Michael J. Gallivan
- Adams, D.L., Nelson, R.R., & Todd, P.A. "Perceived Usefulness, Ease of Use and Usage of Information Technology: A Replication," MIS Quarterly, 16(2), i992, 227-247. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Agarwal, R., Tanniru, M., & Wilemon, D. "Assimilating ~formatiou Technology Innovations: Strategies and Moderating Influences," University of Dayton Working Paper, Dayton, OH, 1995.Google Scholar
- Agarwat, R., & Prayesh, J. "A Field Study of the Role of Innovation Characteristics in the Information Technology Adoption Process," University of Dayton Working Paper, Dayton, OH, 1995.Google Scholar
- Ajzen, t. & Fishbein, M., Understanding Attitudes and Predicting Behavior, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1980.Google Scholar
- Attewe{l, P. "Technology Diffusion and Organizational Learning: The Case of Business Computing,". Organization Science, 1992, 3(1), 1-19.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Bijker, W., Brancheau, J. & Ramiller, N, "Innovation- The Very idea: Exploring Terms of Research on iS/IT Innovations,~ in J.I. DeGross et al., (eds.), Proceedings of the 16th International Conference on Information Systems, Amsterdam, December, 1995, 363.Google Scholar
- Brancheau, J.C. & Wetherbe, J.C. "The Adoption of Spreadsheet Software: Testing Innovation Diffusion 'Theory in the Context of End-User Computing," Information Systems Research, 1991, 1(2), 115-143.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Cohen, W.M. & Levinthal, D.A. "Absorptiw~ Capacity: A New Perspective on Learning and Innovation," ,4drninistrative Science Quarterly, 1990, 35, 123-139.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Couger, J.D., Higgins, L.F. & Mclntyre, S.C. "(Un)Structured Creativity in information Systems Organizations," MIS Quarterly, December, 1993, 17(4), 375-398.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Davis, F.D. "Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease-of-Use and User Acceptance of Information Technology," MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 1989, 319-339.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Davis, F.D., Bagozzi, R.P. & Warshaw, P.R. "User Acceptance of Computer Technology: Comparison of Two Theoretical Models," Management Science, 35(8), 1989, 982-1003. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Fichman, R.G. & Kemerer, C.F. "The Assimilation of Sof~are Process Innovations: An Organizational Learning Perspective," M1T Center for Information Systems Working Paper 281, July 1995.Google Scholar
- Fichman, R.G. & Kemerer, C.F. "Toward A Theory of the Adoption and Diffusion of Software Process Innovations," Proceedings of the International Federation q,f Information Processing, A-45, 1994, 23-30. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Fichman, R.G. & Kemerer, C.F. "Adoption of Software Engineering Process Innovations: The Case of Object Orientation,* Sloan Management Review, Winter 1993, 7-23.Google Scholar
- Fichman, Robert G. "Information Technology Diffusion: A Review of Empirical Research," Proceedings of the 13th International on Information Systems, 1992, in J.I. DeGross, J.D. Becker & J.J. Elam (eds.), Dallas, TX. 195-206. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Fichman, R.G. & Kemerer, C.F. "Object-Oriented and Conventional Analysis and Design Methodologies: Comparison and Critique," iEEE Computer, October, 1992, 22-39. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Gallivan, M.J., Hofman, J.D. & Orlikowski, W.J. "Implementing Radical Change: Gradual versus Rapid Pace," J.i. DeGross, S.L. Huff, and M.C. Munro (eds.), Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Information Systems, Vancouver, December, 1994, 325-340.Google Scholar
- Gallivan, M.J. "Reskilling iS Professionals: Individual and Organizational Adaptation to Software Process Innovations," Proceedings of the A CM Special Interest Group on Computer Personnel Research, L.Olfman (ed.,), Nashville, TN., April 1995a, 103-I 16. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Gallivan, M.J. "Contradictions Among Stakeholder Assessments of a Radical Change Initiative: A Cognitive Frames Analysis," Proceedings of IFIP Working Group 8.2, Cambridge, UK., December 1995b.Google Scholar
- Gallivan, M.J. "The Influence of Software Developers' Innovativeness on their Attitudes to and Assimilation of Software Process Innovatmns," unpublished working paper, MIT Sloan School of Management, 1995c.Google Scholar
- Hofman, J.D. & Rockart, J.F. "Application Templates: Faster, Better and Cheaper Systems," MIT Center for Information Systems Research working paper 270, July 1994.Google Scholar
- Huber, G.H. "Organizational Learning: The Contributing Processes and the Literatures," Organization Science, 2(I), 1991, 88-115.Google Scholar
- Kemerer, C.F. "How the Learning Curve Affects CASE Tool Adoption," IEEE Software, May 1992, 23-28. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Kwon, T.H. & Zmud, R.W. "Unifying the Fragmented Models of Information Systems Implementation," in R.J. Boland and R.A. Hirschheim, Critical Issues in Information Systems Research, New York: Wiley & Sons, 1987. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Leonard-Barton, D. "implementing Structured Software Methodologies: A Case of Innovation in Process Technology," Interfaces, 1987, 17, 6-17.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Leonard-Barton, D. "implementation Characteristics of Organizational innovations: Limits & Opportunities for Management Strategies," Communications Research, 15(5), 1988, 603-631.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Leonard-Barton, D. & Deschamps, I. "Managerial Influence in the Implementation of New Technology," Management Science, 14, 1988, 1252-1265. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Liker, J.K., Roitman, D.B. & Roskies, E. "Changing Everything All at Once: Work Life and Technological Change," Sloan Management Review, 28(4), 1987, 2947.Google Scholar
- Lucas, H.C., Ginzberg, M.J., & Schultz, R.L. Information Systems Implementation: Testing a Structural Model. Norwood, NJ: Ablex, 1981. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Markus, M.L. & Robey, D. "Information Technology and Organizational Change: Causal Structure in Theory and Research," Management Science, 34(5), 1988, 583-598. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Mathieson, K. "Predicting User Intentions: Comparing the Technology Acceptance Model with the Theory of Planned Behavior," Information Systems Research, 2(3), 1991, 173- 191.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Miller, W.C., Couger, J.D., & Higgins, L.F. "Comparing Innovation Style Profiles of iS Personnel to Other Occupations," Proceedings of Hawaii International Conference on Systems Science, Maui, HI, 1993, 378-386.Google Scholar
- Moore, G.C. & Benbasat, I. "Development of an Instrument to Measure the Perceptions of Adapting an information Technology Innovation," Information Systems Research, 2(3), 1991, 192-222.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Orlikowski, W.J. "CASE Tools as Organizational Change: Investigating Incremental & Radical Changes in Systems Development," 1993, 17(3), MIS Quarterly, 309-340.Google Scholar
- Rogers, E.M. Dry'on of Innovations, (2nd edition), 1983, New York: The Free Press.Google Scholar
- Ross, J.W., Beath, C.M. & Goodhue, D.L. "Developing Long-Term Competitiveness through information Technology Assets," MIT Center for Information Systems Working Paper, January, 1996.Google Scholar
- Soh, C. & M.L. Markus, "How iT Creates Business Value: A Process Theory Synthesis," in J.l. DeGross et al., (eds.), Proceedings of the 16th International Conference on information Systems, Amsterdam, December, 1995, 29-41.Google Scholar
- Taylor, S. & Todd, P.A. "Understanding IT Usage: A Test of Competing Models," Information System, Research, 6(2), 1995, 144-176.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Tornatzky, L.G. & Klein, K.J. "Innovation Characteristics and Innovation Adoption-Implementation: A Meta-Analysis of Findings, IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, EM-29(1), 1982, 28-45.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Wynekoop, J. "Strategies for Implementation Research: Combining Research Methods," Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Information Systems, in J.i. DeCn'oss, I.D. Becker & J.J. Elam (eds.), Dallas, TX., 195- 206. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Van de Ven, A.H. & Rogers, E.M. "Innovations and Organizations: Critical Perspectives," Communication Research, 1988, 15(5), 632-651.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Zmud, R.W. "An Examination of Push-Pull Theory Applied to Process Innovation in Knowledge Work," Management Science, 30, 1984, 727-738.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Zmud, R.W. "Diffusion of Modern Software Practices: Influence of Centralization and Formalization," Management Science, 28(12), 1982, 1421-1431.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Zuboff, S. In the Age of the Smart Machine: The Future of Work and Power, New York: Basic Books, 1988. Google ScholarDigital Library
Index Terms
- Strategies for implementing new software processes: an evaluation of a contingency framework
Recommendations
Characterizing the Implementation of Software Non-functional Requirements from Probabilistic Perspective
COMPSAC '11: Proceedings of the 2011 IEEE 35th Annual Computer Software and Applications ConferenceNon-functional requirements are quality concerns of a software envisioned. As an effective treatment, goal-oriented method can capture NFR-related knowledge so that an evaluation for a specific implementation strategy can be provided. This paper makes a ...
Self-regulated learning strategies and software training
We investigated one aspect of the growing trend towards self-management within organizations by examining the learning processes that individuals use when learning computer software alone in a web-based training environment, and found that individuals ...
Comments