Improving the quality of data models: Empirical validation of a quality management framework

Information Systems

Volumn 28, Issue 6, 2003, Pages 619-650

  Moody, Daniel L ^a,b   Shanks, Graeme G ^c  

^a NORWEGIAN UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY   (Norway)

^b MONASH UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

^c UNIVERSITY OF MELBOURNE   (Australia)

Author keywords

Action research; Data modelling; Entity relationship model; Quality assurance; Requirements analysis

Indexed keywords

AUTOMATION; DATA REDUCTION; INFORMATION MANAGEMENT; QUALITY ASSURANCE; REENGINEERING; REQUIREMENTS ENGINEERING; TOTAL QUALITY MANAGEMENT;

DATA MODEL QUALITY ADVISOR; ENTITY RELATIONSHIP MODEL; PROCESS QUALITY; PRODUCT QUALITY; QUALITY MANAGEMENT; REQUIREMENTS ANALYSIS;

DATA STRUCTURES;

EID: 0037811331     PISSN: 03064379     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0306-4379(02)00043-1     Document Type: Article

References (110)

1. G.C. Witt, G.C. Simsion, Data Modeling Essentials: Analysis, Design, and Innovation, The Coriolis Group, 2000.
2. Asma, ASMA Project Database Release 7.0, ASMA (Australian Software Metrics Association), P.O. Box 1287, Box Hill, Victoria, Australia, 3128, November, 1996.
3. Gartner Research, Sometimes You Gotta Break the Rules. Gartner Group Strategic Management Series Key Issues, November 23, 1992.
4. D.L. Moody, G.C. Simsion, Justifying investment in information resource management, Aust. J. Inform. Systems 3 (1) (1995) 25-37.
5. R.D. Banker, R.J. Kauffman, Reuse and productivity in integrated computer aided software engineering: an empirical study, MIS Q. 15 (3) (1991) 375-401.
6. J.C. van Vliet, Software Engineering: Principles and Practice, Wiley, Chichester, England, 1993.
7. R.E. Zultner, The Deming way: total quality management for software, Proceedings of Total Quality Management for Software Conference, Washington, DC, April, 1992.
8. B.W. Boehm, Software Engineering Economics, Prentice-Hall Inc., Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1981.
9. C. Walrad, E. Moss, Measurement: the key to application development quality, IBM Systems J. 32 (3) (1993) 445-460.
10. J. Krogstie, O.I. Lindland, G. Sindre, Towards a deeper understanding of quality in requirements engineering, Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference on Advanced Information Systems Engineering (CAISE), Jyvaskyla, Finland, June, 1995.
11. D.L. Moody, G.G. Shanks, What makes a good data model? Evaluating the quality of entity relationship models, in: P. Loucopolous, (Ed.), Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on the Entity Relationship Approach, Manchester, England, December 14-17, 1994.
12. J.R. Evans, W.M. Lindsay, The Management and Control of Quality, 5th Edition, South-Western (Thomson Learning), Cinciinnati, OH, 2002.
13. W.E. Deming, Out of the Crisis, MIT Center for Advanced Engineering, Cambridge, MA, 1986.
14. B. von Halle, Data: asset or liability? Database Programming Design 4 (7) (1991) 21-24.
15. C. Batini, S. Ceri, S.B. Navathe, Conceptual Database Design: An Entity Relationship Approach, Benjamin Cummings, Redwood City, CA, 1992.
16. A. Levitin, T. Redman, Quality dimensions of a conceptual view, Inform. Process. Manage. 31 (1) (1994).
17. O.I. Lindland, G. Sindre, A. Sølvberg, Understanding quality in conceptual modelling, IEEE Software 11 (2) (1994) 42-49.
18. S. Kesh, Evaluating the quality of entity relationship models. Information Software Technol. 37 (12) (1995) 681-689.
19. J. Ivari, Dimensions of information systems design: a framework for a long range research program, Inform. Systems J. 11 (4) (1986) 343-355.
20. N. Rescher, Methodological Pragmatism: Systems-Theoretic Approach to the Theory of Knowledge, Basil Blackwell, Oxford, 1977.
21. J.L. Wynekoop, N.L. Russo, Studying systems development methodologies: an examination of research methods, Inform. Systems J. 7 (1) (1997) 47-66.
22. M. Gibbon, C. Limoges, H. Nowotny, S. Schwartzman, P. Scott, M. Trow, The New Production of Knowledge: The Dynamics of Science and Research in Contemporary Societies, Sage Publications, Beverley Hills, CA, 1994.
23. D.L. Moody, Metrics for evaluating the quality of entity relationship models, Proceedings of the International Conference on Conceptual Modelling (ER '98), Elsevier, Singapore, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Springer, Berlin, November 16-19, 1998.
24. T.W. Olle, H.G. Sol, A.A. Verrijn-Stuart (Eds.), Information Systems Design Methodologies: A Comparative Review, North-Hollnad, Amsterdam, 1982.
25. T.W. Olle, H.G. Sol, C.J. Tully (Eds.), Information Systems Design Methodologies: A Feature Analysis, North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1983.
26. T.W. Olle, H.G. Sol, A.A. Verrijn-Stuart (Eds.), Information Systems Design Methodologies: Improving the Practice, North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1986.
27. G. Fitzgerald, in: H.E. Nissen, H.K. Klein, R. Hirschheim (Eds.), Validating New Information Systems Techniques: A Retrospective Analysis, Information Systems Research: Contemporary Approaches And Emergent Traditions, North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1991.
28. R.A. Weber, Ontological Foundations of Information Systems, Coopers and Lybrand Accounting Research Methodology Monograph No. 4, Coopers and Lybrand, Melbourne, Australia, 1997.
29. J.A. Bubenko, in: T.W. Olle, H.G. Sol, A.A. Verrijn-Stuart (Eds.), Information Systems Methodologies-A Research View, Information Systems Design Methodologies: Improving The Practice, North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1986.
30. B. Curtis, in: E. Soloway, S. Iyengar, (Eds.), By The Way, Did Anyone Study Any Real Programmers? Empirical Studies of Programmers, Norward, NJ, Ablex, 1986.
31. D.L. Moody, G.G. Shanks, Evaluating and improving the quality of entity relationship models: an action research programme, Aust. Comput. J. 30 (3) (1998) 97-110.
32. C. Westrup, Information systems methodologies in use, J. Inform. Technol. 8 (1993) 267-275.
33. N. Rescher, Cognitive Systematization, Basil Blackwell, Oxford, 1979.
34. R.L. Baskerville, T. Wood-Harper, A critical perspective on action research as a method for information systems research, J. Inform. Technol. 3 (11) (1996) 235-246.
35. R.D. Galliers, in: H.E. Nissen, H.K. Klein, R. Hirschheim, (Eds.), Choosing Information Systems Research Approaches, Information Systems Research: Contemporary Approaches and Emergent Traditions, North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1991.
36. R.D. Galliers, Information Systems Research: Issues, Methods and Practical Guidelines, Blackwell Scientific Publications, Oxford, 1992.
37. J. Nunamaker, M. Chen, T.D.M. Purdin, Systems development in information systems research, J. Manage. Inform. Systems 7 (3) (1991) 89-106.
38. G. Shanks, A. Rouse, D. Arnott, A review of approaches to research and scholarship in information systems, Proceedings of the Fourth Australian Conference on Information Systems, Brisbane, 1993.
39. T.D. Jick, Mixing qualitative and quantitative methods: triangulation in action, Administrative Sci. Q. 24 (1979) 602-611.
40. B. Kaplan, D. Duchon, Combining qualitative and quantitative methods in information systems research: a case study, MIS Q. 12 (4) (1988) 571-586.
41. A. Lee, Integrating positivist and interpretivist approaches to organisational research, Organ. Sci. 2 (4) (1991) 342-365.
42. W.L. Neuman, Social Research Methods-Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches, 4th Edition, Allyn and Bacon, Needham Heights, MA, 2000.
43. D. Avison, F. Lau, M. Myers, P.A. Nielsen, Action Research, Comm. ACM 42 (1) (1999) 94-97.
44. T.L. Baker, Doing Social Research, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1998.
45. J. Mckernan, Curriculum Action Research: A Handbook of Methods and Resources for the Reflective Practitioner, Kogan Page, London, 1991.
46. E.T. Stringer, Action Research-A Handbook for Practitioners, SAGE publications, London, 1996.
47. J. Masters, The history of action research, in: I. Hughes (Ed.), Action Research Electronic Reader (on-line). http://www.behs.cchs.usyd.edu.au/arow/Reader/ The University of Sydney, 1995.
48. B. Dick, A beginner's guide to action research [On line], Action Research and Evaluation On Line (AREOL), http:\\\www.scu.edu.au/schools/gcm/ar/arp/guide.html, 2000.
49. P. B. Checkland, From framework through experience to learning: the essential nature of action research, in: H. E. Nissen, H.K. Klein, R. Hirschheim, (Eds.), Information Systems Research: Contemporary Approaches And Emergent Traditions, North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1991.
50. D. L. Moody, Building links between IS research and professional practice: improving the relevance and impact of IS research, in: R.A. Weber, B. Glasson, (Eds.), International Conference on Information Systems (ICIS'00), Brisbane, Australia, December 11-13, 2000.
51. F.A. Lau, A review of action research in information systems studies, in: A. Lee, J. Liebenau, J.I. DeGross, (Eds.), Information Systems and Qualitative Research, 1997, pp. 31-68.
52. M. Oosthuizen, Action research, in: K. Williamson, (Ed.), Research Methods for Students and Professionals: Information Management and Systems, Charles Sturt University, Centre for Information Studies, 2000.
53. K. Lewin, Action research and minority problems, J. Social Issues 2 (1946) 34-46.
54. S. Kemmis, R.E. McTaggart, The Action Research Planner, Deakin University, Melbourne, Australia, 1988.
55. I.M. Holter, D. Schwartz-Barcott, Action research: what is it, how has it been used and how can it be used in nursing? J. Adv. Nurs. 18 (1993) 296-304.
56. R. Hatten, D. Knapp, R. Salonga, Action research: comparison with the concepts of the reflective practitioner and quality assurance, in: I. Hughes, (Ed.), Action Research Electronic Reader (on line), http://www.behs.cchs.usyd.edu.au/arow/Reader/rmasters.htm, The University of Sydney, 1997.
57. I. Benbasat, R.W. Zmud, Empirical research in information systems: the practice of relevance, MIS Q. 23 (1) (1999) 3-16.
58. T.H. Davenport, M.L. Markus, Rigour vs. relevance revisited: response to benbasat and zmud, MIS Q. 23 (1) (1999) 18-23.
59. R.D. Galliers, Relevance and rigour in information systems research: some personal reflections on issues facing the information systems research community, Proceedings of the IFIP TC8 Conference on Business Process Reengineering: Information Systems and Challenges, Gold Coast, Australia, 1994.
60. P.G.W. Keen, Relevance and rigour in information systems research: improving quality, confidence, cohesion and impact, in: H.-E. Nissen, H.K. Klein, R. Hirschheim, (Eds.), Information Systems Research: Contemporary Approaches and Emergent Traditions, Elsevier Science Publishers, North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1991.
61. P.B. Checkland, S. Holwell, Information, Systems and Information Systems: Making Sense of the Field, Wiley, New York, 1998.
62. S.L. Chow, Significance test or effect size, Psychol. Bull. 103 (1) (1988) 105-110.
63. B. Dick, Rigour and relevance in action research [On line], in: B. Dick, R. Passfield, P. Wildman, (Eds.), Action Research, Evaluation On Line (AREOL), Available online at http:\\\www.scu.edu.au/schools/gem/ar/arp/guide.html, 1997.
64. C. Alexander, Notes on The Synthesis of Form, Harvard University Press, Boston, 1968.
65. Y.-G. Kim, G.C. Everest, Building an IS Architecture: collective wisdom from the field, Inform. Manage. 26 (1995) 1-10.
66. B. Dick, Approaching an action research thesis: an overview, in: B. Dick, R. Passfield, P. Wildman, (Eds.), Action Research and Evaluation on Line (AREOL), Available on-line at http:\\\www.scu.edu.au/schools/gem/ar/arp/guide.html, 1997.
67. C. Argyris, R. Putnam, D.M. Smith, Action Science: Concepts, Methods and Skills for Research and Intervention, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, 1985.
68. T.H. Davenport, Saving IT's soul: human centred information management, Harvard Business Review, March-April, 1994.
69. R.E. Zultner, QFD for software: satisfying customers, American Programmer, February, 1992, pp. 1-14.
70. G.C. Simsion, Creative data modelling, Proceedings of the Tenth International Entity Relationship Conference, San Francisco, 1991.
71. T.P. Moran, J.P. Carroll (Eds.), Design Rationale: Concepts, Techniques and Use, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, New Jersey, 1996.
72. R.G. Ross, The Business Rule Book, 2nd Edition, Database Research Group, Boston, MA, 1996.
73. B. von Halle, J. Conkey, Rewiring the business, Database Programming Design 10 (1) (1997) 11-15.
74. ISO, Information processing systems: concepts and terminology for the conceptual schema and the information base, Information Standards Organisation (ISO), ISO Technical Report 9007, 1987.
75. A.D. Baddeley, The magical number seven: still magic after all these years? Psychol. Rev. 101 (2) (1994) 353-356.
76. G.A. Miller, The magical number seven, plus or minus two: some limits on our capacity for processing information, Psychol. Rev. 63 (1956) 81-97.
77. W. Kent, Data and Reality: Basic Assumptions in Data Processing Reconsidered, North-Holland, Amsterdam, NY, 1978.
78. D.L. Moody, Metrics for improving the quality of entity relationship models: an empirical investigation, University of Melbourne Information Systems Working Paper, Department of Information Systems, University of Melbourne, January (under submission), 2000.
79. T.H. Davenport, D.W. de Long, M.C. Beers, Successful knowledge management projects, Sloan Manage. Rev. 39 (2) (1998) 43-52.
80. D.L. Moody, Strategies for improving the quality of entity relationship models, Information Resource Management Association (IRMA) Conference, Anchorage, Alaska, Idea Group Publishing, May 21-24, 2000.
81. B. Dick, Sources of rigour in action research: addressing the issues of trustworthiness and credibility, Association for Qualitative Research Conference "Issues of Rigour in Qualitative Research", Duxton Hotel, Melbourne, Victoria, 6-10 July 1999.
82. N. Rescher, The Primacy of Practice, Basil Blackwell, Oxford, 1973.
83. D. Batra, J.A. Hoffer, R.P. Bostrom, Comparing representations with relational and EER models, Commun. ACM 33 (2) (1990) 126-139.
84. D.B. Bock, T. Ryan, Accuracy in modelling with extended entity relationship and object oriented data model, J. Database Manage. 4 (4) (1993) 30-39.
85. B.C. Hardgrave, N.P. Dalal, Comparing object oriented and extended entity relationship models, J. Database Manage. 6 (3) (1995) 15-21.
86. H. Lee, B.G. Choi, A comparative study of conceptual data modelling techniques, J. Database Manage. 9 (2) (1998) 26-35.
87. P. Shoval, M. Even-Chaime, Database schema design: an experimental comparison between normalisation and information analysis, Database 18 (3) (1987) 30-39.
88. P. Shoval, S. Shiran, Entity-relationship and object-oriented data modeling: an experimental comparison of design quality, Data Knowledge Eng. 21 (1997) 297-315.
89. D. Batra, J. Davis, Conceptual data modelling in database design: similarities and differences between expert and novice designers, Int. J. Man-Mach. Stud. 37 (1992) 83-101.
90. P. Chaiyasut, G.G. Shanks, Conceptual data modelling process: a study of novice and expert data modellers, in: T. Halpin, R. Meersman, (Eds.), Proceedings of The First International Conference on Object Role Modelling, Magnetic Island, Queensland, Australia, July, 1994.
91. N. Maiden, A. Sutcliffe, Analysing the novice analyst: cognitive models in software engineering, Int. J. Man Mach. Stud. 367 (1992) 719-740.
92. G.G. Shanks, G.C. Simsion, M. Rembach, The role of experience in conceptual data modelling, Fourth Australian Information Systems Conference, Brisbane, Australia, 1993.
93. G.G. Shanks, Conceptual data modelling: an empirical study of expert and novice data modellers, Aust. J. Inform. Systems 4 (2) (1997) 63-73.
94. Y.-G. Kim, S.T. March, Comparing data modelling formalisms, Commun. ACM 38 (1995) 6.
95. J. Nunally, Psychometric Theory, 2nd Edition, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1978.
96. R.D. Caplan, R.K. Naidu, R.C. Tripathi, Coping and defense: constellations vs. components, J. Health Social Behav. 25 (1984) 303-320.
97. H.A. Simon, Sciences of The Artificial, 3rd Edition, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1996.
98. J. Nunamaker, M. Chen, Systems Development in Information Systems Research, IEEE631-639, 1990.
99. F. Burstein, S. Gregor, The systems development or engineering approach to research in information systems: an action research perspective, Proceedings of the Tenth Australasian Conference on Information Systems. Adelaide, Australia, December 3-5, 1999.
100. G. Shanks, P. Darke, Quality in conceptual modelling: linking theory and practice, Proceedings of the Pacific Asia Conference on Information Systems (PACIS), Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Australia, May, 1997.
101. D.T. Campbell, J.C. Stanley, Experimental and Quasi-Experimental Designs for Research, Houghton Mifflin College, 1966.
102. D.R. Cooper, P.S. Schindler, Business Research Methods, 6th Edition, McGraw-Hill International, Singapore, 1998.
103. E.R. Babbie, The Practice of Social Research, Wadsworth Publishing, Belmont, CA, 1998.
104. S. Lauesen, O. Vinter, Preventing requirement defects, Proceedings of the Sixth International Workshop on Requirements Engineering: Foundation for Software Quality (REFSQ'2000), Stockholm, Sweden, June 5-6 2000.
105. J. Martin, Information Engineering, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1989.
106. Standish group, The CHAOS Report into Project Failure, The Standish Group International Inc. Available on-line at http://www.standishgroup.com/visitor/chaos.htm, 1995.
107. Standish group, Unfinished Voyages, The Standish Group International Inc. available on-line at http://www.standishgroup.com/visitor/voyages.htm, 1996.
108. D.L. Moody, Dealing with complexity: a practical method for representing large entity relationship models, Ph.D. Thesis, Department of Information Systems, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia, 2001.
109. E. Mumford, Effective Systems Design and Requirement Analysis. The ETHICS Approach, Macmillan Press, Basingstoke, UK.
110. D.L. Moody, The seven habits of highly effective data modellers, Database Programming and Design October (1996) 12-30.