Measures and item reliability
| Construct | Type | Items | Loading | Source/reference |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CRM consultant resources (CR) | Reflective | Experienced consultants guided us throughout the course of the project. External consultants were experienced in our business processes. External consultants brought considerable expertise and experience to our project | 0.90** 0.87** 0.93** | Consultant resources (Karimi et al., 2007a) |
| User involvement (UI) | Reflective | The user community was involved throughout the (CRM) implementation project. Business users participated in determining systems needs and capabilities. Business users participated in identifying input/output needs | 0.85** 0.92** 0.89** | User involvement (Karimi et al., 2007a) |
| Application complexity (APP) | Reflective | The CRM application was required to integrate with other applications. The CRM technology was required to interface with other types of technology | 0.89** 0.94** | Technical complexity (Gemino et al., 2008) |
| Requirements uncertainty (REQ) | Reflective | A lot of effort had to be spent in reconciling the requirements of various users. Users differed a great deal among themselves in the requirements to be met | 0.70** 0.96** | Requirements uncertainty (Gemino et al., 2008) |
| CRM system quality (SQ) | Reflective | The application developed is reliable. The application is easy to maintain. The users perceive that the system meets intended functional requirements. The system meets user expectations with respect to response time. The overall quality of the developed application is high | 0.83** 0.79** 0.80** 0.74** 0.90** | Product performance (Wallace et al., 2004) |
| Firm performance (FP) | Average three-year ROA | Average three-year return-on-assets (ROA) | NA | |
| Control variables | ||||
| Relative project size (SIZ) | Single-item measure | How does the size of this project compare with others undertaken by the client organization over the past three years? | NA | Project size (Gemino et al., 2008) |
| Firm size (REV) | Single-item measure | What is the annual revenue of your business unit (SBU) in the previous year? | NA | |
| Time since system rollout | Single-item measure | Number of months system used since rollout? | NA | Time since system rollout (Karimi et al., 2007a) |
| Industry | Categorical measure | What is your business unit’s (SBU) industry sector? | NA | |
| Construct | Type | Items | Loading | Source/reference |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Reflective | Experienced consultants guided us throughout the course of the project. | 0.90** | Consultant resources ( | |
| Reflective | The user community was involved throughout the (CRM) implementation project. | 0.85** | User involvement ( | |
| Reflective | The CRM application was required to integrate with other applications. | 0.89** | Technical complexity ( | |
| Reflective | A lot of effort had to be spent in reconciling the requirements of various users. | 0.70** | Requirements uncertainty ( | |
| Reflective | The application developed is reliable. | 0.83** | Product performance ( | |
| Average three-year ROA | Average three-year return-on-assets (ROA) | NA | ||
| Relative project size (SIZ) | Single-item measure | How does the size of this project compare with others undertaken by the client organization over the past three years? | NA | Project size ( |
| Single-item measure | What is the annual revenue of your business unit (SBU) in the previous year? | NA | ||
| Single-item measure | Number of months system used since rollout? | NA | Time since system rollout ( | |
| Categorical measure | What is your business unit’s (SBU) industry sector? | NA | ||
Sharing content requires targeting cookies to be enabled. Please update your cookie preferences to use this feature.