Although assessment centers are popular for selecting and developing employees, important theoretical and practical questions remain about the key building blocks of the method: assessors, dimensions, and exercises. This symposium presents new empirical research regarding assessor training, the meaning of dimensions, candidates’ ability to identify dimensions, and exercise demands.

Abstract is available to download.

Cultivating profitable, long-lasting customer-supplier partnerships is a significant task for today's companies. These relationships bring value-adding benefits, including cost and risk reductions, and bring joint business opportunities (Ravald & Grönroos, 1996; McDonald, et al. 1997). Key account management deals with developing customersupplier partnerships within the business-to-business context. Key account managers are responsible for delivering customised products/services, and defining possible business opportunities for both parties, after carefully selecting buying companies according to their strategic importance for the supplier. However, key account management may be complicated for suppliers to manage especially if the selling companies do not know how to implement a key account management programme appropriately. There have been a number of studies attempting to identify approaches to successful key account management programmes (Millman & Wilson, 1995, Napolitano, 1997, Homburg et al., 2002). Abratt & Kelly (2002) were the first to investigate both buyers' and sellers' perceptions of success factors of a key account management programme. They found that both buyers and sellers hold similar points of view on what a successful key account management programme should contain.This thesis is a replication of Abratt & Kelly (2002), which refined their scale to obtain better reliability assessments and generalisability. Only some of the findings of the original study could be replicated. Six factors were extracted while only three of them were reliable. Some of the items loaded onto the same dimension in the replication as Abratt & Kelly (2002), whereas others did not. The discussion section of the thesis suggests reasons for the difference in findings and suggests future research areas based on this discussion.

One of the major challenges of MIS activities is the difficulty in measuring the effectiveness of delivered systems. The principal purpose of my research is to explore this field in order to develop an instrument by which to measure such effectiveness. Conceptualisation of Information System (IS) Effectiveness has been substantially framed by DeLone and McLean's (1992) Success; Model. But with the innovation in Information Technology (IT) over the past decade, and the constant pressure in IT to improve performance, there is merit in undertaking a fresh appraisal of the issue. This study built on the model of IS Success developed by DeLone and MeLean, but was broadened to include related research from the domains of IS, Management and Marketing. This analysis found that an effective IS function is built on three pillars: the systems implemented; the information held and delivered by these systems; and, the service provided in support of the IS function. A common foundation for these pillars is the concept of stakeholder needs. In seeking to appreciate the effectiveness: of delivered IS applications in relation to the job performance of stakeholders, this research developed an understanding of what quality means in an IT context I argue that quality is a more useful criterion for effectiveness than the more customary measures of use and user satisfaction. Respecification of the IS Success Model was then proposed. The second phase of the research was to test this model empirically through judgment panels, focus groups and interviews. Results consistently supported the structure and components of the respecified model. Quality was determined as a multi-dimensional construct, with the key dimensions for the quality of delivered IS differing from those used in the research from other disciplines. Empirical work indicated that end-user stakeholders derived their evaluations of quality by internally evaluating perceived performance of delivered IS in relation to their expectations for such performance. A short trial explored whether, when overt measurement of expectations was concurrent with the measurement of perceptions, a more revealing appraisal of delivered IS quality was provided than when perceptions alone were measured. Results revealed a difference between the two measures. Using the New IS Success Model as the foundation, and drawing upon the related theoretical and empirical research, an instrument was developed to measure the quality/effectiveness of delivered IS applications. Four trials of this instrument, QUALIT, are documented. Analysis of results from preliminary trials indicates promise in terms of business value: the instrument is simple to administer and has the capacity to pinpoint areas of weakness. The research related to the respecification of the New IS Success Model and the associated empirical studies, including the development of QTJALIT, have both contributed to the development of theory about IS Effectiveness. More precisely, my research has reviewed the components of an information system, the dimensions comprising these components and the indicators of each, and based upon these findings, formulated an instrument by which to measure the effectiveness of a delivered IS.

No description available.

No description available.

University of Macau / Faculty of Business Administration / Department of Management and Marketing

University of Macau / Faculty of Business Administration / Department of Management and Marketing

University of Macau / Faculty of Business Administration / Department of Management and Marketing

University of Macau / Faculty of Business Administration / Department of Management and Marketing