CRDSS_Task1_19-1_CRDSSUserSurvey

Home Browse Search

Responses to the local and remote connection question indicated that internal users would get their information from the people who will be using the CRDSS. That is, several State staff, especially the administrators, seem to indicate that they would be perfectly happy to have others use the system to give them needed information to do their jobs. Internal users appeared to prefer a hierarchical information management structure. External users, on the other hand, wanted a more multi-directional and networking model. They wanted direct access to CRDSS to help them obtain data useful for water system planning and operations. Mosaic External users saw potential benefits of remote access to the CRDSS using the interface. This would provide for standardized queries and reports which could be downloaded to the user?s PC. External users expressed uncertainty about technical and administrative arrangements too make remote connections, and the associated costs. There was strong interest in this fixed-query option by internal users as well who would like to access the CRDSS using the local area network. Lack of responses to and actual comments stating the fact, indicate that most respondents do not have highly developed QA/QC procedures. Data quality problems seem to be accepted as a fact of life, and it is not considered cost-effective to totally correct all data until it is shown that such accuracy is justified by the uses of the data. While this is recognized as ultimately the responsibility of the user, it was of great interest to many that the databases be acknowledged as the ?official? databases, that some oversight quality control process and security be established, and that corrections made to the data could be offered back to the CRDSS as a contribution. Data currency was of strong interest. A variety of questions were asked about how the database was to be updated and maintained. Impact of Using the CRDSS The responses on the impact of using CRDSS is interesting, in that responses indicate some hesitancy in projecting that the system will save operations people time in their work. Ideally, this is what CRDSS is supposed to do. Administrators seem to think they will get better, more timely and more accurate information, and therefore make their decisions easier and more correct. As mentioned, operations people shared this perception, but also indicated it may complicate their jobs. This again leads us to the conclusion that operations people may not use the system as much as one may expect. Similarly, administrative people will easily go back to their old ways of making water decisions if 1) they find CRDSS too difficult to learn and/or 2) their information gatherers do not consider it worthwhile to learn it. Yet, external respondents indicated that the increase of information provided by CRDSS will also increase their work load and therefore their work will require more time and effort. The prospect of having increased amounts and higher quality data and model results was intriguing to most of the respondents, whether internal or external. However, there was some level of skepticism given that having such information would likely require restructuring of their work patterns. How such restructuring would occur was not clear, and that issue remains to be addressed as part of training and integration of the CRDSS into the workplace. Decision Support System Capabilities DSS capabilities of the participating agencies are basic and not extensive; except for Denver Water which has considerable database and modeling capabilities. The NCWCD is also seeking to expand their DSS capabilities. Access to the CRDSS using PCs and telecommunications was therefore of strong interest as a leap could be made from modest or no n-existent DSS capabilities to the high-end CRDSS capabilities. This applies universally for the external agencies and consultants, and also for state staff 11 A 275 01.09.95 1.19-1 Johnson, Grigg, Tang