The Effect of Critical... - Artigo - 2011

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/0263-5577.htm
IMDS
111,9
The effect of critical success

factors on IT governance
performance
1418
Edephonce N. Nfuka and Lazar Rusu
Received 2 February 2011

Revised 16 June 2011
Accepted 16 June 2011
Stockholm University, Stockholm, Sweden

Abstract
Purpose The purpose of this paper is to analyse the effect of critical success factors (CSFs) on
information technology (IT) governance performance in public sector organizations in a developing
country such as Tanzania.
Design/methodology/approach Based on a previous study and a further literature review,
a research model was developed for analysing the relationship between the CSFs found for effective IT
governance in this environment and their effect on IT governance performance. A survey research
method was applied for data collection and sample data from Tanzanian public sector organizations
(this environment) obtained. Subsequently, a second-generation structural equation modelling
technique, namely partial least squares, was applied to test statistically the correlated effect.
Findings The results indicate significant small to strong positive correlated effects on IT
governance performance. The CSF with the most significant correlated effect was involve and get
support of senior management and the one with the least consolidate, standardize and manage IT
infrastructure and application to optimize costs and information flow across the organization. Finally,
a CSF model for effective IT governance in this environment was proposed.
Research limitations/implications The findings imply that decision makers can optimize
IT-related plans and use of scarce resources by concentrating on the CSFs that have a significant effect
on IT governance performance that could lead to an improvement of public service delivery. This
study is limited to a single developing country but future studies can involve more such countries to
broaden the insights into the effect of CSFs on IT governance performance in such environments.
Originality/value By establishing the correlated effects between these CSFs and the IT
governance performance, this study has revealed a significant impact of CSFs on IT governance
performance. It also suggests a CSFs model for effective IT governance in this less-resourced
environment in which such studies have not been conducted before, yet which are vital for analysing
and improving IT governance.
Keywords Tanzania, Developing countries, Public administration, Critical success factors,
IT governance performance, Correlated effect, Public sector
Paper type Research paper
Industrial Management & Data

Systems
Vol. 111 No. 9, 2011
pp. 1418-1448
q Emerald Group Publishing Limited
0263-5577
DOI 10.1108/02635571111182773
1. Introduction
Recently, in many public sector organizations, the use of information technology (IT)
has become pervasive in endeavours to support and evolve public service delivery
(Ali and Green, 2007; UN, 2010). This pervasive use of technology has caused critical
dependency on IT, which in todays economic and administrative world that deals with
government service delivery involves a complex mix of political, organizational,
technical and cultural concerns (Sethibe et al., 2007). This calls for a focus on effective
IT governance, which is an actively designed set of IT governance mechanisms that
encourage behaviours consistent with the organizations mission, strategy and culture
(Weill and Ross, 2004).
While there are various definitions of IT governance (Simonsson and Johnson,

2005), one of the most prevalent is:
[. . .] an integral part of enterprise governance and has potential to provide mechanisms for
leadership and organizational structures and processes that ensure the organizations IT
sustains and extends the organizations strategies and objectives (ITGI, 2003).
Its potential lies in the fact that most significant IT concerns, current and future, are not
technology related, but governance related (Guldentops et al., 2002). For example,
Weill and Ross (2004) showed at least a 20 percent better return on IT investment when
effective IT governance is in place. Thus, IT-governance-related success factors must be
entrenched and adhered to in order to do away with inadequate governance
effectiveness, which has negative consequences for the IT contribution to public service
delivery.
Several studies have looked at such a concern about inadequate governance
effectiveness (Weill and Ross, 2004; Ali and Green, 2007) and the necessary success
factors (Weill, 2004; Tan et al., 2009). However, none of these studies has been carried out
within the context of a developing country like Tanzania (Imran and Gregor, 2007;
Nfuka et al., 2009), which has low human development in contrast to developed countries
(UNDP, 2010). For example, while the human development index that includes life
expectancy, gross national income per capita and access to knowledge was 0.398 in
Tanzania, in developed countries it was mostly above 0.8.
Such governance concern in Tanzanian public sector organizations
(this environment) is due to the fact that today there is a remarkable amount of IT
applications. Examples include applications to manage government employees, income
tax and the distribution of medical supplies (Nfuka et al., 2009). However, such
applications among others are coupled with fragmented IT initiatives with loss of
synergies and economies of scale in and across organizations, leading to duplication of
effort and resources (Ndou, 2004; Bakari, 2007). For example, the Tanzanian
Governments weakness in streamlining some IT applications and enabling
infrastructure cost US$200m and caused duplication of work (Maimu, 2006).
Such a concern is also due to the need to manage the rising IT investment
cost-effectively, e.g. the implementation of a national fibre-optic backbone was
estimated at US$170m (IP, 2010) and an upgrade of the HR system that manages
government employees at US$1m (PO-PSM, 2010). This also applies to a guide to
strategic IT integration into public sector reforms and poverty reduction and economic
growth strategy, in which most improvements are based (Mutagahywa et al., 2007).
This concern is amplified by constraints on IT resources, knowledge and culture in
this environment. For example, IT infrastructure accessibility that apart from
remarkable mobile penetration with tele-density increasing from 1 percent in 2000 to
about 46 percent by June 2010 (TCRA, 2010), there is still low access to the internet: the
available statistics indicate 1.6 percent of the population in contrast to more than
60 percent in most developed countries (IWS, 2010). Other constraints are awareness of
IT potential and familiarity and culture to embrace the optimal management and use of
IT (Nfuka et al., 2009; Rusu and Paul Tenga, 2010).
However, based on IT governance focus areas (ITGI, 2003; Buckby et al., 2008) and
five organizations in this environment, an exploratory study to address such a gap was
pursued (Nfuka and Rusu, 2010a). This study identified critical success factors (CSFs),
The effect of
CSFs on IT
governance
1419
IMDS
111,9
1420
which are limited to a number of areas in which satisfactory results ensure success in
an organization (Rockart and van Bullen, 1986), in this case effective IT governance
implementation. Though, based on this study, it is reasonable to believe there is a
correlated effect between these CSFs and the IT governance performance, this has not
been statistically confirmed.
In this paper, we address such a gap by hypothesizing that the correlated effect exists
and therefore analysing it in this environment. This is achieved based on a survey
research method, sample data from Tanzanian public sector organizations and partial
least squares (PLS)-based structural equation modelling to analyse the proposed model.
The remainder of the paper is organized as follows. Section 2 covers IT governance CSFs
and performance. This is followed by the research model in Section 3 and the
methodology in Section 4. The results and discussion appear in Sections 5 and 6,
respectively, and concluding remarks and future research in Section 7.
2. IT governance CSFs and performance
2.1 IT governance CSFs
CSFs are the limited number of areas in which satisfactory results will ensure a
successful competitive performance for the individual, department or organization
(Rockart and van Bullen, 1986). They are used to direct the focus towards the factors
that define key areas central to the organizations objectives in which to invest their
resources and time to ensure success (Ward and Peppard, 2002; Caralli, 2004). Owing to
their importance, CSFs are widely researched (Gil-Garcia and Pardo, 2005; Tan et al.,
2009) and applied in many organizations from different perspectives: from a single
project to the whole organizations strategic direction (Esteves, 2004; Fortune and
White, 2006). However, in the area of IT governance, and considering CSFs as essential
elements for its effective implementation, few CSF studies have been undertaken, while
IT governance has become critical to most organizations today (Sethibe et al., 2007).
An earlier study on CSFs for effective IT governance in this environment identified a
number of related CSFs (Nfuka and Rusu, 2010a). These include the governance of IT
structures (Guldentops, 2004) and stakeholders involvement (ITGI, 2003). Additionally,
there are: defining and tracking benefits (ITGI and PwC, 2006), well-communicated IT
strategies and policies (Bowen et al., 2007) and the integration of IT/business decisions
(Ribbers et al., 2002). Furthermore, there are IT/business alignment-related CSFs, the top
ranked being managements commitment to the strategic use of IT (Teo and Ang, 1999),
and six enablers of IT/business alignment that include IT/business partnership
(Luftman et al., 1999). Similarly, there are minimum conditions for implementing IT
governance, the most important including IT leadership (de Haes and van Grembergen,
2008). Moreover, the study identified such CSFs in the public sector including aligned
incentives (Weill, 2004) and senior management commitment (Tan et al., 2009).
In identifying these CSFs, the referred-to study (Nfuka and Rusu, 2010a) undertook a
literature review to explore the existing IT governance CSFs in general and the public
sector in particular. To gain a holistic view of CSFs, the IT governance life cycle was
considered mainly based on IT governances five focus areas, i.e. strategic alignment,
value delivery, risk management, resource management and performance management
(ITGI, 2003; Buckby et al., 2008). This was achieved through relevant journals and
conferences including access to Google Scholar. As a result of this process, 100 papers
were explored, ten of which were found to be relevant, as highlighted already.
Given the similarities and different levels of granularity, the referred-to study
harmonized them logically, obtaining 17 CSFs that were operationalized through
questionnaires and face-to-face interviews in five organizations. Through ranked
responses, interview comments and validation, some CSFs were dropped, merged and
adjusted as per contextual needs, leading to five-focus-areas-based 11 CSFs for effective
IT governance in this environment (Figure 1).
Different to the existing CSFs in IT-governance-related studies like Guldentops (2004)
and Tan et al. (2009) pointed out above, these CSFs were identified with holistic view and
The effect of
CSFs on IT
governance
1421
IT leadership to understand the business goals and IT

contribution and bring it to the management attention
Strategic Alignment
Involve and get support of senior management

Encourage and support IT/Business communication and
partnership
Engage key stakeholders
Define and align IT strategies to corporate strategies and
cascade them down in an organization
Resource
Management
Value Delivery &

Risk Management
Consolidate IT structures to ensure responsiveness and

accountability
Consolidate, communicate and enforce policies and

guidelines for cost-effective acquisition and use of IT
across the organization
Consolidate, standardize and manage IT infrastructure to

optimize costs and infromation flow across the
organization
Provide IT governance awareness and training for optimal
IT use
Performance
Measurement
Attract, develop and retain competitive IT professionals
Consolidate performance measures and benchmarks to

track and demonstrate success
Source: Nfuka and Rusu, 2010a
Figure 1.
CSFs for effective IT
governance in public
sector organizations in a
developing country like
Tanzania
IMDS
111,9
1422
a focus to this environment (Nfuka and Rusu, 2010a). In this way, the newly re-established
CSFs included: IT leadership to understand the business goals and IT contribution and
to bring this to the attention of management. This was due to the criticality of IT
leadership understanding business imperatives and necessary IT intervention while the
top management are aware of ITs potential. Others were: engage key stakeholders due
to the broader and harmonized view of the approach to e-government, attract, develop
and retain competitive IT professionals due to the criticality of sustainable skills in such
a widespread and low-paying environment and consolidate, standardize and manage IT
infrastructure and application to optimize costs and information flow across the
organization given the critical need for facilities, harmonized IT initiatives and
cost-effectiveness. Furthermore, was consolidate, communicate and enforce policies and
guidelines for cost-effective acquisition and use of IT across the organization due to the
crucial need for enforcement across the organization, sharing of scarce IT resources and
creating and preserving IT value in this environment.
The remaining CSFs were also considered due to the contextual elements in such an
environment including required political and senior management support and
prioritization of scarce resources amid the still many pressing basic needs. Others were
due to the required accountability from both IT and business, change of mindset,
integration of IT in reform programmes, active monitoring and demonstration of ITs
contribution (Nfuka and Rusu, 2010a).
2.2 IT governance performance
IT governance performance is the rate of IT governance effectiveness or how effective IT
governance is, i.e. how well its arrangements encourage desirable behaviour and
ultimately performance goal achievement in the organization (Weill and Ross, 2004;
Huang et al., 2010). This performance can be measured by the value of services that an IT
organization delivers from a business point of view. The simplest way to measure such
performance in the organization is reported in a study by Weill and Ross (2004), which
was conducted on 250 case studies of IT governance and published in a book that may be
the most cited in the area today. The measure is defined as the effectiveness of IT
governance in delivering four outcomes weighted by their importance to the
organization: the cost-effective use of IT, the effective use of IT for asset utilization,
the effective use of IT for growth and the effective use of IT for business flexibility. This
measure provides IT value from a business perspective and is well recognized and used
by researchers and practitioners (Simonsson et al., 2010).
3. Research model and hypotheses development
This study investigates the research model shown in Figure 2. It includes 11 hypotheses
in five IT governance focus areas suggested as independent variables (IV). These
hypotheses are based on the earlier-identified CSFs for effective IT governance in this
environment (Figure 1) that were achieved based on existing IT-governance-related
CSFs studies like Weill (2004) and Tan et al. (2009) presented in Subsection 2.1 and five
Tanzanian public sector organizations case studies. Also in the model is the IT
governance performance (presented in Subsection 2.2) suggested as a dependent
variable (DV). Though, based on these studies and organizations case studies in which
these CSFs were identified, it is reasonable to believe a correlated effect between them
The effect of
CSFs on IT
governance

H1
Encourage and support IT/Business communication
and partnership
H2
H4
Define and align IT stratgies to corporate strategies

and cascade them down in an organization
H5
Consolidate IT structures to ensure responsivensess

and accountability
H6

1423
H3
IT
governance
performance
H7
H8
Consolidate, stadardize and manage IT

infrastructure and application to optimize costs and
information flow across the organization
H9
H10
Provide IT governance awareness and training for

optimal IT use
H11
Attract, develop & retain competitive IT professionals

Consolidate performance measures and benchmarks
to track and demonstrate success
and the IT governance performance; this is not widely statistically confirmed in this
environment.
In this section, we attempt to provide support for their relationship in the Tanzanian
public sector. Such support including construct items are based on earlier studies as
discussed below and complimented by Appendix 1. Consequently, each hypothesis is
created as follows: Hx: CSFx will positively influence IT governance performance;
CSFx is one of 11 CSFs and Hx the hypothesis.
3.1 Independent variables
IT leadership to understand business goals and IT contribution and bring it to the
attention of management. IT leadership refers to the ability of the chief information
officer (CIO) or equivalent position to articulate a vision for the IT role. It was found
vital for competencies to inspire, influence and guide IT strategic integration in an
organization (Luftman et al., 1999; Lawry and Waddell, 2008; de Haes and van
Grembergen, 2008).
In the context of this study, Nfuka and Rusu (2010a) found a need to improve this
practice due to inadequate competencies and interventions in an environment with
immature IT knowledge and culture. However, the study also found that organizations
have started to recognize its importance and some have introduced a CIO-equivalent
position. Such a development shows that more influence is being brought to bear
Figure 2.
Research model
IMDS
111,9
in tabling relevant business cases for the management and ensuring the necessary
understandability and interventions. Thus:
H1. IT leadership that understands business goals and IT contribution and brings
it to the attention of management will positively influence IT governance
performance.
1424
Involve and get support of senior management. This practice refers to organizations
senior executives personal engagement in IT-related decision making and monitoring
processes (Huang et al., 2010). IT, being an important enabler of business strategies and
underlying operating processes, implies a need for greater involvement and support at
such a level for effective management and use of IT (Luftman et al., 1999; Teo and Ang,
1999; Weill and Ross, 2004). Also, users tend to conform to the senior managements
commitment and practices (Tan et al., 2009). In the context of this environment, which
also includes the need for strong political support, such a practice was shown to be vital
for widely strategic use and management of IT (Nfuka and Rusu, 2010a). For example,
a highly rated problem of business peoples lower acceptance of new IT applications
(Nfuka et al., 2009) was reduced in some organizations due to such a practice. Thus:
H2. The involvement and support of senior management will positively influence
IT governance performance.
Encourage and support IT/business communication and partnership. The role of this
practice has been examined extensively including understanding and involvement in
each others imperatives and initiatives, respectively, to create more value from IT
(Luftman et al., 1999; Teo and Ang, 1999; ITGI, 2003; Bowen et al., 2007; Lee et al.,
2008). In the context of this study, Nfuka and Rusu (2010a) showed common
understanding by IT/business people of IT opportunities and business imperatives as
essential for effective IT governance given lower awareness and wider coordination.
Similarly applies to viable communication and partnership among them. These are
also supported by Nfuka et al. (2009), as an improvement to revealed problems of
inadequate IT/business alignment indicated the contribution to governance
performance in such environments that require relational mechanisms. Thus:
H3. The encouragement and support of IT/business communication and
partnership will positively influence IT governance performance.
Engage key stakeholders. The success of IT governance implementations in such
widespread organizations requires the engagement of stakeholders with clear roles,
goals and a shared understanding of the common agenda (Ribbers et al., 2002). For
example, Weill and Ross (2004) revealed that the more the organization involves key
stakeholders, the more successful the governance of IT becomes. This also applies to the
context of this study in which such success depends on a broader view of needs and
information integration that entails stakeholders participation (Nfuka and Rusu, 2010a).
Likewise, embracing e-government initiatives showed dependency on such a practice
given the interdependent nature and required rational use of the scarce resources
available. Thus:
H4. The engagement of key stakeholders will positively influence IT governance
performance.
Define and align IT strategies to corporate strategies and cascade them down in an
organization. Effective IT governance requires alignment between IT and business in
defining and eventually implementing the strategies (Luftman et al., 1999; Ribbers et al.,
2002; Guldentops, 2004; van Grembergen and de Haes, 2009). Equally important is
cascading them across and down to the operational levels to bring IT/business people onto
the same page, thus encouraging desirable IT behaviours (ITGI, 2003; Weill and Ross,
2004). In the context of this study, such a practice was found vital to the environment with
multifaceted objectives (Nfuka and Rusu, 2010a). This also applies to IT governance
maturity, which indicated organizations with such a practice (e.g. balanced scorecard) to
have a relatively higher maturity level (Nfuka and Rusu, 2010b). Thus:
H5. Defining and aligning IT strategies to corporate strategies and cascading
these down in an organization will positively influence IT governance
performance.
Consolidate IT structures that ensure responsiveness and accountability. IT structure
refers to the responsible functions and committees in an organization (Huang et al.,
2010) vital for ensuring responsiveness and accountability. Such assurance can be
maximized by the CIO who reports to the CEO, a clear role and responsibilities and
committee/s to prioritize and oversee IT projects/investment (Guldentops, 2004; Weill,
2004; Bowen et al., 2007; de Haes and van Grembergen, 2008; Tan et al., 2009). In the
context of this study environment, Nfuka et al. (2009) showed broader and clearly
stated practices regarding the roles and responsibilities in some organizations. This
also applies to IT steering and project committees in an environment characterized by
multiple levels of IT decision making. Though not optimally exploited, subsequent
studies on maturity showed a better governance maturity of related processes in such
organizations (Nfuka and Rusu, 2010b). Thus:
H6. Consolidated IT structures that ensure responsiveness and accountability will
positively influence IT governance performance.
Consolidate, communicate and enforce policies and guidelines for cost-effective
acquisition and use of IT across the organization. Such a practice is vital to effective IT
governance as it institutes and enforces best practices and informs the organization as a
whole about the clear processes, methods and framework to adhere to, thus encouraging
desirable behaviours and optimal IT value creation and preservation (ITGI, 2003;
Guldentops, 2004; Weill, 2004; ITGI and PwC, 2006; Tan et al., 2009; de Haes and van
Grembergen, 2008). In the context of this study, Nfuka et al. (2009) showed lower use of
such best practices like COBIT, ITIL and balanced scorecard. However, in a subsequent
study (Nfuka and Rusu, 2010b), even with scarce resources a few organizations that
applied such a practice indicated relatively higher maturity in some processes, such as
communicating management aims and direction (Nfuka and Rusu, 2010a). Thus:
H7. Consolidated, communicated and enforced policies and guidelines for
cost-effective acquisition and use of IT across the organization will
Consolidate, standardize and manage the IT infrastructure and applications to optimize
costs, responsiveness and information flow across the organization. This practice is a
key result of effective IT governance (Teo and Ang, 1999; ITGI, 2003). Peterson (2004)
The effect of
CSFs on IT
governance
1425
IMDS
111,9
1426
also indicated it in relation to IT delivery and innovation that ensure the provision
and management of a reliable and cost-effective infrastructure and delivery of IT
applications. In the context of this study, Nfuka et al. (2009) revealed some problems, like
fragmented IT initiatives, the improvement of which in some organizations led to
economies of scale, better information flow and increased responsiveness (Nfuka and
Rusu, 2010a). Thus:
H8. Consolidated, standardized and managed IT infrastructure and applications
to optimize costs, responsiveness and information flow across the
organization will positively influence IT governance performance.
Providing IT governance awareness and training for optimal use of IT. This practice is
paramount and acts as a stepping stone to effective IT governance (Weill, 2004). It is the
engine of innovation and optimization of IT capabilities and governance (ITGI, 2003;
Warland and Ridley, 2005; Tan et al., 2009). In this study context, Nfuka and Rusu (2010a)
showed the practice to contribute to competencies and mindset changes to improve IT
governance in an environment that portrays lower IT knowledge and culture. Thus:
H9. Provision of IT governance awareness and training for optimal use of IT will
Attract, develop and retain competitive IT professionals. This practice is important for
effective IT governance (Tan et al., 2009). It is the engine of IT innovation, optimization
and performance (Peterson, 2004; Warland and Ridley, 2005). In the context of this study,
Nfuka and Rusu (2010a) showed its value to sustainable competencies in the planning
and management of IT. This also applies to the recognition of such personnel as working
capital for successful IT/business strategies and operations in an environment that is
still characterized by immature IT development and lower remuneration. Thus:
H10. Attracting, developing and retaining competitive IT professionals will
Consolidate performance measures and benchmarks to track and demonstrate success.
This practice, which cuts across skills/innovation, internal operations, customer
excellence and corporate contribution (de Haes and van Grembergen, 2008), is an
integral part of effective IT governance (ITGI, 2003; Weill, 2004; Peterson, 2004; ITGI
and PwC, 2006; Tan et al., 2009). This is also supported by Sethibe et al. (2007), who
considered performance to be measurable beyond conventional accounting given the
best value rather than profit nature of the public sector. Such a practice for effective
IT governance is also shown by Ali and Green (2007). In the context of this environment,
characterized by scarce resources and a lack of active performance measures, Nfuka et al.
(2009) showed the importance of aligned rewards and clearly set and monitored targets
for higher performance and demonstration of IT contribution. Thus:
H11. Consolidated performance measures and benchmarks to track and
demonstrate success will positively influence IT governance performance.
3.2 Dependent variable
The DV in this study is IT governance performance, which was revealed by Weill and
Ross (2004) in a study on how top performers manage IT. Its measurement allows
an organization to reveal its performance through four outcomes/objectives:

cost-effective use of IT, effective use of IT for asset utilization, effective use of IT
for growth and effective use of IT for business flexibility. Also, the approach is simpler
and has been used in several studies (Simonsson et al., 2010).
4. Research methodology
The aim of this study, which took place from January to May 2010, was to analyse the
effect of CSFs on IT governance performance in public sector organizations from a
developing country: Tanzania. Given the nature of the problem, context and aim, we
used a survey research method that studies a population sample and provides the
possibility to generalize (Fowler, 2002).
4.1 The population and sample
Defining the concerned population and the subsequent determination of a sample frame,
method and size are paramount for a less-biased sample and the ability to generalize
(Kothari, 2004). Our study population consisted of public sector organizations, mainly
ministries, departments and agencies (MDAs), of which there are currently 75 (PO-PSM,
2010). The unit of analysis was individuals consisting of IT and business management
personnel, mainly directors of departments and heads or managers of units. The
sampling frame was mainly the Tanzanian Government directory, which provided
contacts for MDAs (PO-PSM, 2010). Disproportional stratification was applied prior to
sample selection to avoid under-representing IT or business respondents. Since the
directory did not have e-mail addresses for all individuals, it was mainly complemented
by the participants list of a workshop of capacity building on effective management of
IT. This list with e-mail addresses resulted from invitations to MDAs requesting the
participation of both IT and business management personnel.
The determination of the minimum sample size took into consideration the use of
PLS and Monte Carlo simulations on confirmatory factor analysis (Marsh et al., 1998)
from which the results suggested minimum sample sizes that can be calculated as
follows:
n $ 50r2 2 450r 1100
Therefore n $ 100
where, n is the minimum sample size; r is the ratio of indicators to latent variable, for
which in this case the maximum ratio is 5.
This consideration resulted in a minimum required sample size of 100. Also, it is
complemented by Urbach and Ahlemann (2010), who indicated minimum
recommendations that range from 30 to 100 cases. However, for many social research
studies like this, the response rates are typically 40-50 percent (Salkind, 2005). Taking
into account a minimum size of 100 and a rate of 50 percent to be on the safe side, together
with the fact that the respondents were mainly heads of departments or units who tend to
have a busy schedule in such an environment, 198 questionnaires in total were sent out.
Given our unit of analysis, these questionnaires were sent directly to two to three
individual respondents in each MDA.
4.2 Operationalization of the study
The operationalization was based on the research model in Figure 2. The CSFs as IV
were tested by the 11 developed hypotheses, each with 3-5 measurement items
The effect of
CSFs on IT
governance
1427
IMDS
111,9
1428
(MacCallum et al., 1999) on the level of their fulfilment in the organization on a five-point
Likert scale, i.e. 1 strongly disagree, 2 disagree, 3 undecided, 4 agree and
5 strongly agree (Kothari, 2004). IT governance performance as a DV was tested by
four objectives (outcomes) on the influence of their measure of success (Q2) weighted by
how important they are (Q1) in their organizations. This was achieved by Weill and
Rosss (2004) performance measurement instrument scaled not important/not
successful to very important/very successful. The measurement items and source of
construct are found in Appendix 1.
The DV result for each respondent was computed by the formula below (Weill and
Ross, 2004):
P
Governance performance
n124 importance

of outcome{Q1}*influence of IT governance{Q2} *100
P
n124 5importance of outcome
All the measurement items were developed into a self-administered survey

questionnaire (Fowler, 2002) and distributed mainly through e-mail and in some
cases physical delivery. This also applies to reminders, a stage at which we
additionally used phones.
4.3 Data analysis approach
The analysis is mainly based on the developed research model (Figure 2) and the use of
PLS: variance-based structural equation modelling and second-generation data
analysis techniques (Fornell and Larcker, 1981; Wold, 1985). PLS is useful for testing
statistical conclusion validity (Cook and Campbell, 1979). It answers a set of
interrelated research questions in a single, systematic and comprehensive analysis by
modelling the relationships among multiple independent and dependent constructs
simultaneously (Gefen et al., 2000). Differently, from multiple regressions, it assesses
relationship pathways simultaneously, thus there are no statistical issues with a lack of
connection between runs. It also tends to be resilient in the face of multicollinearity and
distribution-free (Gustafsson and Johnson, 2004; Garson, 2008). It was adopted in our
study due to the Likert scales non-parametric nature and the high number of IV thus
likely elements of multicollinearity. Also, it has been used widely in information
systems research (Urbach and Ahlemann, 2010). Specifically, we used SmartPLS,
a prevalent PLS with favourable requirements, methodological options, readily
available support and ease of use (Ringle et al., 2005; Urbach and Ahlemann, 2010).
The test for the proposed research model is based on two PLS key components: the
measurement and structural models (Fornell and Bookstein, 1982; Hair et al., 1995). The
former focuses on the relationship between the unobserved variables not directly
measured (latent variables) and the measurable items (manifest variables). The latter
focuses on the hypothesized relationships, i.e. paths, between latent variables.
Following our research model (Figure 2) and operationalization details, Table I
indicates the latent and manifest variables and respective short codes for reference in
this study.
The measurement model was assessed in terms of convergent and discriminant
validity with a focus on fit and constructs validity. The convergent validity was met
when each measurement item correlated strongly with its proposed construct (Table II).
This also applies to discriminant validity, which was met when each measurement
IV/DV variables
(latent variables)
Short code
Measurement items
(manifest variables)
H1
H2
H3
H4
H5
H6
H7
H8
H9
H10
H11
IT governance performance
ITLeadp
SenMag
ComPart
KeyStak
ITCorStr
ITStruc
PolGuid
ITInfr
ITGAwTr
ITProf
PerfMeas
ITGPerf
ITLeadp1 to ITLeadp3
SenMag1 to SenMag4
ComPart1 to ComPart5
KeyStak1 to KeyStak3
ITCorStr1 to ITCorStr5
ITStruc1 to ITStruc5
PolGuid1 to PolGuid5
ITInfr1 to ITInfr3
ITGAwTr1 to ITGAwTr3
ITProf1 to ITProf3
PerfMeas1 to PerfMeas4
ITGPerfCalMeas
No. of items
3
4
5
3
5
5
5
3
3
3
4
Compared using four items
Note: Variables/items names in Appendix 1
Type of ass.
Criteria
Measurement Convergent validity

model
Item loading
Composite reliability
AVE
Cronbachs alpha coefficient
t-value of outer loading
Discriminant validity
Item cross loadings to
construct correlations
Guideline
Source
$0.4
.0.5
$0.5
$0.7
$1.96
Hair et al. (2006)

Fornell and Larcker (1981)
Gefen and Straub (2005)
Item loads on its own

construct $ to other
constructs
Square root of AVE of each Square root of AVE
construct correlation with
between construct and its
others
measures $ to other
constructs
Structural
model
The effect of
CSFs on IT
governance
1429
Table I.
Research model variables
and short codes

Gefen and Straub (2005),
Variance (R 2)
Variance in DV
$0.5
Hair et al. (1995)
Path coefficients significance
$0.1 small, $0.3
Path coefficients
moderate, $ 0.5 strong
Cohen (1988)
Significance of path
coefficients (t-value)
$1.96 (0.05), $ 2.58 (0.001) Hair et al. (1995)
item correlated weakly with all the other constructs except for the one with which it is
proposed to be associated.
The structural model was assessed for our hypotheses test. It focused on the ability of
the DV to explain variance in the IV and the significance of path coefficients (Table II).
The analysis was complemented by the use of SPSS to store and produce
descriptive statistics.
Table II.
Criteria for assessment
of measurement and
structural models
IMDS
111,9
1430
4.4 Pilot study

A pilot test was performed to verify the internal consistency of the construct (Fowler,
2002) based on 25 individuals from 25 MDAs. The selection was based on the Tanzanian
Government directory, balance of IT/business personnel and related experience and the
availability of an individual to comment on and try out the questionnaire for correctness
and time needed to complete it. The results showed minor issues, for instance, with the
wording in the introduction and constructs. Adjustments were also made to some
measures for H6 and an item was added in H7. The time to complete the questionnaire
was an average of 30 minutes, which is considered acceptable (Rea and Parker, 2005).
Moreover, the pilot showed that the preliminary estimates of the reliability and validity
of construct measurement, i.e. average variance extracted (AVE), Cronbachs alpha and
composite reliability, were acceptable above 0.5, 0.7 and 0.5, respectively (Fornell and
Larcker, 1981; Nunnally and Bernstein, 1994) (Table III).
5. Results
5.1 Sample characteristics
Out of 198 questionnaires sent out, a total of 137 were returned, accounting for
69 percent. However, two of them were only half completed, thus the usable ones
totalled 135, corresponding to 68 percent. These were from 51 out of 75 MDAs to which
questionnaires had been sent for individuals. The distribution based on organization
type and the role of individuals is shown in Table IV.
Furthermore, the sample characteristic was indicated by respondents experience in
the use and management of IT that mostly were beyond five years. Also, regarding
familiarity with IT governance implementation, the majority indicated being four on a
five-point Likert scale (Table IV).
5.2 Test of the measurement model
The criteria discussed for data analysis (Table II) were used to validate the
measurement model. Two main validity aspects were tested, i.e. convergent and
discriminant validity.
Convergent validity. Convergent validity was assessed by item reliability and the
lowest item loading score was 0.658 (Figure 3), thus above the minimum requirement of
0.4 (Hair et al., 2006). The corresponding t-values of outer loading were greater than
2.58 for all the loaded measurement items, thus highly significant at 0.001 (Appendix 2).
Table III.
Pilot constructs validity
Construct
AVE
Cronbachs a
Composite reliability
ITLeadp (H1)
SenMag (H2)
ComPart (H3)
KeyStak (H4)
ITCorStr (H5)
ITStruc (H6)
PolGuid (H7)
ITlnfr (H8)
ITGAwTr (H9)
ITProf (H10)
PerfMeas (H11)
0.6382
0.7604
0.8003
0.6463
0.8345
0.7714
0.5715
0.6901
0.7462
0.5641
0.6824
0.7987
0.8177
0.8471
0.7877
0.8731
0.8493
0.8547
0.7952
0.8088
0.8650
0.8907
0.8976
0.9406
0.9231
0.8449
0.9380
0.9099
0.9259
0.8693
0.9216
0.8988
0.8952
1. Respondents organization type (n 135)

Ministry
Department
Agency
2. Role in the organization (IT or business) (n 135)
directors and heads/managers
IT
Business
3. Experience and familiarity a
Experience of use of IT (years)
Experience of managing IT (years)
Familiarity with IT governance
Frequency
Percentage
58
6
71
43.0
4.4
52.6
The effect of
CSFs on IT
governance
1431
89
46
Median
5
5
4
65.9
34.1
Notes: aOn a five-point Likert scale (1 not at all, 5 beyond five years); (1 not at all, 5 to a great
extent)
Table IV.
Sample characteristics
Figure 3.
Some results of the
measurement model and
structural model values
IMDS
111,9
1432
Convergent validity was also checked by assessing the internal consistency of the
constructs through composite reliability (Fornell and Larcker, 1981). The results
indicated to be above the threshold of 0.5, ranging between 0.844 and 1. This also applies
to the traditional measure of consistency (Cronbachs alpha), which was between 0.773
and 1 and thus above the threshold of 0.7. Similarly, internal consistency was assessed
by the more conservative test, i.e. AVE, and the result was 0.521, thus above threshold of
0.5. These three internal consistency values: AVE, Cronbachs alpha and composite
reliability are shown in Figure 3.
Discriminant validity. This validity was measured in two steps. The first one
examined the item cross loading related to a construct. This test indicated the loadings
of the items on their constructs to be higher (shaded) than the related cross loadings
(Appendix 3). In the second step and following Fornell and Larcker (1981), we checked
the square root of AVE for each construct and associated intercorrelations. The results
indicated the square root of AVE to exceed the corresponding intercorrelations as
shown in Table V. Therefore, both steps met criteria for this validity.
5.3 Test of the structural model and hypotheses
The criteria discussed for data analysis (Table II) were used for structural model and
hypotheses tests. The DVs ability to explain the variance in the IV and the significance
of path coefficients were tested. The result indicated that 87 percent of the variance in
IT governance performance (Figure 3) can be explained by the 11 hypotheses, thus
above 50 percent (Hair et al., 1995). It also indicated the positive path coefficients to be
in the range of 0.170-0.515 (Figure 3; Table VI), which, according to Cohen (1988),
is between small and strong relationship strength. This also applies to the t-values
(significance) generated by SmartPLS bootstrapping, which were above 1.96.
Therefore, the 11 hypotheses were significant, though variably: 0.05 (above 1.96)
and 0.001 (above 2.58). These results of CSFs influence on IT governance performance
are further presented in five IT governance focus areas, i.e. IT strategic alignment,
value delivery, risk management, resource management and performance management
(ITGI, 2003; Buckby et al., 2008).
IT strategic alignment. The hypotheses (CSFs) from this focus area were significant
weak to strong positive effects with involve and get support of senior management
being the highest (g 0.515, t 4.645) in the whole study. Next, in this focus area
were engage key stakeholders (g 0.180, t 2.463) and encourage and support
Construct
Table V.
Intercorrelation of
constructs and the
corresponding square
root of AVE
ComPart (H3)
ITCorStr (H5)
ITGAwTr (H9)
ITInfr (H8)
ITLeadp (H1)
ITProf (H10)
ITStruc (H6)
KeyStak (H4)
PerfMeas (H11)
PolGuid (H7)
SenMan (H2)
H3
H5
H9
H8
H1
H10
H6
H4
H11
H7
H2
0.77
0.6994
0.6647
0.4751
0.6409
0.6677
0.6129
0.6246
0.6764
0.6028
0.6691
0
0.87
0.6808
0.4744
0.6506
0.666
0.6639
0.6675
0.6481
0.5056
0.6241
0
0
0.86
0.4404
0.5946
0.6394
0.6269
0.5985
0.6517
0.5242
0.613
0
0
0
0.87
0.5332
0.4421
0.5144
0.3856
0.465
0.3624
0.5381
0
0
0
0
0.85
0.644
0.6795
0.6549
0.6451
0.5311
0.6203
0
0
0
0
0
0.86
0.5927
0.5947
0.6278
0.5518
0.6272
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.79
0.5957
0.6172
0.5068
0.6392
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.85
0.618
0.4347
0.6245
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.83
0.4671
0.643
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.72
0.5105
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.79
Construct
SenMan (H2)
ITCorStr (H5)
ITStruc (H6)
ITLeadp (H1)
ComPart (H3)
PolGuid (H7)
PerfMeas (H11)
ITGAwTr (H9)
KeyStak (H4)
ITProf (H10)
ITInfr (H8)
Path coeff. (g)
t-values (t)
0.515
0.396
0.316
0.201
0.392
0.285
0.210
0.201
0.180
0.176
0.170
4.645 * *
2.973 * *
2.654 * *
2.925 * *
2.290 *
2.460 *
2.351 *
2.149 *
2.463 *
2.037 *
2.338 *
Notes: Strength and significance of path coefficients; path coefficient significance (Hair et al. (1995)):
significant at: *0.05 (t . 1.96) and * *0.001 (t . 2.58); path coefficient strength (Cohen (1988)):
(,0.1 small, , 0.3 moderate, ,0.5 strong)
IT/business communication and partnership (g 0.392, t 2.290). Though they

have small to moderate path coefficient strength, their significant effect indicates their
influence. This also applies to define and align IT strategies to corporate strategies
and cascade them down in an organization (g 0.396, t 2.973) and consolidate IT
structures to ensure responsiveness and accountability (g 0.316, t 2.654). Finally,
IT leadership to understand the business goals and IT contribution and bring it to the
attention of the management (g 0.201, t 2.925) attained small path coefficient
strength yet with a highly significant effect.
IT value delivery and risk management. Consolidate, communicate and enforce
policies and guidelines for cost-effective acquisition and use of IT across the
organization had a small path coefficient but with a significant positive effect
(g 0.285, t 2.460). This positive significant effect indicated the importance of such
a practice to IT governance performance.
IT resource management. The correlated effects in this focus area were indicated by
small but significant path coefficients. Significance of provide IT governance
awareness and training for optimal IT use (g 0.201, t 2.149) and attract, develop
and retain competitive IT professionals (g 0.176, t 2.037) emphasized sustainable
competencies for success. Consolidate, standardize and manage IT infrastructure and
application to optimize costs and information flow across the organization (g 0.170,
t 2.338) surprisingly had the least path coefficient strength in the whole study.
IT performance management. This area consisted of consolidate performance
measures and benchmarks to track and demonstrate success. It showed a small but
significant effect (g 0.210, t 2.351) and thus its importance to IT governance
performance.
6. Discussion
As we saw, the results indicated a significant effect of CSFs on IT governance
performance. Involve and get support of senior management being the most
significant in the whole study, is certainly due to its importance in resource prioritization
and the strategic use of IT given the scarce resources and still competing basic needs in
this environment (Nfuka et al., 2009). This also applies to the fact that users tend
The effect of
CSFs on IT
governance
1433
Table VI.
Testing of hypotheses
IMDS
111,9
1434
to conform to their bosses expectations and what they follow-up closely (Nfuka and
Rusu, 2010a). The finding complements Weill and Rosss (2004) study, which found that
IT being a vital part of business strategies and operations implies a need for greater
involvement at such a level for higher IT governance performance.
While engage key stakeholders and encourage and support IT/business
communication and partnership had small to moderate path coefficient strength, the
formers significant effect is certainly due to cross-agency functions, thus a need for
common goals and actions. This contributes to stakeholder theory, which emphasizes
inside-in and inside-out stakeholder involvement for success (Freeman, 1984). The
latters significant effect is certainly due to the required shared understanding of ITs
potential for business people and business imperatives for IT people (Nfuka and Rusu,
2010a). This complements Lee et al. (2008) study, which found a need for awareness of
each others imperatives to attain higher performance and value from IT.
Define and align IT strategies with corporate strategies and cascade them down in
an organization and consolidate IT structures to ensure responsiveness and
accountability showed high significance. This is certainly due to the shown importance
of aligned and cascaded IT/business strategies down to operational levels and right
structures across the widespread MDAs (Nfuka and Rusu, 2010a). They complement
studies like that of Guldentops (2004), which showed that governance success requires
such alignment in defining and eventually implementing these strategies and
Huang et al. (2010) on correct governance structures. This also applies to Weill and Ross
(2004) and governance theory (Garson, 2008) on fact that the more you cascade them
down taking into account the organizational experiences of those at the operational level,
the more effective will be the implementation. Additionally IT leadership to understand
the business goals and IT contribution and to bring it to the attention of the
management, though highly significant, its small path coefficient strength was
surprising given its much-attributed effectiveness (de Haes and van Grembergen, 2008).
However, this indicates how important other basic aspects still are, like high-level
support and structures for this to happen.
Furthermore, even with a small path coefficient, the significance effect of
consolidate, communicate and enforce policies and guidelines for cost-effective
acquisition and use of IT across the organization showed its importance in such
widespread MDAs. This is certainly due to the controls; changes and enforcements vital
for people to abide by when performing IT-enabled functions (Nfuka and Rusu, 2007,
2010b). It complements the studies of Weill (2004) and Huang et al. (2010) that found a
need of such practice for higher IT governance performance.
Also, the significance of provide IT governance awareness and training for optimal
IT use indicated its importance due to the required competencies for cost-effective
management and the use of IT in this environment (Nfuka and Rusu, 2010a). This also
applies to attract, develop and retain competitive IT professionals, which emphasized
attracting and sustaining such competencies. These complement the studies of Peterson
(2004) and Tan et al. (2009), which found governance-related awareness and
competencies vital for higher IT governance performance. Additionally, though
consolidate, standardize and manage IT infrastructure and application to optimize costs
and information flow across the organization has been a major concern (Peterson, 2004;
Nfuka and Rusu, 2010a), its smallest path coefficient significance shows the priority to be
still on the basics like awareness, structures and alignment for this to happen.
Moreover, the significance of consolidate performance measures and benchmarks

to track and demonstrate success was certainly due to the importance of setting and
adhering to performance benchmarks in such an environment with diverse roles and
accountabilities (Nfuka and Rusu, 2010a). This also applies to demonstrating IT
success with both IT and business metrics (ITGI, 2003) and the best value rather
than profit nature of the public sector (Sethibe et al., 2007). It complements studies
like that of van Grembergen and de Haes (2009) on performance measurable beyond
conventional accounting and Weill and Ross (2004) on the cost-effective use of IT and
service improvement. However, it differs from Ali and Green (2007), who found no
support for corporate performance systems. This could be due to necessary active
performance measures and demonstration of success for current and future IT support
and prioritization, for example.
Finally, even with constraints on IT resources, knowledge and culture, these 11 CSFs
that cut across IT governance focus areas showed a positive influence on IT
governance performance. This suggests a foundation for IT governance improvement
in the form of a CSF model for effective IT governance (Figure 4). The model links
CSFs and IT governance performance and includes contextual elements for the former
and governance outcomes for the latter.
7. Concluding remarks and future research
This paper analyses the effect of 11 CSFs for effective IT governance on IT governance
performance in public sector organizations in the developing country of Tanzania.
A research model for this study was developed and tested statistically using sample
data from 51 organizations. In accordance with our data analysis approach mainly
using PLS-based structural equation modelling, these CSFs across five IT governance
focus areas showed a significant small to strong positive correlated effect on IT
governance performance.
One CSF, namely involve and get support of senior management, indicated
strong path coefficient strength and a highly significant effect on IT governance
performance. The rest of the CSFs had a significant effect and small to moderate path
coefficient strength with consolidate, standardize and manage IT infrastructure and
application to optimize costs and information flow across the organization being the
smallest.
These CSFs, even with the constraints on IT resources, knowledge and culture,
have shown significant positive correlated effects on IT governance performance.
This suggests a foundation for IT governance improvement in the form of a CSF model for
effective IT governance in this environment. The results from this study also have
important implications both for practitioners and for the academic world.
From a practitioners viewpoint, the results imply that decision makers can optimize
their IT-related plans and use of scarce resources by concentrating on the CSFs that
have a significant effect to IT governance performance and could lead to an
improvement of public service delivery. Specifically, they imply:
.
Active involvement of senior management, stakeholders as well as both IT/business
personnel in IT functions. This can increase IT resources prioritization and optimal
use in this environment with scarce resources and IT becoming a vital part of
business strategies and operations.
The effect of
CSFs on IT
governance
1435
IMDS
111,9
1436
Contextual Elements
IT leadership Business
understand goals/imperatives
Top/business management
understand IT opportunities
IT leadership competencies
Political support
Committed top management
Action oriented involvement
Resource prioritization
Strategic Alignment
IT/Business communication
IT opportunities/business goals
IT/Business cooperation
Encourage and support IT/Business communication and

partnership
Broader view of needs/approach

to solution/e-government
Leapfrog widely use of IT
Shared services
IT strategic plan/communicating
IT/Business alignment
IT Integration in perf. reforms
Active IT committees
Role & responsibilities/categories
Experts/managers accountability
IT usage enforcement with
rewards/punishment
Sharing IT resources
Return on Investment
Controls- value preservation
Meager IT resources/Asset
utilization
Optimize costs, information
flow & increase responsiveness
Providing IT facilities
Standardized and sharable IT
resources
Governance of IT awareness
and know-how
Change of Mindset
Best practices
Reasonable remunerations
IT/Business Competencies
Innovations/Sustainability skills
Figure 4.
CSF model for effective IT
governance in the public
sector organizations from
a developing country
Critical Success Factors
Active performance measures

Demonstrate IT success/
Contribution
Performance aligned rewards &
penalties
Define and align IT strategies to corporate strategies and

cascade them down in an organization
Consolidate IT structures to ensure responsiveness and
accountability
Value Delivery & Risk Management

Resource Management
IT
governance
Performance
Cost-effective
use of IT
Effective use of
IT for growth
Effective use of
IT for resources
utilization
Effective use of
IT for business
flexibility
Consolidate, standardize and manage IT infrastructure and

application to optimize costs and infromation flow across
the organization
Provide IT governance awareness and training for optimal
IT use
Attract, develop and retain competitive IT professionals
Performance Measurement
Consolidate performance measures and benchmarks to
track and demonstrate success
Note: Case of Tanzania

.
Alignment of IT with business strategies and enabling IT structures. This can

make possible successful integration of IT with effects in the public service
delivery improvement in and across these widespread organizations.
Consolidation and communication of IT-governance-related policies and guidelines.
This can enhance the control, changes and enforcement of IT-governance-related
policies and guidelines for performing IT-enabled functions.
IT governance awareness, training as well as attracting and retaining
competitive IT leadership and professionals. This can strengthen and sustain
required competencies for harmonized, standardized and cost-effective IT
applications in this environment.
IT business-value-oriented performance measures and benchmarking in this

environment. This can strengthen demonstration of success and enablement of
continuous business-oriented improvement and higher contribution of IT to
business.
From an academicians point of view, the findings can be used to widen the CSFs scope
for effective IT governance, for instance, across five IT governance focus areas and a
dimension of public sector organizations in a developing country setting. Also, it can
be used to validate the existing IT governance frameworks usefulness like COBIT. For
instance, activity goals to achieve COBITs IT processes could be strengthened based
on results of and insights of the revealed CSFs effects, e.g. enforcing IT policies in
communicate management aims and direction.
Moreover, the findings may present an interesting avenue for further research on
CSFs. One way could be to use them to develop guidelines for improving IT
governance performance. For example, this could be in the form of a CSFs framework
for implementing effective IT governance in this environment. It would also be
interesting to involve more than one developing country in a single study to compare
and broaden the insights into CSFs effect on IT governance performance in public
sector organizations. This approach will also extend the generalizability from
organizations within the country to similar developing countries.
References
Ali, S. and Green, P. (2007), IT governance mechanisms in public sector organizations:
an Australian context, Journal of Global Information Management, Vol. 15 No. 4, pp. 41-63.
Bakari, J.B. (2007), Holistic approach for managing ICT security in non-commercial
organizations: a case in a developing country, doctoral thesis, Stockholm University,
Stockholm.
Bowen, P.L., Cheung, M.D. and Rohdeb, F.H. (2007), Enhancing IT governance practices:
a model and case study of an organizations efforts, International Journal of Accounting
Information Systems, Vol. 8 No. 3, pp. 191-221.
Buckby, S., Best, P. and Stewart, J. (2008), The current state of information technology
governance literature, in Cater-Steel, A. (Ed.), Information Technology Governance and
Service Management Frameworks and Adaptations, Idea Group Publishing, Hershey, PA,
pp. 1-43.
Caralli, R.A. (2004), The critical success factor method: establishing a foundation for enterprise
security management, Technical Report CMU/SEI-2004-TR-010, Software Engineering
Institute, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA.
Cohen, J. (1988), Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioural Sciences, 2nd ed.,
Lawrence-Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ.
Cook, T.D. and Campbell, D.T. (1979), Quasi-experimentation: Design and Analysis for Field
Settings, Rand-McNally, Chicago, IL.
de Haes, S. and van Grembergen, W. (2008), An exploratory study into the design of an IT
governance minimum baseline through Delphi research, Communications of the AIS,
Vol. 22 No. 24, pp. 443-58.
Esteves, J. (2004), Definition and analysis of critical success factors for ERP implementation
projects, doctoral thesis, Universitat Polite`cnica de Catalunya, Barcelona.
The effect of
CSFs on IT
governance
1437
IMDS
111,9
1438
Fornell, C. and Bookstein, F.L. (1982), Two structural equation models: LISREL and PLS applied
to consumer exit-voice theory, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 19 No. 4, pp. 440-52.
Fornell, C. and Larcker, D. (1981), Structural equation models with unobservable variables and
measurement error, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 18 No. 1, pp. 39-50.
Fortune, J. and White, D. (2006), Framing of project critical success factors by a systems model,
International Journal of Project Management, Vol. 24, pp. 53-65.
Fowler, F.J. (2002), Survey Research Methods, 3rd ed., Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.
Freeman, R.E. (1984), Strategic Management: A Stakeholder Approach, Pitman, Boston, MA.
Garson, G.D. (2008), Partial least squares regression and governance theory, Statnotes: Topics
in Multivariate Analysis, available at: http://faculty.chass.ncsu.edu/garson/pa765/statnote.
htm (accessed 15 December 2010).
Gefen, D. and Straub, D. (2005), A practical guide to factorial validity using PLS-graph: tutorial
and annotated example, Communications of the AIS, Vol. 16 No. 25, pp. 91-109.
Gefen, D., Straub, D. and Boudreau, M. (2000), Structural equation modeling techniques and
regression: guidelines for research practice, Communications of the AIS, Vol. 7, pp. 1-78.
Gil-Garcia, J.R. and Pardo, T.A. (2005), E-government success factors: mapping practical tools to
theoretical foundations, Government Information Quarterly, Vol. 22 No. 2, pp. 187-216.
Guldentops, E. (2004), Key success factors for implementing IT governance: lets not wait for
regulators to tell us what to do, Information Systems Control Journal, Vol. 2, pp. 22-3.
Guldentops, E., van Grembergen, W. and de Haes, S. (2002), Control and governance maturity
survey: establishing a reference benchmark and a self-assessment tool, Information
Systems Control Journal, Vol. 6, pp. 32-5.
Gustafsson, A. and Johnson, M.D. (2004), Determining attribute importance in a service
satisfaction model, Journal of Service Research, Vol. 7 No. 2, pp. 124-41.
Hair, J.F. Jr, Anderson, R., Tatham, R. and Black, W. (1995), Multivariate Data Analysis,
Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ.
Hair, J.F. Jr, Black, W., Babin, B., Anderson, R. and Tatham, R. (2006), Multivariate Data Analysis,
6th ed., Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ.
Huang, R., Zmud, R.W. and Price, R.L. (2010), Influencing the effectiveness of IT governance
practices through steering committees and communication policies, European Journal of
Information Systems, Vol. 19 No. 3, pp. 288-302.
Imran, A. and Gregor, S. (2007), A comparative analysis of strategies for e-government in
developing countries, Journal of Business Systems, Governance and Ethics, Vol. 2 No. 3,
pp. 89-99.
IP (2010), Tanzania launches first phase of national fibre backbone, Information Policy Blog
(IP), available at: www.i-policy.org/2010/05/tanzania-launches-first-phase-of-nationalfibre-backbone.html (accessed 30 May 2010).
ITGI (2003), Board Briefing on IT Governance, 2nd ed., available at: www.itgi.org (accessed
7 January 2010).
ITGI and PwC (2006), IT governance in practice: insight from leading CIOs, available at: www.
itgi.org (accessed 3 April 2010).
IWS (2010), Internet World Statistics (IWS), available at: www.internetworldstats.com/stats.htm
(accessed 15 June 2010).
Kothari, C.R. (2004), Research Methodology: Methods and Techniques, 2nd ed., New Age
Publications, New Delhi.
Lawry, R. and Waddell, D. (2008), Roles, responsibilities and futures of chief information officers
(CIOs), International Review of Business Research Papers, Vol. 4 No. 2, pp. 163-75.
Lee, S.M., Kim, K., Paulson, P. and Park, H. (2008), Developing a socio-technical framework for
business-IT alignment, Industrial Management & Data Systems, Vol. 108 No. 9, pp. 1167-81.
Luftman, J., Papp, R. and Brier, T. (1999), Enablers and inhibitors of business-IT alignment,
Communications of the AIS, Vol. 1 No. 11, pp. 1-32.
MacCallum, R.C., Widaman, K.F., Zhang, S. and Hong, S. (1999), Sample size in factor analysis,
Psychological Methods, Vol. 4 No. 1, pp. 84-99.
Maimu, D. (2006), Poor ICT policy cost government billions, says expert, Daily News, Seminar
for district officers in Tanzania, available at: http://dailynews-tsn.com/page.php?id4006
(accessed 1 March 2010).
Marsh, H.W., Hau, K.T., Balla, J.R. and Grayson, D. (1998), Is more ever too much? The number
of indicators per factor in confirmatory factor analysis, Multivariate Behavioral Research,
Vol. 33 No. 2, pp. 181-220.
Mutagahywa, B., Kinyeki, C. and Ulanga, J. (2007), A review of e-government related
interventions in PSRP I and advice on a strategy framework towards PSRP II, available
at: www.utumishi.go.tz/index.php?optioncom_docman&taskcat_view&gid62&
Itemid57 (accessed 1 February 2010).
Ndou, V.D. (2004), E-government for developing countries: opportunities and challenges, The
Electronic Journal on Information Systems in Developing Countries, Vol. 18 No. 1, pp. 1-24.
Nfuka, E.N. and Rusu, L. (2007), Management of IT-enabled change in a public organization in
Tanzania, International Journal of Information Systems and Change Management, Vol. 2
No. 4, pp. 334-49.
Nfuka, E.N. and Rusu, L. (2010a), Critical success factors for effective IT governance in the
public sector organizations in a developing country: the case of Tanzania, in Trish, A.,
Turpin, M. and van Deventer, J.P. (Eds), Proceedings of the 18th European Conference on
Information Systems, University of Pretoria, Pretoria, pp. 1-15.
Nfuka, E.N. and Rusu, L. (2010b), The IT governance maturity in the public sector organizations
in a developing country: the case of Tanzania, Proceedings of the 16th Americas
Conference on Information Systems, Lima, Peru, AIS Electronic Library (AISeL), Atlanta,
GA, pp. 1-12.
Nfuka, E.N., Rusu, L., Johannesson, P. and Mutagahywa, B. (2009), The state of IT governance
in organizations from the public sector in a developing country, Proceedings of the 42nd
Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, Big Island, HI, IEEE Computer
Society Press, Washington, DC, pp. 1-12.
Nunnally, J.C. and Bernstein, I.H. (1994), Psychometric Theory, 3rd ed., McGraw-Hill,
New York, NY.
Peterson, R.R. (2004), Crafting information technology governance for todays turbulent
environment, Information Systems Management, Vol. 21 No. 4, pp. 7-21.
PO-PSM (2010), About President Office, Public Service Management (PO-PSM) and related facts
for this study, available at: www.utumishi.go.tz (accessed 15 March 2010).
Rea, L.M. and Parker, R.A. (2005), Designing and Conducting Survey Research: A Comprehensive
Guide, 3rd ed., Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA.
Ribbers, P.M.A., Peterson, R.R. and Parker, M.M. (2002), Designing IT governance processes:
diagnosing contemporary practices and competing theories, Proceedings of the 35th
Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, Big Island, HI, Computer Society
Press, Los Alamitos, CA, pp. 1-12.
The effect of
CSFs on IT
governance
1439
IMDS
111,9
1440
Ringle, C.M., Wende, S. and Will, A. (2005), SmartPLS 2.0 (M3) Beta, University of Hamburg,
Hamburg, available at: www.smartpls.de (accessed 22 December 2010).
Rockart, J. and van Bullen, C. (1986), A primer on CSFs, in Rockart, J. and Bullen, C.V. (Eds),
The Rise of Managerial Computing, Dow Jones-Irwin, Homewood, IL, pp. 383-423.
Rusu, L. and Paul Tenga, R. (2010), IT governance in healthcare sector: a case study of a public
and private hospital in Tanzania, International Journal of Information Systems and
Change Management, Vol. 4 No. 4, pp. 314-37.
Salkind, N.J. (2005), Exploring Research, 6th ed., Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ.
Sethibe, T., Campbell, J. and McDonald, C. (2007), IT governance in public sector organisations:
examining the differences and defining future research directions, Proceedings of the 18th
Australasian Conference on Information Systems, Toowoomba, Australia, University of
Southern Queensland, Toowoomba, pp. 833-42.
Simonsson, M. and Johnson, P. (2005), Defining IT governance a consolidation of literature,
working paper, Department of Industrial Information and Control Systems, Royal Institute
of Technology (KTH), Stockholm, 15 November.
Simonsson, M., Johnson, P. and Ekstedt, M. (2010), The effect of IT governance maturity on IT
governance performance, Information Systems Management, Vol. 27 No. 1, pp. 10-24.
Tan, W., Cater-Steel, A. and Toleman, M. (2009), Implementing IT service management: a case
study focussing on CSFs, Journal of Computer Information Systems, Vol. 50 No. 2,
pp. 1-12.
TCRA (2010), Tele-density Statistics: Tanzania Communication Regulatory Authority (TCRA),
available at: www.tcra.go.tz/publications/telecomStatsJune10.html (accessed 30 July 2010).
Teo, S. and Ang, J. (1999), Critical success factors in the alignment of IS plans with business
plans, International Journal of Information Management, Vol. 19 No. 2, pp. 173-85.
UN (2010), United Nations e-Government Survey 2010, available at: http://unpan1.un.org/
intradoc/groups/public/documents/UN-DPADM/UNPAN038853.pdf (accessed 15 May
2010).
UNDP (2010), Human Development Report 2010, available at: http://hdr.undp.org/en/media/
HDR_2010_EN_Complete.pdf (accessed 15 November 2010).
Urbach, N. and Ahlemann, F. (2010), Structural equation modeling in information systems
research using partial least squares, Journal of IT Theory & Application, Vol. 11 No. 2,
pp. 5-40.
van Grembergen, W. and de Haes, S. (2009), Enterprise Governance of Information Technology:
Achieving Strategic Alignment and Value, Springer, New York, NY.
Ward, J. and Peppard, J. (2002), Strategic Planning for Information Systems, 3rd ed., Wiley,
Chichester, pp. 41, 211.
Warland, C. and Ridley, G. (2005), Awareness of IT control frameworks in an Australian state
government: a qualitative case study, Proceedings of the 38th Hawaii International
Conference on System Sciences, Kona, HI, IEEE Computer Society Press, Washington, DC,
pp. 1-10.
Weill, P. (2004), Dont just lead, govern: how top-performing firms govern IT, MIS Quarterly
Executive, Vol. 3 No. 1, pp. 1-17.
Weill, P. and Ross, J.W. (2004), IT Governance: How Top Performers Manage IT Decision Rights
for Superior Results, Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA.
Wold, H. (1985), Partial least squares, in Kotz, S. and Johnson, N.L. (Eds), Encyclopedia of
Statistical Sciences, Vol. 6, Wiley, New York, NY, pp. 581-91.
IT leadership to understand the business goals Effective IT leadership competencies

and IT contribution and to bring it to the
IT leadership understanding of business goals/
attention of the management (H1)
imperatives and actionable IT intervention
Management team understanding of IT
opportunities and contribution
Involve and get support of senior management Senior management support to strategic use of
(H2)
IT
Senior management action-oriented
involvement
High-level political support to strategic use of IT
IT-related resources prioritization
Encourage and support IT/business
Shared understanding of business IT goals,
communication and partnership (H3)
strategies and imperatives
Business and IT cooperation formally/
informally
IT governance mechanisms transparency to
managers
Business involvement in IT initiatives and vice
versa
Frequent communication between business and
IT
Engage key stakeholders (H4)
Building collaborative relationships with key
stakeholders
Creating shared understanding among key
stakeholders on common agenda
Stakeholders actively participate in IT planning
and implementation of shared resources
services
Variable
Measurement items (to what extent can the

following influence positively IT governance
performance in your organization?)
(continued)
Ribbers et al. (2002), Weill and Ross (2004),

Nfuka and Rusu (2010a)
Teo and Ang (1999), Luftman et al. (1999),

Bowen et al. (2007), Lee et al. (2008), ITGI (2003),
Nfuka and Rusu (2010a)
Luftman et al. (1999), Teo and Ang (1999), Weill

and Ross (2004), Tan et al. (2009), Nfuka and
Rusu (2010a), Huang et al. (2010)
Luftman et al. (1999), Lawry and Waddell (2008),

de Haes and van Grembergen (2008), Nfuka and
Rusu (2010a)
Source
Appendix 1
The effect of
CSFs on IT
governance
1441
Table AI.
Variables, questions and
sources of constructs in
the study
Table AI.
A well-communicated IT strategy and policy

down to all levels of organization
Well-aligned and prioritized IT projects
Active participation of IT people in corporate
strategy and business people in IT strategy
planning
Aligned IT to performance reforms in public
sector
Participatory designed and widely
Consolidate IT structures to ensure
responsiveness and accountability (H6)
communicated IT governance mechanisms on
IT structure with a focus on partnership
ownership and accountability
Having active IT steering committees that
oversee IT investment, prioritization and
operations
Having IT project committee to oversee/monitor
the project activities and outcome
CIO on executive management and reporting to
CEO
Clear and adequate role and responsibilities/
categories
Consolidate, communicate and enforce policies Provision of effective IT processes guidelines
and guidelines for cost-effective acquisition and for management and IT staff/users
use of IT across the organization (H7)
Implementing an IT governance and control
framework
Alignment of IT business goals, strategy and

operations
(continued)
ITGI (2003), Weill (2004), ITGI and PwC (2006),

Guldentops (2004), Tan et al. (2009), de Haes and
van Grembergen (2008), Nfuka and Rusu (2010a)
Weill (2004), Guldentops (2004), Bowen et al.

(2007), de Haes and van Grembergen (2008), Tan
et al. (2009), Nfuka and Rusu (2010a)
Luftman et al. (1999), Ribbers et al. (2002), ITGI

(2003), Guldentops (2004), van Grembergen and
de Haes (2009), Weill and Ross (2004), Nfuka
and Rusu (2010a)
Source
1442
Define and align IT strategies to corporate

strategies and cascade them down in an
organization (H5)
Variable

IMDS
111,9
IT project governance/management
methodologies
Clear IT budget control, reporting and
responsible usage
Enforced IT-governance-related policies and
guidelines
Consolidate, standardize and manage IT
Effective provision and management of IT
infrastructure and application to optimize costs facilities
and information flow across the organization
(H8)
Standardized and sharable IT infrastructure
and applications to optimize costs and
information flow
Provision of efficient and reliable services to
user departments
Provide IT governance awareness and training Provision of governance of IT training to IT/
for optimal IT use (H9)
business management and experts for costeffective management and optimal use of IT
Provision of governance of IT awareness to
users for optimal and cost-effective use of IT
Incorporation of change management in IT
governance best practices awareness and
training
Attract, develop and retain competitive IT
A focus on attracting and retaining core IT/
professionals (H10)
business competencies related to planning,
development and management of IT resources
Recognition and encouragement of IT
innovations, appropriateness and excellence
Variable

(continued)
Peterson (2004), Tan et al. (2009), Warland and

Ridley (2005), Nfuka and Rusu (2010a)
Tan et al. (2009), Weill (2004), Warland and

Ridley (2005), ITGI (2003), Nfuka and Rusu
(2010a)
Teo and Ang (1999), ITGI (2003), Peterson

(2004), Nfuka and Rusu (2010a)
Source
The effect of
CSFs on IT
governance
1443
Table AI.
Table AI.
Perceived overall IT governance performance
Skilled IT personnel as working capital of

successful IT operations
Clearly set IT targets in business operations,
customer excellence, skills/innovation and
corporate contribution
Clearly set, active and monitored performance
measures for business value from IT
Demonstration of IT success/contribution
Performance-aligned rewards and penalties
How important are the following outcomes of
your IT governance? (Ql)
Cost-effective use of IT
Effective use of IT for growth
Effective use of IT for resources utilization
Effective use of IT for business flexibility
What is the influence of IT governance in your
business on these outcomes (as measures of
success)? (Q2)
Weill and Ross (2004)
Peterson (2004), Weill (2004), ITGI and PwC

(2006), Ali and Green (2007), Sethibe et al. (2007),
Tan et al. (2009), ITGI (2003), Nfuka and Rusu
(2010a)
Source
1444
Consolidate performance measures and

benchmarks to track and demonstrate success
(H11)
Variable

IMDS
111,9
ComPart1
ComPart2
ComPart3
ComPart4
ComPart5
ITCorStr1
ITCorStr2
ITCorStr3
ITCorStr4
ITCorStr5
ITGAwTr1
ITGAwTr2
ITGAwTr3
ITInfr1
ITInfr2
ITInfr3
ITLeadp1
ITLeadp2
ITLeadp3
ITProf1
ITProf2
ITProf3
ComPart (H3)
ITProf (H10)
ITLeadp (H1)
ITInfr (H8)
ITGAwTr (H9)
ITCorStr (H5)
Item
Construct
0.6978
0.7746
0.7811
0.7614
0.8264
0.8432
0.8917
0.8719
0.8649
0.8644
0.8632
0.8489
0.888
O.8568
0.8944
0.8612
0.8789
0.8966
0.7778
0.8627
0.8924
0.8221
Loading
14.1201
18.7393
25.1465
17.9359
33.8818
28.4487
53.836
48.9537
37.0259
46.5652
32.7141
25.845
46.0158
32.3175
32.2872
35.6243
28.7775
48.7199
18.1476
48.8103
43.438
19.5951
t-value
SenMan (H2)
PolGuid (H7)
PerfMeas (H11)
KeyStak (H4)
ITStruc (H6)
Construct
ITStruc1
ITStruc2
ITStruc3
ITStruc4
ITStruc5
KeyStak1
KeyStak2
KeyStak3
PerfMeas1
PerfMeas2
PerfMeas3
PerfMeas4
PolGuid1
PolGuid2
PolGuid3
PolGuid4
PolGuid5
SenMan1
SenMan2
SenMan3
SenMan4
Item
0.8048
0.7505
0.8323
0.7815
0.7903
0.8676
0.9146
0.7566
O.8043
0.825
0.8532
0.8218
0.6874
0.6605
O.8013
0.7877
0.6577
0.7914
0.847
0.8218
0.6937
Loading
28.685
15.851
23.9953
19.1132
24.5792
39.9986
50.2303
15.9627
27.0603
26.0293
39.0568
25.0513
9.6161
9.7642
22.6378
18.4032
11.1795
29.1383
28.5762
31.7047
13.2616
t-value
Appendix 2
The effect of
CSFs on IT
governance
1445
Table AII.
Outer loading bootstrap
analysis
0.6978
0.7746
0.7811
0.7614
0.8264
0.5547
0.619
0.6579
0.5943
0.6024
0.5682
0.5611
0.5986
0.4002
0.4074
0.4327
0.5525
0.5346
0.5619
0.5833
0.6084
0.5268
0.5313
0.2727
0.6022
0.4776
0.4977
0.5346
0.4929
0.5737
0.5151
ComPart1
ComPart2
ComPart3
ComPart4
ComPart5
ITCorStr1
ITCorStr2
ITCorStr3
ITCorStr4
ITCorStr5
ITGAwTr1
ITGAwTr2
ITGAwTr3
ITInfr1
ITInfr2
ITInfr3
ITLeadp1
ITLeadp2
ITLeadp3
ITProf1
ITProf2
ITProf3
ITStruc1
ITStruc2
ITStruc3
ITStruc4
ITStruc5
KeyStak1
KeyStak2
KeyStak3
PerfMeas1
Table AIII.
Items (manifest variables)
loadings and
cross-loadings
ComPart
(H3)
0.3886
0.4648
0.5892
0.6309
0.6078
0.8432
0.8917
0.8719
0.8649
0.8644
0.6062
0.5374
0.6246
0.3775
0.3834
0.4766
0.5515
0.5482
0.5743
0.5489
0.6492
0.5238
0.6015
0.2738
0.5841
0.5391
0.5777
0.5606
0.5691
0.5771
0.5329
ITCorStr
(H5)
0.3318
0.4989
0.5381
0.6014
0.5286
0.5519
0.6223
0.6227
0.5885
0.5619
0.8632
0.8489
0.888
0.4055
0.35
0.3919
0.5094
0.5284
0.484
0.5624
0.5727
0.5099
0.5736
0.337
0.5635
0.4309
0.5391
0.5088
0.5305
0.4861
0.5625
ITGAwTr
(H9)
0.3262
0.3206
0.3813
0.3839
0.4142
0.3962
0.4072
0.5114
0.4051
0.324
0.3999
0.4091
0.3391
0.8568
0.8944
0.8612
0.4919
0.5079
0.3497
0.4141
0.3993
0.3173
0.4239
0.3093
0.3628
0.5017
0.4293
0.3768
0.2893
0.3119
0.4577
ITInfr
(H8)
0.3894
0.5087
0.5433
0.4635
0.5493
0.5747
0.5583
0.5741
0.585
0.5261
0.5611
0.4603
0.5232
0.4675
0.4426
0.4807
0.8789
0.8966
0.7778
0.6019
0.5851
0.4602
0.5727
0.4262
0.5999
0.5152
0.5547
0.54
0.5661
0.5701
0.529
ITLeadp
(H1)
0.381
0.4321
0.5849
0.5371
0.6231
0.5423
0.5659
0.6312
0.6175
0.5223
0.5868
0.498
0.5759
0.4491
0.375
0.3285
0.5202
0.5668
0.5686
0.8627
0.8924
0.8221
0.5237
0.3318
0.5732
0.4533
0.435
0.4539
0.5279
0.5483
0.5021
ITProf
(H10)
0.3318
0.4669
0.5212
0.5214
0.5053
0.5289
0.6066
0.6046
0.5787
0.556
0.5303
0.5379
0.5619
0.4559
0.3653
0.5164
0.5546
0.6017
0.5884
0.5448
0.5353
0.4383
0.8048
0.7505
0.8323
0.7815
0.7903
0.5191
0.5251
0.471
0.5283
ITStruc
(H6)
0.3524
0.4401
0.537
0.5354
0.5289
0.5373
0.6427
0.6447
0.5287
0.5331
0.5377
0.4676
0.549
0.3267
0.2913
0.3861
0.5389
0.569
0.5758
0.5742
0.5119
0.4308
0.5501
0.2745
0.5196
0.4807
0.4923
0.8676
0.9146
0.7566
0.557
KeyStak
(H4)
0.3939
0.5216
0.6135
0.4882
0.5715
0.5254
0.613
0.5723
0.5756
0.5191
0.5678
0.5461
0.5802
0.4524
0.3621
0.396
0.5303
0.5867
0.5346
0.5756
0.5059
0.5288
0.5508
0.3177
0.5833
0.4925
0.4635
0.4843
0.5658
0.5332
0.8043
PerfMeas
(H11)
0.4971
0.4767
0.425
0.4651
0.4603
0.4598
0.4165
0.4735
0.4965
0.3364
0.4461
0.4047
0.5093
0.3299
0.3163
0.2996
0.4602
0.4875
0.4068
0.5236
0.4569
0.4298
0.4324
0.332
0.3503
0.4664
0.4195
0.4462
0.333
0.316
0.3715
PolGuid
(H7)
0.3935
0.4969
0.5432
0.5336
0.5961
0.5089
0.5604
0.5714
0.5493
0.5115
0.5032
0.5153
0.5741
0.5078
0.4228
0.4708
0.5254
0.5658
0.4938
0.6034
0.515
0.4826
0.5545
0.3517
0.5312
0.5083
0.5553
0.5389
0.5733
0.4738
0.5287
ITGPerf
0.5483
0.6287
0.6134
0.5893
0.621
0.5716
0.59
0.6268
0.5959
0.5422
0.6387
0.6171
0.6601
0.5417
0.4998
0.5321
0.6682
0.7122
0.5644
0.7262
0.5879
0.5735
0.6513
0.4798
0.6273
0.575
0.6155
0.6676
0.6108
0.5217
0.5784
(continued)
SenMan
(H2)
1446
Construct
IMDS
111,9
Appendix 3
ComPart
(H3)
0.532
0.62
0.5657
0.3693
0.3173
0.5812
0.5062
0.3325
0.4531
0.5419
0.5538
0.5655
0.6812
Construct
PerfMeas2
PerfMeas3
PerfMeas4
PolGuid1
PolGuid2
PolGuid3
PolGuid4
PolGuid5
SenMan1
SenMan2
SenMan3
SenMan4
ITGPCal-Meas
0.563
0.5272
0.5187
0.3917
0.2773
0.4503
0.3996
0.2754
0.3369
0.51
0.5304
0.5959
0.6763
ITCorStr
(H5)
0.577
0.4646
0.553
0.2951
0.3331
0.5155
0.3771
0.3321
0.3751
0.5414
0.5073
0.5099
0.737
ITGAwTr
(H9)
0.3603
0.4036
0.3207
0.2446
0.0701
0.3714
0.3114
0.2524
0.4292
0.4002
0.4299
0.4437
0.6035
ITInfr
(H8)
0.5016
0.5704
0.5316
0.3422
0.3457
0.4219
0.447
0.3429
0.4831
0.5069
0.5021
0.4665
0.7642
ITLeadp
(H1)
0.5133
0.5675
0.4903
0.3812
0.4065
0.4148
0.4741
0.3053
0.326
0.4861
0.5748
0.5974
0.7407
ITProf
(H10)
0.4852
0.5537
0.4741
0.3341
0.2211
0.4366
0.4678
0.3182
0.4488
0.5343
0.5201
0.515
0.7503
ITStruc
(H6)
0.4577
0.5324
0.5004
0.2415
0.2339
0.3923
0.4184
0.2246
0.3788
0.5125
0.5169
0.5657
0.7119
KeyStak
(H4)
0.825
0.8532
0.8218
0.3083
0.2737
0.4605
0.3513
0.2505
0.4
0.5573
0.548
0.5234
0.748
PerfMeas
(H11)
0.3663
0.4286
0.3766
0.6874
0.6605
0.8013
0.7877
0.6577
0.4065
0.3794
0.455
0.3728
0.6452
PolGuid
(H7)
ITGPerf
0.64
0.6363
0.6148
0.3907
0.38
0.5734
0.5432
0.3907
0.6299
0.674
0.6398
0.6144
1
SenMan
(H2)
0.5289
0.533
0.5355
0.3578
0.2685
0.4612
0.4289
0.282
0.7914
0.847
0.8218
0.6937
0.7903
The effect of
CSFs on IT
governance
1447
Table AIII.
IMDS
111,9
1448
About the authors

Edephonce N. Nfuka is currently a PhD student in the Department of Computer and Systems
Sciences, Stockholm University, Sweden and an employee of University of Dar es Salaam,
Tanzania. He holds a degree in Computer Engineering (BSc) from CUJAE in Havana, a degree in
Software Engineering (MSc) from Universitat Polytecnic de Catalunya in Barcelona and a degree
of Licentiate of Philosophy in Computer and Systems Science from Stockholm University,
Sweden. He is a Member of the Association for Information Systems (AIS) and Information
Systems Audit and Control Association (ISACA). He has over ten years of industrial and
academic experience in the area of IT management. His current research focuses on IT
governance, specifically on approaches to IT governance effectiveness in the public sector
organizations in a developing countrys environment/setting. Edephonce N. Nfuka is the
corresponding author and can be contacted at: nfuka@dsv.su.se
Lazar Rusu is an Associate Professor and Leader of Research Group in IT Management
within the Information Systems Laboratory, Department of Computer and Systems Sciences,
Stockholm University, Sweden. He holds a degree in Electrical Engineering (MSc) from
Cluj-Napoca Polytechnic Institute, a degree in Management (MSc) from Babes-Bolyai University
Cluj-Napoca, a PhD in Management from West University of Timisoara, Romania and a Docent
in Information Systems from Royal Institute of Technology (KTH) Stockholm, Sweden. During
his career, he has focused mainly in carrying out research on the management of information
systems/information technology and has professional experience of over 25 years both in
industry and academia in the area of information technology.
To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: reprints@emeraldinsight.com

Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints

The Effect of Critical... - Artigo - 2011

Diunggah oleh

Informasi Dokumen

Hak Cipta

Format Tersedia

Bagikan dokumen Ini

Bagikan atau Tanam Dokumen

Opsi Berbagi

Apakah menurut Anda dokumen ini bermanfaat?

Apakah konten ini tidak pantas?

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

The Effect of Critical... - Artigo - 2011

Diunggah oleh

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at

The effect of critical success

Edephonce N. Nfuka and Lazar Rusu

Received 2 February 2011

Stockholm University, Stockholm, Sweden

Industrial Management & Data

While there are various definitions of IT governance (Simonsson and Johnson,

IT leadership to understand the business goals and IT

Involve and get support of senior management

Value Delivery &

Consolidate IT structures to ensure responsiveness and

Consolidate, communicate and enforce policies and

Consolidate, standardize and manage IT infrastructure to

Attract, develop and retain competitive IT professionals

Consolidate performance measures and benchmarks to

Source: Nfuka and Rusu, 2010a

IT leadership to understand the business goals and IT

Define and align IT stratgies to corporate strategies

Consolidate IT structures to ensure responsivensess

Consolidate, communicate and enforce policies and

Consolidate, stadardize and manage IT

Provide IT governance awareness and training for

Attract, develop & retain competitive IT professionals

an organization to reveal its performance through four outcomes/objectives:

All the measurement items were developed into a self-administered survey

Note: Variables/items names in Appendix 1

Measurement Convergent validity

Hair et al. (2006)

Item loads on its own

Gefen and Straub (2005)

4.4 Pilot study

1. Respondents organization type (n 135)

Path coeff. (g)

IT/business communication and partnership (g 0.392, t 2.290). Though they

Moreover, the significance of consolidate performance measures and benchmarks

Encourage and support IT/Business communication and

Broader view of needs/approach

Engage key stakeholders

Critical Success Factors

Active performance measures

Define and align IT strategies to corporate strategies and

Value Delivery & Risk Management

Consolidate, standardize and manage IT infrastructure and

Note: Case of Tanzania

Alignment of IT with business strategies and enabling IT structures. This can

IT business-value-oriented performance measures and benchmarking in this

IT leadership to understand the business goals Effective IT leadership competencies

Measurement items (to what extent can the

Ribbers et al. (2002), Weill and Ross (2004),

Teo and Ang (1999), Luftman et al. (1999),

Luftman et al. (1999), Teo and Ang (1999), Weill

Luftman et al. (1999), Lawry and Waddell (2008),

A well-communicated IT strategy and policy

Alignment of IT business goals, strategy and

ITGI (2003), Weill (2004), ITGI and PwC (2006),

Weill (2004), Guldentops (2004), Bowen et al.

Luftman et al. (1999), Ribbers et al. (2002), ITGI

Define and align IT strategies to corporate

Measurement items (to what extent can the

Measurement items (to what extent can the

Peterson (2004), Tan et al. (2009), Warland and

Tan et al. (2009), Weill (2004), Warland and

Teo and Ang (1999), ITGI (2003), Peterson

Perceived overall IT governance performance