This essay has been submitted by a student. This is not an example of the work written by our professional essay writers.
This chapter the researcher intends to provide an overview of the impact of information system implementation on job satisfaction among staff at UiTM Melaka City Campus. This chapter begins with the definition of information system and job satisfaction. Following this section, it covered some importance topics such as system quality, information quality, and service quality. In addition, this chapter also discusses the theoretical framework for this study.
As the starting point in this chapter, the discussion on the definition of job satisfaction will carried out which is appears to vary in the understanding of previous researchers. Some of the most commonly cited definitions on job satisfaction are analyzed in the text that follows. However, for this study the definition is adopted from previous research in an attempt to seek and accommodate the framework of this study.
Job satisfaction can be described the resulting from the incumbent's comparison of actual outcomes with the required outcomes as an affective or emotional reaction to the job (Buitendach & Witte, 2005). Job satisfaction is defined as the employee's job appraisal result of their positive emotional response as well as fulfilling or congruent with the individual's values (Morris & Venkatesh, 2010). On the other hand, Webster' dictionary (1986) define job satisfaction as on how well a job provides fulfillment of a need or want and also means of enjoyment. At the same time, there is also need the attitudes about various aspects of their job such as the kind of work they do, their coworkers, and supervisors or subordinate.
Apart from a few definitions mentioned above, there are many more describing the concept definition of job satisfaction. The definition of job satisfaction has visibly evolved through the decades, but most versions share the belief that job satisfaction is a work-related positive affective reaction (Bernard, 2007). According to Chen (2007), among multiple personality traits, achievement motivation is frequently related to individual working performance and working attitude. Moreover, according to Alhawary and Aborumman, they indicate job satisfaction is associated with an individual's perceptions and evaluation of the job, and this perception is influence by individual circumstances such needs, values and expectations. Therefore individuals will evaluate their jobs according to the factors which they regard as being important to them (Sempane, Rieger and Roodt, 2002).
Abraham Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs
Abraham Maslow's "Hierarchy of Needs" according to Saif, Nawaz, Ali Jan & Khan (2012), an analysis of the "commonly-cited" theoretical models reveals that these are different views of the same reality. Their differences lie in their prioritization of the main aspects of satisfaction. In addition, most of the debates about theories of job satisfaction start with Maslow's theory of "Hierarchy of Needs" (1943). Then, according to Booysen (2008) argues that the basis of this model is the individuals will find out satisfy of the innate needs and wants they have. In addition, these innate needs and wants have a built in prioritizing system which are being referred to the hierarchy of needs.
Then, the Abraham Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs are the needs of an individual exist in a rational order and the basic lower level are must be satisfied before those at higher levels which it is relates with the extra a job allows for growth and acquisition of higher level needs, the more liable the individual is to report satisfaction with his or her job (Worrel, 2004). Therefore, the Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs theorized that satisfaction could be conceptualized as a pyramid with five different horizontal levels which is have to maintained that the lower needs had to be met before the individual could be motivated to achieve the next level (Brown, 2009). Moreover, Ololube (2006), Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs are once a need is satisfied it is no longer a need because it is ceases to motivate employees' behavior and they are motivated by the need at the next level up the hierarchy.
According to Brown (2009) the basic needs which are the lowest level in the pyramid include the physiological necessities. Then, the next level consists of physical safety and financial security and then the third level consist of love and acceptance of peoples. Next, the fourth level include of recognition by peoples. Lastly the top level in the pyramid included of self actualization which is consist self development and autonomy. In addition, Worrel (2004) argues that Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs views of job satisfaction were based on the five stage model of human needs. The lower stage is the basic life sustaining needs and then the next stage included of physical and financial security, while the third stage consisted needs of social acceptance. Then, the fourth stages are incorporated self actualization needs.
Maslow's theory of "Hierarchy of Needs" (1943)
Self Actualization Satisfaction
Self actualization needs that are the top in the level of Maslow's need theory consist of realizing one's full potential or self development that the pinnacle of one's calling (Ololube, 2006). Furthermore, same with the Booysen (2008) which argue the self actualization is the highest need which drives employees to look for achievement, track a useful life in the organization and ultimately in society which is the employee will continue to seek jobs that are challenging and creative in their pursuit for self actualization.
Then, according to Worrel (2004) that the job satisfaction occurs once one's required for growth and self actualization are met by the individual's job. In addition James (2011), it is about quest for reaching one's full potential as an individual which they believed to have frequent occurrences of peak experiences that are energized moments of profound happiness and harmony. He added which is according to Maslow, only a small percentage of the population reaches the level of self actualization. Moreover, this involves striving for health, searching for identity and autonomy and yearning for excellence (Fernando & Nilakant, 2008).
The self actualization concept according to Maslow refers the individual are needs for self fulfillment, namely and the tendencies in order to become actualized of what they are potentially (Cuirrin, 2007). However, according to Maslow (1954), the common feature of the needs for self actualization which is their emergence usually rests upon some prior satisfaction of the physiological, safety, love and esteem needs. In addition, self actualization needs are the entails the provision of opportunities as it occupies the final level at the top of the triangle that would allow employees to reach their full career potential (James, 2011).
Social Needs are individuals related to interaction with others which may include friendship, belonging to a group, and giving and receiving love (james, 2011). Moreover, individuals motivated at the social needs level in the hierarchy have satisfied both their physiological and safety needs (Cuirrin, 2007).
Moreover, Social needs are the employees look for to form social relationships within and outside of the organization and this often to job satisfaction and then the employees often value the receiving of coworkers in the organization that are refers to psychological needs (Booysen, 2008). Moreover, Cuirrin (2007) refer to his results that were consistent with Maslow's theory of need which is argue that who are attempted to verify the association between physiological health, involvement in a romantic relationship and the quality of love in a relationship and the quality of love in a relationship.
The importance of social needs should not be underestimated in an organizational setting, particularly so for graduates whose colleagues and supervisor are a vital source of social support (Cuirrin, 2007). Therefore, There is need to generate a feeling of acceptance, belonging, and community by reinforcing team dynamics, planning team-based projects and social events such as social activities, friendships, sense of belonging and affection. That can provide opportunities for individual to socialize as the socialization are the one factor can make employee work as a team (James, 2011).
Job Characteristic (Hackman and Oldham 1975)
Job related is attributes or factors by job characteristics. Job characteristics model are proposed by Hackman and Oldham (1975) which the model primarily describes the five core job dimensions ( skill variety, task identity, task significance, autonomy and task feedback) that are currently one of the most commonly used tools for describing job that can excite employees to experience critical psychological states, that affect personal and work outcomes (Chen, 2008). According to Hackman & Oldham, 2005, the theory argues core characteristics task which is skill variety, task identity, task significance, autonomy and task feedback have their strongest effects when employees have high growth need strength which is when they have a high desire for growth and personal development at work. Moreover, job characteristics are aspect of the individual employee job and tasks that figure how the employee perceives his or her particular role in the organization. That is exposed of the Hackman and Oldham's (1980) original formulation of job characteristics theory that the outcome of the job redesign were influenced by some moderators which is the difference to which various employees desire individual or psychological progress and then the clarity of tasks leads to higher job satisfaction because greater role clarity creates such workforce, which is more satisfied with, committed to, and involved in work (Saif, Nawaz, Jan & Khan, 2012).
According to Morris & Venkatesh (2010), job characteristics are drawn from job characteristic model by Hackman & Oldham 1980 and consist of the following five constructs which is task significance, defined as the extent to which a job has impact on the lives of people in an organization or society in general. Then, the definition of task identity is the extent to which a job involves completing a whole identifiable outcome. Next is skill variety as the extent to which job requires the use of different talents. Meanwhile, autonomy is defined as the extent to which a job provides the employee with discretion to decide how the work is complete and to set the schedule for completing the work activities. Lastly, the feedback to be defined as the extent to which carrying out the work activities provides the employee with clear information about employee performance. Moreover, Chen (2008) defined that the five core characteristics which the skill variety describe as the degree of technique and talent required by jobs, task identity describe as the degree of job accomplished by an individual worker and task significance indicate the degree of job result effects on the company or others task. Meanwhile, autonomy indicates of an individual of strategic self determination when performing the job. Lastly, task feedback describes the degree of the employee can understand either the job achieves good or bad results. In addition the Casey & Robbins (2009) claims that the core job dimensions of job characteristic model (Hackman & Oldham, 1975) which are skill variety defined as the degree of which job requires a variety of different activities to utilize the use of different skills and talents. Next, task identity means the degree to which a job requires achievement of the whole and identifiable part of work which is doing job from begin to the ending with a visible outcome. Then the task significance is the degree to which the job has important impact on the other people work either in the immediate organization or in the external environment. Meanwhile, autonomy is the degree to which the job provides significant freedom, independence, and discretion to the individual in scheduling the work and determines the procedures to be used in carrying it out. Lastly, feedback from the job is the degree which is carrying out work activities that required by job results of the individual including direct and clear information about the effectiveness of performance.
The theory is not predictable to work with equal effectiveness for all individuals. In particular, individuals with strong value and desire individual feelings of accomplishment and growth must react very positively to a job high in motivating potential and then the individuals who do not value personal growth and accomplishment may find such a job anxiety arousing and may be uncomfortably stretched by it (Hackman and Oldham, 1974). Chen (2008) argued that perceptions of skill variety, task identity and task significance enable the worker to understand the meaning of the job. Moreover perceptions of autonomy can reinforce employee sense of responsibility regarding work outcomes. Finally, perceptions of feedback help employees to predict the possible results of the job.
Job Characteristic Model
Job Characteristic Model by Hackman and Oldham (1975)
DeLone and McLean Success Model
The DeLone and McLean IS Success Model, though published in 1992, was based on theoretical and empirical Information System(IS) research conducted by a number of researchers in the 1970s and 1980s (Petter, 2008). DeLone and McLean Model of Information Systems (IS) is one of the most cited and commonly used models in the Information System literature. Generally, the model has been used mainly to explain Information System success at the individual level of analysis (Wang & Liao, 2008).
Based on previous researcher (Ephraim, 2009) there are six variables or components of information system(IS) such system quality, information quality, use, user satisfaction, individual impact, and organizational impact. Although this variables will attempted to clarify the relationships between the IS success and their impact of newer information technologies. According to Wang & Liao (2007) was makes two important contributions to the understanding of information system which it provide a scheme for categorizing the multitude of information system success measures which have been used in the research literature. Secondly by suggest a model of temporal and causal interdependencies between the categories.
According to Wang (2007), DeLone and McLean model in the academic literature, it seemed appropriate to organize the studies of information system success that were found using its taxonomy. The findings from empirical studies on information system success are organized by success construct or dimensions. Therefore, by organized this studies in this manner can helps to examine for each of the proposed relationship within the D&M model.
Figure 2.1: DeLone and McLean (1992) Model
DeLone and McLean proposed the model of Information System success shown in Figure 1. The model makes important contributions to the understanding of Information System success. First, it provides a scheme for categorizing the multitude of IS success measures that have been used in the literature. Second, it suggest a model of temporal and causal interdependencies between the categories (Petter, 2008)
Figure 2.2: DeLone and McLean (2003) Model of IS Success
Based on the previous research, the updated Information System(IS) model wants to recognizing these proposed modifications to their model, reviewed empirical studies that had been performed during the years since 1992 and revised the original model. The updated model is shown in Figure 2 (Delone, 2003).
This updated IS success model accepted the Hastie et al.(2003) recommendation to include service quality as a construct. Another update to the model addressed the criticism that an information system can affect levels other than individual and organizational levels. Other than that, IS success was affects workgroups, industries, societies, DeLone and McLean replaced the variables, individual impact and organizational impact, with net benefits, thereby accounting for benefits at multiple levels of analysis. This revision allowed the model to be applied to whatever level of analysis the researcher considers most relevant (Halone et al. 2009). In 1959, Herzberg et al. conducted a study which
In 2008, Petter conducted a study which the D&M model has also been found to be a useful framework for organizing IS success measurements. The model has been widely used by IS researchers for understanding and measuring the dimensions of IS success. Furthermore, each of the variables describing success of an information system was consistent with one or more of the six major success dimensions of the updated model. The dimensions of success was include such system quality, information quality, service quality, system use, user satisfaction and net benefits (Delone, 2003).
However, DeLone and McLean (2004) applied their success model to evaluate the success of e-commerce systems. From an e-commerce perspective, the key users are customers and provider. Based on Buitendach & White (2005) also adapted the model for use in evaluating e-learning course. Further, Hastie (2006) used the model when they assessed the efficiency and success of e-learning information system from the viewpoint of organizations and their employees.
The meaning of information systems has been growing in diversity and complexity (Nagib&Belkis, 2002). Based on Cohen (1997, 1999, 2000), for example, after describing the attacks on the Information Systems (IS) field, for "its lack of tradition and focus" and the "misunderstanding of the nature of Information Systems", examines "the limitations of existing frameworks for defining Information Systems" and reconceptualis Information Systems and tries to "demonstrate that it has evolved to be part on an emerging discipline of fields, Informing Science" (Cohen, 20).
From the past researcher, (Wong &Arjpru, 2007) notes that Information System implementation can truly be considered as a "success" when a significant number of users have used the Information Systems (IS) on a continued basis. According to the literature, Information System Implementation can truly be considered as a "success" when a significant number of users have moved from an initial adoption to using the Information System on a continued basis (Bhattacherjee 2001, Cheung &Limayem 2005, Davis&Venkatesh 2004).
In the other hand, Wang & Liao (2008) also indicates that the measurement of information systems success or effectiveness has been widely investigated throughout the information system research community. Moreover, DeLone and McLean (1992) comprehensively reviewed the different information system success measures and proposed a six-factor information system success model as a taxonomy and framework for measuring the complex-dependent variables in information system research.
The past studies of information system have mainly focused on the factors that influence users to begin to use the system. According to Wong & Arjpru (2007), currently there are no information system studies that investigated both the factors that influence user satisfaction and the factors that influence user dissatisfaction and there might be a possibility that employees will continue or discontinue or increase or decrease the use of system depending upon whether they are satisfied or dissatisfied with the system.
From Chen et al. 2004; Chiasson & Lovato 2001; Jones et al. 2002; Venkatesh et al. 2003; Wixom & Todd 2005 have shown in extended studies of technology adoption and technology acceptance. From the researchers Wong & Arjpru (2007), indicates from Bhattacherjee (2001) was the first researchers to propose a Post-Acceptance Model for Information System Continuance. His model seeks to explain users' intention to continue using the system. Although his model is considered to be the most widely cited and influential model in explaining an information system continuance intention (Centefelli & Benbasat 2003; Cheung & Limayem 2005; Koppious et al. 2005), it is incomplete in explaining the use of the system for a particular group of users, most particularly, users who are employees in organization, using the system to perform their jobs. This is because his model emphasizes satisfaction as the main reason causing the users' intention to continue using the system.
Definition of Quality
Reeves and Bednar (1994) has define the terms of quality in organization of quality as excellence, quality as value, quality as conformity to specifications and quality as meeting customer expectations. This statement can be supported based on Swanson (1997) indicates that the information systems quality can be understood using Reeves and Bednar's framework of quality. Excellence in Information System quality involves using state-of-the art- technology, following industry "best practice" software standards and delivering "error-free" performance. Besides that, the value of Information System can be realized by improving profit margins for the firm, providing easy-to-use and useful applications and designing easily maintainable software.
According to Gorla & et.al (2010), system quality represents the quality of the information system processing itself, which includes software and data components, and it is a measure of the extent to which the system is technically sound. It is also characterized by employment of state-of-the-art technology, a system offering key functions and features which denoted as Information System excellence and software that is user friendly, easy to learn and easy maintainable which denoted as Information System value.
Seddon (1997) indicates that system quality is concerned with whether there are bugs in the system, the consistency of user interface, ease of use, quality of documentation, and sometimes, quality and maintainability of program code. This statement can be proved accordingly to DeLone and McLean (2003), each of the variables describing success of an information system was consistent with one or more of the six major success dimensions of the updated model. One of the dimensions of success include of system quality which is define as the desirable characteristics of information systems. For example, ease of use, system flexibility, system reliability and ease of learning, as well as features of intuitiveness, sophistication, flexibility and response times.
Other than that, DeLone and McLean (2003) also stated that system quality is measured by attributes such as ease of use, functionality, data quality, flexibility and integration. While Sedera and Gable (2004) develops and validates an comprehensive instrument for system quality which resulted in nine attributes which are ease of use, ease of learning, user requirements, system features, system accuracy, flexibility sophistication, integration and customization.
The ISO 9000:2000 standard defines quality as the "degree to which a set of inherent distinguishing features fulfils needs or expectations that are stated, generally implied or obligatory" (International Organization of Standardization, 2000). This statement can be supported by Schee & Trumpold, 1996 stated that in accordance with this definition quality information comes from the comparison of the actual and the nominal condition of a quality criterion. Then a quality information system obviously is an instrument for handling such quality information. In many cases quality information is not available directly, but it has to be derived from other raw data. Therefore in the following data is regarded as quality-relevant, if it can be used to obtain quality information ( Sommer, 2002).
Based on Forza (1995), the dimension "quality information systems" considers information flows and information technologies which support managers and workers in their activities in order to improve quality performance. Information technologies are separated from information flows, since information flows can take place even without information technologies and the presence of information technologies does not necessarily guarantee the achievement of information flows.
According to Gorla & et al. (2010) indicated that service quality can be defined as the degree of discrepancy between customers' normative expectations for service and their perceptions of service performance. This can be proved by Levesque and McDougall (1996) notes that the interest is largely driven by the realization that high service quality results in customer satisfaction and loyalty, greater willingness to recommend to someone else, reduction in complaints and improved customer retention rates.
In contrast, service quality is a major influence on a customer satisfaction as customers buy products or services and on whether they continue to do so. As a result, accurate and reliable instruments that assess service quality are of interest to companies whose revenues come in whole or part from service delivery. Currently the most popular and ubiquitous service quality instrument is SERVQUAL (Landrum et al. 2009). This statement can be proved by the seminal work on service quality is that of Parasuramaner al. (1988), which culminated in the development of the SERVQUAL instrument (Gorla et al., 2010).
According to Landrum et al. (2009), SERVQUAL is based on the proposition that service quality can be measured as the gap between the service that customers expect and the performance they perceive to have received. Service quality is calculated as the difference in two scores where better service quality results in a smaller gap (Landrum, Prybutok, Kappelman& Zhang, 2008). From the past researcher (Buttle, 1996), SERVQUAL is founded on the view that the customer's assessment of Service quality is paramount which is service quality is presented as a multidimensional construct. In their original formulation Parasuraman et al. (1985) identified ten components of service quality which are reliability, responsiveness, competence, access, courtesy, communication, credibility, security, understanding or knowing the customer and tangibles.
Although SERVQUAL was developed within the marketing sector, it also is used in a variety of organizational settings, including libraries and information center's (Kettinger& Lee, 1994; Nitecki, 1996). Furthermore, Parasuraman, Zeithaml and Berry (1988) stated that since service quality depends on the relationship of customer expectations with customer perceptions, it is appropriate to calculate service quality by subtracting expected from perceived service. One then achieves an overall measure of service quality by averaging the scores of all items (Brown, Churchill & Peter, 1992).
In the present, Gorla & et al. (2010) the service quality construct was measured by four indicators which are reliability, responsiveness, assurance, and empathy. Scale items were adopted from Pitt et al. They used four constructs for service quality as opposed to the five constructs used by Pitt et al. which are dropped the 'tangibles' construct. The rationale for this approach is that the measure for the 'tangible' dimension had low reliability in the study of Pitt et al. (1995), and their choice is consistent with the choices of previous researchers (Kettinger and Lee, 1997; Carr, 2002) who excluded tangibles dimension in IS-adapted service quality measurement. It can be supported by Landrum (2009), which states as the importance and size of the service sector of the global economy grows, the study of services and innovation are becoming increasingly important. Services are distributed regionally, nationally and globally and are increasingly becoming a larger portion of many organizations' revenue business services aimed at enhancing performance require reliable methods of measurement, assessment and improvement (Spohrer & Maglio, 2008).
Information System (IS)
(DeLone and McLean)
(Ling-Hsiu Chen, 2007)
Figure 2.3 Represent the Theoretical Framework for the Impact of Information System implementation on job satisfaction among staff at UiTM Melaka Campus City.
In conducting this study, several hypotheses were formulated from research questions. It is as follow:
H1 Higher system quality has a relationship with higher job satisfaction among staff at UiTM Melaka City Campus.
H2: Higher information quality has a relationship with higher job satisfaction among staff at UiTM Melaka City Campus.
H3: Higher service quality has a relationship with higher job satisfaction among staff at UiTM Melaka City Campus.
This chapter reviews the literature of employee job satisfaction and the impact of information system. The theoretical frameworks were shows the relationship of job satisfaction and information system. There were shows relationship between two variables for the study.