Participative modelling for understanding: facilitating organizational change with GSS

Vreede, Gert Jan de

doi:10.1109/hicss.1996.493235

Cited by 9 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The quantity of the results is a key indicator of the productivity of the collaboration process, especially when it is compared with the output of other processes. The number of items resulting from or addressed in the collaboration process is used in research studies [15,23,24,40]. Quantity can be addressed at the group level and at the individual level.…”

Section: Quality Of Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessing the Quality of Collaborative Processes

Hengst

Dean

Kolfschoten

et al. 2006

Proceedings of the 39th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS'06)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Use of effective and efficient collaboration is important for organizations to survive and thrive in today's competitive world. This paper presents quality constructs that can be used to evaluate the success of a collaboration process. Two types of collaboration processes are identified: 1) processes that are designed and executed by the same facilitator who designed them, and 2) processes that are designed by a collaboration engineer and executed many times by practitioners. Accordingly, the quality constructs have been divided in two categories. Constructs within the first category apply to both types of collaboration processes. This category includes constructs such as process effectiveness and efficiency, results quantity, results quality, satisfaction, and usability. The second category contains constructs that are useful from the perspective of the collaboration engineering approach: repeatable collaboration processes executed by practitioners. The three constructs important for this perspective are reusability, predictability, and transferability.

show abstract

Section: Quality Of Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessing the Quality of Collaborative Processes

Hengst

Dean

Kolfschoten

et al. 2006

Proceedings of the 39th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS'06)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A systematic research approach based on the inductive-hypothetic research strategy depicted in Figure 2 was well suited to the characteristics of this research. The strategy consists of five activities (Sol, 1982;Van Meel, 1994;de Vreede, 1995), as summarized below. The strategy is organized in terms of the execution of five steps and four model types.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mobile Enterprise Architecture Framework

Steenkamp

2010

International Journal of Information Technologies and Systems Approach

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Mobile Enterprise is a new form of enterprise in the contemporary mobile era. Although several well-known enterprise architecture frameworks are used by enterprises, it is apparent that there is no industry standard available to enable an enterprise to transform its business processes to incorporate mobile technologies to advantage. This article presents a conceptual Mobile Enterprise Architecture Framework and supporting methodology and process model which can aid enterprise decision makers to evaluate the business values, and analyze the risks and other critical business and technical factors for enterprise mobile initiatives and mobile transitions. The framework covers both the enterprise and mobile enterprise architecture domains that represent the Enterprise, Business, and Mobile Adoption levels. The goal at the Enterprise Level is to obtain a mobile enterprise and the technologies adopted at the Mobile Adoption Level are the different mobile technologies to be incorporated. Each level contains some important components impacting the mobile enterprise transformation. The methodology and process model cover the Strategy, Analysis, Design, Implementation, and Maintenance stages for each mobile initiative, and were validated in a research project against some Ontario Government mobile initiatives.

show abstract

“…The facilitator draws insight from a model by structuring the complex matter in a visual representation. Furthermore, in case 2 presenting and discussing the model to participants beforehand did not only involve and commit them to the meeting [20], but it helped also to improve meeting design (e.g. by focusing at relevant issues).…”

Section: Meefing Designmentioning

confidence: 99%

GSS for cooperative policymaking

Herik

Vreede

1997

Proceedings of the International ACM SIGGROUP Conference on Supporting Group Work : The Integration Challenge the Integration C

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Through its intrinsic complexity policy making presents a challenging supportive process for GSS support. This paper presents two case studies for GSS to support policymaking. Apart from meeting process and outcome we measured policy context, preparation and long-term impact. Results suggest that GSS support reached the limit for effective group support. Idea generation, visual modeling and anonymity appear highly successful in a multi party policy environment, whereas lack of expression possibilities of the support system, divergence of goals and views of participants, and sense of voting is evaluated less favorable. On method, assessment of the impact long after the session surfaces new insights, thus stressing the need for more longitudinal research in GSS.

show abstract

Participative modelling for understanding: facilitating organizational change with GSS

Cited by 9 publications

References 17 publications

Assessing the Quality of Collaborative Processes

Assessing the Quality of Collaborative Processes

Mobile Enterprise Architecture Framework

GSS for cooperative policymaking

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About