PK
r}X \ \ (
cqu_2746+ATTACHMENT01+ATTACHMENT01.4.docUT 7f7fࡱ > #` bjbj i #
f j r H D 4` 4` 4` 8 l` ` b ~ d d d (d fh v h , i $ 0 h ( / f l Dh " fh l l /
d (d D zq zq zq l
R d f (d } | zq l zq zq : Qt , D " f t (d b 0Qğ 4` o }t
iv $ Z 0 t . p t t j Uu i i zq j | k i i i / / ^q i i i l l l l d( G D G t J D
GENERIC ATTRIBUTES OF IS GRADUATES
An Australian Academic View
Robert Snoke
School of Computing Science
Central Queensland University
Bundaberg, Australia
Email: b.snoke@cqu.edu.au
Abstract
This paper reports on a follow-up study that validates a group of generic attributes of graduates of Australian undergraduate degree programs with majors in Information Systems (IS). A three round Delphi questionnaire was used. Major findings include the high ratings of generic interpersonal attributes involving teamwork, problem definition, analysis of various solution, oral and written communication, listening are rated as essential team participation and the commitment to further learning and intellectual development. Oral and written communications are significantly rated as more important than a comprehensive knowledge of IS. There has been a shift in the top ranking attributes with information retrieval and defining problems in a systematic way being ranked above the previous studies top ranking attributes of teamwork and the commitment to further learning and intellectual development. This study has a very strong overall correlation with previous Australian and Queensland studies.
Keywords
IS Education and Research (I), IS Curriculum (IA01), IS Research (IB01), IS Skill Requirements (EH0208), IS Professional Societies (IC)
Introduction
This paper reports on a follow-up study by ADDIN EN.CITE Snoke19993673367Robert SnokeAlan Underwood1999Generic Attributes of IS Graduates - An Australian IS Academic Study10th Australasian Conference on Information SystemsVictoria University of Wellington1 - 3 December 1999Snoke1998a3363336Robert SnokeAlan Underwood1998aGeneric Attributes of IS Graduates - An Australian StudyEuropean Conference on Information SystemsAIX, France4 - 6 June, 1998Generic Attributes, Delphi study, delphi techniqueSnoke20065787578Snoke, RobertUnderwood, Alan2006An Australian View of Generic Attributes Coverage in Undergraduate Programs of Study: A QUT FIT Case StudyBruce, C.S., Mohay, G., Smith, G., Stoodley, I. Tweedale, R.Transforming IT education: Promoting a culture of excellence.Santa Rosa, CaliforniaInforming Science Presspp. 405-420Snoke20065777577Snoke, RobertUnderwood, Alan2006Generic Attributes of Faculty of Information Technology - Information Systems GraduatesBruce, C.S., Mohay, G., Smith, G., Stoodley, I. Tweedale, R.Transforming IT education: Promoting a culture of excellence.Santa Rosa, CaliforniaInforming Science Press385-404(Snoke & Underwood 1998a, 1999, 2006b, 2006a) that validates a group of generic attributes of graduates of Australian tertiary Information Systems (IS) programs of study. The 1998 Snoke and Underwood study identified a group of 29 attributes of graduates that were ranked by both industry and academics as important to graduates in their first year of employment after completing a degree in Information Systems. The major findings of the 1998 study included the essential ranking of the attributes Participate in continued learning and intellectual development, Work as part of a team, Retrieve and use relevant information, Oral communications skills, and Define problems in a systematic way. Anecdotal data and a study by Turner ADDIN EN.CITE Turner19993693369Turner, RodneyLowry, Glenn1999Educating Information Systems Professionals: Towards a Rapprochement Between New Graduates and Employers10th Australasian Conference on Information SystemsVictoria University of WellingtonSchool of Communications and Information Management, Victoria University of Wellington221049-1058Beverely Hope, Pak Yoong1 - 3 December 1999ISBN047511065X(Turner & Lowry 1999) suggest that tertiary curricula do not meet the needs of industry. Educators and trainers of future IS professionals must be able to identify and validate the generic attributes desired by employers of IS graduates. The study is significant in that it is a unique study in Australia to empirically validate the attributes of the graduates from the courses taught with an IS major.
The sample population included 528 academics from Australian universities. The study rates a previously identified set of attributes ADDIN EN.CITE Snoke1998b3453345Robert SnokeAlan Underwood1998bGeneric Attributes of IS Graduates - A Queensland StudyAustralasian Conference on Information SystemsUniversity of New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales30 September - 2 October 1998(Snoke & Underwood 1998b) and then ranks them according to their mean rating.
The paper proceeds as follows. First the aims of the study are explained and the definition of key terms given. The research method is then described along with the results of the study. Conclusions are drawn and recommendations made from the study.
Aim of the Study
This Australian study identifies and examines the generic attributes required of entry-level employees from IS programs of study. This is a follow-up study to identify any changes that have occurred in the last 10 years since the first study was conducted. This project will help provide a focus for IS curriculum development in the next decade.
The results of the study will be used to develop a technique for developing a more responsive tertiary curriculum that meets the needs of the Information Systems industry. Institutions will be able to map their IS curriculum offerings against those of the Australian Computer Society (ACS) Core Body of Knowledge ADDIN EN.CITE Underwood19962743274Alan Underwood1996The ACS Core Body of Knowledge for Information Technology ProfessionalsDavid ArnottKit DampneyAngela ScollaryAustralian Information Systems Curriculum Working ConferenceMelbourneDepartment of Information Systems, Monash University1149-6924-25 September 1996(Underwood 1996) to identify strengths and weaknesses in their curricula. They will be able to offer a curriculum that is more responsive to the local employment market that their institution serves. This is particularly important for regional institutions as they serve a much smaller employment area.
Definitions
This paper uses the term generic attributes to describe a core set of abilities and characteristics of an individual ADDIN EN.CITE Sandberg19943301330Jorgen Sandberg1994Human Competence at WorkGoteborgBASjorgen Snadberg's ThesisSandberg199731431314Jorgen Sandberg1997Competence, Lecture, QUT, 19 June, 199719 June 1997Seminarcompetence, competent(Sandberg 1994, 1997). It has many meanings, interpretations and synonyms such as generic skills, basic skills, qualities, knowledge and understanding and competencies ADDIN EN.CITE Bradley199733716337Denise Bradley1997The qualities of a University of South Australia graduate Information for External Members of University CommitteesDenise Bradley199811 May 1998http://www.unisa.edu.au/usainfo/infoextm.htmCrebert199526212262Crebert, Gay1995Implementing Generic AttributesBrisbanePowerpoint slidesGeneric attributeshttp://www.qut.edu.au/admin/mopp/C/c_01_03.htmlDoyle19962544254Kate Doyle1996Framework for the Development of National Competencies for the IT IndustryITITAB19 NovemberFAXMoss199029010290Moss, Jerome, Jr.Liang, Tsanglang1990: Leadership, Leadership Development, and the National Center for Research in Vocational EducationBerkeleyNational Center for Research in Vocational EducationOctoberTechnical/ResearchR: Academic-Education; Adjustment-to-Environment; Classroom-Observation-Techniques; Cognitive-Processes; Curriculum-Development; Educational-Policy; Educational-Research; High-Schools; Industry-; Job-Skills; Participative-Decision-Making; Student-Centered-Curriculum; Teaching-Methods; Technology-; Vocational-EducationM: *Basic-Skills; *Classroom-Environment; *Problem-Solving; *Self-Motivation; *Teacher-Expectations-of-Students; *Thinking-SkillsM: *Generic-SkillsStasz199328910289Stasz, CathleenDavid McArthurKimberly RamsayMathew Lewis1993Teaching and Learning Generic Skills for the WorkplaceBerkeleyNational Center for Research in Vocational EducationAprilTechnicalR: Competency-Based-Education; Curriculum-Development; Employment-Potential; Evaluative-Thinking; High-Schools; Independent-Study; Individualized-Instruction; Instructional-Materials; Job-Training; Learning-Activities; Material-Development; Postsecondary-Education; Self-Evaluation-Individuals; Teaching-Guides; Technical-Education; Work-AttitudesM: *Behavioral-Objectives; *Job-Skills; *Learning-Modules; *Problem-Solving; *Productivity-; *Teamwork-M: *Generic-Technical-Competencies(Bradley 1997; Crebert 1995; Doyle 1996; Moss & Liang 1990; Stasz et al. 1993).
The literature often refers to the concept of generic attributes as generic skills or competencies. Competencies may be defined as consisting of skills, attributes or abilities and understanding or knowledge. Understanding or knowledge is defined as the content or core body knowledge of a subject discipline that a person has acquired. Skills are the routine implementation of the acquired knowledge or attributes. Attributes or abilities are the personal qualities that are applied by an individual to a specific task under a situation. Figure one gives one interpretation of the relationship between some of the terms used to describe generic attributes.
Figure One: Components of Competencies
There exists much debate as to the meaning of the terms competency, competent and competencies. A person by definition is defined to possess competencies if they are competent at a specified task under a given set of conditions. The possession of a set of competencies does not necessarily imply that a person is competent at any task. Therefore the task of educators is to identify a minimalist set of qualities or competencies that will enable a graduate of an IS course to obtain employment. This paper treats generic attributes as competencies that a graduate possesses upon completion of a tertiary degree.
Research Method
The Delphi technique for gaining consensus amongst a diverse group of individuals was used amd asked respondents to rate rather than rank questionnaire items.. Previous researchers ADDIN EN.CITE Ball19821470147Leslie BallRichard Harris1982SMIS Members: A Membership AnalysisMIS Quarterly6119-38issues, needsDickson19841210121Gary W DicksonRobert L LeitheiserJames C WetherbeMal Nechis1984Key Information Systems Issues for the 1980'sMIS Quarterly83135-159delphi technque, priorities, MIS, contains useful survey data from first studyHartog19861450145Curt HartogMartin Herbert19861985 Opinion Survey of MIS Managers: Key IssuesMIS Quarterly104351-362delphi study, key issues , references, methodology, resultsBrancheau19871200120James BrancheauJames C Wetherbe1987Key Issues in Information Systems - 1986MIS Quarterly11123-46IS management, key issues, management priorities, delphi technique, references, previous study, contains sample survey instrumentsWatson19891370137RT Watson1989Key Issues in Information Systems Management: An Australian Perspective 1988Australian Computer Journal213118-129Niederman19911360136Fred NiedermanJames C BrancheauJames C Wetherbe1991Information Systems Management Issues for the 1990'sMIS Quarterly154475-502delphi study, references is issues,survey instrument, research methods, references method and resultsWatson19911390139Richard T WatsonJames C Brancheau1991Key issues in information systems management: An international perspectiveInformation & Management203213-223delphi technique, is key issuesPervan19931513151Graham Pervan1993Results From A Study of Key Issues in Australian IS Management4th Australian Conference on Information SystemsBrisbane, Queensland AustraliaDepartment of Commerce, The University of Queensland11113-12728-30 Septemberkey issues in information management, delphi studyhttp://cbsntweb.curtin.edu.au:80/IS/staff/pervan.htmlPervan19962643264Graham Pervan1996Results from a Study of Key Issues in Australasian IS Management - 1996CD KeenC UrquhartJ Lamp7th Australasian Conference on Information Systems, - 1996Hobart, TasmaniaDepartment of Computer Science, University of Tasmania22509-52011-13 December, 1996http://cbsntweb.curtin.edu.au:80/IS/staff/pervan.htmlMorgado199414131141Eduardo M MorgadoNicolau ReinhardRichard T Watson1994Extending the analysis of key issues in information technology management1-19unpublished papermanagement of information technology, key issues studies, Brazilian banking industry,dBrancheau199616331163James C BrancheauBrian D JanzJames C Wetherbe1996Key Issues in Information Systems Management: A Shift Toward Technology Infrastructurehttp://www.colorado.edu/infs/jcb/key/us94wp.html12 August 1996Snoke199628010280Robert Snoke1996A Technique for Mapping Tertiary Information Systems Education and Training onto Current and Predicted Industry NeedsHobartUniversity of Tasmania10 December 1996Proceedings of the 7th Australasian Conference on Information SystemsSnoke1998a3363336Robert SnokeAlan Underwood1998aGeneric Attributes of IS Graduates - An Australian StudyEuropean Conference on Information SystemsAIX, France4 - 6 June, 1998Generic Attributes, Delphi study, delphi techniqueSnoke1998b3453345Robert SnokeAlan Underwood1998bGeneric Attributes of IS Graduates - A Queensland StudyAustralasian Conference on Information SystemsUniversity of New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales30 September - 2 October 1998(Ball & Harris 1982; Brancheau, J. & Wetherbe 1987; Brancheau, J.C., Janz & Wetherbe 1996; Dickson et al. 1984; Hartog & Herbert 1986; Morgado, Reinhard & Watson 1994; Niederman, Brancheau & Wetherbe 1991; Pervan 1993, 1996; Snoke 1996; Snoke & Underwood 1998a, 1998b; Watson, R. 1989; Watson, R.T. & Brancheau 1991) investigating the key issues in IS have used the Delphi technique to rank and rate the relative importance of the issues. The Delphi method was retained for its value in surfacing new issues and moving study participants toward consensus ADDIN EN.CITE Delbecq19861381138Andre L DelbecqDavid H GustafsonAndrew H Van de Ven,1986Group Techniques for Program Planning: a guide to nominal group and delphi processesMiddleton, WisconsinGreen Briar Press658.403\\\355delphi technique , survey questionaire design(Delbecq, Gustafson & Andrew H Van de Ven 1986).
A traditional Delphi study starts with an open-ended statement and asks participants to respond to the statement. The information is collated and statistics calculated. A second questionnaire is sent out which includes the revised statements and information obtained from the first round questionnaire asking respondents to revise their opinions about the original statement. The process is repeated until the respondents have reached consensus or the facilitator identifies that they have acquired sufficient data for their purpose ADDIN EN.CITE Brancheau199616331163James C BrancheauBrian D JanzJames C Wetherbe1996Key Issues in Information Systems Management: A Shift Toward Technology Infrastructurehttp://www.colorado.edu/infs/jcb/key/us94wp.html12 August 1996(Brancheau, J.C., Janz & Wetherbe 1996). In practice, however, the researcher frequently decides to end the process after two or three rounds, by which time firm trends have generally emerged.
A modified form of the Delphi technique as suggested by ADDIN EN.CITE Watson19891370137RT Watson1989Key Issues in Information Systems Management: An Australian Perspective 1988Australian Computer Journal213118-129(Watson, R. 1989) was used. Watson ADDIN EN.CITE Watson19891370137RT Watson1989Key Issues in Information Systems Management: An Australian Perspective 1988Australian Computer Journal213118-129(Watson, R. 1989) in his study of the key issues in information management modified the Delphi technique by having the respondents rate rather than rank the issues. Miller ADDIN EN.CITE Miller19562290229George A Miller1956The Magical Number Seven, Plus or Minus Two: Some Limits on our Capacity for Processing InformationThe Psychological Review63281-97Information processing capacity(Miller 1956) suggests that when the number of items to be ranked is large (greater than 10) that humans have difficulty in processing the information. Watson ADDIN EN.CITE Morgado199414131141Eduardo M MorgadoNicolau ReinhardRichard T Watson1994Extending the analysis of key issues in information technology management1-19unpublished papermanagement of information technology, key issues studies, Brazilian banking industry,dWatson19891370137RT Watson1989Key Issues in Information Systems Management: An Australian Perspective 1988Australian Computer Journal213118-129Watson19911390139Richard T WatsonJames C Brancheau1991Key issues in information systems management: An international perspectiveInformation & Management203213-223delphi technique, is key issues(Morgado, Reinhard & Watson 1994; Watson, R. 1989; Watson, R.T. & Brancheau 1991) also sent round two questionnaires to the non-respondents from round one of his studies. This has become the standard method of using the Delphi technique in all subsequent key issue studies and has been found to produce reliable results in the previous generic attribute surveys ADDIN EN.CITE Snoke19993673367Robert SnokeAlan Underwood1999Generic Attributes of IS Graduates - An Australian IS Academic Study10th Australasian Conference on Information SystemsVictoria University of Wellington1 - 3 December 1999Snoke1998b3453345Robert SnokeAlan Underwood1998bGeneric Attributes of IS Graduates - A Queensland StudyAustralasian Conference on Information SystemsUniversity of New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales30 September - 2 October 1998Snoke1998a3363336Robert SnokeAlan Underwood1998aGeneric Attributes of IS Graduates - An Australian StudyEuropean Conference on Information SystemsAIX, France4 - 6 June, 1998Generic Attributes, Delphi study, delphi technique(Snoke & Underwood 1998a, 1998b, 1999) that formed part of this study. Participants, in this study, were asked to rate each of the generic competencies as distinct from ranking them. Space was provided at the end of the questionnaire for respondents to make any comments they desired or to add additional competencies that they thought should be included. 56 comments were received from participants and these will be reported in future publications.
The questionnaires were sent via email asking respondents to use the reply function on their email package to complete the questionnaire. This allowed for a short turn around time, as each round was completed within 10 days. This is a significant reduction in the time for a survey as compared with traditional paper based mail surveys that take weeks per round.
The list of competencies was taken from the previous study (Snoke and Underwood, 1998a). This list was expanded from the results of a pilot study and literature.
Participants
Academic participants were selected from Australian universities. This was done by searching the universities homepages. The search was conducted to include academics who taught IS but may be positioned within other organizational units with the institution. Some pages listed IS personnel who had since retired or left the particular institution. Most faculty homepages also identified the position of the individuals listed. An underlying feature of the adopted research methodology was the ability to use individually addressed questionnaires. Other surveys have reported a significantly lower response rate, in the order of only 5-10 percent, to non-personalised email.
Round one
Each participant was sent a list of statements that were descriptions of the generic attributes or competencies of graduates from undergraduate degrees with a major in IS. They were asked to rate their importance in terms of the essential nature of the competency in the workplace for an entry-level graduate during their first year on the job. A seven point Likert type scale, in order of increasing importance, was used where 1 = extremely unimportant, 2 = unimportant, 3 = of little importance, 4 = neutral, 5 = very important, 6 = of major importance. 7 = extremely important (essential). Space was provided at the end of the survey instrument for additional attributes to be added or for other comments.).
The number of respondents per round is shown in table one.
Table One: Respondent rates per round
TotalNumberPercentRound 112223Round 212323Round 312323The mean, median, mode and standard deviation for each attribute were calculated for each round of the study.
Round two
Respondents to the first round were sent a second questionnaire that contained the mean response for each of the competencies as well as their individual responses to the first round questionnaire. Non respondents to the first round were sent a similar questionnaire with only the mean response for each of the competencies included as additional information. Again the mean, median, mode and standard deviation were calculated for each of the competencies. Competencies with a mean below four were to be excluded from round three of the study. There were no competencies that were deleted from the third round. An interesting aspect of the participation of academics was the number of new participants in the second round of 35 which resulted in a participation rate of 23%.
Round three
Round three questionnaires were sent to respondents of either round one or round two. Respondents to round two received questionnaires that contained the mean and their individual responses to each of the competencies. Non-respondents to round two or round one received questionnaires with the mean response of each competency in the previous round questionnaire. There were a significant number of respondents who did not change their opinion when given the additional information for the next round. This accounted for 50 percent of the responses to round three.
Reminder notices were sent to 12 percent of the participants in round three asking them to complete the questionnaire. If a modified Delphi technique had not been used the final round response rate would have been at best 12 percent.
Results
The competencies are listed in overall rank order in table two using the mean of the third round to rank them.
Table Two: IS generic competencies
RankAttributeMean1998 Rank1Be able to retrieve, evaluate and use relevant information6.4632Define problems in a systematic way6.2453Analyze, synthesize and evaluate the various solutions6.1684Work as part of a team in a productive and cooperative manner6.1515Listening skills6.13NR6Written communication skills6.0967Participate in continued learning and intellectual development and develop critical, reflective and creative thinking6.0828Oral communication skills6.0649Interpersonal skills5.91710Consider the quality of the solution and its timeliness5.911111Value the ethics of the Information Technology profession5.911312Possess coherent, extensive, theoretical and practical knowledge of IS5.881013Capacity to use new technologies with additional training5.78NR14Self motivation5.77915Time management skills5.761716Work independently5.711817Be technologically competent (a person is able to use current technology competently)5.691218Confidence about their ability to learn and work independently5.671519Work with people of diverse ethnic and cultural backgrounds5.63NR20Adapt to unfamiliar situations and operate in a socially and culturally diverse environment5.632621Embrace change and be engaged in incremental improvement to keep up with the rapid change in technology5.591422Ability to reflect on own strengths and weaknesses5.582323Possess theoretical and practical knowledge in at least one reference discipline which include behavioral science, computer science, decision theory, information theory, organizational theory, management theory, language theories, systems theory, social science, management science, Artificial Intelligence, economic theory, ergonomics, political science, psychology and accounting.5.481624Maintain an awareness of information technology trends5.48NR25Knowledge of how a business operates or is structured or is orientated5.452226Sensitivity to differences in gender, ethnicity, culture and customs5.432127Participate in on-going professional development5.421928Work with people at all corporate levels5.39NR29Skilled in Internet technologies5.35NR30Project Management Skills5.332731Possess a sense of basic curiosity about technology5.212432Possess the theoretical and practical knowledge of related disciplines. For example, business, law, education, data communications, computer science or leisure recreation5.122533Research skills5.072834Demonstrate practical skills and understanding in at least one computer language5.042035Capacity to use new technologies without additional training4.95NR36Identify information systems that will provide competitive advantages4.83NR37Customer service orientation and skills4.73NR38Understand the profit motive of business4.7129From the mean values listed in table two it can be seen that the top 34 attributes are rated as being at least very important (mean rating of 5.00 or greater) with the top eight being rated as being of major importance with a mean rating of 6.00 or greater. A significant finding is that knowledge and skills in IS are rated twelfth below many of the more general attributes such as oral communications skills (ranked 8th), written communications skills (ranked 6th) and listening skills (ranked 5th). These results are generally consistent with the results obtained in the previous Australian and Queensland studies ADDIN EN.CITE Snoke1998a3363336Robert SnokeAlan Underwood1998aGeneric Attributes of IS Graduates - An Australian StudyEuropean Conference on Information SystemsAIX, France4 - 6 June, 1998Generic Attributes, Delphi study, delphi techniqueSnoke1998b3453345Robert SnokeAlan Underwood1998bGeneric Attributes of IS Graduates - A Queensland StudyAustralasian Conference on Information SystemsUniversity of New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales30 September - 2 October 1998(Snoke & Underwood 1998a, 1998b) and Turners ADDIN EN.CITE Turner19993693369Turner, RodneyLowry, Glenn1999Educating Information Systems Professionals: Towards a Rapprochement Between New Graduates and Employers10th Australasian Conference on Information SystemsVictoria University of WellingtonSchool of Communications and Information Management, Victoria University of Wellington221049-1058Beverely Hope, Pak Yoong1 - 3 December 1999ISBN047511065X(Turner & Lowry 1999) study of third year students and employer groups in Victoria, Australia.
An interesting finding is the change in the order of the essential attributes compared to the 1998 study. The most important of these is the inclusion of the attribute Analyze, syntehszie and evaluate the various solutions. This attribute has moved from a ranking of 8th in the 1998 study to 3rd in the current study. The attributes of working as part of team and participation in continued learning and intellectual development have dropped their rankings compared to the 1998 study. In todays society it is not surprising to see that listening, written and oral communications skills are rated highly. The information age skills of retrieving and using information and defining problems in a systematic way have increased their rankings from the 1998 study and are rated at number one (1998 ranking 3rd) and two (1998 ranking 5th) respectively. This is change from the previous studies which had the people skills more highly ranked than these information age skills.
The bottom ranking attributes of capacity to use new technologies without additional training, identifying IS that will provide competitive advantage, customer service orientation and understanding the profit motive of business is very surprising given anecdotal evidence that suggests that these specific attributes are most sought in IS graduates with industry sources constantly rating an understanding of the profit motive of business and being able to use new technologies as essential qualities of entry level employees.
A surprising result is the low ranking of Demonstrated practical skills and understanding in at least one computer language. The attribute had a ranking of 20 out of 29 in the 1998 study and is ranked 34th in the current study. One possible explanation for this may be a move within the Information Systems curriculum to more of an emphasis on the management of the system rather than practical programming skills.
A possible explanation of the difference in rankings between the technical and human attributes may be found in the controversial motivational theory of Herzberg ADDIN EN.CITE Herzberg19683760376Herzberg, Frederick1968One More Time: How Do You Motivate Employees?Harvard Business ReviewJanuary - February53-62P650/1Discrepancy in data(Herzberg 1968). Hertzberg developed a theory of motivation related to work situations that proposed two groups of factors, which related to job satisfaction. One group comprising environmental factors (hygiene) do not, by themselves, motivate satisfaction, but their absence will cause dissatisfaction. The other group are determinants of job satisfaction which are believed to result in improved performance and are termed "motivators". Thus, the technical skills/knowledge attributes will be expected to have been gained through the academic process, that is the "hygiene factors" in terms of Hertzberg's motivation theory, while the more highly rated attributes represent "motivators" because they are determinants of job satisfaction which are assumed to lead to superior performance.
Overall Conclusions from the Study
The study showed that the more generic interpersonal attributes involving teamwork, problem definition, analysis of various solution, oral and written communication, listening are rated as essential. It is important to note that eight of the attributes were rated as essential qualities for first year employees. An important finding is that while all of the attributes are considered to be important to first year employees some are simply considered to be more important.
There has been a shift in the top ranking attributes away from teamwork and continued intellectual development to information retrieval and defining problems in a systematic way. This may suggest that the information age usage attributes are more important than the teamwork attributes as identified in the previous study.
The high ranking of oral communications and team participation suggests that more group work and oral presentations should form part of the IS curriculum as this is a required skill in industry.
An interesting outcome has been the large drop in the ranking of demonstrated practical skills and understanding in at least one computer language.
Further Research
Further analysis will be conducted to attempt to identify the relationship of the attribute rankings to the type of institution whether they be a regional or capital city institution. A state by state analysis will be conducted to identify any trends that may appear. Analysis will be conducted of the comments submitted by participants to provide a richer understanding of the issues relating to the development of these attributes in our students. This further study will be followed by an international comparative study of the importance of the identified competencies.
References
ADDIN EN.REFLIST Ball, L. & Harris, R. 1982, 'SMIS Members: A Membership Analysis', MIS Quarterly, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 19-38.
Bradley, D. 1997, The qualities of a University of South Australia graduate Information for External Members of University Committees, Denise Bradley, viewed 11 May 1998, < HYPERLINK "http://www.unisa.edu.au/usainfo/infoextm.htm>" http://www.unisa.edu.au/usainfo/infoextm.htm>.
Brancheau, J. & Wetherbe, J.C. 1987, 'Key Issues in Information Systems - 1986', MIS Quarterly, vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 23-46.
Brancheau, J.C., Janz, B.D. & Wetherbe, J.C. 1996, Key Issues in Information Systems Management: A Shift Toward Technology Infrastructure, HYPERLINK "http://www.colorado.edu/infs/jcb/key/us94wp.html" http://www.colorado.edu/infs/jcb/key/us94wp.html, 12 August 1996.
Crebert, G. 1995, Implementing Generic Attributes, Brisbane, Powerpoint slides, < HYPERLINK "http://www.qut.edu.au/admin/mopp/C/c_01_03.html>" http://www.qut.edu.au/admin/mopp/C/c_01_03.html>.
Delbecq, A.L., Gustafson, D.H. & Andrew H Van de Ven 1986, Group Techniques for Program Planning: a guide to nominal group and delphi processes, Green Briar Press, Middleton, Wisconsin.
Dickson, G.W., Leitheiser, R.L., Wetherbe, J.C. & Nechis, M. 1984, 'Key Information Systems Issues for the 1980's', MIS Quarterly, vol. 8, no. 3, pp. 135-59.
Doyle, K. 1996, Framework for the Development of National Competencies for the IT Industry, ITITAB, 19 November, FAX.
Hartog, C. & Herbert, M. 1986, '1985 Opinion Survey of MIS Managers: Key Issues', MIS Quarterly, vol. 10, no. 4, pp. 351-62.
Herzberg, F. 1968, 'One More Time: How Do You Motivate Employees?' Harvard Business Review, no. January - February, pp. 53-62.
Miller, G.A. 1956, 'The Magical Number Seven, Plus or Minus Two: Some Limits on our Capacity for Processing Information', The Psychological Review, vol. 63, no. 2, pp. 81-97.
Morgado, E.M., Reinhard, N. & Watson, R.T. 1994, Extending the analysis of key issues in information technology management, unpublished paper.
Moss, J., Jr. & Liang, T. 1990, : Leadership, Leadership Development, and the National Center for Research in Vocational Education, National Center for Research in Vocational Education, Berkeley.
Niederman, F., Brancheau, J.C. & Wetherbe, J.C. 1991, 'Information Systems Management Issues for the 1990's', MIS Quarterly, vol. 15, no. 4, pp. 475-502.
Pervan, G. 1993, 'Results From A Study of Key Issues in Australian IS Management', paper presented to 4th Australian Conference on Information Systems, Brisbane, Queensland Australia, 28-30 September.
---- 1996, 'Results from a Study of Key Issues in Australasian IS Management - 1996', paper presented to 7th Australasian Conference on Information Systems, - 1996, Hobart, Tasmania, 11-13 December, 1996.
Sandberg, J. 1994, Human Competence at Work, BAS, Goteborg.
Snoke, R. 1996, A Technique for Mapping Tertiary Information Systems Education and Training onto Current and Predicted Industry Needs, University of Tasmania, Hobart.
Snoke, R. & Underwood, A. 1998a, 'Generic Attributes of IS Graduates - An Australian Study', paper presented to European Conference on Information Systems, AIX, France, 4 - 6 June, 1998.
---- 1998b, 'Generic Attributes of IS Graduates - A Queensland Study', paper presented to Australasian Conference on Information Systems, University of New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales, 30 September - 2 October 1998.
---- 1999, 'Generic Attributes of IS Graduates - An Australian IS Academic Study', paper presented to 10th Australasian Conference on Information Systems, Victoria University of Wellington, 1 - 3 December 1999.
---- 2006a, 'Generic Attributes of Faculty of Information Technology - Information Systems Graduates', in C.S. Bruce, G. Mohay, G. Smith, I. Stoodley & R. Tweedale (eds), Transforming IT education: Promoting a culture of excellence., Informing Science Press, Santa Rosa, California, pp. 385-404.
---- 2006b, 'An Australian View of Generic Attributes Coverage in Undergraduate Programs of Study: A QUT FIT Case Study', in C.S. Bruce, G. Mohay, G. Smith, I. Stoodley & R. Tweedale (eds), Transforming IT education: Promoting a culture of excellence., Informing Science Press, Santa Rosa, California, pp. pp. 405-20.
Stasz, C., McArthur, D., Ramsay, K. & Lewis, M. 1993, Teaching and Learning Generic Skills for the Workplace, National Center for Research in Vocational Education, Berkeley.
Turner, R. & Lowry, G. 1999, 'Educating Information Systems Professionals: Towards a Rapprochement Between New Graduates and Employers', paper presented to 10th Australasian Conference on Information Systems, Victoria University of Wellington, 1 - 3 December 1999.
Underwood, A. 1996, 'The ACS Core Body of Knowledge for Information Technology Professionals', paper presented to Australian Information Systems Curriculum Working Conference, Melbourne, 24-25 September 1996.
Watson, R. 1989, 'Key Issues in Information Systems Management: An Australian Perspective 1988', Australian Computer Journal, vol. 21, no. 3, pp. 118-29.
Watson, R.T. & Brancheau, J.C. 1991, 'Key issues in information systems management: An international perspective', Information & Management, vol. 20, no. 3, pp. 213-23.
Copyright
Robert Snoke 2007. The author assigns to ACIS and educational and non-profit institutions a non-exclusive licence to use this document for personal use and in courses of instruction provided that the article is used in full and this copyright statement is reproduced. The authors also grant a non-exclusive licence to ACIS to publish this document in full in the Conference Proceedings. Those documents may be published on the World Wide Web, CD-ROM, in printed form, and on mirror sites on the World Wide Web. Any other usage is prohibited without the express permission of the authors.
18th Australasian Conference on Information Systems Generic Attributes of IS Graduates
5-7 Dec 2007, Toowoomba Robert Snoke
EMBED PowerPoint.Slide.8
" # 1 > ? x
y
C N A
B
M
N
ø~s~d~U~~~~K hP OJ QJ ^J h<