Early conversations about computer requirements: alternative approaches to understanding conversations between computer systems analysts and potential computer users, with a view to discovering what should be taught to computer experts about how to discover user's requirements

Nicholson, Isobel (1991) Early conversations about computer requirements: alternative approaches to understanding conversations between computer systems analysts and potential computer users, with a view to discovering what should be taught to computer experts about how to discover user's requirements. Doctoral thesis, University of Lancaster.

[thumbnail of Thesis document] PDF (Thesis document) - Submitted Version
Restricted to Repository staff only
Available under License Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial Share Alike.

12MB

Abstract

Computer systems analysts arrange to meet users to find out what is required of software to support an improved human x computer system. Bostrom (1989) successfully uses the precision model to help users explain what they want. Double-loop learning should help analysts hear what users say, but this is difficult to use (Salaway 1987).
This research found a majority of analysts had primitive models of users. First meetings are specially difficult:
a. Users rapidly pour out masses of information.
b. Analysts experience cognitive overload.
C. There is less opportunity to use reflective technique.
Three discrete populations of analysts were detected:
GROUP ANALYSTS 'VIEW OF PROBLEMS
Al The analyst is the problem
A2 Systems thinking aids this difficult task. Why won't my colleagues use it?
Any problems are due to users
IT MANAGERS' VIEW OF THIS ANALYST
Few problems
Perhaps naive
Very effective
Hard to control
Too often on users' side
Users complain
Analyst doesn't care
In order to introduce analysts to systems thinking about people, the following models were designed:
a. MENDAC, a cybernetic model of how people think while talking about computer requirements, designed to introduce technical experts to human-centered issues via the technical paradigm
(avoids challenging the technical paradigm, because computer experts often reject human issues rather than question their
existing values and assumptions).
b. Management of disconfirming evidence: a model of how people might, decide when they could risk double-loop learning.
c. H-structures, a model of both views in arguments concerning values. This highlights assumptions of semantic equivalence
between one side's fear and the other side's aspirations.
REFERENCES in this abstract.
Bostrom,R.P. 1989, Successful application of communication techniques to improve the systems development process,
Information & Management,16,279-295.
Salaway,G. 1987, An organisational learning approach to information systems development.
MIS Quarterly,11,2,245-264.


Repository Staff Only: item control page