The role of information and communication technology in the urgent decision making process : a work in progress report

This paper reports part of a study that examines how members of a senior management team in a public sector organisation make decisions under urgency. Four regional managers, who are geographically dispersed around New Zealand were interviewed, either face-to-face or via telephone, regarding their experiences of decision making under urgency.

Preliminary results indicate that only three out of a possible seven steps of a conventional decision making process are used during the urgent decision making process. The study also shows that participants do not fully utilise the information and communication technology available during the decision making process. The implications the findings have for practice and research are discussed.

Evidence-based clinical policy: case report of a reproducible process to encourage understanding and evaluation of evidence

We report within a case study a reproducible process to facilitate the explicit incorporation of evidence by a multidisciplinary group into clinical policy development. To support the decision-making of a multidisciplinary Intersectoral Advisory Group (IAG) convened by the Royal Australasian College of Physicians Health Policy Unit, a systematic review of randomized controlled trials about environmental tobacco smoke and smoking cessation interventions in paediatric settings was first undertaken. As reported in detail here, IAG members were then formally engaged in a transparent and replicable process to understand and interpret the synthesized evidence and to proffer their independent reactions regarding policy, practice and research. Our intention was to ensure that all IAG members were democratically engaged and made aware of the available evidence. As clinical policy must engage stakeholder representatives from diverse backgrounds, a process to equalize understanding of the evidence and 'democratize' judgment about its implications is needed. Future research must then examine the benefits of such explicit steps when guidelines, in turn, are implemented. We hypothesize that changes to future practice will be more likely if processes undertaken to develop guidelines are transparent to clinicians and other target groups.

Reporting usability defects-do reporters report what software developers need?

Reporting usability defects can be a challenging task, especially in convincing the software developers that the reported defect actually requires attention. Stronger evidence in the form of specific details is often needed. However, research to date in software defect reporting has not investigated the value of capturing different information based on defect type. We surveyed practitioners in both open source communities and industrial software organizations about their usability defect reporting practices to better understand information needs to address usability defect reporting issues. Our analysis of 147 responses show that reporters often provide observed result, expected result and steps to reproduce when describing usability defects, similar to the way other types of defects are reported. However, reporters rarely provide usability-related information. In fact, reporters ranked cause of the problem is the most difficult information to provide followed by usability principle, video recoding, UI event trace and title. Conversely, software developers consider cause of the problem as the most helpful information for them to fix usability defects. Our statistical analysis reveals a substantial gap between what reporters provide and what software developers need when fixing usability defects. We propose some remedies to resolve this gap.