Choice Models for the Evaluation and Selection of Software Packages

References

• Adelman, I., and Griliches, Z. On an index of quality change. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 56 (1961), 535–548.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beach, L., and Mitchell, T. R. A contingency model for the selection of decision strategies. Academy of Management Review, 3, 3 (1978), 439–449.
   Google Scholar
• Beckenstein, M. System requirements analysis: a management tool. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, EM-19, 4 (1972), 124–128.
   Google Scholar
• Belton, V. The use of a simple multiple-criteria model to assist in selection from a shortlist. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 36, 4 (1985), 265–274.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bernardo, J. J., and Blin, J. M. A programming model of consumer choice among multiattributed brands. Journal of Consumer Research, 4, 2 (1977), 111–118.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Billings, R. S., and Scherer, L. L. The effects of response mode and importance on decision-making strategies: judgment versus choice. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 41, 1 (1988), 1–19.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dawes, R. M.; Coombs, C. H.; and Tversky A. Mathematical Psychology: An Elementary Introduction. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1970.
   Google Scholar
• Dintersmith, T. A separating choice hyperplane algorithm for evaluating multiattribute decisions. Operations Research, 32, 6 (1984), 1328–1344.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ejiogu, L. O. A simple measure of software complexity. Performance Evaluation Review, 13, 1 (1985), 33–41.
   Google Scholar
• Erlandson, R. F. System evaluation methodologies: combined multidimensional scaling and ordering techniques. Performance Evaluation Review, 9, 1 (1980), 52–58.
   Google Scholar
• Fishbein, M. An investigation of the relationships between belief about an object and the attitude toward that object. Human Relations, 16 (1963), 233–240.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Good, P. I. Software makes the system. Computer Decisions, 13, 2 (1981), 58–60.
   Google Scholar
• Hobbs, B. F. What can we learn from experiments in multiobjective decision analysis? IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics, SMC-16, 3 (1986), 384–394.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Keeney, R. L., and Raiffa, H. Decisions With Multiple Objectives: Preferences and Value Tradeoffs. New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1976.
   Google Scholar
• Keys, Paul. A methodology for methodology choice. Systems Research, 5, 1 (1988), 65–76.
   Google Scholar
• Kleijnen, J. P. C. Scoring methods, multiple criteria, and utility analysis. Performance Evaluation Review, 9, 3 (1980), 45–56.
   Google Scholar
• Lucas, H. C., Jr. Utilizing information technology: guidelines for managers. Sloan Management Review, 28, 1 (1986), 39–47.
   Google Scholar
• Martin, J., and McClure, C. Buying software off the rack. Harvard Business Review, 61, 6 (1983), 32–52.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maynes, E. S. The concept and measurement of product quality. In N. E. Terleckyj, ed., Household Production and Consumption, Studies in Income and Wealth, No. 40. New York: National Bureau of Economic Research, 1975, 529–560.
   Google Scholar
• Maynes, E. S. Decision-making for Consumers. New York: Macmillan, 1976.
   Google Scholar
• Parkin, A. Critique on multi-criteria assessment applied to alternative data processing systems. The Computer Journal, 21, 2 (1978), 188–190.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pearson, S. W., and Bailey, J. E. Measurement of computer user satisfaction. Performance Evaluation Review, 9, 1 (1980), 59–68.
   Google Scholar
• Petersen, T. G. A comparison of software and hardware monitors. Performance Evaluation Review, 3, 2 (1974), 2–5.
   Google Scholar
• Pras, B., and Summers, J. A comparison of linear and nonlinear evaluation process models. Journal of Marketing Research, 12, 3 (1975), 276–281.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Theil, C. T. It’s a grand view from hindsight. InfoSystems, 50, 8 (1983), 88.
   Google Scholar
• Timmreck, E. M. Computer selection methodology. ACM Computing Surveys, 5, 4 (1973), 199–222.
   Google Scholar
• Tversky, A. Elimination by aspects: a theory of choice. Psychological Review, 79, 4 (1972), 281–299.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• White, D. R. J.; Scott, D. L.; and Schulz, R. N. POED—a method of evaluating system performance. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, EM-10, 4 (1963), 177–182.
   Google Scholar
• Zech, K. P. Selecting the right software. Journal of Accountancy, 153, 6 (1982), 112–116.
   Google Scholar