IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/infosf/v23y2021i3d10.1007_s10796-019-09976-0.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Interactions between Analysts in Developing Collaborative Conceptual Models

Author

Listed:
  • Palash Bera

    (Saint Louis University)

Abstract

Conceptual models are frequently developed as part of IS analysis and design. Development of such models involves expertise in conceptual modeling techniques, served by modeling analysts, and in the domain applications, served by domain analysts. This paper focuses on understanding how these two types of analysts interact and develop conceptual models collaboratively. The subjects as analysts were placed in pairs (one modeling and one domain) and asked to develop conceptual models collaboratively on a complex domain. The interactions during conceptual model development were analyzed using a sensemaking framework. It was found that all groups performed the reciprocal acts of modifying each other’s understanding of the concepts that were required to develop the model collaboratively. The study also indicates that the groups which had high incidence of sensebreaking acts (i.e. attempts to question the existing understanding of other) and high incidence of shared conceptualization, created higher quality conceptual models.

Suggested Citation

  • Palash Bera, 2021. "Interactions between Analysts in Developing Collaborative Conceptual Models," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 23(3), pages 561-573, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:infosf:v:23:y:2021:i:3:d:10.1007_s10796-019-09976-0
    DOI: 10.1007/s10796-019-09976-0
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10796-019-09976-0
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10796-019-09976-0?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jiajie Zhang, 1998. "A distributed representation approach to group problem solving," Journal of the American Society for Information Science, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 49(9), pages 801-809.
    2. Vijay Khatri & Iris Vessey & V. Ramesh & Paul Clay & Sung-Jin Park, 2006. "Understanding Conceptual Schemas: Exploring the Role of Application and IS Domain Knowledge," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 17(1), pages 81-99, March.
    3. Yair Wand & Ron Weber, 2002. "Research Commentary: Information Systems and Conceptual Modeling—A Research Agenda," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 13(4), pages 363-376, December.
    4. Dennis A. Gioia & James B. Thomas & Shawn M. Clark & Kumar Chittipeddi, 1994. "Symbolism and Strategic Change in Academia: The Dynamics of Sensemaking and Influence," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 5(3), pages 363-383, August.
    5. Palash Bera & Andrew Burton-Jones & Yair Wand, 2014. "Research Note ---How Semantics and Pragmatics Interact in Understanding Conceptual Models," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 25(2), pages 401-419, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Jan Mendling & Jan Recker & Hajo A. Reijers & Henrik Leopold, 2019. "An Empirical Review of the Connection Between Model Viewer Characteristics and the Comprehension of Conceptual Process Models," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 21(5), pages 1111-1135, October.
    2. Andrew Burton-Jones & Peter N. Meso, 2006. "Conceptualizing Systems for Understanding: An Empirical Test of Decomposition Principles in Object-Oriented Analysis," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 17(1), pages 38-60, March.
    3. Roman Lukyanenko & Wolfgang Maass & Veda C. Storey, 2022. "Trust in artificial intelligence: From a Foundational Trust Framework to emerging research opportunities," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 32(4), pages 1993-2020, December.
    4. Palash Bera & Andrew Burton-Jones & Yair Wand, 2014. "Research Note ---How Semantics and Pragmatics Interact in Understanding Conceptual Models," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 25(2), pages 401-419, June.
    5. Pedro Antunes & Nguyen Hoang Thuan & David Johnstone, 2022. "Nature and purpose of visual artifacts in design science research," Information Systems and e-Business Management, Springer, vol. 20(3), pages 515-550, September.
    6. Swen Nadkarni & Reinhard Prügl, 2021. "Digital transformation: a review, synthesis and opportunities for future research," Management Review Quarterly, Springer, vol. 71(2), pages 233-341, April.
    7. Carlos Martin-Rios, 2016. "Innovative management control systems in knowledge work: a middle manager perspective," Journal of Management Control: Zeitschrift für Planung und Unternehmenssteuerung, Springer, vol. 27(2), pages 181-204, May.
    8. Magnus Schückes & Tobias Gutmann, 2021. "Why do startups pursue initial coin offerings (ICOs)? The role of economic drivers and social identity on funding choice," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 57(2), pages 1027-1052, August.
    9. Lawrence Bunnell & Kweku-Muata Osei-Bryson & Victoria Y. Yoon, 0. "RecSys Issues Ontology: A Knowledge Classification of Issues for Recommender Systems Researchers," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 0, pages 1-42.
    10. Caner Bakir, 2017. "How can interactions among interdependent structures, institutions, and agents inform financial stability? What we have still to learn from global financial crisis," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 50(2), pages 217-239, June.
    11. Bövers, Jana & Hoon, Christina, 2021. "Surviving disruptive change: The role of history in aligning strategy and identity in family businesses," Journal of Family Business Strategy, Elsevier, vol. 12(4).
    12. Alexis Laszczuk & Lionel Garreau & Bernard de Montmorillon, 2017. "Understanding emergence in business model development: how companies interact with stakeholders to deal with environmental ambiguity," Post-Print hal-01787276, HAL.
    13. Gove Allen & Jeffrey Parsons, 2010. "Is Query Reuse Potentially Harmful? Anchoring and Adjustment in Adapting Existing Database Queries," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 21(1), pages 56-77, March.
    14. Geoffrey M. Kistruck & Paul W. Beamish, 2010. "The Interplay of Form, Structure, and Embeddedness in Social Intrapreneurship," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 34(4), pages 735-761, July.
    15. Pandey, Jatin & Gupta, Manish & Behl, Abhishek & Pereira, Vijay & Budhwar, Pawan & Varma, Arup & Hassan, Yusuf & Kukreja, Priyam, 2021. "Technology-enabled knowledge management for community healthcare workers: The effects of knowledge sharing and knowledge hiding," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 135(C), pages 787-799.
    16. Alexis Laszczuk & Lionel Garreau, 2015. "Le journal de bord sibyllique : de l’importance des anticipations dans le processus de construction de sens du chercheur en immersion," Post-Print hal-01649597, HAL.
    17. Roger Clarke, 2022. "Research opportunities in the regulatory aspects of electronic markets," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 32(1), pages 179-200, March.
    18. Stefan W. Konlechner & Barbara Müller & Wolfgang H. Güttel & Irina Koprax & Karin Link, 2016. "Sheep in Wolf’s Clothing: The Role of Artifacts in Interpretive Schema Change," Schmalenbach Business Review, Springer;Schmalenbach-Gesellschaft, vol. 17(2), pages 129-150, August.
    19. Jeffrey S. Bednar & Benjamin M. Galvin & Blake E. Ashforth & Ella Hafermalz, 2020. "Putting Identification in Motion: A Dynamic View of Organizational Identification," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 31(1), pages 200-222, January.
    20. Miloslava Hiršová & Lenka Komárková & Petr Pirožek, 2019. "Hybrid Orientation of Organizational Identity and Its Relation to Particular Organizational Components," Acta Oeconomica Pragensia, Prague University of Economics and Business, vol. 2019(2), pages 21-37.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:infosf:v:23:y:2021:i:3:d:10.1007_s10796-019-09976-0. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.