scientificletitbe吉他谱

HALId:hal-01467803https://hal.
inria.
fr/hal-01467803Submittedon14Feb2017HALisamulti-disciplinaryopenaccessarchiveforthedepositanddisseminationofsci-entificresearchdocuments,whethertheyarepub-lishedornot.
ThedocumentsmaycomefromteachingandresearchinstitutionsinFranceorabroad,orfrompublicorprivateresearchcenters.
L'archiveouvertepluridisciplinaireHAL,estdestinéeaudéptetàladiffusiondedocumentsscientifiquesdeniveaurecherche,publiésounon,émanantdesétablissementsd'enseignementetderecherchefranaisouétrangers,deslaboratoirespublicsouprivés.
DistributedunderaCreativeCommonsAttribution|4.
0InternationalLicenseWhyNotLetITFailTheITProjectSuccessParadoxPaulAmbrose,DavidMunroTocitethisversion:PaulAmbrose,DavidMunro.
WhyNotLetITFailTheITProjectSuccessParadox.
International-WorkingConferenceonTransferandDiffusionofIT(TDIT),Jun2013,Bangalore,India.
pp.
579-582,10.
1007/978-3-642-38862-0_37.
hal-01467803adfa,p.
1,2011.
Springer-VerlagBerlinHeidelberg2011WhyNotLetITFailTheITProjectSuccessParadoxPaulJ.
Ambrose,DavidMunroUniversityofWisconsin-Whitewater,Whitewater,WI53190,USAambrosep@uww.
edu,munrod@uww.
eduAbstract.
IsafocusoninformationsystemsorinformationtechnologysuccessamyopicviewofevaluatingITsuccessandfailureAresuccessandfailuretheoppositeendsofacontinuumforevaluatingITprojectsConventionalmeasuresofsuccesssuchasmeetingcost,time,budgets,anduserneedsdonotaddresspositivesthatcanemergefromfailures.
WecontendthatafocusonsuccessandfailingtofactorthepossibilityoffailureactuallyhamperITpro-jects.
Anorganizationalmandatethatdoesnotallowforfailuredoesnotpro-moterisktakingandinnovation.
Itcanalsofosteraprojectclimatefraughtwithundesirableorunethicalbehaviorandstressamongdevelopers,whilefailingtocapturepositivelessonsthatcouldemergefromITprojectfailure.
Keywords:ISsuccessevaluation,ITfailure,innovation1IntroductionSocialandbusinessnormsexpectsuccessateverythingwedo-atwork,atplay,andathome.
Asasocietywerememberwinnersandnotlosers.
Wedorememberfail-ures,thoughnotinthesamepositivesenseasweglorifysuccesses.
Itisnodifferentwhenitcomestoevaluating,orsettingexpectationsforIT(InformationTechnology)projects.
Successismandatedexplicitlyorimplicitlybyprojectstakeholders.
Per-hapsthatexpectationisjustifiable.
Afterallbusinessstakeholdersinvesttime,effortandmonetaryresourcesinITprojectsandasgoodstewardsofbusinesscapital,havearightfulexpectationofprojectsuccessdefinedbytheprojectmeetingitssetobjec-tivesandgoals.
Butthenthefocusjustonimmediateprojectsuccesscouldbetoonarrowaworldview,andonecanevenarguethatthiscouldbedetrimentalespeciallyfortheoverallorlongtermsuccessofanorganization.
Afteralldoesn'ttheoldadage"Failureisthesteppingstoneforsuccess"seemtoencouragenotwillfulactionsthatprecipitatefailurebutthelatitudetomakemistakessothatwemaylearnfromsucherrorsandconsequentlybecomebetterOrbecomemoresuccessfulinthelongrunThepassiontoevaluateITsuccessinIS(InformationSystems)academicresearch,howeverelusivethatevaluationmaybe,couldbetracedtoearlyinfluencesonthedisciplinethatoriginatedinthescientificcomputingfoundationsandthoughts.
Shan-nonandWeaver'sseminal1949work"AMathematicalTheoryofCommunication"setthestageandstandardsforinformationprocessingwiththefocusbeingonthefidelityofinformationasitmovesfromthesourcetodestination,andconsequentlyimprovingtechnicalaspectsofcommunication.
AtthecoreofDeLoneandMcLean's1992and2003synthesizingworkofpastattemptstoevaluateISsuccesswefindShannonandWeaver'sthesisontechnicalcommunication.
DeLoneandMcLean'sISsuccessconstructsandtheirderivativescontinuetoplayasignificantroleinthemeasurementofITsuccessinISliterature.
Howeveritisironicthatamodelwiththeoreticalrootsinscienceandengineeringisattemptingtoaddressaproblemthatissocialsciencesinnature.
Thedangerofthisapproachisthatwecouldbemissingbehavioralfactorsthatneedtobeaddressedgroundupinatheoreticalmodelratherthanthesefactorsbeinggraftedontopofascientificmodel.
OnemaywonderwhysuchadeterministictechnicalapproachtoevaluationIS/ITprojectsuccessisbeingcriticized,asafteralldon'tweneedasystematicapproachtoevaluatesuccessThecountertothatargumenthoweveristwofold.
Firstthetime,size,andcostandeffortaredifficulttodetermineattheprojectinitiationstageasITprojectsfollowthe"hurricane"model(Dennisetal,2009,pg82)wherethesepa-rameterscanbebetterestimatedonlywhentheprojectiswellunderway,justastheactuallandingsitesofhurricanesareknownonlyafterlandfall.
Second,IThasbeenakeyenablerofbusinesstransformation,andITledtransformationprojectsareinher-entlyhighrisk,highrewardprojectswherethepossibilityoffailureisimplicitandintegraltotheproject.
Ignoringfailurecanleadtonotlearningfromsuchexperiencesandsetthestageforthesamemistakestobecommittedagain.
Todigabitdeeperintothissubject,letusconsiderthreespecificareaswhereafocuspurelyonsuccessandfailingtofactorthepossibilityoffailureinapositivemannerisnotdesirableforITprojects.
2CentralArguments2.
1Successobsessionhindersinnovation:Aholisticapproachtodevelopingprojectsandservicesthatmeetamyriadofstake-holderneedscouldbeaddressedfromtheperspectiveofdesignthinking.
TimBrownelaboratesthecoreprinciplesbehinddesignthinkingtoincludefeasibility(itisfunc-tionallypossibletodelivertheneedsusingtechnology),desirability(doestheprojectmakesensetousers)andviability(canitbeasustainablebusinessmodel).
Further,designthinkingespouseanorganizationalculturethataccepts"forgiveness"laterthanaskingfor"permission"ahead.
Thisisessentialtofosterinnovationbyencouragingrisktakingwhichcanalsoleadtomistakesbeingmade.
HoweverifthebusinessmandateisforITprojectstomeettime,scopeandcost,pertraditionalprojectman-agementprinciples,ITprofessionalarelikelytoadoptariskaversestrategythatcurbsinnovation.
CurrentIS/ITsuccessmodelsseemtofailtotakethisintoaccount.
Inaddition,developershaveadisincentiveforbeinginnovativeindevelopmentapproaches,methodsortoolswhensuccessisdeterminedforthetraditionalperspec-tivecurrentlybeingfollowed.
Insomecasesthisreluctancetobeinnovateisbecausethebenefitsarenotyetwellknownandmayinfactmaynotexist.
The"letsomeoneelsetryitfirst"approachissafer.
Furthermorechangesduetoaninnovationthatisintroducedinaprocesswillintroducenewriskfactorstotheproject,thusmakingithardertoevaluatetheriskandtrade-offsofdoingtheinnovation,whichleadstopro-jectmanagersviewingtheseinnovationsasunnecessaryrisks.
Perhapsthebiggestreasontodiscouragethemistheveryfactthatimplementingtheinnovationwilltaketimeawayfromthe'actualproject'.
Forexamplethelearningcurvealonewilllikelytakemoretimeonthisprojectthentheinnovationwillprovideonthisproject.
Itisnotsurprisingthatofteninnovationhastoforcedtopdownbyupperlevelmanage-ment,whenmostoftenitwouldbemoreeffectiveandcheaperfortheorganizationtohaveitariseorganicallyfromthebottomup.
2.
2Successobsessioncanfosterunhealthystress:Let'sstartbyexamininghowthestresspeoplefeelgetsplayedout.
Ithastobenotedthatthestressindividualfeelaboutavoidingfailureisnotuniformandwillvarygreatlybymanyfactorsincludingtheirworkexperience,personality,andfactorout-sideofworktojustnameafew.
Howeverwewouldbenaivetoassumethatatleastsomeifnotmostoftheindividualsonadevelopmenteffortfeelalotofpressureforaprojecttosucceed,oratleastnotbethecauseofitfailing.
Whiletheconceptofaprofessionalathlete"chokingunderpressure"hasbeenstudiedfordecades,SandersandWalia(2012)haveshownextendedtheeconomictheorythatthisisnotlimitedtoathletes.
Toquotefromtheirconclusion"Pressuremayreducenotonlyreducepro-ductiveoutputbut,morefundamentally,mayerodeincentivestoputforthproductiveinput"Whilethestressmaycausesomepeopletounderperformothersmayleavetheorganizationwhentheirstresslevelsaretoohigh.
Asaperson'sstressfromworkspillsovertotheirpersonallivestheyareoftenencouragedbyconcernedfamilyandfriendstoconsiderlookingforalessstressfuljobenvironment.
Whenthisdoeshap-penandanindividualleavesaprojecttheremainingpeopleontheprojectareleftwithmorestressfromeitherhavingtopickuptheworkoftheindividualwholeavesorincommunicatingandbringinguptospeedthepersonwhoreplacethem.
Athirdwaypeoplecandealwithstressistojustgiveuptryingtomeetwhattheyperceiveasunrealisticexpectationsthatarethrustuponthem.
Thatistheybasicallydealwiththestressoffailurebyassumingitisinevitableandhencedowhattheycanbutnotreallywholeheartedlythrowthemselvesintotheproject.
2.
3Successobsessioncanmotivateundesiredbehavior:Austin(2001)highlightstheeffectoftimepressureondeveloperswheredeveloperswereknowntotakeshortcutswhiledealingwithunanticipatedprojectcomplications,eveniftheseshortcutsarenotinthebestinterestoftheproject.
Austinshowcasesanexamplewheredevelopersdeliberatelyplanteda"bug"inthesoftwarethatwouldbuythemtimetodomoreworkintheprojectwhentheproject"breaks"duringpro-ductiondeployment.
Soholdingdownpeopletohardsuccessmeasurescouldencour-agethemtocircumventboundariesthatcouldbeconsideredasbeingunethical.
Thisisnotanisolatedreport.
Zelazny(2011)reportedbasedonasurveythat"softwaredevelopmentteammembersdonotconsidertheinternalqualityattributesofmodifia-bility,portability,andreusabilitywhenconsideringaninformationsystemsdevelop-mentprojectsuccessful.
"Consideringthatthedevelopmentteammembersarethepeoplewhomostbenefitfromtheseattributesintheirday-to-dayworkshowsthedegreeinwhichtheareatakesbackseatinpursuitofsuccess.
3ConclusionSowheredoesthisallleadtoThebottomlinequestionwouldbe,howdoweposi-tivelyaddressITfailuresaspartofITsuccessevaluationThemotivationistoen-courageITprofessionaltoworkinnovativelyandtakenecessaryrisksandbeproac-tivecontributorsonprojects.
AtechnicalanddeterministicviewofISsuccessmaynotbetherightsolutiontomeetthatend.
ShouldwethendevelopamodelforISfailurethansuccessReferences1.
Austin,R.
D.
,Theeffectsoftimepressureonqualityinsoftwaredevelopment:Anagencymodel.
InformationSystemsResearch,2001.
12(2):p.
195-207.
2.
Brown,T.
andB.
Katz,Changebydesign:howdesignthinkingtransformsorganizationsandinspiresinnovation.
1sted.
2009,NewYork:HarperBusiness.
viii,264p.
3.
DeLone,W.
H.
andE.
R.
McLean,InformationSystemsSuccess:TheQuestfortheDe-pendentVariable.
InformationSystemsResearch,1992.
3(1):p.
60-95.
4.
DeLone,W.
H.
andE.
R.
McLean,TheDeLoneandMcLeanModelofInformationSys-temsSuccess:ATen-YearUpdate.
JournalofManagementInformationSystems,2003.
19(4):p.
9-30.
5.
Dennis,A.
,B.
H.
Wixom,andD.
P.
Tegarden,Systemsanalysisdesign,UMLversion2.
0:anobject-orientedapproach.
3rded.
2009,Hoboken,NJ:J.
Wiley.
xviii,581p.
6.
Sanders,S.
,WalisB.
,"Shirkingand'choking'underincentive-basedpressure:Abehav-ioraleconomictheoryofperformanceproduction",EconomicsLetters,Volume116,Issue3,September2012,Pages363–3667.
Shannon,C.
E.
andW.
Weaver,Themathematicaltheoryofcommunication.
1949,Urba-na,:UniversityofIllinoisPress.
125.
8.
Zelazny,LucianM.
,"TowardaTheoryofInformationSystemDevelopmentSuccess:PerceptionsofSoftwareDevelopmentTeamMembers",June8,2011Dissertation,Virgin-iaPolytechnicInstitute.