Abstract
Research on CASE tools includes conflicting accounts. Many report high productivity gains and improved quality of systems developed. Others report high costs and few gains, organizations abandoning the use of CASE, or seldom using the CASE tools. Organizational differences may, in part, be attributed to the underlying support philosophy of the CASE tool. We explore the tool philosophy in terms of restrictiveness or flexibility. Systems developers in four organizations were surveyed for perceptions of their CASE tool and of their jobs. We found that systems developers, who perceive their tool as restrictive, enjoy CASE less and think it less useful than those who perceive their tool as flexible. The people who perceived their tool as being restrictive also perceived their job as being lower quality by offering lower autonomy and lower skill variety.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
