Criteria to evaluate Automated Personal Identification Mechanisms

Approach for selecting the most suitable Automated Personal Identification Mechanism (ASMSA)

“…We reviewed commercially available IdMS assessment methods in order to consider their applicability for evaluating APIMs. We pursued our aims, outlined in Section 1.2, to exploit our previous efforts that established criteria for evaluating APIMs (Palmer, 2008). While the criteria were grouped into common themes, to assist with the identification of the attributes of the context under review, we decided that a framework is necessary to improve the representation of these attributes and their interrelationships.…”

“…Additionally, in our previous research we decomposed many of the broad heuristics found in the literature to establish over 200 defined evaluation criteria (Palmer, 2008). Importantly, there is now recognition (Grijpink, 2006) that more attention needs to be paid to problem analysis, in order to avoid unintended and counter-productive side effects of selecting unsuitable APIMs, by undertaking assessments from alternative perspectives.…”

“…The method also includes a technique to assess each candidate mechanism. This research is a sequel to our previous work (Palmer, 2008) in which we established a broad set of over 200 criteria for evaluating APIMs. ASMSA, as a decision-support tool, is intended to be used during a development project where the information system requires an APIM; however, the approach also accommodates deployed APIMs.…”

“…Our research is aimed at exhibiting the characteristics of these many qualities, as attribute values, within an evaluation framework. The properties of each attribute are determined by applying our established evaluation criteria for APIMs (Palmer, 2008) to the context under consideration.…”

“…profit versus convenience. Secondly, there are many inter-related factors (Palmer, 2008) represented by mixed data types that necessitates a qualitative evaluation approach.…”