The Impact of Cognitive and other Factors on the Perceived Usefulness of OLAP

References

• Achor, T. “Using Online Analytical Processing, Tool,” The CPA Journal, 72:3, 2002, pp. 64–65.
   Google Scholar
• Agarwal, R. and J. Prasad. “The Role of Innovation Characteristics and Perceived Voluntariness in the Acceptance of Information Technologies,” Decision Sciences, 28:3, 1997, pp. 557–582.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Alberts, C. “BI Makes Cognoscenti at C-Level,” ITWeb Brainstorm, June 2003, pp. 68–69.
   Google Scholar
• Ascolese, M. “Sarbanes-Oxley Act Requires Changes in Corporate Control, Compliance: PricewaterhouseCoopers Survey of Senior Executives,” April 5 2003. Available at http://www.pwcglobal.com/extweb/ncpressrelease.nsf/
   Google Scholar
• Barquin, R.C. and H.A. Edelstein. Planning and Designing the Data Warehouse. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall, 19997.
   Google Scholar
• Brown, I. “The Role of Cognitive Instrumental Processes, Social Influence Processes and Perceived Behavioral Control in the Acceptance of the Internet as a Learning Tool,” forthcoming in Alternation, special issue on Cognitive Science, 10:2, 2003, 53 pp.
   Google Scholar
• Brynjolfsson, E. “Technology's True Payoff - An MIT Survey Finds that Business Tends to Overlook Intangibles when Evaluating Information Technology”, March 29, 2003. Available at http://ccs.mit.edu/IW1.html.
   Google Scholar
• Codd, E.F. “Twelve Rules for On-Line Analytical Processing,” Computerworld, April 13, 1995.
   Google Scholar
• Cody, W.F., J.T. Kreulen, V. Krishna, and W.S. Spangler. “The Integration of Business Intelligence and Knowledge Management,” IBM Systems Journal, 41:4, December 2002, 99697–713.
   Google Scholar
• Colossi, N., W. Malloy, and B. Reinwald. “Relational Extensions for OLAP,” IBM Systems Journal, 41:4, 2002, pp. 714–713.
   Google Scholar
• Davis, F. “Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use and User Acceptance of Information Technology,” MIS Quarterly, 13:3, 1989, pp. 319–340.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dehne, F., T. Eavis, and A. Rau-Chaplin. “Coarse Grained Parallel On-Line Analytical Processing (OLAP) for Data Mining.” In Proc. 2001 International Conference on Computational Science (ICCS 2001), San Francisco, CA, 2001. Springer Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 2074:2, pp. 589–596.
   Google Scholar
• Dresner, H., B. Hostmann, F. Buytendijk, and A. Tiedrich. “Magic Quadrants for EIS/Reporting and BI Platforms, 2H03,” September 18, 2003. Available at http://www.gartner.com/reprints/cognos/116968.html.
   Google Scholar
• El-Beltagi, I. “Evaluating the Factors Affecting DSS Usage in Strategic Decisions in Local Authorities in Egypt Using a Structural Modeling Approach,” Proceedings of the IRMA International Conference, Alaska, May 19–22, 2002.
   Google Scholar
• Folger, D. “Business Intelligence Tools and Platforms,” September 25, 2003. Available at http://www.cognos.Com/news/analyst_reviews.html.
   Google Scholar
• Foreman, S. “OLAP Council White Paper,” September 7, 2003. Available at: http://www.olapcouncil.org/whtpap.html.
   Google Scholar
• Griffith, T., I. Northcraft, and B. Gregory. “Cognitive Elements in the Implementation of New Technology: Can Less Information Provide More Benefits?” MIS Quarterly, 20:1, 1996, pp. 99–110.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hammer, J. “Introductory Notes to the Special Issue on Advances in Online Analytical Processing” (Guest Editorial), Data and Knowledge Engineering, 45:2, 2003, p. 127–129.
   Google Scholar
• Hart, M.L., S. Berkowitz, J. Ryan, and K. Waspe. “Key Information Systems Management Issues in South Africa,” under review by South African Journal of Business Management, 2003, 25 pp.
   Google Scholar
• Huang, L., M.-T. Lu, and B.K. Wong. “The Impact of Power Distance on Email Acceptance: Evidence from the PRC,” Journal of Computer Information Systems, 44:1, Fall 2003, pp. 93–101.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Humphries, F. “Business Intelligence: An Oxymoron or Competitive Necessity?” ITWeb, March 18, 2002, 7 pp.
   Google Scholar
• Kim, N., S. Moon, and S. Lee. “Conflict Order-based View Refreshment Scheme for Transaction Management in Data Warehouse Environment,” Journal of Computer Information Systems, 44:2, Winter 2003/04, pp. 105–111.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lau, H.C.W., P.K.H. Lau, F.T.S. Chan, and R.W.L. Ip. “A Real Time Performance Measurement Technique for Dispersed Manufacturing,” Measuring Business Excellence, 5:1, 2001, pp. 8–15.
   Google Scholar
• Ma, C., D.C. Chou, and D.C. Yen. “Data Warehousing, Technology Assessment and Management,” Industrial Management and Data Systems, 100:3, 2000, pp. 125–135.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McCloskey, D. “Evaluating Electronic Commerce Acceptance with the Technology Acceptance Model,” Journal of Computer Information Systems, 44:2, Winter 2003/04, pp. 49–57.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Park, C.-S., M.H. Kim, and Y.-J. Lee. “Finding an Efficient Rewriting of OLAP Queries Using Materialized Views in Data Warehouses,” Decision Support Systems, 32:4, March 2002, pp. 379–399.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pendse, N. “The OLAP Report,” April 26, 2003. Available at: http://www.olapreport.com.
   Google Scholar
• Pendse, N. “Why Pick OLAP?” (On-Line Analytical Processing Survey), Computer Weekly (UK), February 27 2003b, p. 22.
   Google Scholar
• Power, D. “A Brief History of Decision Support Systems”, March 10, 2003. Available at: http://DSSResources.COM/history/dsshistory.html.
   Google Scholar
• Rao, F., L. Zhang, X.L. Yu, Y. Li, and Y. Chen. “Spatial Hierarchy and OLAP-favored Search in Spatial Data Warehouse,” Proceedings of the 6^th ACM International Workshop on Data Warehousing and OLAP (DOLAP'03), November 7, 2003, New Orleans, Louisiana, pp. 48–55.
   Google Scholar
• Riemenschneider, C.K. and B.C. Hardgrave. “Explaining Software Development Tool Use with the Technology Acceptance Model,” Journal of Computer Information Systems, 41:4, Summer 2001, pp. 1–8.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schlosser, J. “Looking for Intelligence in Ice Cream,” Fortune, March 17, 2003, pp. 70–74.
   Google Scholar
• Strange, K. and B. Burton. “BI Ecosystem: Survival of the Fittest and Most Focused Business Intelligence Market,” 2003. Available at www.gartner.com/resources/112700/112790/112790.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Taylor, S. and P.A. Todd. “Understanding Technology Acceptance Usage: A Test of Competing Models,” Information Systems Research, 6:2, 1995, pp. 144–176.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Todd, P.A. and I. Benbasat. “En Experimental Investigation of the Impact of Computer Based Decision Aids on Decision Making Strategies,” Information Systems Research, 2:2, 1991, pp. 87–114.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Venkatesh, V. “Determinants of Perceived Ease of Use: Integrating Control, Intrinsic Motivation and Emotion into the Technology Acceptance Model,” Information Systems Research, 11:4, 2000, pp. 342–365.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Venkatesh, V. and F. Davis. “A Model of the Antecedents of Perceived Ease of Use: Development and Test,” Decision Sciences, 27:3, 1996, pp. 451–481.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Venkatesh, V. and F. Davis. “A Theoretical Extension of the Technology Acceptance Model: Four Longitudinal Field Studies,” Management Science, 46:2, 2000, pp. 186–204.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Witkowski, A., S. Bellamkonda, T. Bozkaya, G. Dorman, N. Folkert, A. Gupta, L. Shen, and S. Subramanian. “Spreadsheets in RBDMS for OLAP,” Proceedings of the 2003 ACM SIGMOD International Conference on Management of Data, June 9–12, 2003, San Diego, pp. 52–63.
   Google Scholar
• Wright, K.M. and M.J. Granger. “Using the Web as a Strategic Resource: An Applied Classroom Exercise,” Proceedings of the Conference on Informatics Education and Research, New Orleans, Louisiana, December 14–16, 2001.
   Google Scholar