The Impact between Decision Support Systems , Information

Quality and Effective Decision-Making

A field study on Ministry of Civil Service Sultanate of Oman

2013

{) : (19


.




.


.


/ /

.

.

.

.

.




.

) 1 :(1

) 1 :(2

) 1 :(3

) 1 :(4

) 1 :(5

) 1 :(6

10

) 1 :(7

11

) 1 :(8

11

15

) 2 :(1

16

) 2 :(2

17

) 2 :(3

34

) 2 :(4

46

) 2 :(5

59

) 2 :(6

80

81

) 3 :(1

82

) 3 :(2

82

) 3 :(3

82

) 3 :(4

83

) 3 :(5

85

) 3 :(6

86

) 3 :(7

87

89

) 4 :(1

90

) 4 :(2

90

) 4 :(3

106

141

) 5 :(1

142

) 5 :(2

142

) 5 :(3

144

) 5 :(4

145

147

148

154

159

1-3

) (

1-4

2-4
3-4
4-4
5-4
6-4
7-4
8-4

9-4

10-4

)(N = 69

11-4

88
91

93

94

96

100

102

104

105

106

108

110


12-4
13-4
14-4
15-4
16-4

17-4

18-4

19-4

112

114

117

119

121

123

128

132


20-4

21-4

136

140

1-2

26

2-2

29

3-2

30

4-2

39

5-2

42

6-2

43

7-2

51

8-2

56

1-3

85

160

161

.
) (57
) (78 .
SPSS

. :
-1 )
( )
( ) ( 0.05


)(0.852
) ( 0.01 .
-2 )
(
).( 0.05
-3 )
( )
.(0.05
-4
).( 0.05
-5
).( 0.05
:

-1

.

- 2
.
-3
.

ABSTRACT
The Impact between Decision Support Systems ,
Information Quality and Effective Decision-Making
A field study on Ministry of Civil Service Sultanate of Oman

Prepared by
Abdullah Hamood Mohammed Al-Hasani
Supervisor
Prof. Mohammad Al Nuiami
This study aimed to investigate identify the impact range between decision
support systems, information quality and effective decision-making in Ministry of Civil
Service Sultanate of Oman by realizing the relation between the dimensions of
information quality, the dimensions of effective decision-making, measuring both of the
direct impact between study changes and the indirect impact for the dimension of
information quality in the effective decision-making by the existence of decision support
systems.
Achieving the study objectives requires the researcher to design a questioner
that includes (57) paragraphs in order to collect primary information about (78)
employees that form the field of the study . in light of this, the statements were collected
and analysed and the propositions were tested by using the statistical package for
social sciences, also many statistical methods were used to achieve the study
objectives including simple and multi-regression analysis and path analysis then the
study leads to the following results :
1. There is A statistical correlation between the dimensions of Information Quality
(Temporal, Form and content Dimensions) and the dimensions of the of effective
decision-making (ease of decision implementation; decision quality; decision approval


and time decision) on Ministry of Civil Service in Sultanate of Oman at the significance
level ( 0.05). Thus, the highest relational value were between changeable
information quality and the decision approval which was about (0.852 ) which indicates
the probabilistic level ( 0.05) and less.
2. There is a statistically significant impact for the dimensions of the information
Quality (Time, formal and content dimensions ) in the effective decision-making on
Ministry of Civil Service in Sultanate of Oman at the significance level of ( 0.05).
3. There is a statistically significant impact for the decision support systems on the
dimensions of the information quality on Ministry of Civil Service in Sultanate of Oman
at the significance level of ( 0.05).
4. There is a statistically significant impact for the decision support systems in the
effective decision-making on Ministry of Civil Service in Sultanate of Oman at the
significance level of ( 0.05).
5. There is a statistically significant effect for the information quality in the effective
decision-making by the existence of decision support systems on Ministry of Civil
Service in Sultanate of Oman at the significance level of ( 0.05).

The study recommends the following :

1- Strengthen the abilities of the employees on the Ministry of Civil Service in Sultanate
of Oman by enabling them form doing their work, encouraging them , teaching and
training the fresh employees for the continuous improvement of the decision support
systems, also providing the good information quality for the decision makers.
2- increasing the attention on the dimensions of the information quality on the Ministry of
Civil Service in Sultanate of Oman by the continuous and guaranteed developing and
improving of the information for making effective decisions in the long run.
3- setting mechanisms and standards for measuring the information quality to know the
improving indicators in all the activities and processes performed on the Ministry of Civil
Service in Sultanate of Oman.

) 1 :(1
) 1 :(2
) 1 :(3
) 1 :(4
) 1 :(5
) 1 :(6
) 1 :(7
) 1 :(8

) : (1-1 :


) ( 72: 2010
) (181: 2006


) . (280: 2006
) ( 2009

.


) ( 55: 2008
) (27 : 2008

.

3
) (55: 2008

.
) (Senn ,2011: 536
.
) (long , 2011: 46

.


.





.

) : (2-1 :




.






-:
-1 ) :
( ) : ( ) :
( )
(

5
-2


-3


-4


-5

) : (3-1

:
.1
.
.2 .
.3 .
.4
.

.5
.

6

.6
.

) : (4-1




.
.:
.1

.2
.
.3 .

) : (5-1
:

HO1 :
)
( )

(
).( 0.05
HO2 :
)
(
).( 0.05

HO2-1 :

).( 0.05
HO2-2 :

).( 0.05

8
HO2-3 :

).( 0.05

HO3 :
)
( )
.(0.05
HO3-1 :

).( 0.05

HO3-2 :

).( 0.05

HO3-3

).( 0.05

9
HO4 :

).( 0.05

HO5 :
)
(
).( 0.05

HO5-1 :



).( 0.05

HO5-2 :



).( 0.05

10
HO5-3 :



).( 0.05

) : (6-1
.
:
:
.

:
2012/9/29 .2013/6/30
: )PP PP PP
PPP PPP PPP( )PPP ( 2012
)) (ArAzy, etal,2011)(Loshin , 2001) (long , 2011 (2006
) ) (2006 ) (2004 ) (2007 (2011

)) (Alnajjar &Al-Zoubi ,2012P (long , 2011) (2010
PPP PPPP PPP PPPP PPPP

)P P
PP PP PP PP P PP PP PP (
) ) (2003 ) ( 2006 . ( 2006

11

) : (7-1
.1
.
.2
.
.3

.

) : (8-1 :
:


) . (2007

) ) (2007 ) ( 2012 ) (2004
) (2004 (2006
. (Marakas,2011

) O'Brien, ) (long , 2011) (2010

12
:
)(
). (2007
:
:
.
:

.

: ) . (2007
:
:

.
:
.

13
: ) . (2007
:
: .
:
.
:

.
: .
:



) ) (2009 (2009

(22: 2002

:
) . (22: 2002

14
: )
(31: 2008
:
) . (22: 2002 ) (31: 2008
:
) . (22: 2002

15

) 2 :(1

) 2 :(2

) 2 :(3

) 2 :(4

) 2 :(5

) 2 :(6

16

) : (1-2 :





) : 2004
(28


) (107: 2004

) (272 : 2009

) 2009
(16:
.

17
) (16: 2009

.



.

) : (2-2 :


) (13: 2013
) (English,2009:4
.

:

.

)(

18

) (47: 2010
1956 1986
1989
) .(138: 2011
) (7: 2010
" " ) (Commodity
.
"
) (Forma
. ) (Formatio .
) (Formar

) (74: 2013
)" :(Alter " )(OBrien
" " . ) (Laudon & Laudon
" "). (15: 2013
) (24: 2004

19

.
) (178: 2010

.
) (Pollard, etal,2010:473
.
) (34 : 2007

) (long , 2011
)
(107: 2004

.
) (Eppler,2006:1
.

20

:



).
(19 : 2012
) (English,2009:7

.


) (173: 2010



) . (35 : 2007
) (280 :2009

) (

.

21

:
) (20 : 2012

.

)(ArAzy, etal,2011

) (41-40:2011


.

) (O'Brien, Marakas,2011:427) (39-34: 2007

: )
( )
( )
( ) (23: 2010

( ) (Haag , Cummings ,McCubbrey,2009:6-8
.

22
) (85 : 2013

.
) :
( ) :
( ) : ( .

%90 %10


)(
) . (140-136: 2012
- :Temporal Dimension :
-1 :Time Lines

.
-2 :Currently

.
-3 :Time Period .

23

- )( :Content Dimension
:
-1 :Accuracy

.
-2 :Validity & Reliability

.
-3 :Relevancy

.
-4 :Completeness


)(.
-5 :Conciseness


.

24
- :Form Dimension

)( :
-1 :Clarity

.
-2 :regulation
.
-3 :Flexibility

.
-4 :Presentation

.

25

:



:
) .
(135: 2012
) (103: 2010 ) (
) (
) (Data )(
.
) (83: 2013


.
) (Fernandez " :
:
.

. "). (85-84: 2013

26
)(1-2

)(

)(

)(Bernstein,2009

) (99 : 2013


.


) . (89: 2013
) (Adair,2010:3-4
.

27

:


.
)(Eppler,2006


) . 2013
(175:
) (118: 2012


.
) (35: 2011

.
) (Wang2005:8
.

28

)
(39 : 2011
) (21 : 2012



.
.

.

.
) (284: 2009



.
) (115-114: 2010

29





.
)(2-2

) : (115 : 2010
) (Kelkar,2009:11 :

30

:






) . (121-120 : 2004
)(3-2

): . (121-120 : 2004

31
) (8: 2010


.
) (9: 2010
) ( ) (.

:

) (Eppler,2006:58

) (

.
) (189-186 : 2004 :
-1 ) (Pankoff & Virgil


.

32
-2 :

.
) (10-9: 2010 :
-3
.
-4 ) (CPM
.
-5 :

:
: .
: .
:


) (30: 2010
I = Log2n
=I
=n

33
) (

.

) (Baskarada , 2009:141-143

.
) (Kelkar,2009:58
.
) (wang2005:10

.

34

) :(3-2 :



) . (171: 2013


) .
(20 : 2012

:

.
) (21: 2012

.
) (125 :2007 Support

.

35
.
:
) . (34 : 2011
) (11: 2008
)
(15 : 2010
.
) (DSS
) Management Support System (MSS DSS

). . (63-62 : 2005
) (Turban, etal,2011:16
"
"

).(125 : 2007

36
) (171: 2013


.
) (Keen & Scott Morton " :

) . (26 : 2012
) (O'Brien, Marakas,2011:431

.
( Marakas,2003:6) .

.
) (Sauter,2010:5


.


)(Kelkar,2009:72

37


) (25 : 2009


) (2009

) (Alnajjar &Al-Zoubi ,2012
) (2010

:



S Decision
Support (DSS) System

) .(87 : 2012

38
) (Turban, etal,2011:9-10


.


) (41: 2011

) (120: 2011


.

:
) (127-126: 2011 ) (69: 2010

) :(Structured
.
) :(Semi Structured

.

39
) :(Unstructured
.

:
(Turban,

)etal,2011:12

Cummings

(Haag

) McCubbrey,2009:181) (Kelkar,2009:70 ) (124-122 : 2007

:
)(4-2

) : (124-122 : 2007

40
- :Problem Finding

.
- :Problem Solving

.
:
/ .
-1 :Business Intelligence
.
-2 :Design
.
-3 :Choice
.
-4 :Implementation
.
-5 :Results

. .

41

:
) (245-244: 2009 :
) (1 :
.
) (2 :

.
) (3 :
.

:

)
(95 : 2012 ) (139123 : 2011
) (Pollard, etal,2010:473 .

42
)(5-2

DSS
Data Base

Model

): (123139 : 2011
:
) ( Marakas,2003:3) (30-29 : 2012
:
-1
.
-2
.
-3 .

43
-4 .
-5 : .
-6 .
-7
.
-8 .
-9
.
-10

.
)(6-2

DSS

) : (30 : 2012

44
:
) ) (115: 2012 (124: 2011 :
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

:
) (90 : 2012 :
-1 .
-2 .
-3 .
-4 .
-5
.

45
-6 .
-7 .
-8 .
-9 .

:
) (Burstein&Holsapple,2008:765
:
.
.
.
.

46

) :(4-2 :



) .(15 :2009
) (Turban, etal,2011:7
.
) ( Marakas,2003:4
.
)(Burstein&Holsapple,2008:65

) (

.

:
) (111 : 2006



.

47
) (238: 2013

.
) ( Marakas,2003:45-46


" ".
) (42-41 : 2010


.
) (195: 2013


.


) ) (2003
(2006 ) (2005

48

) ) (2005 (2011
.

:
) (Carroll,2012:5 :
.
.

:
) (201-200: 2013
:
: .
: .
: .
.
:
: .
: .
: .

49

:
) (97-96: 2012
:
-1
.
-2
.
-3
.
) (Gruning&Kuhn,2009:41

.

:
) (31-29: 2010 :

:Under Certain


.

50
:Decision Under Risk

.
:Decision Under Uncertainly

.
:
) (O'Brien, Marakas,2011:424) (Pollard, etal,2010:454
)(Frankel,2008:55
-1 :

.
-2 :


.
-3 ) ( :


.

51
)(7-2

) : (47: 2011

:
) ) (99-98: 2012 (113: 2011 :
-1 :
.
-2 :
.
-3 :

.

52
-4 :

.

:
) (Dermott,2013 5 :
:

:
.
: .
: .
: .

:

(Frankel,2008:58).
) (Blenko&Mankins,2012:1
.

53

-1 :

) (Martin, etal,2012 :
-1
-2
-3
-4
-5

.

:


) (219 : 2010
) (McMillan,2012

.

54
) (104-103: 2012
:

.


.

.

:
) (Forman&Selly,2001:1
.
) (Tillman&Cassone,2012

:
-1
.

55
-2
.
-3
.

-2 :



) . (287 : 2011
) (Borkowski, 2006
.

-3 :


)(66 : 2010
) (Hopkin, 2009
.

56


(Martin, etal,2012).

(Decision Innovation , .
)2013

)(8-2

(Decision Innovation , 2013) :

57

-4 :

) (Akrani,2010
.
) (Forman&Selly,2001:6
:
-1 .
-2 .
3 .
-4 .
-5 .
-6 .

:
) (Bowman, 2010 :
-1 :

.
-2 :
.

58
-3 :
.
-4 :


.
-5 :

.

59

) : (5-2
: :
) (2003 "
"








.
) (2003 "
"




.

60

) (2003 "
"



(

.
) (2003 "
"



) (


.

61
) (2004 "
"
) (






.
) (2005 "
"






.

62
) (2005 "
"




.
) (2006 "
"



.
) (2006 "
" .

63

.
) (2007 "
" .




.
) (2007 "
" .

64

.
) (2007 "
" .

:




.
) (2008 "
" .





.

65
) (2009 "
" .








.
) (2009 "
" .

66
) (2009 " " .

.
) (2009 "
"




.
) (2010 " "
" .

67





.
) (2010 "
" .






.
) (2010 "
" .

68





.
) (2011 "
" .







.
) (2011 "
" .

69



) (2012 "
" .

)
(


.

70
: :
) (Bardaki, , Pramatari, 2007 Assessing information quality in a
RFID-integrated

shelf replenishment decision support system for THE

. Retail industry
RFID )
(



RFID
.
) (Pierce&Thomas, 2007 Assessing information Quality using
. prediction markets

)
/
(


.

71
) (Vanden , 2008" " Information Quality and options




.

) (Arnott & Pervan ,2008

Eight key issues for the decision

. support systems discipline

) (


.
) (Carmeli , etal,2009 Does participatory decision-making in
top management teams enhance decision effectiveness and rm
? performance
) (TMT
) (94

72


.
) (Lima , etal,2010" group decision making and quality of
information in e-health systems

) (The project VirtualE Care


.
) (ODonoghue, etal,2011 Modified Early Warning Scorecard
The Role of Data/Information Quality within the Decision Making Process
/ ) (PA-DQM


/ ) (


) (51 Lukes
/

73
) (ArAzy, etal,2011" Information Quality in Wikipedia The
Effects of Group Composition and Task Conflict





.

) (Chen, etal,2011

A pilot study for understanding the

relationship of information system quality , relationship quality and

loyalty

) (


.

) (Wu , etal,2011 sharing quality information in adual

."supplier network : a game theoretic perspective

74
)(

.
) (Ge , etal,2011 Information Quality assessment validiting
." measurment dimensions and process
) (





.
) (Asemi, etal,2011 The Role of Management Information
System (MIS) and Decision Support System (DSS) for Managers Decision
." Making Process

75

.
) (Vohra & Das , 2011 Intelligent decision support system for
admission management in higher education institutes






.
) (Jaafreh & Al-abedallat, 2011 The Relationship between
National Culture and DSS Usage in Jordanian Banking: A Proposed
. Conceptual Framework

) (TAM


)

76
(
.

) (Chen & Tseng , 2011 Quality evaluation of product reviews

.using an information quality framework

) (Multiclass SVM ) (IQ

.

) (Zvi , 2012

Measuring the perceived effectiveness of

decision support systems and their impact on performance

) (652

77
) (Pearson, etal, 2012 The Role of E-Service Quality and
Information Quality in Creating Perceived Value: Antecedents to Web
.Site Loyalty





.
) (Nurach , etal , 2012 Factors That Improve the Quality of
Information Technology and Knowledge Management System for
.SME(s) in Thailand

) (770




.

78
) (Hosack, etal , 2012 A Look Toward the Future: Decision
.Support Systems Research is Alive and Well







.
) (Alnajjar &Al-Zoubi ,2012 Decision Support Systems and its
Field Study at Jordanian

Impact on Organization Empowerment

. Universities
)
( ) ( ) (10
) (5 ) (5

.

) (Reis & Lbler ,2012

The Decision Making Process as

Described by Individuals and Represented in Decision Support

. Systems . ) (DSS

79

) (AHP
:




.

) (Melouk , etal , 2013

Simulation optimization-based

.decision support tool for steel manufacturing

.

80

) 2 :(6

:
-1 :

.

-2 :

.

.

-3 :
.

81

) 3 :(1
) 3 :(2
) 3 :(3
) 3 :(4
) 3 :(5

) 3 :(6
) 3 :(7

82

) : (1-3 :







.

) : (2-3




.

) : (3-3


) (398 .

) (78 ) (78

83
) (71 ) (2
) (69
) (%88 .

) : (4-3 :

:
:


.

.
:


Likert
.SPSS

84
:
: )

( ) (20 :

11

) (5 -1 LiKert:

)(5

)(4

)(3

)(2

)(1

: ) (26
) (5 -1 LiKert:

)(5

)(4

)(3

)(2

)(1

: )
( ) (11 :

) (5 -1 LiKert:

)(5

)(4

)(3

)(2

)(1

) ( ) (57 LiKert

85

) : (5-3 ) (

HO3

HO4

HO2

HO1

HO5

)3(1

86

) : (6-3 :

Statistical Package for Social Sciences SPSS
Amos Ver.18 .
:

Cronbach Alpha .

.

T .

.

.

Path Analysis AMOS 18
.

:

: 1 2.33
2.33 3.66 3.67

87

) 3 :(7 :
- :




) (10 ) (%100
) (1

) ) (2006
) (2003 ) (2003 ) ( 2009 ) (2008
. (2010

- :
Cronbach Alpha

) (Alpha 0.60
) .(Sekaran, 2003 ) (1-3
.

88

)(1-3
) (

) (

20

0.856

11

0.758

12

0.763

13

11

0.827

26

0.924

11

0.711

31

0.623

32

0.698

33

0.617

34

0.653

57

0.937

) (1-3
) (0.711 ) (0.924 .
) .(0.937 Cronbach
Alpha
).(Sekaran, 2003

89

) 4 :(1

) 4 :(2

) 4 :(3

90

) 4 :(1:



.

) 4 :(2 :

:
)
(
" "t
) (1 - 4 ) (2 - 4 ).(3 - 4

91
) (1 -4
t

1
2
3
4

""t

*Sig

3.840

0.759

9.191

0.000

3.594

0.896

5.506

0.000

3.434

0.992

3.640

0.001

3.710

1.189

4.959

0.000

3.644

0.788

) (t ).(1.667) ( 0.05

) (t ).(3

) (1 - 4
.
) (3.840 -3.434 ) (3.644

. " "
) (3.840 ) (3.644
) (0.759 " "
) (3.434
) (3.644 ).(0.992

92


.



) (0.05 .

.
) (2 - 4
.
) (3.855 - 3.318 ) (3.588

. " "
) (3.855 )(3.588
) (0.575 "
" ) (3.318
) (3.588 ) .(1.077

93
.


) (0.05
.
.
)(2 - 4
t

1
2
3
4
5

""t

*Sig

3.724

0.783

7.680

0.000

3.855

0.575

12.333

0.000

3.318

1.077

2.457

0.017

3.652

0.904

5.988

0.000

3.391

0.771

4.215

0.000

3.588

0.547

) (t ).(1.667) ( 0.05

) (t ).(3

94
)(3 - 4
t

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11

""t

10

*Sig

3.188

1.047

1.495

0.031

4.579

0.694

18.890

0.000

3.362

0.954

3.153

0.000

3.739

0.699

8.773

0.000

3.826

0.706

9.717

0.000

3.507

0.833

5.055

0.000

4.115

0.795

11.647

0.000

3.898

0.957

7.799

0.000

4.000

0.954

8.699

0.000

1.985

0.848

-9.929

0.000

11

4.550

0.697

18.471

0.000

3.704

0.401

) (t ).(1.667) ( 0.05

) (t ).(3

) (3 - 4
.
) (4.579 -1.985 ) (3.704
.

95
"
" ) (4.579
) (3.704 ) (0.694 "
"
) (1.985 ) (3.704
).(0.848


.



) (0.05 .

.

96
:

" "t
) .(4 -4

)(4 -4
t

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

*Sig

"t

4.550

0.697

5.720

0.000

3.594

0.862

6.280

0.000

22

3.623

0.824

6.308

0.000

20

3.637

0.839

4.514

0.000

19

3.507

0.933

1.748

0.000

23

3.202

0.978

1.722

0.000

25

2.913

0.966

3.572

0.001

26

3.376

0.876

5.550

0.000

24

97
)(4 - 4
t

9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18

)
(

"t

20

*Sig

3.623

0.806

6.421

0.000

3.724

0.889

6.769

0.000

15

3.652

0.871

6.216

0.000

16

3.652

0.904

5.988

0.000

16

3.753

0.847

7.389

0.000

12

4.115

0.758

12.229

0.000

3.797

0.796

8.311

0.000

3.782

0.855

7.601

0.000

10

3.768

0.807

7.906

0.000

11

3.652

1.026

5.277

0.000

16

98
) (4 -4
t

19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26

"t

13

*Sig

3.739

0.699

8.773

0.000

3.739

0.851

7.210

0.000

13

3.840

0.884

7.891

0.000

3.942

0.783

9.984

0.000

3.985

0.675

12.127

0.000

3.971

0.821

9.813

0.000

3.898

0.972

7.676

0.000

4.115

0.932

9.946

0.000

3.701

0.507

) (t ).(1.667) ( 0.05

) (t ).(3

) (4 - 4
.
) (4.550 -2.913 ) (3.701
.
"

99
" ) (4.550
) (3.701 ) (0.697 "
"
) (2.913 )(3.701
).(0.966


.


) (0.05 .

.

100
:
)
(
" "t
) (5 -4 ) (6 - 4 ) (7 - 4 ).(8 - 4

)(5 -4
t

1
2

*Sig

""t

4.362

0.803

14.077

0.000

4.478

0.677

18.123

0.000

4.420

0.627

) (t ).(1.667) ( 0.05

) (t ).(3

) (5 - 4
.
) (4.478 -4.362 ) (4.420
.
"

101
" ) (4.478
) (4.420 ) (0.677 "
"
) (4.362 ) (4.420
) .(0.803

.



) (0.05 .
.
) (6 -4
.
) (4.463 - 4.173 ) (4.362
.
" "
) (4.463 ) (4.362
) (0.758 " "
) (4.173

102
) (4.362 ) .(0.663

.



) (0.05 .
.
)(6 - 4
t

1
2
3
4

"t

*Sig

4.449

0.697

17.262

0.000

4.463

0.758

16.023

0.000

4.173

0.663

14.702

0.000

4.362

0.593

19.071

0.000

4.362

0.446

) (t ).(1.667) ( 0.05

) (t ).(3

) (7 - 4
.

103
) (4.144 - 3.956 ) (4.050
.
" "
) (4.144 ) (4.050
) (0.712 " "
) (3.956
) (4.050 ) .(0.604

.



) (0.05 .
.

104
)(7 -4
t

1
2

""t

*Sig

4.144

0.712

13.342

0.000

3.956

0.604

13.138

0.000

4.050

0.563

) (t ).(1.667) ( 0.05

) (t ).(3

) (8 - 4
.
) (4.260 - 3.115 ) (3.681
.
"
" ) (4.260
) (3.681 ) (0.740 "
"
) (3.115 ) (3.681
) .(1.157

105
.



) (0.05 .
.

)(8 - 4
t

2


3

"t

*Sig

4.260

.7400

14.141

0.000

3.667

0.834

6.637

0.000

3.115

1.157

4.213

0.000

3.681

.5340

) (t ).(1.667) ( 0.05

) (t ).(3

106

) 4 :(3 :

HO1
)
( )

(
).( 0.05
Person

).(9 - 4

)(9 - 4

)(N = 69

**R = 0.646
P = 0.000

**R = 0.609
P = 0.000

*R = 0.297
P = 0.013

*R = 0.280
P = 0.020

*R = 0.287
P = 0.017

**R = 0.561
P = 0.000

**R = 0.596
P = 0.000

*R = 0.306
P = 0.011

*R = 0.282
P = 0.019

**R = 0.329
P = 0.006

**R = 0.675
P = 0.000

*R = 0.299
P = 0.012

*R = 0.253
P = 0.036

**R = 0.440
P = 0.000

**R = 0.411
P = 0.006

**R = 0.729
P = 0.000

*R = 0.345
P = 0.004

**R = 0.852
P = 0.000

**R = 0.400
P = 0.001

**R = 0.403
P = 0.001

107
) (9 -4


.

)** (0.852 ) ( 0.01

)* (0.253 ) ( 0.05 .

.

)( :
)
( )

(
).( 0.05

108
HO2
)
(
).( 0.05


) (
).(10 - 4

)(10 - 4

)(R2
)(R

0.181

0.425

4.772

*Sig

DF

65

68

* )( 0.05

0.005

*Sig

0.366

2.996

0.003

0.434

3.666

0.000

0.386

3.268

0.002

109
) (10 - 4 )
(
.

) (
(0.425) R

)0.05

.( R2 ) (0.181

) (0.181
(0.366)
(0.434) (0.386) .

(0.366)

) (0.434 (0.386) . F
) (4.772 ) .( 0.05
) (
:
)
(
).( 0.05

110



.

HO2-1

)

.(0.05


) .(11 -4

)(11 - 4

)(R

0.287

) ( R2

0.082

6.000

DF

67

68

*Sig

0.017

0.126

2.450

*Sig

0.017

111

) (11 -4
.




(0.287) R ) .( 0.05 R2 ) (0.082
) (0.082


.(0.126)

) .(0.126

F ) (6.000 ) .( 0.05
T ) (2.450 ) .( 0.05

:

)

.(0.05

112

HO2-2

)

.(0.05


).(12 -4

)(12 -4

)(R

0.329

) ( R2

0.108

8.139

DF

67

68

*Sig

0.006

0.208

2.853

) (12 -4
.

*Sig

0.006

113



(0.329) R ) .( 0.05 R2 ) (0.108
) (0.108


.(0.208)

) .(0.208

F ) (8.139 ).( 0.05
T ) (2.853 ).( 0.05

:

)

.(0.05

114
HO2-3

)

.(0.05


).(13 - 4

)(13 - 4

)(R

0.411

)(R2

0.169

13.653

DF

67

68

*Sig

0.000

0.354

3.695

) (13-4
.

*Sig

0.000

115
(0.411) R ) .( 0.05 R2 ) (0.169
) (0.169


.(0.354)

) .(0.354

F ) (13.653 )
.(0.05 T ) (3.695 )
.(0.05
:

)

.(0.05

116
HO3

) (
).( 0.05


:

HO3-1

)

.(0.05


).(14-4

117
)(14 - 4

)(R

)(R2

0.646

0.417

47.992

DF

67

68

*Sig

0.000

0.541

6.928

) (14 -4
.




(0.646) R )0.05

.( R2

) (0.417 ) (0.417


.(0.541)

).(0.541

F ) (47.992

*Sig

0.000

118
) .( 0.05 T ) (6.928
) .( 0.05
:

)

.(0.05

119
HO3-2

)

.(0.05


).(15 - 4

)(15 - 4

)(R

0.561

)(R2

DF

0.315

30.801

*Sig

*Sig

67

68

0.000

0.605

5.550

) (15- 4
.

0.000

120
(0.561) R )0.05

.( R2

) (0.315 ) (0.315


.(0.605)

).(0.605

F ) (30.801
) .( 0.05 T ) (5.550
) .( 0.05
:

)

.(0.05

121
HO3-3

)

.(0.05


).(16 - 4

)(16 - 4

)(R

)(R2

0.675

0.456

56.175

DF

67

68

*Sig

0.000

0.534

7.495

) (16 -4
.

*Sig

0.000

122
(0.675) R )0.05

.( R2

) (0.456 ) (0.456


.(0.534)

).(0.534

F ) (56.175
) .( 0.05 T ) (7.495
) .( 0.05
:

)

.(0.05

123
HO4

).( 0.05

).(17 - 4
)(17 -4

)(R

0.468

) ( R2

0.219

18.800

DF

67

68

*Sig

0.000

0.318

4.336

) (17 - 4
.


(0.468) R )

*Sig

0.000

124
0.05

( . R2 ) (0.219 ) (0.219

) .(0.318

) .(0.318 F ) (18.800
) .( 0.05 T ) (4.336
) .( 0.05
:

).( 0.05

125
HO5

)
(
).( 0.05

Path Analysis
Amos Ver. 18 SPSS



).(18 - 4

) (18 - 4


.

Chi2 )(16.961

) .( 0.05 Goodness of Fit Index

) (GFI ) (0.993
) ( . Comparative Fit Index

126
) (0.969) (CFI .
(RMSEA) Root Mean Square Error of Approximation
) (0.000 .
) (0.823


.
) (0.318


.



) (0.262
.
T )
( )(8.787
) ( 0.05 T
)
( ) (4.368 )
(0.05
.

127
. )(
:



).( 0.05

128

)(18 - 4

Chi2

16.961

GFI

CFI

*Sig

Direct Effect

0.993

0.969

Indirect
Effect

0.823

*Sig

DSS
IQ

8.787

0.000

*0.262

0.000

0.318

EDM
DSS

4.368

: Goodness of Fit Index must Proximity to one

: Comparative Fit Index must Proximity to one
Root Mean Square Error of Approximation
: Information Quality
: Decision Support System
: Effective Decision-Making

0.000

GFI
CFI
RMSEA
IQ
DSS
EDM

129



:
HO5-1



).( 0.05
Path Analysis
Amos Ver. 18 SPSS



).(19 - 4
) (19 - 4


.



Chi2 ) (24.045 ) .( 0.05
(GFI) Goodness of Fit Index ) (0.998
) ( .

130
(0.999) (CFI) Comparative Fit Index .
Root Mean Square Error of
(0.000) (RMSEA) Approximation .
) (0.416



.
) (0.318


.



) (0.132

. T )

( ) (6.979 ) ( 0.05 T
)
( ) (4.368
) ( 0.05


.

131
.
)( :



).( 0.05

132

)(19 - 4

Chi2

24.045

*Sig
GFI

0.998

CFI

0.999

0.000

Indirect
Effect

Direct Effect

0.416

DSS
IQT

6.979

*Sig

0.000

*0.132
0.318

EDM
DSS

4.368

: Goodness of Fit Index must Proximity to one

: Comparative Fit Index must Proximity to one
Root Mean Square Error of Approximation
: Information Quality Timing
: Decision Support System
: Effective Decision-Making

0.000
GFI
CFI
RMSEA

IQT
DSS
EDM

133
HO5-2



).( 0.05

Path Analysis
Amos Ver. 18 SPSS



).(20 - 4

) (20- 4


.



Chi2 ) (8.069 ) .( 0.05
(GFI) Goodness of Fit Index ) (0.995
) ( .
(0.961) (CFI) Comparative Fit Index .

134
Root Mean Square Error of
(0.000) (RMSEA) Approximation .
) (0.520



.
) (0.318


.



) (0.166

. T )

( ) (5.591 ) ( 0.05 T
)
( ) (4.368
) ( 0.05


.

135
.
)( :



).( 0.05

136

)(20 - 4

Chi2

8.069

*Sig
GFI

0.995

CFI

0.961

Indirect
Effect

Direct Effect

0.520

0.318

DSS
IQF

*Sig

5.591

0.000

*0.166

0.000

EDM
DSS

4.368

: Goodness of Fit Index must Proximity to one

: Comparative Fit Index must Proximity to one
Root Mean Square Error of Approximation
: Information Quality Forum
: Decision Support System
: Effective Decision-Making

0.000
GFI
CFI
RMSEA

IQT
DSS
EDM

137
HO5-3



).( 0.05

Path Analysis
Amos Ver. 18 SPSS



).(21 - 4

) (21- 4


.



Chi2 ) (18.223 ) .( 0.05
(GFI) Goodness of Fit Index ) (0.986
) ( .
(0.992) (CFI) Comparative Fit Index .

138
Root Mean Square Error of
(0.000) (RMSEA) Approximation .
) (0.854



.
) (0.318


.



) (0.272

. T )

( ) (7.551 ) ( 0.05 T
)
( ) (4.368
) ( 0.05


.

139
.
)( :



).( 0.05

140

)(21 - 4

Chi2

18.223

*Sig
GFI

0.986

CFI

0.992

Indirect
Effect

Direct Effect

0.854

0.318

DSS
IQC

*Sig

7.551

0.000

*0.272

0.000

EDM
DSS

4.368

: Goodness of Fit Index must Proximity to one

: Comparative Fit Index must Proximity to one
Root Mean Square Error of Approximation
: Information Quality Content
: Decision Support System
: Effective Decision-Making

0.000
GFI
CFI
RMSEA

IQC
DSS
EDM

141

) 5 :(1
) 5 :(2
) 5 :(3
) 5 :(4

142

) 5 :(1:

) 5 :(2:

.1

.

.

.
.2
.
.3
.
.4 )
( )

143

(
).( 0.05
.5 )

(
).( 0.05
.6
).( 0.05

.7
).( 0.05

.8
).( 0.05

.9
).( 0.05

.10
).( 0.05

.11
).( 0.05

.12
).( 0.05

144
.13


).( 0.05
.14


).( 0.05
.15


).( 0.05
.16


).( 0.05

) 5 :(3 :

.1

.

.2
.

145

.3
.

.4
.

.5
.
.6
.

) 5 :(4:

.1

.

.2

.

.3
.

.4
.

146
.5
.

.6
.


.7
.
.8
.

.9
.
.10
.

147

:
:

148

: :
.1 " (2007)
"
.
.2 ) " (2013 "
:
.3 ) " (2011
" :
.4 " (2009)
"

.5 " (2009)
" :
.6 ) " (2011
" :

.7 ) " (2010 "

.8 ) " (2006 "

149
.9 " (2010)

"
.10

) " (2005

"

.11

" (2009)

"

.12

) " (2012 "

:
.13

" (2009)

"
.14

" (2011)

" . 38 2
479-454 :
.15

" (2004)

"
31 1 42-23 :
.16

) " (2005 "

150
.17

) " (2004 "

.18

" (2006)

"
.
.19

" (2003)

"

.20

" (2010) "

.21

" (2008) "

:
.22

) " (2009 "

.23

" (2009) "

:
.24

" (2005) "

:
.25

" (2004) "

151
.26

" (2003)

"
.27

" (2008)

.28

" (2010) "

:
.29

" " (2010)

"

.
.30

" (2006)

"
.
.31

( 2007)

"

"
109 88-55 :
.32

) " (2009

"
5 4 495-475 :
.33

" (2010)

"
.

152

.34

" (2012)

"

.35

" (2008)

" :
.36

" (2008) "

:
.37

" (2012) "

:
.38

" (2013)

"
:
.39

" (2005 )

"
1 1 100-78 :
.40

) " (2010 "

:
.41

" (2011)

"
9 4 430-403 :

153
.42

" (2003)

"

.
.43

" (2003)

" .

.44

" (2008)

"
302
.45

" (2007) "

:
.46

" (2007)

"
178-134:
.47

" (2009) "

:
.48

" (2010) "

:
.49

" (2010) "

154

:
1. Adair, J (2010) " Decision Making & Problem solving Strategies
" ,Kogan page pubplished , Britain and USA.
2. Akrani,G (2010)"Decision Making Process In Management Problem Solving " , www.KALYAN CITY LIFE.com
3. Alnajjar , F , Al-Zoubi, M (2012) , " Decision Support Systems
and its Impact on Organization Empowerment Field Study at
Jordanian Universities" . Information and Knowledge
Management, Vol 2, No.4
4. ArAzy, O , NOV, O, SON, r, yEO , L (2011) , " Information
Quality in Wikipedia: The Effects of Group Composition and
Task Conflict " , Journal of Management Information Systems ,
Vol. 27, No. 4, p:7198.
5. Arnott , D , Pervan , G (2008) , " Eight key issues for the decision
support systems discipline " , Decision Support Systems 44 : 657
672
6. Asemi, A, Safari ,A, Zavareh ,A (2011) , " The Role of
Management Information System (MIS) and Decision Support
System (DSS) for Managers Decision Making Process " ,
International Journal of Business and Management , Vol. 6, No. 7
7. Bardaki, C , Pramatari, K (2007) ," ASSESSING
INFORMATION QUALITY IN A RFID-INTEGRATED SHELF
REPLENISHMENT DECISION SUPPORT SYSTEM FOR THE
RETAIL INDUSTRY " Research in progress , website Google ,
http://mitiq.mit.edu/iciq/pdf
8. Baskarada , S (2009) ," Information Quality Management
Capability Maturity Model " GWV fachverlage GMBH , Germany.
9. Bernstein, Jay H. (2009) , The Data-Information-KnowledgeWisdom Hierarchy andits Antithesis http://www.academia.edu
10. Blenko,M & Mankins,M (2012) , ," Measuring decision
effectiveness " Bain & Company, Inc. All rights reserved.

155
11. Borkowski, W (2006) ," Decision Implementation-Success or
Failure" www.Yahoo! Inc. All rights reserved
12. Bowman, A ,(2010) ," Five Problem-Solving and Decision
Making Obstacles" ,www.ohioconflictsolutions.com.
13. Burstein,F,Holsapple,C (2008) ," Handbook on Decision Support
Systems (1) " , springer Verlag Berlin Heidelberg.
14. Carmeli, A, Sheaffer, Z, Halevi, M (2009) , " Does participatory
decision-making in top management teams enhance decision
effectiveness and firm performance? " , Personnel Review, Vol.
38 Iss: 6 pp. 696 714
15. carroll ,L (2012) , " Delivering Business Intelligence with
Microsoft,SQLServer",www.mhprofessional.com/.../0071759387_
chap01.pdf - United States
16. Chen, C, Tseng, Y (2011) , " Quality evaluation of product
reviews using an information quality framework " , Decision
Support Systems 50 , 755768
17. Chen, S, Chiu, Kevin, C, Liao , Y (2011) , " A pilot study for
understanding the relationship of information system quality ,
relationship quality and loyalty " , Australian Journal of Business
and Management Research, p:1724.
18. Decision Innovation , (2013)"Improve outcomes using these
decision making tips " , www.decision-making-solutions.com.
19. Dermott,D (2013) " Effective Decision Making In Business " ,
www.decision-making-confidence.com
20. English, L ,(2009) , " Information Quality Applied" wiley
publishing , Inc , Canada
21. Forman,E&Selly,M, (2001) " Decision
www.World Scientific Publishing .com

By

Objectives"

156
22. Eppler,M , (2006) " Managing information Quality" Heidelberg
publishing , Inc , Germany
23. Frankel, E (2008) " Quality decision Management The Heart of
Effective Futures Oriented Managementy" springer Science
&business media B.V 2008.
24. Ge, M, Helfert, M , Jannach, D (2010) , " Informatio Quality
assessment validiting measurment dimensions and process " ,
ECIS 2011 Proceedings. Paper 75
25. Gruning,R,Kuhn,R(2009) " Succeful Decision making
springer Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

"

26. Haag , S, Cummings , M, McCubbrey, D (2009), " Management

Information Systems For the information age McGraw Hill
Irwin,USA
27. Hopkin,M
(2009)
"
leadonpurposeblog.com.

Timely

decisions

www.

28. Hosack , B, Hall , D , Paradice , D , Courtney , J (2012) , " A

Look Toward the Future: Decision Support Systems Research is
Alive and Well " , Journal of the Association for Information
Systems , Vol. 13, Issue 5, pp. 315-340
29. Jaafreh,A, Al-abedallat , A (2011) , " The Relationship between
National Culture and DSS Usage in Jordanian Banking: A
Proposed Conceptual Framework " , European Journal of
Economics, Finance and Administrative Sciences, Issue 42,
30. Kelkar , S (2009) " Information systems " PHI Learning private
limited , New delhi , India
31. Lima , L , Novais , P , Costa1, R, Cruz, J,(2010) , " group decision
making and quality of information in e-health systems " .
Published by Oxford University Press , Vol. 19 No. 2
32. Long ,L (2011) "Management Information System " Prentice
Hall International Inc , USA

157
33. Loshin , D (2001) "Enterprise Knowledge management the data
Quality Approach" Morgan Kaufmann Publisher , USA
34. Marakas , G (2003) " Decision support systems in the 21st
century" Pearson Education ,Inc , New Jersey ,USA .
35. Martin,G,Danzig, A, Wright, W,Flanary, R and Brown,F,(2012) "
School Leader Internship " http://www.eyeoneducation.com/
36. McMillan,A (2012) "PARTICIPATIVE MANAGEMENT "
www.referenceforbusiness.com
37. Melouk , S, Freeman, N , Miller ,D , Dunning, M (2013) , "
Simulation optimization-based decision support tool for steel
manufacturing " . Int. J. Production Economics 141 , 269276
n

38. Nurach, P, Thawesaengskulthai , D, Chandrachai, A (2012) ,

"Factors That Improve the Quality of Information Technology
and Knowledge Management System for SME(s) in Thailand " .
China-USA Business Review, Vol 11, No.3, 359-367
39. O'Brien , J , Marakas , G (2011) " Management Information
Systems" McGraw Hill compamies , USA
40. ODonoghue, J, OKane, T, Gallagher, J, Courtney, G, Aftab, A,
Casey, A, Torres, J and Angove, P (2011) , " Modified Early
Warning Scorecard The Role of Data/Information Quality within
the Decision Making Process ", The Electronic Journal
Information Systems Evaluation ,Vol 13 , Issue 3 , p100-109
41. Pearson , A, Tadisina, S & Griffin , C (2012) , " The Role of EService Quality and Information Qualityin Creating Perceived
Value: Antecedents to Web Site Loyalty " , Information Systems
Management , 29:3, 201-215
42. Pierce , E ,Thomas, L (2007) " ASSESSING INFORMATION
QUALITY USING PREDICTION MARKETS " , website Google,
http://mitiq.mit.edu/iciq/PDF
43. Pollard , C , Sipior , J , Leidner , D , Lai, L , Cheung , C , Cristobal
, D (2010) " Information Technology for Management " John
Wiley & Sons ,Asia .

158
44. Reis, E & Lbler, M (2012) " INTELLIGENT DECISION

SUPPORT" SYSTEMS FOR ADMISSION MANAGEMENT IN

HIGHER "EDUCATION INSTITUTES " , RAC, Rio de Janeiro
,Vol.16, No.3, pp. 397-417
45. Sauter,V(2010)

" Decision Support Systems for Business

Intelligence " , John Wiley &Sons .Inc, new Jersey

46. Sekaran, Uma,(2003) , " Research Method for Business : A skill

building approach " , 4th ed , Newyork : John Wily & Sons Inc.

47. Senn, J (2011) "Information system in management "Wadsworth

publishing co Belmont , California .
48. Tillman,F ,Cassone, D (2012) "A Professional's Guide to
Decision Science and Problem Solving: Define the Objectives and
Identify Metrics "www. Pearson Education, FT Press. All rights
reserved.
49. Turban , E, Sharda , R, Delen , D,Aronson , J, Liang , T, King, D
(2011) " Decision support and business intelligence systems "
Pearson Education ,Inc , New Jersey ,USA .
50. Vanden , J (2008) " Information Quality and options " , Published

by Oxford University ,
51. Vohra , R, Das, N (2011) " Intelligent decision support system

for admission management in higher education institutes " ,

International Journal of Artificial Intelligence & Applications
(IJAIA), Vol.2, No.4
52. Wang , R (2005) " Information Quality " M.E Sharep , Inc , New
York , USA
53. Wu , J , Zhaib, X , Zhangc, C , Xub , L (2011) , " sharing quality
information in adual supplier network : a game theoretic
perspective " , International Journal of Production Research , Vol.
49, No. 1, 199214
54. Zvi, T (2012) , " Measuring the perceived effectiveness of
decision support systems and their impact on performance " .
Decision Support Systems 54 , 248256

159

:
: )(

160

)(1

1
2

..
.

.
.

10

161

) (2

)(

162


-





.



.


.

) 00962785785725 ( 0096892949492
). (ab.alhasani99@gmail.com

163
) ( :

 : IQ
) :
( ) : ( ) :
(
.

 : DSS


.

 : EDM

.

164
) (
) (/ :

:
:
.1

.2

.3

.4

:
.5

.6

.7

.8

.9

:
.10

.11

.12

.13

.14

.15

.16

.17

.18

.19

.20

:
.21

165

.22

.23

.24

.25

.26

.27

.28

.29

.30

.31

.32

.33

.34

)
(

.35

.36

.37

.38

.39

.40

.41

166

.42

.43

.44

.45

.46

:
.47

.48

.49

.50

.51

.52

.53

.54

.55

.56

.57