@inproceedings{KnackstedtEggertHeddieretal.2013, author = {Knackstedt, Ralf and Eggert, Mathias and Heddier, Marcel and Chasin, Friedrich and Becker, J{\"o}rg}, title = {The Relationship of IS and Law - Insights into the German Online Car Registration Case}, series = {ECIS 2013 Completed Research. 18. Proceedings of the 21st European Conference on Information Systems}, booktitle = {ECIS 2013 Completed Research. 18. Proceedings of the 21st European Conference on Information Systems}, pages = {13 S.}, year = {2013}, language = {en} } @inproceedings{KnackstedtEggertFleischer2012, author = {Knackstedt, Ralf and Eggert, Mathias and Fleischer, Stefan}, title = {The Legal Perspective on Business to Government Reporting - A Conceptual Modeling Approach and Its Application in the Financial Sector}, series = {45th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences 2012}, booktitle = {45th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences 2012}, isbn = {978-0-7695-4525-7}, doi = {10.1109/HICSS.2012.576}, pages = {2309 -- 2318}, year = {2012}, language = {en} } @article{KlettkeHomburgGell2015, author = {Klettke, Tanja and Homburg, Carsten and Gell, Sebastian}, title = {How to measure analyst forecast effort}, series = {European Accounting Review}, volume = {24}, journal = {European Accounting Review}, number = {1}, publisher = {Taylor \& Francis}, address = {London}, issn = {0963-8180}, doi = {10.1080/09638180.2014.909291}, pages = {129 -- 146}, year = {2015}, abstract = {We introduce a new way to measure the forecast effort that analysts devote to their earnings forecasts by measuring the analyst's general effort for all covered firms. While the commonly applied effort measure is based on analyst behaviour for one firm, our measure considers analyst behaviour for all covered firms. Our general effort measure captures additional information about analyst effort and thus can identify accurate forecasts. We emphasise the importance of investigating analyst behaviour in a larger context and argue that analysts who generally devote substantial forecast effort are also likely to devote substantial effort to a specific firm, even if this effort might not be captured by a firm-specific measure. Empirical results reveal that analysts who devote higher general forecast effort issue more accurate forecasts. Additional investigations show that analysts' career prospects improve with higher general forecast effort. Our measure improves on existing methods as it has higher explanatory power regarding differences in forecast accuracy than the commonly applied effort measure. Additionally, it can address research questions that cannot be examined with a firm-specific measure. It provides a simple but comprehensive way to identify accurate analysts.}, language = {en} } @inproceedings{KleinLindemann1997, author = {Klein, Stefan and Lindemann, Markus}, title = {New architectures for web-enabled EDI-applications and their impact on VANS}, series = {Global business in practice : proceedings of the Tenth International Bled Electronic Commerce Conference BLED '97, Bled, Slovenia, June 9-11 1997}, booktitle = {Global business in practice : proceedings of the Tenth International Bled Electronic Commerce Conference BLED '97, Bled, Slovenia, June 9-11 1997}, editor = {Vogel, Douglas R.}, publisher = {Moderna organizacija}, address = {Kranj}, pages = {556 -- 573}, year = {1997}, language = {en} } @article{KemptFreyerNagel2022, author = {Kempt, Hendrik and Freyer, Nils and Nagel, Saskia K.}, title = {Justice and the normative standards of explainability in healthcare}, series = {Philosophy \& Technology}, volume = {35}, journal = {Philosophy \& Technology}, number = {Article number: 100}, publisher = {Springer Nature}, address = {Berlin}, doi = {10.1007/s13347-022-00598-0}, pages = {1 -- 19}, year = {2022}, abstract = {Providing healthcare services frequently involves cognitively demanding tasks, including diagnoses and analyses as well as complex decisions about treatments and therapy. From a global perspective, ethically significant inequalities exist between regions where the expert knowledge required for these tasks is scarce or abundant. One possible strategy to diminish such inequalities and increase healthcare opportunities in expert-scarce settings is to provide healthcare solutions involving digital technologies that do not necessarily require the presence of a human expert, e.g., in the form of artificial intelligent decision-support systems (AI-DSS). Such algorithmic decision-making, however, is mostly developed in resource- and expert-abundant settings to support healthcare experts in their work. As a practical consequence, the normative standards and requirements for such algorithmic decision-making in healthcare require the technology to be at least as explainable as the decisions made by the experts themselves. The goal of providing healthcare in settings where resources and expertise are scarce might come with a normative pull to lower the normative standards of using digital technologies in order to provide at least some healthcare in the first place. We scrutinize this tendency to lower standards in particular settings from a normative perspective, distinguish between different types of absolute and relative, local and global standards of explainability, and conclude by defending an ambitious and practicable standard of local relative explainability.}, language = {en} } @inproceedings{JarkeGebhardtJacobsetal.1996, author = {Jarke, Matthias and Gebhardt, Michael and Jacobs, Stephan and Nissen, Hans W.}, title = {Conflict analysis across heterogeneous viewpoints: formalization and visualization}, series = {Proceedings of the 29th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences}, booktitle = {Proceedings of the 29th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences}, isbn = {0-8186-7324-9}, doi = {10.1109/HICSS.1996.493191}, pages = {199 -- 208}, year = {1996}, language = {en} } @book{JanzPeters2002, author = {Janz, Norbert and Peters, Bettina}, title = {Innovation and Innovation Success in the German Manufacturing Sector. Econometric Evidence at Firm Level / Janz, N. and Peters, B.}, pages = {mimeo}, year = {2002}, language = {en} } @article{JanzLoeoefPeters2004, author = {Janz, Norbert and L{\"o}{\"o}f, Hans and Peters, Bettina}, title = {Firm Level Innovation and Productivity, Is there a Common Story Across Countries?}, series = {Problems and Perspectives in Management (2004)}, journal = {Problems and Perspectives in Management (2004)}, isbn = {ISSN 1727-7051}, pages = {184 -- 204}, year = {2004}, language = {en} } @book{JanzLoeoefPeters2003, author = {Janz, Norbert and L{\"o}{\"o}f, Hans and Peters, Bettina}, title = {Firm Level Innovation and Productivity, Is there a Common Story Across Countries?}, publisher = {Zentrum f{\"u}r Europ{\"a}ische Wirtschaftsforschung ZEW}, address = {Mannheim}, isbn = {ISSN 1727-7051}, pages = {34}, year = {2003}, language = {en} } @book{JanzLichtEblingetal.1999, author = {Janz, Norbert and Licht, Georg and Ebling, G{\"u}nther and Niggemann, Hiltrud}, title = {Innovation in the Service Sector. Selected Facts and Some Policy Conclusions / Licht, G., G. Ebling, N. Janz, H. Niggemann}, publisher = {European Commission}, address = {Luxembourg}, year = {1999}, language = {en} }