Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Trainee reactions and task performance: a study of open training in object-oriented systems development

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Information Systems and e-Business Management Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In this study, we examine two trainee reactions: ease of learning and ease of use and their relationships with task performance in the context of object-oriented systems development. We conducted an experiment involving over 300 subjects. From that pool 72 trainees that met all of the criteria were selected for analysis in a carefully controlled study. We found that ease of learning was strongly correlated to task performance whereas ease of use was not. The finding was unexpected; ease of learning and ease of use are two overlapping concepts while their effects on task performance are very different. We offer a theoretical explanation to the paradoxical finding and its implications to the improvement of training evaluation.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Agarwal R, Prasad J et al (1996a) From needs assessment to outcomes: managing the training of information systems professionals. SIGCPR/SIGMIS ‘96, Denver, CO

  • Agarwal R, Sinha A et al (1996b) Cognitive fit in requirements modeling: a study of object and process methodologies. J Manage Inf Syst 13(2):137–162

    Google Scholar 

  • Agarwal R, Sinha A et al (1996c) The role of prior experience and task characteristics in object-oriented modeling: an empirical study. Int J Hum Comput Stud 45:639–667

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alliger GM, Tannenbaum SI et al (1997) A meta-analysis of the relations among training criteria. Pers Psychol 50(2):341–358

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bandura A (1982) Self-efficacy mechanism in human agency. Am Psychol 37:122–147

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bassi LJ, Benson G et al (1996) The top ten trends. Train Dev 50:28–42

    Google Scholar 

  • Batra D, Hoffer JA et al (1990) Comparing representations with relational and EER models. Commun ACM 33(2):126–139

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bloom BS (1956) Taxonomy of educational objectives—handbook I: cognitive domain. David McKay, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Boehm-Davis D, Ross L (1992) Program design methodologies and the software development process. Int J Man Mach Stud 36:1–19

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Booch G (1991) Object oriented design with applications. Benjamin/Cummings, Redwood City

    Google Scholar 

  • Brooks FP (1987) No silver bullet: essence and accidents of software engineering. Computer 20:10–19

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Churchill GA Jr (1979) A paradigm for developing better measures of marketing constructs. J Mark Res 16(1):64–73

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davis FD (1989) Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Q 13(3):319–340

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eaton T, Gatian A (1996) Organizational impacts of moving to object-oriented technology. J Syst Manage 47(2):18–26

    Google Scholar 

  • Fichman R, Kemerer C (1992) Object-oriented and conventional analysis and design methodologies. Computer 25:22–39

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Florida R (2002) The rise of the creative class and how it’s transforming work, leisure, community and everyday life. Basic Books, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Garceau L, Jancura E et al (1993) Object-oriented analysis and design: A new approach to systems development. J Syst Manage 44(1):25–33

    Google Scholar 

  • Gist ME, Mitchell TR (1992) Self-efficacy: a theoretical analysis of its determinants and malleability. Acad Manage Rev 17:183–211

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glass RL (1999) A snapshot of systems development practice. IEEE Software 16:112–121

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldstein IL (1993) Training in organizations: needs assessment, development, and evaluation. Brooks/Cole, Pacific Grove

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldstein IL, Gilliam P (1990) Training system issues in the year 2000. Am Psychol 45:134–143

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Graham I (1994) Object oriented methods. Addison & Wesley, Reading

  • Hair JF, Anderson RR et al (1998) Multivariate data analysis with readings. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs

    Google Scholar 

  • Henderson-Sellers B (1992) A book of object-oriented knowledge. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoffer J, George J et al (1999) Modern systems analysis and design. Addison Wesley, Reading

  • Jacobson I, Booch G et al (1999) The unified software development process. Addison Wesley, Reading

  • Jeffries R, Turner AA et al (1980) The processes involved in designing software. In: Anderson JR (ed) Cognitive skills and their acquisition. Erlbaum, Hillsdale, pp 255–283

    Google Scholar 

  • Jonhson R (2000) The ups and downs of object-oriented systems development. Commun ACM 43(10):68–73

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kirkpatrick DL (1959a) Techniques for evaluating training programs. J Am Soc Train Dev 13:3–9

    Google Scholar 

  • Kirkpatrick DL (1959b) Techniques for evaluating training programs: part 2—learning. J Am Soc Train Dev 13:21–26

    Google Scholar 

  • Kirkpatrick DL (1960a) Techniques for evaluating training programs: part 3—behavior. J Am Soc Train Dev 14:13–18

    Google Scholar 

  • Kirkpatrick DL (1960b) Techniques for evaluating training programs: part 4—results. J Am Soc Train Dev 14:28–32

    Google Scholar 

  • Kottke JL, Schuster DH (1990) Developing tests for measuring Bloom’s learning outcomes. Psychol Rep 66:27–32

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee DM, Allen TJ (1982) Integrating new staff: implications for acquiring new technology. Manage Sci 28(12):1405–1420

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee A, Pennington N (1994) The effects of paradigm on cognitive activities in design. Int J Hum Comput Stud 40:577–601

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martin F, Saljo R (1976) On qualitative differences in learning: outcome and process. Br J Educ Psychol 46:4–11

    Google Scholar 

  • Martocchio JJ, Webster J (1992) Effects of feedback and cognitive playfulness on performance in microcomputer software training. Pers Psychol 45:553–578

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morris M, Speier C et al (1999) An examination of procedural and object-oriented systems analysis methods: does prior experience help or hinder performance. Decis Sci 30(1):107–135

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nelson HJ, Armstrong D et al (2002) Old dogs and new tricks. Commun ACM 45(10):132–137

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Noe RA, Schmitt N (1986) The influence of trainee attitudes on training effectiveness: test of a model. Pers Psychol 39:497–523

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nunnally JC (1967) Psychometric theory. McGraw-Hill, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Payne JW, Bettman JR et al (1992) Behavioral decision research: a constructive processing perspective. Annu Rev Psychol 43:87–131

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saari LM, Johnson TR et al (1988) A survey of management training and education practices in US companies. Pers Psychol 41:731–743

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Salas E, Cannon-Bowers JA (2001) The science of training: a decade of progress. Annu Rev Psychol 52:471–499

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Seddon GM (1978) The properties of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives for the cognitive domain. Rev Educ Res 45:303–323

    Google Scholar 

  • Sharp H, Griffyth J (1999) The effect of previous software development experience on understanding the object-oriented paradigm. J Comput Math Sci Teach 18(3):245–265

    Google Scholar 

  • Silver MS (2006) Browser-based applications: popular but flawed? Inf Syst E Bus Manage 4(4):361–393

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sircar S, Nerur SP et al (2001) Revolution or evolution? A comparison of OO and structured systems development methods. MIS Q 25(4):457–471

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Slovic P, Lichtenstein S (1971) Comparison of Bayesian and regression approaches to the study of information processing in judgment. Organ Behav Hum Perform 6:641–744

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tannenbaum SI, Mathieu JE et al (1991) Meeting trainees’ expectations: the influence of training fulfillment on the development of commitment, self-efficacy, and motivation. J Appl Psychol 76:759–769

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Taylor DS, Goles T et al (2003) Normative perception of the role of is within the organization: an empirical test of measuring student learning. University of Houston, Houston

    Google Scholar 

  • Tversky A, Kahneman (1974) Judgment under uncertainty: heuristics and biases. Science 185:1124–1131

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Venkatesh V (2000) Determinants of perceived ease of use: integrating control, intrinsic motivation, and emotion into technology acceptance model. Inf Syst Res 11(4):342–365

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Venkatesh V, Davis FD (1996) A model of the antecedents of perceived ease of use: development and test. Decis Sci 27(3):451–481

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vessey I, Conger S (1994) Requirements specifications: learning object, process, and data methodologies. Commun ACM 37(5):102–111

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vroom VH (1964) Work and motivation. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Warr P, Bunce D (1995) Traning characteristics and the outcomes of open learning. Pers Psychol 48(2):347–375

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yourdon E (1994) Object-oriented systems design: an integrated approach. Yourdon, Englewood Cliffs

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. The University of Akron, College of Business Building 351, Akron, OH, 44325-4801, USA

    Liping Liu

  2. University of Bío-Bío, Casilla 5-C, Concepción, Chile

    Elizabeth E. Grandon

  3. College of Business and Administration, The University of Akron, Akron, OH, 44325-4801, USA

    Steven R. Ash

Authors
  1. Liping Liu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Elizabeth E. Grandon
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Steven R. Ash
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Liping Liu.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Liu, L., Grandon, E.E. & Ash, S.R. Trainee reactions and task performance: a study of open training in object-oriented systems development. Inf Syst E-Bus Manage 7, 21–37 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10257-007-0049-x

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10257-007-0049-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation