Rex Karsten

An Analysis of IS Professional and End User Causal Attributions for User-System Outcomes

The working relationship of information systems (IS) professionals and end users is an ongoing source of both research and practical concern. This study employs Attribution Theory to examine the causal attributions IS professionals and end users make for successful and unsuccessful user-system outcomesend user attempts to use an information system to get the information needed to complete system-dependent, work-related tasks. Eighty-six IS professionals and 122 end users participated. The results show no differences in the nature of IS professional-end user attributions for successful outcomes, but very significant differences between them following unsuccessful outcomes. Post hoc analysis indicates that for unsuccessful user-system outcomes, the causal attributions of IS professionals and end users who are cross-functional team members are significantly less divergent than the causal attributions of those who are not. The implications of Attribution Theory for IS professional-end user interaction are discussed.

Decision Support for Crisis Incidents

Crisis incidents occur in both business and public domains. This article focuses on non-routine incidents and explores uses of technologies for supporting crisis management tasks. A Crisis Incident Spiral of Decision Support helps identify useful decision support and information technologies. Additionally, a Crisis Incident Process/Decision Support Matrix categorizes processes of crisis planning, response and management with decision support technologies. Ideally, the matrix helps organize and stimulate thinking about novel DSS applications. Not all crises are of equal magnitude and different computerized decision support is needed in different types of crisis incidents.

Perceiving the causes of user-system outcomes: analyst-user causal attributions in outcome evaluation

The impact of distinctive analyst and end user perspectives on system development, implementation, and evaluation has been of recurring interest in the information systems research literature. Analysts and users have been recognized as distinct groups with diverse personal and organizational goals and perspectives (Robey, Farrow, and Franz, 1989). The divergence in analyst-user perspective has often been magnified by the exceptional time and resource constraints under which analysts and user frequently interact, and has been suggested as a source of intergroup confusion or conflict (Robey et al., 1989). Alleviating perceptual disparity has been at least a partial objective of nearly every phase of traditional systems development, with the optimal result a shared analyst-user perception of the decision-making environment (Ahituv and Neumann, 1990). Green (1987) has proposed that understanding differences in analyst-user IS perceptions may help improve analyst-user interaction in the context of system development and evaluation.