Standard method use in contemporary IS development: an empirical investigation
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/13287260710817665 |
| Date | 22 August 2007 |
| Published date | 22 August 2007 |
| Pages | 6-29 |
| Author | Laurie McLeod,Stephen MacDonell,Bill Doolin |
| Subject Matter | Information & knowledge management |
Standard method use in
contemporary IS development:
an empirical investigation
Laurie McLeod and Stephen MacDonell
School of Computing and Mathematical Sciences,
Auckland University of Technology, Auckland, New Zealand and
Bill Doolin
Faculty of Business, Auckland University of Technology, Auckland, New Zealand
Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this research is to obtain an updated assessment of the use of standard
methods in IS development practice in New Zealand, and to compare these practices to those reported
elsewhere.
Design/methodology/approach – A web-based survey of IS development practices in New
Zealand organisations with 200 or more full-time employees was conducted. The results of the survey
were compared to prior studies from other national contexts.
Findings – The results suggest that levels of standard method use continue to be high in New
Zealand organisations, although methods are often used in a pragmatic or ad hoc way. Further, the
type of method used maps to a shift from bespoke development to system acquisition or outsourcing.
Organisations that reported using standard methods perceived them to be beneficial to IS development
in their recent IS projects, and generally disagreed with most of the published limitations of standard
methods.
Research limitations/impli cations – As the intent was to consider only New Z ealand
organisations, the results of the survey cannot be generalised further afield. More comparative
research is needed to establish whether the trends identified here occur at a wider regional or
international level.
Practical implications – A significant proportion of organisations anticipated extending their use
of standard methods. Growth in packaged software acquisition and outsourced development suggests
an increasing need for deployment management as well as development management, possibly
reflecting the increased visibility of standard project management methods.
Originality/value – The relevance of traditional standard methods of IS development has been
questioned in a changing and more dynamic IS development environment. This study provides an
updated assessment of standard method use in New Zealand organisations that will be of interest to
researchers and practitioners monitoring IS development and acquisition elsewhere.
Keywords Information systems,New Zealand
Paper type Research paper
Introduction
A standard method of information systems (IS) development is a formal or documented
set of procedures for directing or guiding IS development, whether commercially or
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/1328-7265.htm
The authors would like to thank all respondents to the survey reported in this paper. This
research was funded through a Top Achiever Doctoral Scholarship by the Tertiary Education
Commission of New Zealand.
JSIT
9,1
6
Journal of Systems and Information
Technology
Vol. 9 No. 1, 2007
pp. 6-29
qEmerald Group Publishing Limited
1328-7265
DOI 10.1108/13287260710817665
publicly available, or developed internally by an organisation. The focus of a standard
method in IS is not just on software development, but on the analysis, design and
implementation of the whole system (Wynekoop and Russo, 1995). This use of
“method” to refer to the codified systematic conduct of IS development is primarily
European. North American usage tends to refer to a method as a “methodology” (Iivari
et al., 2000; Robey et al., 2001). Each standard method embodies a set of guiding
principles and is based upon a particular philosophy, paradigm or approach to IS
development. Usually, each method is supported by a set of preferred development
techniques and tools (Fitzgerald et al., 2002; Iivari et al., 2000; Iivari and Maansaari,
1998; Robey et al., 2001; Wynekoop and Russo, 1995, 1997).
According to much of the IS literature, use of an appropriate standard method of IS
development can improve both the development process and its outcomes, particularly
in large or complex IS projects (Butler and Fitzgerald, 1999; Chatzoglou, 1997;
Fitzgerald, 1998c; Kim and Peterson, 2003; Wixom and Watson, 2001). A standard
method is considered to facilitate the development process by supplying an element of
control (perceived or actual) over aspects such as the sequence of development
activities, project management, cost allocation, project team composition and user
participation (Lyytinen and Hirschheim, 1987). Conversely, lack of or inappropriate use
of a standard method is often considered to increase the risk of IS project failure
(Ewusi-Mensah, 1997; Lyytinen and Hirschheim, 1987; Pan et al., 2004; Roberts et al.,
1999; Schmidt et al., 2001; Wynekoop and Russo, 1995).
A number of empirical studies, however, have failed to find a significant association
between the use of standard methods and IS project success (Amoako-Gyampah and
White, 1993; Barry and Lang, 2003; Fitzgerald, 1998a; Jiang and Klein, 1999 , 2000;
Martin and Chan, 1996). Certainly, relative to other factors influencing IS development,
use of a standard method has not usually been regarded as a primary mechanism for
improving IS project outcomes, and may not be enough in itself to ensure success of an
IS project (Barry and Lang, 2003; Mathiassen and Purao, 2002; Warne and Hart, 1996).
Kiely and Fitzgerald (2003) suggest, for instance, that standard methods can be of help
if used properly by experienced developers, but are still unlikely to solve all IS
development problems.
Since the late 1990s, various researchers and practitioners have, therefore,
questioned the relevance of traditional standard methods and their underlying
concepts, particularly in light of the more dynamic IS development environment
characterised by short-term business needs, rapid application development, Internet
and multimedia applications, and different IS acquisition options (Avison and
Fitzgerald, 2003; Fitzgerald, 1996, 1998b, 2000; Fitzgerald et al., 2002; Fitzgerald et al.,
1999; Iivari et al., 2000; Kautz et al., 2004; Kiely and Fitzgerald, 2003; Nandhakumar
and Avison, 1999; Sawyer, 2001; Wynekoop and Russo, 1997). It seems that some
organisations are now trying new methods, or even rejecting the use of methods
altogether. Other organisations are employing alternatives to traditional in-hous e IS
development, such as incremental development or continuous redevelopment of IS,
contingent use of individual tools and techniques, packaged software acquisition or
outsourced IS development (Avison and Fitzgerald, 1999, 2003; Avison et al., 1992;
Madsen and Kautz, 2002; Truex et al., 1999).
Given the changing IS development environment, empirical knowledge of the
current forms of IS development practice, such as standard method use, is needed
Standard
method use
7
To continue reading
Request your trial