What Is the User Value of AI? A Taxonomy Based on AI Startups in France in 2019

This article presents strategies for enhancing the long-term business and user value of portals as the third in a series of articles describing a Portal Design Framework. This article identifies essential Enterprise 2.0 functionality for collaboration and dialog—capabilities that support emerging Social Business practices—included in the Building Blocks Design Framework. The author discusses portal management and governance best practices and describes strategies for maintaining and enhancing the user experience of portals designed using the Building Blocks Framework.

Download Full-text

Compensating Qualitative Rating Distortion of User Experience Evaluation Based on Prospect Theory

Sustainability ◽

10.3390/su11236815 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 11 (23) ◽

pp. 6815

Author(s):

Min Chul Lee ◽

Jaehyun Park

Keyword(s):

Decision Making ◽

Prospect Theory ◽

Case Studies ◽

User Experience ◽

Cognitive Distortion ◽

Model Fit ◽

Online Questionnaire ◽

Measurement Results ◽

Preliminary Study ◽

User Value

Psychophysical assessment may be affected by cognitive distortion. Although the theory was originally developed to revise decision making in uncertain situations, prospect theory can be applied to psychophysical measurements, which was verified in a previous preliminary study. Two case studies were used to validate the utilization of prospect theory in psychophysical measurements. Affective satisfaction dimensions were rated by participants for an experimental device using a 0–100 scale. Performance of affective satisfaction models increased with the application of prospect theory-based compensation. Hundreds of participants evaluated the user value of their own devices via an online questionnaire. Although model fit performance increased slightly with transformed data, more case studies are needed to investigate the utility of prospect theory on user value or on a range of target constructs. The application of prospect theory in various situations of psychophysical measurement can be expected to improve and compensate for measurement results.

Download Full-text

Relating Software Quality Models and Process Methods to User Value

International Journal of Human Capital and Information Technology Professionals ◽

10.4018/jhcitp.2013040103 ◽

2013 ◽

Vol 4 (2) ◽

pp. 27-42 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Mohamed A Sheriff ◽

Elli Georgiadou

Keyword(s):

Risk Management ◽

Quality Management ◽

Software Development ◽

Software Quality ◽

Process Models ◽

Quality Model ◽

Quality Models ◽

Software Quality Management ◽

Risk Management Process ◽

User Value

The ultimate object of software development should be to deliver value to all stakeholders. The traditional approach to delivering this value is to ensure that the software developed is of the highest quality. A number of quality models have been proposed to specify or describe what constitutes high quality software. The ISO9126 is one such model and perhaps the most comprehensive. Similarly, there are several methods, frameworks and guidelines for ensuring software quality in either the development or use process or both. Software Quality Management and Risk Management are probably the two most popular methods employed by developers during software development and implementation to deliver quality. In this paper the authors examine whether, and to what extent, the implied value propositions of software products as portrayed by the ISO9126 quality model and the prescribed processes in Software Quality Management and Risk Management, map onto user value perceptions and experiences. An ontology of value, in the form of a value tree, is developed and used to identify and analyse the key value dimensions of the ISO9126 quality model and the Software Quality Management and Risk Management process methods. These are then mapped onto contextualised user value characterisations derived from the extant literature. Differences identified are analysed and discussed and the authors suggest approaches that could narrow the perennial gap between idealised quality product and process models and stakeholder perceptions and actualisations of software value.

Download Full-text