Abstract

Electronic Records Management Systems (ERMS) have become the basic need of modern and democratic institutions today with the functions of creating, editing, querying, classifying, authorizing access and archiving processes. Minimum capabilities and functions of an ERMS is specified by TS 13298 standard in Turkey. However, this standard does not include the required criteria for usability. ERMS softwares are managed and used by humans, so the usability should be considered from the beginning of software development life cycle by IT professionals and ERMS should be tested periodically in terms of usability in the development, purchasing, certification and usage process. The purpose of this research is to explain how the “Heuristic Walkthrough” test method, which is frequently applied in the field of software usability, can be applied on ERMS, the types of information that can be gathered via this method and the benefits of the test. The method described in this research can be used by software developers, institutions and certification authorities to identify factors affecting the usability of the ERMS, to correct problematic interface elements and to provide input for purchasing decisions.

Keywords: Electronic records management systems, heuristic walkthrough, usability assessment criteria

References

  1. Alred, G. J., Brusaw, C. T. ve Oliu, W. E. (2000). Handbook of technical writing (6. bs.). New York: Macmillan.
  2. Bağış, A. (2002). Ara yüz tasarımlarının karşılaştırmalı değerlendirilmesinde kullanılabilirlik yaklaşımı. Mühendis ve Makine Dergisi, 44(522), 25-31.
  3. Battleson, B., Booth, A. ve Weintrop, J. (2001). Usability testing of an academic library web site: A case study. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 27(3), 188-198.
  4. Benyon, D., Turner, P. ve Turner, S. (2006). Designing interactive systems: People, activities, contexts, technologies. Harlow; Munich: Addison-Wesley.
  5. Bertot, J. C., McClure, C. R., Moen, W. E. ve Rubin, J. (1997). Web usage statistics: Measurement issues and analytical techniques. Government Information Quarterly, 14(4), 373–395.
  6. Bevan, N. (1995). Human-computer interaction standards, Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Human Computer Interaction, July 1995, Yokohama, 885-890. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0921-2647(06)80326-6 adresinden erişildi.
  7. Booth, P. (1989). An introduction to human computer interaction. London: LEA.
  8. Brinck, T., Gergle, D. ve Wood, S. (2003). Usability for the web. San Francisco: Morgan Kaufmann.
  9. Campbell, K. ve Aucoin, R. (2003). Value-based design of learning portals as new academic spaces. A. Jafari, M. Sheehan (Yay. Haz.), Designing Portals: Opportunities and Challenges içinde (ss. 162–185). Hershey, PA: IRM Press.
  10. Chui, M., Manyika, J., Bughin, J., Dobbs, R., Roxburgh, C. ve Sarrazin, H. (2012). The social economy: Unlocking value and productivity through social technologies. https://www.mckinsey.com/industries/high-tech/our-insights/the-social-economy adresinden erişildi.
  11. Cooke, L. (2006). Is eye tracking the next step in usability testing? IEEE International Professional Communication Conference içinde (ss. 236 – 242). doi: 10.1109/IPCC.2006.320355.
  12. İnal, Y., Özen Çınar, N., Çağıltay, K. ve Güngör, M. K. (2014). Kamu internet sitelerinde yer alan arama alanlarının kullanılabilirliğinin belirlenmesi. UYSM 2014 VIII. Ulusal Yazılım Mühendisliği Sempozyumu, 8-10 Eylül 2014, Güzelyurt, KKTC: Bildiriler kitabı içinde (ss. 79-88). http://uyms.comu.edu.tr/foto/dosya_156a4ccbe1df43.pdf adresinden erişildi.
  13. Dee, C. ve Allen, M. (2006). A survey of the usability of digital reference services on academic health science library web sites. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 32(1), 69-78. doi: 10.1016/j.acalib.2005.11.001
  14. Dix, A. J., Finlay, J. E., Abowd, G. D. ve Beale, R. (2004). Human-computer interaction (3. bs.). Harlow Assex: Pearson Education Limited.
  15. Doll, W. ve Torkzadeh, G. (1991). The measurement of end-user computing satisfaction: Theoretical and methodological issues. MIS Quarterly, 15(1), 5-10. doi:10.2307/249429.
  16. Durmuş, S. ve Çağıltay, K. (2012). Kamu kurumu web siteleri ve kullanılabilirlik. M. Z. Sobaci ve M. Yıldız (Yay. Haz.). E-devlet Kamu Yönetimi ve Teknoloji İlişkisinde Güncel Gelişmeler içinde (ss. 293-322). Ankara: Nobel Yayınevi.
  17. Dykstra, D. (1993). A comparison of heuristic evaluation and usability testing: The efficacy of a domain-specific heuristic checklist (Yayımlanmamış doktora tezi). Texas A&M University, Texas.
  18. e-Yazışma Projesi ile İlgili 2017/21 Sayılı Başbakanlık Genelgesi, T.C. Resmi Gazete (30210, 14 Ekim 2017).
  19. Ellis, R. D., Jankowski, T. B., Jasper, J. E., ve Tharuvai, B. S. (1998). Listener: A tool for client‐side investigation of hypermedia navigation behavior. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 30(4), 573–582.
  20. Fitts, P. M. (1992). The information capacity of the human motor system in controlling the amplitude of movement. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 121(3), 262–269. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-3445.121.3.262 adresinden erişildi.
  21. Geng, R. ve Tian, J. (2015). Improving web navigation usability by comparing actual and anticipated usage. IEEE Transactions On Human-Machine Systems, 45(1), 84-94. doi: 10.1109/thms.2014.2363125
  22. Head, A. (1999). Web redemption and the promise of usability. Online, 23(6), 20-32.
  23. Hick, W. (1952). On the rate of gain of information. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 4(1), 11-26. doi: 10.1080/17470215208416600
  24. Hix, D. ve Hartson, H. R. (1993). Developing user interfaces: Ensuring usability through product and process. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons.
  25. Holleran, P. A. (1991). A methodological note on pitfalls in usability testing. Behaviour & Information Technology, 10(5), 345-357.
  26. IEEE 610.12-1990. (1990). IEEE standard glossary of software engineering terminology. https://standards.ieee.org/standard/610_12-1990.html adresinden erişildi.
  27. ISO 15489. (2016). Information and documentation: Records management. https://www.iso.org/standard/62542.html adresinden erişildi.
  28. ISO 9241-11:2018. (2018). Ergonomics of human-system interaction. https://www.iso.org/standard/63500.html adresinden erişildi.
  29. Izzo, J. K. (2012). Colour: User experience and psychology. http://usabilitygeek.com/colour-user-experience-psychology/ adresinden erişildi.
  30. İnal, Y. ve Güner, H. (2016). Yazılım geliştiricilerin kullanıcı deneyimi ve kullanılabilirlik konusundaki farkındalıklarının ve bilgi seviyelerinin belirlenmesi. Pamukkale Üniversitesi Mühendislik Bilimleri Dergisi, 22(5), 384-389. https://jag.journalagent.com/pajes/pdfs/PAJES_22_5_384_389.pdf adresinden erişildi.
  31. Jeffries, R., Miller, J. R., Wharton, C. ve Uyeda, K. M. (1991). User interface evaluation in the real world: A comparison of four techniques. Proceedings ACM CHI’91 Conference, April 28- May 2, New Orleans içinde (ss. 119-124). https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/108844.108862 adresinden erişildi.
  32. Jimenez, C., Lozada, P. ve Rosas, P. (2016). Usability heuristics: A systematic review. Computing Conference (CCC), 2016 IEEE 11th Colombian içinde (ss. 1–8). https://doi.org/10.1109/ColombianCC.2016.7750805 adresinden erişildi.
  33. Kanis, H. (1998). Usage centred research for everyday product design. Applied Ergonomics, 29(1), 75–82. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0003-6870(97)00028-8 adresinden erişildi.
  34. Koyuncu Tunç, S. (2014). HCI knowledge and awareness in the Turkish IT Industry:HCI education adequacy. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/341832209_HCI_Knowledge_and_Awareness_in_the_Turkish_IT_Industry_-HCI_Education_Adequacy adresinden erişildi.
  35. Landauer, T. Κ. (1988). Relations between cognitive psychology and computer system design. J. M. Carroll (Yay. Haz.), Interfacing Thought: Cognitive içinde (ss. 1-25). Cambridge: MIT Press.
  36. Lecerof, A. ve Paterno, F. (1998). Automatic support for usability evaluation. IEEE Transaction on Software Engineering, 24(10), 863-888.
  37. Logan, G. D. (1994). On the ability to inhibit thought and action: A users’ guide to the stop signal paradigm. D. Dagenbach ve T. H. Carr (Yay. Haz.), Inhibitory Processes in Attention, Memory, and Language içinde (ss. 189–239). San Diego: Academic Press.
  38. Nielsen, J. (1993). Usability engineering. San Francisco, CA, USA: Morgan Kaufmann Publishers Inc.
  39. Nielsen, J. (1994). Heuristic evaluation: How-to. https://www.nngroup.com/articles/how-to-conduct-a-heuristic-evaluation/ adresinden erişildi.
  40. Nintex. (2018). Definitive guide to America’s most broken processes. https://info.nintex.com/rs/272-JVS-996/images/Nintex%20AMBP%20Ebook%20Final.pdf adresinden erişildi.
  41. Norman, D. A. (2013). The design of everyday things. New York: Basic Books.
  42. Önaçan, M. B. K., Medeni, T. D. ve Özkanlı, Ö. (2012). Elektronik belge yönetim sistemi (EBYS)’nin faydaları ve kurum bünyesinde EBYS yapılandırmaya yönelik bir yol haritası. Sayıştay Dergisi, 85, 1-26. https://www.sayistay.gov.tr/tr/Upload/95906369/files/dergi/pdf/der85m1.pdf adresinden erişildi.
  43. Öztekin, A., Nikov, A. ve Zaim, S. (2009). UWIS: An assessment methodology for usability of web-based information systems. Journal of Systems And Software, 82(12), 2038-2050. doi: 10.1016/j.jss.2009.06.047
  44. Preece, J. (1993). A Guide to usability: Human factors in computing. USA: Addison-Wesley Longman Publishing.
  45. Preece, J., Rogers, Y., Sharp, H., Holland, S., Carey, T. ve Benyon, D. (1994). Human-computer interaction. GBR: Addison Wesley.
  46. Quesenbery, W. (2001). What does usability mean: looking beyond “ease of use”. http://www.wqusability.com/articles/more-than-ease-of-use.html adresinden erişildi.
  47. Shackel, B. ve Richardson, S. J. (Ed.). (1991). Human factors for informatics usability. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
  48. Shneiderman, B. (1987). Designing the user interface strategies for effective human-computer interaction. ACM SIGBIO Newsletter, 9(1). https://doi.org/10.1145/25065.950626 adresinden erişildi.
  49. Sprehe, T. J. (2005). Integrating records management into information resources management in US government agencies. Government Information Quarterly, 17(1), 13-26.
  50. Squires, D. ve Preece, J. (1999). Predicting quality in educational software. Interacting with Computers, 11(5), 467-483. doi: 10.1016/S0953-5438(98)00063-0.
  51. TS 13298. (2015). Elektronik belge ve arşiv yönetim sistemi standardı. Ankara: Türk Standartları Enstitüsü.
  52. UXServices. (2019). Turkey user experience (ux) report 2018/19. https://uxservices.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/TUX-2018-19.pdf adresinden erişildi.
  53. Wickens, C. D., Lee, J., Liu, Y., Gordon-Becker, S. ve Al, E. (2003). An introduction to human factors engineering. Brantford, Ontario: W. Ross Macdonald School Resource Services Library.

License

Copyright (c) 2020 The author(s). This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium or format, provided the original work is properly cited.

How to Cite

Koyuncu Tunç, S., & Külcü, Özgür. (2020). Usability Assessment of Electronic Records Management Systems via Heuristic Walkthrough Method. Information World, 21(2), 269-297. https://doi.org/10.15612/BD.2020.556