End-User Computing, Development, and Software Engineering: New Challenges

End-User Computing, Development, and Software Engineering: New Challenges

Ashish Dwivedi (The University of Hull, UK) and Steve Clarke (University of Hull Business School, UK)
Release Date: February, 2012|Copyright: © 2012 |Pages: 448|DOI: 10.4018/978-1-4666-0140-6
ISBN13: 9781466601406|ISBN10: 146660140X|EISBN13: 9781466601413
Hardcover:
Available
$156.00
List Price: $195.00
20% Discount:-$39.00
TOTAL SAVINGS: $39.00
E-Book:
Available
$156.00
List Price: $195.00
20% Discount:-$39.00
TOTAL SAVINGS: $39.00
Hardcover +
E-Book:
Available
$188.00
List Price: $235.00
20% Discount:-$47.00
TOTAL SAVINGS: $47.00
OnDemand:
(Individual Chapters)
Available
$37.50
No Current Special Offers
TOTAL SAVINGS: $37.50

Description

End users have become increasingly integrated into computing environments, necessitating continued inquiry into successful models for end user design and development and the impact that these models have on performance and productivity.

End-User Computing, Development and Software Engineering: New Challenges explores the implementation of organizational and end user computing initiatives and provides foundational research to further the understanding of this discipline and its related fields. This book reviews the factors and barriers to ICT adoption in organizations, opportunities and benefits of communities of practice, and impact that end user computing can have on overall firm performance.

Topics Covered

The many academic areas covered in this publication include, but are not limited to:

  • Communities of Practice
  • Computer Self-Efficacy and Technology Acceptance
  • E-Learning
  • End User Attitudes
  • End User Development
  • End User Software Engineering
  • End User Training
  • Enterprise Systems Training
  • ICT System Adoption
  • IT Capability and Organizational Types

Reviews and Testimonials

We hope that you, the academics, practitioners, managers, and students who access this volume, will enjoy reading these contributions as much as we have, and will find within them issues of interest and value for your own practice and research.

– Ashish N. Dwivedi, PhDHull University, UKSteve Clarke, PhDHull University, UKOctober 2011

Table of Contents and List of Contributors

Search this Book:
Reset

Preface

Evolution of Information Management practices and its impact upon Organizational and End User Computing

One of the major challenges that faces managers is how to make effective decisions based on the data at hand.  It is acknowledged that the selection of a particular direction is both constrained and influenced by the availability of data, the ability to transform data into information and then to make recognition of it by deriving knowledge from information. Modern day organisations are facing a deluge of data and information whilst simultaneously lacking knowledge. The 20th century has witnessed a business environment where revolutionary technologies have resulted in new products and reduced product lifecycles.  Thus the twin forces of economic and technological revolutions have put organisations under pressure to adopt innovative information management practices so as to be in a position to adapt swiftly to the new business environment (Dwivedi, Wickramasinghe, Bali, & Naguib, 2008; Sieloff, 1999)

Technological innovations relating to workflow and groupware systems in conjunction with the growth of the WWW has brought about a radical transformation in the way organisations can interact internally and externally.  These new ways of collaboration have resulted in organisations deluged with information to an unprecedented degree resulting in data/information overload (Sieloff, 1999).  The widespread use of Internet applications using client server architecture and web browsers has further increased exponentially our ability to draw on information in ways not previously possible. 

Linkage between Information and Communication Technology, Information Management, and End-User Computing

Information And Communication Technology (ICT) has been be defined as a “family of technologies used to process, store and disseminate information, facilitating the performance of information-related human activities, provided by, and serving both the public at-large as well as the institutional and business sectors” Salomon and Cohen (1999) in (Zhang, Van Donk, & Van der Vaart, 2011). According to Antonelli, Geuna, and Steinmueller (2000) advances in ICT are changing the ways in which organisations carry out their core processes and, more importantly, organise their processes for creating, classifying and accumulating new knowledge.  They observe that:

1.ICTs have made it easier to transfer information.  Through the use of ICTs, organisations are in a position to combine their internal tacit knowledge with the knowledge of external parties (suppliers etc).  In some cases, this also helps organisations to overcome geographical barriers.

2.Modern ICTs are the result of the amalgamation of a number of diverse scientific and technological advances.  They have drawn upon the best from different and distinct scientific and technological fields with the end product being totally different and possessing a very rich knowledge base.  When these ICTs are used in different domains they are therefore able to provide new ways of generating or applying knowledge.

3.Modern ICTs that provide support for simulation etc in combination with their ability to access and draw broad trends from a wide variety of data sources can assist organisations in elucidating new forms of quasi-codified knowledge.

4.Modern ICTs, through the use of powerful and diverse general purpose software and algorithms, have increased the economic value of codified knowledge which consequently has further accelerated the rate of codification. 

5.The evolution of ICTs has also impacted on organisational structures with the old model of vertical integration in an organisation being rendered obsolete.  Innovative organisational structures based upon quasi-vertical integration are becoming the norm.  Large Research and Development (R&D) laboratories are being replaced with internal networks of small units (both internal and external). 

6.ICTs are serving as a means of bringing together highly localised knowledge which was traditionally inaccessible. 

According to Rabkin and Tingley (1999) in 1999 about fifty percent of American households owned a computer and about forty percent of all American adults had access to the Internet.  One of the new challenges brought about by the ICT revolution is that consumers’ expectations with regard to the speed of service have increased exponentially.  Contemporary consumers are technologically proficient and are used to a very fast response time (in IT terms).  It is expected that, in the future, companies who are unable to meet consumers high expectations may not survive (Rabkin & Tingley, 1999).

According to Antonelli, Geuna and Steinmueller (2000) advances in ICT are changing the way organisations carry out their core processes and, more importantly, organise their process for creating, classifying and accumulating new knowledge.  Antonelli, Geuna and Steinmueller (2000, pp.73) have observed that throughout the twentieth century “the central goal of technology management has been to align the mass production of artifacts and knowledge”.  They support this contention by stating that, after the end of the Second World War, a number of Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) economies (including the USA) started large scale public funding for R&D activities which, in many cases, amounted to over 50% of the total R&D expenditure.  This was in sheer contrast to the period preceding the second world war when public R&D funding was severely limited. 

Antonelli, Geuna and Steinmueller (2000) go on to argue that this approach led to creation of an extremely complex research network that was composed of both public and private actors (people and organisations).  Concurring with this, we offer the example of the Internet which was financed by Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) (Talbot, 2001).

The Internet was partly financed by DARPA primarily for USA defence purposes but later spawned to civilian purposes. This validates the contention expressed above that the most important goal of technology management has been to align the mass production of artifacts and knowledge processes.  Dertouzos writing in Talbot (2001, pp.50) mentions that DARPA can be said to have had a return on investment in the region of 1,000 to one, or in business terms 100,000 percent.  He further mentions that some of its most significant success have been “ethernet, the ARPAnet… major advances in computer aided design, especially of very-large-scale integration (VLSI) circuits, speech-understanding systems and many other key contributions in computer science and Al”.  Dertouzos believes that DARPA has been responsible for about fifty percent of the major innovations that have made IT what it is today.

Information Management (IM) has been in existence for over 4000 years. The earliest known attempts at information management have been traced to the ancient city of Ebla in Syria where texts dating back approximately 4000 years illustrate attempts to record and organise information (Pearlson & Saunders, 2003).  Whilst the phenomenon of Information Management has not changed, the tools and techniques used to enable the process of Information Management have changed.  To better understand the relevance of the change in Information Management and its relationship to End User Computing, it is important to understand the nature of the components of the Information Management processes. Information Management in the 20th century has been defined by the evolutions in Information Technology and Computing Science paradigms.  Information management can be defined as: “The economic, efficient and effective coordination of the production, control, storage, retrieval and dissemination of information from external and internal sources, in order to improve the performance of the organisation” (Best, 2010)

A common point in most definitions of Information Technology (IT) is that IT refers to the application of technology to carry out the capture, storage, retrieval, analysis, and communication of information.  IT has its origins in the domain of information sciences which itself is a cluster of separate but related branches of knowledge (see Figure 1), including computer science, information systems, and library science (Pyle & Illingworth, 1996).   Similarly definitions of Computing Science (CS) state that it includes the study of computers and its underlying principles and use. It incorporates computing techniques, such as simulation and artificial intelligence (Dwivedi et al., 2008).The interaction between Computing Science (CS) and Information Science (IS) created the IM concept (see Figure 1). Table 1 traces how the evolution in Information Management products has impacted upon organisation decision-making over the last forty years.


It is possible to draw a link between the evolution of computing technologies in business and its organisational impact.  In the 1960s, the centralised mainframe architecture (see Table 1) became the industry norm and was typically used for electronic data processing. Organisations that adopted this architecture were characterised as being “data heavy at the bottom and data management systems were used to keep the data in check” (Grover and Davenport, 2001, pp.5).  The main objective behind them was to provide information for decision-making.  Information was presented using database concepts to aggregate data.  The 1970s saw the advent of management information systems.  The 1980s witnessed the introduction of the PC and saw its subsequent application as a decision support system.  This in conjunction with user friendly fourth generation languages, and distributed informational control gave the end users the ability to cater to their own unstructured data and information needs” (Grover & Davenport, 2001).  The mid to late 1980s witnessed the coming of age of strategic information systems which were characterised by organisations adopting a proactive approach to information and systems. This facilitated the development of competitive advantage and its subsequent deployment for achieving organisational objectives.  A major catalyst for the above was “the emergence of the Internet and related technologies that provided a potent mechanism for efficiently allowing access to a rich repertoire of information using multimedia channels” (Grover and Davenport, 2001, pp.6).

The evolution in Information Management practices and processes as detailed above has meant that the introduction of information systems into organizations will generally cause a change in behaviour of the actors who interact with various components of Information Management practices and processes, i.e. it will cause a change in human behaviours. Substantial research aimed at understanding crucial factors which contribute to or hinder acceptance and utilization of information systems (IS) exists, and it is widely acknowledged that changing human behaviour is a complex issue and is often regarded as being “obtrusive and distracting”. Incorporation of End-user perspectives is often regarded as a possible solution to this dilemma (Oinas-Kukkonen, Hohtari, & Pekkola, 2010).

However, incorporation of End-user perspectives is quite complex. This is primarily due to the inability to have a clear boundary for what the term “End-user perspective” represents.  Over two decades ago, (Galletta & Hufnagel, 1992) had noted that, “although the term ‘EUC policy’ is widely used in the MIS literature, a clear definition of it has not been stated”.  O'Donnell and March (1987) have noted that there are there are numerous taxonomies in the literature addressing the meaning of the term “end-user”, and “that the categories are either loosely defined and overlapping so that categorization is difficult, or too specific, leaving some classes undefined” (O'Donnell & March, 1987).

Consequently, key concepts such as End-User Computing, End-User Development, and Usability all are related concepts which fall within the boundary of ‘End-user perspective’. End-User Computing has been defined as “direct interaction with application software by managerial, professional, and operating level personnel in user departments” (Torkzadeh & Lee, 2003), whilst (Alavi, 1985) has noted that End-user computing “means that the user of the results of the computing also creates the software specifications necessary to effect the computing itself”.

End-User Development has been defined as a set of methods, techniques, and tools that allows users of software systems, who are acting as non-professional software developers, at some point to create, modify or extend a software artefact (Lieberman, Paternò, & Wulf, 2006).  Wang, Doll, and Deng (2010) have noted that Usability has been conceptually defined and operationally measured in multiple ways, with definitions of usability extend from high-level conceptualizations to more focused descriptions that include notions of user relevance, use efficiency, user attitude, which has resulted in a scenario wherein a key issue facing usability researchers and practitioners alike is which metrics can best measure the construct of usability itself (Wang, Doll, & Deng, 2010).

In-order to provide Information Technology educators, researchers, and practitioners a concise summary on the theory and practice of organizational and end user computing, as editors, we have structured current publications from the Journal of Organizational and End User Computing in three sections titled as “End-User Computing - Innovations and New Understanding” (Section 1), Approaches frameworks and techniques for End-User Computing (Section 2),  and “End-User Computing : Evidence from Practice” (Section 3).

Organisation of this book

Section 1 (End-User Computing - Innovations and New Understanding) has five chapters which discuss the new Innovations that are characterising the domain of End-User Computing. Chapter 1 (Contrasting IT Capability and Organizational Types: Implications for Firm Performance) by Byrd and Byrd discusses how the Resource-Based View (RBV) has become one of the most popular ways to examine the impact of IT on firm performance. They argue that increasing number of researchers are using the theoretical underpinning of the RBV to ground their research in investigating this relationship. The authors develop multidimensional measures for two dimensions of IT capability, inside-out IT capability and spanning IT capability, make an exploratory comparative assessment of the relative impact of inside-out IT capability and spanning IT capability, while analyzing the differences on the impact of IT capability in diverse types of organizations.

Chapter 2 (Utilization and Perceived Benefit for Diverse Users of Communities of Practice in a Healthcare Organization) by Walczak and Mann argues that Communities of Practice have been heralded as a powerful knowledge management tool, especially for geographically disparate workgroups. They examine the effectiveness of communities of practice as a knowledge sharing tool in a large and geographically disparate healthcare organization. They authors note that the findings suggest that job role affects community members’ perceptions of the benefit and impact of communities of practice as well as their participation in such communities.  Chapter 3 (Culturally Compatible Usability Work: An Interpretive Case Study on the Relationship between Usability Work and Its Cultural Context in Software Product Development Organizations) by Livari analyzes how organizational culture is intertwined with usability work in software (SW) development organizations. The author notes that Usability is an important quality characteristic of software products and systems, but the development of usability is challenging in SW development. The empirical results suggest that differences exists in how usability work is modified and interpreted in the organizations with divergent cultural contexts, those advocating different motives and practices for usability work.

Chapter 4 (Studying the Documentation of an API for Enterprise Service-Oriented Architecture) by Myers, Jeong, Xie, Beaton, Stylos, Ehret, Karstens, Efeoglu and Busse notes that almost all software today is written using application programming interfaces (APIs). The authors report the results of a user study of the online documentation of a large and complex API for Enterprise Service-Oriented Architecture (eSOA), which showed that the participants’ background influenced how they navigated the documentation. Lack of familiarity with business terminology was a barrier for developers without business application experience.  

The last chapter in Section 1 - Chapter 5 (Mutual Development: The Software Engineering Context of End-User Development) by March and Andersen presents and analyzes data from a case study in customer-initiated software product development. The main research question is how customers and professional developers engage in mutual development mediated by shared software tools (products and support systems). The authors report their findings in terms of co-configuration, meta-design and modding to name and compare the various stages of development (adaptation, generalization, improvement request, specialization, and tailoring).

Section 2 (Approaches, Frameworks and techniques for End-User Computing) consisits of six chapters which presents novel approaches in the domain of End-User Computing.  Chapter 6 (WOAD: A Framework to Enable the End-User Development of Coordination-Oriented Functionalities) by Cabitza and Simone present WOAD - a framework that was inspired and partly validated within a 2-year observational case study at a major teaching hospital. The WOAD framework addresses (a) the user-friendly and yet formal expression of local coordinative practices based on the work context; (b) the promotion of awareness of both these conventions and the context to enable actors to quickly respond; (c) the full deployment of coordination-oriented and context-aware functionalities into legacy electronic document systems.

Chapter 7 (Self-Determined Adoption of an ICT System in a Work Organization) by Korpelainen, Vartiainen and Kira examines the process and implications of the self-determined adoption of an internet-based meeting system in a global company. Self-determination theory and structuration theory are used as theoretical lenses to understand the adoption and use of an ICT system.  The research shows that the self-determined adoption of ICT systems has benefits like user motivation and satisfaction. Employees and organizations are likely to benefit from self-determined adoption because it promotes employees' motivation and initiative-taking.

Chapter 8 (A Model of System Re-Configurability and Pedagogical Usability in an E-Learning Context: A Faculty Perspective) by Wang, Doll and Deng uses the example of course management systems (CMSs) to discuss how and why the full benefits of technology cannot be realized if faculty do not adopt the new technology and use it to achieve their instructional design objectives. From a faculty perspective, pedagogical usability of the software is an important factor affecting technology adoption and effective implementation.

Chapter 9 (End-User Software Engineering and Why it Matters) by Burnett highlights why end-user programming has become ubiquitous. In this chapter, the authors consider what happens when we add considerations of software quality to end-user programming environments, going beyond the "create a program" aspect of end-user programming. The authors describe a philosophy of software engineering for end users, and then survey several projects in this area. A basic premise is that end-user software engineering can only succeed to the extent that it respects that the user probably has little expertise or even interest in software engineering.

Chapter 10 (End User Development and Meta-Design: Foundations for Cultures of Participation) by Fischer notes that whilst the first decade of the World Wide Web predominantly enforced a clear separation between designers and consumers, new technological developments, such as the participatory Web 2.0 architectures, have emerged to support social computing. These developments are the foundations for a fundamental shift from consumer cultures (specialized in producing finished goods) to cultures of participation (in which all people can participate actively in personally meaningful activities).

Chapter 11 (Investigating Technology Commitment in Instant Messaging Application Users) by Wang and Datta observes that although much research in the IS field has examined IS adoption, less is known about post-adoption behavior among IS users, especially when competing alternatives are available. Incorporating commitment theory from social psychology and management science literature, the authors propose an IS continuance model that explains why some IS technologies enjoy continued use after adoption and others are often relegated to the basement as shelfware. The model is empirically tested in the context of instant messaging software. Results show a strong support for the model and explicate commitment differentials among users across different brands of instant messaging software.

Section 3 (End-User Computing: Evidence from Practice) consists of six chapters and builds upon the preceding sections and presents lessons from current and previous End-User Computing implementations.   Chapter 12 (Appropriation Infrastructure: Mediating Appropriation and Production Work) by Stevens, Pipek and Wulf taking the case of the BSCWeasel groupware, discusses how End User Development offers technological flexibility to encourage the appropriation of software applications within specific contexts of use. The empirical results from the BSCWeasel project demonstrate the impact of such an infrastructure on the appropriation and design process. It is argued that the social construction of IT artifacts should be tightly integrated in the material construction of IT artifacts in bridging design and use discourses.

Chapter 13 (Entering the Clubhouse: Case Studies of Young Programmers Joining the Online Scratch Communities) by Kafai, Fields and Burke argue that previous efforts in end-user development have focused on facilitating the mechanics of learning programming, leaving aside social and cultural Actors equally important in getting youth engaged in programming.  The authors as part of a 4-month long ethnographic study, followed two 12-year-old participants as they learned the programming software Scratch and its associated file-sharing site, scratch.mit.edu, in an after-school club and class. The chapter focusses on the role that agency membership, and status played in their joining and participating in local and online communities of programmers.

Chapter 14 (Enterprise Systems Training Strategies: Knowledge Levels and User Understanding) by Coulson, Olfman, Ryan and Shayo observe that Enterprise systems (ESs) are customizable, integrated software applications designed to support core business processes. The authors report their experiments demonstrated that training involving the tool-conceptual knowledge level leads to superior mental models, compared with training oriented toward lower knowledge levels, as expressed in the recollection and communication of ES concepts.

Chapter 15 (The Influence of Perceived Source Credibility on End User Attitudes and Intentions to Comply with Recommended IT Actions) by Johnston and Warkentin provides a conceptual model for explaining the influence of source credibility on end user attitudes and behavioral intentions to comply with organizationally motivated, recommended IT actions within a decentralized, autonomous environment. The findings suggest that the elements of source competency, trustworthiness, and dynamism are significant determinants of attitudes and behavioral intentions to engage in recommended IT actions. These findings reveal the importance of these elements of effective communication in persuading end users to follow recommended IT activities and advance IT acceptance and adoption research through the application of persuasive communication theory to the domain.

Chapter 16 (Organizing End-User Training: A Case Study of an E-Bank and its Elderly Customers) by Oinas-Kukkonen, Hohtari and Pekkola describes a qualitative case study of how the end-user training in an e-Bank was organized, and how the training was delivered to its elderly customers. The authors argue that an approach that integrates the end-user training with the system’s development improves organizational implementation. As a result, this chapter makes practical suggestions about the issues related to organizing end-user training.  The last chapter of the book - Chapter 17 (A Path Analysis of the Impact of Application-Specific Perceptions of Computer Self-Efficacy and Anxiety on Technology Acceptance) by Hasan and Ahmed notes that perceptions of computer self-efficacy (CSE) and computer anxiety are valuable predictors of various computer-related behaviors, including acceptance and utilization of information systems (IS).  The authors add that although both factors are purported to have general and application-specific components, little research has focused on the application or system-specific component, especially in IS acceptance contexts. The results demonstrated that the direct impacts of application CSE and application anxiety on perceived ease of use and perceived usefulness were almost equal, but in opposite directions.

We hope that you, the academics, practitioners, managers, and students who access this volume, will enjoy reading these contributions as much as we have, and will find within them issues of interest and value for your own practice and research.

Ashish N. Dwivedi, PhD

Hull University, UK

Steve Clarke, PhD

Hull University, UK

October 2011


References

Alavi, M. (1985). End-user computing: The MIS managers' perspective. Information & Management, 8(3), 171-178.

Antonelli, C., Geuna, A., & Steinmueller, W. E. (2000). Information and communication technologies and the production. distribution and use of knowledge, Int. J. Technology Management(20), Nos. 1-2.

Best, D. P. (2010). The future of information management. Records Management Journal, 20(1), 61 - 71.

Dwivedi, A. N., Wickramasinghe, N., Bali, R. K., & Naguib, R. N. G. (2008). Designing intelligent healthcare organizations with KM and ICT. International Journal of Knowledge Management Studies 2(2), 198 - 213.

Galletta, D. F., & Hufnagel, E. M. (1992). A model of end-user computing policy: Context, process, content and compliance. Information & Management, 22(1), 1-18.

Grover, V., & Davenport, T. H. (2001). General perspectives on knowledge management: Fostering a research agenda. Journal of Mgmt Information Systems, 18(1), 5-21.

Lieberman, H., Paternò, F., & Wulf, V. (2006). End user development. Dordrecht: Springer.

O'Donnell, D. J., & March, S. T. (1987). End-user computing environments — Finding a balance between productivity and control. Information & Management, 13(2), 77-84.

Oinas-Kukkonen, H., Hohtari, S., & Pekkola, S. (2010). Organizing End-User Training: A Case Study of an E-Bank and its Elderly Customers. Journal of Organizational and End User Computing, 22(4), 95-112.

Pearlson, K. E., & Saunders, C. S. (2003). Managing and Using Information Systems : A Strategic Approach: Wiley.

Pilot Software Inc. (1999). An introduction to data mining.   Retrieved 4 March 2002, from http://www.umich.edu/~cisdept/bba/320/1999/fall/pilot-software.html

Pyle, C. I., & Illingworth, V. (1996). Dictionary of computing: Oxford University Press.

Rabkin, B., & Tingley, M. (1999). Tech-savvy customers want quick response. National Underwriter, 103(40), 12-13.

Salomon, I., & Cohen, G. (1999). ICT and urban public policy: does knowledge meet policy. Serie Research Memoranda, Faculteit der Economische Wetenschappen en Econometrie, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam. .

Sieloff, C. (1999). If only HP knew what HP knows: The roots of knowledge management at Hewlett-Packard. Journal of Knowledge management, 3(1), 47-53.

Talbot, D. (2001). DARPA'S disruptive technologies. Technology Review, 104(8), 42-50.

Torkzadeh, G., & Lee, J. (2003). Measures of perceived end-user computing skills. Information & Management, 40(7), 607-615.

Wang, J., Doll, W. J., & Deng, X. (2010). A Model of System Re-Configurability and Pedagogical Usability in an E-Learning Context: A Faculty Perspective. Journal of Organizational and End User Computing, 22(3), 66-81.

Zhang, X., Van Donk, D. P., & Van der Vaart, T. (2011). Does ICT influence supply chain management and performance?: A review of survey-based research. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 31(11), 1215 - 1247.

Author(s)/Editor(s) Biography

Ashish Dwivedi is the Deputy Director of the Centre for Systems Studies at Hull University Business School, UK. Previously, he was the Deputy Graduate Research Director at Hull University Business School, and was also associated with the management of the high-tech Management Learning Laboratory. His primary research interests are in knowledge management (in which he obtained his PhD), supply chain management, healthcare management and information, and communication technologies. He has published 4 books, and over 50 journal and conference papers. He has served as an Invited reviewer and Guest Editor for several journals, including the IEEE Transactions on Information Technology in Biomedicine.
Steve Clarke, Ph.D.received a BSc in Economics from The University of Kingston Upon Hull, an MBA from the University of Luton, and a PhD in human centred approaches to information systems development from Brunel University (UK). He is a professor of Information Systems in the University of Hull Business School (UK). He has extensive experience in management systems and information systems consultancy and research, focusing primarily on the identification and satisfaction of user needs and issues connected with knowledge management. His research interests include: social theory and information systems practice; strategic planning; and the impact of user involvement in the development of management systems. Professor Clarke is the co-editor of two books, Socio-Technical and Human Cognition Elements of Information Systems, 2003 published by Idea Group Publishing, and Beyond Knowledge Management, 2004 published by Idea Group Publishing.

Editorial Board

List of Reviewers

  • Akhilesh Bajaj, The University of Tulsa, USA
  • Peter Baloh, University of Ljubljana, Slovenia
  • Mary Brabston, The University of Manitoba, Canada
  • Randy Bradley, The University of Tennessee, USA
  • Linda L. Brennan, Mercer University, USA
  • Janice Burn, Edith Cowan University, Australia
  • Tom Butler, University College Cork, Ireland
  • Terry A. Byrd, Auburn University, USA
  • Govidarajala Chitibabu, Delaware State University, USA
  • Katherine M. Chudoba, Utah State University, USA
  • Carol Clark, Middle Tennessee State University, USA
  • Paul Cragg, University of Canterbury, New Zealand
  • Lizette de Wet, University of the Free State, South Africa
  • Judy Drennan, Queensland University, Australia
  • James P. Downey, University of Central Arkansas, USA
  • Evan W. Duggan, University of Alabama, USA
  • Jeanette Eriksson, Blekinge Institute of Technology, Sweden
  • TerryAnn Glandon, University of Texas at El Paso, USA
  • Chitibabu Govidarajala, Delaware State University, USA
  • Mary Granger, George Washington University, USA
  • Nicole Haggerty, Richard Ivey School of Business, USA
  • Ranida B. Harris, Indiana University Southeast, USA
  • Bassam Hasan, The University of Toledo, USA
  • Ciara Heavin, University College Cork, Ireland
  • Richard Herschel, St. Joseph's University, USA
  • Yujong Hwang, DePaul University, USA
  • I.M. “Jim” Jawahar, Illinois State University, USA
  • Allen C. Johnston, University of Alabama at Birmingham, USA
  • Arnold Kamis, Bentley College, USA
  • Rex Karsten, University of Northern Iowa, USA
  • Terry Kidd, Texas A&M University, USA
  • Stefan Koch, University of Economics and BA, Austria
  • Eija Korpelainen, Helsinki University of Technology, Finland
  • Jennifer Kreie, New Mexico State University, USA
  • Casper Lessenius, Helsinki University of Technology, Finland
  • Albert L. Lederer, University of Kentucky, USA
  • Lori Leonard, University of Tulsa, USA
  • Ben Light, University of Salford, UK
  • Susan K. Lippert, Drexel University, USA
  • Stephen L. Loy, Eastern Kentucky University, USA
  • Efrem Mallach, University of Massachusetts Dartmouth, USA
  • Kent Marett, Washington State University, USA
  • Ronald E. McGaughey, University of Central Arkansas, USA
  • Roger McHaney, Kansas State University, USA
  • James D. McKeen, Queen's University, Canada
  • Natalie Mitev, London School of Economics, UK
  • Anders Morch, University of Oslo, Norway
  • Harri Oinas-Kukkonen, University of Oulu, Finland
  • Lorne Olfman, Claremont Graduate University, USA
  • Ram Pakath, University of Kentucky, USA
  • Raymond Panko, University of Hawaii, USA
  • Robin Poston, University of Memphis, USA
  • Anne Powell, Southern Illinois University-Edwardsville, USA
  • Bruce Reinig, San Diego State University, USA
  • Brian Reithel, University of Mississippi, USA
  • Debbie Richards, Macquarie University, Australia
  • Mikko Siponen, University of Oulu, Finland
  • Amanda Spink, Queensland University, Australia
  • Thomas F. Stafford, University of Memphis, USA
  • Robert Stone, University of Idaho, USA
  • Jason B. Thatcher, Clemson University, USA
  • Dewi Rooslani Tojib, Monash University, Australia
  • A.R. Venkatachalam, University of New Hampshire, USA
  • Steven Walczak, University of Colorado at Denver, USA
  • Elanie Winston, Hofstra University, USA
  • Vincent Yen, Wright State University, USA
  • Dale Young, Georgia College and State University, USA
Associate Editors
  • J. Peter Blakey, Massey University, New Zealand
  • Steve Clarke, University of Hull, UK
  • Timothy Paul Cronan, University of Arkansas, USA
  • Tanya McGill, Murdoch University, Australia
  • Peter P. Mykytyn, Southern Illinois University at Carbondale, USA
  • Marvin Troutt, Kent State University, USA
  • Stuart A. Westin, University of Rhode Island, USA