1996
DOI: 10.4018/joeuc.1996040103
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A Methodology for Evaluating EIS Software Packages

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
10
0

Year Published

2001
2001
2012
2012

Publication Types

Select...
5
1

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 16 publications
(10 citation statements)
references
References 24 publications
(39 reference statements)
0
10
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The authors cited are as follows: A1¼ (Byun and Suh, 1996); A2¼ (Kim and Moon, 1997); A3¼ (Teltumbde, 2000) …”
Section: Literature Review Summary: Criteria and Subcriteria Used Formentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The authors cited are as follows: A1¼ (Byun and Suh, 1996); A2¼ (Kim and Moon, 1997); A3¼ (Teltumbde, 2000) …”
Section: Literature Review Summary: Criteria and Subcriteria Used Formentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Three newly formed car models of midsize are used to show how the method allows choice to be prioritized and analyzed statistically. Bhyun and Suh (1996) study criteria of full-featured executive information systems packages in the evaluation stage and consider the prioritization of these criteria at the laboratory experiment using the process AHP method. Lai et al (1999) discuss the multimedia processing environment, the applicability of AHP in problem solving, and how AHP can be applied to the selection of multimedia authorizing systems (MAS) in a group decision environment.…”
Section: Literature Reviewmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This is achieved by evaluation of a set of criteria elements and sub-criteria elements through a series of pairwise comparisons (Bhyun, 2001). Also, group decision-making problems are easily formulated by the Expert Choice software package (Bhyun & Suh, 1996;Forman, Saaty, Selly, & Waldron, 1983;Lai, Trueblood, & Wong, 1999); this allows the decision-maker to derive geometric means as weights or priorities instead of using an eigenvector method. The geometric mean is an appropriate rule for combining individual judgments to obtain the group judgment for each pairwise comparison.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The quality of vendor support and its characteristics are of major importance in the selection of software, such as in [2]. It is also critical for the successful installation and maintenance of the software.…”
Section: Vendormentioning
confidence: 99%
“…(2 ) and (3) We can obtain the normalized decision matrices R2 and R3 of the experts P2 and P (Eqs. 2 Using Eq. (6), the distances between RP and the positive ideal a* can be obtained.…”
Section: Applicationmentioning
confidence: 99%