Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Synthesizing User Centered and Designer Centered IS Development Approaches Using General Systems Theory

  • Published:
Information Systems Frontiers Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper uses general systems theory to provide an expanded view of information systems in organizations. Three general viewpoints and corresponding approaches to information systems development are identified. The designer centered or American approach to information systems development is based on a “functionalist” perspective of information systems and a problem solving orientation. The user centered or European approach to information systems development takes an expanded view of information systems that specifically considers humans and recognizes their aspirations and goals and uses a democratic, participative approach to develop systems in an effort to produce an improved workplace and a better quality of worklife for users. A third viewpoint on information systems development, business process centering, is identified that further expands the components of the system to include the set of integrated tasks that provide value to the customer. We define a new development approach that combines the strengths of these approaches based on general systems theory, business process centering, and a measurement and control system.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Ackoff RL. Management Misinformation Systems. Management Science 1967;14(4):147–156.

    Google Scholar 

  2. An JM, Hunt RG, Sanders GL. The role of domain coverage and consensus in a network of learning and problem solving systems. In: Blanning R and King D, eds. Current Research in Decision Support Technology, IEEE Computer Society Press, 1993:227–240.

  3. Barki H, Hartwick J. Rethinking the Concept of User Involvement. MIS Quarterly 1989;13(1):53–63.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Bjerknes G, Ehn P, Kyng M. Computers and Democracy-A Scandinavian Challenge. Aldershot, UK: Avebury, 1987.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Bjorn-Anderson N. Are human factors human? In: Klein HK and Kumar K, eds. Systems Development for Human Progress. North Holland: Elsevier Science Publishers, 1989.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Boland RJ. The Process and Product of System Design. Management Science 1978;24(9):887–898.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Bowditch JL, Buono AF. Quality of Worklife Assessment: A Survey-Based Approach. Auburn House Publishing Company, 1982.

  8. Brix VH. Action Learning and Control Theory. Omega 1983; 11(5):491–500.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Brynjolfsson E, Hitt LM. Beyond the Productivity Paradox. Communications of the ACM 1998;41(8):49–55.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Carmel E, Whitaker RD, George JF. PD and Joint Application Design: A Transatlantic Comparison. Communications of the ACM 1993;36(4):40–48.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Cerveny RP, Sanders GL. Implementation and Structural Variables. Information and Management 1986;11:191–198.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Cerveny RP, Garrity EJ, Sanders GL. A Problem Solving Perspective on Systems Development. Journal of Management Information Systems 1990;6(4):103–122.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Checkland P. Towards a Systems-based Methodology for Real-World Problem Solving. Journal of Systems Engineering 1972;3(2):9–38.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Churchman CW. The Design of Inquiring Systems: Basic Concepts of Systems and Organizations.NewYork, NY: Basic Books Inc., 1971.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Churchman CW. The Systems Approach and Its Enemies. New York, NY: Basic Books, Inc., 1979.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Clark CE, Cavanaugh NC, Brown CV, Sambamurthy V. Building Change-Readiness Capabilities in the IS Organization: Insights from the Bell Atlantic Experience. MIS Quarterly 1997;21(4):425–456.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Clement A, Van den Besselaar P. A Retrospective Look at PD Projects. Communications of the ACM 1993;36(4):29–37.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Coe L. Five Small Secrets to Systems Success. In: Garrity EJ and Sanders GL, eds. Information Systems Success Measurement, Hershey, PA: Idea Group Publishing, 1998:152–165.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Compass. ed. The Compass World IT Strategy Census 1999;http://www.compassamerica.com/census.htm.

  20. Dewey J. How We Think. New York, NY: D.C. Heath and Company, 1910.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Floyd C, Mehl W, Reisen F, Schmidt G, Wolf G. Out of Scandinavia: Alternative Approaches to Software Design and System Development. Human Computer Interaction 1989;4:253–350.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Garrity EJ. User Participation, Management Support, and System Types. Information Resources Management Journal 1994;7(3):34–43.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Garrity EJ, Cerveny RP, Sanders GL. User Participation and Problem Solving in Systems Development. Journal of Management Systems 1995;7(2):61–78.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Garrity EJ, Sanders GL. Introduction to information systems success measurement. In: Garrity EJ and Sanders GL, eds. Information Systems Success Measurement, Hershey, PA: Idea Group Publishing, 1998:1–12.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Garrity EJ, Sanders GL. Dimensions of information systems success measurement. In: Garrity EJ and Sanders GL, eds. Information Systems Success Measurement, Hershey, PA: Idea Group Publishing, 1998:13–45.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Gasson S. The Reality of User-centered Design. Journal of End User Computing 1999;11(4):5–15.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Hammer M. Beyond Reengineering. New York, New York: Harper Business, 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Hammer M, Champy J. Reengineering the Corporation. New York, New York: Harper Business, 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Hirscheim R, Klein HK, Lyytinen K. Information Systems Development and Data Modeling. Cambridge, Great Britain: Cambridge University Press, 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Hunt RG, Sanders GL. Propaedeutics of Decision-making: Supporting Managerial Learning and Innovation. Decision Support Systems 1986;2(2):125–134.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Kast FE, Rosenzweig JE. General Systems Theory: Applications for Organization and Management. Academy of Management Review 1972;447–465.

  32. Kolb DA. Experimental Learning: Experience as the Source of Learning and Development. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1984.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Kuhn S, Muller MJ. Participatory Design. Communications of the ACM 1993;36(4):25–28.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Kyng M. Making RepresentationsWork. Communications of the ACM 1995;38(9):47–55.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Leavitt HJ. Applying organizational change in industry: structural, technological, and humanistic approaches. In: March JG, ed. Handbook of Organizations, Chicago, Ill: Rand McNally, 1965.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Luchsinger VP, Dock VT. In: Luchsinger, VP and Dock VT, eds. An Anatomy os systems in MIS: A Managerial Perspective. 1977:3–12.

  37. Miller GA, Gallanter E, Pribam KH. Plans and the Structure of Behavior. New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, 1960.

    Google Scholar 

  38. Mumford E. Designing Human Systems-The ETHICS Method. Manchester, UK: Manchester Business School, 1983.

    Google Scholar 

  39. Newell A, Simon HA. Human Problem Solving. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1972.

    Google Scholar 

  40. Newman M, Noble F. User Involvement as an Interaction Process: A Case Study. Information Systems Research1990;1(1):89–113.

    Google Scholar 

  41. Ngwenyama OK, Lee AS. Communication Richness in Electronic Mail: Critical Social Theory and the Contextuality of Meaning. MIS Quarterly 1997;21(2):145–167.

    Google Scholar 

  42. Preece J, Rogers Y, Sharp J, Benyon D, Holland S, Carey T. Human Computer Interaction. Workingham, UK: Addison-Wesley, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  43. Sachs P. Transforming Work: Collaboration, Learning and Design. Communications of the ACM 1995;38(9):36–45.

    Google Scholar 

  44. Scheer AW, Habermann F. Making ERP a Success. Communications of the ACM 2000;43(4):57–61.

    Google Scholar 

  45. Sherman BA, Sanders GL, Garrity EJ. Expanding our View of Information Systems Success: Task Support and Quality of Worklife Satisfaction. Working Paper, State University of New York at Buffalo, 1999.

  46. Simon HA. The Shape of Automation Management, New York, NY: Harper and Row, 1965.

    Google Scholar 

  47. Suchman L. MakingWorkVisible. Communications of the ACM1995;38(9):56–64.

    Google Scholar 

  48. Tellioglu H, Wagner I. Software Cultures. Communications of the ACM 1999;42(12):71–77.

    Google Scholar 

  49. Winograd T. From Programming Environments to Environments for Designing. Communications of the ACM 1995;38(6):65–74.

    Google Scholar 

  50. Winston PH. Artificial intelligence, 2nd ed. Reading, Ma: Addison-Wesley, 1984.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Management Computer Information Systems Department, Richard J. Wehle School of Business, Canisius College, Buffalo, NY, 14208, USA

    Edward J. Garrity

Authors
  1. Edward J. Garrity
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Garrity, E.J. Synthesizing User Centered and Designer Centered IS Development Approaches Using General Systems Theory. Information Systems Frontiers 3, 107–121 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1011457822609

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1011457822609

Search

Navigation