The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/0263-5577.htm
IMDS
111,9
1418
Received 2 February 2011
Revised 16 June 2011
Accepted 16 June 2011
Industrial Management & Data
Systems
Vol. 111 No. 9, 2011
pp. 1418-1448
q Emerald Group Publishing Limited
0263-5577
DOI 10.1108/02635571111182773
The effect of critical success
factors on IT governance
performance
Edephonce N. Nfuka and Lazar Rusu
Stockholm University, Stockholm, Sweden
Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to analyse the effect of critical success factors (CSFs) on
information technology (IT) governance performance in public sector organizations in a developing
country such as Tanzania.
Design/methodology/approach – Based on a previous study and a further literature review,
a research model was developed for analysing the relationship between the CSFs found for effective IT
governance in this environment and their effect on IT governance performance. A survey research
method was applied for data collection and sample data from Tanzanian public sector organizations
(this environment) obtained. Subsequently, a second-generation structural equation modelling
technique, namely partial least squares, was applied to test statistically the correlated effect.
Findings – The results indicate significant small to strong positive correlated effects on IT
governance performance. The CSF with the most significant correlated effect was “involve and get
support of senior management” and the one with the least “consolidate, standardize and manage IT
infrastructure and application to optimize costs and information flow across the organization”. Finally,
a CSF model for effective IT governance in this environment was proposed.
Research limitations/implications – The findings imply that decision makers can optimize
IT-related plans and use of scarce resources by concentrating on the CSFs that have a significant effect
on IT governance performance that could lead to an improvement of public service delivery. This
study is limited to a single developing country but future studies can involve more such countries to
broaden the insights into the effect of CSFs on IT governance performance in such environments.
Originality/value – By establishing the correlated effects between these CSFs and the IT
governance performance, this study has revealed a significant impact of CSFs on IT governance
performance. It also suggests a CSFs model for effective IT governance in this less-resourced
environment in which such studies have not been conducted before, yet which are vital for analysing
and improving IT governance.
Keywords Tanzania, Developing countries, Public administration, Critical success factors,
IT governance performance, Correlated effect, Public sector
Paper type Research paper
1. Introduction
Recently, in many public sector organizations, the use of information technology (IT)
has become pervasive in endeavours to support and evolve public service delivery
(Ali and Green, 2007; UN, 2010). This pervasive use of technology has caused critical
dependency on IT, which in today’s economic and administrative world that deals with
government service delivery involves a complex mix of political, organizational,
technical and cultural concerns (Sethibe et al., 2007). This calls for a focus on effective
IT governance, which is an actively designed set of IT governance mechanisms that
encourage behaviours consistent with the organization’s mission, strategy and culture
(Weill and Ross, 2004).
 While there are various definitions of IT governance (Simonsson and Johnson, The effect of
2005), one of the most prevalent is: CSFs on IT
[. . .] an integral part of enterprise governance and has potential to provide mechanisms for governance
leadership and organizational structures and processes that ensure the organization’s IT
sustains and extends the organization’s strategies and objectives (ITGI, 2003).
Its potential lies in the fact that most significant IT concerns, current and future, are not 1419
technology related, but governance related (Guldentops et al., 2002). For example,
Weill and Ross (2004) showed at least a 20 percent better return on IT investment when
effective IT governance is in place. Thus, IT-governance-related success factors must be
entrenched and adhered to in order to do away with inadequate governance
effectiveness, which has negative consequences for the IT contribution to public service
delivery.
Several studies have looked at such a concern about inadequate governance
effectiveness (Weill and Ross, 2004; Ali and Green, 2007) and the necessary success
factors (Weill, 2004; Tan et al., 2009). However, none of these studies has been carried out
within the context of a developing country like Tanzania (Imran and Gregor, 2007;
Nfuka et al., 2009), which has low human development in contrast to developed countries
(UNDP, 2010). For example, while the human development index that includes life
expectancy, gross national income per capita and access to knowledge was 0.398 in
Tanzania, in developed countries it was mostly above 0.8.
Such governance concern in Tanzanian public sector organizations
(this environment) is due to the fact that today there is a remarkable amount of IT
applications. Examples include applications to manage government employees, income
tax and the distribution of medical supplies (Nfuka et al., 2009). However, such
applications among others are coupled with fragmented IT initiatives with loss of
synergies and economies of scale in and across organizations, leading to duplication of
effort and resources (Ndou, 2004; Bakari, 2007). For example, the Tanzanian
Government’s weakness in streamlining some IT applications and enabling
infrastructure cost US$200m and caused duplication of work (Maimu, 2006).
Such a concern is also due to the need to manage the rising IT investment
cost-effectively, e.g. the implementation of a national fibre-optic backbone was
estimated at US$170m (IP, 2010) and an upgrade of the HR system that manages
government employees at US$1m (PO-PSM, 2010). This also applies to a guide to
strategic IT integration into public sector reforms and poverty reduction and economic
growth strategy, in which most improvements are based (Mutagahywa et al., 2007).
This concern is amplified by constraints on IT resources, knowledge and culture in
this environment. For example, IT infrastructure accessibility that apart from
remarkable mobile penetration with tele-density increasing from 1 percent in 2000 to
about 46 percent by June 2010 (TCRA, 2010), there is still low access to the internet: the
available statistics indicate 1.6 percent of the population in contrast to more than
60 percent in most developed countries (IWS, 2010). Other constraints are awareness of
IT potential and familiarity and culture to embrace the optimal management and use of
IT (Nfuka et al., 2009; Rusu and Paul Tenga, 2010).
However, based on IT governance focus areas (ITGI, 2003; Buckby et al., 2008) and
five organizations in this environment, an exploratory study to address such a gap was
pursued (Nfuka and Rusu, 2010a). This study identified critical success factors (CSFs),
IMDS which are limited to a number of areas in which satisfactory results ensure success in
111,9 an organization (Rockart and van Bullen, 1986), in this case effective IT governance
implementation. Though, based on this study, it is reasonable to believe there is a
correlated effect between these CSFs and the IT governance performance, this has not
been statistically confirmed.
In this paper, we address such a gap by hypothesizing that the correlated effect exists
1420 and therefore analysing it in this environment. This is achieved based on a survey
research method, sample data from Tanzanian public sector organizations and partial
least squares (PLS)-based structural equation modelling to analyse the proposed model.
The remainder of the paper is organized as follows. Section 2 covers IT governance CSFs
and performance. This is followed by the research model in Section 3 and the
methodology in Section 4. The results and discussion appear in Sections 5 and 6,
respectively, and concluding remarks and future research in Section 7.

2. IT governance CSFs and performance

2.1 IT governance CSFs
CSFs are the limited number of areas in which satisfactory results will ensure a
successful competitive performance for the individual, department or organization
(Rockart and van Bullen, 1986). They are used to direct the focus towards the factors
that define key areas central to the organizations’ objectives in which to invest their
resources and time to ensure success (Ward and Peppard, 2002; Caralli, 2004). Owing to
their importance, CSFs are widely researched (Gil-Garcia and Pardo, 2005; Tan et al.,
2009) and applied in many organizations from different perspectives: from a single
project to the whole organization’s strategic direction (Esteves, 2004; Fortune and
White, 2006). However, in the area of IT governance, and considering CSFs as essential
elements for its effective implementation, few CSF studies have been undertaken, while
IT governance has become critical to most organizations today (Sethibe et al., 2007).
An earlier study on CSFs for effective IT governance in this environment identified a
number of related CSFs (Nfuka and Rusu, 2010a). These include the governance of IT
structures (Guldentops, 2004) and stakeholders’ involvement (ITGI, 2003). Additionally,
there are: defining and tracking benefits (ITGI and PwC, 2006), well-communicated IT
strategies and policies (Bowen et al., 2007) and the integration of IT/business decisions
(Ribbers et al., 2002). Furthermore, there are IT/business alignment-related CSFs, the top
ranked being management’s commitment to the strategic use of IT (Teo and Ang, 1999),
and six enablers of IT/business alignment that include IT/business partnership
(Luftman et al., 1999). Similarly, there are minimum conditions for implementing IT
governance, the most important including IT leadership (de Haes and van Grembergen,
2008). Moreover, the study identified such CSFs in the public sector including aligned
incentives (Weill, 2004) and senior management commitment (Tan et al., 2009).
In identifying these CSFs, the referred-to study (Nfuka and Rusu, 2010a) undertook a
literature review to explore the existing IT governance CSFs in general and the public
sector in particular. To gain a holistic view of CSFs, the IT governance life cycle was
considered mainly based on IT governance’s five focus areas, i.e. strategic alignment,
value delivery, risk management, resource management and performance management
(ITGI, 2003; Buckby et al., 2008). This was achieved through relevant journals and
conferences including access to Google Scholar. As a result of this process, 100 papers
were explored, ten of which were found to be relevant, as highlighted already.
Given the similarities and different levels of granularity, the referred-to study The effect of
harmonized them logically, obtaining 17 CSFs that were operationalized through CSFs on IT
questionnaires and face-to-face interviews in five organizations. Through ranked
responses, interview comments and validation, some CSFs were dropped, merged and governance
adjusted as per contextual needs, leading to five-focus-areas-based 11 CSFs for effective
IT governance in this environment (Figure 1).
Different to the existing CSFs in IT-governance-related studies like Guldentops (2004) 1421
and Tan et al. (2009) pointed out above, these CSFs were identified with holistic view and

IT leadership to understand the business goals and IT

contribution and bring it to the management attention

Involve and get support of senior management

Strategic Alignment

Encourage and support IT/Business communication and

partnership

Engage key stakeholders

Define and align IT strategies to corporate strategies and

cascade them down in an organization

Consolidate IT structures to ensure responsiveness and

accountability
Risk Management
Value Delivery &

Consolidate, communicate and enforce policies and

guidelines for cost-effective acquisition and use of IT
across the organization

Consolidate, standardize and manage IT infrastructure to

optimize costs and infromation flow across the
Management

organization
Resource

Provide IT governance awareness and training for optimal

IT use

Attract, develop and retain competitive IT professionals

Measurement
Performance

Consolidate performance measures and benchmarks to

Figure 1.
track and demonstrate success
CSFs for effective IT
governance in public
sector organizations in a
developing country like
Tanzania
Source: Nfuka and Rusu, 2010a
IMDS a focus to this environment (Nfuka and Rusu, 2010a). In this way, the newly re-established
111,9 CSFs included: “IT leadership to understand the business goals and IT contribution and
to bring this to the attention of management”. This was due to the criticality of IT
leadership understanding business imperatives and necessary IT intervention while the
top management are aware of IT’s potential. Others were: “engage key stakeholders” due
to the broader and harmonized view of the approach to e-government, “attract, develop
1422 and retain competitive IT professionals” due to the criticality of sustainable skills in such
a widespread and low-paying environment and “consolidate, standardize and manage IT
infrastructure and application to optimize costs and information flow across the
organization” given the critical need for facilities, harmonized IT initiatives and
cost-effectiveness. Furthermore, was “consolidate, communicate and enforce policies and
guidelines for cost-effective acquisition and use of IT across the organization” due to the
crucial need for enforcement across the organization, sharing of scarce IT resources and
creating and preserving IT value in this environment.
The remaining CSFs were also considered due to the contextual elements in such an
environment including required political and senior management support and
prioritization of scarce resources amid the still many pressing basic needs. Others were
due to the required accountability from both IT and business, change of mindset,
integration of IT in reform programmes, active monitoring and demonstration of IT’s
contribution (Nfuka and Rusu, 2010a).

2.2 IT governance performance

IT governance performance is the rate of IT governance effectiveness or how effective IT
governance is, i.e. how well its arrangements encourage desirable behaviour and
ultimately performance goal achievement in the organization (Weill and Ross, 2004;
Huang et al., 2010). This performance can be measured by the value of services that an IT
organization delivers from a business point of view. The simplest way to measure such
performance in the organization is reported in a study by Weill and Ross (2004), which
was conducted on 250 case studies of IT governance and published in a book that may be
the most cited in the area today. The measure is defined as the effectiveness of IT
governance in delivering four outcomes weighted by their importance to the
organization: the cost-effective use of IT, the effective use of IT for asset utilization,
the effective use of IT for growth and the effective use of IT for business flexibility. This
measure provides IT value from a business perspective and is well recognized and used
by researchers and practitioners (Simonsson et al., 2010).

3. Research model and hypotheses development

This study investigates the research model shown in Figure 2. It includes 11 hypotheses
in five IT governance focus areas suggested as independent variables (IV). These
hypotheses are based on the earlier-identified CSFs for effective IT governance in this
environment (Figure 1) that were achieved based on existing IT-governance-related
CSFs studies like Weill (2004) and Tan et al. (2009) presented in Subsection 2.1 and five
Tanzanian public sector organizations’ case studies. Also in the model is the IT
governance performance (presented in Subsection 2.2) suggested as a dependent
variable (DV). Though, based on these studies and organizations’ case studies in which
these CSFs were identified, it is reasonable to believe a correlated effect between them
 IT leadership to understand the business goals and IT The effect of
contribution and bring it to the management attention CSFs on IT
Involve and get support of senior management governance
H1
Encourage and support IT/Business communication
and partnership H2

H3
1423
Engage key stakeholders

Define and align IT stratgies to corporate strategies H4

and cascade them down in an organization H5

Consolidate IT structures to ensure responsivensess IT

and accountability H6 governance
performance
Consolidate, communicate and enforce policies and
guidelines for cost-effective acquisition and use of IT H7
across the organization
H8
Consolidate, stadardize and manage IT
infrastructure and application to optimize costs and H9
information flow across the organization
H10
Provide IT governance awareness and training for
optimal IT use H11

Attract, develop & retain competitive IT professionals

Consolidate performance measures and benchmarks Figure 2.

to track and demonstrate success Research model

and the IT governance performance; this is not widely statistically confirmed in this
environment.
In this section, we attempt to provide support for their relationship in the Tanzanian
public sector. Such support including construct items are based on earlier studies as
discussed below and complimented by Appendix 1. Consequently, each hypothesis is
created as follows: Hx: CSFx will positively influence IT governance performance;
CSFx is one of 11 CSFs and Hx the hypothesis.

3.1 Independent variables

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

3.2 Dependent variable

The DV in this study is IT governance performance, which was revealed by Weill and
Ross (2004) in a study on how top performers manage IT. Its measurement allows
an organization to reveal its performance through four outcomes/objectives: The effect of
cost-effective use of IT, effective use of IT for asset utilization, effective use of IT CSFs on IT
for growth and effective use of IT for business flexibility. Also, the approach is simpler
and has been used in several studies (Simonsson et al., 2010). governance

4. Research methodology
The aim of this study, which took place from January to May 2010, was to analyse the 1427
effect of CSFs on IT governance performance in public sector organizations from a
developing country: Tanzania. Given the nature of the problem, context and aim, we
used a survey research method that studies a population sample and provides the
possibility to generalize (Fowler, 2002).

4.1 The population and sample

Defining the concerned population and the subsequent determination of a sample frame,
method and size are paramount for a less-biased sample and the ability to generalize
(Kothari, 2004). Our study population consisted of public sector organizations, mainly
ministries, departments and agencies (MDAs), of which there are currently 75 (PO-PSM,
2010). The unit of analysis was individuals consisting of IT and business management
personnel, mainly directors of departments and heads or managers of units. The
sampling frame was mainly the Tanzanian Government directory, which provided
contacts for MDAs (PO-PSM, 2010). Disproportional stratification was applied prior to
sample selection to avoid under-representing IT or business respondents. Since the
directory did not have e-mail addresses for all individuals, it was mainly complemented
by the participants’ list of a workshop of capacity building on effective management of
IT. This list with e-mail addresses resulted from invitations to MDAs requesting the
participation of both IT and business management personnel.
The determination of the minimum sample size took into consideration the use of
PLS and Monte Carlo simulations on confirmatory factor analysis (Marsh et al., 1998)
from which the results suggested minimum sample sizes that can be calculated as
follows:

n $ 50r2 2 450r þ 1100 Therefore n $ 100

where, n is the minimum sample size; r is the ratio of indicators to latent variable, for
which in this case the maximum ratio is 5.
This consideration resulted in a minimum required sample size of 100. Also, it is
complemented by Urbach and Ahlemann (2010), who indicated minimum
recommendations that range from 30 to 100 cases. However, for many social research
studies like this, the response rates are typically 40-50 percent (Salkind, 2005). Taking
into account a minimum size of 100 and a rate of 50 percent to be on the safe side, together
with the fact that the respondents were mainly heads of departments or units who tend to
have a busy schedule in such an environment, 198 questionnaires in total were sent out.
Given our unit of analysis, these questionnaires were sent directly to two to three
individual respondents in each MDA.

4.2 Operationalization of the study

The operationalization was based on the research model in Figure 2. The CSFs as IV
were tested by the 11 developed hypotheses, each with 3-5 measurement items
IMDS (MacCallum et al., 1999) on the level of their fulfilment in the organization on a five-point
111,9 Likert scale, i.e. “1” – strongly disagree, “2” – disagree, “3” – undecided, “4” – agree and
“5” – strongly agree (Kothari, 2004). IT governance performance as a DV was tested by
four objectives (outcomes) on the influence of their measure of success (Q2) weighted by
how important they are (Q1) in their organizations. This was achieved by Weill and
Ross’s (2004) performance measurement instrument scaled “not important/not
1428 successful to very important/very successful”. The measurement items and source of
construct are found in Appendix 1.
The DV result for each respondent was computed by the formula below (Weill and
Ross, 2004):

P 
n¼124 importance of outcome{Q1}*influence of IT governance{Q2} *100
Governance performance ¼ P
n¼124 5ðimportance of outcomeÞ

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

questionnaire (Fowler, 2002) and distributed mainly through e-mail and in some
cases physical delivery. This also applies to reminders, a stage at which we
additionally used phones.

4.3 Data analysis approach

The analysis is mainly based on the developed research model (Figure 2) and the use of
PLS: variance-based structural equation modelling and second-generation data
analysis techniques (Fornell and Larcker, 1981; Wold, 1985). PLS is useful for testing
statistical conclusion validity (Cook and Campbell, 1979). It answers a set of
interrelated research questions in a single, systematic and comprehensive analysis by
modelling the relationships among multiple independent and dependent constructs
simultaneously (Gefen et al., 2000). Differently, from multiple regressions, it assesses
relationship pathways simultaneously, thus there are no statistical issues with a lack of
connection between runs. It also tends to be resilient in the face of multicollinearity and
distribution-free (Gustafsson and Johnson, 2004; Garson, 2008). It was adopted in our
study due to the Likert scale’s non-parametric nature and the high number of IV thus
likely elements of multicollinearity. Also, it has been used widely in information
systems research (Urbach and Ahlemann, 2010). Specifically, we used SmartPLS,
a prevalent PLS with favourable requirements, methodological options, readily
available support and ease of use (Ringle et al., 2005; Urbach and Ahlemann, 2010).
The test for the proposed research model is based on two PLS key components: the
measurement and structural models (Fornell and Bookstein, 1982; Hair et al., 1995). The
former focuses on the relationship between the unobserved variables not directly
measured (latent variables) and the measurable items (manifest variables). The latter
focuses on the hypothesized relationships, i.e. paths, between latent variables.
Following our research model (Figure 2) and operationalization details, Table I
indicates the latent and manifest variables and respective short codes for reference in
this study.
The measurement model was assessed in terms of convergent and discriminant
validity with a focus on fit and constructs validity. The convergent validity was met
when each measurement item correlated strongly with its proposed construct (Table II).
This also applies to discriminant validity, which was met when each measurement
 The effect of
IV/DV variables Measurement items
(latent variables) Short code (manifest variables) No. of items CSFs on IT
H1 ITLeadp ITLeadp1 to ITLeadp3 3
governance
H2 SenMag SenMag1 to SenMag4 4
H3 ComPart ComPart1 to ComPart5 5
H4 KeyStak KeyStak1 to KeyStak3 3 1429
H5 ITCorStr ITCorStr1 to ITCorStr5 5
H6 ITStruc ITStruc1 to ITStruc5 5
H7 PolGuid PolGuid1 to PolGuid5 5
H8 ITInfr ITInfr1 to ITInfr3 3
H9 ITGAwTr ITGAwTr1 to ITGAwTr3 3
H10 ITProf ITProf1 to ITProf3 3
H11 PerfMeas PerfMeas1 to PerfMeas4 4
IT governance performance ITGPerf ITGPerfCalMeas Compared using four items Table I.
Research model variables
Note: Variables/items names in Appendix 1 and short codes

Type of ass. Criteria Guideline Source

Measurement Convergent validity

model
Item loading $0.4 Hair et al. (2006)
Composite reliability .0.5 Fornell and Larcker (1981)
AVE $0.5 Fornell and Larcker (1981)
Cronbach’s alpha coefficient $0.7 Gefen and Straub (2005)
t-value of outer loading $1.96 Gefen and Straub (2005)
Discriminant validity
Item cross loadings to Item loads on its own
construct correlations construct $ to other
constructs Gefen and Straub (2005)
Square root of AVE of each Square root of AVE Gefen and Straub (2005),
construct correlation with between construct and its Fornell and Larcker (1981)
others measures $ to other
constructs
Structural
model Variance (R 2)
Variance in DV $0.5 Hair et al. (1995)
Path coefficients’ significance
$0.1 small, $0.3 Table II.
Path coefficients moderate, $ 0.5 strong Cohen (1988) Criteria for assessment
Significance of path of measurement and
coefficients (t-value) $1.96 (0.05), $ 2.58 (0.001) Hair et al. (1995) structural models

item correlated weakly with all the other constructs except for the one with which it is
proposed to be associated.
The structural model was assessed for our hypotheses test. It focused on the ability of
the DV to explain variance in the IV and the significance of path coefficients (Table II).
The analysis was complemented by the use of SPSS to store and produce
descriptive statistics.
IMDS 4.4 Pilot study
111,9 A pilot test was performed to verify the internal consistency of the construct (Fowler,
2002) based on 25 individuals from 25 MDAs. The selection was based on the Tanzanian
Government directory, balance of IT/business personnel and related experience and the
availability of an individual to comment on and try out the questionnaire for correctness
and time needed to complete it. The results showed minor issues, for instance, with the
1430 wording in the introduction and constructs. Adjustments were also made to some
measures for H6 and an item was added in H7. The time to complete the questionnaire
was an average of 30 minutes, which is considered acceptable (Rea and Parker, 2005).
Moreover, the pilot showed that the preliminary estimates of the reliability and validity
of construct measurement, i.e. average variance extracted (AVE), Cronbach’s alpha and
composite reliability, were acceptable above 0.5, 0.7 and 0.5, respectively (Fornell and
Larcker, 1981; Nunnally and Bernstein, 1994) (Table III).

5. Results
5.1 Sample characteristics
Out of 198 questionnaires sent out, a total of 137 were returned, accounting for
69 percent. However, two of them were only half completed, thus the usable ones
totalled 135, corresponding to 68 percent. These were from 51 out of 75 MDAs to which
questionnaires had been sent for individuals. The distribution based on organization
type and the role of individuals is shown in Table IV.
Furthermore, the sample characteristic was indicated by respondents’ experience in
the use and management of IT that mostly were “beyond five years”. Also, regarding
familiarity with IT governance implementation, the majority indicated being four on a
five-point Likert scale (Table IV).

5.2 Test of the measurement model

The criteria discussed for data analysis (Table II) were used to validate the
measurement model. Two main validity aspects were tested, i.e. convergent and
discriminant validity.
Convergent validity. Convergent validity was assessed by item reliability and the
lowest item loading score was 0.658 (Figure 3), thus above the minimum requirement of
0.4 (Hair et al., 2006). The corresponding t-values of outer loading were greater than
2.58 for all the loaded measurement items, thus highly significant at 0.001 (Appendix 2).

Construct AVE Cronbach’s a Composite reliability

ITLeadp (H1) 0.6382 0.7987 0.8976

SenMag (H2) 0.7604 0.8177 0.9406
ComPart (H3) 0.8003 0.8471 0.9231
KeyStak (H4) 0.6463 0.7877 0.8449
ITCorStr (H5) 0.8345 0.8731 0.9380
ITStruc (H6) 0.7714 0.8493 0.9099
PolGuid (H7) 0.5715 0.8547 0.9259
ITlnfr (H8) 0.6901 0.7952 0.8693
ITGAwTr (H9) 0.7462 0.8088 0.9216
Table III. ITProf (H10) 0.5641 0.8650 0.8988
Pilot constructs validity PerfMeas (H11) 0.6824 0.8907 0.8952
 The effect of
Frequency Percentage
CSFs on IT
1. Respondent’s organization type (n ¼ 135) governance
Ministry 58 43.0
Department 6 4.4
Agency 71 52.6
2. Role in the organization (IT or business) (n ¼ 135) 1431
– directors and heads/managers
IT 89 65.9
Business 46 34.1
3. Experience and familiarity a Median
Experience of use of IT (years) 5
Experience of managing IT (years) 5
Familiarity with IT governance 4
Notes: aOn a five-point Likert scale (1 – not at all, 5 – beyond five years); (1 – not at all, 5 – to a great Table IV.
extent) Sample characteristics

Figure 3.
Some results of the
measurement model and
structural model values
IMDS Convergent validity was also checked by assessing the internal consistency of the
111,9 constructs through composite reliability (Fornell and Larcker, 1981). The results
indicated to be above the threshold of 0.5, ranging between 0.844 and 1. This also applies
to the traditional measure of consistency (Cronbach’s alpha), which was between 0.773
and 1 and thus above the threshold of 0.7. Similarly, internal consistency was assessed
by the more conservative test, i.e. AVE, and the result was 0.521, thus above threshold of
1432 0.5. These three internal consistency values: AVE, Cronbach’s alpha and composite
reliability are shown in Figure 3.
Discriminant validity. This validity was measured in two steps. The first one
examined the item cross loading related to a construct. This test indicated the loadings
of the items on their constructs to be higher (shaded) than the related cross loadings
(Appendix 3). In the second step and following Fornell and Larcker (1981), we checked
the square root of AVE for each construct and associated intercorrelations. The results
indicated the square root of AVE to exceed the corresponding intercorrelations as
shown in Table V. Therefore, both steps met criteria for this validity.

5.3 Test of the structural model and hypotheses

The criteria discussed for data analysis (Table II) were used for structural model and
hypotheses tests. The DV’s ability to explain the variance in the IV and the significance
of path coefficients were tested. The result indicated that 87 percent of the variance in
IT governance performance (Figure 3) can be explained by the 11 hypotheses, thus
above 50 percent (Hair et al., 1995). It also indicated the positive path coefficients to be
in the range of 0.170-0.515 (Figure 3; Table VI), which, according to Cohen (1988),
is between small and strong relationship strength. This also applies to the t-values
(significance) generated by SmartPLS bootstrapping, which were above 1.96.
Therefore, the 11 hypotheses were significant, though variably: 0.05 (above 1.96)
and 0.001 (above 2.58). These results of CSFs’ influence on IT governance performance
are further presented in five IT governance focus areas, i.e. IT strategic alignment,
value delivery, risk management, resource management and performance management
(ITGI, 2003; Buckby et al., 2008).
IT strategic alignment. The hypotheses (CSFs) from this focus area were significant
weak to strong positive effects with “involve and get support of senior management”
being the highest (g ¼ 0.515, t ¼ 4.645) in the whole study. Next, in this focus area
were “engage key stakeholders” (g ¼ 0.180, t ¼ 2.463) and “encourage and support

Construct H3 H5 H9 H8 H1 H10 H6 H4 H11 H7 H2

ComPart (H3) 0.77 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

ITCorStr (H5) 0.6994 0.87 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
ITGAwTr (H9) 0.6647 0.6808 0.86 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
ITInfr (H8) 0.4751 0.4744 0.4404 0.87 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
ITLeadp (H1) 0.6409 0.6506 0.5946 0.5332 0.85 0 0 0 0 0 0
ITProf (H10) 0.6677 0.666 0.6394 0.4421 0.644 0.86 0 0 0 0 0
Table V. ITStruc (H6) 0.6129 0.6639 0.6269 0.5144 0.6795 0.5927 0.79 0 0 0 0
Intercorrelation of KeyStak (H4) 0.6246 0.6675 0.5985 0.3856 0.6549 0.5947 0.5957 0.85 0 0 0
constructs and the PerfMeas (H11) 0.6764 0.6481 0.6517 0.465 0.6451 0.6278 0.6172 0.618 0.83 0 0
corresponding square PolGuid (H7) 0.6028 0.5056 0.5242 0.3624 0.5311 0.5518 0.5068 0.4347 0.4671 0.72 0
root of AVE SenMan (H2) 0.6691 0.6241 0.613 0.5381 0.6203 0.6272 0.6392 0.6245 0.643 0.5105 0.79
 The effect of
Construct Path coeff. (g) t-values (t)
CSFs on IT
SenMan (H2) 0.515 4.645 * * governance
ITCorStr (H5) 0.396 2.973 * *
ITStruc (H6) 0.316 2.654 * *
ITLeadp (H1) 0.201 2.925 * *
ComPart (H3) 0.392 2.290 * 1433
PolGuid (H7) 0.285 2.460 *
PerfMeas (H11) 0.210 2.351 *
ITGAwTr (H9) 0.201 2.149 *
KeyStak (H4) 0.180 2.463 *
ITProf (H10) 0.176 2.037 *
ITInfr (H8) 0.170 2.338 *
Notes: Strength and significance of path coefficients; path coefficient significance (Hair et al. (1995)):
significant at: *0.05 (t . 1.96) and * *0.001 (t . 2.58); path coefficient strength (Cohen (1988)): Table VI.
(,0.1 small, , 0.3 moderate, ,0.5 strong) Testing of hypotheses

IT/business communication and partnership” (g ¼ 0.392, t ¼ 2.290). Though they

have small to moderate path coefficient strength, their significant effect indicates their
influence. This also applies to “define and align IT strategies to corporate strategies
and cascade them down in an organization” (g ¼ 0.396, t ¼ 2.973) and “consolidate IT
structures to ensure responsiveness and accountability” (g ¼ 0.316, t ¼ 2.654). Finally,
“IT leadership to understand the business goals and IT contribution and bring it to the
attention of the management” (g ¼ 0.201, t ¼ 2.925) attained small path coefficient
strength yet with a highly significant effect.
IT value delivery and risk management. “Consolidate, communicate and enforce
policies and guidelines for cost-effective acquisition and use of IT across the
organization” had a small path coefficient but with a significant positive effect
(g ¼ 0.285, t ¼ 2.460). This positive significant effect indicated the importance of such
a practice to IT governance performance.
IT resource management. The correlated effects in this focus area were indicated by
small but significant path coefficients. Significance of “provide IT governance
awareness and training for optimal IT use” (g ¼ 0.201, t ¼ 2.149) and “attract, develop
and retain competitive IT professionals” (g ¼ 0.176, t ¼ 2.037) emphasized sustainable
competencies for success. “Consolidate, standardize and manage IT infrastructure and
application to optimize costs and information flow across the organization” (g ¼ 0.170,
t ¼ 2.338) surprisingly had the least path coefficient strength in the whole study.
IT performance management. This area consisted of “consolidate performance
measures and benchmarks to track and demonstrate success”. It showed a small but
significant effect (g ¼ 0.210, t ¼ 2.351) and thus its importance to IT governance
performance.

6. Discussion
As we saw, the results indicated a significant effect of CSFs on IT governance
performance. “Involve and get support of senior management” being the most
significant in the whole study, is certainly due to its importance in resource prioritization
and the strategic use of IT given the scarce resources and still competing basic needs in
this environment (Nfuka et al., 2009). This also applies to the fact that users tend
IMDS to conform to their bosses’ expectations and what they follow-up closely (Nfuka and
111,9 Rusu, 2010a). The finding complements Weill and Ross’s (2004) study, which found that
IT being a vital part of business strategies and operations implies a need for greater
involvement at such a level for higher IT governance performance.
While “engage key stakeholders” and “encourage and support IT/business
communication and partnership” had small to moderate path coefficient strength, the
1434 former’s significant effect is certainly due to cross-agency functions, thus a need for
common goals and actions. This contributes to stakeholder theory, which emphasizes
inside-in and inside-out stakeholder involvement for success (Freeman, 1984). The
latter’s significant effect is certainly due to the required shared understanding of IT’s
potential for business people and business imperatives for IT people (Nfuka and Rusu,
2010a). This complements Lee et al. (2008) study, which found a need for awareness of
each other’s imperatives to attain higher performance and value from IT.
“Define and align IT strategies with corporate strategies and cascade them down in
an organization” and “consolidate IT structures to ensure responsiveness and
accountability” showed high significance. This is certainly due to the shown importance
of aligned and cascaded IT/business strategies down to operational levels and right
structures across the widespread MDAs (Nfuka and Rusu, 2010a). They complement
studies like that of Guldentops (2004), which showed that governance success requires
such alignment in defining and eventually implementing these strategies and
Huang et al. (2010) on correct governance structures. This also applies to Weill and Ross
(2004) and governance theory (Garson, 2008) on fact that the more you cascade them
down taking into account the organizational experiences of those at the operational level,
the more effective will be the implementation. Additionally “IT leadership to understand
the business goals and IT contribution and to bring it to the attention of the
management”, though highly significant, its small path coefficient strength was
surprising given its much-attributed effectiveness (de Haes and van Grembergen, 2008).
However, this indicates how important other basic aspects still are, like high-level
support and structures for this to happen.
Furthermore, even with a small path coefficient, the significance effect of
“consolidate, communicate and enforce policies and guidelines for cost-effective
acquisition and use of IT across the organization” showed its importance in such
widespread MDAs. This is certainly due to the controls; changes and enforcements vital
for people to abide by when performing IT-enabled functions (Nfuka and Rusu, 2007,
2010b). It complements the studies of Weill (2004) and Huang et al. (2010) that found a
need of such practice for higher IT governance performance.
Also, the significance of “provide IT governance awareness and training for optimal
IT use” indicated its importance due to the required competencies for cost-effective
management and the use of IT in this environment (Nfuka and Rusu, 2010a). This also
applies to “attract, develop and retain competitive IT professionals”, which emphasized
attracting and sustaining such competencies. These complement the studies of Peterson
(2004) and Tan et al. (2009), which found governance-related awareness and
competencies vital for higher IT governance performance. Additionally, though
“consolidate, standardize and manage IT infrastructure and application to optimize costs
and information flow across the organization” has been a major concern (Peterson, 2004;
Nfuka and Rusu, 2010a), its smallest path coefficient significance shows the priority to be
still on the basics like awareness, structures and alignment for this to happen.
 Moreover, the significance of “consolidate performance measures and benchmarks The effect of
to track and demonstrate success” was certainly due to the importance of setting and CSFs on IT
adhering to performance benchmarks in such an environment with diverse roles and
accountabilities (Nfuka and Rusu, 2010a). This also applies to demonstrating IT governance
success with both IT and business metrics (ITGI, 2003) and the “best value” rather
than “profit” nature of the public sector (Sethibe et al., 2007). It complements studies
like that of van Grembergen and de Haes (2009) on performance measurable beyond 1435
conventional accounting and Weill and Ross (2004) on the cost-effective use of IT and
service improvement. However, it differs from Ali and Green (2007), who found no
support for corporate performance systems. This could be due to necessary active
performance measures and demonstration of success for current and future IT support
and prioritization, for example.
Finally, even with constraints on IT resources, knowledge and culture, these 11 CSFs
that cut across IT governance focus areas showed a positive influence on IT
governance performance. This suggests a foundation for IT governance improvement
in the form of a CSF model for effective IT governance (Figure 4). The model links
CSFs and IT governance performance and includes contextual elements for the former
and governance outcomes for the latter.

7. Concluding remarks and future research

This paper analyses the effect of 11 CSFs for effective IT governance on IT governance
performance in public sector organizations in the developing country of Tanzania.
A research model for this study was developed and tested statistically using sample
data from 51 organizations. In accordance with our data analysis approach mainly
using PLS-based structural equation modelling, these CSFs across five IT governance
focus areas showed a significant small to strong positive correlated effect on IT
governance performance.
One CSF, namely “involve and get support of senior management”, indicated
strong path coefficient strength and a highly significant effect on IT governance
performance. The rest of the CSFs had a significant effect and small to moderate path
coefficient strength with “consolidate, standardize and manage IT infrastructure and
application to optimize costs and information flow across the organization” being the
smallest.
These CSFs, even with the constraints on IT resources, knowledge and culture,
have shown significant positive correlated effects on IT governance performance.
This suggests a foundation for IT governance improvement in the form of a CSF model for
effective IT governance in this environment. The results from this study also have
important implications both for practitioners and for the academic world.
From a practitioner’s viewpoint, the results imply that decision makers can optimize
their IT-related plans and use of scarce resources by concentrating on the CSFs that
have a significant effect to IT governance performance and could lead to an
improvement of public service delivery. Specifically, they imply:
.
Active involvement of senior management, stakeholders as well as both IT/business
personnel in IT functions. This can increase IT resources prioritization and optimal
use in this environment with scarce resources and IT becoming a vital part of
business strategies and operations.
IMDS Contextual Elements
111,9 • IT leadership Business
understand goals/imperatives
• Top/business management
understand IT opportunities
• IT leadership competencies
Critical Success Factors
Strategic Alignment
IT leadership to understand the business goals and IT
contribution and bring it to the management attention

• Political support
• Involve and get support of senior management
1436 •
Committed top management
Action oriented involvement
• Resource prioritization

• IT/Business communication
Encourage and support IT/Business communication and
• IT opportunities/business goals partnership
• IT/Business cooperation
• Broader view of needs/approach Engage key stakeholders
to solution/e-government
• Leapfrog widely use of IT
• Shared services Define and align IT strategies to corporate strategies and
• IT strategic plan/communicating cascade them down in an organization IT
• IT/Business alignment governance
• IT Integration in perf. reforms Performance
Consolidate IT structures to ensure responsiveness and
• Active IT committees accountability • Cost-effective
• Role & responsibilities/categories use of IT
• Experts/managers accountability
• Effective use of
• IT usage enforcement with Value Delivery & Risk Management IT for growth
rewards/punishment
• Sharing IT resources Consolidate, communicate and enforce policies and • Effective use of
• Return on Investment guidelines for cost-effective acquisition and use of IT IT for resources
• Controls- value preservation
across the organization utilization
• Meager IT resources/Asset
utilization • Effective use of
IT for business
• Optimize costs, information Resource Management flexibility
flow & increase responsiveness
• Providing IT facilities Consolidate, standardize and manage IT infrastructure and
• Standardized and sharable IT application to optimize costs and infromation flow across
resources the organization
• Governance of IT awareness
and know-how Provide IT governance awareness and training for optimal
• Change of Mindset IT use
• Best practices

• Reasonable remunerations
Attract, develop and retain competitive IT professionals
• IT/Business Competencies
• Innovations/Sustainability skills
Figure 4. • Active performance measures Performance Measurement
CSF model for effective IT • Demonstrate IT success/
governance in the public Contribution Consolidate performance measures and benchmarks to
• Performance aligned rewards & track and demonstrate success
sector organizations from penalties
a developing country
Note: Case of Tanzania

.
Alignment of IT with business strategies and enabling IT structures. This can
make possible successful integration of IT with effects in the public service
delivery improvement in and across these widespread organizations.
.
Consolidation and communication of IT-governance-related policies and guidelines.
This can enhance the control, changes and enforcement of IT-governance-related
policies and guidelines for performing IT-enabled functions.
.
IT governance awareness, training as well as attracting and retaining
competitive IT leadership and professionals. This can strengthen and sustain
required competencies for harmonized, standardized and cost-effective IT
applications in this environment.
 .
IT business-value-oriented performance measures and benchmarking in this The effect of
environment. This can strengthen demonstration of success and enablement of CSFs on IT
continuous business-oriented improvement and higher contribution of IT to
business. governance
From an academician’s point of view, the findings can be used to widen the CSFs scope
for effective IT governance, for instance, across five IT governance focus areas and a 1437
dimension of public sector organizations in a developing country setting. Also, it can
be used to validate the existing IT governance frameworks usefulness like COBIT. For
instance, activity goals to achieve COBIT’s IT processes could be strengthened based
on results of and insights of the revealed CSFs effects, e.g. enforcing IT policies in
communicate management aims and direction.
Moreover, the findings may present an interesting avenue for further research on
CSFs. One way could be to use them to develop guidelines for improving IT
governance performance. For example, this could be in the form of a CSFs framework
for implementing effective IT governance in this environment. It would also be
interesting to involve more than one developing country in a single study to compare
and broaden the insights into CSFs’ effect on IT governance performance in public
sector organizations. This approach will also extend the generalizability from
organizations within the country to similar developing countries.

References
Ali, S. and Green, P. (2007), “IT governance mechanisms in public sector organizations:
an Australian context”, Journal of Global Information Management, Vol. 15 No. 4, pp. 41-63.
Bakari, J.B. (2007), “Holistic approach for managing ICT security in non-commercial
organizations: a case in a developing country”, doctoral thesis, Stockholm University,
Stockholm.
Bowen, P.L., Cheung, M.D. and Rohdeb, F.H. (2007), “Enhancing IT governance practices:
a model and case study of an organization’s efforts”, International Journal of Accounting
Information Systems, Vol. 8 No. 3, pp. 191-221.
Buckby, S., Best, P. and Stewart, J. (2008), “The current state of information technology
governance literature”, in Cater-Steel, A. (Ed.), Information Technology Governance and
Service Management Frameworks and Adaptations, Idea Group Publishing, Hershey, PA,
pp. 1-43.
Caralli, R.A. (2004), “The critical success factor method: establishing a foundation for enterprise
security management”, Technical Report CMU/SEI-2004-TR-010, Software Engineering
Institute, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA.
Cohen, J. (1988), Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioural Sciences, 2nd ed.,
Lawrence-Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ.
Cook, T.D. and Campbell, D.T. (1979), Quasi-experimentation: Design and Analysis for Field
Settings, Rand-McNally, Chicago, IL.
de Haes, S. and van Grembergen, W. (2008), “An exploratory study into the design of an IT
governance minimum baseline through Delphi research”, Communications of the AIS,
Vol. 22 No. 24, pp. 443-58.
Esteves, J. (2004), “Definition and analysis of critical success factors for ERP implementation
projects”, doctoral thesis, Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya, Barcelona.
IMDS Fornell, C. and Bookstein, F.L. (1982), “Two structural equation models: LISREL and PLS applied
to consumer exit-voice theory”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 19 No. 4, pp. 440-52.
111,9
Fornell, C. and Larcker, D. (1981), “Structural equation models with unobservable variables and
measurement error”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 18 No. 1, pp. 39-50.
Fortune, J. and White, D. (2006), “Framing of project critical success factors by a systems model”,
International Journal of Project Management, Vol. 24, pp. 53-65.
1438 Fowler, F.J. (2002), Survey Research Methods, 3rd ed., Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.
Freeman, R.E. (1984), Strategic Management: A Stakeholder Approach, Pitman, Boston, MA.
Garson, G.D. (2008), “Partial least squares regression and governance theory”, Statnotes: Topics
in Multivariate Analysis, available at: http://faculty.chass.ncsu.edu/garson/pa765/statnote.
htm (accessed 15 December 2010).
Gefen, D. and Straub, D. (2005), “A practical guide to factorial validity using PLS-graph: tutorial
and annotated example”, Communications of the AIS, Vol. 16 No. 25, pp. 91-109.
Gefen, D., Straub, D. and Boudreau, M. (2000), “Structural equation modeling techniques and
regression: guidelines for research practice”, Communications of the AIS, Vol. 7, pp. 1-78.
Gil-Garcia, J.R. and Pardo, T.A. (2005), “E-government success factors: mapping practical tools to
theoretical foundations”, Government Information Quarterly, Vol. 22 No. 2, pp. 187-216.
Guldentops, E. (2004), “Key success factors for implementing IT governance: let’s not wait for
regulators to tell us what to do”, Information Systems Control Journal, Vol. 2, pp. 22-3.
Guldentops, E., van Grembergen, W. and de Haes, S. (2002), “Control and governance maturity
survey: establishing a reference benchmark and a self-assessment tool”, Information
Systems Control Journal, Vol. 6, pp. 32-5.
Gustafsson, A. and Johnson, M.D. (2004), “Determining attribute importance in a service
satisfaction model”, Journal of Service Research, Vol. 7 No. 2, pp. 124-41.
Hair, J.F. Jr, Anderson, R., Tatham, R. and Black, W. (1995), Multivariate Data Analysis,
Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ.
Hair, J.F. Jr, Black, W., Babin, B., Anderson, R. and Tatham, R. (2006), Multivariate Data Analysis,
6th ed., Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ.
Huang, R., Zmud, R.W. and Price, R.L. (2010), “Influencing the effectiveness of IT governance
practices through steering committees and communication policies”, European Journal of
Information Systems, Vol. 19 No. 3, pp. 288-302.
Imran, A. and Gregor, S. (2007), “A comparative analysis of strategies for e-government in
developing countries”, Journal of Business Systems, Governance and Ethics, Vol. 2 No. 3,
pp. 89-99.
IP (2010), “Tanzania launches first phase of national fibre backbone”, Information Policy Blog
(IP), available at: www.i-policy.org/2010/05/tanzania-launches-first-phase-of-national-
fibre-backbone.html (accessed 30 May 2010).
ITGI (2003), Board Briefing on IT Governance, 2nd ed., available at: www.itgi.org (accessed
7 January 2010).
ITGI and PwC (2006), “IT governance in practice: insight from leading CIOs”, available at: www.
itgi.org (accessed 3 April 2010).
IWS (2010), Internet World Statistics (IWS), available at: www.internetworldstats.com/stats.htm
(accessed 15 June 2010).
Kothari, C.R. (2004), Research Methodology: Methods and Techniques, 2nd ed., New Age
Publications, New Delhi.
Lawry, R. and Waddell, D. (2008), “Roles, responsibilities and futures of chief information officers The effect of
(CIOs)”, International Review of Business Research Papers, Vol. 4 No. 2, pp. 163-75.
CSFs on IT
Lee, S.M., Kim, K., Paulson, P. and Park, H. (2008), “Developing a socio-technical framework for
business-IT alignment”, Industrial Management & Data Systems, Vol. 108 No. 9, pp. 1167-81. governance
Luftman, J., Papp, R. and Brier, T. (1999), “Enablers and inhibitors of business-IT alignment”,
Communications of the AIS, Vol. 1 No. 11, pp. 1-32.
MacCallum, R.C., Widaman, K.F., Zhang, S. and Hong, S. (1999), “Sample size in factor analysis”, 1439
Psychological Methods, Vol. 4 No. 1, pp. 84-99.
Maimu, D. (2006), “Poor ICT policy cost government billions, says expert”, Daily News, Seminar
for district officers in Tanzania, available at: http://dailynews-tsn.com/page.php?id¼4006
(accessed 1 March 2010).
Marsh, H.W., Hau, K.T., Balla, J.R. and Grayson, D. (1998), “Is more ever too much? The number
of indicators per factor in confirmatory factor analysis”, Multivariate Behavioral Research,
Vol. 33 No. 2, pp. 181-220.
Mutagahywa, B., Kinyeki, C. and Ulanga, J. (2007), “A review of e-government related
interventions in PSRP I and advice on a strategy framework towards PSRP II”, available
at: www.utumishi.go.tz/index.php?option¼com_docman&task¼cat_view&gid¼62&
Itemid¼57 (accessed 1 February 2010).
Ndou, V.D. (2004), “E-government for developing countries: opportunities and challenges”, The
Electronic Journal on Information Systems in Developing Countries, Vol. 18 No. 1, pp. 1-24.
Nfuka, E.N. and Rusu, L. (2007), “Management of IT-enabled change in a public organization in
Tanzania”, International Journal of Information Systems and Change Management, Vol. 2
No. 4, pp. 334-49.
Nfuka, E.N. and Rusu, L. (2010a), “Critical success factors for effective IT governance in the
public sector organizations in a developing country: the case of Tanzania”, in Trish, A.,
Turpin, M. and van Deventer, J.P. (Eds), Proceedings of the 18th European Conference on
Information Systems, University of Pretoria, Pretoria, pp. 1-15.
Nfuka, E.N. and Rusu, L. (2010b), “The IT governance maturity in the public sector organizations
in a developing country: the case of Tanzania”, Proceedings of the 16th Americas
Conference on Information Systems, Lima, Peru, AIS Electronic Library (AISeL), Atlanta,
GA, pp. 1-12.
Nfuka, E.N., Rusu, L., Johannesson, P. and Mutagahywa, B. (2009), “The state of IT governance
in organizations from the public sector in a developing country”, Proceedings of the 42nd
Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, Big Island, HI, IEEE Computer
Society Press, Washington, DC, pp. 1-12.
Nunnally, J.C. and Bernstein, I.H. (1994), Psychometric Theory, 3rd ed., McGraw-Hill,
New York, NY.
Peterson, R.R. (2004), “Crafting information technology governance for today’s turbulent
environment”, Information Systems Management, Vol. 21 No. 4, pp. 7-21.
PO-PSM (2010), “About President Office, Public Service Management (PO-PSM) and related facts
for this study”, available at: www.utumishi.go.tz (accessed 15 March 2010).
Rea, L.M. and Parker, R.A. (2005), Designing and Conducting Survey Research: A Comprehensive
Guide, 3rd ed., Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA.
Ribbers, P.M.A., Peterson, R.R. and Parker, M.M. (2002), “Designing IT governance processes:
diagnosing contemporary practices and competing theories”, Proceedings of the 35th
Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, Big Island, HI, Computer Society
Press, Los Alamitos, CA, pp. 1-12.
IMDS Ringle, C.M., Wende, S. and Will, A. (2005), SmartPLS 2.0 (M3) Beta, University of Hamburg,
Hamburg, available at: www.smartpls.de (accessed 22 December 2010).
111,9
Rockart, J. and van Bullen, C. (1986), “A primer on CSFs”, in Rockart, J. and Bullen, C.V. (Eds),
The Rise of Managerial Computing, Dow Jones-Irwin, Homewood, IL, pp. 383-423.
Rusu, L. and Paul Tenga, R. (2010), “IT governance in healthcare sector: a case study of a public
and private hospital in Tanzania”, International Journal of Information Systems and
1440 Change Management, Vol. 4 No. 4, pp. 314-37.
Salkind, N.J. (2005), Exploring Research, 6th ed., Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ.
Sethibe, T., Campbell, J. and McDonald, C. (2007), “IT governance in public sector organisations:
examining the differences and defining future research directions”, Proceedings of the 18th
Australasian Conference on Information Systems, Toowoomba, Australia, University of
Southern Queensland, Toowoomba, pp. 833-42.
Simonsson, M. and Johnson, P. (2005), “Defining IT governance – a consolidation of literature”,
working paper, Department of Industrial Information and Control Systems, Royal Institute
of Technology (KTH), Stockholm, 15 November.
Simonsson, M., Johnson, P. and Ekstedt, M. (2010), “The effect of IT governance maturity on IT
governance performance”, Information Systems Management, Vol. 27 No. 1, pp. 10-24.
Tan, W., Cater-Steel, A. and Toleman, M. (2009), “Implementing IT service management: a case
study focussing on CSFs”, Journal of Computer Information Systems, Vol. 50 No. 2,
pp. 1-12.
TCRA (2010), Tele-density Statistics: Tanzania Communication Regulatory Authority (TCRA),
available at: www.tcra.go.tz/publications/telecomStatsJune10.html (accessed 30 July 2010).
Teo, S. and Ang, J. (1999), “Critical success factors in the alignment of IS plans with business
plans”, International Journal of Information Management, Vol. 19 No. 2, pp. 173-85.
UN (2010), United Nations e-Government Survey 2010, available at: http://unpan1.un.org/
intradoc/groups/public/documents/UN-DPADM/UNPAN038853.pdf (accessed 15 May
2010).
UNDP (2010), Human Development Report 2010, available at: http://hdr.undp.org/en/media/
HDR_2010_EN_Complete.pdf (accessed 15 November 2010).
Urbach, N. and Ahlemann, F. (2010), “Structural equation modeling in information systems
research using partial least squares”, Journal of IT Theory & Application, Vol. 11 No. 2,
pp. 5-40.
van Grembergen, W. and de Haes, S. (2009), Enterprise Governance of Information Technology:
Achieving Strategic Alignment and Value, Springer, New York, NY.
Ward, J. and Peppard, J. (2002), Strategic Planning for Information Systems, 3rd ed., Wiley,
Chichester, pp. 41, 211.
Warland, C. and Ridley, G. (2005), “Awareness of IT control frameworks in an Australian state
government: a qualitative case study”, Proceedings of the 38th Hawaii International
Conference on System Sciences, Kona, HI, IEEE Computer Society Press, Washington, DC,
pp. 1-10.
Weill, P. (2004), “Don’t just lead, govern: how top-performing firms govern IT”, MIS Quarterly
Executive, Vol. 3 No. 1, pp. 1-17.
Weill, P. and Ross, J.W. (2004), IT Governance: How Top Performers Manage IT Decision Rights
for Superior Results, Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA.
Wold, H. (1985), “Partial least squares”, in Kotz, S. and Johnson, N.L. (Eds), Encyclopedia of
Statistical Sciences, Vol. 6, Wiley, New York, NY, pp. 581-91.

Variable
IT leadership to understand the business goals Effective IT leadership competencies
and IT contribution and to bring it to the
attention of the management (H1)
Involve and get support of senior management Senior management support to strategic use of
(H2)
Encourage and support IT/business
communication and partnership (H3)
Engage key stakeholders (H4)
sources of constructs in
Variables, questions and
the study
Table AI.
Measurement items (to what extent can the
following influence positively IT governance
performance in your organization?) Source
Appendix 1
Luftman et al. (1999), Lawry and Waddell (2008),
IT leadership understanding of business goals/ de Haes and van Grembergen (2008), Nfuka and
imperatives and actionable IT intervention Rusu (2010a)
Management team understanding of IT
opportunities and contribution
Luftman et al. (1999), Teo and Ang (1999), Weill
IT and Ross (2004), Tan et al. (2009), Nfuka and
Senior management action-oriented Rusu (2010a), Huang et al. (2010)
involvement
High-level political support to strategic use of IT
IT-related resources prioritization
Shared understanding of business IT goals, Teo and Ang (1999), Luftman et al. (1999),
strategies and imperatives Bowen et al. (2007), Lee et al. (2008), ITGI (2003),
Business and IT cooperation formally/ Nfuka and Rusu (2010a)
informally
IT governance mechanisms’ transparency to
managers
Business involvement in IT initiatives and vice
versa
Frequent communication between business and
IT
Building collaborative relationships with key Ribbers et al. (2002), Weill and Ross (2004),
stakeholders Nfuka and Rusu (2010a)
Creating shared understanding among key
stakeholders on common agenda
Stakeholders actively participate in IT planning
and implementation of shared resources
services
(continued)
governance
1441
CSFs on IT
The effect of

Table AI.
Variable
Define and align IT strategies to corporate
strategies and cascade them down in an
organization (H5)
Consolidate IT structures to ensure
responsiveness and accountability (H6)
Consolidate, communicate and enforce policies Provision of effective IT processes guidelines
and guidelines for cost-effective acquisition and for management and IT staff/users
use of IT across the organization (H7)
111,9
IMDS
1442
Measurement items (to what extent can the
following influence positively IT governance
performance in your organization?) Source
Alignment of IT business goals, strategy and Luftman et al. (1999), Ribbers et al. (2002), ITGI
operations (2003), Guldentops (2004), van Grembergen and
de Haes (2009), Weill and Ross (2004), Nfuka
and Rusu (2010a)
A well-communicated IT strategy and policy
down to all levels of organization
Well-aligned and prioritized IT projects
Active participation of IT people in corporate
strategy and business people in IT strategy
planning
Aligned IT to performance reforms in public
sector
Participatory designed and widely Weill (2004), Guldentops (2004), Bowen et al.
communicated IT governance mechanisms on (2007), de Haes and van Grembergen (2008), Tan
IT structure with a focus on partnership et al. (2009), Nfuka and Rusu (2010a)
ownership and accountability
Having active IT steering committees that
oversee IT investment, prioritization and
operations
Having IT project committee to oversee/monitor
the project activities and outcome
CIO on executive management and reporting to
CEO
Clear and adequate role and responsibilities/
categories
ITGI (2003), Weill (2004), ITGI and PwC (2006),
Guldentops (2004), Tan et al. (2009), de Haes and
van Grembergen (2008), Nfuka and Rusu (2010a)
Implementing an IT governance and control
framework
(continued)
 Measurement items (to what extent can the
following influence positively IT governance
Variable performance in your organization?) Source

Consolidate, standardize and manage IT
infrastructure and application to optimize costs facilities
and information flow across the organization
(H8)
Provide IT governance awareness and training Provision of governance of IT training to IT/
for optimal IT use (H9)
Attract, develop and retain competitive IT
professionals (H10)
IT project governance/management
methodologies
Clear IT budget control, reporting and
responsible usage
Enforced IT-governance-related policies and
guidelines
Effective provision and management of IT Teo and Ang (1999), ITGI (2003), Peterson
(2004), Nfuka and Rusu (2010a)
Standardized and sharable IT infrastructure
and applications to optimize costs and
information flow
Provision of efficient and reliable services to
user departments
Tan et al. (2009), Weill (2004), Warland and
business management and experts for cost- Ridley (2005), ITGI (2003), Nfuka and Rusu
effective management and optimal use of IT (2010a)
Provision of governance of IT awareness to
users for optimal and cost-effective use of IT
Incorporation of change management in IT
governance best practices awareness and
training
A focus on attracting and retaining core IT/ Peterson (2004), Tan et al. (2009), Warland and
business competencies related to planning, Ridley (2005), Nfuka and Rusu (2010a)
development and management of IT resources
Recognition and encouragement of IT
innovations, appropriateness and excellence
(continued)
governance
CSFs on IT

Table AI.
1443
The effect of
 111,9
IMDS

1444

Table AI.
Measurement items (to what extent can the
following influence positively IT governance
Variable performance in your organization?) Source

Skilled IT personnel as working capital of

Consolidate performance measures and
benchmarks to track and demonstrate success
(H11)
Perceived overall IT governance performance
successful IT operations
Clearly set IT targets in business operations, Peterson (2004), Weill (2004), ITGI and PwC
customer excellence, skills/innovation and (2006), Ali and Green (2007), Sethibe et al. (2007),
corporate contribution Tan et al. (2009), ITGI (2003), Nfuka and Rusu
Clearly set, active and monitored performance (2010a)
measures for business value from IT
Demonstration of IT success/contribution
Performance-aligned rewards and penalties
How important are the following outcomes of Weill and Ross (2004)
your IT governance? (Ql)
Cost-effective use of IT
Effective use of IT for growth
Effective use of IT for resources utilization
Effective use of IT for business flexibility
What is the influence of IT governance in your
business on these outcomes (as measures of
success)? (Q2)
 Appendix 2

Construct Item Loading t-value Construct Item Loading t-value

ComPart (H3) ComPart1 0.6978 14.1201 ITStruc (H6) ITStruc1 0.8048 28.685
ComPart2 0.7746 18.7393 ITStruc2 0.7505 15.851
ComPart3 0.7811 25.1465 ITStruc3 0.8323 23.9953
ComPart4 0.7614 17.9359 ITStruc4 0.7815 19.1132
ComPart5 0.8264 33.8818 ITStruc5 0.7903 24.5792
ITCorStr (H5) ITCorStr1 0.8432 28.4487 KeyStak (H4) KeyStak1 0.8676 39.9986
ITCorStr2 0.8917 53.836 KeyStak2 0.9146 50.2303
ITCorStr3 0.8719 48.9537 KeyStak3 0.7566 15.9627
ITCorStr4 0.8649 37.0259 PerfMeas (H11) PerfMeas1 O.8043 27.0603
ITCorStr5 0.8644 46.5652 PerfMeas2 0.825 26.0293
ITGAwTr (H9) ITGAwTr1 0.8632 32.7141 PerfMeas3 0.8532 39.0568
ITGAwTr2 0.8489 25.845 PerfMeas4 0.8218 25.0513
ITGAwTr3 0.888 46.0158 PolGuid (H7) PolGuid1 0.6874 9.6161
ITInfr (H8) ITInfr1 O.8568 32.3175 PolGuid2 0.6605 9.7642
ITInfr2 0.8944 32.2872 PolGuid3 O.8013 22.6378
ITInfr3 0.8612 35.6243 PolGuid4 0.7877 18.4032
ITLeadp (H1) ITLeadp1 0.8789 28.7775 PolGuid5 0.6577 11.1795
ITLeadp2 0.8966 48.7199 SenMan (H2) SenMan1 0.7914 29.1383
ITLeadp3 0.7778 18.1476 SenMan2 0.847 28.5762
ITProf (H10) ITProf1 0.8627 48.8103 SenMan3 0.8218 31.7047
ITProf2 0.8924 43.438 SenMan4 0.6937 13.2616
ITProf3 0.8221 19.5951
governance

Outer loading bootstrap

analysis
CSFs on IT

Table AII.
1445
The effect of
 111,9
IMDS

1446

Table AIII.

loadings and
cross-loadings
Items (manifest variables)
ComPart ITCorStr ITGAwTr ITInfr ITLeadp ITProf ITStruc KeyStak PerfMeas PolGuid SenMan
Construct (H3) (H5) (H9) (H8) (H1) (H10) (H6) (H4) (H11) (H7) (H2) ITGPerf

ComPart1 0.6978 0.3886 0.3318 0.3262 0.3894 0.381 0.3318 0.3524 0.3939 0.4971 0.3935 0.5483
Appendix 3

ComPart2 0.7746 0.4648 0.4989 0.3206 0.5087 0.4321 0.4669 0.4401 0.5216 0.4767 0.4969 0.6287
ComPart3 0.7811 0.5892 0.5381 0.3813 0.5433 0.5849 0.5212 0.537 0.6135 0.425 0.5432 0.6134
ComPart4 0.7614 0.6309 0.6014 0.3839 0.4635 0.5371 0.5214 0.5354 0.4882 0.4651 0.5336 0.5893
ComPart5 0.8264 0.6078 0.5286 0.4142 0.5493 0.6231 0.5053 0.5289 0.5715 0.4603 0.5961 0.621
ITCorStr1 0.5547 0.8432 0.5519 0.3962 0.5747 0.5423 0.5289 0.5373 0.5254 0.4598 0.5089 0.5716
ITCorStr2 0.619 0.8917 0.6223 0.4072 0.5583 0.5659 0.6066 0.6427 0.613 0.4165 0.5604 0.59
ITCorStr3 0.6579 0.8719 0.6227 0.5114 0.5741 0.6312 0.6046 0.6447 0.5723 0.4735 0.5714 0.6268
ITCorStr4 0.5943 0.8649 0.5885 0.4051 0.585 0.6175 0.5787 0.5287 0.5756 0.4965 0.5493 0.5959
ITCorStr5 0.6024 0.8644 0.5619 0.324 0.5261 0.5223 0.556 0.5331 0.5191 0.3364 0.5115 0.5422
ITGAwTr1 0.5682 0.6062 0.8632 0.3999 0.5611 0.5868 0.5303 0.5377 0.5678 0.4461 0.5032 0.6387
ITGAwTr2 0.5611 0.5374 0.8489 0.4091 0.4603 0.498 0.5379 0.4676 0.5461 0.4047 0.5153 0.6171
ITGAwTr3 0.5986 0.6246 0.888 0.3391 0.5232 0.5759 0.5619 0.549 0.5802 0.5093 0.5741 0.6601
ITInfr1 0.4002 0.3775 0.4055 0.8568 0.4675 0.4491 0.4559 0.3267 0.4524 0.3299 0.5078 0.5417
ITInfr2 0.4074 0.3834 0.35 0.8944 0.4426 0.375 0.3653 0.2913 0.3621 0.3163 0.4228 0.4998
ITInfr3 0.4327 0.4766 0.3919 0.8612 0.4807 0.3285 0.5164 0.3861 0.396 0.2996 0.4708 0.5321
ITLeadp1 0.5525 0.5515 0.5094 0.4919 0.8789 0.5202 0.5546 0.5389 0.5303 0.4602 0.5254 0.6682
ITLeadp2 0.5346 0.5482 0.5284 0.5079 0.8966 0.5668 0.6017 0.569 0.5867 0.4875 0.5658 0.7122
ITLeadp3 0.5619 0.5743 0.484 0.3497 0.7778 0.5686 0.5884 0.5758 0.5346 0.4068 0.4938 0.5644
ITProf1 0.5833 0.5489 0.5624 0.4141 0.6019 0.8627 0.5448 0.5742 0.5756 0.5236 0.6034 0.7262
ITProf2 0.6084 0.6492 0.5727 0.3993 0.5851 0.8924 0.5353 0.5119 0.5059 0.4569 0.515 0.5879
ITProf3 0.5268 0.5238 0.5099 0.3173 0.4602 0.8221 0.4383 0.4308 0.5288 0.4298 0.4826 0.5735
ITStruc1 0.5313 0.6015 0.5736 0.4239 0.5727 0.5237 0.8048 0.5501 0.5508 0.4324 0.5545 0.6513
ITStruc2 0.2727 0.2738 0.337 0.3093 0.4262 0.3318 0.7505 0.2745 0.3177 0.332 0.3517 0.4798
ITStruc3 0.6022 0.5841 0.5635 0.3628 0.5999 0.5732 0.8323 0.5196 0.5833 0.3503 0.5312 0.6273
ITStruc4 0.4776 0.5391 0.4309 0.5017 0.5152 0.4533 0.7815 0.4807 0.4925 0.4664 0.5083 0.575
ITStruc5 0.4977 0.5777 0.5391 0.4293 0.5547 0.435 0.7903 0.4923 0.4635 0.4195 0.5553 0.6155
KeyStak1 0.5346 0.5606 0.5088 0.3768 0.54 0.4539 0.5191 0.8676 0.4843 0.4462 0.5389 0.6676
KeyStak2 0.4929 0.5691 0.5305 0.2893 0.5661 0.5279 0.5251 0.9146 0.5658 0.333 0.5733 0.6108
KeyStak3 0.5737 0.5771 0.4861 0.3119 0.5701 0.5483 0.471 0.7566 0.5332 0.316 0.4738 0.5217
PerfMeas1 0.5151 0.5329 0.5625 0.4577 0.529 0.5021 0.5283 0.557 0.8043 0.3715 0.5287 0.5784
(continued)
 ComPart ITCorStr ITGAwTr ITInfr ITLeadp ITProf ITStruc KeyStak PerfMeas PolGuid SenMan
Construct (H3) (H5) (H9) (H8) (H1) (H10) (H6) (H4) (H11) (H7) (H2) ITGPerf

PerfMeas2 0.532 0.563 0.577 0.3603 0.5016 0.5133 0.4852 0.4577 0.825 0.3663 0.5289 0.64
PerfMeas3 0.62 0.5272 0.4646 0.4036 0.5704 0.5675 0.5537 0.5324 0.8532 0.4286 0.533 0.6363
PerfMeas4 0.5657 0.5187 0.553 0.3207 0.5316 0.4903 0.4741 0.5004 0.8218 0.3766 0.5355 0.6148
PolGuid1 0.3693 0.3917 0.2951 0.2446 0.3422 0.3812 0.3341 0.2415 0.3083 0.6874 0.3578 0.3907
PolGuid2 0.3173 0.2773 0.3331 0.0701 0.3457 0.4065 0.2211 0.2339 0.2737 0.6605 0.2685 0.38
PolGuid3 0.5812 0.4503 0.5155 0.3714 0.4219 0.4148 0.4366 0.3923 0.4605 0.8013 0.4612 0.5734
PolGuid4 0.5062 0.3996 0.3771 0.3114 0.447 0.4741 0.4678 0.4184 0.3513 0.7877 0.4289 0.5432
PolGuid5 0.3325 0.2754 0.3321 0.2524 0.3429 0.3053 0.3182 0.2246 0.2505 0.6577 0.282 0.3907
SenMan1 0.4531 0.3369 0.3751 0.4292 0.4831 0.326 0.4488 0.3788 0.4 0.4065 0.7914 0.6299
SenMan2 0.5419 0.51 0.5414 0.4002 0.5069 0.4861 0.5343 0.5125 0.5573 0.3794 0.847 0.674
SenMan3 0.5538 0.5304 0.5073 0.4299 0.5021 0.5748 0.5201 0.5169 0.548 0.455 0.8218 0.6398
SenMan4 0.5655 0.5959 0.5099 0.4437 0.4665 0.5974 0.515 0.5657 0.5234 0.3728 0.6937 0.6144
ITGPCal-Meas 0.6812 0.6763 0.737 0.6035 0.7642 0.7407 0.7503 0.7119 0.748 0.6452 0.7903 1
governance

Table AIII.
1447
CSFs on IT
The effect of
IMDS About the authors
Edephonce N. Nfuka is currently a PhD student in the Department of Computer and Systems
111,9 Sciences, Stockholm University, Sweden and an employee of University of Dar es Salaam,
Tanzania. He holds a degree in Computer Engineering (BSc) from CUJAE in Havana, a degree in
Software Engineering (MSc) from Universitat Polytecnic de Catalunya in Barcelona and a degree
of Licentiate of Philosophy in Computer and Systems Science from Stockholm University,
Sweden. He is a Member of the Association for Information Systems (AIS) and Information
1448 Systems Audit and Control Association (ISACA). He has over ten years of industrial and
academic experience in the area of IT management. His current research focuses on IT
governance, specifically on approaches to IT governance effectiveness in the public sector
organizations in a developing country’s environment/setting. Edephonce N. Nfuka is the
corresponding author and can be contacted at: nfuka@dsv.su.se
Lazar Rusu is an Associate Professor and Leader of Research Group in IT Management
within the Information Systems Laboratory, Department of Computer and Systems Sciences,
Stockholm University, Sweden. He holds a degree in Electrical Engineering (MSc) from
Cluj-Napoca Polytechnic Institute, a degree in Management (MSc) from Babes-Bolyai University
Cluj-Napoca, a PhD in Management from West University of Timisoara, Romania and a Docent
in Information Systems from Royal Institute of Technology (KTH) Stockholm, Sweden. During
his career, he has focused mainly in carrying out research on the management of information
systems/information technology and has professional experience of over 25 years both in
industry and academia in the area of information technology.

To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: reprints@emeraldinsight.com

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