More than providing ‘solutions’: towards an understanding of customer-oriented citizenship behaviors of IS professionals

Information systems (IS) support in organizations has undergone dramatic changes over the years. IS professionals in the support function have become an important knowledge source to colleagues who seek assistance with their IS usage. Our understanding of IS professionals’ customer-oriented behaviours is limited, however. Focusing on IS post-implementation support and drawing upon organizational citizenship behaviour (OCB) theory, this paper seeks to understand IS professionals’ citizenship behaviours in supporting colleagues. Our analysis of 630 support tasks performed by IS professionals with regard to two systems at three periods reveals five types of customer-oriented OCB: anticipation, education, justification, personalization-technology and personalization-business. Our results also show different associations between four contextual factors of IS support (i.e. system, user, task and problem) and the OCBs. In instances of user deficiency, more personalization-business and anticipation OCBs were observed across all the four problem domains (functionality, data, workflow and role). By contrast, in instances of system deficiency, more personalization-technology OCBs were observed among the two problem domains of data and functionality. Moreover, the occurrence of OCBs revealed a temporal pattern such that personalization-business OCBs are more pronounced in early post-implementation periods whereas anticipation OCBs and personalization-technology OCBs become more dominant later. The categorization scheme of the customer-oriented OCB, the OCB dynamics and the patterns between OCB types and the contextual factors advance our understanding of the evolving and challenging work of organizational IS support. Our findings extend the OCB literature on customer orientation and enrich the limited studies on knowledge-intensive IS support work. Practical implications of the findings on IS management and policies are discussed

MOESM1 of Hemodynamics of cerebral bridging veins connecting the superior sagittal sinus based on numerical simulation

Additional file 1. The detail data about the difference between the anterior and posterior segments of bridging vein models

Supraoinferior diameters of the intercavernous sinuses in cadaver and CE-MRV (mm).

<p>Supraoinferior diameters of the intercavernous sinuses in cadaver and CE-MRV (mm).</p

Illustration showing the operative space of sphenoid sinus in different types of intercavernous sinus.

<p>AIS: anterior intercavernous sinus; BS: basilar sinus; H: hypophysis; IIS: inferior intercavernous sinus; SH: stalk of hypophysis.</p

The rate of intercavernous sinuses in cadaver and CE-MRV.

<p>The rate of intercavernous sinuses in cadaver and CE-MRV.</p

Anteroposterior diameters of the intercavernous sinuses in cadaver and CE-MRV (mm).

<p>Anteroposterior diameters of the intercavernous sinuses in cadaver and CE-MRV (mm).</p

Boletín de Segovia: Número 157 - 1845 diciembre 27

Copia digital. Madrid : Ministerio de Cultura. Subdirección General de Coordinación Bibliotecaria, 200

Illustration showing transverse sections at different levels of the lumbar region.

<p>(a) At the upper level of the lumbar spine, three cleavage planes within the paraspinal muscles were found: ML, SQ and LI, which are the entries used in the Wiltse, Watkins and Weaver approaches, respectively. (b) At the lower level of the lumbar spine, only ML was found, and its superficial location lied more laterally to the midline than the location at the upper level. The Wiltse approach through ML may be the best choice for protecting muscle integrity and its neurovascular supply. <i>Arrow</i>: incision site; <i>M</i>: multifidus; <i>L</i>: longissimus; <i>I</i>: iliocostalis; <i>IS</i>: iliac spine; <i>QL</i>: quadratus lumborum; <i>PS</i>: psoas major.</p

CT and MRI Determination of Intermuscular Space within Lumbar Paraspinal Muscles at Different Intervertebral Disc Levels

<div><p>Background</p><p>Recognition of the intermuscular spaces within lumbar paraspinal muscles is critically important for using the paramedian muscle-splitting approach to the lumbar spine. As such, it is important to determine the intermuscular spaces within the lumbar paraspinal muscles by utilizing modern medical imaging such as computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI).</p><p>Methods</p><p>A total of 30 adult cadavers were studied by sectional anatomic dissection, and 60 patients were examined using CT (16 slices, 3-mm thickness, 3-mm intersection gap, <i>n</i> = 30) and MRI (3.0T, T2-WI, 5-mm thickness, 1-mm intersection gap, <i>n</i> = 30). The distances between the midline and the superficial points of the intermuscular spaces at different intervertebral disc levels were measured.</p><p>Results</p><p>Based on study of our cadavers, the mean distances from the midline to the intermuscular space between multifidus and longissimus, from intervertebral disc levels L1–L2 to L5–S1, were 0.9, 1.1, 1.7, 3.0, and 3.5 cm, respectively. Compared with the upper levels (L1–L3), the superficial location at the lower level (L4–S1) is more laterally to the midline (<i>P</i><0.05). The intermuscular space between sacrospinalis and quadratus lumborum, and that between longissimus and iliocostalis did not exist at L4–S1. The intermuscular spaces in patients also varied at different levels of the lumbar spine showing a low discontinuous density in CT and a high signal in MRI. There were no significant differences between the observations in cadavers and those made using CT and MRI.</p><p>Conclusion</p><p>The intermuscular spaces within the paraspinal muscles vary at different intervertebral disc levels. Preoperative CT and MRI can facilitate selection of the muscle-splitting approach to the lumbar spine. This paper demonstrates the efficacy of medical imaging techniques in surgical planning.</p></div

Transverse CT images at different disc level.

<p>(a) L1-L2 intervertebral disc level; (b) L2-L3 intervertebral disc level; (c) L3-L4 intervertebral disc level; (d) L4-L5 intervertebral disc level; (d) L5-S1 intervertebral disc level</p