Predicting Flexibility and Success in Information Systems Planning: A System Dynamics Approach
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Organizations intend to achieve a high level of information systems flexibility and success. They plan information systems with multiple approaches and adopt different planning methodologies. A broad range of measurements is available in the literature to assess IS planning effectiveness and success. This study theoretically develops a causal model to assess and predict IS planning success, empirically validate the model, and simulate the empirically tested model to predict the "ends" and "means" of the IS planning. The Systems Dynamics approach is used to model and simulate the "ends" and "means" variables. The model represents the user involvement in IS planning and flexibility variables ("means") and IS success variables ("ends") in a framework. The questionnaire survey method is used to validate the model, and the survey was administered to 296 respondents from 42 organizations selected from eight different sectors. The survey results validate the existence of relationship between user involvement, flexibility, and IS success. The empirically validated model is used to predict flexibility and information systems success in the surveyed organizations.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.014 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it