1 Maurg

Decision Support Systems Research Papers

Objectives

IJDSS is a scholarly journal that publishes applied and theoretical research contributing to DSS as a distinct scientific field where information systems, operations research and management science cooperate. Moreover, it aims at cultivating and fostering the generic idea of DSS. Its objectives are to establish an effective channel of communication between all people involved in the underlying research areas and to promote and coordinate the relevant developments and innovative research initiatives.

It therefore aims to:

  • Raise the awareness of the importance of the DSS research field
  • Focus on excellence in developing DSS methodologies, models and techniques to deal with major decision making problems
  • Provide insights into the latest DSS developments, and
  • Offer a networking forum for academic researchers and industry practitioners

Readership

IJDSS shapes its content from the research needs of a wide-ranging but tightly focused set of groups that are actively involved in advancing the field of DSS. These groups include academic researchers active within the areas of information systems, operations research and management science cooperation. Contributions from industry practitioners and professionals such as management consultants and business analysts are also welcome.


Contents

IJDSS publishes high quality theoretical, empirical and survey research pieces that contribute significantly and provide meaningful insights in the field of DSS. Priority is given to articles that reveal novel concepts of broad interest to the international research community. Suggestions for special issues that address specific and well-defined relevant topics are welcome.

IJDSS hosts all the basic methodological streams of DSS. We focus on papers presenting new theoretical insights and developments, as well as real-world case studies illustrating the implementation of DSS approaches in everyday business practice. Papers exploring the interactions of DSS with other relevant disciplines are of particular interest. Research papers from eminent scientists reviewing the existing state-of-the-art are also welcome.


 

Hide
  • Alavi, M. and Carlson, P. (1992). A Review of MIS Research and Disciplinary Development, Journal of Management Information Systems8(4): 45–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

  • Anthony, R.N. (1965). Planning and Control Systems: A framework for analysis, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar

  • Arnott, D. and Pervan, G. (2005). A Critical Analysis of Decision Support Systems Research, Journal of Information Technology20(2): 67–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

  • Arnott, D. and Pervan, G. (2008). Eight Key Issues for the Decision Support Systems Discipline, Decision Support Systems44(3): 657–672.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

  • Arnott, D. and Pervan, G. (2010). How Relevant is Fieldwork to DSS Design-Science Research? in A. Respicio, F. Adam, G. Phillips-Wren, C Teixeira and J. Telhada (eds.) Bridging the Socio-Technical Gap in Decision Support Systems: Challenges for the next decade, Amsterdam: IOS Press, pp. 199–210.Google Scholar

  • Arnott, D. and Pervan, G. (2012). Design Science in Decision Support Systems Research: An assessment using the Hevner, March, Park, and Ram guidelines, Journal of the Association for Information Systems13(11): 923–949.Google Scholar

  • Arnott, D., Pervan, G. and Dodson, G. (2005). Who Pays for Decision Support Systems Research? Review, Directions and Issues, Communications of the Association for Information Systems16: 356–380.Google Scholar

  • Baskerville, R. (2008). What Design Science is Not, European Journal of Information Systems17(5): 441–443.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

  • Benbasat, I. and Barki, H. (2007). Quo Vadis, TAM? Journal of the Association for Information Systems8(4): 211–218.Google Scholar

  • Benbasat, I. and Nault, B. (1990). An Evaluation of Empirical Research in Managerial Support Systems, Decision Support Systems6(3): 203–226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

  • Bragge, J., Korhonen, P., Wallenius, H. and Wallenius, J. (2012). Scholarly Communities of Research in Multiple Criteria Decision Making: A bibliometric research profiling study, International Journal of Information Technology and Decision Making 11(2): 401–426.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

  • Briggs, R.O., de Vreede, G.-J. and Nunamaker, Jr. J.F. (2003). Collaboration engineering with ThinkLets to Pursue Sustained Success with Group Support Systems, Journal of Management Information Systems 19(4): 31–64.Google Scholar

  • Brown, B., Court, D. and Willmott, P. (2013). Mobilizing your C-suite for Big Data Analytics, McKinsey Quarterly, November.Google Scholar

  • Cavaye, A.L.M. (1996). Case Study Research: A multi-faceted research approach for IS, Information Systems Journal6(3): 227–242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

  • Chen, H., Chiang, R. and Storey, V. (2012). Business Intelligence and Analytics: From big data to big impact, MIS Quarterly36(4): 1165–1188.Google Scholar

  • Chen, W.S. and Hirschheim, R. (2004). A Paradigmatic and Methodological Examination of Information Systems Research from 1991 to 2001, Information Systems Journal14(3): 197–235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

  • Chiang, R.H.L., Goes, P. and Stohr, E.A. (2012). Business Intelligence and Analytics Education, and Program Development: A unique opportunity for the information systems discipline, ACM Transactions on Management Information Systems3(3): 1–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

  • Clark, Jr T.D., Jones, M.C. and Armstrong, C.P. (2007). The Dynamic Structure of Management Support Systems: Theory development, research focus, and direction, MIS Quarterly31(3): 579–615.Google Scholar

  • Davenport, T.H. (2006). Competing on Analytics, Harvard Business Review84(1): 98–107.Google Scholar

  • Davenport, T.H. and Harris, J.G. (2007). Competing on Analytics: The new science of winning, Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.Google Scholar

  • Davis, F.D. (1989). Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, and User Acceptance of Information Technology, MIS Quarterly13(3): 319–339.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

  • Delen, D. and Crossland, M.D. (2008). Seeding the Survey and Analysis of Research Literature with Text Mining, Expert Systems with Applications34(3): 1707–1720.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

  • DeLone, W.H. and McLean, E.R. (2003). The DeLone and McLean Model of Information Systems Success: A ten-year update, Journal of Management Information Systems19(4): 9–30.Google Scholar

  • Dennis, A.R., Carte, T.A. and Kelly, G.G. (2003). Breaking the Rules: Success and failure in groupware-supported business process reengineering, Decision Support Systems36(1): 31–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

  • Dennis, A.R., Tyran, C.K., Vogel, D.R. and Nunamaker, Jr J.F. (1997). Group Support Systems for Strategic Planning, Journal of Management Information Systems14(1): 155–184.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

  • Galliers, R.D. (1991). Choosing Appropriate Information Systems Research Approaches: A revised taxonomy, in H.-E. Nissen, H.K. Klein and R. Hirschheim (eds.) Information Systems Research: Contemporary approaches and emergent traditions, Amsterdam: North-Holland, pp. 327–345.Google Scholar

  • Galliers, R.D. and Meadows, M. (2003). A Discipline Divided: Globalization and parochialism in information systems research, Communications of the Association for Information Systems 11: 108–117.Google Scholar

  • Gartner (2007). Creating Enterprise Leverage: The 2007 CIO agenda (Gartner EXP CIO Report), Stamford, CT: Gartner Inc.Google Scholar

  • Gartner (2008). Gartner says worldwide business intelligence platform market grew 13 percent in 2007, Gartner Newsroom, [WWW document] http://www.gartner.com/it/page.jsp?id=700410 (accessed 7 November 2012).

  • Gartner (2009). Gartner says worldwide business intelligence, analytics and performance management grew 22 percent in 2008, Gartner Newsroom, [WWW document] http://www.gartner.com/it/page.jsp?id=1017812 (accessed 7 November 2012).

  • Gartner (2010). Gartner says worldwide business intelligence, analytics and performance management software market grew 4 percent in 2009, Gartner Newsroom, [WWW document] http://www.gartner.com/it/page.jsp?id=1357514 (accessed 7 November 2012).

  • Gartner (2011). Gartner says worldwide business intelligence, analytics and performance management software market surpassed the $10 billion mark in 2010, Gartner Newsroom, [WWW document] http://www.gartner.com/it/page.jsp?id=1642714 (accessed 7 November 2012).

  • Gartner (2012a). Amplifying the Enterprise: The 2012 Gartner CIO agenda report, Stamford, CT: Gartner Inc.Google Scholar

  • Gartner (2012b). Gartner says worldwide business intelligence, analytics and performance management software market surpassed the $12 billion mark in 2011, Gartner Newsroom, [WWW document] http://www.gartner.com/it/page.jsp?id=1971516 (accessed 7 November 2012).

  • Gartner (2013a). Gartner predicts business intelligence and analytics will remain top focus for CIOs through 2017, Gartner Newsroom, [WWW document] http://www.gartner.com/newsroom/id/2637615 (accessed 18 February 2014).

  • Gartner (2013b). Gartner says worldwide business intelligence software revenue to grow 7 percent in 2013, Gartner Newsroom, [WWW document] http://www.gartner.com/newsroom/id/2340216 (accessed 18 February 2014).

  • Germonprez, M., Hovorka, D. and Gal, U. (2011). Secondary Design: A case of behavioral design science research, Journal of the Association for Information Systems12(10): 662–683.Google Scholar

  • Goodhue, D.L. and Thompson, R.L. (1995). Task-Technology Fit and Individual Performance, MIS Quarterly19(2): 213–236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

  • Gorry, G.A. and Scott Morton, M.S. (1971). A Framework for Management Information Systems, Sloan Management Review13(1): 1–22.Google Scholar

  • Gottschalk, P. (2000). Predictors of IT Support For Knowledge Management in the Professions: An empirical study of law firms in Norway, Journal of Information Technology15(1): 69–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

  • Gregor, S. and Jones, D. (2007). The Anatomy of a Design Theory, Journal of the Association for Information Systems8(5): 312–335.Google Scholar

  • Guo, Z. and Sheffield, J. (2008). A Paradigmatic and Methodological Examination of Knowledge Management Research: 2000 to 2004, Decision Support Systems44(3): 673–688.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

  • Hevner, A.R. (2007). The Three Cycle View of Design Science Research, Scandinavian Journal of Information Systems19(2): 87–92.Google Scholar

  • Hevner, A.R., March, S.T., Park, J. and Ram, S. (2004). Design Science in Information Systems Research, MIS Quarterly28(1): 75–106.Google Scholar

  • Hirschheim, R. (2007). Introduction to the Special Issue on ‘Quo Vadis TAM — Issues and reflections on technology acceptance research’, Journal of the Association for Information Systems8(4): 203–205.Google Scholar

  • Hosack, B., Hall, D., Paradice, D. and Courtney, J.F. (2012). A Look Toward the Future: Decision support is alive and well, Journal of the Association for Information Systems13(5): 315–340.Google Scholar

  • Hwang, H.-G., Ku, C.-Y., Yen, D. and Cheng, C.C. (2004). Critical Factors Influencing the Adoption of Data Warehouse Technology: A study of the banking industry in Taiwan, Decision Support Systems37(1): 1–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

  • Indulska, M. and Recker, J.C. (2008). Design Science in IS Research: A literature analysis, in S. Gregor and S. Ho (eds.) Proceedings of the 4th Biennial ANU Workshop on Information Systems Foundations, Canberra, Australia: ANU.Google Scholar

  • Iivari, J. (2007). A Paradigmatic Analysis of Information Systems as a Design Science, Scandinavian Journal of Information Systems19(2): 39–64.Google Scholar

  • Jourdan, Z., Rainer, R.K. and Marshall, T.E. (2008). Business Intelligence: An analysis of the literature, Information Systems Management25(2): 121–131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

  • Kahneman, D. (2011). Thinking Fast and Slow, New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.Google Scholar

  • Kuechler, W. and Vaishnavi, V. (2012). A Framework for Theory Development in Design Science Research: Multiple perspectives, Journal of the Association for Information Systems13(6): 395–423.Google Scholar

  • Lee, A.S. (2010). Retrospect and Prospect: Information systems research in the last and next 25 years, Journal of Information Technology25(4): 336–348.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

  • Leidner, D.E., Carlsson, S., Elam, J. and Corrales, M. (1999). Mexican and Swedish Managers’ Perceptions of the Impact of EIS on Organizational Intelligence, Decision Making, and Structure, Decision Sciences30(3): 633–658.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

  • Lewin, K. (1943). Defining the ‘Field at a Given Time’, Psychological Review50(3): 292–310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

  • Lipshitz, R. and Bar-Ilan, O. (1996). How Problems are Solved: Reconsidering the phase theorem, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes65(1): 48–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

  • March, S. and Smith, G.F. (1995). Design and Natural Science Research on Information Technology, Decision Support Systems15(4): 251–266.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

  • Marginson, D., King, M. and McAulay, L. (2000). Executives’ Use of Information Technology: Comparison of electronic mail and an accounting information system, Journal of Information Technology15(2): 149–164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

  • McAfee, A. and Brynjolfsson, E. (2012). Big Data: The management revolution, Harvard Business Review (October): 61–68.Google Scholar

  • Nandhakumar, J. (1996). Design for Success?: Critical success factors in executive information systems development, European Journal of Information Systems5(1): 62–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

  • Neuman, W.L. (2000). Social Research Methods: Qualitative and quantitative approaches, 4th edn, Needham Heights, MA: Allyn and Bacon.Google Scholar

  • Osareh, F. (1996). Bibliometrics, Citation Analysis and Co-Citation Analysis: A review of literature I, Libri46(3): 149–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

  • Power, D.J. (2012). A brief history of decision support systems (version 4.1). [www document] http://dssresources.com/history/dsshistory.html, accessed 3 July 2012.

  • Ross, J.W., Beath, C.M. and Quaadgras, A. (2013). You May Not Need Big Data After All, Harvard Business Review (December): 90–98.Google Scholar

  • Rouibah, K. and Ould-ali, S. (2002). PUZZLE: A concept and prototype for linking business intelligence to business strategy, Journal of Strategic Information Systems11(2): 133–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

  • Salo, A. and Kakola, T.K. (2005). Groupware Support for Requirements Management in New Product Development, Journal of Organizational Computing and Electronic Commerce15(4): 253–284.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

  • Shander, B. (2013). Does your company actually need data visualization? HBR blog network [www document] http://blogs.hbr.org (accessed 14 November 2013).

  • Shanks, G., Jagielska, I. and Jayaganesh, M. (2009). A Framework for Understanding Customer Relationship Management Systems Benefits, Communications of the Association for Information Systems25: 263–288.Google Scholar

  • Simon, H.A. (1960). The New Science of Management Decision, New York: Harper.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

  • Taylor, H., Dillon, S. and Van Wingen, M. (2010). Focus and Diversity in Information Systems Research: Meeting the dual demands of a healthy applied discipline, MIS Quarterly34(4): 647–667.Google Scholar

  • Tversky, A. and Kahneman, D. (1981). The Framing of Decisions and the Psychology of Choice, Science211(4487): 453–458.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

  • Vaishnavi, V.K. and Kuechler, Jnr W. (2008). Design Science Research Methods and Patterns: Innovating information and communication technology, Boca Raton, FL: Auerbach Publications.Google Scholar

  • Venable, J., Pries-Heje, J. and Baskerville, R. (2012). A Comprehensive Framework for Evaluation in Design Science Research, in K. Peffers, M. Rothenberger and B Kuechler (eds.) Proceedings of the 7th Conference on Design Science in Information Systems (DESRIST’12) Berlin: Springer-Verlag, pp. 423–438.Google Scholar

  • Watson, H.J., Fuller, C. and Ariyachandra, T. (2004). Data Warehouse Governance: Best practices at blue cross and blue shield of North Carolina, Decision Support Systems38(3): 435–450.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

  • Watson, H.J., Goodhue, D.L. and Wixom, B.H. (2002). The Benefits of Data Warehousing: Why some organizations realize exceptional payoffs, Information & Management39(6): 491–502.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

  • Walls, J.G., Widmeyer, G.R. and El Sawy, O.A. (1992). Building an Information Systems Design Theory for Vigilant EIS, Information Systems Research3(1): 36–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

  • Weber, R.P. (1990). Basic Content Analysis, 2nd edn, Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar

  • Webster, J. and Watson, R.T. (2002). Analyzing the Past to Prepare for the Future: Writing a literature review, MIS Quarterly26(2): xiii–xxiii.Google Scholar

  • Winter, R. (2008). Design Science Research in Europe, European Journal of Information Systems17(5): 470–475.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

  • Yin, R.K. (1994). Case Study Research: Design and methods, 2nd edn, Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar

  • Zikmund, W.G., Babin, B.J., Carr, J.C. and Griffin, M. (2010). Business Research Methods, 8th edn, Mason, OH: South-Western, Cengage Learning.Google Scholar

  • Leave a Comment

    (0 Comments)

    Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *