Investigating Usability of an Innovation Management Decision Aid

Elizabeth Gendreau, J. Summers, Lamiae Benhayoun Sadafiyine, M. Dain
{"title":"Investigating Usability of an Innovation Management Decision Aid","authors":"Elizabeth Gendreau, J. Summers, Lamiae Benhayoun Sadafiyine, M. Dain","doi":"10.1115/DETC2019-97801","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Initial usability testing was used to identify and fix usability concerns within a recently developed absorptive capacity assessment tool. The tool was designed to aid innovation management decision making by helping firms understand their processing of external knowledge within the context of a collaborative innovation network. Part of the recent development of the tool involved the implementation of Simos-Roy-Figueira’s revised method for eliciting subjective importance weights. However, the method, as it was applied within the tool, suffered from poor usability that could not be fully addressed. This paper presents a study on the usability of the tool further by conducting additional think-aloud studies to better understand its nature. Five common attributes of usability (efficiency, effectiveness, satisfaction, learnability, and usefulness) were characterized based on the findings from the think-aloud studies in order to develop a list of recommendations for improving usability. The goal of these recommendations is to help future academic developers of decision aid tools to better consider usability in their own work to maximize the impact and dissemination of their research.","PeriodicalId":352702,"journal":{"name":"Volume 1: 39th Computers and Information in Engineering Conference","volume":"64 1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-11-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Volume 1: 39th Computers and Information in Engineering Conference","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1115/DETC2019-97801","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Initial usability testing was used to identify and fix usability concerns within a recently developed absorptive capacity assessment tool. The tool was designed to aid innovation management decision making by helping firms understand their processing of external knowledge within the context of a collaborative innovation network. Part of the recent development of the tool involved the implementation of Simos-Roy-Figueira’s revised method for eliciting subjective importance weights. However, the method, as it was applied within the tool, suffered from poor usability that could not be fully addressed. This paper presents a study on the usability of the tool further by conducting additional think-aloud studies to better understand its nature. Five common attributes of usability (efficiency, effectiveness, satisfaction, learnability, and usefulness) were characterized based on the findings from the think-aloud studies in order to develop a list of recommendations for improving usability. The goal of these recommendations is to help future academic developers of decision aid tools to better consider usability in their own work to maximize the impact and dissemination of their research.
研究创新管理决策辅助工具的可用性
最初的可用性测试用于在最近开发的吸收能力评估工具中识别和修复可用性问题。该工具旨在通过帮助企业了解他们在协作创新网络背景下对外部知识的处理,来帮助创新管理决策。该工具最近的部分发展涉及Simos-Roy-Figueira的修正方法的实施,以引出主观重要性权重。然而,由于该方法在工具中应用,因此无法完全解决可用性差的问题。本文提出了一项关于该工具可用性的进一步研究,通过进行额外的有声思考研究来更好地理解其本质。可用性的五个常见属性(效率、有效性、满意度、易学性和有用性)是基于有声思考研究的结果来描述的,目的是为提高可用性提出一系列建议。这些建议的目标是帮助决策辅助工具的未来学术开发人员更好地考虑其工作中的可用性,以最大限度地提高其研究的影响和传播。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信