Do systems development methodologies and case tools decrease stress among systems analysts?

Behaviour and Information Technology

Volumn 19, Issue 4, 2000, Pages 307-313

  Nelson, Anthony C ^a   Teng, James T C ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH FLORIDA   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COMPUTER AIDED DESIGN; COMPUTER AIDED MANUFACTURING; INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY; PROGRAM DOCUMENTATION; SOFTWARE PROTOTYPING;

COMPUTER-AIDED SYSTEMS;

COMPUTER AIDED SOFTWARE ENGINEERING;

EID: 0034236845     PISSN: 0144929X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/01449290050086417     Document Type: Article

References (20)

1. Bell, D. 1983, The Coming of Post-Industrial Society (New York: Basic Books).
2. Baroudi, J. 1985, The Impact of Role Variables on IS Personnel Work Attitudes and Intentions. MIS Quarterly, December, 341 - 356.
3. Chen, M., Nunamaker, J. and Weber, E. 1989, CASE: present status and future directions. Data Base, Spring, 7-13.
4. Collins, P. and King, D. 1988, Implications of CAD for work and performance. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 24 (2), 173-190.
5. Garson, B. 1989, The Electronic Sweatshop (Penguin Books Ltd).
6. Hage, J. and Aiken, M. 1967, Relationship of centralization to other structural properties. Administrative Science Quarterly, 12, 72-92.
7. Henderson, S. and Cooprider J. 1990, Dimensions of IS planning and design aids: a functional model of CASE technology. Information Systems Research, 1(3), 227-308.
8. Hidding, G. 1997, Communications of the ACM, 40(11), 102-109.
9. Jackson, S. and Schuler, R. 1985, A meta-analysis and conceptual critique of research on role ambiguity and role conflict in work settings. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 36, 16-78.
10. Necco, C., Gordon, C. and Tsai, N. 1987, Systems analysis and design: current practices. MIS Quarterly, 11(4), December, 461-478.
11. Norman, R. and Nunamker, J. 1989, CASE productivity perceptions of software engineering professionals. Communications of the ACM, September, 32(9), 1102-1108.
12. Orlikowski, W. 1989, Division among the ranks: the social implications of CASE tools for system developers. Proceedings of the Tenth International Conference on Information Systems, Boston, MA, 4-6 December, 199-210.
13. Orlikowski, W. 1993, CASE Tools as organizational change: investigating incremental and radical changes in systems development. MIS Quarterly, 17(3) September, 309-340.
14. Rizzo, J., House, R. and Lirtzman, S. 1970, Role conflict and ambiguity in complex organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly, 15(2), June, 150-163.
15. Tosi, H.L., Rizzo, J.R. and Carroll, S.J. 1990, Managing Organizational Behaviour (Harper and Row).
16. Vessey, I., Jarvenpaa, S. and Tractinsky, N. 1992, Evaluation of vendor products: CASE Tools as methodology companions. Communications of the ACM, 35(4), April, 90-105.
17. Withey, M., Daft, R. and Cooper, W. 1983, Measures of Perrow'S work unit technology: an empirical assessment and a new scale. Academy of Management Journal, 26, 45-63.
18. Wuitten, J. and Bentley, D. 1988, Systems Analysis and Design Methods (Boston, MA: Irwin/McGraw Hill).
19. Yellen, R. 1990, Systems Analysts Performance Using CASE Versus Manual Methods. Proceedings of the HICCS conference, 4, Honolulu, HI, 497-501.
20. Zuboff, S. 1988, In The Age of the Smart Machine (New York: Basic Book Publishers).