Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A method for taxonomy development and its application in information systems

  • Research Article
  • Published:
European Journal of Information Systems

Abstract

A fundamental problem in many disciplines is the classification of objects in a domain of interest into a taxonomy. Developing a taxonomy, however, is a complex process that has not been adequately addressed in the information systems (IS) literature. The purpose of this paper is to present a method for taxonomy development that can be used in IS. First, this paper demonstrates through a comprehensive literature survey that taxonomy development in IS has largely been ad hoc. Then the paper defines the problem of taxonomy development. Next, the paper presents a method for taxonomy development that is based on taxonomy development literature in other disciplines and shows that the method has certain desirable qualities. Finally, the paper demonstrates the efficacy of the method by developing a taxonomy in a domain in IS.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Figure 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Abdelaal A and Ali H (2007) A typology for community wireless networks business models. In Proceedings of the 13th Americas Conference on Information Systems (Hoxmeier JA and Hayne S, Eds), AIS, Keystone, CO.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aldenderfer MS and Blashfield RK (1984) Cluster Analysis. Sage Publications, Beverly Hills, CA.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Anderberg MR (1973) Cluster Analysis for Applications. Academic Press, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bailey KD (1984) A three-level measurement model. Quality and Quantity 18 (3), 225–245.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bailey KD (1994) Typologies and Taxonomies – An Introduction to Classification Techniques. Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Bapna R, Goes P, Gupta A and Yiwei J (2004) User heterogeneity and its impact on electronic auction market design: an empirical exploration. MIS Quarterly 28 (1), 21–43.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bowker GC and Star SL (1999) Sorting Things Out: Classification and Its Consequences. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dobson S (2004) A taxonomy for thinking about location in pervasive computing. Technical Report TCD-CS-2004–05. Department of Computer Science, Trinity College, Dublin.

  • Dogac A, Laleci G, Kabak Y and Cingil I (2002) Exploiting web service semantics: taxonomies vs ontologies. Bulletin of the IEEE Computer Society Technical Committee on Data Engineering.

  • Dombroviak KM and Ramnath R (2007) A taxonomy of mobile and pervasive applications. In Proceedings of the 2007 ACM Symposium on Applied Computing (Cho Y, Wainwright RL, Haddad H, Shin SY and Koo YW, Eds), pp 1609–1615, ACM, Seoul.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Doty DH and Glick WH (1994) Typologies as a unique form of theory building: toward improved understanding and modeling. Academy of Management Review 19 (2), 230–251.

    Google Scholar 

  • Doty DH, Glick WH and Huber GP (1993) Fit, equifinality, and organizational effectiveness: a test of two configurational theories. Academy of Management Journal 36 (6), 1195–1250.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eldredge N and Cracraft J (1980) Phylogenetic Patterns and the Evolutionary Process. Columbia University Press, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fiedler KD, Grover V and Teng JTC (1996) An empirically derived taxonomy of information technology structure and its relationship to organizational structure. Journal of Management Information Systems 13 (1), 9–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Geiger D, Schulze T, Seedorf S, Nickerson RC and Schader M (2011) Managing the crowd: towards a taxonomy of crowdsourcing processes. In Proceedings of the 17th Americas Conference on Information Systems (Sambamurthy V and Tanniru M, Eds), AIS, Detroit, MI.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glass RL and Vessey I (1995) Contemporary application-domain taxonomies. IEEE Software 12 (4), 63–76.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goguen JA and Linde C (1993) Techniques of requirements elicitation. In Proceedings of the International Symposium on Requirements Engineering (Fickas S and Finkelstein A, Eds), pp 152–164, IEEE Computer Society, San Diego, CA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gregor S (2006) The nature of theory in information systems. MIS Quarterly 30 (3), 611–642.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grove A (2003) Taxonomy. Encyclopedia of Library and Information Science pp 2770–2777, Marcel Dekker, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gruber TR (1993) A translation approach to portable ontology specifications. Knowledge Acquisition 5 (2), 199–220.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gruninger M, Bodenreider O, Olken F, Obrst L and Yim P (2008) Ontology summit 2007 – ontology, taxonomy, folksonomy: understanding the distinctions. Applied Ontology 3 (3), 191–200.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guarino N (1998) Formal ontology and information systems. In Proceedings of FOIS ‘98 (Guarino N, Ed), pp 3–15, IOS Press, Trento.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heinonen K and Pura M (2006) Developing a conceptual framework for mobile services. In Proceedings of the Helsinki Mobility Roundtable (Jarvenpaa S, Saarinen T and Kristiina V, Eds), Helsinki School of Economics, Helsinki.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hevner AR and Chatterjee S (2010) Design Science Research in Information Systems. Springer, New York.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Hevner AR, March ST, Park J and Ram S (2004) Design science in information systems research. MIS Quarterly 28 (1), 75–105.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hirschheim RA, Klein HK and Lyytinen K (1995) Information Systems Development and Data Modeling: Conceptual and Philosophical Foundations. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Iivari J (2007) A paradigmatic analysis of information systems as a design science. Scandinavian Journal of Information Systems 19 (2), 39–64.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kemper H and Wolf E (2002) Iterative process models for mobile application systems: a framework. In Proceedings of the 23rd International Conference on Information Systems (Miralles F and Valor J, Eds), pp 401–413, AIS, Barcelona.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krug S, Campidelli H and Nickerson RC (2012) A preliminary taxonomy for software failure impact: categorizing the impact on enterprises when software fails. In Proceedings of the 18th Americas Conference on Information Systems (Jessup L and Valacich J, Eds), Seattle, Washington.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leem CS, Suh HS and Kim DS (2004) A classification of mobile business models and its applications. Industrial Management & Data Systems 104 (1), 78–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lehmann H and Lehner F (2002) Making sense of mobile applications – a critical note to recent approaches to their taxonomy and classification. In Proceedings of the 15th Bled eCommerce Conference (Gricar J, Ed), pp 493–507, AIS, Bled.

    Google Scholar 

  • March ST and Smith GF (1995) Design and natural science research on information technology. Decision Support Systems 15 (4), 251–266.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McKinney JC (1966) Constructive Typology and Social Theory. Appleton-Centur-Crofts, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • McKnight DH and Chervany NL (2001) What trust means in e-commerce customer relationships: an interdisciplinary conceptual typology. International Journal of Electronic Commerce 6 (2), 35–59.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller GA (1956) The magic number seven, plus or minus two: some limits on our capacity for processing information. Psychological Review 101 (2), 343–352.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller JG and Roth AV (1994) A taxonomy of manufacturing strategies. Management Science 40 (3), 285–304.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ngai EWT and Gunasekaran A (2007) A review for mobile commerce research and applications. Decision Support Systems 43 (1), 3–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nickerson R (1997) A taxonomy of collaborative applications. In Proceedings of the 3rd Americas Conference on Information Systems (Gupta JND, Ed), pp 560–562, AIS, Indianapolis, IN.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nickerson R, Muntermann J and Varshney U (2010) Taxonomy development in information systems: a literature survey and problem statement. In Proceedings of the 16th Americas Conference on Information Systems (Santana M, Luftman JN and Vinze AS, Eds), AIS, Lima.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nickerson R, Varshney U, Muntermann J and Isaac H (2007) Towards a taxonomy of mobile applications. In Proceedings of the 13th Americas Conference on Information Systems (Hoxmeier JA and Hayne S, Eds), AIS, Keystone, Co.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nickerson R, Varshney U, Muntermann J and Isaac H (2009) Taxonomy development in information systems: developing a taxonomy of mobile applications. In Proceedings of the European Conference on Information Systems (Newell A, Whitley EA, Pouloudi N, Wareham J and Mathiassen L, Eds), AIS, Verona.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nysveen H, Pedersen PE and Thorbjørnsen H (2005) Intentions to use mobile services: antecedents and cross-service comparisons. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 33 (3), 330–346.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parsons J and Wand Y (2008) Using cognitive principles to guide classification in information systems modeling. MIS Quarterly 32 (4), 839–868.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pinto HS and Martins JP (2004) Ontologies: how can they be built? Knowledge and Information Systems 6 (4), 441–464.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sabherwal R and King WR (1995) An empirical taxonomy of the decision-making processes concerning strategic applications of information systems. Journal of Management Information Systems 11 (4), 177–214.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schwarz A, Mehta M, Johnson N and Chin WW (2007) Understanding frameworks and reviews: a commentary to assist us in moving our field forward by analyzing our past. The Database for Advances in Information Systems 38 (3), 29–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simon HA (1969) The Sciences of the Artificial. The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sokal RR and Sneath PHA (1963) Principles of Numerical Taxonomy. W.H. Freeman and Company, San Francisco, CA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sowa JF and Zachman JA (1992) Extending and formalizing the framework for information systems architecture. IBM Systems Journal 31 (3), 590–616.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Varshney U and Vetter R (2002) Mobile commerce: framework, applications and networking support. Mobile Networks and Applications 7 (3), 185–198.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wand Y, Monarchi DE, Parsons J and Woo CC (1995) Theoretical foundations for conceptual modeling in information systems development. Decision Support Systems 15 (4), 285–304.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wand Y and Weber R (2004) Reflection: ontology in information systems. Journal of Database Management 15 (2), iii–vi.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weber M (1949) The Methodology of the Social Sciences. Translated by Shils EA and finch HA. Free Press, Glencoe, IL.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams K, Chatterjee S and Rossi M (2008) Design of emerging digital services: a taxonomy. European Journal of Information Systems 17 (5), 505–517.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Information Systems, College of Business, San Francisco State University, San Francisco, California, USA

    Robert C Nickerson

  2. Department of Computer Information Systems, Robinson College of Business, Georgia State University, Atlanta, Georgia

    Upkar Varshney

  3. Department of Information Systems and Department of Finance, Accounting and Taxes, University of Göttingen, Göttingen, Germany

    Jan Muntermann

Authors
  1. Robert C Nickerson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Upkar Varshney
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Jan Muntermann
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Robert C Nickerson.

Appendix

Appendix

Papers surveyed

  1. 1

    ABDELAAL A and ALI H (2007) A typology for community wireless networks business models. In Proceedings of the 13th Americas Conference on Information Systems (HOXMEIER JA and HAYNE S, Eds), AIS, Keystone, Co.

  2. 2

    ALTER S (1977) A taxonomy of decision support systems. Sloan Management Review 19(1), 39–56.

  3. 3

    ANDERSON GA and JENSEN ED (1975) Computer interconnection structures: taxonomy, characteristics, and examples. ACM Computing Surveys 7(4), 197–213.

  4. 4

    ARRANGA EC (2000) Cobol tools: Overview and taxonomy. IEEE Software 17(2), 59–61.

  5. 5

    BALL N, ADAMS C and XIA W (2004) IS/IT architecture: an integrated view and typology. In Proceedings of the 10th Americas Conference on Information Systems (BULLEN C and STOHR E, Eds), pp 3753–3754, AIS, New York.

  6. 6

    BERANEK D and HORAN T (2006) Toward an empirical user taxonomy for personal health records systems. In Proceedings of the 12th Americas Conference on Information Systems (RODRGUEZ-ABITIA, G and IGNACIO AB, Eds), pp 2806–2810, AIS, Acapulco.

  7. 7

    BITTON D, DEWITT DJ, HSAIO DK and MENON J (1984) A taxonomy of parallel sorting. ACM Computing Surveys 16(3), 287–318.

  8. 8

    BLUM BI (1994) A taxonomy of software development methods. Communications of the ACM 37(11), 82–94.

  9. 9

    CARMEL E and EISENBERG J (2006) Narratives that software nations tell themselves: an exploration and taxonomy. Communications of the Association for Information Systems 17(1), 851–872.

  10. 10

    CARR P and LU Y (2007) Information technology and knowledge worker productivity: a taxonomy of technology crowding. In Proceedings of the 13th Americas Conference on Information Systems (HOXMEIER JA and HAYNE S, Eds), AIS, Keystone, Co.

  11. 11

    CASAVANT TL (1988) A taxonomy of scheduling in general-purpose distributed computing systems. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 14(2), 141–154.

  12. 12

    CHANDRASEKARAN B (1983) Towards a taxonomy of problem solving types. AI Magazine 4(1), 9–17.

  13. 13

    CHIKOFSKY EJ and CROSS II JH (1990) Reverse engineering and design recovery: a taxonomy. IEEE Software 7(1), 13–17.

  14. 14

    CHUANG S-L and CHIEN L-F (2003) Enriching Web taxonomies through subject categorization of query terms from search engine logs. Decision Support Systems 35(1), 113–127.

  15. 15

    CHUANG S and CHIEN L (2005) Taxonomy generation for text segments: a practical web-based approach. ACM Transactions on Information Systems 23(4), 363–396.

  16. 16

    COTTERMAN WW and KUMAR K (1989) User cube: a taxonomy of end users. Communications of the ACM 32(11), 1313–1320.

  17. 17

    CRAINIC TG, TOULOUSE M and GENDREAU M (1997) Towards a taxonomy of parallel tabu search heuristics. INFORMS Journal of Computing 9(1), 61–72.

  18. 18

    DELGADO N, GATES AQ and ROACH S (2004) A taxonomy and catalog of runtime software-fault monitoring tools. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 30(12), 859–872.

  19. 19

    DENNING DE and BRANSTAD D (1996) A taxonomy for key escrow encryption systems. Communications of the ACM 39(3), 34–40.

  20. 20

    DUCASSE S and POLLET D (2009) Software architecture reconstruction: a process-oriented taxonomy. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 35(4), 573–591.

  21. 21

    DURCIKOVA A and EVERARD A (2002) An employee typology: a knowledge management perspective. In Proceedings of the 8th Americas Conference on Information Systems (BANKER RD, CHANG H and KAO Y-C, Eds), pp 2042–2048, AIS, Dallas, Texas.

  22. 22

    EARL M (2001) Knowledge management strategies: toward a taxonomy. Journal of Management Information Systems 18(1), 215–233.

  23. 23

    FARBEY B, LAND F and TARGETT D (1995) A taxonomy of information systems applications: the benefits evaluation ladder. European Journal of Information Systems 4(1), 41–50.

  24. 24

    FIEDLER KD, GROVER V and TENG JTC (1996) An empirically derived taxonomy of information technology structure and its relationship to organizational structure. Journal of Management Information Systems 13(1), 9–34.

  25. 25

    FILLEY A and ALDAG R (1978) Characteristics and measurement of an organizational typology. Academy of Management Journal 21(4), 578–591.

  26. 26

    GILLENSON ML, SHERRELL DL and CHEN L (2000) A taxonomy of web site traversal patterns and structures. Communications of the Association for Information Systems 3(1), Article 17.

  27. 27

    GREGG DG and SCOTT JE (2008) A typology of complaints about Ebay sellers. Communications of the ACM 51(4), 69–74.

  28. 28

    GUMM DC (2006) Distribution dimensions in software development projects: a taxonomy. IEEE Software 23(5), 45–51.

  29. 29

    HAMBRICK D (1983) An empirical typology of mature industrial-product environments. Academy of Management Journal 26(2), 213–230.

  30. 30

    HASAN H (2009) A taxonomy of modes of knowledge sharing between disparate group. In Proceedings of the 13th Pacific Asia Conference on Information Systems (BAPNA R and SAMBAMURTHY V, Eds), AIS, Hyderabad.

  31. 31

    IRANI Z and LOVE P (2001) The propagation of technology management taxonomies for evaluating investments in information systems. Journal of Management Information Systems 17(3), 161–177.

  32. 32

    KAFENTZIS K, APOSTOLOU D and MENTZAS G (2004) Interorganizational knowledge management systems: typology and cases. In Proceedings of the 13th European Conference on Information Systems (LEINO T, SAARINEN T and KLEIN S), AIS, Turku.

  33. 33

    KAYWORTH T, BROCATO L and WHITTEN D (2005) What is a chief privacy officer? An analysis based on Mintzberg's taxonomy of managerial roles. Communications of the Association for Information Systems 16(6), 110–126.

  34. 34

    KEARNS GS (2005) An electronic commerce strategic typology: insights from case studies. Information & Management 42(7), 1023–1036.

  35. 35

    LANDWEHR C, BULL A, MCDERMOTT J and CHOI W (1994) A taxonomy of computer program security flaws. ACM Computing Surveys 26(3), 211–254.

  36. 36

    LARSEN K (2003) A taxonomy of antecedents of information systems success: variable analysis studies. Journal of Management Information Systems 20(2), 169–246.

  37. 37

    LAUFER A (1968) A taxonomy of management theory: a preliminary framework. Academy of Management Journal 11(4), 435–442.

  38. 38

    LEROUGE C and GJESTLAND C (2002) A typology of data warehouse quality. In Proceedings of the 8th Americas Conference on Information Systems (BANKER RD, CHANG H and KAO Y-C, Eds), pp 34–37, AIS, Dallas, Texas.

  39. 39

    LIMONAD L and WAND Y (2009) A conceptual model and typology for Information Systems controls. In Proceedings of the 13th Americas Conference on Information Systems (NICKERSON RC and SHARDA R, Eds), pp 1–9, AIS, San Francisco, California.

  40. 40

    LÓPEZ TS, RANASINGHE DC, PATKAI B and MCFARLANE D (2009) Taxonomy, technology and applications of smart objects. Information Systems Frontiers 11(4), 1–20.

  41. 41

    LU Y and CAMPBELL S (2007) Managing the dark side of computer use at work: a typology of information technology abuse and management strategy. In Proceedings of the 13th Americas Conference on Information Systems (HOXMEIER JA and HAYNE S, Eds), AIS, Keystone, Co.

  42. 42

    MCKNIGHT D and CHERVANY N (2001) What trust means in E-commerce customer relationships: an interdisciplinary conceptual taxonomy. International Journal of Electronic Commerce 6(2), 35–59.

  43. 43

    MCKNIGHT D, CHOUDHURY V and KACMAR C (2002) Developing and validating trust measures in e-commerce: an integrative typology. Information Systems Research 13(3), 334–359.

  44. 44

    MERRITT S (1985) An inverted taxonomy of sorting algorithms. Communications of the ACM 28(1), 96–99.

  45. 45

    MESO P and MADEX G (2000) A complexity-based taxonomy of systems development methodologies. In Proceedings of the 6th Americas Conference on Information Systems (CHUNG M, Ed), AIS, Long Beach, CA.

  46. 46

    MILLER J and ROTH A (1994) A taxonomy of manufacturing strategies. Management Science 40(3), 285–304.

  47. 47

    MISTILIS N and DAMBRA J (2007) A taxonomy of virtual information tasks and e-capability of visitor information centres: an Australian case study. In Proceedings of the 13th Americas Conference on Information Systems (HOXMEIER JA and HAYNE S, Eds), AIS, Keystone, Co.

  48. 48

    MONARCHI D and PHUR G (1992) A research typology for object-oriented analysis and design. Communications of the ACM 35(9), 35–47.

  49. 49

    NARASIPURAM M (2006) Towards a taxonomy for globally distributed work. In Proceedings of the 12th Americas Conference on Information Systems (RODRGUEZ-ABITIA, G and IGNACIO AB, Eds), pp 867–871, AIS, Acapulco.

  50. 50

    NICKERSON R (1997) A taxonomy of collaborative applications. In Proceedings of the 3rd Americas Conference on Information Systems (GUPTA JND, Ed), pp 560–562, AIS, Indianapolis.

  51. 51

    NICKERSON R, VARSHNEY U, MUNTERMANN J and ISAAC H (2007) Towards a taxonomy of mobile applications. In Proceedings of the 13th Americas Conference on Information Systems (HOXMEIER JA and HAYNE S, Eds), AIS, Keystone, Co.

  52. 52

    OLIVIER M and VON SOLMS S (1994) A taxonomy of secure object-oriented databases. ACM Transactions on Database Systems 19(1), 3–46.

  53. 53

    PASWAN A, DSOUZA D and ZOLFAGHARIAN MA (2009) Toward a contextually anchored service innovation typology. Decision Sciences 40(3), 513–540.

  54. 54

    PEARSON J and SHIM J (1994) An empirical investigation into decision support systems capabilities: a proposed taxonomy. Information and Management 27(1), 45–57.

  55. 55

    PLAISANT C, CARR D, and SHNEIDERMAN B (1995) Image-browser taxonomy and guidelines for designers. IEEE Software 12(2), 21–32.

  56. 56

    PRUDEN HO (1973) The upward mobile, indifferent and ambivalent typology of managers. Academy of Management Journal 16(3), 454–464.

  57. 57

    PUGLISI SJ, SMYTH WF and TURPIN AH (2007) A taxonomy of suffix array construction algorithms. ACM Computing Surveys 39(2), Article 4.

  58. 58

    ROBINSON SL and BENNETT RJ (1995) A typology of deviant workplace behaviors: a multidimensional scaling study. Academy of Management Journal 38(2), 555–572.

  59. 59

    SABHERWAL R and KING WR (1995) An empirical taxonomy of the decision-making processes concerning strategic applications of information systems. Journal of Management Information Systems 11(4), 177–214.

  60. 60

    SABHERWAL R and ROBEY D (1993) An empirical taxonomy of implementation processes based on sequences of events in information systems development. Organization Science 4(4), 548–576.

  61. 61

    SELMAN AL (1994) A taxonomy of complexity classes of functions. Journal of Computer and System Sciences 48(2), 357–381.

  62. 62

    SESTER A, EDER B and SCHEICHEL C (2006) Blessing or curse? A taxonomy for virtual product communities. In Proceedings of the 12th Americas Conference on Information Systems (RODRGUEZ-ABITIA, G and IGNACIO AB, Eds), pp 4495–4503, AIS, Acapulco.

  63. 63

    SHENHAR AJ and BONEN Z (1997) The new taxonomy of systems: Toward an adaptive systems engineering framework. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics Part A: Systems and Humans 27(2), 137–145.

  64. 64

    SON J and KIM SS (2008) Internet users’ information privacy-protective responses: a taxonomy and a nomological model. MIS Quarterly 32(3), 503–529.

  65. 65

    SRINIVASAN V, DAVIDSON ES and TYSON GS (2004) A prefetch taxonomy. IEEE Transactions on Computers 53(2), 126–140.

  66. 66

    STEFANI RT (1999) A taxonomy of sports rating systems. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics Part A: Systems and Humans 29(1), 116–120.

  67. 67

    TANGPONG C, MICHALISIN MD and MELCHER AJ (2008b) Toward a typology of buyer-supplier relationships: A study of the computer industry. Decision Sciences 39(3), 571–593.

  68. 68

    VENUGOPAL S, BUYYA R and RAMAMOHANARAO K (2006) A taxonomy of data grids for distributed data sharing, management, and processing. ACM Computing Surveys 38(1), 1–53.

  69. 69

    VEREECKE A, VAN DIERDONCK R and DE MEYER A (2006) A typology of plants in global manufacturing networks. Management Science 52(11), 1737–1750.

  70. 70

    WANG H and WANG C (2003) Taxonomy of security considerations in software quality. Communications of the ACM 46(6), 75–78.

  71. 71

    WILLIAMS JJ and RAMAPRASAD A (1996) A taxonomy of critical success factors. European Journal of Information Systems 5(4), 250–260.

  72. 72

    WILLIAMS K, CHATTERJEE S and ROSSI M (2008) Design of emerging digital services: A taxonomy. European Journal of Information Systems 17(5), 505–517.

  73. 73

    YOSHIOKA T, HERMAN G, YATES J and ORLIKOWSKI W (2001) Genre taxonomy: A knowledge repository of communicative actions. ACM Transactions on Information Systems 19(4), 431–456.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Nickerson, R., Varshney, U. & Muntermann, J. A method for taxonomy development and its application in information systems. Eur J Inf Syst 22, 336–359 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1057/ejis.2012.26

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/ejis.2012.26

Keywords

Search

Navigation