount, perceived value, and satisfaction, Information andManagement 29(6), 305-315.

Wan, T.B., and Wah, L.T. 1990. Validation of a user satisfaction scale for office automation success,Information and Management 18(4), 203-208.

Wang, Y.S. 2003. Assessment of learner satisfaction with asynchronous electronic learning systems,Information and Management 41(1), 75-86.

Wu, J.H., Wang, Y.M., Chien, M.C.C., and Tai, W.C. 2002. An examination of ERP usersatisfaction in Taiwan, Proceedings of the 35 thHawaii International Conference on System

Sciences.


17/17



255

Xiao, L., and Dasgupta, S. 2002. Measurement of user satisfaction with web-based IS: An empiricalstudy, Proceedings of Eight Americas Conference on Information Systems, pp. 1149-1156.

Yang, Z., Cai, S., Zhou, Z., and Zhou, N. 2005. Development and validation of a scale to measureuser perceived service quality of information presenting web portals, Information andManagement 42(4), 575-589.

Yoo, B., and Donthu, N. 2001. Developing a scale to measure the perceived quality of an internet

shopping site (SiteQual), Quarterly Journal of Electronic Commerce 2(1), 31-45.Zviran, M., Pliskin, N., and Levin, R. 2005. Measuring user satisfaction and perceived usefulness in

the ERP context, The Journal of Computer Information Systems 45(3), 43-52.

ABOUT THE AUTHORS

Ly-Fie Sugianto holds a bachelors degree (first-class honours) in engineering from Curtin

University and a Ph.D. in electrical engineering from Monash University in Victoria, Australia. Sheis a senior lecturer at Monash, teaching and supervising doctoral students in e-commerce. She hasresearched and published more than 60 refereed articles in the fields of e-commerce, DSS, b2eportals, and the deregulated electricity market. Her research reflects her on-going interests in thestudy and development of support tools and techniques for intelligent decision making.

Dewi Rooslani Tojib is a research student in the Faculty of Information Technology at Monash

University. She received her bachelor of business systems (honours) degree from Monash in 2003.She is currently a Ph.D. candidate at the Clayton School of Information Technology at Monash. Her

research interests include b2e portals, user satisfaction, scale development, e-business, and web-based information systems.

an examination of erp user satisfaction in taiwan

Documents