# Evaluation Methodology for Circular and Resilient Information Systems
## 2 Background Literature
### Circularity and Resiliency in Information Systems' Evaluation  
Unlike traditional linear models, CISs emphasise resource efficiency, closed-loop processes, and waste minimisation. [PERSON] et al. [16] refer to the use cases of real-life CIS paradigms to address circular economy challenges, such as supporting waste management infrastructure, advancing recycling technology, and more. This process uses quantitative and qualitative techniques to evaluate these systems. Moreover, according to [PERSON] and [PERSON] [17], in the context of the DSR framework, the evaluation of a system is divided into pre-evaluation (functional requirements) and post-evaluation (performance of the developed system). The normative literature contains a plethora of evaluation methodologies for information systems (ISs) across different stages. In their seminal research, [PERSON] et al. [18], by scrutinising the literature on IS success models, dimensions, and measurements from 1992 to 2007, reported their findings, part of which firmly match our initial research. Fitting to the CRIS's project evaluation information system, [PERSON] et al. [19] propose the \"5M\" model (Man, Machine, Method, Material, Money). In contrast, several measures have been proposed in the general context of the evaluation of manufacturing (IS). Regarding evaluating the success of an implemented IS from the scope of its usage and its benefits, the DeLone and McLean IS Success Model is an established model, having been used extensively in the literature [20; 21]. This model identifies six critical dimensions of IS success, developed by DeLone and McLean in 1992 and later updated in 2003 [21]. The first of the dimensions is the \"System's Quality\", where the performance characteristics of the IS (including factors such as reliability, usability, response time, and functionality) are measured. The second dimension is the \"Information Quality\". Critical attributes for evaluation relevant to information quality are accuracy, relevance, completeness, and timeliness. The third one is the \"Service Quality\". This aspect evaluates the quality of the support services provided to users of the information system (user support, training, and the support team's responsiveness). The fourth dimension is \"Use\", or in some cases \"intention to use\", in which actual usage can be measured (or the intention to use the IS). The fifth dimension of the success model is \"User Satisfaction\", and the sixth dimension is the \"Net Benefits\" for evaluating the impact of the IS in the organisation. From the scope of IS usability, [PERSON] et al. [22] systematically presented some of the most eligible approaches for obtaining empirical measurements. The Post-Study System Usability Questionnaire, or PSSUQ, and the After-Scenario Questionnaire (ASQ), are commonly used in the literature for IS usability measurement [23; 24]. Of all the proposed evaluation methodologies, \"heuristic evaluation\" is mentioned as the most prominent in the 1990s [25]. Nevertheless, measuring an information system's usability directly comes with a high degree of difficulty [26]. For Cradle to Cradle (C2C) designed products, to maximise the benefits for humans and the environment, [PERSON] and [PERSON] [27] suggest the Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) evaluation, as it performs efficiently. C2C product creation is a philosophy focusing on the materials' continuous reuse in a closed-loop system [28]. The role of the information system in data management, analysis, and reporting in the LCA evaluation is crucial, and the IS's effectiveness should also be evaluated. Regarding the evaluation of the system's applicability, [PERSON] and [PERSON] [29] were among the first to approach this issue systematically and noted the importance of further research and methodology development. Matching the criteria for [PERSON]'s project CRIS applicability, the evaluation methodology that [PERSON] et al.