skip to main content
article
Free Access

Deep realities: the fit of usability in business

Published:20 November 2000Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

This commentary provides insight into the case study presented by Mirel by analyzing the social/organizational themes of (a) text book process versus deep reality, (b) group dynamics, (c) leadership, and (d) the role of values. It concludes that social information processing can provide explanatory power for both this case study and for other professional settings. It also notes the importance of ongoing and early educationof software industry professionals in the importance of usability.

References

  1. Anderson, R. J. (1994). Representations and requirements: The value of ethnography in system design. Human-Computer Interaction, 9, 151-182.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Brown, J. S., and Gray, E. S. (1995). The people are the company. Fast Company. {online} URL: http: //www. fastcompany. com/online/ 01/people. htmlGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Campion, M. A., Medsker, G. J., and Higgs, A. C. (1993). Relations between work group characteristics and effectiveness: Implications for designing effective work groups. Personnel Psychology, 46, 823-850.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Carlson, P. (1999). Information technology and organizational change. In SIGDOC99 Conference Proceedi ngs, (pp. 26-35). New York, NY: ACM. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Daft, R. L., and Lengel, R. H. (1986). Organizational information requirements, media richness, and structural design. Management Science, 32, 554-571. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. Frokjaer, E., Hertzum, M., and Hornbaek, K. (2000). Measuring usability: Are effectiveness, efficiency, and satisfaction really correlated? In CHI 2000 Conference Proceedings, (pp. 345-352). New York, NY: ACM. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Fulk, J., and Boyd, B. (1991). Emerging theories of communication in organizations. Journal of Management, 17, 407-446.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Grudin, J. (1993). Obstacles to participatory design in large product development organizations. In D. Schuler and A. Namioka (Eds. ), Participatory design: Principles and practices, (pp. 99-119). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Mirel, B. (1999). Complex queries in information visualization: Distributing instruction across documentation and interfaces. In SIGDOC99 Conference Proceedings, (pp. 1-8). New York, NY: ACM. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Star, S. L. (1995). The politics of formal representations: Wizards, gurus, and organizational compl exity. In S. L. Star (Ed.), Ecol ogi es of knowledge : Work and politics in science and technology, (pp. 88-118). Albany: State University of New York Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Wiebe, D. (2000). Private communication: Discussion on the role of usability in other software start-ups.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Wiebe, E. N. (1997). Adding agility to CAD: Integrating product data management tools into an organization. International Journal of Human Factors in Manufacturing, 7, 21-35.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Wiebe, E. N., Howe, J. E., Summey, J., and Norton, J. J. (1997). Computing and organizational assessment in the furniture industry. In G. Salvendy, M. Smith, J., and R. J. Koubek (Eds.), Design of computing systems: Organizational considerations, (Vol. 21B). Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Winfield, I. (1991). Organisations and information technology: Systems, power and job design. Oxford, UK: Blackwell Scientific Publications.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Deep realities: the fit of usability in business

        Recommendations

        Comments

        Login options

        Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

        Sign in

        Full Access

        PDF Format

        View or Download as a PDF file.

        PDF

        eReader

        View online with eReader.

        eReader