Why do we keep using a process modelling technique?

ACIS 2007 Proceedings - 18th Australasian Conference on Information Systems

Volumn , Issue , 2007, Pages 48-59

  Recker, Jan ^a  

^a QUEENSLAND UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY   (Australia)

Author keywords

Expectation confirmation theory; Process modelling; Technology acceptance; User evaluation

Indexed keywords

EMPIRICAL TEST; EXPECTATION CONFIRMATION THEORY; HYBRID RESEARCH MODELS; IN-DEPTH UNDERSTANDING; PROCESS MODELLING; TECHNOLOGY ACCEPTANCE; THEORETICAL MODELS; USER EVALUATIONS;

INFORMATION SYSTEMS; RESEARCH;

PROCESS ENGINEERING;

EID: 84869137476     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (46)

1. Ajzen, I. and Fishbein, M. (1980) Understanding Attitudes and Predicting Social Behavior, Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey.
2. Akaike, H. (1974) A New Look at the Statistical Model Identification, IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, 19, 716-723.
3. Bandara, W., Gable, G.G. and Rosemann, M. (2005) Factors and Measures of Business Process Modelling: Model Building Through a Multiple Case Study, European Journal of Information Systems, 14, 347-360.
4. Bentler, P.M. and Bonett, D.G. (1980) Significance Tests and Goodness of Fit in the Analysis of Covariance Structures, Psychological Bulletin, 88, 588-606.
5. Bhattacherjee, A. (2001) Understanding Information Systems Continuance: An Expectation-Confirmation Model, MIS Quarterly, 25, 351-370.
6. Bhattacherjee, A. and Premkumar, G. (2004) Understanding Changes in Belief and Attitude Toward Information Technology Usage: A Theoretical Model and Longitudinal Test, MIS Quarterly, 28, 229-254.
7. Bozdogan, H. (1987) Model Selection and Akaike's Information Criterion (AIC): The General Theory and Its Analytical Extensions, Psychometrika, 52, 345-370.
8. BPMI.org and OMG (2006) Business Process Modeling Notation Specification. Final Adopted Specification, URL http://www.bpmn.org, Accessed February 20.
9. Carroll, J., Howard, S., Peck, J. and Murphy, J. (2003) From Adoption to Use: the Process of Appropriating a Mobile Phone, Australian Journal of Information Systems, 10, 38-48.
10. Chau, P.Y.K. (1996) An Empirical Assessment of a Modified Technology Acceptance Model, Journal of Management Information Systems, 13, 185-204.
11. Churchill Jr., G.A. and Surprenant, C. (1982) An Investigation into the Determinants of Customer Satisfaction, Journal of Marketing Research, 19, 491-504.
12. Curtis, B., Kellner, M.I. and Over, J. (1992) Process Modeling, Communications of the ACM, 35, 75-90.
13. Davenport, T.H. (1993) Process Innovation: Reengineering Work Through Information Technology, Harvard Business School Press, Boston, Massachusetts.
14. Davies, I., Green, P., Rosemann, M., Indulska, M. and Gallo, S. (2006) How do Practitioners Use Conceptual Modeling in Practice?, Data & Knowledge Engineering, 58, 358-380.
15. Davis, F.D. (1986) A Technology Acceptance Model for Empirically Testing New End-User Information Systems: Theory and Results, Doctoral Thesis, Sloan School of Management, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
16. Davis, F.D. (1989) Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, and User Acceptance of Information Technology, MIS Quarterly, 13, 319-340.
17. Davis, F.D., Bagozzi, R.P. and Warshaw, P.R. (1989) User Acceptance Of Computer Technology: A Comparison Of Two Theoretical Models, Management Science, 35, 982-1003.
18. Fazio, R.H., Zanna, M.P. and Cooper, J. (1978) Direct Experience and Attitude-Behavior Consistency: An Information Processing Analysis, Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 4, 48-51.
19. Fornell, C. and Larcker, D.F. (1981) Evaluating Structural Equations with Unobservable Variables and Measurement Error, Journal of Marketing Research, 18, 39-50.
20. Frey, B.S. (1993) Shirking or Work Morale? The Impact of Regulating, European Economic Review, 37, 1523-1532.
21. Gartner Group (2007) Creating Enterprise Leverage: The 2007 CIO Agenda, EXP Premier Report No. January2007, Gartner, Inc, Stamford, Connecticut.
22. Gemino, A. and Wand, Y. (2004) A Framework for Empirical Evaluation of Conceptual Modeling Techniques, Requirements Engineering, 9, 248-260.
23. Goodhue, D.L. (1995) Understanding User Evaluations of Information Systems, Management Science, 41, 1827-1844.
24. Hair, J.F., Anderson, R.E., Tatham, R.L. and Black, W.C. (1995) Multivariate Data Analysis with Readings (4th edition), Prentice Hall, New York, New York.
25. Hsu, M.H., Chiu, C.M. and Ju, T.L. (2004) Determinants of Continued Use of the WWW: An Integration of Two Theoretical Models, Industrial Management & Data Systems, 104, 766-775.
26. Jasperson, J., Carter, P.E. and Zmud, R.W. (2005) A Comprehensive Conceptualization of Post-Adoptive Behaviors Associated with Information Technology Enabled Work Systems, MIS Quarterly, 29, 525-557.
27. Jöreskog, K.G., Sörbom, D., du Toit, S. and du Toit, M. (2001) LISREL 8: New Statistical Features, SSI, Lincolnwood, Illinois.
28. Kim, S.S. and Malhotra, N.K. (2005) A Longitudinal Model of Continued IS Use: An Integrative View of Four Mechanisms Underlying Postadoption Phenomena, Management Science, 51, 741-755.
29. King, W.R. and He, J. (2006) A Meta-analysis of the Technology Acceptance Model, Information & Management, 43, 740-755.
30. Krogstie, J., Sindre, G. and Jørgensen, H.D. (2006) Process Models Representing Knowledge for Action: a Revised Quality Framework, European Journal of Information Systems, 15, 91-102.
31. Lee, Y., Kozar, K.A. and Larsen, K.R.T. (2003) The Technology Acceptance Model: Past, Present, and Future, Communications of the AIS, 12, 752-780.
32. Likert, R. (1932) A Technique for the Measurement of Attitudes, Archives of Psychology, 140, 5-53.
33. Moody, D.L. (1996) Seven Habits of Highly Effective Data Modelers, Database Programming and Design, 9, 12-30.
34. Moore, G.C. and Benbasat, I. (1991) Development of an Instrument to Measure the Perceptions of Adopting an Information Technology Innovation, Information Systems Research, 2, 192-222.
35. Orlikowski, W.J. (1993) CASE Tools as Organizational Change: Investigating Incremental and Radical Changes in Systems Development, MIS Quarterly, 17, 309-340.
36. Pinsonneault, A. and Kraemer, K.L. (1993) Survey Research Methodology in Management Information Systems: An Assessment, Journal of Management Information Systems, 10, 75-105.
37. Premkumar, G. and Bhattacherjee, A. (2008) Explaining Information Systems Usage: A Test of Competing Models, Omega, 36, 64-75.
38. Recker, J. and Rosemann, M. (2007) Understanding the Process of Constructing Scales Inventories in the Process Modelling Domain in H. Österle, J. Schelp and R. Winter (eds.) Proceedings of the 15th European Conference on Information Systems, University of St. Gallen, St. Gallen, Switzerland, 2014-2025.
39. Rosemann, M., Recker, J., Indulska, M. and Green, P. (2006) A Study of the Evolution of the Representational Capabilities of Process Modeling Grammars in E. Dubois and K. Pohl (eds.) Advanced Information Systems Engineering - CAiSE 2006, Springer, Luxembourg, Grand-Duchy of Luxembourg, 447-461.
40. Scheer, A.-W. (2000) ARIS - Business Process Modeling (3rd edition), Springer, Berlin, Germany.
41. SeJoon, H., Thong, J.Y.L. and Tam, K.Y. (2006) Understanding Continued Information Technology Usage Behavior: A Comparison of Three Models in the Context of Mobile Internet, Decision Support Systems, 42, 1819-1834.
42. van der Aalst, W.M.P., ter Hofstede, A.H.M., Kiepuszewski, B. and Barros, A.P. (2003) Workflow Patterns, Distributed and Parallel Databases, 14, 5-51.
43. Venkatesh, V. and Davis, F.D. (1996) A Model of the Antecedents of Perceived Ease of Use: Development and Test, Decision Sciences, 27, 451-481.
44. Venkatesh, V. and Davis, F.D. (2000) A Theoretical Extension of the Technology Acceptance Model: Four Longitudinal Field Studies, Management Science, 46, 186-204.
45. Venkatesh, V., Morris, M.G., Davis, G.B. and Davis, F.D. (2003) User Acceptance of Information Technology: Toward a Unified View, MIS Quarterly, 27, 425-478.
46. Verbeek, H.M.V., van der Aalst, W.M.P. and ter Hofstede, A.H.M. (2007) Verifying Workflows with Cancellation Regions and OR-joins: An Approach Based on Relaxed Soundness and Invariants, The Computer Journal, 50, 294-314.