Integrated Acceptance and Sustainability Assessment ... - Science Direct

Available online at www.sciencedirect.com

ScienceDirect Procedia Computer Science 77 (2015) 92 – 97

ICTE in Regional Development

Integrated acceptance and sustainability assessment model transformations into executable system dynamics model Dace Aizstrautaa*, Egils Gintersa a

Sociotechnical Systems Engineering Institute, Vidzeme University of Applied Sciences, Cesu Str. 4, Valmiera, LV-4200, Latvia

Abstract Integrated acceptance and sustainability assessment model (IASAM2) consists of four main flows and helps to evaluate any new technology and its sustainability. IASAM2 has been validated using Skype and the pattern of Skype development dynamics and life cycle further on serves as a model for technology evaluation. The developed approach combines static and dynamic viewpoints and can produce results regarding any point of time. The new IASAM version also includes a collection of feedback within the model for further, more effective judgements regarding the technology under question. © Published by Elsevier B.V. B.V. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license © 2015 2016The TheAuthors. Authors. Published by Elsevier (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/). Peer-review under responsibility of the Sociotechnical Systems Engineering Institute of Vidzeme University of Applied Sciences. Peer-review under responsibility of the Sociotechnical Systems Engineering Institute of Vidzeme University of Applied Sciences Keywords: IASAM2; Sustainability; System dynamics

1. Introduction Nowadays more and more decisions are based on socio-technical solutions – large scale, distributed software and simulation models. Therefore the sustainability of these solutions is important both for the developers as well as potential users and sustainability is also a matter of the quality of the decision making process in policy planning. There are several theories that partly reflect the issues of acceptance, adoption and success of technologies and innovations, but none of them give a full understanding about the factors influencing acceptance and sustainability combined. Moreover, none of them address system sustainability, although this parameter is critically important for decisions about investments in technology development and exploitation. The concept of technology sustainability is

* Corresponding author. E-mail address: [email protected]

1877-0509 © 2015 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/). Peer-review under responsibility of the Sociotechnical Systems Engineering Institute of Vidzeme University of Applied Sciences doi:10.1016/j.procs.2015.12.364

Dace Aizstrauta and Egils Ginters / Procedia Computer Science 77 (2015) 92 – 97

proposed for the evaluation of a set of factors that let technology be developed, implemented, maintained properly (i.e. according to the needs of all stakeholders) and attract long-term users and create a positive output and/or outcome corresponding to the purpose of the technology and initial intentions of its developers (financial, social, etc.).1 To fill this gap an Integrated Acceptance and Sustainability Assessment model (IASAM) was created in Sociotechnical Systems Engineering Institute in 2013. IASAM evaluation approach is based on the assumption that technology acceptance research should not be separated from technological, economic and social evaluation, in other words it introduces a new approach for the evaluation of technologies by combining socio-economic aspects and socio-technical characteristics of technology development and exploitation. The model has evolved since its development and now already the second updated version IASAM2 has been released. The two main projects that have been using IASAM/IASAM2 are FP7-ICT-2009-5 CHOReOS project No. 257178 (2010-2013) “Large Scale Choreographies for the Future Internet (IP)” (CHoREOS) and “Future policy modelling” EC 7th Framework grant no. 287119 (FUPOL), but those were project-based, one-time-only assessments. The assessment with IASAM2 can be carried out at any given point in time and it delivers static results. It is now clear that there is a need for an approach that is more dynamic and helps to not only assess the technology or innovation at the moment of evaluation, but also to analyse it in the context the technology life-cycle. Therefore this publication aims to introduce the next step in IASAM2 evolution – a two tier system dynamics model that would generate not only static values, but also give its users analytical and dynamic results and understanding about the potential of the technology under assessment. The following sections are organized as follows: section 2 shortly introduces IASAM basics and the difference between IASAM and IASAM2. The next section introduces the next stage of the IASAM approach step-by-step. Finally the conclusion contains a summary of the main ideas of the paper. 2. IASAM development phases The underlying aim of the research has been to create a methodology that identifies measures and arranges the criteria that impact technology sustainability and cover a wide range of issues, is easy to use and available to different stakeholders. The methodology has to be usable for initial evaluation as well as within later stages of technology development, and it also has to offer an opportunity to analyse and assess the anticipated dynamics of the results. Thus the assessment model can also be used as a guideline for decision makers. IASAM consists of four groups of factors that have an impact on integrated technology acceptance and sustainability: x x x x

Management – successful management of every asset; Quality of technology – quality of the product, quality of production, including supporting services; Acceptance and economical context; Domain development – the impact of domain and societal development.1

The initial version of IASAM used Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT) by Venkatesh et.al. for measuring acceptance. UTAUT combines other models and includes four key determinants for acceptance analysis: performance expectancy, effort expectancy, social influence, facilitating conditions; and four moderators: gender, age, experience, voluntariness of use.2 After application of IASAM within the framework of the CHOReOS project it was concluded to improve the model and to abandon the potential user survey and search for criteria that could be included in the model. After painstaking research it was concluded that user acceptance evaluation can be expanded based on diffusion of innovations by Rogers.3 The innovation-decision process, according to Rogers, is the process through which an individual (or other decision making unit) passes from first knowledge of an innovation to forming an attitude toward the innovation, to decision to adopt or reject, to implementation of the idea, and to confirmation of this

93

94


decision. The idea about five attributes of innovation that take part in the innovation adoption process was introduced in the IASAM methodology. The five attributes are – relative advantage, compatibility, complexity, trialability and observability. Additional evaluation criteria were elaborated and the methodology was adjusted thus creating IASAM2.4 IASAM/IASAM2 is meant not only for already existing technologies and systems, but also to assess technologies in the development process. Therefore it is not possible to use data from technology usage, but only to evaluate planned activities, the proposed project or strategy. Because of that, IASAM2 includes criteria and their descriptions that help evaluate the criteria and respective set of factors. In short, this approach is based on a questionnaire, where each statement has to be evaluated using a certain scale. The evaluation of criteria is undeniably subjective, but it relies on the assumption that every evaluator, whether a technology developer or potential investor, will be concerned to receive a reliable evaluation for decision-making. Each IASAM2 flow consists of several criteria. Each criterion is evaluated with the help of a specially formulated criteria description/statement. The respondent evaluates each description. x The statement provided for each criterion is evaluated in 7 point Likert scale; x The result gives a numerical value of integrated technology sustainability index (IASAM2 index). The integrated technology sustainability index evaluates the conformity with IASAM2 framework criteria. It is calculated as the sum of all values from the questionnaire and divided by maximum possible value of questions answered: 12

49

¦F ¦B n

IASAM 2index

n 1

i

i 1

(N C) 7

(1)

, where F – additional IASAM2 survey response values; B – initial IASAM survey response values, N – total number of questions; C – number of questions marked with “N/A”. 3. Towards two-tier IASAM2 system dynamics model The current IASAM generates static results – technology evaluation at any given point of time ti, but to be able to give any estimation regarding the future development of the specific technology, the assessment model has to become dynamic. Therefore it is necessary to embed the functionality and respective advantages of system dynamics modelling within IASAM2. 3.1. System dynamics The system dynamics simulation approach studies the dynamic, evolving, cause-effect interrelations, and information feedbacks that direct interactions in a system over time, and it does not require longitudinal data. System dynamics is usually characterized as a “strategy and policy laboratory” and “socio-economic system laboratory” because it provides a tool to test the effects of various strategies and policies in a system, especially for socio-economic systems.5 A system dynamics simulation model consists of a set of differential equations whose solutions are approximated to demonstrate dynamic system behaviour, enabling curves of trends over time in outcomes of interest to be explored and compared for future policy options.6 The system dynamics approach allows describing technology development as a set of parallel processes. This set is characterized by:


x x x x x

Socio-technical features of the system (dual nature: technical plus social and/or environmental factors); Development in a specific period of time; Involvement of multiple decision making entities, such as companies, institutions and individual consumers; Set of relevant internal and external socio-technical factors that impact the trends of individual change processes; Possibility to append or replace parameters.7

3.2. Using Skype for evaluation purposes After scrupulous analysis Skype was chosen to be the case-study against which the validation of IASAM and IASAM2 was carried out8. There were four main arguments in favour of Skype as a case study. First, at the time of development it was considered to be an innovative technology, second, there is plenty of information on Skype’s development and exploitation, third, it is publicly available for researchers, and finally, it has succeeded in the market and is still widely known and popular worldwide. But Skype is not only used for validation purposes, it is also the “role model”, which can be used for interpretation of IASAM2 results. The main idea is to use the Skype development and acceptance trend as a reference for IASAM result projections. Namely, user statistics help to design a trend line for deeper understanding of technology/society interactions and in relation with IASAM2 results, it also helps to project the dynamics of the system that is being evaluated. For the purposes of such an evaluation, data on Skype user statistics Skype (t) have to be reprocessed using spline approximations. That will return a mathematically constructed trend line with Skype life-cycle continuous process out of a set of discrete separate values. This Skype trend line will serve as a reference trend line for IASAM index (t). As Skype is still very popular and its life cycle has not yet finished, research should be conducted about other random technologies that have already experienced a full cycle. The tendencies of chosen technologies will give an understanding of potential Skype developments. This approach corresponds to the technology life-cycle approach that is described in the next sub-section. 3.3. Adding feedback within IASAM2 system dynamics model The progress of technologies over time depends on many internal and external factors. Therefore the next level of IASAM2 model evolution is to integrate feedback between the different flows and stocks of the model. Conceptually, the feedback concept is at the heart of the system dynamics approach. Diagrams of information feedback loops and circular causality are tools for conceptualizing the structure of a complex system and for communicating model-based insights.9 Feedback occurs when outputs of a system are routed back as inputs as part of a chain of cause-and-effect that forms a circuit or loop10. Feedback can be positive or negative. A causal link from one element A to another element B is positive (+) if either (a) A adds to B or (b) a change in A produces a change in B in the same direction. And a causal link from one element A to another element B is negative (−) if either (a) A subtracts from B or (b) a change in A produces a change in B in the opposite direction.11 Or as Richardson puts it – interaction between variables is characterized by reinforcing (positive) loops, which amplify dynamic system patterns of behaviour and balancing (negative) feedback loops, which dampen these patterns. 9 A higher sustainability index undoubtedly has impact on input flows thus creating feedback. (For potential IASAM feedback loops see Fig. 1.) For example, the longer the period that technology is in the market, the more users it attracts, but at the same time there is more and more competition within the market. When the number of users/purchases/interactions rises, a rise can also be seen in management costs, etc.

95

96


Fig. 1. Feedbacks of IASAM2 in InsightMaker notation

The approach mentioned above and based on system dynamics allows simulating the assessed "goal system" IASAM index curve in continuous time thus forecasting potential sustainability of the new technology (see Fig.2).

Fig. 2. Skype based IASAM index curve simulation of goal system

The customers can change input parameters and manage different "what-if" situations related to sustainability of the new technology. 4. Conclusions IASAM serves as a self-assessment (but not limited only to the developer) tool for developing technologies or innovations and provides an easy to use methodology to carry out assessments at any point of technology development. Four groups of factors and corresponding criteria that have an impact on integrated technology acceptance and sustainability together shape the understanding of technology acceptance and sustainability. These four groups are Management, Quality of technology, Acceptance and Domain development.


System dynamics offer valuable opportunities for decision makers by enabling them to dynamically interact with models and analyse results. By describing the development process of a two-tier IASAM2 model this paper shows how those opportunities offered by the system dynamics approach can actually be used. Mathematically reprocessed life-cycle data of other technologies help to reshape the static IASAM2 into a dynamic analytical tool that helps not only to evaluate the current condition of the technology, but also to make judgements about potential life cycle parameters of the technology under assessment.

References 1.

Aizstrauta D., Ginters E. Introducing Integrated Acceptance and Sustainability Assessment of Technologies: a Model based on System Dynamics Simulation. In Springer LNBIP 145 Series Modeling and Simulation in Engineering, Economics and Management, Spain, 2013, Springer Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013, pp.23-30 2. Venkatesh, V., Morris, M., Davis, G., Davis, F. User acceptance of information technology: toward unified view. MIS Quarterly. Vol. 27; 2003. p.425 – 478. 3. Rogers E.M. Diffusion of Innovations, 5th Edition. Simon and Schuster. 2003. 4. Aizstrauta, D., Ginters, E., Piera Eroles, M.A. Applying theory of diffusion of innovations to evaluate technology acceptance and sustainability. ICTE in Regional Development, December 2014, Valmiera, Latvia: Procedia Computer Science, Elsevier, Volume 43, 69-78 5. Shouke, W., Hong, Y., Jinxi, S., Karim, C. A., Zongxue, X. System dynamics simulation model for assessing socio-economic impacts of different levels of environmental flow allocation in the Weihe River Basin, China, European Journal of Operational Research, Volume 221, Issue 1, 16 August 2012, Pages 248-262 6. Mcmillan, A., Connor, J., Witten, K., Kearns, R., Rees, D., Woodward, A. The Societal Costs and Benefits of Commuter Bicycling: Simulating the Effects of Specific Policies Using System Dynamics Modeling. Environ Health Perspect, April 2014, Vol 122 – 4 7. Barkāne Ginters 8. Aizstrauta, D., Celmina, A., Ginters, E., Mazza, R. Validation of Integrated Acceptance and Sustainability Assessment Methodology. IN: ICTE in Regional Development, 2013, Valmiera, Latvia: Procedia Computer Science, Elsevier, Volume 26, 33-40 9. Richardson, GP. Reflections on the foundations of system dynamics. Syst Dyn Rev. 2011;27:219–243 10. Andrew, Ford. Chapter 9: Information feedback and causal loop diagrams. Modeling the Environment. Island Press. 2010, pp. 99 11. Kirkwood, C. W. System Dynamics Methods. College of Business Arizona State University USA, 1998 http://www.public.asu.edu/~kirkwood/sysdyn/SDIntro/ch-1.pdf 5.11.2015. 12. The Societal Costs and Benefits of Commuter Bicycling: Simulating the Effects of Specific Policies Using System Dynamics Modeling http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3984216/ 08.11.2015.

Dace Aizstrauta is a doctoral student and is working on technology evaluation tool – Integrated acceptance and sustainability model. Dace holds a masters degree in Sociotechnical Systems modelling and a bachelors degree in Political science and Public administration. Her work on IASAM resembles the multi-disciplinary education and her previous professional experience in research.

Egils Ginters is director of Sociotechnical Systems Engineering Institute. He is a full time Professor of Information Technologies in the Systems Modelling Department at Vidzeme University of Applied Sciences. Graduated with excellence from Riga Technical University Department of Automation and Telemechanics in 1984 and holds Dr.Sc.Ing. in 1996. He is a Senior member of the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE), and member of European Social Simulation Association (ESSA) and Latvian Simulation Society.

97