Workflow Systems: Occasions for Success and Failure

Workflow technologies have created considerable discussion within the computer supported cooperative work community. Although a number of theoretical and empirical warnings about the difficulties of workflow systems have appeared, the technologies continue to be built and sold. This paper examines the use of one workflow-like system and outlines three cases when the technology supported the work of its users. Comparing these successful occasions with some reports of difficulties, this paper draws conclusions about the circumstances that led to tool usage.     

Information systems practice, education and research

Abstract. The launch of a new journal in information systems prompts thought and debate concerning the state of the subject area and some contemplation on its past and future. This introductory paper reflects the views of the editors, views which will not be shared by all. We find a wide spectrum of interpretations and experiences concerning the nature of information systems and this wide range of views is both a strength and a weakness. It is a weakness in the sense that it is very difficult to put boundaries around the area and establish common definitions and accepted norms. The latter are usually associated with more stable and established disciplines that have accepted underlying theories. It is a strength in the sense that the wide variety of views, experiences and background subjects adds richness to the discipline. From the point of view of the Journal of Information Systems this should mean a wide variety of interesting topics from which we can draw. Our paper begins with an introduction to the debate about the nature of information systems, a debate which is continued in the following paper. We also give an overview of practice, education and research in information systems. In order to keep the paper to a reasonable length, this overview will necessarily be selective and will probably be Anglocentric.     

Recomposition: Coordinating a Web of Software Dependencies

In this paper, I revisit theconcept of recomposition – all the work thatdevelopment organizations do to make sure thattheir product fits together and into a broaderenvironment of other technologies. Technologies, such as Configuration Management(CM) systems, can ameliorate some of a softwaredevelopment team's need to engage inrecomposition. However, technologicalsolutions do not scale to address other kindsof recomposition needs. This paper focuses onvarious organizational responses to the needfor recomposition. By organizational response,I mean how individuals engage in recompositionso that the organization can assemble softwaresystems from parts. Specifically, I describehow those responses are manifested in theday-to-day communications and responsibilitiesof individuals throughout the organization. Ialso highlight how changes in an organizationcomplicate recomposition. The paper concludeswith a discussion of three features of softwaredevelopment work that are revealed byrecomposition: the affects of environmentaldisturbances on development work, the types ofdependencies that require recomposition, andthe images of organizations required to managethe recomposition.     

Process Modelling and Empirical Studies of Software Evolution (PMESSE'97) Workshop Report

Much progress is being made in both the areas of process modelling and software metrics. However, neither of these concepts is complete without the other: processes cannot be improved if no assessment of quality is available, and metrics are useless if they cannot be applied in order to assess the evolution of systems. The PMESSE (Process Modelling and Empirical Studies of Software Evolution) Workshop, held in Boston MA, on May 18, 1997, brought together researchers and practitioners from both of these fields, and stimulated some very lively debate on these issues. This collection of reports reflects the work done by the Workshops five Working Groups.Dialogue between the software metrics and process modelling communities is essential. This workshop succeeded in bringing together researchers with a wide range of research interests, and the resulting discussions were very animated. Perhaps the most contentious point of discussion lay in the 'level of granularity' question; some suggested that only high-level measurements were sensible, whereas others preferred to 'divide and conquer' the system, providing detailed process measurement schemas. No doubt this debate will continue.