MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2777968359 · doi:10.4018/978-1-59140-556-6.ch072

Psychologically Aware IT Workers

2006· book-chapter· en· W2777968359 sur OpenAlexaff
Eugene Kaluzniacky

Notice bibliographique

RevueIGI Global eBooks · 2006
Typebook-chapter
Langueen
DomaineDecision Sciences
ThématiqueComplex Systems and Decision Making
Établissements canadiensUniversity of Winnipeg
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésBurnoutPsychologyProfessional developmentPsychePublic relationsSocial psychologyPedagogyPolitical science

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Increasingly, information systems development has been recognized as a sociotechnical endeavor. We have seen calls in professional literature and at MIS conferences that IT workers must develop soft skills and emotional literacy and that they must learn to “grow their whole selves”, to quote Extreme Programming initiator, Kent Beck. Many stories abound of system development efforts where the system was built right, but it was not the right system; that is, it did not satisfy the real needs of the users. As well, we see increasing reports of burnout among IT professionals, as the business and organizational environments look for an increasingly impactful role from newly developed systems. To quote Edward Yourdon (2002), “Burnout is still a topic that most senior managers would rather not confront, but it has become so prevalent and severe that some IT organizations have become almost completely dysfunctional” (cover page). The IT profession, no doubt, has been undergoing continual change in its orientation, methodologies, and technological tool sets. To deal with this constant change and increased expectations from IT, it has been proposed that the profession adopt an interdisciplinary, holistic approach to professional development, similar to that of an Olympic athlete who would consult the areas of physiology, psychology, nutrition, kinesiology, and so forth to enable optimum performance. A powerful ally in the IT professional’s quest for inner balance and resilience is multidimensional psychological awareness. IT work is done mostly with one’s mind, one’s psyche, and thus, a deeper awareness and understanding of one’s own inner psychological dynamisms and those of one’s co-workers is advisable. System developers can release previously pent-up, unavailable psychic energies for a more effective and less stressful work effort. Possible areas of psychological functioning that would warrant specific, concerted attention from the IT profession at this point in its evolution are personality typing systems, cognitive, creativity, and learning styles and also the reality of the “deepest inner self” (core or spirit). Until now, focus on psychological factors in IT has been growing, albeit rather slowly. Groups of IT workers may have been introduced to a psychological perspective at a one-day seminar with no extensive, planned follow-up. A few organizations have taken their interests further and involved IT team members in exercises and assessments of the effect of their newly developed interests on their work performance and satisfaction. However, it may indeed be true that now the time has come for a concentrated effort in the IT profession to involve psychological factors in a more widespread, concerted, and thorough manner. The recent book, Managing Psychological Factors in Information Systems Work: An Orientation to Emotional Intelligence by Kaluzniacky (2004), provides a vision for such a possibility and issues a call to action. Psychological aspects promoted are the Myers-Briggs (MBTI) and Enneagram personality types; Kirton’s Adaptor/Innovator cognitive styles, creativity styles as measured, for example, by the Creative Styles Inventory; four learning styles as defined by Kolb (1984); the deepest inner self as outlined by the PRH (1997); and Hoffman (1988) personal growth programs, and promoted by contemporary authors such as Borysenko (1990), Bedrij (1977), Dyer (1995), McGraw (2001), and Weizenbaum (1976). The book promotes professional acceptance and application individually and collectively and suggests specific areas for both academic research and development of materials (e.g., a full-scale methodology for psychological factors in IT) to facilitate such an acceptance within the IT profession.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,002
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: Sans objet
GenreSignal candidat: Autre · Signal consensuel: aucune
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,029
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,098

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0020,009
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,001
Bibliométrie0,0010,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0070,008
Communication savante0,0120,004
Science ouverte0,0010,008
Intégrité de la recherche0,0030,011
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0290,008

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,152
Tête enseignante GPT0,391
Écart entre enseignants0,239 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreAutre

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2006
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueIGI Global eBooksMême sujetComplex Systems and Decision MakingTravaux en français237 207