Evaluation of “Instantiation†for Cultural Heritage Information System

  • Authors

    • Suriyati Razali
    • Wan Adilah Wan Adnan
    2018-12-09
    https://doi.org/10.14419/ijet.v7i4.33.23480
  • Soft design science methodology, IT artifacts evaluation, Community based e-museum, Sustainable cultural heritage information system.

  • Abstract

    This paper presents the evaluation of “Instantiation†for cultural heritage information system. Within social-technical concerned, the soft design science was used as an approach to create “Instantiation†as IT artifacts. The evaluation of “Instantiation†was performed based on the “functionalities characteristic†evaluation criteria. Explanation on how the verification study was conducted to evaluate constructed instantiation according to five sub-characteristics of “functionality†named as accuracy, suitability, interoperability, security, and functionality compliance is also presented. Finally, this paper concludes the results of applying information quality by highlighting the feedback that shows the “Instantiation†created has been accepted among the museum and cultural heritage community.

     

     

     

  • References

    1. [1] Hevner AR., March ST, Park J & Ram S (2004), Design Science in Information Systems Research. MIS Quarterly 28(1), 75-105.

      [2] Walls JG, Widmeyer GR. & El Sawy O (1992), Building an Information System Design Theory for Vigilant EIS. Information Systems Research 3(1), 36-59.

      [3] March S & Smith G (1995). Design and Natural Science Research on Information Technology. Decision Support Systems 15, 251 - 266.

      [4] Peffers K, Tuunanen T, Gengler C, Rossi M, Hui W, Virtanen V & Bragge J (2006). The Design Science Research Process: A Model for Producing and Presenting Information Systems Research. Proceedings of the First International Conference on Design Science Research in Information Systems and Technology, pp. 83-106.

      [5] Archer LB (1984), Systematic Method for Designers. In N. Cross (Ed.), Developments in Design Methodology. Chichester: John Wiley and Sons, pp. 56-59.

      [6] Takeda H, Veerkamp P, Tomiyama T & Yoshikawa H (1990), Modeling Design Processes. AI Magazine 11(4), 37-48.

      [7] Nunamaker, J, Chen M & Purdin T (1991). System Development in Information Systems Research. Journal of Management Information Systems 7(3), 89-106.

      [8] Rossi M & Sein M (2003). Design Research Workshop: A Proactive Research Approach. Proceedings of the Information Systems Research Seminar in Scandinavia.

      [9] Gregor S & Jones D (2007), The Anatomy of a Design Theory. Journal of the Association for Information Systems 8(5), 312-335.

      [10] Becker J, Niehaves B & Janiesch C (2007), Socio-technical perspectives on design science in IS research. In W. Wojtkowski, W.G. Wojtkowski, J. Zupancic, G. Magyar, & G. Knapp (Eds.), Advances in Information Systems Development. Massachusetts: Springer, pp. 127–139.

      [11] Razali S (2018), Evaluation of “Method†as IT Artifacts in Soft Design Science Research: Development of Community Based E-Museum Framework towards Sustainable Cultural Heritage. Proceedings of the World Conference on Information Systems and Technologies, pp. 915-924.

      [12] Becker J, Niehaves B & Pfeiffer D (2008), Ontological Evaluation of Conceptual Models. Scandinavian Journal of Information Systems 20(2), 83-110.

      [13] Parsons J & Wand Y (2008), Using Cognitive Principles to Guide Classification in Information Systems Modelling. MIS Quarterly 32(4), 839-868.

      [14] Peffers K, Tuunanen T, Rothenberger MA & Chatterjee S (2008), A Design Science Research Methodology for Information Systems Research. Journal of Management Information Systems 3, 45--77.

      [15] Greiffenberg S & Schermann M (2003), Requirements of Information Systems theories - Part 1. Proceedings of the 6th International Con­ference Wirtschaftsinformatik, pp. 947-968.

      [16] Wynekoop JL & Russo NL (1997), Studying system development methodologies: An ex­amination of research methods. Information Systems Journal 7(1), 147-65.

      [17] Pries-Heje J, Baskerville R & Venable J (2007), Soft Design Science Research: Extending the Boundaries of Evaluation in Design Science Research. Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Design Science Research in IT, pp. 18-38.

      [18] Walls JG, Widmeyer GR & El Sawy O (1992), Building an Information System Design Theory for Vigilant EIS. Information Systems Research 3(1), 36-59.

      [19] Grady RB & Caswell DL (1987), Software Metrics: Establishing a Company- wide Program. Prentice Hall.

      [20] Pfeiffer D & Niehaves B (2005), Evaluation of conceptual models: A structuralist approach. Proceedings of the 13th European Conference on Information Systems, pp. 1-12.

      [21] Venable J (2006), The Role of Theory and Theorising in Design Science Research. Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Design Science in Information Systems and Technology, pp. 1-18.

      [22] Vaishnavi V & Kuechler B (2008), Design Research in Information Systems. AIS World Net.

  • Downloads

  • How to Cite

    Razali, S., & Adilah Wan Adnan, W. (2018). Evaluation of “Instantiation” for Cultural Heritage Information System. International Journal of Engineering & Technology, 7(4.33), 37-40. https://doi.org/10.14419/ijet.v7i4.33.23480

    Received date: 2018-12-08

    Accepted date: 2018-12-08

    Published date: 2018-12-09