Tuesday, 11 December 2012

Layout

Introduction
Literature Review  (2000 words)
Information on UA from Companies & Survey  (1000 words)
New Acceptance Model/Hybrid  (2000 words)
New Validation Tool  (2000 words)
Guidelines  (2000 words)
Limitations of Model & Validation Tool  (2000 words)
Critical Evaluation
Conclusion

Short Term Plan:
write on AGILE, SCRUM        ** DONE **
reread paper and fix flow, include papers on AGILE and SCRUM, waterfall - to introduce the topic
New Model
Validation Tools
Guidelines
Literature Review - more references + include them in the research paper -quote it (50)

Sun 23rd Dec 2012
Fixing the flow of the paper
Already wrote on agile and scrum

Issues found:
- Presence of trust, confidence and its impact on using the system
- Usage over time - affecting user acceptance changing as it becomes habit
- UA and development methods should be combined
- Agile  - SCRUM & DSDM  - how to solve large organisation, many users problem - if they choose not to    use it - possible use a change management solution
- Absence of a Validation Tool
- New Model
- Absence of UA guidelines

Mon 25th Dec 2012
Fix flow
New Model

Fri 28th Dec 2012 & Sat 29th Dec 2012
New Model
chapter on new model
validation tool

Lit review is too long
Tie back survey to Agile, and models relevance
New model - show the strength of certain factors for UA, some more than others - weights
Show how the model was derived from the research - CLEARLY

Questions for Moonesh
   -How well does scrum work for Company C
   - What other techniques they using
   - How long users using ISMIS
 
   - How long users using WebStar
   - How long users using Work Flow

Fri 4th Jan 2013
- add findings in abstract
-Write chapter on New model, tie in relevance of the existing models here
-Fix flow
-show how the research links to the creation of the model
-Include references

New UA model chapter  ** DONE **
Model in action
Limitations of Model
Limitations of paper
Validation Tool
Limitations of Tool
Overview of Paper
Conclusions & future work
Guidelines

References
Fix Flow


Wed 9th Jan 2013
Metric to measure UA
should be Large company vs small
1 location, different geographic location

conditions that would impact the emphasis on the determinants of UA

Sat 19th Jan 2013
Incorporate comments into it
Add in references

Tue 22nd Jan 2013
Redo Chapter 4 new model  ** DONE **
fixed then send to ravi           ** DONE **
Continue with finishing the rest of the paper


Overview of New Model
New Model in Action
Limitations of New Model
Critical review of New Model

Conclusion
Introduction
References & Reference List
Give Opal To read completed Project Wed 23 Jan 2013

Thur 24 Jan 2013
Email to Ravi       ** DONE **
Email to Opal      ** DONE **
Email to Kerrie    ** DONE **


Fri 25th Jan 2013
References and formatting
Compare below with supervisor comments and fix paper
Ensure not repeating past mistakes
Courses used
Sentence construction formal language
more on research methodology  ** DONE **
get 10 more references for paper ** DONE **
use references in the  last chapter  ** DONE **

Which is weighted more for me qualitative or quantitative data and why ** DONE **
Expand on research methodology observation, interviews, surveys   . ** DONE **
conclusion fix it


language - sentence construction
develop findings
  - make it clearly presented - add a chart       ** DONE **
  - what %  are significant and why                  ** DONE **
  - compare and contrast the companies          ** DONE **
substantiate my model with findings                 ** DONE **
identify key questions my paper should address    ** DONE **
once i have answered them - project completed

Review intro abstract conclusion - ensure it reflects my direction clearly

Ravi Comments Fri 25th Jan 2013
- do not start a section with acronym, put Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) then you can use TAM     again once in same section.
- lit review a lot better
- sentences overburdened
- your chapter 3 still hard to read ( weighting for sections, and even ness not there)

Saturday 26th Jan 2013
Bobby Comments:
if it is bespoke - what about bespoke that is different from generic
go deep for bespoke
why should companies use this model - what is the value        ** DONE **
get feedback from the stakeholders to validate it                    ** DONE **
strengths and weaknesses of the model compare with the previous models
don't want to be too generic or too prescriptive
will it work well alone or needs additional tools for better results
how is it going to be tested and evaluated
How does the model compare the lit review or objectives
sample size is this a limitation
Conclusion: link back to objectives and how well it met or didn't meet the objectives

Ravi Comments: Mon 28th Jan 2013
so i re read your paper
i understand what you are trying to say
you were able to develop a solution, but the solution seemed superficial, like each different stage felt more like a definition of word and was vague

i honestly did not see how the data that was achieved was tied back in to the applied
i assumed the data would have reflected the application of the mode

Lit review  Draw backs - ONLY was a small section on drawbacks - more detail needed

Field Research -
the field research section feels as though
you already had the model in mind and did research to do the model
and not the other way around
where in my research i allude to decision making process
need to tie to existing models

Model section - like a lit review - too many references ie social influence
not much differentiation
the Bespoke Model Applied, i did not see that tie back into your data
elaborate of short comings of the model
- need to expand on the how to use this model what questions need to be asked to make this model applicable and successful
-need to tie to existing models

I did not go deep enough
  - I could have used agile to go deep with user acceptance - but instead I mention it in passing
  - i identified trust is a problem - but I don't offer a solution to it - to fixing it ** DONE **

critical review  - was ok, a bit short but good

Critical Reflection

u need to be critical
ur critical reflection was hard to read
 u switch between 3rd person to first person when writing making it difficult

also try to tie ur sections in together

ur model seems so disjointed it does not have stage flow ** DONE **
but the factors seems disjointed from everything  ** DONE **

think of it like a cake
flour eggs milk  ** DONE **

drowning in quoting
little application of own thought  ** DONE **
***

Agenda: Mon 28 Jan 2013
Fix Findings + discussion chapters  ** DONE **
Then go through remainder of the paper  - taking into consideration ravi comments ** DONE **
Add 3 organisation feedback on the model ** DONE **
I don't know if discussion is too chatty - was there enough discussion ** DONE **

Issues to ADDRESS!!!!
  •  How does one  evaluate UA in the organisation as they change their strategy to know one's progress
  • How does 1 evaluate trust and confidence ** DONE **
  • did my research logically lead to my findings - were my findings justified ** DONE **
  • was my analysis deep enough
  • was all the issues of the last supervisor comments addressed here  ** DONE **
  • did i address how my model is different or better than the existing models ** DONE **
  • what does my model paper bring to the table for readers
  •  check my weights  ** DONE **
  • was there adequate depth ** DONE **
  • was there critical analysis  ** DONE **
Critical Overview
What is the model about – what is it trying to accomplish
How does this model rate compare with other models
What is special about the model
How is the model limited in terms of use
How does the model work with objectives and criteria
Strengths and weaknesses of the paper

Characteristics of Bespoke/in-house applications are:
·         The system features and functionality are based on a thorough understanding of the system.
·         The system does not have to wait for the next upgrade for changes. The organization’s stakeholders will decide on pace and priority of features.
·         The system does not have to accommodate the application, it is the reverse. The application is tailored to the needs of the system.
·         As the business needs changes, the system functionality is changed to accommodate the needs.

check my Harvard style  ** DONE **
Reread slowly for grammar ** DONE **
Go through all comments  & previous comments and ensure I covered it ** DONE **
Ensure data links to model ** DONE **






Sunday, 2 December 2012

Sun 2nd Dec 2012

Chapter - Survey Results
Chapter - New Model

Need to research SCRUM, AGILE, Waterfall & UA  - write it up
How does it fit in the paper
Questions:
Survey was not appropriate for the Company B
What can I do to make the information more meaningful.

How does Company C measure/validate UA?

Wed 5th Dec 2012
Summarised roughly the Company A & C results. Needs refining.
Do I sumarise it in total or by company?
Company B survey was not adequate. What to do?

Thur 6th Dec 2012
Ravis Comments:
Incorporate everything evenly - write about it each same amount
Take a spin on the existing model to show my own interpretation of the model
what ever is your creation
    - expand on it
    - limitations
    - what it encompasses
    - where the results would be supper high/low and why
    - variables in scores for types of organisation ( client vs development company)

UA survey
explain why scores in Company B would not score so high - development specific company
not user centric, they don't test everyday, the real test is the clients who buy the product, so in company B don't expect great scores.

Also point of limitation of margin of error - dishonest answers, incorrect misinterpretation of the survey questions.






Tuesday, 20 November 2012

Ravi's comments on Survey & test new model

Model is not a model. It is a definitions. Research how to design Models.

Survey:
If I am bringing system into UA....

system is not UA.
 Systems are business driven.
If a company decides to use SAP, users would adopt it. Business decision.
So be wary of bringing system into UA.

Saturday, 17 November 2012

Review Chapters - Notes

Critical Review of UA model

Critical Evaluation of UA tool


Conclusion
Limitations of thesis 
Research 


Organizational Input
Critical Reflection
Future Improvements
Overall conclusion



Meeting with Supervisor Sat 17th Nov 2012

Notes from Supervisor Meeting:

Survey questions quidelines:

How satisfied are you with  the system meeting your needs on a scale of 1-5

How reliable is the system?

Do you get the information you need easily or do you have to do additional steps? 1-5 range
easily
difficult

How easily does the system allow you to meet your objectives?

Bobby's Suggestion:
Write
-Introductory Chapters now since this is fresh in my head.
-Lit review fixes
-Methodology Chapter
-while waiting on Survey Results

Methodology Notes:   Include -
    -survey, how you gather info, how you analyzed info, how  you evaluated work gathered



Thursday, 15 November 2012

Week 2 November

1) reasons/direction of the project ** DONE**
2) New model    (I have a General Idea)
3) questions for companies ** DONE **
4) Collate Survey Results

5) Need to get more references and USE ALL in the Literature REVIEW else I will lose marks
6) Write Introductory Chapters now since this is fresh in my head. (WIP)

7) Methodology Chapter (WIP)
8) Validation Tool
9) Step by Step guidelines of achieving UA



 - Write out 2 chapters



In my model:
Why am I not using some parts of the model?
Be CLEAR - identify weaknesses or reasons why some parts were left out.



Questions for Survey:

How is User Acceptance measured/monitored in 3 organisations?

Trust & Confidence
Observation questions?
CompanyA - previous project genie - low confidence and trust in the sytem - very slow and they went back
Company B -
Company C -

Positive Emotions/Social Influence/Perceived userfulness/Ease of Use/Subjective Norm/
Observation Questions:
Was there PR to promote to enhancement?
Was social influence/peer influence used?

(PR needed specially in a negative environment to build hype and positive emotions)

Time with the System
How long are you using the application?
Did you like it from inception?
Did it take getting use to?

Facilitating Conditions
Was there adequate technical support for the system enhancement (IT/IS)?
Was there adequate help for the enhancement for e.g. Business Analyst support/user manuals/training?

Level of system accuracy of serving user needs
Is the system challenging to use?
Does the system cater for your needs adequately - allow you to process your work in an efficient/user friendly way?




Tuesday, 6 November 2012

Agenda for Week 1 November 2012

Agenda for Week 1 November 2012

Find articles on in-house applications/solutions, tie in with lit review
develop lit review limitations/merits in more dept

Companies questions
Compile it and send out to 3 companies
start this chapter



Chapter 2 - Research and rewrite Lit Review
Chapter 3 - Data from companies
Chapter 4 - Intro into new model, identifying the need for it

For the Lit Review

Findings absence of papers on in-house/bespoke solutions:
In the literature review, state this. that this paper is addressing a need.

If i show merits/limitations in terms of bespoke wont that be personal opinion in lit review?
It is really a judgement call, due to the lack of material on in-house solutions.
State shortage of papers - comparison limited application to bespoke to what extent the models cater for this environment.

Discuss the characteristics of bespoke versus off the shelf how it affects the applicability of the model in either case

what came out of the lit review that justifies the need for this project?
what are the shortcomings of the models that my paper will address?

Overall short comings of the models?



Issues with the Models

While the above models provided a better understanding of user behaviour in terms of the decisions making process, the models did not address issues of trust and confidence of system and the effect of it would have on user behaviour. The presence of these factors would have a weight on the decision making process.

There was no clear indication of a start to finish guideline on how to achieve the user acceptance in an Information Technology/Information System environment with bespoke solutions. The models had good suggestions but were too general. It was unclear how to follow through in a step by step process to achieve this goal of user adoption.
While user acceptance is a soft system approach and related to people and problems not clearly defined, there was no mention of the technical side of the system in terms achieving the user needs.

Questions for Companies?
How does the company measure/monitor UA?
Trust/Confidence in system
Trust/Confidence in team

Team
Are you satisfied with the technical support you receive from information System?
Are you satisfied with the technical support you receive from IT?
Is IT and IS the same to you?


Have you made requests before?
If YES Have they been taken seriously or been given a satisfactory explanation why it cannot happen?

System
Are you satisfied with the system in terms of aiding you in everyday work?



System development
Rate emphasis on technical team in meeting objectives, in terms of over all importance in UA

What does the Model look like?
Will it look like the same UTAUT with just trust added as a bubble?
What other bubbles needed?

Model in action?

even though UA is user specific, the model does not refer to the system side of things, but
there still needs to be a solid development process that accurately builds the application according to the end user needs. Waterfall/Scrum/Agile whatever combination that gives the users what the need in a timely accurate manner.

How will organisations be able to validate and monitor UA and progress over time with the new model?

*** 

User Acceptance Model ( main focus)
In addition to this one still needs in the background:

1.      Development Solution
2.      Change Management Solution
3.      Long term strategies for the organisation