www.sharexxx.net - free books & magazines

204 Mullany and Lay
prescriptive manner. For instance, as previously noted, the sensitivity of the R-score
to the cognitive style of the researcher is left untested in this study.
The Ability of Adaption-Innovation Theory to Predict
Aspects of the Analyst-User Interface
Following the successful testing of hypothesis HI, significant associations
between analyst- user KAI score differences and aspects of the analyst-user
interface were expected. These associations are represented by hypotheses H2(a)
to H2(d). Of these, hypothesis H2(c) tested significant at p = 0.020 in precise
contradiction of the original posit. A tendency was thus demonstrated for a user
not to view an analyst who is more innovative than he is as a person who tends to
waste time on side issues. It initially seems, therefore, that A-I theory failed to
predict this aspect of the analyst-user interface correctly. However, a reconsideration
of hypothesis H2(c) suggests another, which both agree with A-I theory and
the result obtained. That is, that the user, generally being a non-systems expert,
really does not know whether the analyst is wasting time on peripheral issues or not.
What he rather observes in a more innovative analyst is a confident, to-the-point
individual, who does not appear to waste time on peripheral issues. Unfortunately,
it can be argued that this is merely an attempt to explain away an unexpected result,
since the original hypothesis was a fair one, quite as soundly based on A-I theory.
The ultimate conclusion in respect of this matter must then be one of caution when
trying to predict specific behaviors of an analyst-user dyad directly from A-I theory.
Hypothesis H2(a) tested inconclusively significant at p = 0.070, although
stronger support may have been achieved with a better measuring technique. In
other words, there is some evidence that a user will find an analyst who is more
innovative than he is to comprehend system requirements relatively quickly. These
results may prove useful in situations where R-score/KAI testing of the persons
involved is not immediately feasible or possible. In such cases, users who comment
on the quick comprehension, confidence and brevity of the analyst could be
suspected of belonging to analyst-user dyads in which the analyst is the more
innovative. Such observations might also motivate the later administration of KAI
tests or measuring of R-scores, so that a more precise analysis of user resistance
can be made.
On the basis of this study, the hypotheses H2(b) and H2(d) cannot be
considered as providing useful information. However, it is of interest to note a
common feature. They both involved direct questioning of the user regarding his
personal relationship with the analyst, implying potential negative criticism of the
analyst in some way. Although in terms of A-I theory these associations should have
Copyright © 2003, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written
permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited.