Understanding acceptance of information system development and management methodologies by actual users: A review and assessment of existing literature <s> Data collection <s> Managers in charge of introducing new production technologies need to approach implementation as an internal marketing campaign. Potential users of the innovation are subject to various influences. By building on positive influences and countering negative ones, implementation managers can speed the diffusion of the innovation within the organization. For instance, in the case presented here, programmers and analysts were more likely to use new structured software development methods if their supervisors, influential peers, and especially their clients supported use. Users were more likely than nonusers to have received training close to the time they were asked to use the new methods and to see very specific, rather than just general, potential benefits. <s> BIB001 </s> Understanding acceptance of information system development and management methodologies by actual users: A review and assessment of existing literature <s> Data collection <s> Object-oriented systems development (OOSD) is a recent innovation in software development that is often cited as a viable solution to many of the ills plaguing this critical industry. However, some express doubt about the potentially over-hyped claims of OOSD. While there are many accounts of the successful application of OOSD, widespread acceptance has not been achieved, implying that OOSD may not be viewed as positively by industry as the literature would suggest.To address this dilemma, the present study examines a wide variety of specific beliefs about OOSD as provided by a survey of 150 systems developers. Using Ajzen's (1988) theory of planned behavior as a foundation, an exploratory factor analysis is performed to determine which specific beliefs about OOSD are indeed salient indicators of three fundamental concepts that should influence acceptance: the usefulness of OOSD, social pressure to use OOSD, and the ease of using OOSD. The results of the study reveal that while many specific beliefs about OOSD are indeed salient indicators of these more fundamental, potentially influential factors, many other beliefs are not. This study should prove helpful to practitioners who are considering the adoption or continued use of OOSD, and to researchers who are interested in the diffusion of innovations in general <s> BIB002 </s> Understanding acceptance of information system development and management methodologies by actual users: A review and assessment of existing literature <s> Data collection <s> This paper proposes a four-tiered framework for classifying and understanding the myriad of information systems development methodologies that have been proposed in the literature. The framework is divided into four levels: paradigms, approaches, methodologies, and techniques. This paper primarily focuses on the two intermediate levels: approaches and methodologies. The principal contribution of the framework is in providing a new kind of "deep structure" for better understanding the intellectual core of methodologies and approaches and their interrelationships. It achieves this goal by articulating a parsimonious set of foundational features that are shared by subsets of methodologies and approaches. To illustrate how the framework's deep structure provides a better understanding of methodologies' intellectual core, it is applied to eleven examples. The paper also introduces and illustrates a procedure for "accommodating" and "assimilating" new information systems development methodologies in addition to the eleven already discussed. This procedure provides the framework with the necessary flexibility for handling the continuing proliferation of new methodologies. <s> BIB003 </s> Understanding acceptance of information system development and management methodologies by actual users: A review and assessment of existing literature <s> Data collection <s> A review of prior, relevant literature is an essential feature of any academic project. An effective review creates a firm foundation for advancing knowledge. It facilitates theory development, closes areas where a plethora of research exists, and uncovers areas where research is needed. <s> BIB004
For purposes of data collection, we again relied on the advice of Webster and Watson BIB004 , and applied a structured approach. We searched a number of online databases, using a combination of keywords, for example methodology, adoption, use etc. The use of multiple databases and keywords allowed us to cover a large number of different publications, preventing the review from being too narrow or shallow  . Since our goal was to potentially investigate all published academic articles in the area of interest, we did not confine the search to certain time periods. The search resulted in a total number of 22,291 results (see Table 1 ). Although the number might seem overwhelming at first, a large number of search hits had little in common with the specific research area and were consequently dismissed quickly. The initial filtering through the search results was done by examining the title and the abstract. However, in a large number of cases, the abstract was not examined, because the title was found to provide sufficient evidence that the article did not address the research topic at hand. We identified 58 publications that were related to the research at hand and were consequently selected for further examination. The full text of each research paper was further reviewed to eliminate those that were not actually related to ISDM methodology usage behaviour of individuals. The review yielded 17 articles related to our very specific research interest. This sharp reduction in the final list of research papers can be explained by the fact that many papers studied methods and tools but classified them as a study of methodologies (for e.g. BIB002 BIB001 ) or focused on organisational adoption decisions instead of individual acceptance BIB003 . Such papers appeared in the search results only because their title contained the keywords we used, but were discarded after we recognised that they did not address the research topic at hand. To conclude the data-gathering phase, we "went backward" BIB004 by reviewing the citations of the pool of 17 articles to find relevant articles that we might have overlooked and that should be considered. This revealed another 2 articles, increasing the final number of publications to 19. A work-log revealed that a total of 74 hours were spent on data collection (this does not include data analysis) and that the majority of the work i.e. 71% was done on weekends and holidays.