The Modified Delone & Mclean Model

Based on Walsh’s (2007) article, explain why end-user satisfaction should be used in addition to return on investment (ROI) when measuring new systems.

This report is based on The Northern Breast Screening Unit (NBSU) and its aim is to critically evaluate the use of the GAP model approach towards measuring customer satisfaction. It will further explain the advantages and disadvantages of this tool for managers to measure service delivery at NBSU. Further, it will assess the quality of the service which is being provided by NBSU based upon the results of their recent patient satisfaction survey. Furthermore, it will compare and contrast the different perceptions of the service received by the two patient groups. It will also explore how the three staff members differ in their understanding of the patient’s priorities and perceptions. Finally, recommendations will be made to NBSU management to help improve their service quality management.

Kats, Y. (2013). E-Learning Service Delivery Quality: A Determinant of User Satisfaction. In Learning Management Systems and Instructional Design (p. 89 & 265). PA: IGI Global.

Impact of Performance Parameters on Customers’ Satisfaction level of Bancassurance Services in Public and Private Sector Banks

Leavell and Clark model wanted to explain how the relationship between an agent, host, and environment could affect an individual’s’ health. Agent-Host-Environment model, according to Leavell and Clark, is beneficial for investigative causes of disease in an individual. The model attempts to explain how the interconnection of three separate elements correlates to affect an individual health status. The agent-host-environmental model suggests, how certain factors must be present or absent for an illness to occur; and as a result of such external factor a living organism is capable of being adversely infected or affected by outside influences (Leavell and Clark, 1965).

When users know that they are using the service, they become less passive. They are better prepared to the risk and consequence of using the

Customer satisfaction and service quality are the two important components that direct anyone’s attention in every concept related to marketing, services, etc. (Spreng and Mackoy, 2006). In today’s competitive era, the success lies in

“A Structural Model of the Relationships Between Sport Website Quality, E-Satisfaction, and E- Loyalty (2011)” written by Drs. Youngjin Hur, Young Jae Ko, and Joseph Valacich examines if sport web quality positively correlates with E-Satisfaction and E-Loyalty. In the article, Drs. Hur, Ko, and Valacich break down what each category mean and how they interact together based on the cumulative research that the researchers conducted. In the opening of the research article, the researchers explain their purpose. It is stated, “[t]he purpose of this study was to examine theoretical relationships between key variables of online sport consumption behavior such as sport consumers’ perceptions of sport website quality, satisfaction, and behavioral loyalty to the websites”(Hur, Ko, & Valacich, 2011, p.458).To simply reiterate, the researchers are stating that if a consumer likes a particular layout or amount of information (quality) of a particular website that the consumer is visiting, the consumer will return to the website due to being satisfied with the quality and information being provided to the consumer by the website. However, before the researchers could come to a direct conclusion about Sport Web Quality and its correlation to E-Satisfaction and E-Loyalty, the doctors constructed hypotheses that would help guide and structure the research.

While the explicit study of the effect of patient experience and satisfaction has been limited, many scholars have explored the relationship between aspects of patients’ experience during their stay at hospitals or health centers and their satisfaction ratings. Most of this literature focused on patient centered care and its various manifestations from physicians’ communications to nursing attention time spent per patient. Tables 2 and 3 presents the summary of this research.

I believe one of the major reasons why companies have had difficulty realizing productivity gains from investments in IT is because the users of the systems were not involved enough with the creation and implementation of new information systems. System implementations often focus on getting the technical solution designed and developed instead of focusing on the user and what information they need. This can create poor user interfaces that can confuse users and prevent or slow access to time saving opportunities. When selecting, developing and implementing new IT systems management and all users should be working closely with their IT staff to communicate what information they need or want. They also must ensure that the information will be delivered to them in user-friendly way and that the system is set up to help meet the organization’s strategy.

When accessing the performance of an IS, Palmius (2007) cites three types of approach are the most common: economical benefit, usability measurement and measurement of user/customer satisfaction. Economical benefits are linked frequently in return on investments (ROI) and cost-benefit analysis (CBA). Usability measurements regularly refer to interface quality while user/consumer satisfaction indicates quality of service studies. All of these can be indicator of performance in some specific level, but isolated they cannot measure the success of an IS.

The more your users understand the benefits of a new system, the more accepting they will be. Remember the WIIFM rule. What’s In It For Me? By explaining the benefits that will affect them, you’ll be laying the groundwork for a successful implementation.

User Satisfaction can be ddefined as the “sum of one’s feeling’s or attitudes toward a variety of factors affecting that situation in a given situation” (Bailey and Pearson 1983), and is considered the most thoroughly used domain in measuring system success (e.g. Delone and McLean, 1992; Doll and Torkzadeh, 1988; Etezadi-Amili and Farhoomand, 1996; Igbaria and Nachman, 1990; Igbaria and Tan, 1997; Gatian, 1994), and is widely cited as an a standard instruments that measure end user satisfaction (e.g. Bailey and Pearson, 1983; Baroudi and Orlikowski, 1988; Doll and Torkzadeh, 1988). DeLone and McLean (1992). Even some author feel that satisfaction is an important domain for information system success, previous researchers as early as 1983 concluded that satisfaction constructs (e.g. User Information Satisfaction - Bailey and Pearson 1983) does not just measure satisfaction but also multiple dimension of system quality which are blend together as system quality and information quality rather than just measuring user satisfaction.

Baltzan, Phillips, Lynch and Blakey (2010) stated that success is difficult to measure. Markova, Aula, Vainio, Wigelius, and Kulju (2007) discussed how tools for measuring success lies in the fact that success means different things for the different stakeholders that are the users of the service might emphasize the easiness of use while improved productivity is often mentioned as one of the main benefits from the perspective of the company. The success of Wi-Fi can be evaluated on the basis of benefits it is providing to its users and the company which is deploying that service. Both factors that are usability and business aspects are taken into consideration for evaluating success. Bradley, Pridmore, and Byrd (2006) explained how IT plan quality and cultural factors have a greater impact on success .Bradley et al. (2006) explained how the DeLone and McLean developed a six-factor Information success model ( Refer Fig. 1 ) which included system quality, information quality, IS use, user satisfaction, individual impact, and organizational impact to measure the success of an organization. In the case study McDonald failed to develop the Wi-Fi strategy due to their pay-per-use approach but did not want to miss the chance of earning extra revenue. So, Baltzan et al. (2010) explained how success could be measured using metrics

Information systems literature infers that satisfaction is the consumer’s level of fulfilment with a system, as well as with the system output (Petter et al., 2008). Notably, many studies do not distinguish between information satisfaction and system satisfaction as separate constructs for instance, (Wixom and Todd, 2005; Ghobakhloo et al., 2013)Within the electronic commerce context, consumer satisfaction may be described as the feeling or reaction of a consumer regarding his/her experiences with different aspects of the electronic commerce system