- Email: [email protected]
User information satisfaction, job satisfaction and computer background: An exploratory study
ELSEVIER Information & Management 32 (1997) 255-266
Research
User information satisfaction, job satisfaction and computer background: An exploratory study J. Ang , R H . Soh Department of Decision Sciences, Faculty of Business Administration, 10 Kent Ridge Crescent, National University of Singapore, Singapore 0511, Singapore Received 10 March 1997; revised 10 March 1997; accepted 9 July 1997
Abstract
The relationships among user information satisfaction (UIS), job satisfaction and the users' computer background were examined. UIS was measured using a modified version of the short-form of UIS, while job satisfaction was measured using the short-form Minnesota satisfaction questionnaire (MSQ). We found that UIS provides a sound indication of job satisfaction. However, none of the user computer-background parameters has any significant effect on UIS and job satisfaction. Data for the study were collected from three large organizations which had similar organizational structure and comparable information systems maturity; people who used computer as part of their jobs were randomly selected to take part in the study. A study with more organizations would yield better results. © 1997 Elsevier Science B.V.
Keywords: UIS; Job satisfaction; Computer background characteristics
1. Introduction
UIS I in a given computer-mediated environment refers to the 'extent to which users believe the IS available to them meets their 'information requirements' [19]. Studies on UIS generally focus on factors influencing IS success [6, 25], the relationship of UIS with user involvement [22], and the theoretical underpinning of the UIS construct and the validity of UIS measures [15, 21].
*Corresponding author. Fax: 65-7792621; e-mail: [email protected]. 1UIS has been widely used as a surrogate measure of information system (IS) success, 0378-7206/97/$17.00 © 1997 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved PH S-0378-7206(97)00030-X
It has been claimed that IS success improves organizational productivity [28], enhance the quality of management decision [24], and improve the quality of life [30]. But these claims have not been empirically corroborated, though positive relationships between these benefits and job satisfaction have been reported in the organizational behavior literature. The main objective of this study was to examine the relationship between UIS and job satisfaction. If the relationship between UIS and job satisfaction holds, then we can focus our attention on developing IS that are perceived by their users to be 'good.' This may in turn lead to higher productivity; this is in line with Liker et al.'s [23] suggestion after studying the use of computer-aided design (CAD) tools in both Japanese and American firms.
256
J. Ang, PH. Soh/Information & Management 32 (1997) 255-266
The second objective is to study how the computer background variables (frequency of use, user training, and computer literacy) affect UIS and job satisfaction in a computer-mediated environment where the use of computer is mandatory. Yaverbaum [31] tbund these variables to be positively correlated to UIS and job satisfaction. Her subjects were, however, from small firms where computerization was in the early stages and the use of computer was not mandatory. Knowing which parameters affect UIS and job satisfaction in a computer-mediated environment permits us to develop better training programs for employees [7].
2.1. Hypotheses HI: UIS is positively correlated with user job satisfaction. Using Ostroff's [27] situational context (i.e., job satisfaction is influenced by contextual factors), we suggest that one of the most important contextual factors is organizational climate. In a computer-mediated work environment, we can expect UIS to influence organizational climate, which, in turn, will influence job satisfaction. Past research suggests the possible association between the two constructs [5, 12, 13].
H2a: Frequency of use accounts for significant differences in job satisfaction and UIS.
2. Framework and hypotheses The framework (Figure 1) focuses on the links among UIS, job satisfaction and users' computer background. Although demographic variables are included, they are not the main associations to be examined. Studies of the implications of demographic variables on job satisfaction [32, 33] and UIS [17] have been made. In this study, only the influence of organizational position was examined, because of its relative importance in organizational theory. Organizational positions are differentiated by the tasks assigned, and the nature of these tasks affects user satisfaction.
H2b: User training accounts for significant differences in job satisfaction and UIS. H2c: Computer literacy accounts for significant differences in job satisfaction and UIS. The three computer background variables include the types of computer training, the number of training sessions attended per year, and computer experience, which involves the number of years that workers have used IS on their jobs. Recent research seems to suggest that these affect UIS [8, 14, 18] and job satisfaction.
Demographic variables Sex
A~e Educational level Years in present job Years in the company Organizational position
:triIs acf°,io ":ti°n
Computer background Frequency of use User training Computer literacy
ID
Represents the main associations to be examined in the study
Fig. 1. The framework used in the study.
J. Ang, P.H. Soh/Information & Management 32 (1997) 255-266 H3: Significant differences in job satisfaction and UIS exist among users at different organizational positions. Organizational level was examined in this study, because of its relative importance, both in organization theory and the MIS domain. IS have impact on power relations, decision making processes, supervision, and control structures of an organization [ 1,26]. Workers at different levels have been reported to have different job satisfaction because of various computer-impact factors, such as deskilling and upgrading of job, shifting of responsibilities, and span of control. However, research findings are far from conclusive. H4: Significant differences in job satisfaction and UIS exist between management users and non-management users. Cyert and March [9] argue that organizational environment continually imposes the need for information upon managers. These requirements of the managers directly affect the quality of the decision making process, and hence the effectiveness of the organization. The effectiveness of an organization is its ability to create acceptable outcomes by meeting the demands of groups and other organizations that are concerned with its activities. Since IS are designed to support management users for decision making, their success in meeting the information requirements will significantly impact management use. Given that the organizational information requirements are becoming more critical at the management level, there should be a significant difference in job satisfaction and UIS between management- and non-management users. In this study, management users consist of senior, middle, and junior management staff. Non-management users include professionals (defined as junior staff without supervisory responsibility), professional assistants, and clerical workers.
3. Research method
The survey questionnaire consisted of three parts: A modified short-form of the UIS measure, the MSQ
257
[29] and a section on user background. Reliability and validity tests for the two instruments were carried out. Hypotheses of the model were tested using ANOVA and correlation analysis. 3.1. The sample Table 1(a) shows the profiles of the three companies which took part in the study. While Company A and Company B developed and maintained their IS locally, Company C customized systems that were developed in other regional offices in Asia. Many functions within these companies were computerized and they both had mainframes and a network of computers. In order not to cause any organizational perturbations, a staff member from the human resource department of each company served as contact person. As the departments of Company A were dispersed geographically in Singapore, questionnaires were mailed directly to their various heads of departments, who then redistributed them to their own staff members. For the other two companies, the human resource personnel were requested to select, at random, employees who used computers as part of their jobs and who also liasoned with the application systems analysts/programmers for requirement changes and upgrading. A total of 300 questionnaires were distributed to subjects from different departments and at different organizational levels of each company. 133 questionnaires were returned, representing a response rate of 44 percent. All returned questionnaires were combined in the data analysis, as these companies were conceptually similar and shared the same level of IS maturity. Table l(b) shows the subjects' responses on user characteristics and computer-related variables. 3.2. The questionnaire 3.2.1. The modified version of the short-form UIS measure Baroudi and Orlikowski [4] tested the psychometric properties of the short-form measure of UIS (developed by Ives et al.) using a sample of 385 employees from a variety of industries. They found the measure reasonably valid and reliable. Three factors were identified. They are:
J. Ang, P.H. Soh/lnformation & Management 32 (1997) 255-266
258 Table 1 Table l(a) Company
Business
Total number of employees *
Number of IS staff *
No. of users #
Response rate
A+ B+ C
Transportation Banking Insurance
14,000 3,000 340
350(2.5%) 250(8.3%) 40(11.7%)
200 70 30
62(31%) 56(80%) 15(50%)
Several/day
Whole day
* Figures are approximate. # Number of computer users who took part in the survey. + Company A and B had a large number of staff whose job did not require the use of computers. The actual numbers were not revealed to us. Table l(b) Educational level
Sex
Male Female Missing observation
57 74 2
Age Below 26 26-30 31-35 36--40 41-45 46 and above
24 32 33 26 14 4
Years in company Less than 1 1-3 4-45 7-9 Over 9
10 33 16 12 62
Organizational position Senior management Middle management Junior management Professionals + Professional assistant Clerical staff
10 35 51 6 4 27
Pre-university and below Diploma Degree Others * Missing observation Years in present job Less than 1 1-3 4-6 7-9 Over 9
47 17 66 2 1
22 46 22 11 32
* Certificate in computing and secretariat. + Professionals defined as junior staff without supervisory responsibility. Frequency of use by organizational position (Two missing observations) < 4/month Sr mgmt Mid mgmt Jr mgmt Professional Prof. assts. Clerical Total
Once a week
Once a day
3 1
4 6
4 8 8
1 5
1 11
2 7 29
5 17 32 5 2 15 76
1 2 4 1 2 10 (continued)
J. Ang, P.H. Soh/Information & Management 32 (1997) 255-266
259
Table 1 (Continued) Average number of training sessions per year by organizational position
Senior management Middle management Junior management Professionals Professional assistant Clerical Total
No training
1-2
3-4
No Response
Total
3 12 18 2 1 11 47
4 21 24 3 1 14 67
1 1 1 0 1 0 4
2 1 8 1 1 2 15
10 35 51 6 4 27 133
Types of training conducted for users (Of the 133 users, 86 (64.7%) had received formal computer training in their present jobs. 75 of them had attended at least one of the types of training as mentioned above. 11 gave no indication. They probably had either no idea or forgotten by whom and where the training was conducted) a. In-house by IS staff b. In-house by consultants or vendors c. External training Number of users who attended the following combinations of training (a,b,c) 4 (a,c) 9 (b,c) 1 (a) 42
(b)
2
(c)
17
Total: 75
Years of experience by organizational position (Years of experience refers to the number of years respondents had been using computer at work)
Senior management Middle management Junior management Professionals Professional assistant Clerical Total
Less than 1 year
1-3 years
4-6 years
7-9 years
Over 9 years
2 0 5 0 0 1 8(6%)
4 9 16 2 2 9 42(31.6%)
2 16 10 1 1 7 37(27.8%)
2 7 12 1 1 6 29(21.8%)
0 3 8 2 0 4 17(12.8%)
Information product: The respondents' selfreported assessment of the quality of output delivered by the IS. EDP staff and services: The respondents' selfreported assessment of the attitude and responsiveness, as well as the quality of their relationship with the EDP staff. Knowledge and involvement: The respondents' selfreported assessment of the quality of training provided, their understanding of the system, and their participation in its development. The 13 items were examined for similarity of meaning and two were eliminated. They are 'precision
of output information' and 'relationship with the EDP staff.' We consulted our IS faculty members on the remaining 11 items. Acting on their advice, three items from the original UIS [2] instrument, and five of the six items from Davis' [10] perceived usefulness measure were included. The original UIS items added are: 'timeliness of output information,' 'currency (upto-dateness) of output information' and 'usefulness of documentation.' The rationale for doing so was that the participant companies relied heavily on the timeliness and currency of output information for decision making, and documentation was one of the main services provided by their IS departments.
260
J. Ang, P.H. Soh/lnformation & Management32 (1997) 255-266
Davis stated that perceived usefulness depends on the extent to which an application contributes to the enhancement of the user's job performance. It is, therefore, conceptually possible that the usefulness of an IS has implication on user job satisfaction. The five Davis items are speed, job performance, productivity, easiness and usefulness. The item dropped is 'using computer would enhance user job effectiveness' as the IS faculty members felt that the definition of job effectiveness overlaps those of productivity and performance. 3.2.2. Minnesota satisfaction questionnaire (MSQ) The MSQ measures the degree of job satisfaction. The short form, which consists of 20 items, was used in this study. Each of the 20 items represents a feature in the work environment. Three job satisfaction indices were used: Intrinsic, extrinsic, and overall job satisfaction. Intrinsic satisfaction refers to satisfaction derived from the work itself, such as feelings of accomplishment and personal growth, while extrinsic satisfaction refers to the benefits associated with doing the job rather than the work itself. Examples of extrinsic satisfaction are pay, promotion and work conditions. Herzberg's [16] two factor theory provides the underlying explanation for intrinsic and extrinsic satisfaction. The indices for these can be calculated by averaging the scores of the respective component items, whereas the overall job satisfaction index was calculated by averaging all the 20 items. 3.3. Validating the instruments Although both instruments are reasonably reliable and valid, the psychometric characteristics of the modified version of the UIS and the MSQ measures were tested, since new items were included in the former. Construct validity was tested using item-total correlation and factor analysis on both instruments, even though MSQ is well established. The itemtotal correlations of both instruments are all positive and significant at the 0.001 level. The 19 UIS correlations range from 0.39 to 0.64 with seven of them at levels below 0.50. The 20 MSQ correlations range from 0.31 to 0.70 with nine of them below 0.50.
For factor analysis, the principal component method with varimax rotation and eigenvalue greater than 1 was used. Four factors (Table 2) were generated for the modified version of the UIS measure, the additional factors being the usefulness construct of Davis. Two of the four factors, usefulness and product informatiOn, have all the relevant items loaded on them. However, three items loaded differently from those reported by Ives et al. and Baroudi and Orlikowski. 'User involvement' and 'understanding of system' loaded high on EDP staff and services instead of user knowledge, and 'processing of requests for changes' loaded high on user knowledge instead of EDP staff and services. 'Processing of requests for changes' was found to have similar loading under both EDP staff and services and user knowledge in the study by Baroudi and Orlikowski. Extension of a wellestablished instrument may result in slightly different factor loading, but this does not affect the stability of the factor structure of the 'modified' UIS measure. Two factors were generated for MSQ (Table 3). They are intrinsic satisfaction and extrinsic satisfaction. As expected, all 20 items loaded on their respective factors. Reliability was tested using Cronbach's alpha (Table 4).
4. Results of data analysis ANOVA and correlation analysis were performed to test the six hypotheses. The statistical package SPSS release 4.0 for Macintosh was used for the data analysis. 4.1. Statistical results Each UIS item was measured by a pair of semantic differentials (adjective pairs) scored from 1 to 7. A five-point Likert scale from 1 (dissatisfied) to 5 (satisfied) was used to measure each MSQ item. Table 5 shows the means of overall UIS, overall job satisfaction, and their respective factors. 4.1.1. Analysis of variance (ANOVA) ANOVA was performed to test the differences in the UIS index and job satisfaction indices by frequency of use, number of training, and computer literacy. Table 6 shows only the ANOVA results for organiza-
J. Ang, P.H. Soh/lnformation & Management 32 (1997) 255-266
261
Table 2 Factor analysis of UIS
Items
Factor 1 Information product
Factor 2 Usefulness
Factor 3 EDP staff and services
Factor 4 User knowledge
0.84 0.83 0.82 0.73 0.71 0.70
0.18 0.12 -0.1 0.22 0.26 0.23
0.15 0.20 0.13 0.11 0.20 0.21
0.18 0.22 0.13 0.03 0.07 0.05
0.19 0.01 0.21 0.28 0.26
0.82 0.80 0.77 0.68 0.56
0.18 0.20 0.14 0.13 0.04
0.11 0.07 -0.05 0.08 0.49
0.19 0.21 0.06 0.34 0.14
0.14 0.10 0.19 0.22 0.07
0.82 0.77 0.76 a 0.68 a 0.40
0.18 0.19 0.21 0.02 0.28
0.04 0.21 0.13
0.00 0.01 0.19
0.17 0.25 0.25
0.81 0.77 0.75 a
Information product 9. Accuracy of output information 8. Completeness of output information 7. Timeliness of output information 6. Reliability of output information 11. Currency of output information 10. Relevance of output information
Usefulness 1. 3. 2. 4. 5.
Productivity
Usefulness of system Job performance Speed to accomplish the tasks Doing my job with the system
EDP staff and services 12. Communication with the IS staff 15. Attitude of the IS staff 13. User involvement a 14. Understanding of the system a 19. Elapsed time for system development User knowledge 17. Computer training 18. User manual 16. Processing of requests for changes a
a Items 13 and 14 were listed under Factor 4 in Ives et al. (1983) and Baroudi and Orlikowski (1988), while item 16 was found to have similar factor loading under both Factors 3 and 4 in Baroudi and Orlikowski.
tional positions and managerial/non-managerial positions. No significant difference was found in the UIS index. There is also no significant difference in all the three job satisfaction indices and the UIS index for the computer background variables. As such, H2a, H2b, H2c, and the part of H3 and H4 on the relationships between UIS and organizational positions and managerial/non-managerial users can be rejected.
4.1.2. Correlation analysis Table 7 shows the Spearman and Pearson correlation coefficients between the UIS index and the job satisfaction index, and user characteristics and computer background. None of the coefficients is significant for user computer background, lending further support for the rejection of H2. 'Organizational position' is negatively correlated with job satisfaction and
this significant relationship suggests that the part of H3 dealing with job satisfaction and organizational positions cannot be rejected. A negative correlation is obtained because 'senior management' is coded 1, 'middle management' 2, and so on. 'Age' is the only user characteristic that is positively correlated with both UIS and job satisfaction at significant level 0.1 and 0.05, respectively. 'Educational level' and 'number of years in company' are correlated with UIS at the significant level of 0.05. No significant correlation is found in 'sex' and 'number of years in the present job.' Table 8 shows the correlation coefficients between the UIS index and the UIS factor indices, and the three job satisfaction indices. The UIS index is positively correlated with job satisfaction, intrinsic, and extrinsic satisfaction at the 0.05 level or better. Hence, H 1 cannot be rejected.
J. Ang, P..H. Soh/lnformation & Management 32 (1997) 255-266
262 Table 3 Factor analysis of job satisfaction Items
Factor 1 Intrinsic satisfaction
Intrinsic satisfaction 2. The chance to do different things from time to time to time 15. The freedom to use my own judgement 9. The chance to be 'somebody' in the community 8. The chance to do things for other people 10. The chance to tell people what to do 20. The feeling of accomplishment I get from the job 6. Being able to do things that don't go against my conscience 11. The chance to do something that makes use of my abilities 7. The way my job provides for steady employment 16. The chance to try my own methods of doing the job 1. The chance to work alone on the job 18. The way my co-workers get along with each other 3. Being able to keep busy all the time Extrinsic satisfaction 4. The way my boss handles his/her workers 19. The praise I get for doing a good job 17, The working conditions 14. The chances for advancement on this job 12. The way company policies are put into practice 5. The competence of my supervisor in making decisions 13. My pay and the amount of work I do
Table 4 Reliability alpha for UIS and MSQ factors
Factor 2 Extrinsic satisfaction
0.75 0.69 0.64 0.63 0.63 0.57 0.57 0.56 0.53 0.52 0.46 0.39 0.27
0.16 0.42 0.35 -0.08 0.22 0.24 0.22 0.46 -0.0 0.46 0.09 0.27 0.21
-0.12 0.24 0.22 0.27 0.21 0.18 0.18
0.80 0.67 0.65 0.64 0.62 0.59 0.58
4.2. Discussion
Factors
Cronbach alpha
UIS Usefulness Information EDP staff and services User knowledge
0.83 0.89 0.80 0.78
MSQ Intrinsic Extrinsic
0.86 0.81
We found no evidence that computer background variables have any significant relationships with job s a t i s f a c t i o n or UIS. O n e p o s s i b l e e x p l a n a t i o n is t h a t the o r g a n i z a t i o n s u n d e r s t u d y h a d a c h i e v e d a s u b s t a n tial l e v e l o f IS m a t u r i t y a n d t h a t the u s e o f IS w a s m a n d a t o r y . H e n c e , the e f f e c t o f t h e s e v a r i a b l e s w a s m i n i m a l . H o w e v e r , age w a s f o u n d to b e r e l a t e d sign i f i c a n t l y w i t h j o b s a t i s f a c t i o n a n d UIS, w i t h o l d e r e m p l o y e e s r e p o r t i n g h i g h e r levels o f U I S a n d o f j o b satisfaction. T h e p o s i t i v e r e l a t i o n s h i p b e t w e e n age a n d
Table 5 Means of UIS and UIS factors Overall satisfaction
Usefulness of system
Mean scores 5.30 5.59 Means of job satisfaction and job satisfaction factors Overall satisfaction Intrinsic satisfaction Mean scores 3.67 3.85
Information product
EDP staff and services User knowledge
5.67
5.2
Extrinsic satisfaction 3.31
4.21
J. Ang, P.H. Soh/lnformation & Management 32 (1997) 255-266
263
Table 6 ANOVA results for organizational positions, and managerial and non-managerial positions Satisfaction variable
UIS Index ~ Job satisfaction Intrinsic satisfaction Extrinsic satisfaction
Computer background and organizational positions
Degree of freedom
F-value
Prob>F
Organizational position Managerial & non-managerial position Managerial & non-managerial position organizational position Managerial and non-managerial position
5 1 1 5 1
2.65 7.10 3.58 1.90 3.18
0.03 0.01 0.06 0. l0 0.08
No significant findings. Note: The ANOVA results for frequency of use, user training, and computer literacy are not shown because they are not significant. a
Table 7 Correlation among UIS index, bob satisfaction (JS) index, user characteristics and computer background JS index
UIS index Spearman
Pearson
Spearman
Pearson
User characteristics Sex Age Educational level No. of years in company No. of years in the present job Organizational position
-0.01 0.16 ~ -0.21 b 0.19 b 0.08 0.00
-0.01 0.10 -0.13 0.17 ~ 0.03 0.01
-0.08 0.20 b -0.00 0.06 0.04 -0.28 b
-0.07 0.21 b 0.02 0.11 0.03 -0.27 b
Computer background Computer experience Frequency of use Type of computer training No. of training attended
0.04 -0.03 -0.06 0.14
0.03 -0.00 -0.04 0.17
0.03 -0.05 -0.03 0.06
-0.00 -0.06 -0.5 0.11
Two-tailed significance. Significant at P < 0.1. b Significant at P < .05.
Table 8 JS factor 1 intrinsic satisfaction
JS index
UIS UIS UIS UIS UIS
index factor factor factor factor
1 2 3 4
(Information product) (Usefulness) (EDP staff and services) (User knowledge)
Two-tailed significance. a Significant at P < 0.1. b Significant at P < 0.05. Significant at P < 0.001.
JS factor 2 extrinsic satisfaction
Spearman
Pearson
Spearman
Pearson
Spearman
Pearson
0.40 0.09 0.17 0.24 0.26
0.44 0.17 0.15 0.27 0.29
0.20 b 0.02 0.12 0.26 b 0.3
0.25 b 0.05 0.09 0.30 b 0.4
0.33 c 0.11 0.05 0.09 0.33 c
0.37 ° 0.18 a 0.12 0.08 0.36 ¢
¢ a b b
¢ a b b
264
z Ang, P.H. Soh/lnformation & Management 32 (1997) 255-266
job satisfaction is consistent with Judge and Watanabe's [20] finding that job satisfaction and life satisfaction are significantly as well as reciprocally related. Life satisfaction, according to Diener [11], increases with age. A probable reason for the positive relationship between age and UIS is that the older employees in this study were those between 31 and 45 years of age (only three were aged 46 and above), an age group whose growth need strength is high. Besides task variety and increased responsibility (which are associated with higher organizational positions), computers, since their use was mandatory, probably provided them with a means to enhance their growth need strength. Job satisfaction (both intrinsic and extrinsic) was found to be positively related to organizational positions and managerial/non-managerial users. Each organizational level has a different set of immediate task activities and it is these activities that link the individual to the organization. Task activities associated with higher level positions tend to be high in variety, a feature that is intrinsic satisfying. The level also determines the type of rewards (an important extrinsic satisfaction item) available to the job holder as well as the degree of job satisfaction. The same reasoning also applies to managerial/non-managerial users. One possible reason why UIS is not significantly related to organizational position and managerial/non-managerial position is that computer usage in different functions affect different groups quite differently, independently of their organizational status. For example, computer usage in research-related functions (where task variety is high), just like the design engineers in Liker et al's study, could result in a higher level of UIS compared to computer usage in administrative functions (where task variety is more orderly), regardless of the workers' organizational status. Educational level was negatively correlated with UIS, while the number of years in company was positively correlated with UIS. A plausible explanation for the negative correlation between UIS and educational level is that local institutions of higher learning in Singapore (e.g., polytechnics, universities) place greater emphasis on computer skills by including them in the academic curricula. Employees who have been equipped with such skills (from the institutions) would have higher expectations (demands) for
good computer systems, especially if computer use is essential for accomplishing their duties. Hence, they are likely to be less tolerant of systems that are not useful or if the MIS department has poor services or uncooperative staff. Since computer use was mandatory in the organization under study, it is likely that employees who had been with the company for a long time would be more comfortable with the computermediated work environment. This could explain the positive correlation between UIS and the number of years in company. The study indicated that job satisfaction and UIS were highly correlated. In other words, the general user perception of information satisfaction and services does reflect job attitudes and vice versa. Therefore, in attempting to improve the job satisfaction of end-user employees, an additional focus would be on improving the level of their UIS (i.e., factors such as user knowledge of IS, quality of service provided by the MIS staff, and quality of output delivered by the IS). Similarly, organizations wanting to increase the UIS level should not overlook the importance of job satisfaction factors, such as pay, working conditions, feeling of accomplishment etc. Since it is easier for management to implement schemes to increase extrinsic rather than intrinsic satisfaction, management should look at ways to reward employees, create better working conditions, etc. For example, users who are more knowledgeable about systems (the UIS factor which correlates significantly with job satisfaction) tend to be in greater control of their job situation, especially in a computer-mediated environment. This sense of control could be indirectly translated into higher confidence in their job advancement prospects, or, at least, greater satisfaction with the working environment in which the computer is perceived as a valuable tool. In the case of MIS staff and services, higher service quality level provided by the MIS department may influence the perceptions of the end-users' working conditions. If UIS and job satisfaction are highly correlated, then we can explore new ways of work redesign. Instead of trying to reconfigure existing work processes, we can focus our attention on developing a computer-mediated environment with IS that are perceived by their users to be 'good.' In order to achieve this, management has to get users actively involved in the analysis, design and implementation of the IS.
J. Ang, PH. Soh/lnformation & Management 32 (19971 255-266
I n v o l v e m e n t must be m o r e than just s y m b o l i c ; it must be active, with the users p r o v i d i n g useful inputs at each stage o f the systems d e v e l o p m e n t process. U s e r i n v o l v e m e n t is important because it restores and e n h a n c e s p e r c e i v e d control on the part o f end users [3]. This sense o f control tends to reduce the threatening quality o f the s y s t e m ' s i m p l e m e n t a t i o n experience, thus leading to higher levels of U I S and j o b satisfaction.
5. Limitations M a n y critical factors that h a v e direct influence on or intervening effect b e t w e e n UIS and j o b satisfaction w e r e omitted to keep the f r a m e w o r k simple. By including such factors as organizational climate, cognitive differences and nature of tasks, a d e e p e r insight can be gained into relationship b e t w e e n the two constructs. The significant correlations b e t w e e n UIS and j o b satisfaction and certain d e m o g r a p h i c variables (e.g., age, educational level) indicate that these variables c o u l d be important intervening variables. Our exploratory f r a m e w o r k only factored in the users' c o m p u t e r b a c k g r o u n d and their organizational positions. An extension o f this study w o u l d be a m o r e c o m p r e h e n s i v e one, w h e r e these other variables are included. O w i n g to the difficulty o f getting c o m p a n i e s to participate in this project, the study has to be restricted to three organizations that have c o m p a r a b l e organizational structure and IS maturity. A m o r e c o m p r e h e n sive f r a m e w o r k that includes other influential factors coupled with more sample points w o u l d yield m o r e insightful results.
References [ 1] J. Ang and E Pavri, A survey and critique of the impacts of information technology. International Journal of lnformation Management, 14(2), April 1994, 122-133. [2] Bailey, J.E. and Pearson, S.W., Development of a tool for measuring and analyzing computer user satisfaction, Management Science 29, 1983, 530-545. [3] A.M. Baronas and, M.R. Louis, Restoring a sense of control during implementation: How user involvement leads to user acceptance. MIS Quarterly, March 1988, 111123.
265
[4] Baroudi, J.J. and Orlikowski, W.J., A short-form measure of user information satisfaction: A psychometric evaluation and notes on use, Journal of Management Information Systems 4(4), 1988, 44-59. [5] Chency, P.H. and Dickson, G.W., Organizational characteristics and information systems: An exploratory investigation, Academy of Management Journal 25(1), 1982, 170-184. [6] Cheney, P.H., Mann, R.I. and Amoroso, D.L., Organizational factors affecting the success of end-user computing, Journal of Management Information Systems 3(1), 1986, 65-80. [71 D. Compeau, L. Olfman, M. Sei, and J. Webster, End-user: Training and learning. Communications of the ACM, 38(7), July 1995, 24-26. [8] Conrath, D.W. and Mignen, O.O., What is being done to measure user satisfaction with EDP/MIS, Information and Management 19(1), 1990, 7-19. [9] R.N. Cyert, and J.G. March, A Behavioral Theo~ of the Firm, Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, N.J., 1963. [10] Davis, F.D., Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology, MIS Quarterly 13(3), 1989, 259-274. [11 r Diener, E., , Subjective well-being 95, 1984, 542-575. [12] Galletta, D.F. and Lederer, A.L., Some cautions on the measurement of user information satisfaction. Decision Sciences 3, 1989, 419--438. [13] D.L. Goodhue, IS attitudes: Toward theoretical and definition clarity. Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference on Information Systems, San Diego, California, 1986, 181194. [14] Henderson, J.C. and Treacy, M.E., Managing end-user computing for competitive advantage, Sloan Management Review 27(2), 1986, 3-14. [15] Hendrickson, A.R,, Glorfield, K. and Cronan, T.E , On the repeated test-retest relaibility of end-user computing satisfaction instrument: A comment, Decision Sciences 25(4), 1994, 655-667. [16] F. Herzberg, One more time: How do you motivate employees'? Harvard Business Review, Jan-Feb, 1968, 5362. [17] lgabaria, M. and Nachman, S.A., Correlates of user satisfaction with end user computing, Information and Management 19, 1990, 73-82. [18] Igabaria, M. and Chakrabrati, A., Computer anxiety and aattitdues towards microcomputer use, Behavior and lnfi)rmation Technology 9(3), 1990, 229-241. [19] lves, B., Olson, M. and Baroudi, J.J. , The measurement of user information satisfaction, Communications of the ACM 26(10), 1983, 785-793. [20] Judge, T.A. and Watanabe, S., Another look at the jobsatisfaction relationship, Journal of Applied Psychology 78(6), 1993, 939-948. [211 Kettinger, W.J. and Lee, C.C., Perceived service quality and user satisfaction with the information services function, Decision Sciencs 25(5/6), 1994, 737-766. [22] M. Lawrence, and G. Low, Exploring individual user satisfaction with user-led development. MIS Quarterly, 17(2), June 1993, 195-208.
266
£ Ang, P.H. Soh/Information & Management 32 (1997) 255-266
[23] J.K., Liker, M., Fleischer, M. Nagamachi, and M.S. Zonnevylle, Designers and their machines: CAD use and support in the US and Japan. Communications of the ACM, 15(2), February 1992, 77-95. [24] McLeod, R. and Jones, J.W., A framework for office automation, MIS Quarterly 11(1), 1987, 86-104. [25] Montazemi, A.R., Factors affecting information satisfaction in the context of the small business environment, MIS Quarterly 12(2), 1988, 239-256. [26] Orlikowski, W.J. and Robey, D., Information technology and the structuring of organizations, Information Systems Research 2(2), 1991, 143-169. [27] Ostroff, C., The relationship between satisfaction, attitudes, and performance, An organizational level analysis, Journal of Applied Psychology 77(6), 1992, 963-974. [28] R. Schroeder, J.C. Anderson, and G.D. Scubber, White collar productivity measurement. Management Decision, 24(5), Winter 1986, 3-7.
[29] D.J. Weiss, R.V. Dawis, G.W. England, and L.H. Lofquist, Manual for the Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire, 1967, Industrial Relations Centre, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis. [30] R. Westrum, Technologies and society: the shaping of people and things. Wadsworth Publishing Company, Belmont, California, 199. [31] Yaverbaum, G.J., Critical factors in the user environment: An experimental study of users, organizations and tasks, MIS Quarterly 12(1), 1988, 75-89. [32] Zeffane, R.M., Correlates of job satisfaction and their implications for work redesign: A focus on the Australian Telecommunication Industry, Public Personnel Management, 23(1), 1994a, 61-75. [33] Zeffane, R.M., The influence of computer usage on employees and managers' satisfaction: Findings from the Australian Telecommunication, Human Systems Management, 13, 1994b, 269-282.
Research
User information satisfaction, job satisfaction and computer background: An exploratory study J. Ang , R H . Soh Department of Decision Sciences, Faculty of Business Administration, 10 Kent Ridge Crescent, National University of Singapore, Singapore 0511, Singapore Received 10 March 1997; revised 10 March 1997; accepted 9 July 1997
Abstract
The relationships among user information satisfaction (UIS), job satisfaction and the users' computer background were examined. UIS was measured using a modified version of the short-form of UIS, while job satisfaction was measured using the short-form Minnesota satisfaction questionnaire (MSQ). We found that UIS provides a sound indication of job satisfaction. However, none of the user computer-background parameters has any significant effect on UIS and job satisfaction. Data for the study were collected from three large organizations which had similar organizational structure and comparable information systems maturity; people who used computer as part of their jobs were randomly selected to take part in the study. A study with more organizations would yield better results. © 1997 Elsevier Science B.V.
Keywords: UIS; Job satisfaction; Computer background characteristics
1. Introduction
UIS I in a given computer-mediated environment refers to the 'extent to which users believe the IS available to them meets their 'information requirements' [19]. Studies on UIS generally focus on factors influencing IS success [6, 25], the relationship of UIS with user involvement [22], and the theoretical underpinning of the UIS construct and the validity of UIS measures [15, 21].
*Corresponding author. Fax: 65-7792621; e-mail: [email protected]. 1UIS has been widely used as a surrogate measure of information system (IS) success, 0378-7206/97/$17.00 © 1997 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved PH S-0378-7206(97)00030-X
It has been claimed that IS success improves organizational productivity [28], enhance the quality of management decision [24], and improve the quality of life [30]. But these claims have not been empirically corroborated, though positive relationships between these benefits and job satisfaction have been reported in the organizational behavior literature. The main objective of this study was to examine the relationship between UIS and job satisfaction. If the relationship between UIS and job satisfaction holds, then we can focus our attention on developing IS that are perceived by their users to be 'good.' This may in turn lead to higher productivity; this is in line with Liker et al.'s [23] suggestion after studying the use of computer-aided design (CAD) tools in both Japanese and American firms.
256
J. Ang, PH. Soh/Information & Management 32 (1997) 255-266
The second objective is to study how the computer background variables (frequency of use, user training, and computer literacy) affect UIS and job satisfaction in a computer-mediated environment where the use of computer is mandatory. Yaverbaum [31] tbund these variables to be positively correlated to UIS and job satisfaction. Her subjects were, however, from small firms where computerization was in the early stages and the use of computer was not mandatory. Knowing which parameters affect UIS and job satisfaction in a computer-mediated environment permits us to develop better training programs for employees [7].
2.1. Hypotheses HI: UIS is positively correlated with user job satisfaction. Using Ostroff's [27] situational context (i.e., job satisfaction is influenced by contextual factors), we suggest that one of the most important contextual factors is organizational climate. In a computer-mediated work environment, we can expect UIS to influence organizational climate, which, in turn, will influence job satisfaction. Past research suggests the possible association between the two constructs [5, 12, 13].
H2a: Frequency of use accounts for significant differences in job satisfaction and UIS.
2. Framework and hypotheses The framework (Figure 1) focuses on the links among UIS, job satisfaction and users' computer background. Although demographic variables are included, they are not the main associations to be examined. Studies of the implications of demographic variables on job satisfaction [32, 33] and UIS [17] have been made. In this study, only the influence of organizational position was examined, because of its relative importance in organizational theory. Organizational positions are differentiated by the tasks assigned, and the nature of these tasks affects user satisfaction.
H2b: User training accounts for significant differences in job satisfaction and UIS. H2c: Computer literacy accounts for significant differences in job satisfaction and UIS. The three computer background variables include the types of computer training, the number of training sessions attended per year, and computer experience, which involves the number of years that workers have used IS on their jobs. Recent research seems to suggest that these affect UIS [8, 14, 18] and job satisfaction.
Demographic variables Sex
A~e Educational level Years in present job Years in the company Organizational position
:triIs acf°,io ":ti°n
Computer background Frequency of use User training Computer literacy
ID
Represents the main associations to be examined in the study
Fig. 1. The framework used in the study.
J. Ang, P.H. Soh/Information & Management 32 (1997) 255-266 H3: Significant differences in job satisfaction and UIS exist among users at different organizational positions. Organizational level was examined in this study, because of its relative importance, both in organization theory and the MIS domain. IS have impact on power relations, decision making processes, supervision, and control structures of an organization [ 1,26]. Workers at different levels have been reported to have different job satisfaction because of various computer-impact factors, such as deskilling and upgrading of job, shifting of responsibilities, and span of control. However, research findings are far from conclusive. H4: Significant differences in job satisfaction and UIS exist between management users and non-management users. Cyert and March [9] argue that organizational environment continually imposes the need for information upon managers. These requirements of the managers directly affect the quality of the decision making process, and hence the effectiveness of the organization. The effectiveness of an organization is its ability to create acceptable outcomes by meeting the demands of groups and other organizations that are concerned with its activities. Since IS are designed to support management users for decision making, their success in meeting the information requirements will significantly impact management use. Given that the organizational information requirements are becoming more critical at the management level, there should be a significant difference in job satisfaction and UIS between management- and non-management users. In this study, management users consist of senior, middle, and junior management staff. Non-management users include professionals (defined as junior staff without supervisory responsibility), professional assistants, and clerical workers.
3. Research method
The survey questionnaire consisted of three parts: A modified short-form of the UIS measure, the MSQ
257
[29] and a section on user background. Reliability and validity tests for the two instruments were carried out. Hypotheses of the model were tested using ANOVA and correlation analysis. 3.1. The sample Table 1(a) shows the profiles of the three companies which took part in the study. While Company A and Company B developed and maintained their IS locally, Company C customized systems that were developed in other regional offices in Asia. Many functions within these companies were computerized and they both had mainframes and a network of computers. In order not to cause any organizational perturbations, a staff member from the human resource department of each company served as contact person. As the departments of Company A were dispersed geographically in Singapore, questionnaires were mailed directly to their various heads of departments, who then redistributed them to their own staff members. For the other two companies, the human resource personnel were requested to select, at random, employees who used computers as part of their jobs and who also liasoned with the application systems analysts/programmers for requirement changes and upgrading. A total of 300 questionnaires were distributed to subjects from different departments and at different organizational levels of each company. 133 questionnaires were returned, representing a response rate of 44 percent. All returned questionnaires were combined in the data analysis, as these companies were conceptually similar and shared the same level of IS maturity. Table l(b) shows the subjects' responses on user characteristics and computer-related variables. 3.2. The questionnaire 3.2.1. The modified version of the short-form UIS measure Baroudi and Orlikowski [4] tested the psychometric properties of the short-form measure of UIS (developed by Ives et al.) using a sample of 385 employees from a variety of industries. They found the measure reasonably valid and reliable. Three factors were identified. They are:
J. Ang, P.H. Soh/lnformation & Management 32 (1997) 255-266
258 Table 1 Table l(a) Company
Business
Total number of employees *
Number of IS staff *
No. of users #
Response rate
A+ B+ C
Transportation Banking Insurance
14,000 3,000 340
350(2.5%) 250(8.3%) 40(11.7%)
200 70 30
62(31%) 56(80%) 15(50%)
Several/day
Whole day
* Figures are approximate. # Number of computer users who took part in the survey. + Company A and B had a large number of staff whose job did not require the use of computers. The actual numbers were not revealed to us. Table l(b) Educational level
Sex
Male Female Missing observation
57 74 2
Age Below 26 26-30 31-35 36--40 41-45 46 and above
24 32 33 26 14 4
Years in company Less than 1 1-3 4-45 7-9 Over 9
10 33 16 12 62
Organizational position Senior management Middle management Junior management Professionals + Professional assistant Clerical staff
10 35 51 6 4 27
Pre-university and below Diploma Degree Others * Missing observation Years in present job Less than 1 1-3 4-6 7-9 Over 9
47 17 66 2 1
22 46 22 11 32
* Certificate in computing and secretariat. + Professionals defined as junior staff without supervisory responsibility. Frequency of use by organizational position (Two missing observations) < 4/month Sr mgmt Mid mgmt Jr mgmt Professional Prof. assts. Clerical Total
Once a week
Once a day
3 1
4 6
4 8 8
1 5
1 11
2 7 29
5 17 32 5 2 15 76
1 2 4 1 2 10 (continued)
J. Ang, P.H. Soh/Information & Management 32 (1997) 255-266
259
Table 1 (Continued) Average number of training sessions per year by organizational position
Senior management Middle management Junior management Professionals Professional assistant Clerical Total
No training
1-2
3-4
No Response
Total
3 12 18 2 1 11 47
4 21 24 3 1 14 67
1 1 1 0 1 0 4
2 1 8 1 1 2 15
10 35 51 6 4 27 133
Types of training conducted for users (Of the 133 users, 86 (64.7%) had received formal computer training in their present jobs. 75 of them had attended at least one of the types of training as mentioned above. 11 gave no indication. They probably had either no idea or forgotten by whom and where the training was conducted) a. In-house by IS staff b. In-house by consultants or vendors c. External training Number of users who attended the following combinations of training (a,b,c) 4 (a,c) 9 (b,c) 1 (a) 42
(b)
2
(c)
17
Total: 75
Years of experience by organizational position (Years of experience refers to the number of years respondents had been using computer at work)
Senior management Middle management Junior management Professionals Professional assistant Clerical Total
Less than 1 year
1-3 years
4-6 years
7-9 years
Over 9 years
2 0 5 0 0 1 8(6%)
4 9 16 2 2 9 42(31.6%)
2 16 10 1 1 7 37(27.8%)
2 7 12 1 1 6 29(21.8%)
0 3 8 2 0 4 17(12.8%)
Information product: The respondents' selfreported assessment of the quality of output delivered by the IS. EDP staff and services: The respondents' selfreported assessment of the attitude and responsiveness, as well as the quality of their relationship with the EDP staff. Knowledge and involvement: The respondents' selfreported assessment of the quality of training provided, their understanding of the system, and their participation in its development. The 13 items were examined for similarity of meaning and two were eliminated. They are 'precision
of output information' and 'relationship with the EDP staff.' We consulted our IS faculty members on the remaining 11 items. Acting on their advice, three items from the original UIS [2] instrument, and five of the six items from Davis' [10] perceived usefulness measure were included. The original UIS items added are: 'timeliness of output information,' 'currency (upto-dateness) of output information' and 'usefulness of documentation.' The rationale for doing so was that the participant companies relied heavily on the timeliness and currency of output information for decision making, and documentation was one of the main services provided by their IS departments.
260
J. Ang, P.H. Soh/lnformation & Management32 (1997) 255-266
Davis stated that perceived usefulness depends on the extent to which an application contributes to the enhancement of the user's job performance. It is, therefore, conceptually possible that the usefulness of an IS has implication on user job satisfaction. The five Davis items are speed, job performance, productivity, easiness and usefulness. The item dropped is 'using computer would enhance user job effectiveness' as the IS faculty members felt that the definition of job effectiveness overlaps those of productivity and performance. 3.2.2. Minnesota satisfaction questionnaire (MSQ) The MSQ measures the degree of job satisfaction. The short form, which consists of 20 items, was used in this study. Each of the 20 items represents a feature in the work environment. Three job satisfaction indices were used: Intrinsic, extrinsic, and overall job satisfaction. Intrinsic satisfaction refers to satisfaction derived from the work itself, such as feelings of accomplishment and personal growth, while extrinsic satisfaction refers to the benefits associated with doing the job rather than the work itself. Examples of extrinsic satisfaction are pay, promotion and work conditions. Herzberg's [16] two factor theory provides the underlying explanation for intrinsic and extrinsic satisfaction. The indices for these can be calculated by averaging the scores of the respective component items, whereas the overall job satisfaction index was calculated by averaging all the 20 items. 3.3. Validating the instruments Although both instruments are reasonably reliable and valid, the psychometric characteristics of the modified version of the UIS and the MSQ measures were tested, since new items were included in the former. Construct validity was tested using item-total correlation and factor analysis on both instruments, even though MSQ is well established. The itemtotal correlations of both instruments are all positive and significant at the 0.001 level. The 19 UIS correlations range from 0.39 to 0.64 with seven of them at levels below 0.50. The 20 MSQ correlations range from 0.31 to 0.70 with nine of them below 0.50.
For factor analysis, the principal component method with varimax rotation and eigenvalue greater than 1 was used. Four factors (Table 2) were generated for the modified version of the UIS measure, the additional factors being the usefulness construct of Davis. Two of the four factors, usefulness and product informatiOn, have all the relevant items loaded on them. However, three items loaded differently from those reported by Ives et al. and Baroudi and Orlikowski. 'User involvement' and 'understanding of system' loaded high on EDP staff and services instead of user knowledge, and 'processing of requests for changes' loaded high on user knowledge instead of EDP staff and services. 'Processing of requests for changes' was found to have similar loading under both EDP staff and services and user knowledge in the study by Baroudi and Orlikowski. Extension of a wellestablished instrument may result in slightly different factor loading, but this does not affect the stability of the factor structure of the 'modified' UIS measure. Two factors were generated for MSQ (Table 3). They are intrinsic satisfaction and extrinsic satisfaction. As expected, all 20 items loaded on their respective factors. Reliability was tested using Cronbach's alpha (Table 4).
4. Results of data analysis ANOVA and correlation analysis were performed to test the six hypotheses. The statistical package SPSS release 4.0 for Macintosh was used for the data analysis. 4.1. Statistical results Each UIS item was measured by a pair of semantic differentials (adjective pairs) scored from 1 to 7. A five-point Likert scale from 1 (dissatisfied) to 5 (satisfied) was used to measure each MSQ item. Table 5 shows the means of overall UIS, overall job satisfaction, and their respective factors. 4.1.1. Analysis of variance (ANOVA) ANOVA was performed to test the differences in the UIS index and job satisfaction indices by frequency of use, number of training, and computer literacy. Table 6 shows only the ANOVA results for organiza-
J. Ang, P.H. Soh/lnformation & Management 32 (1997) 255-266
261
Table 2 Factor analysis of UIS
Items
Factor 1 Information product
Factor 2 Usefulness
Factor 3 EDP staff and services
Factor 4 User knowledge
0.84 0.83 0.82 0.73 0.71 0.70
0.18 0.12 -0.1 0.22 0.26 0.23
0.15 0.20 0.13 0.11 0.20 0.21
0.18 0.22 0.13 0.03 0.07 0.05
0.19 0.01 0.21 0.28 0.26
0.82 0.80 0.77 0.68 0.56
0.18 0.20 0.14 0.13 0.04
0.11 0.07 -0.05 0.08 0.49
0.19 0.21 0.06 0.34 0.14
0.14 0.10 0.19 0.22 0.07
0.82 0.77 0.76 a 0.68 a 0.40
0.18 0.19 0.21 0.02 0.28
0.04 0.21 0.13
0.00 0.01 0.19
0.17 0.25 0.25
0.81 0.77 0.75 a
Information product 9. Accuracy of output information 8. Completeness of output information 7. Timeliness of output information 6. Reliability of output information 11. Currency of output information 10. Relevance of output information
Usefulness 1. 3. 2. 4. 5.
Productivity
Usefulness of system Job performance Speed to accomplish the tasks Doing my job with the system
EDP staff and services 12. Communication with the IS staff 15. Attitude of the IS staff 13. User involvement a 14. Understanding of the system a 19. Elapsed time for system development User knowledge 17. Computer training 18. User manual 16. Processing of requests for changes a
a Items 13 and 14 were listed under Factor 4 in Ives et al. (1983) and Baroudi and Orlikowski (1988), while item 16 was found to have similar factor loading under both Factors 3 and 4 in Baroudi and Orlikowski.
tional positions and managerial/non-managerial positions. No significant difference was found in the UIS index. There is also no significant difference in all the three job satisfaction indices and the UIS index for the computer background variables. As such, H2a, H2b, H2c, and the part of H3 and H4 on the relationships between UIS and organizational positions and managerial/non-managerial users can be rejected.
4.1.2. Correlation analysis Table 7 shows the Spearman and Pearson correlation coefficients between the UIS index and the job satisfaction index, and user characteristics and computer background. None of the coefficients is significant for user computer background, lending further support for the rejection of H2. 'Organizational position' is negatively correlated with job satisfaction and
this significant relationship suggests that the part of H3 dealing with job satisfaction and organizational positions cannot be rejected. A negative correlation is obtained because 'senior management' is coded 1, 'middle management' 2, and so on. 'Age' is the only user characteristic that is positively correlated with both UIS and job satisfaction at significant level 0.1 and 0.05, respectively. 'Educational level' and 'number of years in company' are correlated with UIS at the significant level of 0.05. No significant correlation is found in 'sex' and 'number of years in the present job.' Table 8 shows the correlation coefficients between the UIS index and the UIS factor indices, and the three job satisfaction indices. The UIS index is positively correlated with job satisfaction, intrinsic, and extrinsic satisfaction at the 0.05 level or better. Hence, H 1 cannot be rejected.
J. Ang, P..H. Soh/lnformation & Management 32 (1997) 255-266
262 Table 3 Factor analysis of job satisfaction Items
Factor 1 Intrinsic satisfaction
Intrinsic satisfaction 2. The chance to do different things from time to time to time 15. The freedom to use my own judgement 9. The chance to be 'somebody' in the community 8. The chance to do things for other people 10. The chance to tell people what to do 20. The feeling of accomplishment I get from the job 6. Being able to do things that don't go against my conscience 11. The chance to do something that makes use of my abilities 7. The way my job provides for steady employment 16. The chance to try my own methods of doing the job 1. The chance to work alone on the job 18. The way my co-workers get along with each other 3. Being able to keep busy all the time Extrinsic satisfaction 4. The way my boss handles his/her workers 19. The praise I get for doing a good job 17, The working conditions 14. The chances for advancement on this job 12. The way company policies are put into practice 5. The competence of my supervisor in making decisions 13. My pay and the amount of work I do
Table 4 Reliability alpha for UIS and MSQ factors
Factor 2 Extrinsic satisfaction
0.75 0.69 0.64 0.63 0.63 0.57 0.57 0.56 0.53 0.52 0.46 0.39 0.27
0.16 0.42 0.35 -0.08 0.22 0.24 0.22 0.46 -0.0 0.46 0.09 0.27 0.21
-0.12 0.24 0.22 0.27 0.21 0.18 0.18
0.80 0.67 0.65 0.64 0.62 0.59 0.58
4.2. Discussion
Factors
Cronbach alpha
UIS Usefulness Information EDP staff and services User knowledge
0.83 0.89 0.80 0.78
MSQ Intrinsic Extrinsic
0.86 0.81
We found no evidence that computer background variables have any significant relationships with job s a t i s f a c t i o n or UIS. O n e p o s s i b l e e x p l a n a t i o n is t h a t the o r g a n i z a t i o n s u n d e r s t u d y h a d a c h i e v e d a s u b s t a n tial l e v e l o f IS m a t u r i t y a n d t h a t the u s e o f IS w a s m a n d a t o r y . H e n c e , the e f f e c t o f t h e s e v a r i a b l e s w a s m i n i m a l . H o w e v e r , age w a s f o u n d to b e r e l a t e d sign i f i c a n t l y w i t h j o b s a t i s f a c t i o n a n d UIS, w i t h o l d e r e m p l o y e e s r e p o r t i n g h i g h e r levels o f U I S a n d o f j o b satisfaction. T h e p o s i t i v e r e l a t i o n s h i p b e t w e e n age a n d
Table 5 Means of UIS and UIS factors Overall satisfaction
Usefulness of system
Mean scores 5.30 5.59 Means of job satisfaction and job satisfaction factors Overall satisfaction Intrinsic satisfaction Mean scores 3.67 3.85
Information product
EDP staff and services User knowledge
5.67
5.2
Extrinsic satisfaction 3.31
4.21
J. Ang, P.H. Soh/lnformation & Management 32 (1997) 255-266
263
Table 6 ANOVA results for organizational positions, and managerial and non-managerial positions Satisfaction variable
UIS Index ~ Job satisfaction Intrinsic satisfaction Extrinsic satisfaction
Computer background and organizational positions
Degree of freedom
F-value
Prob>F
Organizational position Managerial & non-managerial position Managerial & non-managerial position organizational position Managerial and non-managerial position
5 1 1 5 1
2.65 7.10 3.58 1.90 3.18
0.03 0.01 0.06 0. l0 0.08
No significant findings. Note: The ANOVA results for frequency of use, user training, and computer literacy are not shown because they are not significant. a
Table 7 Correlation among UIS index, bob satisfaction (JS) index, user characteristics and computer background JS index
UIS index Spearman
Pearson
Spearman
Pearson
User characteristics Sex Age Educational level No. of years in company No. of years in the present job Organizational position
-0.01 0.16 ~ -0.21 b 0.19 b 0.08 0.00
-0.01 0.10 -0.13 0.17 ~ 0.03 0.01
-0.08 0.20 b -0.00 0.06 0.04 -0.28 b
-0.07 0.21 b 0.02 0.11 0.03 -0.27 b
Computer background Computer experience Frequency of use Type of computer training No. of training attended
0.04 -0.03 -0.06 0.14
0.03 -0.00 -0.04 0.17
0.03 -0.05 -0.03 0.06
-0.00 -0.06 -0.5 0.11
Two-tailed significance. Significant at P < 0.1. b Significant at P < .05.
Table 8 JS factor 1 intrinsic satisfaction
JS index
UIS UIS UIS UIS UIS
index factor factor factor factor
1 2 3 4
(Information product) (Usefulness) (EDP staff and services) (User knowledge)
Two-tailed significance. a Significant at P < 0.1. b Significant at P < 0.05. Significant at P < 0.001.
JS factor 2 extrinsic satisfaction
Spearman
Pearson
Spearman
Pearson
Spearman
Pearson
0.40 0.09 0.17 0.24 0.26
0.44 0.17 0.15 0.27 0.29
0.20 b 0.02 0.12 0.26 b 0.3
0.25 b 0.05 0.09 0.30 b 0.4
0.33 c 0.11 0.05 0.09 0.33 c
0.37 ° 0.18 a 0.12 0.08 0.36 ¢
¢ a b b
¢ a b b
264
z Ang, P.H. Soh/lnformation & Management 32 (1997) 255-266
job satisfaction is consistent with Judge and Watanabe's [20] finding that job satisfaction and life satisfaction are significantly as well as reciprocally related. Life satisfaction, according to Diener [11], increases with age. A probable reason for the positive relationship between age and UIS is that the older employees in this study were those between 31 and 45 years of age (only three were aged 46 and above), an age group whose growth need strength is high. Besides task variety and increased responsibility (which are associated with higher organizational positions), computers, since their use was mandatory, probably provided them with a means to enhance their growth need strength. Job satisfaction (both intrinsic and extrinsic) was found to be positively related to organizational positions and managerial/non-managerial users. Each organizational level has a different set of immediate task activities and it is these activities that link the individual to the organization. Task activities associated with higher level positions tend to be high in variety, a feature that is intrinsic satisfying. The level also determines the type of rewards (an important extrinsic satisfaction item) available to the job holder as well as the degree of job satisfaction. The same reasoning also applies to managerial/non-managerial users. One possible reason why UIS is not significantly related to organizational position and managerial/non-managerial position is that computer usage in different functions affect different groups quite differently, independently of their organizational status. For example, computer usage in research-related functions (where task variety is high), just like the design engineers in Liker et al's study, could result in a higher level of UIS compared to computer usage in administrative functions (where task variety is more orderly), regardless of the workers' organizational status. Educational level was negatively correlated with UIS, while the number of years in company was positively correlated with UIS. A plausible explanation for the negative correlation between UIS and educational level is that local institutions of higher learning in Singapore (e.g., polytechnics, universities) place greater emphasis on computer skills by including them in the academic curricula. Employees who have been equipped with such skills (from the institutions) would have higher expectations (demands) for
good computer systems, especially if computer use is essential for accomplishing their duties. Hence, they are likely to be less tolerant of systems that are not useful or if the MIS department has poor services or uncooperative staff. Since computer use was mandatory in the organization under study, it is likely that employees who had been with the company for a long time would be more comfortable with the computermediated work environment. This could explain the positive correlation between UIS and the number of years in company. The study indicated that job satisfaction and UIS were highly correlated. In other words, the general user perception of information satisfaction and services does reflect job attitudes and vice versa. Therefore, in attempting to improve the job satisfaction of end-user employees, an additional focus would be on improving the level of their UIS (i.e., factors such as user knowledge of IS, quality of service provided by the MIS staff, and quality of output delivered by the IS). Similarly, organizations wanting to increase the UIS level should not overlook the importance of job satisfaction factors, such as pay, working conditions, feeling of accomplishment etc. Since it is easier for management to implement schemes to increase extrinsic rather than intrinsic satisfaction, management should look at ways to reward employees, create better working conditions, etc. For example, users who are more knowledgeable about systems (the UIS factor which correlates significantly with job satisfaction) tend to be in greater control of their job situation, especially in a computer-mediated environment. This sense of control could be indirectly translated into higher confidence in their job advancement prospects, or, at least, greater satisfaction with the working environment in which the computer is perceived as a valuable tool. In the case of MIS staff and services, higher service quality level provided by the MIS department may influence the perceptions of the end-users' working conditions. If UIS and job satisfaction are highly correlated, then we can explore new ways of work redesign. Instead of trying to reconfigure existing work processes, we can focus our attention on developing a computer-mediated environment with IS that are perceived by their users to be 'good.' In order to achieve this, management has to get users actively involved in the analysis, design and implementation of the IS.
J. Ang, PH. Soh/lnformation & Management 32 (19971 255-266
I n v o l v e m e n t must be m o r e than just s y m b o l i c ; it must be active, with the users p r o v i d i n g useful inputs at each stage o f the systems d e v e l o p m e n t process. U s e r i n v o l v e m e n t is important because it restores and e n h a n c e s p e r c e i v e d control on the part o f end users [3]. This sense o f control tends to reduce the threatening quality o f the s y s t e m ' s i m p l e m e n t a t i o n experience, thus leading to higher levels of U I S and j o b satisfaction.
5. Limitations M a n y critical factors that h a v e direct influence on or intervening effect b e t w e e n UIS and j o b satisfaction w e r e omitted to keep the f r a m e w o r k simple. By including such factors as organizational climate, cognitive differences and nature of tasks, a d e e p e r insight can be gained into relationship b e t w e e n the two constructs. The significant correlations b e t w e e n UIS and j o b satisfaction and certain d e m o g r a p h i c variables (e.g., age, educational level) indicate that these variables c o u l d be important intervening variables. Our exploratory f r a m e w o r k only factored in the users' c o m p u t e r b a c k g r o u n d and their organizational positions. An extension o f this study w o u l d be a m o r e c o m p r e h e n s i v e one, w h e r e these other variables are included. O w i n g to the difficulty o f getting c o m p a n i e s to participate in this project, the study has to be restricted to three organizations that have c o m p a r a b l e organizational structure and IS maturity. A m o r e c o m p r e h e n sive f r a m e w o r k that includes other influential factors coupled with more sample points w o u l d yield m o r e insightful results.
References [ 1] J. Ang and E Pavri, A survey and critique of the impacts of information technology. International Journal of lnformation Management, 14(2), April 1994, 122-133. [2] Bailey, J.E. and Pearson, S.W., Development of a tool for measuring and analyzing computer user satisfaction, Management Science 29, 1983, 530-545. [3] A.M. Baronas and, M.R. Louis, Restoring a sense of control during implementation: How user involvement leads to user acceptance. MIS Quarterly, March 1988, 111123.
265
[4] Baroudi, J.J. and Orlikowski, W.J., A short-form measure of user information satisfaction: A psychometric evaluation and notes on use, Journal of Management Information Systems 4(4), 1988, 44-59. [5] Chency, P.H. and Dickson, G.W., Organizational characteristics and information systems: An exploratory investigation, Academy of Management Journal 25(1), 1982, 170-184. [6] Cheney, P.H., Mann, R.I. and Amoroso, D.L., Organizational factors affecting the success of end-user computing, Journal of Management Information Systems 3(1), 1986, 65-80. [71 D. Compeau, L. Olfman, M. Sei, and J. Webster, End-user: Training and learning. Communications of the ACM, 38(7), July 1995, 24-26. [8] Conrath, D.W. and Mignen, O.O., What is being done to measure user satisfaction with EDP/MIS, Information and Management 19(1), 1990, 7-19. [9] R.N. Cyert, and J.G. March, A Behavioral Theo~ of the Firm, Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, N.J., 1963. [10] Davis, F.D., Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology, MIS Quarterly 13(3), 1989, 259-274. [11 r Diener, E., , Subjective well-being 95, 1984, 542-575. [12] Galletta, D.F. and Lederer, A.L., Some cautions on the measurement of user information satisfaction. Decision Sciences 3, 1989, 419--438. [13] D.L. Goodhue, IS attitudes: Toward theoretical and definition clarity. Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference on Information Systems, San Diego, California, 1986, 181194. [14] Henderson, J.C. and Treacy, M.E., Managing end-user computing for competitive advantage, Sloan Management Review 27(2), 1986, 3-14. [15] Hendrickson, A.R,, Glorfield, K. and Cronan, T.E , On the repeated test-retest relaibility of end-user computing satisfaction instrument: A comment, Decision Sciences 25(4), 1994, 655-667. [16] F. Herzberg, One more time: How do you motivate employees'? Harvard Business Review, Jan-Feb, 1968, 5362. [17] lgabaria, M. and Nachman, S.A., Correlates of user satisfaction with end user computing, Information and Management 19, 1990, 73-82. [18] Igabaria, M. and Chakrabrati, A., Computer anxiety and aattitdues towards microcomputer use, Behavior and lnfi)rmation Technology 9(3), 1990, 229-241. [19] lves, B., Olson, M. and Baroudi, J.J. , The measurement of user information satisfaction, Communications of the ACM 26(10), 1983, 785-793. [20] Judge, T.A. and Watanabe, S., Another look at the jobsatisfaction relationship, Journal of Applied Psychology 78(6), 1993, 939-948. [211 Kettinger, W.J. and Lee, C.C., Perceived service quality and user satisfaction with the information services function, Decision Sciencs 25(5/6), 1994, 737-766. [22] M. Lawrence, and G. Low, Exploring individual user satisfaction with user-led development. MIS Quarterly, 17(2), June 1993, 195-208.
266
£ Ang, P.H. Soh/Information & Management 32 (1997) 255-266
[23] J.K., Liker, M., Fleischer, M. Nagamachi, and M.S. Zonnevylle, Designers and their machines: CAD use and support in the US and Japan. Communications of the ACM, 15(2), February 1992, 77-95. [24] McLeod, R. and Jones, J.W., A framework for office automation, MIS Quarterly 11(1), 1987, 86-104. [25] Montazemi, A.R., Factors affecting information satisfaction in the context of the small business environment, MIS Quarterly 12(2), 1988, 239-256. [26] Orlikowski, W.J. and Robey, D., Information technology and the structuring of organizations, Information Systems Research 2(2), 1991, 143-169. [27] Ostroff, C., The relationship between satisfaction, attitudes, and performance, An organizational level analysis, Journal of Applied Psychology 77(6), 1992, 963-974. [28] R. Schroeder, J.C. Anderson, and G.D. Scubber, White collar productivity measurement. Management Decision, 24(5), Winter 1986, 3-7.
[29] D.J. Weiss, R.V. Dawis, G.W. England, and L.H. Lofquist, Manual for the Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire, 1967, Industrial Relations Centre, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis. [30] R. Westrum, Technologies and society: the shaping of people and things. Wadsworth Publishing Company, Belmont, California, 199. [31] Yaverbaum, G.J., Critical factors in the user environment: An experimental study of users, organizations and tasks, MIS Quarterly 12(1), 1988, 75-89. [32] Zeffane, R.M., Correlates of job satisfaction and their implications for work redesign: A focus on the Australian Telecommunication Industry, Public Personnel Management, 23(1), 1994a, 61-75. [33] Zeffane, R.M., The influence of computer usage on employees and managers' satisfaction: Findings from the Australian Telecommunication, Human Systems Management, 13, 1994b, 269-282.