pdf 820Kb - INSEAD CALT

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Evaluation report of the use of Onto-Logging platform in the user site Deliverable ID: D8b Page : 80 of 110 Version: 1.0 Date: 27 january 2004 Status: Final Confid.: Public 8.2.3 The tendering process at INDRA The tendering process at INDRA aims to select a supplier and a proposal for the considered services and systems, and to agree with the chosen supplier on a contract defining the deliveries and responsibilities of both parties. The tendering process includes the following sub-processes: • preparation of request for proposal • response preparation, • supplier selection • contract preparation. These sub-processes do not need to be executed in the sequence of Figure 2: they may overlap in time, and there may be iterations of groups of these sub-processes. Tendering Preparation of request for proposal Response preparation Supplier selection Contract preparation Contract monitoring Decision point execution Contract completion Administrative completion Procurement 1 Acquisition Initiation Tendering Preparation of request for proposal Response preparation Supplier selection Contract preparation Contract monitoring Decision point execution Contract completion Administrative completion Procurement 2 Tendering Preparation of request for proposal Response preparation Supplier selection Contract preparation Contract monitoring Decision point execution Contract completion Administrative completion Procurement n Figure 2: The acquisition process model
Evaluation report of the use of Onto-Logging platform in the user site Deliverable ID: D8b Page : 81 of 110 Version: 1.0 Date: 27 january 2004 Status: Final Confid.: Public See (INDRA, 2002) or a detailed description of the tendering process at INDRA. 8.2.4 References Albert A. Angehrn and Larry Todd Wilson (2002), ‘Knowledge Management & Ontology Building at INDRA’, <strong>INSEAD</strong> Case 2002. INDRA (2002). ‘Indra Case Study: Using Ontologies in Tendering Process’, INDRA internal document. 8.3 Annex 3: Ten Usability Heuristics (Nielsen J. and Molich P.) Visibility of system status The system should always keep users informed about what is going on, through appropriate feedback within reasonable time. Match between system and the real world The system should speak the users' language, with words, phrases and concepts familiar to the user, rather than system-oriented terms. Follow real-world conventions, making information appear in a natural and logical order. User control and freedom Users often choose system functions by mistake and will need a clearly marked "emergency exit" to leave the unwanted state without having to go through an extended dialogue. Support undo and redo. Consistency and standards Users should not have to wonder whether different words, situations, or actions mean the same thing. Follow platform conventions. Error prevention Even better than good error messages is a careful design which prevents a problem from occurring in the first place. Recognition rather than recall Make objects, actions, and options visible. The user should not have to remember information from one part of the dialogue to another. Instructions for use of the system should be visible or easily retrie vable whenever appropriate. Flexibility and efficiency of use Accelerators -- unseen by the novice user -- may often speed up the interaction for the expert user such that the system can cater to both inexperienced and experienced users. Allow users to tailor frequent actions. Aesthetic and minimalist design Dialogues should not contain information which is irrelevant or rarely needed. Every extra unit of information in a dialogue competes with the relevant units of information and diminishes their relative visibility. Help users recognize, diagnose, and recover from errors
Page 1 and 2:
The ONTO-LOGGING Consortium consist
Page 3 and 4:
Evaluation report of the use of Ont
Page 5 and 6:
Executive Summary Evaluation report
Page 7 and 8:
Page 9 and 10:
Page 11 and 12:
Page 13 and 14:
Page 15 and 16:
Page 17 and 18:
Page 19 and 20:
Page 21 and 22:
Page 23 and 24:
Page 25 and 26:
Page 27 and 28:
Page 29 and 30: Evaluation report of the use of Ont
Page 53 and 54: • List of connected users to the
Page 67 and 68: 5.5.1 Description of the evaluation
Page 69 and 70: 6 Discussion and Conclusions Evalua
Page 75 and 76: 8 Annex Evaluation report of the us
Page 79: Evaluation report of the use of Ont
Page 93 and 94: esolver consultas. C42 Existen axio
Page 103 and 104: 1 The functionalities provided by D
show all

pdf 820Kb - INSEAD CALT

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?