《关于ERP外文翻译基于ERP系统的关键用户.doc》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《关于ERP外文翻译基于ERP系统的关键用户.doc（12页珍藏版）》请在三一办公上搜索。
1、本科毕业论文外文翻译外文译文题目（中文） ：基于ERP系统的关键用户学 院:XX学院专 业:信息管理与信息系统学 号:2008023学生姓名:XX指导教师:XX日 期:二XX年六月Key user roles on web-based ERPJih-Hsin TangInformation Systems Research 1997：8(3)：240-253 基于ERP系统的关键用户琼.唐信息系统研究 1997：8(3)：240-2532.1 用户需求的问题：异构和许多 对于ISD和WIS的发展，RA通常起到关键的作用。有些学者认为RA是WIS的发展的重要组成部分，甚至调用一个系统，有纪律的方
2、法（Murugesan et al., 2001）。一方面，一些研究人员声称，确定为一个基于互联网的电子商务应用系统的要求与其应用他应用程序的过程中是不同的（Hofferetal， 2002）。这些学者认为，联合应用开发（JAD）会议可能足够地有效引出用户的要求。Holck（2003）声称在四个方面，传统的软件开发和WIS的发展没有差异。另一方面，一些学者认为，WIS的发展和传统的软件开发之间的区别在于发展速度和发展的生命周期的不同（e.g.Fraternali，1999；Fuccella and Pizzolato，1998； Ginige and Murugesan，2001； Press
3、man，1998）。例如，Wang and Head第一次与传统的对比的是用户和WIS用户，然后提出了一个电子零售发展的概念框架。虽然它是超越目前的研究，解决了传统的软件开发和WIS发展的差异之间的争议的范围和目的，希望澄清一些传统的软件和WIS的发展，用户需求之间的差异。Wang and Head（2001）提出了详细的比较与传统用户和WIS用户。同时也承认，确实存在上述差异，IS和WIS用户之间最重要的区别是： （1）前未知系统的发展，甚至系统运行前未知的早期阶段; （2）太异类； （3）可能在WIS上有太多的用户； 如果用户不能确定前一个WIS的发展，那么RA是非常难以进行的。在某些WI
4、S，如内联网和外联网，大多数用户可以提前确认; 因此，RA的传统方法，如访谈，可以方便地应用于调查和焦点小组。然而，在其他情况下，未来的用户和他们的需求事前可能不会被承认。因此，Yang and Tang (2003)提出，RA分为三个阶段，以获得更透彻地了解用户需求。收集用户代表的需求一直是一个以用户为中心设计的关键部分被应用到网页设计（Campbell，2001； Sampson， 1998），基本假设是： （1）用户可以在系统开发的早期阶段确定; （2）用户代表的是真正的用户; （3）一小部分用户的数量可以代表整个用户群体。 然而，这些基本假设受到了质疑，因为： （1）早期阶段，一些WI
5、S的用户不能适应有针对性的系统开发; （2）用户代表参加在网页设计未必是实际的用户; （3）用户样本可能无法代表整个用户群体。 因此，评估“典型”或“影响力”的网上用户的要求有很大的价值，整个用户群体的需求得到一个精确的快照。本研究分类WIS的使用尺寸，首先解决两个重大问题WIS的用户 - 用户是否太“异类”或“太多” - 并随后评估“影响力”的关键用户，根据不同的WIS的使用尺寸。关键用户可根据自己的特定情况下有不同的含义。例如，在一个商业网站，关键用户可能是非常重要的客户，如那些有助于该公司的大部分收入。关键用户是指在这项研究中，作为有影响力的用户可能显着的影响其他用户在WIS的使用。例如
6、，关键用户可影响购买决策的，在寻求或建议网上的人际关系的建立和维护信息的方法之一，或在他们在线娱乐自己的方式。 2.2 WIS的使用尺寸与传统的是用户相比，WIS的用户更加多样化和异质性; 此外，用户总人数可以预计将增长到临界质量为欧共体成功（Hagel and Armstrong，1997）。因此，在进一步讨论之前，分清正确的用户和他们的角色是至关重要的。本研究采用来自Isakowitz的WIS分类方法等，并提出了一些初步的用户要求的尺寸，这是最从几个最近的研究（Armstrong and Hagel，1996； Korgaonkar and Wolin，1999；Schneiderman，
7、1997）的合成。由于网络使用与各种用户的动机想关联，因此，它不可能枚举所有用户的需求。然而，WIS的用户最重要的动机有以下几种： （1）信息的采集; （2）沟通； （3）探索（如网上冲浪）;（4）收购的商业货物（Rodgers and Sheldon，2002）。 探索与嬉戏相关联，所以一些研究人员认为，嬉闹对WWW的使用有显着的影（Atkinson and Kydd，1997）。因此，本研究采用WIS的使用作为一个维度嬉闹或娱乐。作为讨论的起点，用户的特点和不同的方式在他们的陪同下要求的应用程序下面列出。如表一所示，在企业内部网用户amajority是在一个组织的雇员，因此，用户可确定系统
8、开发的早期阶段之前。一般来说，比较的otherWIS用户，企业内部网用户的增长速度低，由于一个事实，即它的增长是依赖于组织的整体人力电源增长率。为网络的存在和欧共体，大多数用户是谁也无法具体确定事先一般，其身份往往只能推断，从他们如何选择在线注册自己的客户。因此，而市场调研，确定细分市场，找出潜在的客户，真正的客户可以不知道，直到该网站实际上是打开业务。一个成功的企业的关键条件之一是，当客户和参观者预计将在一个较高的速度增长，以形成一个临界质量（Hagel and Armstrong，1997）。外联网主要创建B2B交易，因此，用户无论是在内部或组织外。因此，有关组织内大多数用户可以提前确定，
9、一些业务合作伙伴的用户可以bereached之前系统开发的早期阶段。但是，这种类型的用户增长率往往是有限的，因为业务合作伙伴公司，显然不能在数量上增加迅速的消费者。其中一个最重要的用户需求是“信息”的收集和共享，因此，信息的内容，用户的导航程序和数据过滤功能是首要的系统关注。对于一个组织内的用户，如何创造，获取和分发知识，是一个巨大的挑战。知识管理已不再是一个口号，而是实际的和不可分割的一部分的知识管理系统（Alavi and Leidner，2001）; WIS的为这些系统提供一个合理的平台。换句话说，组织记忆和关键信息应适当的编码，存储，检索和利用，以实现其知识资产的最优值（索利曼和优素福
10、，2003年，野生等，2002）。“关系”或“沟通”的要求是重要的，不仅在工作场所，而且还为用户的个人目的。可能从简单的通讯设施，如e-mail或复杂的社区建设设施的电子论坛，会议的通信需求。通过调查几个社区，Preece（1998）建议，应提供网上社区用户的信任，平等和同情的气氛，此外，这些方面应在设计阶段结合。stanoevska Slabeva（2002）强调，特别是互联网的社会方面，提出了面向社区的互联网平台的设计。上述研究的意义，意味着与用户的沟通; 在线用户之间的关系是两个最重要的用户需求，有助于显着地增加用户的满意程度。“交易”为电子商务和网上社区的主要功能是商业网站（Hagel
11、 and Armstrong，1997；Korgaonkar and Wolin，1999；Rodgers and Sheldon，2002）。相应的客户需求，如隐私的关注，信任和方便，应该予以考虑。此外，由于内联网或网络的存在是不为交易目的，也没有必要在这种类型的情况分析，包括维。随着电子商务站点或虚拟社区进行的研究外，“嬉闹”或“幻想”是两个文献已收到很少注意（Armstrong and Hagel，1996）的主题。最近的实证研究已经证实，嬉闹，或享受，是一个网页设计质量的关键尺寸（Liu etal，2001；Van der Heijden，2003）。Agarwal and Karah
12、anna (2000)，关于嬉闹个人特质与认知的吸收，如一些学者，内在动机相关的变量，其中有一个积极影响知觉有用与知觉易于使用，在使用互联网的意向最终结果。 2.3找出关键用户面临的困难 确定关键用户特别重要的是WIS的需求获取，因为用户不能确定在一个新网站的发展(Rahardja, 1999),可能是要考虑太多，或可能是太多样化进行分析。以往的研究提出的焦点团体的方式，重点放在用户要求的数量(Abelsetal，1998),导出用户要求（Artz，1996年），为Web应用程序或可用性的方法（Campbell，2001）。然而，据我们所知，没有先前的研究已确定的少数重要用户，这是作为“关键用
13、户”在研究确定采用的方法阐述。借用社会网络分析（SNA）的在线用户的角度，仔细研究这项研究的关键用户和他们的要求之间的关系。我们采取了这种方法为以下几个原因：首先，大部分的需求获取方法主要侧重于寻求信息或一般的导航分析。运用SNA的数据，其他条件，如通讯，社会，情感支持的需求，也可确定。确定管理者可以帮助征求他们的意见，这可能提高社会/通信的功能，接口或其他设计品质的系统设计。其次，有时一个WIS用户是相当分歧。这是不容易进行与很多用户的需求分析不提其他人可能是“潜在用户”。只有有限数量的用户，通常介乎五十五的用户，可靠性试验的宝贵（Campbell，2001；Nielsen，1993）。拥有
14、真正的RA相同的规则。第三，用户自己是为WIS的重要资源，不仅为他们的贡献，该网站的内容，也为他们的潜在购买力。关键用户是有价值的，因为他们的意见和反应系统和有效地使用系统的分析。第四，SNA是有用的，在确定相关信息，如看门人，舆论领袖和组织边界扳手角色。它可以用来了解网上社区成员和主要社会成员的合作模式，因此可以被发现。因此，一个系统的SNA可能是有用的定位系统的分析过程中适当的用户和提高政府新闻处（Loughman，2000）。在信息网络，最接近的信息是从朋友直接，最接近的未来关系将是一个“朋友的朋友”，等等。在这项研究中采用接近中心，因为它是概念化为便于为一组的其他成员访问。从特定类型的
15、关系，如咨询，友谊，沟通和对抗性网络构建的社会网络已经探讨各种研究（Baldwin，1997；Ibarra and Andrews，1993）。四个亚群的关系：信息，通信，交易和娱乐的网络已被证明是WIS的用户尤为重要。 2.1 User requirements questions: heterogeneous and many RA is usually a critical stage for both ISD and WIS development. Some scholars consider RA is a crucial component for WIS development
16、 and even call for a systematic and disciplined approach (Murugesan et al., 2001). On the one hand, some researchers claim that determining systems requirements for an internet-based EC application is not different from the process of doing so for other applications (Hoffer et al., 2002). These scho
17、lars have suggested that a joint application development (JAD) session may work well enough to elicit user requirements effectively. Holck (2003) proposed four perspectives on WIS, claiming that there is no difference between traditional software development and WIS development.On the other hand, so
18、me scholars believe that the difference between WIS development and traditional software development is significant in the development speed and the development life cycle (e.g. Fraternali, 1999; Fuccella and Pizzolato, 1998; Ginige and Murugesan, 2001; Pressman, 1998). Wang and Head (2001), for exa
19、mple, first made a contrast between traditional IS users and WIS users and then proposed a conceptual framework for e-tailing development. While it is beyond the scope and purpose of the present study to solve the controversy between the difference of traditional software development and WIS develop
20、ment, it will hopefully elucidate some of the differences between user requirements for traditional software and WIS development.Wang and Head (2001) presented a detailed comparison between traditional IS users and WIS users. While acknowledging that all the above differences do exist, the most impo
21、rtant differences between IS and WIS users were shown to be: (1) unknown before the early stage of system development or even unknown before system operation； (2) too heterogeneous； (3) perhaps too many users on the WIS. If users cannot be identified prior to the development of a WIS, then RA is ext
22、remely difficult to conduct. In some WIS, such as in intranets and extranets, most users can be recognized in advance; therefore, traditional RA methods such as interviews, surveys and focus groups can be easily applied. However, in other cases, future users and their needs may not be recognized bef
23、orehand. Thus, Yang and Tang (2003a) proposed dividing RA into three stages in order to gain a more thorough understanding of user requirements. Gathering requirements from user representatives has long been a pivotal part of user-centered design and has, thus, been applied to the web design (Campbe
24、ll, 2001; Sampson, 1998). The basic assumptions are that: (1) users can be identified at the early stage of system development; (2) user representatives are real users; and (3) a small number of users can represent the entire user population. However, these fundamental assumptions have been question
25、ed because: (1) some WIS users cannot be targeted appropriately before the early stage of system development; (2) user representatives who participate in the web design may not be the actual users; (3) a sample of users may not represent the entire user population. Accordingly, there is great value
26、in assessing the requirement of “typical” or “influential” online users to get an accurate snapshot of the needs of the entire user Population. The present study classifies WIS usage dimensions by first addressing the two major questions of WIS users whether or not users are “too heterogeneous” or a
27、re “too many” and subsequently assesses the “influential” key users according to various WIS usage dimensions. Key users may have different meanings according to their specific contexts. For example, on a commercial web site, key users may be very important customers, such as those who contribute mo
28、st of the revenues of the corporation. The key users are defined in this study as influential users who may influence other users in significant WIS usage. For example, the key users may influence others in purchasing decisions,in their methods of information seeking or getting advice, in the establ
29、ishment and maintenance of online interpersonal relationship with one-another, or in the way that they entertain themselves online. 2.2 The WIS usage dimensions Compared with traditional IS users, WIS users are more diverse and heterogeneous; moreover their overall number of users can be expected to
30、 grow to a critical mass for EC success (Hagel and Armstrong, 1997). Therefore, it is crucial to classify properly users and their roles before further discussion. The present study adopts WIS classifications from Isakowitz et al. (1998), and suggests some tentative user requirements dimensions, whi
31、ch are most synthesized from several recent studies (Armstrong and Hagel, 1996; Korgaonkar and Wolin, 1999; Schneiderman, 1997). As web usage is associated with a variety of user motivations, it, therefore, not possible to enumerate all user needs. However, the most important motivations for WIS use
32、rs are the following: (1) the acquisition of information; (2) communication; (3) exploration (e.g. surfing); and (4) the acquisition of commercial goods (Rodgers and Sheldon, 2002). Exploration is related with play, and some researchers contend that playfulness has a significant effect on www usage
33、(Atkinson and Kydd, 1997). Therefore, this study adopts playfulness or entertainment as a dimension for WIS use. As a starting point for discussion, the user characteristics and their accompanied requirements in different WIS applications are listed below. As shown in Table I, amajority of users in
34、intranets are employees in an organization; thus users could be identified prior to the early stage of system development. Generally speaking, in comparison to the otherWIS users, the intranet-user growth rate is low due to the fact that its growth is dependent upon the organizational overall human-
35、power growth rate. As for web presence and EC, most users are customers who cannot be specifically identified beforehand in general and whose identities can often only be inferred from how they choose to register themselves online. Thus, whereas marketing research may identify the market segment and
36、 identify potential customers, the real customers cannot be known until the web sites are actually open for business. One of the critical conditions for a successful business is when customers and visitors are expected to grow at a high rate in order to form a critical mass (Hagel and Armstrong, 199
37、7). Extranets are mainly created for B2B transactions; therefore, users are either on the inside or on the outside of an organization. Therefore, most users within the related organizations can be identified in advance, and some of the business partner users can bereached prior to the early stage of
38、 system development. But this type of user growth rate is often limited since business partners are corporations, which, obviously, cannotincrease in number as rapidly as can its consumers. One of the most important user requirements is “information” gathering and sharing; therefore, information con
39、tent, the users navigation processes and data filtering capabilities are prime system concerns. For users within an organization, how to create, gain access to and distribute knowledge is a prodigious challenge. Knowledge management is no longer a slogan, but rather a practical and integral part of
40、knowledge management systems (Alavi and Leidner, 2001); WIS providing a reasonable platform for these systems. In other words, organizational memory and critical information should be appropriately coded, stored, retrieved and utilized in order to realize the optimal value of its knowledge assets (S
41、oliman and Youssef, 2003; Wild et al., 2002). “Relationship” or “communication” requirements are important not only in the workplace but also for users personal purposes. Meeting communication requirements may range from simple communication facilities, such as e-mail or electronic forums to sophist
42、icated community-building facilities. Through an investigation of several communities, Preece (1998) suggested that online communities should provide users with a climate of trust, equality and empathy; furthermore, these aspects should be combined in the design stage. Stanoevska-Slabeva (2002) emph
43、asized specifically the social aspect of the internet and proposed a community-oriented design of internet platforms. The implications of the aforementioned studies imply that communication with the users; and the relationship between online users are the two paramount user needs that contribute sig
44、nificantly to increases to users satisfaction levels. “Transaction” is the main function for e-commerce and online communities commercial web sites (Hagel and Armstrong, 1997; Korgaonkar and Wolin, 1999; Rodgers and Sheldon, 2002). Consequential customer requirements, such as privacy concerns, trust
45、, and convenience should be taken into consideration. Moreover, sinceintranets or web presence are not for transaction purposes, there is no need to include this dimension for analysis in this type of situations. With the exception of studies conducted on e-commerce sites or virtual communities, “pl
46、ayfulness” or “fantasies” are two topics that have received scant attention in the literature (Armstrong and Hagel, 1996). Recent empirical studies have confirmed that playfulness, or enjoyment, is a key dimension of web design quality (Liu et al., 2001; Van der Heijden, 2003). Some scholars, such a
47、s Agarwal and Karahanna (2000), regard playfulness as an individual trait related to cognitive absorption, an intrinsic motivation related variable, which has a positive impact on perceived usefulness and perceived ease-of-use, and ultimately results in the intention of internet use. 2.3 The problem
48、 of finding key users Identifying key users is especially important for WIS requirements elicitation because users cannot be identified during a new web site development (Rahardja, 1999), might be too many to be taken care of, or may be too diverse to be analyzed. A number of previous studies proposed to place emphasis on user requirements by means of focus groups (Abels et al., 1998), derived user requirements (Artz, 1996), or usability methods (Campbell
