End-user computing strategy: an examination of its impact on end-user satisfaction.
Moore, Rita ; Jackson, Mary Jo ; Wilkes, Ronald B. 等
ABSTRACT
Organizational attitudes and expectations regarding end-user
computing (EUC) have changed radically in the past 25 years and have
researchers describing end-user computing as a vital component of the
overall information resource in the organization. Throughout this period
of unprecedented growth from limited desktop computing to
near-saturation desktop and mobile EUC, companies have struggled to
formulate appropriate EUC strategy and researchers have suggested that
the development of an effective EUC strategy "may be the most
important short-term decision the organization can make if it hopes to
benefit from its investments in end-user-based technologies"
(Alavi, M., Nelson, R. R., and Weiss, I. R., 1987-88, p. 29). Using the
EUC Strategy Grid proposed by Munro, Huff, and Moore (1987-88), this
research explores the issue of EUC management by examining (1) the
relationship between EUC strategy and end-user satisfaction, and (2) the
influence of end-user satisfaction with organizational satisfaction. The
results indicate that organizations can increase the level of
satisfaction of employees engaged in EUC activities by adopting an EUC
strategy high in expansion tactics and that the level of dissatisfaction
experienced by higher-level end-users can be decreased by avoiding or
modifying the containment EUC strategy, characterized by high control
and low expansion. Additionally, the EUC strategy can be expected to
have a positive influence on user behavior.
INTRODUCTION
Organizational attitudes and expectations regarding end-user
computing (EUC) have changed radically in the past 25 years. Initially,
EUC was perceived as a departmental-level management issue for MIS. From
1982 until 1991, MIS managers consistently ranked "the facilitation and management of end-user computing" in their lists of top twenty
issues (Ball and Harris, 1982; Dickson, G. W., Leitheiser, R. L.,
Wetherbe, J. C., and Nechis, M., 1984; Brancheau and Wetherbe, 1987;
Niederman, F., Brancheau, J. C., and Wetherbe, J. C., 1991). During that
same period, as large numbers of organizations made the transition from
centralized mainframe technology to decentralized desktop technology,
spending for end-user computing in some organizations increased from
between 40% and 50% of the computing resources (Rockart and Flannery,
1983) to between 60% and 80% of the IT budget (Amoroso and Cheney,
1991). In less than 10 years, however, EUC had spread so broadly
throughout most organizations that it could no longer be considered a
management issue solely for MIS managers (Reed, 1989). In 1992, research
by Harrison and Rainer confirmed that end-user computing had emerged as
a vital component of the overall information resource in the
organization. EUC in some organizations was consuming nearly 90% of the
computing resources (Amoroso and Cheney, 1992). Increased funding
translated to greater numbers of end-users. In a 1994 survey, Nord and
Nord found that 98% of those interviewed used a computer in their jobs.
Today, end-user computing is part and parcel of the work place;
moreover, EUC is now expanding beyond the confines of the office. One
writer recently used the term "explosion" to describe the ever
growing number of end-users, freed from their desktops by wireless
connectivity, engaged in mobile EUC activities (Saran, 2006).
From the beginning, end-user computing has changed the way people
worked, improving the collection and organization of data, and allowing
them to focus on their basic job responsibilities. At first, early
organizational expectations for EUC were primarily to expedite the entry
of data into the organization's centralized mainframe system and to
facilitate personal productivity by providing mostly word processing and/or spreadsheet application software on the desktop. By 1990, Boyer
suggested that the organization had to achieve a better understanding of
end-user computing because it presented such important advantages and
disadvantages in areas of time, cost, and quality. Today, in their
fast-paced, global environment, businesses actively seek employees with
increased technical skills and knowledge, and expect these end-users to
utilize the technology for the maximum benefit to the organization
(Jawahar and Elango, 2001).
Throughout this period of unprecedented growth in end-user
computing, from limited desktop computing to near-saturation desktop and
mobile EUC, companies have struggled to formulate appropriate EUC
strategy. As early as 1983, while studying the status of end-user
computing in corporate America, Rockart and Flannery were surprised to
find that the organizations participating in their study did not have a
strategy for the management of EUC. The authors suggested that
organizations would be required to establish appropriate strategies for
the development and management of EUC if they were to take advantage of
its immense potential. Since that study, other researchers have
suggested that the development of an effective EUC strategy "may be
the most important short-term decision the organization can make if it
hopes to benefit from its investments in end-user-based
technologies" (Alavi, M., Nelson, R. R., and Weiss, I. R., 1987-88,
p. 29). A study conducted under the auspices of The Institute of
Internal Auditors Research Foundation revealed that only 31 percent of
the organizations surveyed had developed their end-user computing in a
systematic fashion (Rittenberg and Senn, 1993). In a commentary
appearing in Computerworld in 1995, de Jager stated that companies had
little to show in the way of increased productivity for the billions of
dollars being spent annually on computers, and that the fault rested
with the management (or lack thereof) of end-user computing. Reminiscent
of Rockart and Flannery's (1983) findings, de Jager (1995) found
that most businesses still had no formal EUC policies, guidelines, or
audit procedures to monitor the productivity of their EUC resource.
Rockart and Flannery (1983) recommended that EUC strategy be
clearly defined for and between the MIS staff and the end-user
community, and that the strategy defined should emphasize the
development and management of an environment shared by MIS professionals
and end-users. They also suggested that new corporate policies
pertaining to such areas as system cost justification and software
procurement and development be formulated. History has proven these
suggestions to be sound. Today, end-user computing is evolving into
end-user development (EUD), which can be a source of either
"covert" end-user activity (Ferneley, 2007) or a bone fide
application software acquisition alternative for the organization
(Martin, E. Wainright; Brown, Carol; DeHayes, Daniel; Hoffer, Jeffrey;
and Perkins, William., 2005). Effective strategic planning and
responsible information resource management now demand that businesses
have an "explicit" end-user computing strategy (Martin et.
al., 2005).
Building on the findings and recommendations of Rockart and
Flannery, Munro, Huff, and Moore (1987-88) presented a model of
organizational EUC strategy defined along two dimensions: expansion and
control. The expansion dimension deals with the level of encouragement
or support provided by the organization to end-users to increase EUC.
The control dimension deals with the extent of limitations or
restrictions placed on end-users by the organization to restrain EUC.
The Strategy Grid is shown in Figure 1. Since the identification of
Munro et al.'s (1987-88) EUC strategies, no research has been
located which further investigates EUC management in terms of these two
dimensions, although the model continues to be presented in texts as a
guide to end-user computer strategy (Martin et. al., 2005).
Using the EUC Strategy Grid proposed by Munro et al., this research
explores the issue of EUC management by examining (1) the relationship
between EUC strategy and end-user satisfaction, and (2) the influence of
end-user satisfaction with organizational satisfaction.
LITERATURE REVIEW
End-Users and End-User Computing
A review of the literature yields several definitions for
"end-user." Cotterman and Kumar (1989) narrowly define
end-users as people who interact with computer-based information systems
only as consumers of information. Turban's (1993) definition, on
the other hand, is much broader and includes all managers and
professionals using PCs, secretaries using word processing, and CEOs
using e-mail. Turban (1993) suggests that the end-user can be at any
level in the organization or in any functional area. The research
presented here uses the broadest possible definition of end-user to
include not only consumers of information, but anyone in the
organization who directly uses a computer in the performance of his or
her job. MIS professionals (i.e., systems analysts, programmer/analysts,
and programmers) are excluded from this definition.
A variety of definitions for "end-user computing" have
also appeared in the literature. Rockart and Flannery (1983) very simply
define end-user computing as computing developed and operated by the
user. Turban (1993) defines end-user computing as the development and
use of computer-based information systems by people outside the formal
IS areas. The definition adopted for this study has been advanced by
several authors who define end-user computing as the direct, hands-on
use of computers by anyone in the organization with problems for which
computer-based solutions are appropriate (Hackathorn and Keen, 1981;
Carr, 1987; Doll and Torkzadeh, 1988).
End-user Satisfaction
DeLone and McLean (1992) suggest that the evaluation of information
systems (IS) practices, policies, and procedures requires an IS success
measure against which various strategies can be tested, and they
identify user satisfaction as one of the six major dimensions or
categories of IS success. In their investigation of 100 empirical
studies examining some aspect of IS success, Delone and McLean (1992)
found 33 studies which used user satisfaction as the measure of IS
success. The authors state that user satisfaction is probably the most
widely used single measure of IS success for three reasons. First, user
satisfaction has a high degree of face validity; it is hard to deny the
success of a system which its users say that they like. Second, reliable
instruments have been developed to measure user satisfaction and to
allow the comparison of results among studies. Third, most of the other
measures (i.e., system quality, information quality, use, individual
impact, and organizational impact) are poor; that is to say, they are
either conceptually weak or empirically difficult to obtain. Raymond
(1987) suggests that user satisfaction is the best assessment of system
success.
Numerous studies are available linking some aspect of EUC and
end-user satisfaction. Rushinek and Rushinek (1986) report over 4,500
end-users' satisfaction with 17 specific system characteristics.
Bergeron and Berube (1988) studied end-user satisfaction with various
forms of support and management of the EUC environment. They found that
end-users were more satisfied with their microcomputing activities when
(1) the organizational microcomputing plan was incorporated in the
information systems master plan, (2) there was an information center to
support end-user activity, and (3) users had access to a hot-line to
solve their microcomputing problems. Igbaria and Nachman (1990) made an
exploratory study of correlates of end-user satisfaction with end-user
computing. They found that significant positive relationships existed
between end-user satisfaction and hardware/software accessibility and
availability, computer background of users, user attitudes toward
end-user computing, and system utilization. Their results also
demonstrated that computer anxiety and user age were negatively related
with end-user satisfaction. No significant relationships were found
between end-user satisfaction and gender, education, and organizational
level. Bergeron, Rivard, and DeSerre (1990) found that specific
characteristics of an Information Center (IC) resulted in higher levels
of end-user satisfaction. They found that end-user satisfaction
increases with the variety of services offered by the IC, the proximity
of the IC, and the proportion of the IS budget devoted to the IC.
Similarly, Mirani and King (1994) found that end-user satisfaction was
higher when information centers provided support that fulfilled more of
the users' needs. Shaw et al. (2003) conducted a study which showed
that satisfied and dissatisfied end-users have "different
technological frames of reference" towards EUC which affect their
expectations of the technology, their interactions with the information
center support staff, and their utilization of the technology. Aladwani
(2002) conducted a field study to investigate the relationship among
organizational actions, computer attitudes, and end-user satisfaction,
and found that top management advocacy of end-user computing positively
influences end-user satisfaction in public organizations.
Measuring End-User Satisfaction
Methodologically, the measurement of user satisfaction is a problem
crucial to information systems research, and user satisfaction has been
operationalized in many different ways. Scales developed for the
measurement of user satisfaction generally fall into two categories:
those which focus on the content of the information system or "the
product," and those which include the organizational support for
developing and maintaining the system as well as the system product
itself (Ives, B., Olson, M. H., and Baroudi, J. J., 1983). Of the 33
studies included in the meta-analysis reported by DeLone and McLean
(1992), six studies used the Bailey-Pearson (1983) instrument, nine
studies used other multi-item scales, and 13 studies (over one-third of
all the studies cited) used a single question about overall user
satisfaction. Other studies have employed single-item rating scales
(Edmundson and Jeffery, 1984; Hogue, 1987; King and Epstein, 1983;
Langle et al., 1984). Many of the more popular measures of end-user
satisfaction focus on end-user satisfaction with individual systems and
are unsuitable to assess EUC success from a company-wide perspective
(Guimaraes and Igbaria, 1994). Since overall ratings of user
satisfaction have proven just as effective as multi-item scales
(Rushinek and Rushinek, 1986; Rivard and Huff, 1988), and since the
research presented here is neither concerned with user information
satisfaction nor end-user satisfaction with a particular application, an
overall rating of satisfaction with the EUC strategy seems most
appropriate.
End-User Computing Strategy
During the early period of EUC strategy research, some authors
narrowly defined EUC strategy only in terms of risks associated with the
development of software by end-users, and suggested specific EUC
policies enumerating particular tactics to control risks of end-user
development (Alavi and Weiss, 1986; Davis and Olson, 1985; Leitheiser
and Wetherbe, 1986). In more general terms, however, EUC strategy
consists of all processes and approaches adopted by an organization for
identifying, assessing, and assimilating end-user technologies into the
organization (Alavi et al., 1987-88). EUC strategy is implemented and
operationalized through policies and procedures dealing with such
critical EUC management issues as resources procurement, application
development by users, decentralized support services, and control
through line management (Kahn, 1992).
Three major models of EUC strategy are proposed in MIS literature
(Alavi et al., 1987-88; Henderson and Treacy, 1986; Munro et al.,
1987-88). Brown and Bostrom (1989) characterize all three of these
models as evolutionary because they are "based on the assumption
that the organization's EUC strategy should change over time to
match the stage of EUC assimilation within the given organization (p.
80)."
Henderson and Treacy (1986) propose a four-stage model for the
management of end-user computing. Their model is prescriptive in nature,
based on prior literature and not specific field data. The four stages
in the Henderson-Treacy (1986) model are Implementation, Marketing,
Operations, and Economic. The authors, assuming that the
organization's overall EUC management objective is to maximize the
rate of EUC diffusion, suggest that each stage of EUC management
requires its own particular structure and set of control mechanisms.
Taking a descriptive research approach based on their study of 47
different organizations, Munro et al. (1987-88) propose a model of four
EUC strategies established along two dimensions, expansion and control.
Expansion is the rate or pace of EUC growth and development in the
organization. Control refers to actions taken to direct the activities
and choices made by users. The authors contend that organizational EUC
strategy directly affects the rate of diffusion of EUC technologies and
the outcomes of EUC activities within the organization. They further
suggest that the end-user computing strategy finally selected by an
organization reflects which dimension (expansion or control) is more
dominant in the organization. A strategy dominated by control results in
slow diffusion and limited application of end-user computing, while a
strategy dominated by expansion results in rapid diffusion and
widespread application of end-user computing.
Munro et al. emphasize that the EUC strategy adopted by an
organization has important implications on not only the scope of EUC
activities in the organization, but also on the resource requirements.
They suggest that the strategy choice made by the organization is
influenced by such factors as internal conditions of the firm,
observations of the growth patterns of user computing in other firms,
and the attitudes of top management. As shown in Figure 1, this model
depicts four possible EUC strategies formed when the two dimensions of
EUC strategy (control and expansion), each on a scale of low to high,
are crossed to form a matrix. The four EUC strategies are defined as
follows:
1. Laissez-faire: Laissez-faire, in its extreme, is the
"opening position" for most firms, one in which the
organization's interest in end-user computing is low; hence there
is no particular drive to increase the amount of EUC in place. Since
there is little user computing under way, the need for controls, that
is, limitations on EUC choices, is low. Thus, the organization is
assuming a "hands-off" posture with respect to EUC.
2. Acceleration: In the Acceleration cell, the firm has decided
that it will provide abundant resources for end-user computing but has
little concern as to the direction in which EUC will go. The concern is
rather to enable each user to have the best possible opportunity to make
his or her own decisions regarding solutions for the problems being
addressed.
3. Containment: For an organization in the Containment cell,
management has decided to develop end-user computing slowly and
carefully. The intention is to expand at a low rate and to ensure that
the increase in EUC is done in such a way as to remain within precise
and narrow growth boundaries defined by the EUC support group or
information systems department. Very specific controls are in place and
users are required to carry out their computing activities within the
limited range of choices these controls permit.
4. Controlled Growth: In the Controlled Growth cell, the
organization has chosen to develop end-user computing rapidly, but
simultaneously to control carefully the environment in which it occurs.
Hence, ample resources are provided to ensure that EUC does in fact take
hold and that it is encouraged and well supported. However, at the same
time, appropriate controls are in place to ensure that the growth of
end-user computing conforms to management's explicit desires.
The third evolutionary model of EUC strategy is proposed by Alavi
et al. (1987-88) and is based on their interviews with five companies.
Their model seems to "merge" the two models discussed above by
profiling five EUC strategies: laissez-faire, acceleration, monopolist,
marketing, and operations-based. The first four strategies correspond
with Munro et al.'s (1987-88) laissez-faire strategy, acceleration
strategy, containment strategy, and controlled growth strategy
respectively. The fifth strategy, operations-based, is included as an
"on-going management" strategy (p. 32). In this model, the
five core strategies are described in terms of an EUC management
framework of policy setting, planning, support, and control similar to
Munro et al.'s expansion and control framework. Like Henderson and
Treacy (1986), Alavi et al. assume that an organization's EUC
objective in the early stages of their EUC evolution is to maximize the
rate of EUC growth.
The model of EUC strategy described by Munro et al. (1987-88) is
utilized in this study for several reasons. First, it is based on the
largest sample of organizations (i.e., 47). Second, it is the most
parsimonious; the two stages (i.e., marketing and operations-based)
substituted in the Alavi et al. (1987-88) model for the one controlled
growth stage in the Munro et al. (1987-88) model addresses concern for
specifying an additional EUC growth stage, not a different strategy.
Finally, in their research, Munro et al. developed composite expansion
and control indices to provide an objective mechanism for placing the
organizations studied into the expansion-control grid. Unfortunately,
although significant research concerning the management of EUC has been
conducted since the development of the EUC strategy grid by Munro et al.
(1987-88), no subsequent empirical research could be found which
confirms this model.
Generally speaking, this research studies the relationship between
EUC strategy and end-user satisfaction, and asserts that EUC strategy
has an influence on end-user satisfaction, and that end-users'
overall satisfaction with the organization is influenced by their
satisfaction with the organization's EUC strategy. Specifically:
[H.sub.1]: End-user satisfaction will be higher for EUC strategies
characterized by low control than for EUC strategies characterized by
high control.
[H.sub.2]: End-user satisfaction will be higher for EUC strategies
characterized by high expansion than for EUC strategies characterized by
low expansion.
[H.sub.3]: End-users' overall satisfaction with the
organization is influenced by their satisfaction with the
organization's EUC strategy.
Hypotheses 1 and 3 are suggested by Spector's (1986) findings
that employees who perceive themselves as having comparatively high
levels of control over their work are more satisfied, involved,
committed, and motivated. Hypothesis 1 is also supported by Bergeron and
Berube's (1988) suggestion that an increase in the number of
policies lowers end-user satisfaction with microcomputing because
end-users see policies as restrictions in their work. Hypothesis 2 and 3
are suggested by Igbaria and Nachman's (1990) study which found
that significant positive relationships existed between user
satisfaction and such high expansion tactics as (1) hardware/software
accessibility and availability and (2) system utilization.
This research presumes (1) that EUC strategy affects
end-users' reactions to their work environment as evidenced by
their satisfaction, and (2) that end-users' overall satisfaction
with the organization is influenced by their satisfaction with the
organization's EUC strategy. The questions investigated by this
research are:
1. What is the relationship between EUC strategy and end-user
satisfaction?
2. What is the relationship between end-user satisfaction with the
EUC strategy and overall satisfaction with the organization?
This research suggests answers to these questions by examining the
relationship between EUC strategy and end-user satisfaction in a variety
of organizations, and by examining how end-user satisfaction with EUC
strategy correlates with overall satisfaction with the organization.
Figure 2 depicts the conceptual model utilized in this research.
[FIGURE 2 OMITTED]
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
Research Design
This research is a field experiment investigating the relationship
between EUC strategy, end-user satisfaction, and overall organizational
satisfaction. In order to operationalize EUC strategy, four EUC strategy
scenarios were developed, one for each cell of the strategy grid defined
by Munro et al. (1987-88). Development of the scenarios is based on
empirical research performed by Munro et al. in which they were able to
identify specific expansion and control tactics used by organizations in
conjunction with their dominant EUC strategy objective. The four
categories of expansion tactics suggested by the authors were:
1. flow of information (high or low) to end-users about computing
services and products available;
2. cost to users (high or low) for computing technology, training
and support;
3. acquisition of new technology (easy or difficult) by end users;
and
4. quality and range of services (high or low) available to end
users.
The four control tactics suggested by the authors were:
1. end users are required to buy one specific type of technology or
choose technology from an approved vendor list;
2. end users are allowed to only read corporate data files;
3. end users are limited to specific software tools; and
4. MIS has veto power over end-user technology acquisitions.
The scenarios developed for this study incorporate these tactics in
different combinations to describe the EUC environment at four
hypothetical organizations. After the scenarios were developed, ten
faculty members (already knowledgeable with the concept of EUC) at a
local college were asked to serve as independent raters, assessing each
scenario and assigning it to a cell on the Munro et al. grid. The
scenarios were classified with an inter-rater reliability of 100%.
Instrument Design
The first section of the research instrument includes respondent demographics of gender, age, educational level, years in current job,
whether or not the current job is a management position, extent of
computer use in current job, and number of years the individual has used
a computer. The second section includes the four scenarios depicting the
four EUC strategies. To reduce bias resulting from the order in which
respondents read the scenarios, the four scenarios were presented in the
questionnaires in any one of the 24 possible combinations. Approximately
equal numbers of questionnaires for each of the 24 different
combinations were distributed randomly.
Respondents were asked to imagine that they worked in the
organization described and to indicate their satisfaction (1) with the
company's rate of expansion and support for EUC (the expansion
dimension), (2) with the company's restrictions over EUC activities
(the control dimension), (3) with the company's overall policy for
EUC, and (4) with the company in general. The 5-point Likert scale ranged from 1 (extremely dissatisfied) to 5 (extremely satisfied).
Sample Selection
Respondents were end-users from 12 Tennessee organizations at all
levels of end-user sophistication and in as many functional areas of the
organization as possible. Although the respondents were not selected
randomly from the population of end-users, the sample is not believed to
be significantly biased for several reasons: (1) each respondent is a
full-time employee of the company; (2) the respondents are from
different types of companies; (3) the respondents within each company
represent different functional areas; (4) each respondent is an end-user
engaged in some level of EUC activity; and (5) respondents were selected
by twelve different individuals.
DATA ANALYSIS
A total of 260 questionnaires were distributed; 153 questionnaires
were returned, resulting in a 58.8% overall response rate.
Demographically, almost two-thirds (63.4%) of the respondents were
female, 58.8% were over the age of 39, 54.3% held a Bachelors Degree or
above, and 81% had been using a computer for 5 years or more. 49% of the
respondents had held their current job for 5 years or more, 54.2% used
their computers more than 20 hours per week, and almost one-third of the
respondents (32.7%) had management positions in their organizations.
Table 1 shows the means and standard deviations of the overall
satisfaction ratings for the four EUC strategies. In order of mean
satisfaction level, the acceleration strategy (LC/HE) received the
highest satisfaction rating at 3.9281, and the controlled growth
strategy (HC/HE) received the second highest satisfaction rating with a
mean of 3.6471. The two strategies characterized by low expansion had
the lowest mean satisfaction levels. A simple one-way ANOVA and a
Fisher's LSD post hoc test with significance level set at .05
revealed (1) that the end-users' mean satisfaction with the
acceleration strategy is significantly different from their mean
satisfaction with each of the other three strategies, and (2) that the
end-users' mean satisfaction for the controlled growth strategy is
significantly different from their mean satisfaction for both the
laissez-faire and the containment strategies. There was no significant
difference between end-users' mean satisfaction for laissez-faire
and containment.
A Cronbach's alpha coefficient was also computed for each EUC
strategy scenario. For acceleration, controlled growth, containment, and
laissez-faire, the Cronbach's alpha coefficients were .89, .80, .86
and .87 respectively. These high alphas (all over .70) demonstrate a
high level of reliability for the EUC strategy scenarios (Nunnally,
1978).
Hypothesis 1
Hypothesis 1 is concerned with the main effect of the control
dimension of EUC strategy on user satisfaction without regard to the
user's EUC activity level; it predicts that end-user satisfaction
will be higher for EUC strategies characterized by low control than for
EUC strategies characterized by high control. The two EUC strategies
found in the low control cells of the strategy grid are laissez-faire,
characterized by low control and low expansion (LC/LE), and
acceleration, characterized by low control and high expansion (LC/HE).
The two EUC strategies found in the high control cells of the strategy
grid are containment, characterized by high control and low expansion
(HC/LE), and controlled growth, characterized by high control and high
expansion (HC/HE). Before Hypothesis 1 could be tested, it was necessary
to compute each respondent's average satisfaction rating with the
two low control strategies as well as each respondent's average
satisfaction rating with the two high control strategies. To test
Hypothesis 1, both a paired t-test and a Wilcoxon matched-pairs
signed-ranks test were performed comparing the sample mean of
respondents' satisfaction with low control strategies with the
sample mean of respondents' satisfaction with high control
strategies. The results of both tests are shown in Table 2. Both tests
failed to reject the null hypothesis; therefore, Hypothesis 1 was not
supported.
Hypothesis 2
Hypothesis 2 is concerned with the main effect of the expansion
dimension of EUC strategy on user satisfaction; it predicts that
end-user satisfaction will be higher for EUC strategies characterized by
high expansion than for EUC strategies characterized by low expansion.
The two EUC strategies found in the high expansion cells of the strategy
grid are acceleration, characterized by low control and high expansion
(LC/HE), and controlled growth, characterized by high control and high
expansion (HC/HE). The two EUC strategies found in the low expansion
cells of the strategy grid are laissez-faire, characterized by low
control and low expansion (LC/LE), and containment, characterized by
high control and low expansion (HC/LE). Before Hypothesis 2 could be
tested, it was necessary to compute each respondent's average
satisfaction rating with the two high expansion strategies as well as
each respondent's average satisfaction rating with the two low
expansion strategies. To test Hypothesis 2, both a paired t-test and a
Wilcoxon matched-pairs signed-ranks test were performed comparing the
sample mean of the respondents' satisfaction with high expansion
strategies with the sample mean of respondents' satisfaction with
low expansion strategies. The results of both tests are shown in Table
3. With p-values of .000 and .0000 respectively, both tests rejected the
null hypothesis; Hypothesis 2 was supported.
Hypothesis 3
Hypothesis 3 predicts a strong association between end-user
satisfaction with the organization's EUC strategy and overall
end-user satisfaction with the organization in general. To test
Hypothesis 3, a Pearson's product moment correlation analysis was
performed comparing end-user satisfaction with the EUC strategy in an
organization with end-user satisfaction for the organization. A strong
correlation, .9022 (p = .000) rejected the null hypothesis; therefore,
Hypothesis 3 was supported.
DISCUSSION
This research empirically investigates the relationship between EUC
strategy and end-user satisfaction, and the influence of end-user
satisfaction on overall organizational satisfaction. Generally, the
study expected to find high levels of end-user satisfaction associated
with EUC strategies characterized by low control and with EUC strategies
characterized by high expansion. Also, the study expected to find that
end-users' overall satisfaction with the organization would
correlate with their overall satisfaction with the EUC strategy. Figure
3 summarizes the results of the respondents' end-user satisfaction
ratings with the four EUC strategy scenarios developed for this research
by placing the end-user satisfaction sample means previously reported in
Table 1 on the EUC strategy grid previously presented in Figure 1.
Hypothesis 1 had predicted that end-user satisfaction would be
higher for EUC strategies characterized by low control (i.e.,
laissez-faire and acceleration) than for EUC strategies characterized by
high control (i.e., containment and controlled growth); however, this
hypothesis was not supported by the data. Respondents reported their
highest overall levels of satisfaction with the two high expansion EUC
strategies (i.e., acceleration and controlled growth), and their lowest
overall levels of satisfaction with the two strategies characterized by
low expansion (i.e., laissez-faire and containment). Respondents'
greater dissatisfaction with the low expansion strategies seems to
outweigh their great satisfaction with the low-control acceleration
strategy. A review of job satisfaction literature indicates that
important factors contributing to job satisfaction include mentally
challenging work, equitable rewards, supportive working conditions, and
supportive colleagues (Robbins, 1991). Employees are concerned with the
work environment not only for their personal comfort, but also for doing
a good job; this concern includes having adequate tools and equipment
(Robbins, 1991). The level of expansion (i.e., high or low) present in
the EUC strategy adopted by an organization impacts the amount of
organizational resources available for end-user support and training, as
well as the acquisition of new hardware and software technologies as
they become available. Literature also suggests that an
organization's policies can contribute to explaining and predicting
employees' attitudes and behavior to the extent that those policies
reduce employees' ambiguity and clarify their understanding of what
they are supposed to do and how they are supposed to do it (Spector,
1994). Satisfaction increases when employees experience greater
certainty about future directions and outcomes of the organization
(Zeffane, 1994). The laissez-faire EUC strategy was described to the
respondents in this study as one in which the organization's
overall interest in end-user computing was low and in which the
organization's commitment of resources to EUC was small. The
containment EUC strategy was described as one in which the
organization's desire was to move slowly and carefully. In
response, end-users in this study indicated their lowest level of
satisfaction with these two low expansion EUC environments. The effect
of the low level of the control dimension in the laissez-faire strategy
was apparently lost in the negativity of this overall low expansion,
unsupportive and uncertain EUC environment.
As predicted by Hypothesis 2, end-user satisfaction is
significantly higher for EUC strategies characterized by high expansion
than for EUC strategies characterized by low expansion. This finding
supports an earlier study which found significant positive relationships
between user satisfaction and such specific high expansion tactics as
(1) hardware/software accessibility and availability and (2) system
utilization (Igbaria and Nachman, 1990).
Taken together, the fact that Hypothesis 1 was not supported and
the fact that Hypothesis 2 was supported seem to suggest that the
expansion dimension has a stronger influence on end-user satisfaction
than the control dimension. This may be partially explained by the
findings of the well-known obedience to authority experiments conducted
at Yale in the early 1960s which concluded that when people are placed
in a subordinate role, most relinquish their individual control and
defer to the authority structure in place (Milgram, 1963). Since
employees relinquish much of their individual control to the
organizational authority structure when they accept employment (Rigg,
1992), perhaps their satisfaction with the EUC environment is less
influenced by the control dimension of EUC strategy than by the
expansion dimension.
As predicted by Hypothesis 3, end-users' overall satisfaction
with the organization is influenced by their satisfaction with the
organization's EUC strategy. As end-users' level of
satisfaction with the organization's EUC strategy increases, their
level of overall satisfaction with the organization increases. Since an
organization's EUC strategy involves aspects of both control (e.g.,
restricting end-users and EUC activity) and expansion (e.g., providing
resources for EUC activity), this finding is consistent with other
studies which investigated employees' satisfaction as influenced by
their perception of organizational control and organizational support.
Spector (1986) found that employees who perceive themselves as having
comparatively high levels of control over their work are more satisfied,
involved, committed, and motivated. Igbaria and Nachman (1990) found
that significant positive relationships existed between end-user
employees' satisfaction and such high expansion tactics as (1)
hardware/software accessibility and availability and (2) system
utilization. Since respondents in this study had significantly higher
levels of satisfaction with EUC strategies characterized by high
expansion than with EUC strategies characterized by low expansion, it is
not surprising that their overall satisfaction with the company would be
influenced correspondingly.
IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE AND RESEARCH
This research is of interest to both academicians and
practitioners. It builds on past EUC research by utilizing the Munro et
al. (1987-88) model of EUC strategy in empirical research. It extends
the original study by operationalizing the EUC strategies defined by
Munro et al. (1987-88) through the development of four scenarios
describing the EUC environment in terms of specific, relevant
organizational tactics identified in that same research. For
academicians, this research fills knowledge gaps about end-user
computing and end-user satisfaction by examining the relationship
between EUC strategy and end-user satisfaction. For practitioners faced
with the decision of choosing and implementing EUC strategy in their
organizations, this research offers insight into the identification of
successful EUC strategies. The research does not suggest a particular
EUC strategy for a particular organization; rather, this research
increases our understanding of the impact of EUC strategy on end-users.
The results of this study hold several important suggestions for
organizational policy making related to EUC activities which could lead
to increased end-user satisfaction. First, organizations can increase
the level of satisfaction of employees engaged in EUC activities by
adopting an EUC strategy high in expansion tactics. Second,
organizations can decrease the level of dissatisfaction experienced by
higher-level end-users by avoiding or modifying the containment EUC
strategy, characterized by high control and low expansion. Based on a
study by Gatian (1994) which indicates that a relationship does exist
between user satisfaction and user behavior, EUC strategy which
increases user satisfaction (or conversely, which decreases user
dissatisfaction) can be expected to have a positive influence on user
behavior.
The results of this study suggest several opportunities for further
research. The research model could be expanded to include other
individual characteristics as moderating variables on the relationship
between EUC strategy and end-user satisfaction. For example,
need-fulfillment theories of job satisfaction generally assume that
individuals differ in the outcomes they prefer (or need) to obtain from
their jobs, and hypothesize that the relationship between the outcomes
received on the job and satisfaction is dependent upon these preferences
or needs (Graen, G. B., Dawis, R. V., and Weiss, D. J., 1968). The model
could also be expanded to include other job-related factors as
moderating variables on the relationship between EUC strategy and
end-user satisfaction. Review of management literature reveals an
enduring and well-established stream of research on factors contributing
to job satisfaction and job dissatisfaction. For example, one study
suggests that certain job dimensions (i.e., achievement, responsibility,
and recognition) are more important for both satisfaction and
dissatisfaction than certain other job dimensions (i.e., working
conditions, company policies and practices, and security) (Dunnette, M.
D., Campbell, J. P., and Hakel, M. D., 1967). Another study suggests an
interaction between end-user computing levels, job motivation, and job
satisfaction (Barker, 1995).
CONCLUSIONS
Because end-user computing holds both significant advantages and
significant risks for the organization, there is an increased need for
organizational EUC strategy. As the level of organizational EUC
activities continues to grow, so does the need for EUC strategies
containing both elements of control (i.e., acquisition policies and
procedures, end-user access to the corporate database, sharing of
resources, and quality of systems and information) and expansion (i.e.,
end-user support and training, and hardware and software availability).
Finally, this research suggests that the EUC strategy utilized by the
organization not only affects end-user satisfaction but overall
satisfaction with the organization. Based on a study by Gatian (1994)
which indicates that a relationship does exist between user satisfaction
and user behavior, EUC strategy which increases end-user satisfaction
(or conversely, which decreases end-user dissatisfaction) can be
expected to have a positive influence on end-user behavior.
REFERENCES
Aladwani, A. (2002). Organizational actions, computer attitudes,
and end-user satisfaction in public organizations: An empirical study.
Journal of End User Computing, 14:1, Jan-Mar, 42-50.
Alavi, M., Nelson, R. R. & Weiss, I. R. (1987-88). Strategies
for end-user computing: an integrative framework. Journal of Management
Information Systems, 4:3, Winter, 28-49.
Alavi, M. & Weiss, I. R. (1986). Managing the risks associated
with end-user computing. Journal of Management Information Systems, 2:3,
5-20.
Amoroso, D. L. & Cheney, P. H. (1991). Testing a causal model of end-user effectiveness. Journal of Management Information Systems,
8:1, Summer, 63-89.
Amoroso, D. L. & Cheney, P. H. (1992). Quality end-user
developed applications: some essential ingredients. Data Base, 23,
Winter, 1-11.
Bailey, J. E. & Pearson, S. W. (1983). Development of a tool
for measuring and analyzing computer user satisfaction. Management
Science, 29:5, May, 530-545.
Ball, L. & Harris, R. (1982). SMIS members: a membership
analysis. MIS Quarterly, 6:1, March, 19-38.
Barker, Robert M. (1995). The interaction between end user
computing levels and job motivation and job satisfaction: An exploratory
study. Journal of End User Computing, 7:3, Summer, 12-20.
Bergeron, F. & Berube, C. (1988). The management of the
end-user environment: an empirical investigation." Information and
Management, 14, 107-113.
Bergeron, F., Rivard, S. & DeSerre, L. (1990). Investigating
the support role of the information center. MIS Quarterly, September,
247-260.
Boyer, G. (1990). Ten facts of end user computing for every systems
manager. Journal of Systems Management, June 14.
Brancheau, J. C. & Wetherbe, J. (1987). Key issues in
information systems management. MIS Quarterly, March, 23-45.
Brown, C. V. & Bostrom, R. P. (1989). Effective management of
end-user computing: a total organization perspective. Journal of
Management Information Systems, 6:2, Fall, 77-92.
Carr, H. H. (1987). Information centers: the IBM model vs.
practice. MIS Quarterly, 11:3, 325-340.
Cotterman, W. W. and Kumar, K. (1989). User cube: a taxonomy of end
users. Communications of the ACM, 32:11, November, 1313-1320.
Davis, G. B.& Olson, M. H. (1985). Management Information
Systems: Conceptual Foundations, Structure, and Development. 2nd
Edition. St. Louis, MO: McGraw-Hill Book Company.
de Jager, P. (1995). Are computers boosting productivity? No!
Computerworld, March 27, 129-130.
DeLone, W. H. & McLean, E. R. (1992). Information systems
success: the quest for the dependent variable. Information System
Research, 3:1, March, 60-95.
Dickson, G. W., Leitheiser, R. L., Wetherbe, J. C. & Nechis, M.
(1984). Key information systems issues for the 1980s. MIS Quarterly,
September, 135-159.
Doll, W. J. & Torkzadeh, G. (1988). The measurement of end-user
computing satisfaction. MIS Quarterly, June, 259-274.
Dunnette, M. D., Campbell, J. P. & Hakel, M. D. (1967). Factors
contributing to job satisfaction and job dissatisfaction in six
occupational groups. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 2,
143-174.
Edmundson, B. and Jeffery, R. (1984). The impact of requirements
analysis upon user satisfaction with packaged software. Information and
Management, 7:2, April, 83-90.
Ferneley, Elaine H. (2007). Covert End User Development: A Study of
Success. Journal of Organizational and End User Computing, 19:1,
Jan-Mar, 62-71.
Gatian, A. W. (1994). Is user satisfaction a valid measure of
system effectiveness? Information and Management, 26:3, March, 119-131.
Graen, G. B., Dawis, R. V., and Weiss, D. J. (1968). Need type and
job satisfaction among industrial scientists. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 52:4, 286-289.
Guimaraes, T. & Igbaria, M. (1994). Exploring the relationship
between IC success and company performance. Information and Management,
26:3, March, 133-141.
Hackathorn, R. D. and Keen, P. G. W. (1981). Organizational
strategies for personal computing in decision support system. MIS
Quarterly, 5:3, 21-27.
Harrison, A. W. and Rainer, R. K. (1992). The influence of
individual differences on skill in end-user computing. Journal of
Management Information Systems, 9:1, Summer, 93-111.
Henderson, J. C. & Treacy, M. E. (1986). Managing end-user
computing for competitive advantage. Sloan Management Review, Winter,
3-14.
Hogue, J. T. (1987). A framework for the examination of management
involvement in decision support systems. Journal of Management
Information Systems, 4:1, Fall, 96-110.
Igbaria, M. & Nachman, S. A. (1990). Correlates of user
satisfaction with end user computing. Information and Management, 19:2,
September, 73-82.
Ives, B., Olson, M. H. & Baroudi, J. J. (1983). The measurement
of user information satisfaction. Communications of the ACM, 26:10,
October, 785-793.
Jawahar, I.M. & Elango, B. (2001). The effect of attitudes,
goal setting and self-efficacy on end user performance. Journal of End
User Computing, 13, 40-45.
Kahn, E. H. (1992). The effects of information centers on the
growth of end-user computing. Information and Management, 23:5,
November, 279-289.
King, W. R. & Epstein, B. J. (1983). Assessing information
system value. Decision Sciences, 14:1, January, 34-45.
Langle, G. B., Leitheiser, R. L. & Naumann, J. D. (1984). A
survey of applications systems prototyping in industry. Information and
Management, 7:5, October, 273-284.
Leitheiser, R. L. & Wetherbe, J. C. (1986). Service support
levels: an organized approach to end-user computing. MIS Quarterly,
December, 337-349.
Martin, E. Wainright; Brown, Carol; DeHayes, Daniel; Hoffer,
Jeffrey; and Perkins, William (2005).. Managing Information Technology.
5th Edition. Upper Saddle River, NJ. Pearson Prentice Hall.
Milgram, Stanley. (1963). Behavioral study of obedience. Journal of
Abnormal Social Psychology, 67:4, 371-378.
Mirani, R. & King, W. R. (1994). Impacts of end-user and
information center characteristics on end-user computing support.
Journal of Management Information Systems, 11:1, Summer, 141-166.
Munro, M. C., Huff, S. L. & Moore, G. (1987-88). Expansion and
control of end-user computing. Journal of Management Information
Systems, 4:3, Winter, 5-27.
Niederman, F., Brancheau, J. C. & Wetherbe, J. C. (1991).
Information systems management issues for the 1990s. MIS Quarterly,
December, 475-500.
Nord, G. D. & Nord, J. H. (1994). Perceptions and attitudes of
end-users on technology issues. Journal of Systems Management, 45:11,
November, 12-15.
Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric Theory, 2nd edition, New York:
McGraw-Hill.
Raymond, L. (1987). Validating and applying user satisfaction as a
measure of MIS success in small organizations. Information and
Management, 12:4, April, 173-179.
Rigg, Michael. (1992). Increased personal control equals increased
individual satisfaction. Industrial Engineering, 24:2, February, 12-13.
Rittenberg, L. E. & Senn, A. (1993). End-user computing: is it
true that end-user computing is like a runaway train? Internal Auditor,
February, 35-39.
Rivard, S. & Huff, S.L. (1988). Factors of success for end-user
computing. Communications of the ACM, 31:5, 552-561.
Robbins, S. P. (1991). Organizational Behavior: Concepts,
Controversies, and Applications. Fifth Edition. Englewood Cliffs, NJ:
Prentice Hall.
Rockart, J. F. & Flannery, L. S. (1983). The management of
end-user computing. Communications of the ACM, 26:10, October, 776-784.
Rushinek, A. & Rushinek, S. F. (1986). What makes users happy?
Communications of the ACM, 29:7, July, 594-598.
Saran, Cliff. (2006). Manage the Explosion. Computer Weekly. March
14, 48.
Shaw, Nancy, Lee-Partidge, Joo-Eng & Ang, James. (2003).
Understanding the hidden dissatisfaction of users toward end-user
computing. Journal of End User Computing, 15:2, Apr-Jun, 1-22.
Spector, Paul E. (1986). Perceived Control by Employees: A
Meta-Analysis of Studies Concerning Autonomy and Participation at Work.
Human Relations, 39:11, 1005-1016.
Spector, P. E. (1994). Using self-report questionnaires in OB
research: a comment on the use of a controversial method. Journal of
Organizational Behavior, 15, 385-392.
Turban, Efraim. (1993). Decision Support and Expert Systems:
Management Support Systems. 3rd Edition. New York, NY: Macmillan
Publishing Company.
Zeffane, Rachid M. (1994). Correlates of job satisfaction and their
implications for work redesign: a focus on the Australian
telecommunications industry. Public Personnel Management, 23:1, Spring,
61-76.
Rita Moore, Dalton State College
Mary Jo Jackson, University of South Florida at St. Petersburg
Ronald B. Wilkes, University of Memphis
Table 1: Parametric and Non-Parametric Test Results For Comparison of
End-Users' Satisfaction with EUC Strategies Characterized by High
Control and EUC Strategies Characterized by Low Control t-tests
for Paired Samples
t-tests for Paired Samples
Variable Number of Pairs Mean
Satisfaction with High-Control 2.9379
Strategies
Satisfaction with Low-Control 2.9837
Strategies 153
Variable t-value 2-tail sig.
Satisfaction with High-Control
Strategies
Satisfaction with Low-Control
Strategies -.52 .604
Wilcoxon Matched-Pairs Signed-Ranks Test
Variable Mean Rank Sum of Ranks
Satisfaction with High-Control 64.98 3639.0
Strategies
Satisfaction with Low-Control 60.46 4111.0
Strategies
Z = -.5973 2-tailed P = 055.3
Variable Cases
Satisfaction with High-Control 56 - Ranks
Strategies (low control less than high control)
Satisfaction with Low-Control 68 + Ranks
Strategies (low control greater than high control)
29 Ties
(low control equal to high control)
153 Total
Z = -.5973
Table 2: Parametric and Non-Parametric Test Results For Comparison
of End-Users' Satisfaction with EUC Strategies Characterized by High
Expansion and EUC Strategies Characterized by Low Expansion
t-tests for Paired Samples-
Variable Number of Mean
Pairs
Satisfaction with High-Expansion 3.7876
Strategies
Satisfaction with Low-Expansion 2.1340
Strategies 153
t-tests for Paired Samples-
Variable t-value 2-tail sig.
Satisfaction with High-Expansion
Strategies
Satisfaction with Low-Expansion
Strategies 18.46 .000
Wilcoxon Matched-Pairs Signed-Ranks Test
Variable Mean Rank Sum of Ranks
Satisfaction with High-Expansion 72.01 9722.0
Strategies
Satisfaction with Low-Expansion 29.60 148.00
Strategies
Z = -9.9953 2-tailed P = 000
Variable Cases
Satisfaction with High-Expansion 135 - Ranks
Strategies (low control equal to high control)
Satisfaction with Low-Expansion 5 + Ranks
Strategies (low control less than high control)
13 Ties
(low control greater than high control)
153 Total
Z = -9.9953
Table 3: Overall Satisfaction with EUC Strategy
EUC Strategy Mean Standard Deviation
Acceleration Low Control/ 3.9281 1.0072
High Expansion
Controlled Growth High Control/ 3.6471 1.0789
High Expansion
Containment High Control/ 2.2288 .9767
Low Expansion
Laissez-faire Low Control/ 2.0392 .9168
Low Expansion
Figure 1
EUC Strategy Grid (Munro et al., 1987-88)
High Acceleration Controlled Growth
EXPANSION
Low Laissez-faire Containment
Low High
CONTROL
Figure 3
End-User Satisfaction with EUC Strategy
Acceleration Controlled Growth
High 3.9281 3.6471
EXPANSION Laissez-faire Containment
Low 2.0392 2.2288
Low High
CONTROL