Where does deep structure use collide?

The idea that using a system well means engaging the features that carry the meaningful, task-relevant content of the work rather than the generic surface controls. Burton-Jones and Straub's 2006 Reconceptualizing System Usage: An Approach and Empirical Test split usage into deep structure usage, drawing on features that map to the core task, and surface structure usage, drawing on features common to any application, and argued that only the deeper kind should predict performance. This treatment fixes the label to a feature-level distinction inside one act of use, which differs from the theory that names the same idea effective use, from the account built on rich and extended post-adoption use, and from the account framed as trying to innovate with the system.[1]

Unit

A user's reliance on task-relevant deep features within an act of use

Recovery means

Not applicable

Measured by

Assessed by the extent to which the features a user invokes map onto the substantive content of the task rather than generic controls

The idea that using a system well means using it in a way that helps a user attain the goals of the work, grounded in how faithfully the system represents the domain it stands for. Burton-Jones and Grange's 2013 From Use to Effective Use: A Representation Theory Perspective defined effective use through three parts that build on one another: transparent interaction with the system, access to the system's faithful representation of the world, and informed action taken on that representation. This treatment ties the label to a representation-theory account of what good use is for, which is broader than the pure feature-level split of the deep and surface model, and distinct from the counts of rich or extended use and from the framing of exploratory, innovative use.[2]

Unit

A user's degree of goal-attaining use across three ordered dimensions

Recovery means

Not applicable

Measured by

Assessed through transparent interaction, representational fidelity, and informed action, judged against the goals the use is meant to serve

The idea that using a system well means drawing on more of its features and using them more fully once the system is already in place, rather than settling for a thin, habitual slice of what it offers. Jasperson, Carter, and Zmud's 2005 A Comprehensive Conceptualization of Post-Adoptive Behaviors Associated with Information Technology Enabled Work Systems mapped the behaviours that follow adoption, including using additional features and extending a feature to new tasks, and argued that most users exploit only a fraction of a system's potential. This treatment locates the label in the breadth and depth of feature use over time, which differs from the single-act deep and surface split, from the goal-grounded theory of effective use, and from the framing centred on innovation.[3]

Unit

A user's breadth and depth of feature use after adoption

Recovery means

Not applicable

Measured by

Assessed by the range of features invoked and the extent to which features are extended and reused across tasks

The idea that using a system well means going past the routine ways of working with it to find new applications, applying its features to problems they were not first used for. Ahuja and Thatcher's 2005 Moving Beyond Intentions and Toward the Theory of Trying: Effects of Work Environment and Gender on Post-Adoption Information Technology Use studied trying to innovate with information technology, the effort a user puts into discovering novel uses, and how the work setting shapes that effort. This treatment fixes the label to exploration and novelty in use, which is narrower than the general goal-grounded theory of effective use, and different again from the deep and surface feature split and from the count of how many features a user exercises.[4]

Unit

A user's effort to find and apply novel uses of a system

Recovery means

Not applicable

Measured by

Assessed by self-reported trying to innovate and observed application of features to tasks beyond their original use