Advertisement

Business & Information Systems Engineering

, Volume 61, Issue 1, pp 67–89 | Cite as

Engineering of Augmented Reality-Based Information Systems

Design and Implementation for Intralogistics Services
  • Lisa Berkemeier
  • Benedikt ZobelEmail author
  • Sebastian Werning
  • Ingmar Ickerott
  • Oliver Thomas
Research Paper
  • 52 Downloads

Abstract

The development of augmented reality glasses is still ongoing and faces barriers in diffusion and concerns about their impact on users, organizations and society. The study aims to find sufficient solutions for this struggling digital innovation and to provide guidance for the implementation of augmented reality glasses in design-oriented projects. During a 3-year consortium research, acceptance and privacy have been identified as major phenomena that influence the adoption of augmented reality glasses in the logistics domain. To forge ahead digital innovation research, the focus of the presented research lies on the diffusion of this technology with design knowledge for the development of augmented reality glasses-based systems. Evidence and artifacts contribute to the still limited knowledge of system design based on augmented reality glasses from a domain-specific instantiation and an implementation framework.

Keywords

Augmented reality Design framework Digital innovation Design science research Acceptance Privacy Intralogistics services Consortium research Mobile information systems engineering 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This research study is based on the Project GLASSHOUSE (Grant No. 02K14A090), funded by the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF) within the Program “Innovations for Tomorrow’s Production, Services and Work” and managed by the Project Management Agency Karlsruhe (PTKA).

Supplementary material

12599_2019_575_MOESM1_ESM.pdf (2.1 mb)
Supplementary material 1 (PDF 2115 kb)

References

  1. Azuma R (1997) A survey of augmented reality. Presence Teleoper Virtual Environ 6:355–385.  https://doi.org/10.1162/pres.1997.6.4.355 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Baskerville R, Pries-Heje J (2014) Design theory projectability. In: Working conference on information systems and organization. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 219–232Google Scholar
  3. Bélanger F, Crossler RE (2011) Privacy in the digital age: a review of information privacy research in information systems. MIS Q 35:1017–1041CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Berkemeier L, McGuire M-R, Steinmann S et al (2017a) Datenschutzrechtliche Anforderungen an Smart Glasses-basierende Informationssysteme in der Logistik. In: Eibl M, Gaedke M (eds) Informatik 2017. Lecture notes in informatics (LNI), Chemnitz, pp 1037–1048Google Scholar
  5. Berkemeier L, Werning S, Zobel B et al (2017b) Der Kunde als Dienstleister: Akzeptanz und Gebrauchstauglichkeit von Smart Glasses im Self-Service. HMD Prax Wirtschaftsinformatik 54:781–794CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Berkemeier L, Menzel L, Remark F, Thomas O (2018) Acceptance by design: towards an acceptable smart glasses-based information system based on the example of cycling training. In: Multikonferenz Wirtschaftsinformatik, LüneburgGoogle Scholar
  7. Bohn D (2018) Intel is giving up on its smart glasses. In: Theverge.com. https://www.theverge.com/2018/4/18/17255354/intel-vaunt-shut-down. Accessed 23 Jun 2018
  8. Brooke J (1996) SUS: a quick and dirty usability scale. In: Jordan PW, Thomas B, Weerdmeester BA, McClelland IL (eds) Usability evaluation in industry. Taylor & Francis, London, pp 189–194Google Scholar
  9. Däuble G, Özcan D, Niemöller C et al (2015) Design of user-oriented mobile service support systems – analyzing the eligibility of a use case catalog to guide system development: design of user-oriented mobile service support systems – analyzing the eligibility of a use case catalog to guide system. In: Proceedings 12. Internationale Tagung Wirtschaftsinformatik, Osnabrück, pp 149–163Google Scholar
  10. Davis FD, Bagozzi RP, Warshaw PR (1989) User acceptance of computer technology: a comparison of two theoretical models. Manag Sci 35:982–1003.  https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.35.8.982 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Elder S, Vakaloudis A (2015) Towards uniformity for smart glasses devices: an assessment of function as the driver for standardisation. In: 2015 IEEE international symposium on technology and society. IEEE, New York, pp 1–7Google Scholar
  12. Ernst C-PH, Stock B, dos Santos Ferreira TP (2016) The usage of augmented reality smartglasses: the role of perceived substitutability. In: Proceedings AMCIS. https://aisel.aisnet.org/amcis2016/ITProj/Presentations/4/. Accessed 30 Nov 2018
  13. Fettke P (2006) State-of-the-art des state-of-the-art. Wirtschaftsinformatik 48(4):257–266CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Fichman RG, Dos Santos BL, Zheng Z (2014) Digital innovation as a fundamental and powerful concept in the information systems curriculum. MIS Q 38:329–343.  https://doi.org/10.25300/MISQ/2014/38.2.01 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Fraunhofer SCS (2018) Umsatz der Logistikbranche in Deutschland von 1995 bis 2017. In: Handelsblatt. n.d. Statista. https://de.statista.com/statistik/daten/studie/166970/umfrage/umsatz-der-logistikbranche-in-deutschland/. Accessed 23 Jun 2018
  16. Google Inc. (2015a) We’re graduating from Google[x] labs. In: Google Plus Public Status. https://plus.google.com/+GoogleGlass/posts/9uiwXY42tvc. Accessed 23 Jun 2018
  17. Google Inc. (2015b) Design for glass. In: Google Dev. https://developers.google.com/glass/design/. Accessed 27 Jun 2018
  18. Gregor S, Hevner AR (2013) Positioning and presenting design science: types of knowledge in design science research. MIS Q 37:337–355CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Hein EDW, Rauschnabel AP (2016) Augmented reality smart glasses and knowledge management: a conceptual framework for enterprise social networks. In: Rossmann A, Stei G, Besch M (eds) Enterprise social networks: Erfolgsfaktoren für die Einführung und Nutzung – Grundlagen, Praxislösungen, Fallbeispiele. Springer, Wiesbaden, pp 83–109Google Scholar
  20. Herterich MM, Peters C, Uebernickel F et al (2015) Mobile work support for field service: a literature review and directions for future research. In: Internationale Tagung Wirtschaftsinformatik, pp 134–148. https://aisel.aisnet.org/wi2015/10/. Accessed 30 Nov 2018
  21. Hevner AR, March ST, Park J, Ram S (2004) Design science in information systems research. MIS Q 28:75–105.  https://doi.org/10.2307/25148625 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Hobert S, Schumann M (2017) Enabling the adoption of wearable computers in enterprises – results of analyzing influencing factors and challenges in the industrial sector. In: Proceedings of the 50th Hawaii international conference on system sciences, pp 4276–4285Google Scholar
  23. Hofmann B, Haustein D, Landeweerd L (2017) Smart-glasses: exposing and elucidating the ethical issues. Sci Eng Ethics 23:701–721.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-016-9792-z CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Ives B, Palese B, Rodriguez JA (2016) Enhancing customer service through the internet of things and digital data streams. MIS Q Exec 15:279–297Google Scholar
  25. Jacobson I, Spence I, Kerr B (2011) Use-case 2.0: the guide to succeeding with use cases. Ivar Jacobson International, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  26. Kalogerakis K, Lüthje C, Herstatt C (2010) Developing innovations based on analogies: experience from design and engineering consultants. J Prod Innov Manag 27:418–436CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Kim H-C (2015) Acceptability Engineering: the study of user acceptance of innovative technologies. J Appl Res Technol 13:230–237.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jart.2015.06.001 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Klinker K, Fries V, Wiesche M, Krcmar H (2017) CatCare: designing a serious game to foster hand hygiene compliance in health care facilities. In: Proceedings of the 12th international conference on design science research in information systems and technology, pp 20–28Google Scholar
  29. Koelle M, Kranz M, Andreas M (2015) Don’t look at me that way! – understanding user attitudes towards data glasses usage. In: MobileHCI’15, pp 362–372Google Scholar
  30. Koelle M, El Ali A, Cobus V et al (2017) All about acceptability? identifying factors for the adoption of data glasses. In: Proceeding of the 2017 CHI conference human factors computing systems, pp 295–300.  https://doi.org/10.1145/3025453.3025749
  31. Koops B-J, Leenes R (2014) Privacy regulation cannot be hardcoded. A critical comment on the ‘privacy by design’ provision in data-protection law. Int Rev Law Comput Technol 28:159–171.  https://doi.org/10.1080/13600869.2013.801589 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Langheinrich M (2001) Privacy by design – principles of privacy-aware ubiquitous systems. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 273–291Google Scholar
  33. Lars Nagel, Moritz Roidl GF (2004) The internet of things: on standardisation in the domain of intralogistics. In: First international conference on the internet of things, pp 76–81Google Scholar
  34. Ma D, Fan X, Gausemeier J, Grafe M (2011) Virtual reality and augmented reality in industry. Springer, HeidelbergCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Matijacic M, Fellmann M, Özcan D et al (2013) Elicitation and consolidation of requirements for mobile technical customer services support systems – a multi-method approach. In: Proceedings of the 34th international conference on information systems, pp 1–16Google Scholar
  36. Mehler-Bicher A, Steiger L (2011) Augmented reality: theorie und praxis. Oldenbourg, MünchenCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Meta Company (2017) Interface design. In: Meta Devcenter Des. UI Guidel. http://devcenter.metavision.com/design/user-interface-guidelines-interface-design. Accessed 22 Jun 2018
  38. Metzger D, Niemöller C, Thomas O (2016) Design and demonstration of an engineering method for service support systems. Inf Syst E Bus Manag 14:1–35.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10257-016-0331-x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Metzger D, Niemöller C, Wingert B et al (2017) How machines are serviced – design of a virtual reality-based training system for technical customer services. In: Leimeister JM, Brenner W (eds) Proceedings der 13. Internationalen Tagung Wirtschaftsinformatik. AISeL, St. Gallen, pp 604–618Google Scholar
  40. Metzger D, Niemöller C, Jannaber S et al (2018) The next generation: design and implementation of a smart glasses-based modelling system. Enterp Model Inf Syst Archit – Int J Concept Model (accepted for publication)Google Scholar
  41. Milgram P, Kishino F (1994) A taxonomy of mixed reality visual displays. In: IEICE TRANSACTIONS on information and systems. The institute of electronics, information and communication engineers, pp 1321–1329Google Scholar
  42. Misoch S (2015) Qualitative interviews. De Gruyter Oldenbourg, BerlinCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Myers M (2009) Qualitative research in business and management. Sage, LondonGoogle Scholar
  44. Myers MD, Newman M (2007) The qualitative interview in IS research: examining the craft. Inf Organ 17:2–26.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infoandorg.2006.11.001 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Niemöller C, Metzger D, Thomas O et al (2015) Smart Glasses zur Unterstützung von Logistikdienstleistungen – Bedarfsorientierte Informationsbereitstellung zur Prozesssteuerung. Product. 20/4 20:13–16Google Scholar
  46. Niemöller C, Metzger D, Fellmann M et al (2016) Shaping the future of mobile service support systems – ex-ante evaluation of smart glasses in technical customer service processes. In: Mayr HC, Pinzger M (eds) Informatik von Menschen für Menschen. LNI 259, Klagenfurt, pp 753–767Google Scholar
  47. Niemöller C, Metzger D, Thomas O (2017a) Design and evaluation of a smart glasses-based service support system. In: Leimeister JM, Brenner W (eds) Proceedings der 13. Internationalen Tagung Wirtschaftsinformatik. AISeL, St. Gallen, pp 106–120Google Scholar
  48. Niemöller C, Zobel B, Berkemeier L et al (2017b) Sind Smart Glasses die Zukunft der Digitalisierung von Arbeitsprozessen? Explorative Fallstudien zukünftiger Einsatzszenarien in der Logistik. In: Leimeister JM, Brenner W (eds) Proceedings der 13. Internationalen Tagung Wirtschaftsinformatik. St. Gallen, pp 410–424Google Scholar
  49. Nylén D, Holmström J (2015) Digital innovation strategy: a framework for diagnosing and improving digital product and service innovation. Bus Horiz 58:57–67CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Oates BJ (2006) Researching information systems and computing. Sage, Thousand OaksGoogle Scholar
  51. Österle H, Becker J, Frank U et al (2011) Memorandum on design-oriented information systems research. Eur J Inf Syst 20:7–10.  https://doi.org/10.1057/ejis.2010.55 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Paetsch F, Eberlein A, Maurer F (2003) Requirements engineering and agile software development. In: 12th IEEE international workshop on enabling technologies: infrastructure for collaborative enterprisesGoogle Scholar
  53. Porter ME, Heppelmann JE (2014) How smart, connected products are transforming competition. Harv Bus Rev 92:64–88Google Scholar
  54. Rai A, Burton-Jones A, Chen H et al (2017) Diversity of design science research. MIS Q 41:3–18Google Scholar
  55. Rauschnabel PA, Ro YK (2016) Augmented reality smart glasses: an investigation of technology acceptance drivers. Int J Technol Mark 11:1–26.  https://doi.org/10.1504/IJTMKT.2016.075690 Google Scholar
  56. Schumpeter JA (1934) The theory of economic development. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  57. Segura S, Thiesse F (2015) Extending UTAUT2 to explore pervasive information systems. In: Proceedings of the European conference on information systems. Paper 154Google Scholar
  58. Soinio J, Tanskanen K, Finne M (2012) How logistics-service providers can develop value-added services for SMEs: a dyadic perspective. Int J Logist Manag 23:31–49.  https://doi.org/10.1108/09574091211226911 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Sonnenberg C, vom Brocke J (2012) Evaluations in the science of the artificial – reconsidering the build-evaluate pattern in design science research. In: Peffers K, Rothenberger M, Kuechler B (eds) DESRIST 2012. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 381–397Google Scholar
  60. Sony Corporation (2017) Design guidelines. In: Sony Dev. World. https://developer.sony.com/develop/smarteyeglass-sed-e1/developer-tools/design-guidelines. Accessed 27 Jun 2018
  61. Statistisches Bundesamt (2017) Umsatz der Unternehmen in Deutschland nach Wirtschaftszweigen im Jahr 2016. StatistaGoogle Scholar
  62. Sutherland IE (1968) A head-mounted three dimensional display. In: AFIPS’68 (Fall, part I) Proceedings of the December 9–11, 1968, fall joint computer conference, part I. ACM, New York, pp 757–764Google Scholar
  63. Tanuma K, Sato T, Nomura M, Nakanishi M (2011) Comfortable design of task-related information displayed using optical see-through head-mounted display. In: Salvendy G, Smith MJ (eds) Human interface and the management of information. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 418–429Google Scholar
  64. Ubimax GmbH (2015) High speed sequencing with zero errors. In: Ubimax Cust. Stories. http://www.ubimax.com/cms/customer-projects-20180504-1-D9099j44.pdf. Accessed 23 Jun 2018
  65. Ubimax GmbH (2017) Fast and flexible picking at syncreon. In: Ubimax Cust. Stories. http://www.ubimax.com/cms/customer-projects-20170919-1-RGdeVUt4.pdf. Accessed 23 Jun 2018
  66. Uchiyama T, Tanuma K, Fukuda Y, Nakanishi M (2013) GUI design solution for a monocular, see-through head-mounted display based on users’ eye movement characteristics. In: Shumaker R (ed) Virtual, augmented and mixed reality: applications of virtual and augmented reality. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 231–240Google Scholar
  67. Vaishnavi VK, Kuechler W Jr (2007) Design science research methods and patterns: innovating information and communication technology. Auerbach, BostonCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Vaishnavi VK, Kuechler W (2015) Design science research methods and patterns: innovating information and communication technology. CRC Press, Boca RatonCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Venable J, Pries-Heje J, Baskerville R (2016) FEDS: a framework for evaluation in design science research. Eur J Inf Syst 25:77–89CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Venkatesh V, Morris MG, Davis GB, Davis FD (2003) User acceptance of information technology: towards a unified view. MIS Q 27:425–478.  https://doi.org/10.2307/30036540 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Volkswagen AG (2015) Volkswagen rolls out 3D smart glasses as standard equipment. In: Volkswagen AG News. https://www.volkswagenag.com/en/news/2015/11/3D_smart_glasses.html. Accessed 23 Jun 2018
  72. Webster J, Watson RT (2002) Analyzing the past to prepare for the future: writing a literature review. MIS Q 26:13–23.  https://doi.org/10.2307/4132319 Google Scholar
  73. Yoo Y, Henfridsson O, Lyytinen K (2010a) The new organizing logic of digital innovation: an agenda for information systems research. Inf Syst Res 21:724–735.  https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.1100.0322 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Yoo Y, Lyytinen KJ, Boland RJ, Berente N (2010b) The next wave of digital innovation: opportunities and challenges: a report on the research workshop “Digital Challenges in Innovation Research.” Available SSRN 1622170 1–37.  https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1622170
  75. Zhou T (2012) Examining location-based services usage from the perspectives of unified theory of acceptance and use of technology and privacy risk. J Electron Commer Res 13:135Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden GmbH, ein Teil von Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Lisa Berkemeier
    • 1
  • Benedikt Zobel
    • 1
    Email author
  • Sebastian Werning
    • 2
  • Ingmar Ickerott
    • 2
  • Oliver Thomas
    • 1
  1. 1.Information Management and Information SystemsOsnabrück UniversityOsnabrückGermany
  2. 2.Business Administration and Logistics ManagementOsnabrück University of Applied SciencesLingen (Ems)Germany

Personalised recommendations