MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Developers’ Views on Information Systems Quality and Success in Canadian Software Development Firms

2017· article· en· W2624133323 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Information Systems and Technology Management · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSoftware Engineering Techniques and Practices
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSoftware developmentQuality (philosophy)Knowledge managementSoftware qualityTeam software processCapability Maturity ModelSoftware development processSoftware quality controlProcess managementProduct (mathematics)Information systemEngineeringSoftwareBusinessComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

For years software developers have struggled in their attempts to deliver high quality and successful software products. A survey was conducted in Canada to assess the main determinants of information systems (IS) quality and success. The survey confirmed the notion that developer skills and contribution had the greatest impact on information systems quality, over process maturity and the application of the latest technology. The survey also discovered that user perception had a greater impact on IS success in comparison to IS quality. In an attempt to gain deeper insights into the state of IS quality and success in Canada, interviews were conducted with Canadian software developers. The interviews revealed that organization climate such as top management support, the social interactions and dynamics among project team members and the structural analysis of the industry are other factors which can influence the quality and success of the delivered software product. These insights if applied during the development and delivery of information systems can enhance the likelihood of producing high quality and successful software products and increase the competitiveness of these firms.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.839
Threshold uncertainty score0.809

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.004
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.028
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.258 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it