J. Service Scie nce & Management, 2009, 3: 168-180
doi:10.4236/jssm.2009.23020 Published Online September 2009 (www.SciRP.org/journal/jssm)
AHP and CA Based Evaluation of Website Information
Service Quality: An Empirical Study on High-Tech
Industry Information Center Web Portals
Changping HU1, Yang ZHAO1, Mingjing GUO1, 2
1School of Information Management, Wuhan University, Wuhan, China; 2Faculty of Economy and Management of China University
of Geosciences, Wuhan, China.
Received January 18th, 2009; revised April 15th, 2009; accepted July 20th, 2009.
ABSTRACT
Web portal is a useful way for high-tech information center providing information services for high-tech enterprises.
The importance of evaluating th e informa tion service quality o f the web porta l has been recogn ized by both info rmatio n
service researchers and practitioners. By applying for an analytic hierarchy process (AHP) approach, a hierarchical
structure evaluation criteria model has been constructed, and the global priority weight of each criterion in the model
has also been determined in this study. According to the model, two different methods—comprehensive score method
and correspondence analysis (CA) have been used to analyze and evaluate the information service quality of ten pri-
mary information center web portals in China high-tech industry from different aspects. The fin dings of this study pro-
vide a useful instrument fo r researchers who wish to measure the info rmation service quality of web portals, a s well as
for high-tech information center managers who want to enhance their web portals service performance.
Keywords: information service, web portal, high-tech industry, AHP, correspondence analysis
1. Introduction
High-tech industry is a knowledge and technology inten-
sive industry, which needs high quality and diversified
information services. In China, information services for
high-tech industry are usually provided by special in-
formation centers, such as China National Chemical In-
formation Center, State Food and Drug Administration
Information Center etc. All of them mainly provide in-
formation services through their web portals. A high-tech
industry information center web portal (HIIC web portal)
is a website that provides high-tech enterprises with on-
line information and information related services for
their decision-making, such as information retrieval, in-
formation publication, business consulting, and it is also
a good channel fo r enterprises to communicate with their
business partners.
With the rapid development of high-tech industry in
China, the information quality requirements of high-tech
industry have become higher and higher. As a result,
analyzing and evaluating the web portals information
service quality and then improving it become a very im-
portant task for information centers. In recent years,
many evaluations of website information service quality
have been concerned, and relevant researches [1-3] have
also been carried out around this issue. According to the
findings of these researches, different scholars have
identified different evaluation criteria and propos ed some
evaluation methods and models, such as website flux
index statistical method [2], expert assessment, question-
naire investigation [1], and the co mprehensiv e evaluatio n
method [3]. But most of these studies only introduce the
evaluation model constructing process or application
fields without getting specific evaluation results for the
websites. In addition, as to the types of evaluation web-
sites, the majority were concentrated on the e-commerce
websites [4] and library websites [5], with little focus on
the information center web portals. Therefore, there is an
urgent need to provide an effective method to evaluate
HIIC web portals information service quality and help
the owners improve their web portals’ quality.
This study first ly identifies the information service qua-
lity evaluation criteria and sub-criteria of HIIC web por-
tals according to their characteristics. Then by applying

CHANGPING HU, YANG ZHAO, MINGJIN G GUO 169
an analytic hierarchy process (AHP) approach [6], the
study constructs a hierarchical structure evaluation crite-
ria model and determines the global priority weight of
each criterion. Secondly, according to the evaluation
criteria model, two different methods—comprehensive
score method and correspondence analysis (CA) have
been used to analyze and evaluate the information ser-
vice quality of 10 samples from different aspects. To be
specific, the comprehensive score method is used to
compare the information service quality by calculating
the final scores of that 10 different HIIC web portals,
while CA is used to clearly reflect their advantages and
disadvantages in each factor. Finally, according to the
results of evaluation, th is study proposes the suggestions
for high-tech industry information center owners to im-
prove their web portals quality and provide better infor-
mation services for users.
2. Related Researches
2.1 Research on Information Service Quality
Evaluation
In many studies, information service quality is generally
regarded as an aspect of service quality; few researches
specially focus on this issue. Levjakangas [7] has defined
information service in his study as “a useful set of re-
fined data provided to the user of information that sup-
ports the user’s decision making as planning and execu-
tion of efficient operations.” This definition included the
right content, right timing, right formatting and right
channeling of information, which can be used as indica-
tors for information service quality evaluation. S.Feindt
[8] thought that in the e-business context, website infor-
mation service quality insinuated delivering relevant,
updated, and easy-to-understand information to signifi-
cantly influence online users’ attitude, satisfaction, and
purchases. Delone and McLean [9] have established a
well-known model to measure information service qual-
ity; they highlighted the importance of relevance, time-
liness, and accuracy of information. In addition to these
researches, the information service quality evaluation is
usually studied within service evaluation like some other
related issues, such as website design quality, website
security quality. For example, the most well-known ser-
vice quality instrument, SERVQUAL, was used to mea-
sure customer’s expectation and perception of service
quality [10,11], and has been adopted successfully in the
information system field to measure information system
service quality. SERVQUAL consists of reliability, res-
ponsiveness, empathy, assurance, and tangibility, among
which, reliability, responsiveness, and empathy are con-
sidered as the factors relating to information service
quality evaluation. The .comQ (dotcom service quality)
scale established by Wolfinbarger and Gilly [12] also
considers information service quality which includes
four major factors: website design, information reliabi-
lity, privacy/security, and customer service. In order to
measure e-business success and develop a high service
quality website, Lee and Kozar [4] proposed a compre-
hensive research model from information quality and
service quality two aspects respectively.
2.2 Research on Web Portal Information Service
Quality Evaluation
With the rapid development of internet, evaluation of
website information service has become a key issue,
more and more organizations and researchers have de-
veloped different methods for various websites informa-
tion service quality evaluations. Gomez.com developed
different scorecard indices to evaluate websites informa-
tion service quality in different industries such as bank-
ing, mortgage, insurance, and retail [13].Their evaluation
of a website combines results from both consumer sur-
veys and expert judgments based on factors such as us-
age, web resources, information reliability, response
speed and personalized service. BisRate.com established
an index system for the information service evaluation of
ecommerce website based on dimensions such as product
representation, product information, on-time delivery,
and customer support [14]. Web portal information ser-
vice is more diversified than general website information
service—a web portal presents information from diverse
sources in a unified way. So it is more complicated and
difficult to evaluate their qualities. There is currently no
established conceptual foundation for developing and
measuring the information service quality of web portal
in general. The only two published researches we can
find to address this issue were conducted by Van Riel et
al. [15] and Yang et al. [2] respectively. Van Riel et al.
employed exploratory factor ana- lysis (EFA) to identify
underlying dimensions. Based on a sample of 52 sub-
scribers from a portal that publishes a weekly medical
newsletter, they found three key aspects of portal infor-
mation service: core service, supporting services, and
user interface. Yang et al. employed a rigorous scale
development procedure to establish an instrument that
measures information service quality of information
presenting web portal (IP web portal). They determined
that there were five service quality dimensions perceived
by users of an IP web portal: usability, usefulness of
content, adequacy of information, accessibility, and in-
teraction. The five dimension measurement scales added

CHANGPING HU, YANG ZHAO, MINGJIN G GUO 170
Figure 1. Research foundations and proposed information service quality cr iteria of HIIC web portals
to extant literature by establishing a basis for further
theoretical advances on information service quality of a
web portal.
In sum, prior researches from different perspectives
developed some fundamental knowledge about informa-
tion service quality evaluation, but most of them are for
general websites and not for web portals, especially not
for HIIC web portals. HIIC web portals help high-tech
information centers to provide a consistent look and feel
with access control and procedures for multiple applica-
tions, which o therwise would h ave b een d ifferent en tities
altogether. Compared with general websites, HIIC web
portals are more authoritative and information-oriented.
Therefore, the general information service quality eva-
luation index system or criteria model may not be suit-
able for HIIC web portals. It needs to identify related
evaluation criteria (or factors) according to the charac-
teristics of the HIIC web portals. Each of the criteria
should have a significant impact on overall information
service quality of a web portal. So as to be used to for-
mulate a model to dealing with the prob lem of HIIC web
portal information service quality evaluation.
3. Evaluation Criteria Model
3.1 Identifying the Criteria and Sub-Criteria
There is currently no established evaluation criteria mo-
del for measuring the information service quality of HIIC
web portals. Thus, we integrated several conceptual me-
thods to identity important service quality dimensions
related to HIIC web portals for our study. Before we
identify the criteria we should determine that a user must
have a reason to adopt the website as an information and
communication channel. The well-known technology
adoption model (TAM) is thus embraced. Then, an HIIC
web portal essentially is also an Information System,
consisting of digital information and an information de-
livery infrastructure (browsers, search engines, encryp-
tion, networking systems, etc.). Accordingly, information
quality and system quality are of importance for HIIC
web portal users. Based on these foundations, by ana-
lyzing previous models of general websites and consid-
ering our research feasibility, we make a reference to the
model proposed by Yang et al. [2] to identity informa-
tion service quality criteria related to the HIIC web por-
tals for our study. Considering the particularity of the
HIIC web portals, two criteria and wording of some
items have been changed. Finally, this study proposes a
modified evaluation model consists of five criteria to
measuring the information service quality of HIIC web
portals, including usefulness of content, adequacy of
information, specialization, easy of use and interaction.
Each of the five criteria had a significant impact on
overall information service quality. Figure 1 lists the
foundations and their relationships to the proposed in-
formation service quality criteria.
3.1.1 Use fulness of C ontent
The content of a HIIC web portal is of great importance
since it directly influences the user’s perception of the
destination [16]. Usefulness of content examines whether
a HIIC web portal can provide reliable, up-to-date, rele-
vant and accurate information. Specifically, content reli-
able refers to its dependability and consistency. Content
up-to-date is concerned with information timeliness and
continuous update. Content relevance includes relevant
depth and scope, and completeness of the information [4].
Content accuracy describes the degree to which the web
portal information is free of error [2].
3.1.2 Ade quacy of Informati on
High-tech enterprises usually need HIIC web portals to
provide information as complete as possible. Adequacy

CHANGPING HU, YANG ZHAO, MINGJIN G GUO 171
refers to the extent of completeness of information. It can
be measured using complete product/service description,
complete content, detailed contact information and rich
variety of information. Complete product/service descri-
ption facilitates users understanding of the products and
personalized services. Detailed contact information re-
fers to whether a HIIC web portal contains such informa-
tion as contact address, telephone numbers, email and
relevant high-tech enterprises Yellow Pages. In addition,
web portals should provide complete and a great variety
of information to satisfy the demands of different de-
partment users [15,17,18].
3.1.3 Specialization
Compared with other industries, high-tech industry has
its own features. For example, it is knowledge-intensive,
market-oriented and highly innovative. It needs special
information and services in its development process.
Specialization is a critical factor, which can make a HIIC
web portal distinguish itself from general information
center websites. It can be measured by examining whe-
ther a HIIC web portal has special databases, industry
research reports and supply-demand information. Special
databases can provide high-tech enterprises with rich
products information, technical standards and front
knowledge. Industry research reports can help enter-
prises better understand the development status and
trends of the industry. In addition, a main purpose of the
high-tech enterprises is to put their products into market
quickly, so they also need lots of supply-demand infor-
mation.
3.1.4 Easy of Use
In the websites context, easy of use has been regarded as
the most frequently used factor in measuring information
quality or user satisfaction [19,20]. It involves five as-
pects: search function, navigation, personalization, hy-
perlinks structure and speed of page loading. Search
function refers to the website’s capability to provide di-
versity retrieval methods, and helps users to quickly find
and select the products or services they need [21]. Good
navigation allows users to stay oriented during their vis-
its and easily locate the information or products they
need. Personalization services can provide online users
an individualized interface, effective one-to-one service
and customized information. Effective hyperlinks struc-
ture and high speed of page loading of a web portal can
enhance the user experience.
3.1.5 Interaction
Interaction is a kind of action that occurs as two or more
objects have an effect upon one another [22]. The inter-
action about a HIIC web portal can be divided into three
categories: enterprise-information centre interaction,
enterprise-enterprise interaction and enterprise-website
interaction. Although using a HIIC web por tal is primar-
ily a self-served process, high-tech enterprise staff may
still expect websites quick response to them and provide
professional follow-up services by the knowledgeable
and caring contact persons working in information cen-
ters. HIIC web portal is a platform for information com-
munication between users and service providers, there-
fore, it should provide contact channels for business-to-
business/information centre such as email, message
boards, char room and discussion forum.
3.2 Model Construction
In order to enable persons engage in the evaluation work
to visualize the problem systematically in terms of rele-
vant criteria and sub-criteria, we adopt the AHP to con-
struct an evaluation criteria model. The AHP, developed
by Saaty (1980) is designed to solve complex multi-crite-
ria decision problems [23]. The hierarchical structure
used in formulating the AHP model can show the rela-
tionship between different factors more clearly. Fur-
thermore, AHP has inherent capability to hand le qualita-
tive and quantitative criteria used in information service
quality evaluation problems. The criteria and sub-criteria
we have identified have both qualitative components
such as usefulness of content and quantitative ones such
as number of special database. Therefore, AHP is the
best method for evaluation criteria model construction in
this study.
The common AHP process involves three phases: con-
struction of a hierarchical structure of the AHP model to
present the problem, perform pair wise comparison of
the criteria at the same level and determine their weights
and synthesis to obtain the global weights for the criteria
[24]. The consistency of the results is measured using a
consistency ratio (CR). A CR of less than 0.1 is consid-
ered adequate to interpret the results [25]. Using this
three-phase approach, this study first formulates a three-
level hierarchy criteria model for HIIC web portal
evaluation, as show in Figure 2. The goal of our problem
is to evaluate the information service quality of HIIC
web portals, which is placed on the first level of the hi-
erarchy. Five factors described in the above section are
identified to achieve the goal, which form the second
level of the hierarchy. The third level occupies the crite-
ria defining the fiv e factors of the second level.
In addition, using th e AHP, we can also determine the
weights of each criterion and sub-criterion, which will be

CHANGPING HU, YANG ZHAO, MINGJIN G GUO 172
Figure 2. The evaluation criteria model
Table1. Global weights of the sub-criteria
Criteria Local weights Sub-criteria Local weights Glo bal w eights
Reliable information 0.2815 0.0577
Up-to-date information 0.2089 0.0428
Relevant information 0.2124 0.0435
Usefulness
of content 0.2048
Accurate information 0.2972 0.0609
Complete product/ service description0.2460 0.0423
Complete cont e nt 0.2967 0.0510
Detailed contact inform ation 0.1422 0.0245
Adequacy
of information 0.1721
Rich variety of information 0.3151 0.0542
Special databases 0.4600 0.1030
Industry research reports 0.2211 0.0495 Specialization 0.2239
Supply-demand information 0.3189 0.0714
Strong search functions 0.2361 0.0560
Good navigation 0.1541 0.0365
Personalized services 0.3018 0.0716
Effective hyperlinks structure 0.1540 0.0365
Easy of use 0.2371
High speed of page loading 0.1540 0.0365
Quick responsiveness to enterprises 0.4639 0.0752
Follow-up services to enterprises 0.2786 0.0452
Interaction 0.1621
Contact channels for B to
B/information centers 0.2575 Total: 0.0417 1.0000

CHANGPING HU, YANG ZHAO, MINGJIN G GUO 173
used to calculate the total scores of each HIIC web portal
for their information service quality evaluation in our
following study. Based on the AHP hierarchy model, 5
experts were invited to assign pair wise comparisons to
the criteria and sub-criteria in each level of the hierarchy
by scoring the comparison matrices. The nine-point scale
as suggested by Satty is used by them to assign their pair
wise comparisons of all elements. Of these five experts,
one is senior engineer from the website design depart-
ment, two are information consultants of famous high-
tech enterprises and the other two are professors of in-
formation management. All of these experts have suffi-
cient experience in web information service quality
evaluation and are qualified to assign pair wise compari-
son judgment matrices for the proposed AHP model, as
shown in Appendix A.
Based on the pair wise comparison judgment matrices
obtained from five experts, we collected the valid data,
calculated the geometric mean and checked the inte-
grated CR. The software Matlab is used to determine the
normalized priority weights for each criterion. The re-
sults of CRs are all less than 0.1, so the matrices sat-
isfy the consistency condition. Based on these results,
th e global weight of each sub-criterion of level three has
also been calculating by Matlab, the results are show in
Table 1.
4. Method
The questionnaire consisting of 19 items, as showed in
Appendix B, was used in the stu dy. All the items were in
one-to-one correspondence with the sub-criteria in eva-
luation model and measured by using a 5-point Likert
scales ranging from low to high. Then the questionnaires
were sent to evaluate work participants by emails.
4.1 Evaluation Samples
According to the Organ ization of Economic Cooperation
and Development (OECD)’s industry classification
standard, high-tech industry has been divided into 4 ma-
jor categories which including aerospace manufacturing,
computer and office equipment manufacturing, electron-
ics and telecommunications equipment manufacturing
and pharmaceutical manufacturing [26]. At present,
China is basically in accordance with the OECD’s
high-tech classification standards to define the statistic
scope of high-tech industry. But considering the National
Economic Industry Classification Standard (GB
/T4745-2002) of China, another four categories have
been added to the OECD’s categories in our country,
they are nuclear fuel processing, information chemicals
manufacturing, public software services and medical
equipment and instrument manufacturing. In order to
accurately reflect the level and current situation of in
Table 2. Samples of high-tech industry information
center web po rtals
Code Information center
web portals Web site
w1 China atomic in-
formation Network http://www.atominfo.com.cn
w2 China chemical information center
Network http://www.cheminfo.gov.cn/
w3 China medical in-
formation network http://www.cpi.gov.cn/
w4 China aviation in-
formation network http://www.aeroinfo.com.cn
w5 China electronics industry informa-
tion network http://www.ceic.gov.cn/
w6 China computer industry association
network http://www.chinaccia.org.cn/
w7
China culture and
office equipment
manufacturing
network
http://www.ccoea.org.cn
w8 China medical de- vices information
network http://www.cmdi.gov.cn/
w9 China instrument
network http://www.yibiao.com/
w10 China network software services
network http://www.mycnsoft.com/
formation service quality of China’s HIIC web portals,
according to China high-tech industry statistics classifi-
cation standards, 10 information center web portals of
different high-tech industry categories were selected as
the samples in this study, as showed in Table 2. These 10
websites were in the charge of relevant government de-
partments or industry associations, which are the most
authoritative web portals of each high-tech sub-industry
in China.
4.2 Participant
Thirty CIOs from different high-tech enterprises agreed
to our cooperation request and then participated in this
study. The enterprises were selected from “China High-
tech Enterprise Directory” and all of them have the spe-
cialized information technology department. Generally
speaking, CIO is the person in an enterprise who is re-
sponsible for the information technology and computer
systems; so he could understand the enterprise’s infor-
mation services demands better than general employees.
75% of the participants were male and 25% were female.
All participants were experienced HIIC web portal u sers:
40% of them had visited more than 8 HIIC web portals
and 80% had visited more than 5. Regarding their usage
frequency, over 80% of them used services provided by

CHANGPING HU, YANG ZHAO, MINGJIN G GUO 174
HIIC web portals for supporting enterprise goals several
times a day while the others several times a week.
Every CIO must fill in 10 questionnaires because they
should score all the 10 samples respectively. Before fill-
ing in the questionnaires, all the participants were asked
to visit the samples and access the information service
experiences. Every one should score all items of each
HIIC web portal according to their experiences. In order
to ensure the effectiveness of response results, follow-up
calls were made to these participants. In the end, all the
questionnaires responded with complete data.
4.3 Data Analysis Methods
The data collected from the 300 (30×10) questionnaires
were coded and analyzed statistically, and then we cal-
culated the average score of each sample in each item. In
order to analyze and compare the information service
quality of the samples, two data analysis methods—
comprehensive score method and correspondence analy-
sis (CA) were used in this study. They evaluated the in-
formation service quality of HIIC web portals from dif-
ferent aspects respectively.
4.3.1 Comprehensive Score Metho d
In this study, the evaluation samples (alternatives) have
not been placed in a separate level like usual AHP ap-
proach, an improved method—Comprehensive Score
Method was instead of assessing pair wise comparisons
among the evaluation objects. In Subsection 4.2 we have
already asked thirty CIOs of different enterprises scored
the each criteria of each HIIC web portal sample with
their experiences by using 5-point Likert scales, and then
we calculated the average score of each HIIC web portal
sample in each criterion. The Comprehensive Score Me-
thod is used to calculate the final score of each sample by
multiplying the global weights of criteria in the third
level with the 5-point Lik ert scales average scores of the
corresponding criteria obtained from questionnaires. So,
assume the average score of each sample in each item
(sub-criterion) is(, , the final score Si
(i=1,2,…,10) of each sample can be calculated by com-
prehensive score method as shown in following equation.
1i2i18i 19i
,, , )aaa a
where 12 1819is
the global priority weight of each sub-criterion. Then we
can compare the information service qualities of 10 HIIC
web portals by their final scores. It should be noted in
this study that we didn’t calculate the weights of evalua-
tion samples as traditional AHP method which usually
placed the evaluation samples (in traditional AHP me-
thod it is called alternatives) in the lowest level in an
AHP hierarchical structure and then got their global
weights by a pair wise comparison judgment matrix.
0.577,0.0428, ,0.0452,0.0417(, ,,,)()wwww
This study only calculated the global priority weights
of sub-criteria, and then used them to get final scores of
10 samples. The reason is that if we adopt the traditional
AHP method to compare 10 samples (alternatives), the
number of pair wise comparisons required for each of the
19 sub-criteria would be equal to n(n-1)/2=45, and it
becomes computationally difficult and sometimes infea-
sible. The major advantage of comprehensive score
method is to overcome the explosion in the number of
required comparisons when the number of samples is
large, and shorten the evaluation time.
4.3.2 Cor r esponde n c e Analysis
In order to further explore the relationship between the
10 HIIC web portals in different criteria and then classify
them according to their similarities, this study adopts the
correspondence analysis to deal with the collected data.
Correspondence analysis is a powerful method for the
multivariate exploration of large-scale data, which re-
veals a correlation between variables through analyzing
interactive tables constituting qualitative variables, thus
presenting differences between different categories of the
same variable, and those between different categories of
different variables. The primary idea of correspondence
analysis is to present the proportion structure of elements
in the columns and rows of a contingency table in the
form of points in a space with lower dimensionality [5].
Mathematically, correspondence analysis can be regard-
ed as either:
1) A method for decomposing the chi-squared statistic
for a contingency table into components corresponding
to different dimensions of the heterogeneity between its
rows and column s, or
2) A method for simultaneously assigning a scale to
rows and a separate scale to columns so as to maximize
the correlation between the resu lting pair of variables.
Quintessentially, however, correspondence analysis is
a technique for displaying multivariate categorical data
graphically, by providing coordinates to represent the
categories of the variables involved; these may then be
plotted to provide a “picture” of the data. Therefore, we
can present the evaluation samples and criteria in a single
figure with CA, directly and clearly observe categories
and attributes of the samples.
1218 19
19
1i2i18i 19i1
(, ,,,)
(, ,,,)'
i
ii
i
Sww ww
aaa awa






5. Results
5.1 Comprehensive Score Method Result
According to the equation explained above, we calculated

CHANGPING HU, YANG ZHAO, MINGJIN G GUO 175
Figure 3. Comprehensive score of each HIIC W
Figure 4. Score of each HIIC web portal in five factors

CHANGPING HU, YANG ZHAO, MINGJIN G GUO 176
the final total score of each HIIC web portal by multi-
plying the global priority weight of each criterion with
the CIOs’ average score, and adding the resulting values.
Compared to the total score of each HIIC web portal as
shown in Figure 3, we find that W8 has the highest score
3.8296, which means its integrated information service
quality is the best, especially at adequ acy of information,
specialization and easy of use. This web portal has a
clear navigation system. When users visit it, they can
easily find what they need and got special on-line ser-
vices and consultation. W2 and W5 respectively got the
second and third highest score, which are 3.8254 and
3.6956, so their service qualities are satisfactory. Com-
paratively speaking, W7, W1 and W10 are the web por-
tals whose comprehensive scores are lower than other
ones. They have some common problems such as slow
information update, less information content, imperfect
search function, and bad interaction. So they should
make great efforts to improve their information services
so as to better satisfy the needs of high-tech enterprises.
In addition, other HIIC web portals are in the general
level of information service qu ality.
Figure 4 has further shown the comparison results of
information service quality from five factors: usefulness
of content, adequacy of information, specialization, easy
of use and inter action. On one ha nd, we find that W4 ha s
the highest usefulness of content, because it can usually
provide latest official policy about aerospace manufac-
turer and update information content everyday. On the
other hand, W2 has the highest adequacy of information
and specialization; it has a quotations center which can
help users understand chemical products price trend and
market development in time. In addition, it has detailed
industry statistics and special rep orts which provide users
with abandon useful information. W8 has the highest
easy of use, users can search information what they need
by keywords or full text. The navigation of W8 is also
very good, which divides the website content into four-
teen sections and the most important information are put
on the striking location, so users can find it quickly. W10
has the highest interaction which provides online con-
sultation services and responses users’ needs quickly,
and it also provides a chart room for business negotia-
tions between different enterprises. But, we also find that
W10 has the lowest usefulness of content and adequacy
of information, W7 has the lowest easy of use and inter-
action, while W1 has the lowest easy of use. Based on
these comparison results we can clearly find out the ad-
vantages and disad vantages of each HIIC web portal and
then propose feasible suggestions to improve its infor-
mation service qualities
5.2 CA Result
In order to further analyze the advantages and disadvan-
tages of these HIIC web portals in which criterion, the
average score of each HIIC web portal sample in each
criterion was entered into the SPSS—the data analysis
tool, and analyzed. The results of correspondence analy-
sis appear in Figure 5. The association graph was ana-
lyzed further, and the points of criteria and HIIC web
portals on Figure 5 were classified into four group.
The first g rouping includes W1 and W4. Th e common
ground of these two HIIC web portals are reliable infor-
mation (C11), rapid information updating (C12), complete
product/service description (C21), complete content (C22),
detailed contact info rmation (C23) and good personalized
services (C43). They get high scores in these criteria. For
example, W1 updates news of Nuclear Fuel Processing
industry everyday and provides detailed contact informa-
tion of these kinds of companies. But it is also presented
in Figure 5 that search function (C41) and supply-demand
information (C33) of the two web portals are not very
good, there is a long distance between them. Therefore,
much attention must be paid to the search function and
supply-demand information in the future to improve their
information service qualities.
The second grouping includes W2, W3, W5 and W8.
The advantages of these web portals lay in the relevant
information (C13), rich variety of information (C24) and
industry research reports (C32). However, among these
four web portals, W2 is not near the other three points
and far from many criteria. It is seen from average scores
made by participants that W2 got similar high scores in
these criteria, which indicates that W2 performs better in
these aspects than other web portals.
The third grouping includes W6 and W7. Their ad-
vantages are accurate information (C14) and high speed
of page loading (C45). But they are not very successful,
with little contact information and specialized informa-
tion such as special databases, industry research reports,
etc, revealing that the information service qualities are at
a lower level. Therefore, such web portals should make
great efforts to improve their information abundance and
specialization.
The fourth grouping includes W9 and W10. They can
provide users with rich supply-demand information (C33)
and good interactive services such as quick responsive-
ness (C51) and follow-up services to enterprises (C52),
contact channels for business-to-business/information
centre (C53), etc. They also have good navigation (C42)
and effective hyperlinks structure (C44). This indicates
that overall performance of such web portals is in normal
order. Therefore, such web portals should find their
proper positions in the high-tech industry according to
their own situation and advantages.
There are still another two criteria points-special da-
tabases (C31) and strong search functions (C41) don’t be-

CHANGPING HU, YANG ZHAO, MINGJIN G GUO 177
long to any of the above groupings, which shows that
compared with other criteria, they are not the unique
attributes for a particular web portal, but they make great
influence for the information service qualities of some
HIIC web portals such W1, W4, W6, W7, W9 and W10.
These web portals don’t get high scores in the two crite-
ria, so they should attach much importance to these two
aspects.
6. Discussion and Conclusions
Information service quality evaluation of a HIIC web
portal is an important problem to information centre it-
self and high-tech enterprises. By improving the model
proposed by Zhilin Yang et al., this study identified five
information service quality criteria including usefulness
of content, adequacy of information, specialization, easy
of use and interaction, which included 19 sub-criteria.
Then by using an AHP approach, this study constructed a
hierarchical structure evaluation criteria model and de-
termined the global priority weight of each criterion and
sub-criterio n. Based on this evalu ation criteria modal, the
study comprehensively applied the comprehensive score
method and CA to analyze the information service qual-
ity of ten typical information center web portals in
high-tech industry and got several useful results. From
the research results we can find:
First, using the AHP approach proposed in this study,
the criteria for information service quality evaluation
were clearly defined and the problem was structured
systematically. This enabled executives of HIIC to ex-
amine the strengths and weaknesses of their web portals
by comparing them with respect to appropriate criteria.
The weights of five criteria showed that specialization
and easy of use carry more weight on the overall evalua-
tion of a HIIC web portal than other factors. Thus, ex-
ecutives should expend more effort to make their web
portals more professional and easy to use.
Second, the study found that the comprehensive score
of each HIIC web portal calculated by equation proposed
in this paper all are not very high (less than 4), especially
at two aspects—easy of use and interaction. It indicated
that the overall information service qualities o f these web
portals were at a lower level and the main shortages are
at easy of use and interaction. To a high-tech enterprise,
it was important for it to be able to locate the needed
information without difficulties. So the information cen-
ter should design a user-friendly website, with strong
search functions, good navigation, personalized services,
effective hyperlinks structure and high speed of page
loading. At the same time, the information center should
strengthen the interaction between web portal and users
by using some facilities such as user chat room, message
board, reputation system and providing online consulta-
0.1
.05
0
-0.1 -0.050.00.05 0.1
W1 W4
W3 W8 W5
W2
W6
W7
W9 W10
C11 C21
0
0.
-0.05
-0.1
C12
C22
C23
C43
C13 C32 C24
C14
C45
C52 C42
C31
C53
C44 C51
C33
C41
HIIC Web PortalCriteria
Figure 5. Positioning maps
tion and training services.
Finally, according to the CA results, the 10 samples
have been divided into four groupings by their similari-
ties in different criteria, wh ich can help su ch web portals
to position themselves properly and provider extra spe-
cially services for enterprise users. It can also urge the
web portals to compare themselves with those that have
the best performance in different criteria, to enable them
to make improvements on information services.
At the same time, this study still has several limita-
tions that should be revisited in the future studies. First,
the study only chose CIOs in the high-tech enterprises as
the participants, which could not represent various kinds
of users’ views. Second, this study was conducted with
relatively small samples, 10 official HIIC web portals
might not give a comprehensive reflection of the overall
situation of HIIC web portals in China. Finally, evalua-
tion criteria were selected based on the previous model
of general websites, which could have excluded some
criteria that might strongly influence website information
service quality. Future research needs to take into con-
sideration more kinds of users such as managers, staff in
the high-tech enterprises participate in the evaluation
process. Furthermore, it also should increase the number
of website samples and co llect data to examine th e valid-
ity of the proposed model better.
7. Acknowledgement
This work was supported by grants from the China Na-
tional Social Science Foundation Major Project “Study
of Information Services in China National Innovation
System” (No.06&ZD031) and Key Project of Philosop hy
and Social Sciences Research “Education of Ministry of
Knowledge Information Service System of Innovation-
Oriented Country” ( No. 06JZD003 2).

CHANGPING HU, YANG ZHAO, MINGJIN G GUO 178
REFERENCES
[1] H. Landrum and V. R. Prybutok, “A service quality and
success model for the information service industry,”
European Journal of Operational Research, Vol. 156, No.
3, pp. 628–642, Auguest 2004.
[2] Z. L. Yang, S. H. Cai, Z. Zhou, et al., “Development and
validation of an instrument to measure user perceived
service quality of information presenting web portals,”
Information & Management, Vol. 42, No. 4, pp. 575-589,
May 2005.
[3] L. Leiming and W. Y., “Comparative study of Web site
evaluation pattern,” Qingbao Xuebao, Vol. 23, No. 2, pp.
198–203, 2004.
[4] Y. Lee, and K. A. Kozar, “Investigating the effect of web
site quality on e-business success: An analytic hierarchy
process (AHP) approach,” Decision Support Systems,
Vol. 42, No. 3, pp. 1383–1401, December 2006.
[5] X. Shen, D. Li, and C. Shen, “Evaluating China’s uni-
versity library web sites using correspondence analysis,”
Journal of the American Society for Information Science
and Technology, Vol. 57, No. 4, pp. 493–500, 2006.
[6] T. Saaty, “The analytic hierarchy process,” McGraw-Hill,
New York, 1980.
[7] P. Levjakangas, J. Haajanen, and A. M. Alaruikka, “In-
formation service architecture for international multi-
modal logistic corridor,” IEEE Transactions on Intelligent
Transportation Systems, Vol. 8, No. 4, pp. 565–574, De-
cember 2007.
[8] S. Feindt, J. Jeffcoate, and C. Chappell, “Identifying suc-
cess factors for rapid growth in SME e-commerce,” Small
Business Economics, Vol. 19, pp. 51–62, 2002.
[9] W. H. DeLone and E. R. McLean, “Information systems
success: The quest for the dependent variable,” Infor-
mation Systems Research, Vol. 3, No. 1, pp. 60–95, 1992.
[10] E. Babakus, and G. W. Boller, “An emperical assessment
of the SERVQUAL scale,” Journal of Business Research,
Vol. 24, No. 3, pp. 253–268, 1992.
[11] T. P. Van Dyke, L. A. Kappelman, and V. R. Prybutok,
“Measuring information systems service quality: Con-
cerns on the use of the SERVQUAL questionnaire,” MIS
Quarterly, Vol. 21, No. 2, pp. 195–208, 1997.
[12] M. F. Wolfinbarger and M. C. Gilly, “.ComQ: Dimen-
sionalizing, measuring and predicting quality of the
etailing experience,” MSI Working Paper Series, pp.
2–100, 2002.
[13] S. A. Kaynama and C. I. Black, “A proposal to assess the
service quality of online travel agencies: An exploratory
study,” Journal of Professional Services Marketing, Vol.
21, No. 1, pp. 63–88, 2000.
[14] V. A. Zeithaml, A. Parasuraman, and A. Malhotra, “Ser-
vice quality delivery through web sites: A critical extant
knowledge,” Journal of the Academy of Marketing
Science, Vol. 30, No. 4, pp. 362–375, 2002.
[15] A. C. R. V. Riel, V. Liljander, and P. Jurriens, “Exploring
consumer evaluations of e-services: A portal site,”
International Journal of Service Industry Management,
Vol. 12, No. 4, pp. 359–377, 2001.
[16] C. Zafiropoulos, V. Vrana, and D. Paschaloudis, “An
evaluation of the performance of hotel web site using the
managers’ views about online information services,” Pro-
ceedings of the 13th European Conference on Informa-
tion Systems, Information Systems in a Rapidly Chang-
ing Economy, 2005.
[17] N. Cho, and S. Park, “Development of electronic com-
merce userconsumer satisfaction index (ECUSI) for inter-
net shopping,” Industrial Management & Data Systems,
Vol. 101, No. 8, pp. 400–405, 2001.
[18] K. V. La, and J. Kandampully, “Electronic retailing and
distribution of services: Cyber intermediaries that serve
customers and service providers,” Managing Service Qua-
lity, Vol. 12, No. 2, pp. 100–116, 2002.
[19] D. L. Hoffman and T. P. Novak, “Marketing in hyper-
media computer-mediated environments: Conceptual foun-
dations,” Journal of Marketing, Vol. 60, pp. 50–68, 1996.
[20] M. M. Misic and K. L. Johnson, “Benchmarking: A tool
for web site evaluation and improvement,” Internet
Research: Electronic Networking Applications and Policy,
Vol. 9, No. 5, pp. 383–392, 1999.
[21] B. Shneiderman, “Designing the user interface: Strategies
for effective human-computer interaction,” Addison-
Wesley, 1998.
[22] A. K. Shiau, D. Barstad, P. M. Loria, et al., “The struc-
tural basis of estrogen receptor/coactivator recognition
and the antagonism of this interaction by tamoxifen,” Cell,
Vol. 95, No. 7, pp. 927–937, December 1998.
[23] E. W. T. Ngai and E. W. C. Chan, “Evaluation of know-
ledge management tools using AHP,” Expert Systems
with Applications, Vol. 29, No. 4, pp. 889–899, Novem-
ber 2005.
[24] T. Saaty and L. Vargas, “Decision making in economic,
political, social, and technological environments with the
analytic hierarchy process,” RWS Publications, Pitts-
burgh, 1994.
[25] M. C. Carnero, “Selection of diagnostic techniques and
instrumentation in a predictive maintenance program: A
case study,” Decision Support Systems, Vol. 38, No. 4,
pp. 539–555, 2005.
[26] S. Juan, X. Dai, and J. Yang, “Thinking about China
high-tech industry statistics definition,” Statistics and
Decision, Vol. 256, No. 4, pp. 4–6, 2008.

CHANGPING HU, YANG ZHAO, MINGJIN G GUO 179
Appendix
A. Pair Wise Comparison Judgments Matrices
Table A1 shows the pair wise comparison judgments ma-
trices for comparing the criteria and sub-criteria which
are assigned by the 5 experts.
B. Questionnaire Directions
We need your impressions abou t perfor mance of the high
-tech information center web portals that provide infor-
mation services for your enterprise. Before you fill in
this questionnaire, please visit the following 10 web por-
tals (Table A2) and experience their various information
services. For each of the items in the questionnaire,
please indicate your perception of the web portals infor-
mation services qualities by circling a number in the
column (Table A3). There is no right or wrong answer.
Please do not omit any feature. A questionnaire is corre-
sponding to a web portal.
Table A1. Pair wise comparison judgments matrices
Goal B1 B
2 B 3 B 4 B 5 Priority
B1 1 1.2 1/1.5 1 1.5
B2 1/1.2 1 1/1.6 1/1.2 1.2
B3 1.5 1.6 1 1/1.4 1
B4 1 1.2 1.4 1 1.5
B5 1/1.5 1/1.2 1 1/1.5 1
0.2048
0.1721
0.2239
0.2371
0.1621
CR=0.02
Usefulness of content C11 C
12 C 13 C 14 Priority
C11 1 1.3 1.3 1
C12 1/1.3 1 1 1/1.5
C13 1/1.3 1 1 1/1.4
C14 1 1.5 1.4 1
0.2815
0.2089
0.2124
0.2972
CR =0.0
Adequacy of information C21 C
22 C 23 C 24 Priority
C21 1 1/1.2 2 1/1.5
C22 1.2 1 2 1
C23 1/2 1/2 1 1/2
C24 1.5 1 2 1
0.246
0.2967
0.1422
0.3151
CR=0.01
Specialization C31 C
32 C 33 Priority
C31 1 1.5 2 0.4600
C32 1/1.5 1 1/2 0.2211
C33 1/2 2 1
0.3189
CR=0.09
Easy of use C41 C
42 C 43 C 44 C 54 Priority
C41 1 1.5 1/1.2 1.5 1.5 0.2361
C42 1/1.5 1 1/2 1 1 0.1541
C43 1.2 2 1 2 2 0.3018
C44 1/1.5 1 1/2 1 1 0.1540
C54 1/1.5 1 1/2 1 1
0.1540
CR=0.00
Interaction C51 C
52 C 53 Priority
C51 1 2 1.5 0.4639
C52 1/2 1 1.3 0.2786
C53 1/1.5 1/1.3 1
0.2575
CR=0.03

CHANGPING HU, YANG ZHAO, MINGJIN G GUO 180
Table A2. High-tech information center web portals list
Information center web portals Web site
China atomic information network http://www.atominfo.com.cn
China chemical information center network http://www.cheminfo.gov.cn
China medical information network http://www.cpi.gov.cn
China aviation information network http://www.aeroinfo.com.cn
China electronics industry information network http://www.ceic.gov.cn
China computer industry association network http://www.chinaccia.org.cn
China culture and office equipment manufacturing networkhttp://www.ccoea.org.cn
China medical devices information network http://www.cmdi.gov.cn
China instrument network http://www.yibiao.com
China network software services network http://www.mycnsoft.com
Table A3. Questionnaire
Name of web portal: How the web portals
performs here
Low High
Quality of usefulness of content 1 2 3 4 5
1.Reliability of information received 1 2 3 4 5
2.Up-to-date information received 1 2 3 4 5
3.Relevance of information received 1 2 3 4 5
4.Accuracy of information received 1 2 3 4 5
Quality of adequacy of information 1 2 3 4 5
5.Complete product/ service description 1 2 3 4 5
6.Complete content 1 2 3 4 5
7.Detailed contact information 1 2 3 4 5
8.Rich variety of information 1 2 3 4 5
Quality of specialization 1 2 3 4 5
9.Special databases 1 2 3 4 5
10.Industry research reports 1 2 3 4 5
11.Supply-demand information 1 2 3 4 5
Quality of easy of use 1 2 3 4 5
12.Search functions are easy to use 1 2 3 4 5
13.A navigation that is easy to use 1 2 3 4 5
14.Personalized Service 1 2 3 4 5
15.Effective hyperlinks structure 1 2 3 4 5
16.Quick speed of page loading 1 2 3 4 5
Quality of interaction 1 2 3 4 5
17.Quick responsiveness to enterprises 1 2 3 4 5
18.Follow-up services to enterprises 1 2 3 4 5
19.Contact channels for business-to-business/
information centre 1 2 3 4 5