Measuring software methodology usage: Challenges of conceptualization and operationalization

2005 International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering, ISESE 2005

Volumn , Issue , 2005, Pages 447-457

  Dybå, Tore ^a   Moe, Nils B ^a   Arisholm, Erik ^b  

^a SINTEF ICT   (Norway)

^b SIMULA RESEARCH LABORATORY   (Norway)

Author keywords

Conceptualization; Empirical Software Engineering; Measurement; Methodology usage; Operationalization; Technology acceptance

Indexed keywords

COMPUTER SCIENCE; COMPUTER SOFTWARE REUSABILITY; REGRESSION ANALYSIS; SOCIETIES AND INSTITUTIONS;

CONCEPTUALIZATION; EMPIRICAL SOFTWARE ENGINEERING; METHODOLOGY USAGES; OPERATIONALIZATION; TECHNOLOGY ACCEPTANCE;

SOFTWARE ENGINEERING;

EID: 33749064573     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: 10.1109/ISESE.2005.1541852     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (42)

1. Agarwal and Prasad (2000) A Field Study of the Adoption of Software Process Innovations by Information Systems Professionals, IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, vol. 47, no. 3, pp. 295-308.
2. Ajzen, I. (1991) The Theory of Planned Behavior, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, vol. 50, pp. 179-211.
3. Avison, D.E. and Fitzgerald, G. (1995) Information Systems Development: Methodologies, Techniques, and Tools, 2nd Edition, New York: McGraw-Hill.
4. Burton-Jones, A. and Straub, D. (2004) Reconceptualizing System Usage, Working Paper, Georgia State Univ.
5. Campbell and Fiske (1959) Campbell, D. T., & Fiske, D. W. (1959). Convergent and Discriminant Validation by the Multitrait-Multimethod Matrix, Psychological Bulletin, vol. 56, pp. 81-105.
6. Davis, F. (1989) Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, and User Acceptance of Information Technology, MIS Quarterly, vol. 13, no. 3, pp. 318-339.
7. Davis, F., Bagozzi, R., and Warshaw, P. (1989) User Acceptance of Computer Technology: A Comparison of Two Theoretical Models, Management Science, vol. 35, no. 8, pp. 982-1003.
8. DeLone, W.H. and McLean, E.R. (1992) Information Systems Success: The Quest for the Dependent Variable, Information Systems Research, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 60-95.
9. DeLone, W.H. and McLean, E.R. (2003) The DeLone and McLean Model of Information Systems Success: A Ten-Year Update, Journal of Management Information Systems, vol. 19, no. 4, pp. 9-30.
10. Devaraj, S. and Kohli, R. (2003) Performance Impacts of Information Technology: Is Actual Usage the Missing Link? Management Science, vol. 49, no. 3, pp. 273-289.
11. Dybå, T. (2003) A Dynamic Model of Software Engineering Knowledge Creation, book chapter in A. Aurum, R. Jeffery, C. Wohlin, and M. Handzic (Eds.) Managing Software Engineering Knowledge, Berlin: Springer Verlag, pp. 95-117.
12. Dybå, T. (2005) An Empirical Investigation of the Key Factors for Success in Software Process Improvement, IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, vol. 31, no. 5, pp. 410-424.
13. Dybå, T., Moe, N.B., and Mikkelsen, E.M. (2004) An Empirical Investigation on Factors Affecting Software Developer Acceptance and Utilization of Electronic Process Guides, Proceedings of the 10th International Software Metrics Symposium (Metrics 2004), Chicago, Illinois, USA, 14-16 Sep, pp. 220-231.
14. Fitzgerald, B. (1998) An Empirical Investigation into the Adoption of Systems Development Methodologies, Information and Management, vol. 34, pp. 317-328.
15. Freund, R.J. and Wilson, W.J. (1998) Regression Analysis: Statistical Modeling of a Response Variable, San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
16. Goodhue, D.L. and Thompson, R.L. (1995) Task-Technology Fit and Individual Performance, MIS Quarterly, vol.19, no. 2, pp. 213-236.
17. Green, G.C., Hevner, A.R., and Collins, R.W. (2005) The Impacts of Quality and Productivity Perceptions on the Use of Software Process Improvement Innovations, Information and Software Technology, vol. 47, no. 8, pp. 543-553.
18. Hartwick, J. and Barki, H. (1994) Explaining the Role of User Participation in Information System Use, Management Science, vol. 40, no. 4, pp. 440-465.
19. Hardgrave, B.C. and Johnson, R.A. (2003) Toward an Information Systems Development Acceptance Model: The Case of Object-Oriented Systems Development, IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, vol. 50, no. 3, pp. 322-336.
20. Hardgrave, B.C., Davis, F.D., and Riemenschneider, C.K. (2003) Investigating Determinants of Software Developers' Intentions to Follow Methodologies, Journal of Management Information Systems, vol. 20, no. 1, pp. 123-151.
21. Hidding, G.J. (1997) Reinventing Methodology: Who Reads It and Why?, Communications of the ACM, vol. 40, no. 11, pp. 102-109.
22. Iivari, J. (1996) Why are CASE Tools Not Used?, Communications of the ACM, vol. 39, no. 10, pp. 94-103.
23. Iivari, J. and Maansaari, J. (1998) The Usage of Systems Development Methods: Are We Stuck to Old Practices?, Information and Software Technology, vol. 40, pp. 501-510.
24. Khalifa, M. and Verner, J. (2000) Drivers for Software Development Method Usage, IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, vol. 47, no. 3, pp. 360-369.
25. Moe, N.B. and Dybå, T. (2005) The use of an Electronic Process Guide in a Medium-Sized Software Development Company, accepted for publication in Software Process: Improvement and Practice.
26. Moore, G.C. and Benbasat, I. (1991) Development of an Instrument to Measure the Perceptions of Adopting an Information Technology Innovation, Information Systems Research, vol. 2, no. 3, pp. 192-222.
27. Neuman, W.L. (2002) Social Research Methods: Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches, Fifth Edition, Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
28. Parnas, D.L. and Clements, P.C. (1986) A Rational Design Process: How and Why to Fake It, IEEE Trans actions on Software Engineering, vol. 12, no. 2, pp. 251-257.
29. Podsakoff, P.M. and Organ, D.W. (1986) Self-Reports in Organizational Research: Problems and Prospects, Journal of Management, vol. 12, no. 4, pp. 531-544.
30. Riemenschneider, C.K., Hardgrave, B.C., and Davis, F.D. (2002) Explaining Software Developer Acceptance of Methodologies: A Comparison of Five Theoretical Models, IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, vol. 28, no. 12, pp. 1135-1145.
31. Roberts, T., Gibson, M., Fields, K., and Rainer, R. (1998) Factors that Impact Implementing a System Development Methodology, IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, vol. 24, no. 8, pp. 640-649.
32. Rogers, E.M. (2003) Diffusion of Innovations, Fifth Edition, New York: The Free Press.
33. Scott, L., Carvalhoa, L., Jeffery, R., D'Ambra, J., and Becker-Kornstaedt, U. (2002) Understanding the Use of an Electronic Process Guide, Information and Software Technology, vol. 44, pp 601-616.
34. Shadish, W.R., Cook, T.D., and Campbell, D.T. (2002) Experimental and Quasi-Experimental Designs for Generalized Causal Inference, Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company.
35. Sharma, S. and Rai, A. (2000) CASE Deployment in IS Organizations, Communications of the ACM, vol. 43, no. 1, pp. 80-88.
36. Straub, D., Limayem, M., and Karahanna-Evaristo (1995), Measuring System Usage: Implications for IS Theory Testing, Management Science, vol. 41, no. 8, pp. 1328-1342.
37. Szajna, B. (1996) Empirical Evaluation of the Revised Technology Acceptance Model, Management Science, vol. 42, no. 1, pp. 85-92.
38. Taylor, S. and P.A. Todd (1995) Assessing IT Usage: The Role of Prior Experience, MIS Quarterly, vol. 19, no. 4, pp. 561-570.
39. Thompson, R., Higgins, C., and Howell, J. (1991) Personal Computing: Toward a Conceptual Model of Utilization, MIS Quarterly, vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 125-143.
40. Trice, A.W. and Treacy, M.E. (1988) Utilization as a Dependent Variable in MIS Research, Data Base, vol. 19, no. 3/4, pp. 33-41.
41. Venkatesh, V. and Davis, F. (2000) A Theoretical Extension of the Technology Acceptance Model: Four Longitudinal Field Studies, Management Science, vol. 46, no. 2, pp. 186-204.
42. Wynekoop, J.L. and Russo, N.L. (1997) Studying System Development Methodologies: An Examination of Research Methods, Information Systems Journal, vol. 7, pp. 47-65.