This research project has established a new measurement model for User Empowerment as an enabler to Enterprise Systems 1 success. This study was inspired by the reported relationship between Empowerment and improved work outcomes. From this, it was hypothesised that empowering the users of Enterprise Systems during the implementation process would improve the reports of post implementation system success. A new related concept of system oriented User Empowerment was conceived. The outcomes of empowering users (increased worker effectiveness; (increased work satisfaction) conceptually resonates very closely to the outcomes of individual performance, quality of system outputs, goodness of system functionality and, on a broader level, effective use of the system to yield successful business outcomes. These latter outcomes represent the measures of Enterprise Systems success. Thus Empowerment as an independent variable, and Enterprise Systems success as a dependent variable, provided a launching platform for the study. The research model was built upon the existing research into Empowerment as articulated by Spreitzer (Spreitzer, 1996) and Thomas and Velthouse (Thomas & Velthouse, 1990) and its derived systems related construct of User Empowerment, first explored by Doll, Deng and Metts (Doll, Deng, & Metts, 2003). It used a current and validated measure of Enterprise Systems Success as developed by Gable, Sedera and Chan (Gable, Sedera, & Chan, 2003); this measure is a refinement of the Information Systems Success Model of DeLone and McLean (DeLone & McLean, 2002). 2 In order to test the relationships of Empowerment to (Enterprise) System success, the following research sub-problems were explored: * What types of Empowerment are relevant in the Enterprise System context? * Is User Empowerment different from Psychological Empowerment and if so, how? * What is the relationship between Psychological Empowerment and User Empowerment? * How can User Empowerment be measured? * What is the effect of Psychological Empowerment on Enterprise Systems success? * What is the effect of User Empowerment on Enterprise Systems success? This research project was a PhD study funded by the Australian Research Council through an industry linkage program. The industry partner in this project was SAP - the most successful vendor of Enterprise Systems. Although limited in analysis the study spanned across two industry sectors, with two Enterprise Systems (Oracle and SAP). This research was a multimethod study and involved both qualitative and quantitative phases. The multimethod included content analysis, survey, and case study. This research was led by an explorative research strategy and paid considerable attention to analysing each research method in relation to other research methods, and also in relation to the demands of the research problem. A comprehensive literature review established extant definitions and constructs for Psychological Empowerment, User Empowerment and, Enterprise Systems success. The literature review employed a formal qualitative research method, using open coding supported through the use of Nvivo, a Qualitative software package, in order to identify and derive key themes in the referent disciplines. The responses from the email survey of Information Systems researchers, and Enterprise Systems consultants were triangulated with the findings from the categorised literature review on Empowerment. This sub-study utilised WordStat software and the findings were presented at the QualIT conference (Sehgal & Stewart, 2006). Drawing from the existing perspectives on Empowerment a contextbased perspective on Empowerment was proposed by the researcher. From this work, a new working definition of (User) Empowerment was derived. This construct proposed that User Empowerment involved Computer Self-efficacy, Perceived Usefulness, Intrinsic Motivation, User Autonomy, and Problem-solving and Decision support. Psychological Empowerment involves Meaning, Self-determination, Competence, and Impact. The research project then empirically tested the relationship of both Psychological Empowerment and User Empowerment to Enterprise Systems success using a quantitative enquiry. The new User Empowerment construct was statistically tested for validity and reliability. This quantitative study found no statistical evidence for a relationship between Psychological Empowerment and Enterprise Systems success. The study findings suggest significant statistical evidence for a relationship between User Empowerment and Enterprise Systems success. Statistical analysis showed that the construct for User Empowerment was different from the construct of Enterprise Systems success. These relationships held regardless of the level of the user: senior management, operational, end users or technical. This phase of the study was presented at the Americas Conference of Information Systems (Sehgal & Stewart, 2004). This exploratory survey was followed by another industry based case study, which confirmed the results for a different industry sector and different Enterprise System. This latter study was used in an independent confirmatory factor analysis of the Enterprise Systems success measurement which was presented at the Americas Conference on Information Systems (Sehgal & Stewart, 2004) and International Conference on Information Systems (Sedera, Gable, & Chan, 2004) by fellow researchers. This research has demonstrated that User Empowerment, rather than Psychological Empowerment was significantly related to Enterprise Systems Success. The study findings identified potentially significant benefits to the Enterprise System implementing organisations as well as the Enterprise System vendor from empowering Enterprise System users. Of the reported benefits one of the relevant one was improved and positive reports about the implemented Enterprise System. Further, the study highlights the importance of context when measuring a construct such as Empowerment. There are clear practical implications for the research outcomes. These include a recommendation that training programs should ensure that users have a high degree of computer self-efficacy when using the enterprise system. The validated User Empowerment instrument will be utilised as a diagnostic tool for organisational readiness prior to an ES implementation. This would assist in benchmarking the level of empowerment and predicted Enterprise Systems success. Future research will explore the effects of an Enterprise System on the components of User Empowerment as it is conjectured that there is a reciprocal relationship between the system and user attributes of Computer Self-efficacy, Problem-solving Decision Support, and understanding of business logic.

Organizations make large investments in Information Systems (IS) expecting positive impacts to the organisation and its functions. Yet, there exists much controversy surrounding the 'potential' impacts of these systems, with some studies reporting broadly positive impacts of IS across organizations (Barua, Kriebel and Mukhopadhyay 1995; Barua and Lee 1997; Brynjolfsson and Hitt 1996; Lehr and Lichtenberg 1999; Mukherjee, Ray and Miller 2001), while others have shown nil or detrimental impacts (Attewell and Rule 1984; Brynjolfsson and Yang 1996; Cameron and Quinn 1988; Wilson 1993). Various authors have suggested that these conflicting results may be due to poor measurement - E.g. incomplete or inappropriate measures of success (DeLone and McLean 1992; Gable 1996; Melone 1990), lack of theoretical grounding and hence agreement on appropriate measures of success (Bonner 1995; Myers, Kappelman and Prybutok 1998), myopic focus on financial performance indicators (Ballantine, Bonner, Levy, Martin, Munro and Powell 1996; Kaplan and Norton 1996), weaknesses in survey instruments employed (Gable, Sedera and Chan 2003) (e.g., constructs lacking in validity), or (5) inappropriate data collection approach (Seddon, Staples, Patnayakuni and Bowtell 1999; Sedera and Gable 2004) (e.g., asking the wrong people, unrepresentative sample). Enterprise Systems (ES) have over the past decade emerged to be one of the most important developments in the corporate use of information technology. Anecdotal evidence reveals discontent with these large application software packages. Yet Enterprise System investments are seldom systematically evaluated post-implementation; the review process and measures typically being idiosyncratic and lacking credibility. Impacts resulting from 'Enterprise Systems' are particularly difficult to measure, with an Enterprise System entailing many users ranging from top executives to data entry operators; many applications that span the organization; and a diversity of capabilities and functionality. Despite the substantial investments made by organizations and the anecdotal evidence of discontent, systematic attempts to measure their success have been few. The primary objective of this research is to develop and test a standardized instrument for measuring ES-Success. Other related objectives of this research include: (1) to identify the dimensions and measures of ES-Success, (2) to validate a maximally generalizable measurement model and survey instrument for gauging ES-Success; (3) to develop an understanding of the state of Enterprise Systems using descriptive/comparative statistics, and (4) to identify and test an antecedent of ES-Success. With the above objectives, and in attention to the weaknesses identified in past IS-success research, this study follows and extends the 'research cycle' guidelines of Mackenzie and House (1979) and McGrath (1979). The research cycle entails two main phases: (1) an exploratory phase to develop the hypothesized measurement model, and (2) a confirmatory phase, to test the hypothesized measurement model against new data. The two surveys (termed as identification-survey and specification-survey) conducted in the exploratory phase of this research go beyond the activities recommended by Mackenzie and House (1979) and McGrath (1979). A third "confirmation-survey" was completed in the confirmatory phase of the research cycle. The three surveys gathered and analyzed data from six hundred (600) respondents. The purpose of the identification-survey was to discover the salient ES-Success dimensions and measures to include in an a-priori ES-Success model. Data from 137 respondents representing 27 Australian State Government Agencies that had implemented SAP R/3 in the late 1990s were analyzed. The analysis of identification-survey data yielded an a-priori model with 41 measures of 5 dimensions of ES-Success that provide a holistic view across the organization from strategic to operational levels. The specification-survey was employed to validate the a-priori ES-Success measurement model derived in the preceding identification-survey. Employing 310 responses from the same 27 public sector organizations, exploratory data analysis validated 27 measures of success pertaining to the 4 dimensions: information quality, system quality, individual impact and organizational impact. Data for testing the influence of an antecedent of ES-Success was simultaneously gathered during the specification-survey. This analysis, based on the Adaptive Structuration Theory (AST), investigated the influence of Knowledge Management Structures Adequacy (KMSA) on ES-Success. Preliminary results indicate a strong relationship between the Knowledge Management Structures Adequacy and ES-Success. The purpose of the confirmation-survey was to further validate the dimensions and measures of the ES-Success model, using new data, employing confirmatory statistical techniques. Data was gathered from 153 respondents across a large University that had implemented the Oracle Enterprise System, which facilitated further construct validity of the ES-Success measurement instrument was further established using Structural Equation Modeling (SEM).

The doctoral research project is titled ‘An Exploration of the Relationship of Organisational Culture and Enterprise System Success and sought to address the research gap identified in the literature between organisational culture literature and Information System success literature. This is a research project which is funded by the Australian Research Council in conjunction with industry. The industry sponsors for this research were SAP AG, SAP USA and SAP ANZ. The research project adopted a multi-method research design, grounded in practice, in order to surface any reported relationship between Enterprise Systems Success (ESS) and Organisational Culture (OC). A critical part of the study was to identify who could report on this relationship. Partners in implementation include internal change managers, internal consultants, vendor consultants and implementation partner consultants. Representatives from each of these constituents were interviewed, covering a range of industry sectors and Enterprise Systems vendor organisations. The first phase of the research was to qualitatively assess the perception of these participants on the role of culture to Enterprise Systems Success. This phase used open, axial and selective coding of the responses obtained in a semi-structured interview. The next phase of the research was to gather quantitative measures of Organisational Culture and Enterprise Systems Success. The Organisational Culture Assessment Inventory (OCAI) of Cameron and Quinn was selected to gather quantitative data on Organisational Culture. The Enterprise Systems Success instrument of Gable, Sedera and Chan was selected to measure the perception of ESS because of its proven reliability and validity. Each of these data sets were then analysed to determine if an association existed between the cultures of organisations that achieved most success with the Enterprise System as opposed to the culture types reported of organisations that achieved the least success with the ES. These findings then assisted in the development of a model of interaction between OC and ESS. Finally, the relationship of OC to ESS was explored in a rich case study of one large firm, to determine if the consultant’s reported relationships could be identified in the subcultures of the organisation. The key findings of this study were: 1. There was a relationship reported between culture type and success types. The findings a-e below represent findings using the culture definitions from Cameron & Quinn’s culture instrument: a. clan cultures which emphasised the behaviours of development of others were related to reports of ESS b. hierarchical cultures which emphasised the behaviours of control and coordination were related to reports of ESS c. hierarchical cultures which were poor in the execution of control and coordination were related to reports of the least success with ES d. market cultures which emphasised (internal) competitiveness were strongly related to reports of least success with ES e. literature attributes of continuous improvement (CI), flexibility (F) and innovation (I), which are often described as antecedents to innovation success and are found in the culture type of adhocracy, were reported as strongly related to success of ES, but the culture type of adhocracy was not reported as being present in the quantitative data describing consultant experiences with enterprises which had implemented ES. 2. that the literature supported theoretical reasons for the above findings 3. that these patterns of association were found in the case study. The research supports the proposition that there is a relationship between Organisational Culture type and ESS. Certain culture types practice behaviours that correspond to reported necessary behaviours for innovation success and ESS, whilst other culture types practice behaviours that correspond to behaviours for failure of innovation and of ES failure. A model of and explanation for this relationship was proposed as a result of the findings. Future research is now required to empirically test this model.