Campus-Wide Information SystemsMeasuring the success of library 2.0 technologies in the African context: The suitabilityof the DeLone and McLean's modelEdda Tandi Lwoga

Article information:To cite this document:Edda Tandi Lwoga, (2013),"Measuring the success of library 2.0 technologies in the African context",Campus-Wide Information Systems, Vol. 30 Iss 4 pp. 288 - 307Permanent link to this document:http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/CWIS-02-2013-0011

Downloaded on: 01 June 2015, At: 08:22 (PT)References: this document contains references to 35 other documents.To copy this document: permissions@emeraldinsight.comThe fulltext of this document has been downloaded 392 times since 2013*

Users who downloaded this article also downloaded:Edda Tandi Lwoga, (2014),"Integrating Web 2.0 into an academic library in Tanzania", The ElectronicLibrary, Vol. 32 Iss 2 pp. 183-202 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/EL-06-2012-0058Marina Trkman, Peter Trkman, (2009),"A wiki as intranet: a critical analysis using theDelone and McLean model", Online Information Review, Vol. 33 Iss 6 pp. 1087-1102 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/14684520911011025Hanne Srum, Rony Medaglia, Kim Normann Andersen, Murray Scott, William DeLone,(2012),"Perceptions of information system success in the public sector: Webmasters at the steeringwheel?", Transforming Government: People, Process and Policy, Vol. 6 Iss 3 pp. 239-257 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/17506161211251254

Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by 317839 []

For AuthorsIf you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald forAuthors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelinesare available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.

About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.comEmerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The companymanages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well asproviding an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and services.

Dow

nloa

ded

by U

NIV

ERSI

DA

DE

DO

MIN

HO

At 0

8:22

01

June

201

5 (P

T)

Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committeeon Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archivepreservation.

*Related content and download information correct at time of download.

Dow

nloa

ded

by U

NIV

ERSI

DA

DE

DO

MIN

HO

At 0

8:22

01

June

201

5 (P

T)

Measuring the success of library2.0 technologies in the

African contextThe suitability of the DeLone and

McLeans modelEdda Tandi Lwoga

Directorate of Library Services,Muhimbili University of Health and Allied Health Sciences, Dar es salaam,

United Republic of Tanzania

Abstract

Purpose This study aims to examine the suitability of information systems (IS) success model inthe adoption of library 2.0 technologies among undergraduate students in the African context, andfocused at the Muhimbili University of Health and Allied Sciences (MUHAS) of Tanzania.Design/methodology/approach Based on the IS success model, the study re-specified andvalidated the IS model to examine adoption of library 2.0 technologies via a structural equationmodeling (SEM) approach. The study examined the role of quality (service quality, information qualityand system quality) in influencing user perceived net benefits, satisfaction and intention to reuselibrary 2.0 application. A case study research design was used in this study. Self-administeredquestionnaire were distributed to all first year undergraduate students (n 408) at MUHAS, with arate of return of 71.8%.Findings The study findings confirm the validity of using the proposed IS model for library 2.0adoption assessment. The users intention to reuse is quite important, and accurately predicts theusage behaviour of library 2.0 services. The perceived net benefits had the strongest effect on usersintention to reuse library 2.0 systems than any other determinants within the model. Among the threequality-related constructs, service quality had the strongest total effect on perceived net benefits andintention to reuse. Compared to system quality, information quality had the largest effect on usersatisfaction. It is thus important for librarians to consider all these factors for effective adoption oflibrary 2.0 projects in research and academic institutions.Originality This is the first comprehensive study focusing on the health sciences library patronsusage behaviour of library 2.0 applications in Tanzania, and reveals findings that are useful forplanning and implementing library 2.0 initiatives in other institutions with similar conditions.

Keywords DeLone and McLean Model, Information systems success, IS success Model, Library 2.0,Web 2.0, Tanzania

Paper type Research paper

IntroductionThe advancement of technology, termed as Web 2.0 that focuses on user participationand collaboration, has transformed the operation of information services and resourcesharing in academic libraries. Web 2.0 technologies enhance library services byimproving the communication with customers, promoting and marketing services andimparting information literary skills to users (Chua and Goh, 2010). Web 2.0 refers to acollection of technologies such as blogs, wikis, RSS feeds, social networks etc, whereusers are able to add, share and edit the content, creating a socially networked webenvironment (Anderson, 2007). With the conception of the term Web 2.0, other terms

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available atwww.emeraldinsight.com/1065-0741.htm

Campus-Wide Information SystemsVol. 30 No. 4, 2013pp. 288-307r Emerald Group Publishing Limited1065-0741DOI 10.1108/CWIS-02-2013-0011

288

CWIS30,4

Dow

nloa

ded

by U

NIV

ERSI

DA

DE

DO

MIN

HO

At 0

8:22

01

June

201

5 (P

T)

were created, such as Library 2.0 which refers to the integration of the Web 2.0technologies in a library environment.

Library 2.0 is a model for constant and purposeful change, whereby it empowerslibrary users through participatory and user-driven services. Library 2.0 seeks toimprove services to current library users, while also reaching out to potential libraryusers (Casey and Savastinuk, 2007). With Library 2.0, library services are frequentlyevaluated and updated to meet the changing needs of library users (Pienaar and Smith,2008). The Library 2.0 technologies encourage users to participate in the planning andexecution of library services through their feedbacks (Pienaar and Smith, 2008). Withthe collaboration and knowledge sharing between users and libraries through Library2.0, library services have the ability to evolve and improve on a constant and rapidbasis. In the information science perspective, Library 2.0 tools include the followingcategories: information acquisition for gathering information from sources external tolibrary (e.g. blogs, wikis); information dissemination for distributing information bylibraries to users (e.g. RSS); information organization to facilitate representation ofcontent and subsequent search and retrieval (e.g. social tagging); and informationsharing to enable bilateral flow of information between libraries and their users (e.g.instant messaging and social networking services) (Chua and Goh, 2010). Library 2.0enables the libraries to change and provide demand-led services by concentrating onneeds of users already using the library and nonusers who the library may reach out tobring into the library.

An increasing number of studies have been conducted to better understand theLibrary 2.0 users behaviour and their impact. Previous research on Library 2.0applications has focused on the users acceptance and behavioural usage of Web 2.0 andLibrary 2.0 applications (Ayiah and Kumah, 2011; Booth, 2009; Burhanna et al., 2009;Garoufallou and Charitopoulou, 2011; Kim and Abbas, 2010; Ponte and Simon, 2011).Other studies also assessed the extent of Web 2.0 applications prevalence on library websites through content analysis methods (Chua and Goh, 2010). However, little researchhas examined the success factors of the continued behavioural usage of Library 2.0applications in academic institutions, and especially in the African context. This gap iscontributed by the low application of Web 2.0 among African libraries. Few Africanuniversity libraries have embraced the application of Web 2.0 systems, such as in 15French speaking countries in western Africa (Samb, 2011), South Africa (Wood, 2009),Tanzania, (Muneja et al., 2012; Lwoga 2012) and Zambia (Banda, 2011). Thus, moststudies in the African context focus on the development of Library 2.0 applications, whilelittle empirical findings exist on the usage behaviour of these systems. It is thusimperative to assess the success factors of the continued behavioural usage of Library2.0 applications in academic institutions, and especially in the African context.

Library 2.0 applications can be regarded as a kind of information system (IS) thatlibrary users access or share relevant information, participate, interact andcollaborate. Priori research has revealed findings that support for the generalquality of an IS and that it could significantly affect users behavioural usage andintention to reuse the system (Delone and Mclean, 2003, 2004; Petter and McLean, 2009;Petter et al., 2008; Urbach and Muller, 2012; Wu and Wang, 2006). To better serve allusers in the Library 2.0 environment, academic libraries need to assess the needs ofdifferent types of users including students and staff, and determine success factors thatcan enhance usage of Library 2.0 applications. Success factors affecting adoption ofLibrary 2.0 applications may differ in different countries, and different categories ofresearch communities or disciplines. It is therefore imperative to assess the adoption of

289

Library 2.0technologies

Dow

nloa

ded

by U

NIV

ERSI

DA

DE

DO

MIN

HO

At 0

8:22

01

June

201

5 (P

T)

Library 2.0 applications for effective deployment of Library 2.0, particularly in Africancountries where the application of Web 2.0 in academic libraries is still low.

Therefore, this study aimed to examine the adoption of Library 2.0 technologiesamong undergraduate students in the African context, and focused at the MuhimbiliUniversity of Health and Allied Sciences (MUHAS) of Tanzania. The study examinedthe undergraduate students usage intention to reuse Library 2.0 application by usingthe DeLone and McLeans (2004) IS because it addressed the study objectives. It hasbeen suggested that despite the multidimensional and contingent nature of IS success,an attempt should be made to reduce significantly the number of measures used tomeasure IS success, so that research results can be compared and findings validated(DeLone and McLean, 2004). Based on IS success model, the study re-specified andvalidated IS model to examine adoption of Library 2.0 technologies via the structuralequation modeling (SEM) approach. The study examined the role of quality (servicequality, information quality and system quality) in influencing user perceived netbenefits, satisfaction and intention to reuse Library 2.0 application in a health scienceTanzanian public university. The paper provides a brief background of thedevelopment and implementation of Library 2.0 technologies at MUHAS Library,the conceptual model and research hypotheses development, research methodology,results, discussions, implications for research and practice and conclusion.

The implementation of Library 2.0 technologies at MUHASMUHAS Library is a leading biomedical and health sciences university library inTanzania. The library is part of the MUHAS which became a university in its ownright in 2007, having previously been a college of the University of Dar es Salaam. Thelibrary currently houses over 100,000 volumes of materials, subscribes to over 40 academicdatabases and has automated its services, established a digital institutional repository, andprovides a wide range of other information and reference services. In order to servethe growing demands and need of increasing numbers of its clients, within and outside theUniversity, the library therefore adopted emerging social and dynamic technologies inorder to develop a more responsive range of user-focused services. In July 2012, the libraryadopted Web 2.0 services for the purpose of providing access to information, gettingfeedback from users, to enhance interactive and collaborative learning, and promotinglibrary services. The library, therefore, developed the following tools:

. Social bookmarking and tagging systems: these tools are used to organize andcategorize web-based scholarly literature in the health science discipline andshare them as subject guides to faculty and students via the library web site. TheMUHAS library used an external web service, known as delicious (http://delicious.com/) to manage library information resources of more than 100annotated web links.

. Single-click downloadable library toolbar: the library developed a downloadablelibrary toolbar to allow single click access to a wide range of library collectionand enhance use of library services at MUHAS. This toolbar was developedwith the help of Conduit (www.conduit.com). The single-click library toolbarcontains several products and services provided by the library, which include alink to MUHAS library web site, MUHAS e-mails, MUHAS homepage, Google websearch, library catalogue, links to e-resources and other social networks such aslibrary page on Facebook and blog. The library expects to increase the frequencyof use of different services available through the downloadable library toolbar.

290

CWIS30,4

Dow

nloa

ded

by U

NIV

ERSI

DA

DE

DO

MIN

HO

At 0

8:22

01

June

201

5 (P

T)

. Blogs and mashups: blogs are used at MUHAS for delivering health contentthrough online search tool to search for e-resources at the library web site,posting information on training schedule, new information resources at thelibrary, online tutorials on information search techniques, international and localconferences, and other information that may be relevant to faculty and students.The library used an external free service to provide its blog service, known asblogger which is the most common blogging platform used by libraries.Statistics show that the blog has total page views of over 12,614, where itreceives an average of 1,400 hits per month, with most viewers from Tanzania.

. RSS feeds: the library integrated RSS feeds on its web site, blog and Facebookpage to instantly update its users on new and useful e-resources or pertinentinformation being added on the web site or blog.

. Social networks: in this category, Facebook seemed to be a good choice tocommunicate with library users at MUHAS, since most students are already usingthis tool for social and educational purposes. The MUHAS library Facebook pageis still being promoted, and has already accumulated 163 members.

. Wiki: in supporting learning and information literacy activities, the library usedwiki to provide online training modules and annotated links on various topics.The library wiki was developed by using free hosting services provided bygoogle site. The library wiki provides online training modules in form of powerpoint presentations on various information literacy aspects, including onlinesearch strategies, evidence-based practice, citation and reference managementand use of Web 2.0 technologies.

Conceptual model and research hypotheses developmentThe IS success model has been widely used to study various aspects of IS assummarized by Petter et al. (2008), where 180 examples have been described. Anothermeta-analysis study of 52 empirical studies indicate that relationships within the ISsuccess model at the individual level of analysis found support for the relationshipsthat encompass the IS success model (Petter and McLean, 2009). The empirical studiesindicate that IS success models (DeLone and McLean, 1992, 2002, 2003) are appropriateto examining technology usage and continuance.

The DeLone and McLean (1992) full model proposes six major dimensions of ISsuccess, namely system quality, information quality, use, user satisfaction, individualimpacts and organizational impacts. The extended model (DeLone and McLean, 2002,2004) incorporates service quality as the third quality dimension and intention to useand net benefits as the other new dimensions. Delone and Mclean (2004) propose that ahigh-quality system will be associated with more use, more user satisfaction andpositive net benefits. In other words, system quality, service quality and informationquality positively influence intention to use, actual system usage and user satisfactionwhile intention to use, actual use and user satisfaction influence net benefit (Delone andMclean, 2004).

Scholars however argue that the IS success model has not been tested andempirically validated (Seddon, 1997; Wang, 2008). Studies support that quality factors(information, system and service) influence attitude and behaviour in an IS context.However, there have been many debates on the relationships of the right-hand side ofthe IS success model (Wu and Wang, 2006). Scholars argue that the system use in the

291

Library 2.0technologies

Dow

nloa

ded

by U

NIV

ERSI

DA

DE

DO

MIN

HO

At 0

8:22

01

June

201

5 (P

T)

original D&M model of IS success is a behavior and should be interpreted as aconsequence of IS success, not as a determinant of impacts or benefits (Seddon, 1997).The meta-analysis study of 52 empirical studies indicate that relationships within theIS success model at the individual level of analysis, found that the relationship betweensystem use and other variables in the IS success models were moderate and/or weak(Petter and McLean, 2009). According to Wu and Wang (2006), system use is necessarybut not sufficient to generate system benefits. Due to difculties in interpreting thedimension use, DeLone and McLean (2004) proposed intention to use as an alternativemeasure to actual use IS in some contexts.

The model by Wu and Wang (2006) further re-specified and validated IS successmodel (Delone and Mclean, 2004), and consists of five dimensions: information quality,system quality, perceived net benefits, user satisfaction and system use. Wu and Wang(2006) hypothesized that user satisfaction results from personal feelings and attitude,which cannot influence system benefits. However, perceived system benefits can influenceuser satisfaction. Therefore, individual impact and net benefits can cause user satisfaction(rather than vice versa) (Wu and Wang, 2006). The IS success model by Wu and Wang(2006) also specifies that system use is affected by perceived net benefits and usersatisfaction, which, in turn, are influenced by information quality, system quality andservice quality in the knowledge management system context. Based on the IS successmodels of Wu and Wang (2006) and DeLone and McLean, (2003), this study adopted thefollowing six variables of the IS success model, which included information quality,system quality, service quality, net benefits, user satisfaction and intention to reuse.Figure 1 represents the theoretical model for this paper. The research model hypothesizethat intention to reuse are affected by perceived net benefits and user satisfaction, which,in turn, are influenced by information quality, system quality and service quality.

While previous studies on Library 2.0 and web site evaluation have empiricallyshown the importance of the information quality, system quality and service quality(Chua and Goh, 2010; Kim, 2011; Masrek et al., 2010), none has empirically shown therelationship between these qualities and user satisfaction and behavioural intention toreuse. Similarly, very limited Library 2.0 studies have empirically shown therelationship between user satisfaction, net benefits and behavioural intention to reuse.The study therefore assesses whether factors such as information quality, systemsquality and service quality are predictors of net benefits and user satisfaction in thecontext of academic Library 2.0 systems. Likewise, the findings would ascertainwhether perceived net benefits and user satisfaction are a determinant of behaviouralintention to reuse.

Information qualityIn the Web 2.0 environment, information quality can be defined as measuring the usersperception of the content quality of Web 2.0 application in a specific library web site.

Informationquality

System quality

Service quality

Perceived netbenefits

User satisfaction

Behaviouralintention to reuse

Figure 1.Library 2.0 success model

292

CWIS30,4

Dow

nloa

ded

by U

NIV

ERSI

DA

DE

DO

MIN

HO

At 0

8:22

01

June

201

5 (P

T)

Factors such as personalization, completeness, relevancy, easy to understand andsecurity are examples of qualities that can influence users to gather or share content andreturn to the site on a regular basis (Delone and Mclean, 2004). Information quality hasbeen found to strongly influence user satisfaction in the context of academic libraryportal (Masrek et al., 2010) and other fields in IS (Petter and McLean, 2009; Petter et al.,2008; Urbach and Muller, 2012). The literature reviews of IS success studies also revealedthat information quality had a moderate effect on net benefits (Petter et al., 2008; Urbachand Muller, 2012). Previous studies of ISs have shown that information quality positivelyimpacts the perceived value and user satisfaction, which in turn significantly affects theintention to reuse IS (Wu and Wang, 2006). These results indicate the positive influencethat information quality has on users satisfaction, perceived net benefits and intention toreuse. As library users perceive that the information quality on Library 2.0 applicationis better than those of others, they are more likely to continue using the system.Information quality is therefore significant in assessing the users perceived net benefitsand satisfaction, which in turn is a direct driver of intention to reuse Library 2.0applications because library services are largely information-intensive (Chua and Goh,2010). Thus, this study proposed the following hypothesis:

H1. Information quality has a positive effect on user satisfaction in the Library 2.0context.

H2. Information quality has a positive effect on perceived net benefits in theLibrary 2.0 context.

System qualityIn the Web 2.0 environment, system quality measures the desired characteristics of the IS(Delone and Mclean, 2004). The system quality reflects the general performance thatusers perceive when interacting with Web 2.0 systems, such as Library 2.0 technologies(Wang and Lin, 2011). The system quality measures following aspects: usability,availability, reliability, adaptability and response time (e.g. download time) (Delone andMclean, 2004), ease of access and privacy (Chua et al., 2012). System quality has beenfound as a strong predictor of user satisfaction in the context of IS (Petter and McLean,2009; Raeth et al., 2009; Urbach and Muller, 2012; Wu and Wang, 2006). The literaturereviews of IS success studies also revealed that system quality moderately influenced netbenefits in IS environment (Petter et al., 2008; Urbach and Muller, 2012). System qualitywas found to significantly impact the intention to reuse IS through both perceived valueand the user satisfaction (Wang, 2008). Thus, library users are more likely to continuereusing the Library 2.0 applications due to better interaction experience they have withthe system. Hence, the following hypotheses were proposed:

H3. System quality has a positive effect on user satisfaction in the Library 2.0context.

H4. System quality has a positive effect on perceived net benefits in the Library2.0 context.

Service qualityThe service quality can be conceptualized as the overall support delivered by thelibrary, ICT support department and Web 2.0 service providers such as blogger, social

293

Library 2.0technologies

Dow

nloa

ded

by U

NIV

ERSI

DA

DE

DO

MIN

HO

At 0

8:22

01

June

201

5 (P

T)

network sites, etc. (Delone and Mclean, 2004). In a library setting, library servicequality comprises information access (content/scope and timeliness), personal control(ease of navigation and convenience), effect of service (responsiveness and reliability)and library as a place (utilitarian space) (Heath et al., 2002). A study of Web 2.0application in 120 library web sites from North America, Europe and Asia establishedthat the presence of Web 2.0 applications was found to be associated with the overallquality, and in particular, service quality of library web sites (Chua and Goh, 2010).Service quality was also found as a significant predictor of user satisfaction in thecontext of academic library portal (Masrek et al., 2010). The literature reviews of ISsuccess studies also revealed that service quality had a moderate effect on net benefitsand user satisfaction (Urbach and Muller, 2012). Service quality was found tosignificantly impact the intention to reuse IS through both perceived value and the usersatisfaction (Wang, 2008). The interactive and participatory nature of Web 2.0application can influence users to use Library 2.0 services. On one hand, the librarianplays an important role in providing support to patrons in Library 2.0 environment by:providing promised services dependably and accurately (reliability); providing promptassistance (responsiveness); inspiring trust and confidence (assurance); and offeringindividualized attention to library users (empathy) (Chua and Goh, 2010). In addition,Web 2.0 service providers offer a wide range of services to support users such aspersonalization and customization of user interfaces. Various Web 2.0 applicationsallow incorporation of multimedia content, javascript or third-party plug-ins toenhance the appearance or interactivity of their pages on Library 2.0 services such asblogs, or social networks, blogs (Wang and Lin, 2011). Web 2.0 service providers alsoprovide a wide range of content management functions, such as pre-defined categories,keywords, tags, such as blogging service providers (Wang and Lin, 2011). Thus,library users are more likely to adopt and use Library 2.0 applications if there areuseful supportive functions from Web 2.0 service providers and adequate support fromlibrarians/IT support unit in a university setting. Therefore, the following hypotheseswere proposed:

H5. Service quality has a positive effect on user satisfaction in the Library 2.0context.

H6. Service quality has a positive effect on perceived net benefits in the Library 2.0context.

Perceived net benefitsAccording to Delone and Mclean (2004), net benefits refer to both positive and negativeimpacts of IS on customers, suppliers, employees, organizations, markets, industries,economies and even our societies. This definition in the model is conceptually toobroad to define. When using the updated D&M model, Delone and Mclean (2004)suggests that researchers need to clearly and carefully define the stakeholders and thecontext in which net benefits are to be measured. In the context of this study, perceivednet benefits refer to positive impacts of the Library 2.0 applications on individuallibrary users. The perceived net benefits dimensions of individual impact may includeawareness/recall, decision effectiveness, individual productivity, job effectiveness, jobperformance, job simplification, learning, productivity, task performance, usefulnessand task innovation (Urbach and Muller, 2012). Previous studies show that perceivednet benefits are a significant predictor of user satisfaction and intention to use the IS

294

CWIS30,4

Dow

nloa

ded

by U

NIV

ERSI

DA

DE

DO

MIN

HO

At 0

8:22

01

June

201

5 (P

T)

system (Petter and McLean, 2009; Wu and Wang, 2006). These studies show thatperceived net benefits when using IS such as Library 2.0 technologies can influenceusers satisfaction and intentions to reuse the specified system. Therefore, this studyproposes the following hypotheses:

H7. Perceived net benefits has a positive effect on intention to reuse in the Library2.0 context.

H8. Perceived net benefits has a positive effect on user satisfaction in the Library2.0 context.

User satisfaction and intention to reuseOn one hand, user satisfaction is the level of satisfaction a user has with a systemrelative to what the user expected upon first use of the system (Seddon, 1997). Usersatisfaction can be measured by using items such as adequacy, effectiveness, efficiency,enjoyment, information satisfaction and system satisfaction (Urbach and Muller, 2012).Priori IS studies have also indicated that satisfaction is a significant predictor ofintention to reuse (Petter and McLean, 2009; Wang, 2008). These studies show that usersatisfaction with Library 2.0 application can influence behavioural intentions to reusethe specified system. On the other hand, intention to reuse refers to the favourableattitude of the user towards the Library 2.0 system that result in repeated usebehaviour of gathering or sharing content (Wang, 2008). Priori IS studies haveconsistently indicated that intention to reuse is an important factor in determining ISacceptance by users in IS fields (Wang, 2008). These studies show that behaviouralintention to reuse is an important predictor of system usage. Thus, the followinghypothesis was tested:

H9. User Satisfaction has a positive effect on Intention to reuse in the Library 2.0context.

MethodologyThe case study research design was used to collect data from all first yearundergraduate students at MUHAS during the end of first semester, 2012/2013. A totalof 408 self-administered questionnaires were sent out to all first year undergraduatestudents at MUHAS. A total of 293 students took part in the survey, with a rate ofreturn of 71.8 per cent. The objective of the survey was to establish the undergraduatestudents intention to reuse Library 2.0 applications. Tables I-III lists the respondentsdemographic characteristics, including gender, age, degree programmes, usage of Web2.0 tools and Library 2.0 services.

The survey items were developed by using research instruments as proposed byvarious scholars. The indicators to measure the five research constructs are listed inTable V. A five-point Likert scale, ranging from 1 strongly disagree to5 strongly agree, was used for all the items in the survey questionnaire, whereeach construct measured between four to five items. Information quality wasmeasured by assessing four indicators (information timeliness, relevancy,completeness and accuracy) (Delone and Mclean, 2004; Masrek et al., 2010; Wangand Lin, 2011). Three items (system reliability, availability and usability) were used torepresented system quality (Delone and Mclean, 2004; Wang and Lin, 2011). Four items(service responsiveness, empathy, reliability and assurance) were used to

295

Library 2.0technologies

Dow

nloa

ded

by U

NIV

ERSI

DA

DE

DO

MIN

HO

At 0

8:22

01

June

201

5 (P

T)

Frequencies %

GenderFemale 95 32.4Male 198 67.6Age20 years and below 101 34.521-25 years 138 47.126-30 years 32 10.931 years and above 22 7.5Degree programmeDoctor of Medicine 153 52.2Doctor of Dentistry 23 7.8Bachelor of Pharmacy 34 11.6Bachelor of Nursing 60 20.5Bachelor of Science Radiation Therapy Technology 7 2.4Bachelor of Medical Laboratory Sciences 16 5.5

Note: n 293

Table I.Demographic detailsof study participants

Web 2.0 tools Frequencies %

Audio sharing tools (e.g. Podomatic, etc.) 18 6.50Discussion forums (e.g. Google Groups, etc.) 38 13.80Online calendars (e.g. Google Calender, etc.) 24 8.70Presentations tools (e.g. SlideShare, etc.) 29 10.50RSS Readers (e.g. Google Reader, etc.) 43 15.60Social networking tools (e.g. Facebook, etc.) 197 71.40Voice over IP (VoIP)/Instant messaging (IM) (e.g. Skype, etc.) 28 10.10Blogging tools (e.g. Blogger, etc.) 147 53.30Photo sharing tools (e.g. Flickr, etc.) 29 10.50Remote collaboration tools (e.g. GoogleDocs, etc,) 20 7.20Social bookmarking/tagging tools (e.g. Del.iciou.us, etc.) 125 45.30Video sharing tools (e.g. You tube, etc.) 97 35.10Micro blogging tools (e.g. Twitter, etc.) 49 17.80

Notes: n 269. Multiple responses were allowed

Table II.Students personalaccounts in Web 2.0 tools

Frequencies %

Have you ever used MUHAS library web site Yes 250 85.4No 43 14.7

How often do you use MUHAS library web site? Never 43 14.7Once in awhile

113 38.6

Monthly 21 7.2Weekly 76 25.9Daily 40 13.7

Have you ever used research tools developed by the MUHAS libraryusing Web 2.0 sites?

Yes 109 37.2No 184 62.8

Note: n 293

Table III.Use of library web siteand Library 2.0 tools

296

CWIS30,4

Dow

nloa

ded

by U

NIV

ERSI

DA

DE

DO

MIN

HO

At 0

8:22

01

June

201

5 (P

T)

operationalize service quality (Delone and Mclean, 2004; Kim, 2011; Masrek et al., 2010;Wang, 2008). Two items (time saving in accessing content, and enhanced learning andacademic performance) were employed to measure perceived net benefits (Delone andMclean, 2004; Kim, 2011; Park et al., 2011). Two indicators (satisfaction in contentaccess and distribution, and satisfaction for Library 2.0 systems) were used to measureuser satisfaction (Delone and Mclean, 2004; Wang and Lin, 2011). Repeated visits toLibrary 2.0 services were used to measure behavioural intention to reuse (Wang, 2008).The measurement indicators were pre-tested with 30 fourth year medical undergraduatestudents at MUHAS. Some indicators were modified based on the responses in thepilot test.

The SEM approach was used to validate the research model. AMOS version 21.0was used to analyse the hypotheses generated. The study used the two-step analyticalprocedure as recommended by Hair et al. (2010) whereby, the confirmatory factoranalysis (CFA) was conducted to examine the reliability and validity of the measurementmodel, and the structural model also was analysed to test the associations conceptualizedin the research model.

ResultsThe demographical information including gender, age, degree programme andtechnical skills is presented in Table I. In this study, more male (67.6 per cent; n 198)participated in the study than female (32.4 per cent; n 95). The average age was 23years, with most respondents aged between 21 and 25 years (47.1 per cent; n 138).Most students were enrolled in the Doctor of Medicine degree programme (52.2 percent; n 153).

Prior to determining the factors affecting the intention to reuse Library 2.0 services,it was deemed necessary to find out the level of experience and usage of Web 2.0,library web site and Library 2.0 technologies. All respondents acknowledged that theyhad used at least one Web 2.0 tools available on the internet. Most students had usedWeb 2.0 technologies for less than a year (76.8 per cent, n 225), followed by thosestudents who had used Web 2.0 services for less than two years (14.3 per cent, n 42),while few respondents had used Web 2.0 sites for more than three years (8.9 per cent,n 26). Table II shows that most respondents (91.8 per cent, n 269) had personalaccounts on various Web 2.0 services. The majority of students had personal accountson social networks tools (71.4 per cent, n 197) and blogging tools (53.3 per cent,n 147). The study findings imply that most students had experience with Web 2.0tools, and thus they formed a viable target group to assess their intention to reuse Web2.0 services provided through the library web site.

Students were also asked to indicate if they had used library web site and Library2.0 services, and their frequency of using library web site. Table III shows that moststudents had used library web site (85.4 per cent, n 250). Despite of high level offamiliarity and usage of Web 2.0 services, students were not frequent users of libraryweb site, where 38.6 per cent (n 113) had used library web site once in a while.Similarly, a low percentage of respondents (37.2 per cent, n 109) had used research toolsdeveloped by library using Web 2.0 services. It was therefore important to determinefactors that can enhance adoption and usage of Library 2.0 services at the university.

Measurement modelThe first-order CFA was conducted using AMOS 21 to test the measurement model.Common six model-fit indices were used to evaluate the overall goodness-of-fit, which

297

Library 2.0technologies

Dow

nloa

ded

by U

NIV

ERSI

DA

DE

DO

MIN

HO

At 0

8:22

01

June

201

5 (P

T)

included the following: the w2 normalization by degrees of freedom (w2/df); the adjustedgoodness-of-fit index (AGFI); the non-normalized fit index (NNFI); the comparative fitindex (CFI); the incremental fit index (IFI); and the root-mean-square error ofapproximation (RMSEA). Table IV presents the results of CFA for measurement model.The ratio of the w2 value to the degrees of freedom w2/df for measurement model was2.179 (w2 664.728 with df 305), which is smaller than 3 as recommended by Hair et al.(2010) and it indicated a good fit for measurement model. All other model-fit indicesshowed good fit for the measurement model. The thresholds below were adopted asrecommended by Hair et al. (2010).

The measurement model was further assessed for convergent validity of scaleitems, which was assessed by using three criteria: reliability, composite reliability (CR)and the average extracted variance. Reliability of factors was estimated by assessingthe Cronbachs a, and factor loadings from the CFA. Cronbachs a coefficient for eachaspect was examined. Cronbachs a coefficient exceeding the 0.7 threshold indicates ahigh level of consistency among the aspects; a Cronbachs a coefficient exceeding 0.9indicates a much higher level of consistency among the aspects. The Cronbachs acoefficients of the six constructs all exceeded 0.8, and five aspects had Cronbachs acoefficients higher than 0.9, which indicates the instrument used for the study washighly reliable.

Convergent validity was further evaluated by examining the factor loadings fromthe CFA (see Table V). According to Fornell and Larcker (1981), all indicator factorloadings should be significant and exceed 0.7. All factor loadings of the items in theCFA of the measurement model were40.7 and were significant at p 0.001. Thus, allfactors in the measurement model had adequate reliability and convergent validity.

Convergent validity was also evaluated by using CR and average variance extracted(AVE). CR assessed the internal consistency of the measurement model. Therecommended thresholds for CR is 0.70 or above, and an AVE of more than 0.50, thenconstruct internal consistency is evidenced (Hair et al., 2010). The results of theconvergent validity using CFA are shown in Table VI which indicates that all thecomposite reliability values are above 0.90 and the AVE is all above 0.60. Thus, theresearch model can be considered to have acceptable convergent validity.

Discriminant validity assesses the extent to which a concept and its indicators differfrom another concept and its indicators (Bagozzi et al., 1991). According to Fornell andLarcker (1981), when the square root of the AVE is greater than its correlations with allother constructs then discriminant validity has been established. Table VI indicatesthat the all of the square roots of the AVEs were greater than the correlations betweenthe construct and any other construct in the model (satisfying Fornell and Larckers(1981) criteria for discriminant validity). All diagonal values exceeded the inter-construct correlations, and thus, the results confirm that the research instrument had

Fit measures Recommended values Measurement model Structural model

w2/df p3.00 2.179 2.334AGFI X0.80 0.822 0.809CFI X0.90 0.958 0.952IFI X0.90 0.958 0.952RMSEA p0.08 0.064 0.068NNFI (TLI) X0.90 0.951 0.945

Table IV.Fit indices formeasurement andstructural models

298

CWIS30,4

Dow

nloa

ded

by U

NIV

ERSI

DA

DE

DO

MIN

HO

At 0

8:22

01

June

201

5 (P

T)

Internal reliabilityCronbachs a

Factorloading

System quality 0.94515 Web 2.0 tools on library web site are user friendly (usability) 0.91114 It is easy for me to share the content and post comments on

library Web 2.0 (usability) 0.83316 Library Web 2.0 service is always available so I can use it

whenever I want (availability) 0.91013 It is easy to find the information I need from the library Web 2.0

tools (usability) 0.86618 Web 2.0 tools on library web site operate reliably (reliability) 0.878Information quality 0.9189 Library Web 2.0 provide me with complete set of content

(completeness) 0.8297 Library Web 2.0 tools provide me with the most recent content

(timeliness) 0.8725 Content contains links to e-resources that are necessary to

complete my assignments (relevance) 0.9021 Library Web 2.0 tools disseminate accurate information (accuracy) 0.7532 Information provided by Library Web 2.0 tools is timely

(timeliness) 0.849Service quality 0.89728 Web 2.0 tools on library web site give prompt service to users

(responsiveness) 0.85326 Web 2.0 tools on library web site understand and adapt to the

users specific needs (empathy) 0.80325 Web 2.0 tools on library web site can be dependent upon to

provide what is promised (reliability) 0.83919 Web 2.0 tools on library web site are trustworthy (assurance) 0.849Perceived net benefits 0.94641 It provides useful information for my research project/

assignment 0.87740 It enhances the quality of my research project/assignment 0.90037 It enables me to acquire new skills on information searching 0.89436 It helps me to find information that I need 0.89535 It enables me to reduce time that I would use to search

information (time saving) 0.846Satisfaction 0.91346 I am satisfied to continue posting comments on library Web 2.0

tools even if others in my field do not (repeated visits) 0.87347 I am satisfied with library Web 2.0 tools efficiency 0.91548 I am satisfied that library Web 2.0 tools meet my information

needs 0.89643 Overall, I am very satisfied with library Web 2.0 tools 0.718Behavioural intention to reuse 0.94333 I am willing to encourage other people to reuse Web 2.0 tools on

library web site 0.88131 In the future, if I have any need for information, I will reuse

library Web 2.0 tools 0.87732 I will reuse library Web 2.0 tools in the near future (repeat visit) 0.93134 Overall, I intend to use library Web 2.0 tools frequently 0.883

Table V.Result of CFA for

measurement model

299

Library 2.0technologies

Dow

nloa

ded

by U

NIV

ERSI

DA

DE

DO

MIN

HO

At 0

8:22

01

June

201

5 (P

T)

satisfactory construct validity. Therefore, the CFA measurement model had adequatereliability, convergent validity and discriminant validity.

SEMThe same set of goodness-of-fit indices was used to observe the structural model. Table IVindicates that the observed normed w2 for structural equation model was 2.334(w2 723.620 with df 310), which is smaller than 3 as recommended by Hair et al. (2010),and this indicated a good fit for SEM model. The results also indicate that all indicessurpassed the recommended values, and thus the structural model of this study exhibitedgood fit (AGFI 0.809, NNFI 0.945, CFI 0.952, IFI 0.952, RMSEA 0.068).

Figure 2 indicates the SEM results, and it shows the standardized path coefficients,their significance for the structural model, and the coefficients of determinant (R2) foreach endogenous construct. The standardized path coefficient indicates the strengthsof the relationships between the independent and dependent variables. R2 representsthe percentage of variance of a dependent variable that was explained by its predictors.First, information quality had significant positive influences on user satisfaction andperceived net benefits, thus, H1, H2 were supported (b 0.433, and 0.246, respectively).These results implied that increased information quality of the Library 2.0 applicationswould be related with increased user perceived net benefits and user satisfaction.Second, system quality had a significant positive effect on user satisfaction, but it hadno effect on perceived net benefits. Thus, H3 was supported (b 0.284), but H4 wasnot. Third, service quality had significant positive effect on perceived net benefits, butit had no effects on user satisfaction. Thus, H6 was supported (b 0.905), but not H5.Fourth, perceived net benefits appeared to be a significant determinant of usersatisfaction, and intention to reuse, hence H7 and H8 were supported (b 0.495, and

CR AVEServicequality

Informationquality

Systemquality

Perceived netbenefits

Usersatisfaction

Intentionto reuse

Service quality 0.903 0.699 0.836Information quality 0.922 0.702 0.875 0.838System quality 0.945 0.775 0.937 0.821 0.880Perceived netbenefits 0.946 0.779 0.796 0.748 0.718 0.883User satisfaction 0.914 0.729 0.810 0.833 0.780 0.850 0.854Intention to reuse 0.940 0.798 0.811 0.769 0.719 0.863 0.826 0.893

Table VI.Composite reliability (CR),average varianceextracted (AVE) anddiscriminant validityof constructs

Informationquality

System quality

Service quality

Perceived netbenefits

R2= 0.763

UsersatisfactionR2=0.883

Behaviouralintentionto reuse

R2= 0.848

0.277

0.284*

0.221

0.905***

0.246*

0.433***

0.495***

0.366***

0.578***

Note: p*

0.578, respectively). Lastly, the effect of user satisfaction on intention to reuse was alsosignificant, and thus H9 was supported (b 0.366). On the whole, the study findingssupported seven out of nine hypotheses. The research model indicates that informationquality, system quality and service quality can account for 76.3 per cent of the variancein perceived net benefits, and the same three quality factors can explain about 88.3 percent of the variance in user satisfaction. Collectively, these factors explain 84.8 per centof the variance in behavioural intention to reuse.

Table VII summarizes the direct, indirect and total effects of information quality,system quality and service quality on perceived net benefits, user satisfaction andbehavioural intention to reuse. It is worth noting that that perceived net benefits hadthe strongest direct effect on behavioural intention to reuse than the other determinantswithin the model. Among the three quality-related constructs, service quality had thestrongest total effect on behavioural intention to reuse. Further, service quality had thestrongest effect on perceived net benefits, while information quality had the largesteffect on user satisfaction.

Discussion of study findingsThe findings from the present study provide significant support for the IS successmodel. Seven of nine proposed hypotheses were supported. The data collected fromthis study yielded five main findings. First, perceived net benefits had the strongestdirect effect on intention to reuse than any other determinants within the model.Similar findings were revealed by other IS studies (Petter and McLean, 2009; Petteret al., 2008). Perceived net benefits play a critical role to the Library 2.0 services successmeasurement and management. Apart from relying on users satisfaction and qualitymeasurement, it is also important for library management to promote benefits of usingLibrary 2.0 services to improve users participation and usage of Library 2.0 servicesand boost membership of their services. Similar to previous IS studies (Petter et al.,2008; Urbach and Muller, 2012), the study findings also indicated that informationquality and system quality were significant predictor of perceived user benefits. Thereis a greater need to improve information, system and service quality of their Library2.0 systems for users to continue reusing library services.

Second, the study findings indicate that among the three quality-related constructs,service quality had the strongest total effect on perceived net benefits and intention toreuse. Chua and Goh (2010) also found that the presence of Web 2.0 applications wasfound to correlate to the overall quality of library web sites, where the association wasstrongest with service quality. Consistent findings were revealed by other studiesin IS field (Petter et al., 2008; Wang, 2008). The interactive and participatory natureof Library 2.0 applications could have contributed positively to service qualitydimensions. Further, the reliability, assurance, responsiveness and empathy of librarianscontributed to the strong influence of service quality on perceived net benefits andintention to reuse Library 2.0 systems among the surveyed library users. The patronmembership to Library 2.0 services can thus develop and improve if the library servicequality is appropriately managed. Library 2.0 applications can be used as a way todisseminate information and engage users while visiting library web site, therebyinfluencing them to continually reuse the library services effectively.

Third, compared to system quality, information quality had the largest effect onuser satisfaction in this study. These findings corroborate with the results of previousIS studies (Masrek et al., 2010; Petter and McLean, 2009; Petter et al., 2008; Urbach andMuller, 2012). Indications are that users were satisfied with the quality of information

301

Library 2.0technologies

Dow

nloa

ded

by U

NIV

ERSI

DA

DE

DO

MIN

HO

At 0

8:22

01

June

201

5 (P

T)

Dir

ect

effe

ctIn

dir

ect

effe

ctT

otal

effe

cts

Per

ceiv

edn

etb

enef

its

Use

rsa

tisf

acti

onIn

ten

tion

tore

use

Per

ceiv

edn

etb

enef

its

Use

rsa

tisf

acti

onIn

ten

tion

tore

use

Per

ceiv

edn

etb

enef

its

Use

rsa

tisf

acti

onIn

ten

tion

tore

use

Info

rmat

ion

qu

alit

y0.

246

0.43

30.

122

0.34

50.

246

0.55

50.

345

Sy

stem

qu

alit

y0

.277

0.28

40

.137

0.1

060

.277

0.14

70

.106

Ser

vic

eq

ual

ity

0.90

50

.221

0.44

80.

606

0.90

50.

227

0.60

6P

erce

ived

net

ben

efit

s0.

495

0.57

80.

759

Use

rsa

tisf

acti

on0.

366

0.49

50.

366

Table VII.The direct, indirect andtotal effect of variablesdepicted

302

CWIS30,4

Dow

nloa

ded

by U

NIV

ERSI

DA

DE

DO

MIN

HO

At 0

8:22

01

June

201

5 (P

T)

provided through the Library 2.0 sites, which influenced them to use the site. AlthoughLibrary 2.0 applications allow user generated content, it is also important for librariansto ensure quality of content in these systems to create greater level of patronage, andboosting users behavioural intention to re-use the library web sites.

Lastly, the finding that system quality did not have a significant direct influence onuser perceived net benefits, was found to be similar to previous studies in knowledgemanagement system context (Wu and Wang, 2006). However, this finding wasinconsistent with most previous studies in IS which found a strong associationbetween system quality and user satisfaction (Petter et al., 2008; Urbach and Muller,2012). The findings of the present study show that the system quality in Library 2.0environment is essential but not a significant factor for users to attain net benefits.Librarians thus need to ensure that the Library 2.0 applications are operational,reliable, available and user friendly to encourage users to reuse the system. Accordingto Wu and Wang (2006), system quality may be important at the initial stages ofimplementing IS, but its significance subsides in due time. Lastly, the result thatservice quality had no significant effects on user satisfaction imply that user supportprovided by librarians on Web 2.0 environment were necessary but not sufficient toshape users beliefs and to effects their intention to reuse the Library 2.0 system.However, this finding was contrary with most previous studies in IS which found astrong correlation between service quality and user satisfaction (Petter et al., 2008).

ConclusionsThe study findings demonstrate that the IS success model is suitable in guiding theunderstanding of the contributing factors with respect to library users intention toreuse Library 2.0 applications. Study findings supported the IS success model well,where seven of nine hypothesized relationships were found to be significant. The 84.8per cent overall explanatory ability exhibited in the validated research model, alsotestified the potential of the IS success model in evaluating the success of Library 2.0 inthe African context. In summary, the study found that information quality, systemquality, service quality, perceived net benefits, user satisfaction and intention to reuseare important factors for evaluating the success of Library 2.0 system. In general, theperceived net benefits had the strongest direct effect on behavioural intention to reusethan any other determinants within the model. Among the three quality-relatedconstructs, service quality had the strongest total effect on perceived net benefits andintention to reuse. Compared to system quality, information quality had the largesteffect on user satisfaction. Lastly, system quality did not have significant influence onuser perceived net benefits, while service quality had no significant effects on usersatisfaction. The study shows that a re-specified and validated IS success model(Delone and Mclean, 2004) can be adapted to analyse factors that contribute tosuccessful implementation of Library 2.0 systems in similar environments.

Implication for practiceThis study has several implications for the success of Library 2.0 applications and itseffectiveness. The study findings indicate that librarians should pay attention to ISsuccess factors when planning and implementing Library 2.0 services in order toensure success from such investments in four folds. First, the significance of perceivednet benefits factor implies that Library 2.0 adoption may be enhanced by assessing andimproving the net benefits as perceived by patrons to maintain their usage intention ofLibrary 2.0 services. Second, the findings indicated that service quality played a key

303

Library 2.0technologies

Dow

nloa

ded

by U

NIV

ERSI

DA

DE

DO

MIN

HO

At 0

8:22

01

June

201

5 (P

T)

role in driving users usage intention. Librarians should strive to enhance overallservice quality of their Library 2.0 applications to increase patrons usage intention.Students are the major readers and contributors of online content on Library 2.0platform. Increasing their usage intention helps enrich the content of the Library 2.0platform. Hence, libraries should provide reliable Library 2.0 services, provide promptassistance to users queries and demands, ensure trust and confidence and offerindividualized attention to library users to encourage patrons usage intention.Libraries should identify skilled librarians to manage Library 2.0 services in additionto their normal job responsibilities in order to ensure high quality of services.Librarians should also take the advantage of a wide range of Web 2.0 functions andservices to add value to their Library 2.0 services and strengthen users usageintention, especially students. Third, the information quality was found to play a keyrole in increasing user satisfaction with Library 2.0 services. Librarians should focuson enhancing information quality to raise user satisfaction in Library 2.0 application.Information relevance, accuracy, timeliness and completeness are the main factorsleading to the success of Library 2.0 applications. Librarians should develop means tomonitor online content to ensure good quality of information including user-generatedcontent. The usage intention to continue using Library 2.0 services can increase due tohigh level of user satisfaction, and thus be able to account for high investment costsinvolved in developing and maintaining the Library 2.0 services. Lastly, the usage ofLibrary 2.0 can also improve when the system quality is in place to enhance usersatisfaction and continuance usage of Library 2.0 services. Librarians need to ensurethat the Library 2.0 services are reliable, available and user friendly to encourage usersto reuse the system.

Implications for researchMany IS success factors have been evaluated in priori studies. Previous studies haveevaluated the success of information systems as a multi-dimensional constructthrough the influence of quality factors, user satisfaction and net benefits on systemuse (Wu and Wang, 2006). Wang (2008) also re-specified and re-validated themultidimensional model for assessing e-commerce systems success. Wang (2008)found that intention to reuse was affected by perceived value and user satisfaction,which, in turn, were influenced by information quality, system quality and servicequality. This study conceptualized the IS success model, and the validated modelconsists of six dimensions: system quality, service quality and information quality,perceived net benefits, user satisfaction and intention to reuse. The conceptualizedmodel indicate that the quality factors (i.e. information, system and service) influencethe net benefits and user satisfaction, while net benefits and user satisfaction areantecedents of intention to reuse, and the intention to reuse is a surrogate measure of ISsuccess (see Figure 2). The factors examined provide a strong basis for theunderstanding of the success of Web 2.0 in a library setting. The study has alsobridged the gap of limited evaluation of success of IS in a Library 2.0 setting. It has alsocontributed to the body of knowledge on the Library 2.0 systems because littleempirical findings exist in the developing world context although much of theliterature exists in other developed countries. Thus, the re-conceptualized IS successmodel and the validated 27-item research instrument can be adapted to test researchhypotheses and theories not only in the context of Library 2.0 technologies, but alsoother related aspects such as Web 2.0/social media, and digital libraries in otherinstitutions with similar conditions. The validated 27-item research instrument with

304

CWIS30,4

Dow

nloa

ded

by U

NIV

ERSI

DA

DE

DO

MIN

HO

At 0

8:22

01

June

201

5 (P

T)

good reliability and validity can be an important tool for measuring Library 2.0 systemsuccess dimensions, and a base for describing, elaborating and comparing differencesamong the study findings. The results can provide more understanding into how toplan and implement successful Web 2.0 systems in a library setting.

Limitations and further researchThere are two main limitations in this study. This study focused only on a single healthscience public university whereas, the scope of data collection was limited to only firstyear undergraduate students at MUHAS. This study can be expanded to assess theadoption of Library 2.0 services among different types of library users across a widenumber of public and private universities and other tertiary institutes within Tanzaniaand beyond. Further, experimental studies or even a longitudinal study to capture dataover a given time frame can examine the influence of Library 2.0 applications on usersusage behaviour can validate the IS success model, together with other dimensions thatwere not evaluated in this study, such as system use and organizational net benefitconstructs. Another possible approach could be mixing a qualitative and quantitativedesign involving in-depth interviews with students and faculty and observations in anatural usage setting. This research is significant as the applicability of IS successmodel with regards to the adoption and usage of Library 2.0 services in the Africancontext has received little attention when compared to other technology contexts.

References

Anderson, P. (2007), What is web 2.0? Ideas, technologies and implications for education, JISCTechnology and Standards Watch, available at: www.jisc.ac.uk/media/documents/techwatch/tsw0701b.pdf (accessed 12 September 2012).

Ayiah, E.M. and Kumah, C.H. (2011), Social networking: a tool to use for effective servicedelivery to clients by African libraries, World Library and Information Congress: 73rdCongress: 77th IFLA General Conference and Assembly, pp. 1-14, available at: http://conference.ifla.org/ifla77 (accessed 12 July 2012).

Banda, C. (2011), Use of Social Networking Tools in Libraries in Zambia, The Zambia LibraryAssociation (ZLA) Annual Conference, Zambia, 11-13 August.

Bagozzi, R., Yi, Y. and Phillips, L. (1991), Assessing construct validity in organizationalresearch, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 36 No. 3, pp. 421-458.

Booth, C. (2009), Informing Innovation: Tracking Student Interest in Emerging LibraryTechnologies at Ohio University, Association of College & Research Libraries, Chicago, IL.

Burhanna, K.J., Seeholzer, J. and Salem, J.J. (2009), No natives here: a focus group study ofStudent perceptions of web 2.0 and the academic library, The Journal of AcademicLibrarianship, Vol. 35 No. 6, pp. 523-532.

Casey, M. and Savastinuk, L. (2007), Library 2.0: a guide to participatory library service,Information Today, Medford, NJ, p. 5.

Chua, A.Y.K. and Goh, D.H. (2010), A study of web 2.0 applications in library websites, Libraryand Information Science Research, Vol. 32 No. 3, pp. 203-211.

Chua, A.Y.K., Goh, D.H. and Ang, R.P. (2012), Web 2.0 applications in government web sites:prevalence, use and correlations with perceived web site quality, Online InformationReview, Vol. 36 No. 2, pp. 175-195.

DeLone, W. and McLean, E. (1992), Information systems success: the quest for the dependentvariable, Information Systems Research, Vol. 3 No. 1, pp. 60-95.

Delone, W. and Mclean, E. (2002), Information systems success revisited, Proceedings of the35th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS), pp. 2966-2976.

305

Library 2.0technologies

Dow

nloa

ded

by U

NIV

ERSI

DA

DE

DO

MIN

HO

At 0

8:22

01

June

201

5 (P

T)

Delone, W. and Mclean, E. (2003), The DeLone and McLean model of information systems success:a ten-year update, Journal of Management Information Systems, Vol. 19 No. 4, pp. 9-30.

Delone, W. and Mclean, E. (2004), Measuring e-commerce success: applying the DeLone &McLean information systems success model, International Journal of ElectronicCommerce, Vol. 9 No. 1, pp. 31-47.

Fornell, C. and Larcker, D. (1981), Evaluating structural equation models with unobservablevariables and measurement error, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 18 No. 1,pp. 21-28.

Garoufallou, E. and Charitopoulou, V. (2011), The use and awareness of web 2.0 tools by GreekLIS students, New Library World, Vol. 112 Nos 11/12, pp. 490-498.

Hair, J., Black, W., Babin, B., Anderson, R. and Tatham, R. (2010), Multivariate Data Analysis,available at: www.lavoisier.fr/livre/notice.asp?ouvrage1115189

Heath, F., Boykin, J. and Webster, D. (2002), Service quality in the information environment: theLibQUAL Protocol, The 4th International JISC/CNI Conference: Service QualityAssessment in a Digital Library Environment, Edinburgh, 26-27 June.

Kim, Y.-M. (2011), Users perceptions of university library websites: a unifying view, Libraryand Information Science Research, Vol. 33 No. 1, pp. 63-72.

Kim, Y.-M. and Abbas, J. (2010), Adoption of library 2.0 functionalities by academic librariesand users: a knowledge management perspective, The Journal of Academic Librarianship,Vol. 36 No. 3, pp. 211-218.

Lwoga, E. (2012), Making learning and web 2.0 technologies work for higher learninginstitutions in Africa, Campus-Wide Information Systems, Vol. 29 No. 2, pp. 90-107.

Masrek, M.N., Jamaludin, A. and Mukhtar, S.A. (2010), Evaluating academic library portaleffectiveness: a Malaysian case study, Library Review, Vol. 59 No. 3, pp. 198-212.

Muneja, P.S., Abungu, A.K. and Makori, E.O. (2012), Application of web 2.0 tools in deliveringlibrary services: a case of selected libraries in Tanzania, SCECSAL XXth Conference,Nairobi, 4-8 June, available at: http://scecsal.viel.co.ke/images/c/ce/POTENTIAL_OF_LIBRARY_2.0_IN_PROVISION_OF_INFORMATION_ SERVICES_IN_ACADEMIC_LIBRARIES.pdf (accessed 3 July 2012).

Park, S., Zo, H., Ciganek, A.P. and Lim, G.G. (2011), Examining success factors in the adoption ofdigital object identifier systems, Electronic Commerce Research and Applications, Vol. 10No. 6, pp. 626-636.

Petter, S. and McLean, E. (2009), A meta-analytic assessment of the DeLone and McLean ISsuccess model: an examination of IS success at the individual level, Information andManagement, Vol. 46 No. 3, pp. 159-166.

Petter, S., DeLone, W. and McLean, E. (2008), Measuring information systems success: models,dimensions, measures, and interrelationships, European Journal of Information Systems,Vol. 17 No. 3, pp. 236-263.

Pienaar, H. and Smith, I. (2008), Development of a library 2.0 service model for an Africanlibrary, Library Hi Tech News, Vol. 25 No. 5, pp. 7-10.

Ponte, D. and Simon, J. (2011), Scholarly communication 2.0: exploring researchers opinions onweb 2.0 for scientific knowledge creation, evaluation and dissemination, Serials Review,Vol. 37 No. 3, pp. 149-156.

Raeth, P., Smolnik, S., Urbach, N. and Zimmer, C. (2009), Towards assessing the success of socialsoftware in corporate environments, Proceedings of the 15th Americas Conference onInformation Systems, San Francisco, CA, pp. 1-10, available at: http://iris.ebs.edu/accessdb/WWW/iris_pub_web.nsf/wwwPublAuthorSingleEng/28EC489144D1F67EC12576DD0055699B/$file/Raeth et al 2009-Towards Assessing the Success of Social Software in CorporateEnvironments.pdf (accessed 8 July 2012).

306

CWIS30,4

Dow

nloa

ded

by U

NIV

ERSI

DA

DE

DO

MIN

HO

At 0

8:22

01

June

201

5 (P

T)

Samb, A.A. (2011), Web 2.0 tools and the marketing of libraries: the case of Africa, in Gupta, D. andSavard, R. (Eds), Marketing Libraries in a Web 2.0 World, Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin,pp. 137-146 available at: http://brainshare.zxq.net/libraryscience/MarketingLibraries in a Web2.0 World %2528IFLA Publications%2529.pdf (accessed 8 July 2012).

Seddon, P. (1997), A respecification and extension of the DeLone and McLean model of ISsuccess, Information Systems Research, Vol. 8 No. 3, pp. 240-253.

Urbach, N. and Muller, B. (2012), The Updated DeLone and McLean model of information systemssuccess, in Dwivedi, Y.K., Wade, M.R. and Schneberger, S.L. (Eds), Information SystemsTheory: Explaining and Predicting Our Digital Society, Springer, New York, NY, pp. 1-18.

Wang, S. and Lin, J. (2011), The effect of social influence on bloggers usage intention, OnlineInformation Review, Vol. 35 No. 1, pp. 50-65.

Wang, Y. (2008), Assessing e-commerce systems success: a respecification and validation of the DeLoneand McLean model of IS success, Information Systems Journal, Vol. 18 No. 5, pp. 529-557.

Wood, M. (2009), Academic library websites in South Africa, Innovation, Vol. 39, pp. 43-57,available at: www.innovation.ukzn.ac.za/InnovationPdfs/No39-MandyWoodr.pdf (accessed 20July 2012).

Wu, J. and Wang, Y. (2006), Measuring KMS success: a respecification of the DeLone andMcLeans model, Information and Management, Vol. 43 No. 6, pp. 728-739.

About the author

Edda Tandi Lwoga holds a PhD in Information Studies from the University of KwaZulu-Natal,South Africa. She is also a Senior Librarian and Director at the Directorate of Library Services ofMuhimbili University of Health and Allied Sciences in Tanzania. Dr Lwoga has been working inthe library and information science field for the past ten years. She is supervising a number ofPhD and Masters students. She is also teaching e-learning, web 2.0 tools and information literacyprogramme to undergraduate students at MUHAS. She has also facilitated a wide number ofworkshops in the field of information searching skills, and other related areas such as scientificwriting, web 2.0, reference management etc. Her area of research interests includes informationliteracy/search techniques, open access, web 2.0 technologies, ICT for rural livelihoods, e-learning,knowledge management and indigenous knowledge systems. Dr Lwoga has published widely inpeer reviewed journals, book chapters, books and conference proceedings. Edda Tandi Lwoga canbe contacted at: tlwoga@gmail.com

To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: reprints@emeraldinsight.comOr visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints

307

Library 2.0technologies

Dow

nloa

ded

by U

NIV

ERSI

DA

DE

DO

MIN

HO

At 0

8:22

01

June

201

5 (P

T)