IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v12y2020i4p1682-d324413.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

An Action Research for Improving the Sustainability Assessment Framework Instruments

Author

Listed:
  • Nelly Condori-Fernandez

    (Centro de Investigación CITIC, Universidade da Coruña, 15001 A Coruña, Spain
    Department of Computer Science, Faculty of Sciences, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands)

  • Patricia Lago

    (Department of Computer Science, Faculty of Sciences, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands)

  • Miguel R. Luaces

    (Centro de Investigación CITIC, Universidade da Coruña, 15001 A Coruña, Spain)

  • Ángeles S. Places

    (Centro de Investigación CITIC, Universidade da Coruña, 15001 A Coruña, Spain)

Abstract

In the last years, software engineering researchers have defined sustainability as a quality requirement of software, but not enough effort has been devoted to develop new methods/techniques to support the analysis and assessment of software sustainability. In this study, we present the Sustainability Assessment Framework (SAF) that consists of two instruments: the software sustainability–quality model, and the architectural decision map. Then, we use participatory and technical action research in close collaboration with the software industry to validate the SAF regarding its applicability in specific cases. The unit of analysis of our study is a family of software products (Geographic Information System- and Mobile-based Workforce Management Systems) that aim to address sustainability goals (e.g., efficient collection of dead animals to mitigate social and environmental sustainability risks). The results show that the sustainability–quality model integrated with the architectural decision maps can be used to identify sustainability–quality requirements as design concerns because most of its quality attributes (QAs) have been either addressed in the software project or acknowledged as relevant (i.e., creating awareness on the relevance of the multidimensional sustainability nature of certain QAs). Moreover, the action–research method has been helpful to enrich the sustainability–quality model, by identifying missing QAs (e.g., regulation compliance, data privacy). Finally, the architectural decision maps have been found as useful to guide software architects/designers in their decision-making process.

Suggested Citation

  • Nelly Condori-Fernandez & Patricia Lago & Miguel R. Luaces & Ángeles S. Places, 2020. "An Action Research for Improving the Sustainability Assessment Framework Instruments," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(4), pages 1-25, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:4:p:1682-:d:324413
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/4/1682/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/4/1682/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ming Yan & Chien Aun Chan & André F. Gygax & Jinyao Yan & Leith Campbell & Ampalavanapillai Nirmalathas & Christopher Leckie, 2019. "Modeling the Total Energy Consumption of Mobile Network Services and Applications," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-18, January.
    2. Barbara H. Wixom & Peter A. Todd, 2005. "A Theoretical Integration of User Satisfaction and Technology Acceptance," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 16(1), pages 85-102, March.
    3. Assefa, G. & Frostell, B., 2007. "Social sustainability and social acceptance in technology assessment: A case study of energy technologies," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 29(1), pages 63-78.
    4. Hanna Pihkola & Mikko Hongisto & Olli Apilo & Mika Lasanen, 2018. "Evaluating the Energy Consumption of Mobile Data Transfer—From Technology Development to Consumer Behaviour and Life Cycle Thinking," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-16, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Oughton, Edward & Geraci, Giovanni & Polese, Michele & Shah, Vijay & Bubley, Dean & Blue, Scott, 2024. "Reviewing wireless broadband technologies in the peak smartphone era: 6G versus Wi-Fi 7 and 8," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(6).
    2. Ding, David Xin & Hu, Paul Jen-Hwa & Sheng, Olivia R. Liu, 2011. "e-SELFQUAL: A scale for measuring online self-service quality," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 64(5), pages 508-515, May.
    3. Jungsug Kim & Eunjeung Kim, 2022. "Relationship between Self-Esteem and Technological Readiness: Mediation Effect of Readiness for Change and Moderated Mediation Effect of Gender in South Korean Teachers," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(14), pages 1-11, July.
    4. Jin P. Gerlach & Ronald T. Cenfetelli, 2022. "Overcoming the Single-IS Paradigm in Individual-Level IS Research," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 33(2), pages 476-488, June.
    5. Ofir Turel & Catherine E. Connelly, 2012. "Team Spirit: The Influence of Psychological Collectivism on the Usage of E-Collaboration Tools," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 21(5), pages 703-725, September.
    6. Wilson, Christopher & van der Velden, Maja, 2022. "Sustainable AI: An integrated model to guide public sector decision-making," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 68(C).
    7. Antoine Boche & Clément Foucher & Luiz Fernando Lavado Villa, 2022. "Understanding Microgrid Sustainability: A Systemic and Comprehensive Review," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(8), pages 1-29, April.
    8. Turel, Ofir & Connelly, Catherine E., 2013. "Too busy to help: Antecedents and outcomes of interactional justice in web-based service encounters," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 33(4), pages 674-683.
    9. Patrick Krieger & Carsten Lausberg, 2021. "Entscheidungen, Entscheidungsfindung und Entscheidungsunterstützung in der Immobilienwirtschaft: Eine systematische Literaturübersicht [Decisions, decision-making and decisions support systems in r," Zeitschrift für Immobilienökonomie (German Journal of Real Estate Research), Springer;Gesellschaft für Immobilienwirtschaftliche Forschung e. V., vol. 7(1), pages 1-33, April.
    10. Sara Moussawi & Marios Koufaris & Raquel Benbunan-Fich, 2021. "How perceptions of intelligence and anthropomorphism affect adoption of personal intelligent agents," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 31(2), pages 343-364, June.
    11. Roxana Ologeanu-Taddei & David Morquin & Claudio Vitari, 2016. "Perceptions of an Electronic Medical Record (EMR): lessons from a French longitudinal survey," Grenoble Ecole de Management (Post-Print) halshs-01923438, HAL.
    12. Yoon, Hyun Shik & Occeña, Luis G., 2015. "Influencing factors of trust in consumer-to-consumer electronic commerce with gender and age," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 35(3), pages 352-363.
    13. Ana Beatriz Hernández-Lara & Juan Pablo Gonzales-Bustos & Amado Alarcón-Alarcón, 2021. "Social Sustainability on Corporate Boards: The Effects of Female Family Members on R&D," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-13, February.
    14. Ponce, Pedro & Polasko, Kenneth & Molina, Arturo, 2016. "End user perceptions toward smart grid technology: Acceptance, adoption, risks, and trust," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 587-598.
    15. Gabriel JIPA, 2018. "Mobile Applications Buying Opinions Exploration using Topic Modeling," Expert Journal of Economics, Sprint Investify, vol. 6(2), pages 44-55.
    16. Arghya Ray & Muskan Jain & Lan Ma & Khalid Hussain Alhamzi & Ananya Ray & Long She, 2024. "The impact of personality traits, barriers and gamification on Gen X continuance intention for mobile credit bill payment apps," Journal of Financial Services Marketing, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 29(3), pages 1154-1174, September.
    17. Prentice, Catherine & Nguyen, Mai, 2021. "Robotic service quality – Scale development and validation," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 62(C).
    18. Ilham Hidayah Napitupulu, 2023. "Internal Control, Manager’s Competency, Management Accounting Information Systems and Good Corporate Governance: Evidence from Rural Banks in Indonesia," Global Business Review, International Management Institute, vol. 24(3), pages 563-585, June.
    19. Jeeyeon Jeong & Yaeri Kim & Taewoo Roh, 2021. "Do Consumers Care About Aesthetics and Compatibility? The Intention to Use Wearable Devices in Health Care," SAGE Open, , vol. 11(3), pages 21582440211, August.
    20. Ilham Hidayah Napitupulu, 2018. "Organizational Culture in Management Accounting Information System: Survey on State-owned Enterprises (SOEs) Indonesia," Global Business Review, International Management Institute, vol. 19(3), pages 556-571, June.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:4:p:1682-:d:324413. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.