- Volume 13 Issue 2
The most critical problem of MIS evaluation is the lack of the systematic framework to cover various factors and viewpoints. To solve this problem, this study takes the multi-level and contingent approach to performance evaluation, composed of three levels: evaluating the contribution of MIS to an organization [strategy level]; evaluating the activities of MIS department or MIS function as an organizational sub-function through the overall MIS lifecycle [function level]; and evaluating the quality or productivity of the application systems as MIS outputs [system level]. Ideal MIS evaluation should include all three levels of the hierarchy with balanced importance. However, MIS evaluationcanbedividedintothreetypes,suchasstrategy-oriented, function-oriented and system-oriented evaluation, depending on the focus and emphasis of evaluation. The usage pattern of each evaluation type is analyzed according to contingent variables of MIS evaluation such as MIS maturity, information intensity and firm size, and top management's intent. It is also found that the firms of higher MIS maturity and top management's intent use the strategy-oriented evaluation type, and the firms with strategy-oriented evaluation type show a higher MIS performance. Further, MIS maturity and top management's intent show contingent effects between evaluation type and MIS performance. Some managerial implications can be drawn based on the results of the study. First, strategy-oriented evaluation of MIS is more important as many firms more often use information technology as a strategic weapon. Second, MIS performance varies with evaluation type. Therefore, the design of MIS evaluation framework should be done carefully in the strategic and managerial contexts. Third, firms are recommend to use a different evaluation type according to organizational characteristics such as MIS maturity and information intensity.
MIS evaluation;MIS performance