Conceptualising a Multidimensional Model of Information Communication and Technology Project Complexity

South African Journal of Information Management ISSN: (Online) 1560-683X, (Print) 2078-1865 Page 1 of 14 Original Research Conceptualising a multidimensional model of information communication and technology project complexity Author: Background: Information communication and technology (ICT) projects are different from other 1 Nazeer Joseph projects, such as construction, and require a new perspective to determine their true nature. The Affiliation: lacklustre state of ICT projects has plagued researchers and practitioners for decades as they are 1Department of Applied yet to understand why ICT projects do not perform. Literature places significant emphasis on Information Systems, success criteria and success factors for determining project success, but this is a unilateral view University of Johannesburg, as the level of complexity involved is underestimated. ICT projects, however, are multifaceted as South Africa there are a number of dimensions that influence the management and outcome of a project. Corresponding author: Objectives: Nazeer Joseph, This article aimed to illuminate how the dimensions are interdependent and [email protected] interconnected through the construction of a conceptual model of ICT project complexity. Dates: Methods: Content analysis was used to identify and understand the various dimensions and Received: 14 Dec. 2016 facilitated construction of the model. Accepted: 26 July 2017 Published: 02 Nov.2017 Results: The article identified five dimensions that affect ICT projects, viz. project success, project lifecycle, project complexity, project types and project methods. Each dimension was How to cite this article: analysed to understand the key constructs and elements that need to be considered. The Joseph, N., 2017, ‘Conceptualising a dimensions were mapped in a multidimensional model. multidimensional model of Conclusion: The multidimensional model of ICT project complexity can be used by ICT project information communication and technology project managers to more effectively manage projects as they are provided with a greater understanding complexity’, South African of ICT project influences. Journal of Information Management 19(1), a825. https://doi.org/10.4102/ sajim.v19i1.825 Introduction Information communication and technology (ICT) projects require a new perspective to determine Copyright: © 2017. The Authors. their true nature. This is particularly important considering that ICT projects are used to realise Licensee: AOSIS. This work organisational strategies (Chari, Devaraj & David 2007; Hu & Quan 2005; Kim & Sanders 2002). is licensed under the Organisations invest significant capital into ICT projects with the intention of catalysing improved Creative Commons organisation performance (Kalkan, Erdil & Çetinkaya 2011; Kossaï & Piget 2014). Literature asserts Attribution License. that there is a positive relationship between ICT investment and organisational performance (Farhanghi, Abbaspour & Ghassemi 2013; Hu & Quan 2005; Kalkan et al. 2011; Osei-Bryson & Ko 2004;). ICT projects do, however, have a bad reputation of lacklustre performance rates both internationally and within South Africa (Curtis 2012; Joseph, Erasmus & Marnewick 2014; Joseph & Marnewick 2014; Hastie & Wojewoda 2015; Marnewick 2012). The constant struggle of understanding why ICT projects do not perform has plagued researchers and practitioners for decades. Literature places significant emphasis on success criteria and success factors for determining project success, but this is a unilateral view as the level of complexity involved is underestimated (Bosch-Rekveldt et al. 2011; Cooke-Davies 2002; Dvir et al. 1998; Geraldi, Maylor & Williams 2011; Hyväri 2006; Ika 2009; Vidal & Marle 2008; Westerveld 2003). Similarly, ICT project research revolves around success criteria and success factors (Chow & Cao 2008; Milis & Mercken 2002; Purna Sudhakar 2012; Tan 1996). ICT projects, however, are multifaceted as there are a number of dimensions that influence the management and outcome of a project. Research is yet to identify and analyse the various dimensions of ICT projects to address their waning performance. Five dimensions were identified and analysed through content analysis, viz. project success, project Read online: lifecycle, project complexity, project types and project methods. Each dimension consists of Scan this QR multiple constructs and elements that need to be considered throughout an ICT project’s lifespan. code with your smart phone or Moreover, understanding the intricacies of each dimension is essential to reimagine ICT project mobile device understanding. The notion is that a conceptual model of ICT project complexity can be constructed to read online. to illuminate how the dimensions are interdependent. http://www.sajim.co.za Open Access Page 2 of 14 Original Research The article is structured as follows. The first section details representation and enable conceptual model construction the research methodology used to construct the conceptual (Asher 2013; Dube & Marnewick 2016; Schön et al. 2017). model. The second section analyses the five dimensions and discusses the various constructs and elements that constitute Conceptualising a multidimensional each dimension. The design and construction of the conceptual model are presented in the third section. The final section model of information summarises and concludes with an outlook for future research. communication and technology project complexity Research methodology Project success A systematic literature review in the form of content analysis Project success is a misnomer in literature as multiple was used as it facilitates the analysis of textual material (Flick definitions and interpretations exist. Project success was 2014:429; Martens & Carvalho 2017; Pade, Mallinson & Sewry initially determined based on the triple constraint of time, 2008). Schreier (2014:170) asserts that qualitative content analysis cost and quality (Ika 2009; Jugdev & Müller 2005; Todorović is a method for systematically describing the meaning of qualitative et al. 2015). However, it was realised that this perception data and [t]his is done by assigning successive parts of the material was incomplete and stakeholder views had to be included, to the categories of a coding frame. The key concepts were first as well as benefits realisation (Baccarini 1999; Chih & highlighted prior to grouping similar points and ideas (Flick Zwikael 2015; Joseph & Marnewick 2014; Lappe & Spang 2014:436; He et al. 2015). Table 1 shows the search criteria used for conducting the content analysis and the initial results. 2014; Marnewick 2016; Serra & Kunc 2015; Serrador & Turner 2015; Wateridge 1998). The proliferation of project Schön, Thomaschewski and Escalona (2017) assert that a management led to the inception of various standards and ® ® strict search protocol must be established when performing methodologies such as PMBOK Guide, P2M, APMBOK , content analysis. This research first identified the key PRINCE2 and ISO 21500. Table 2 indicates the varying concepts to be investigated then precise keywords were perspectives regarding project success as each standard and defined to assist the content search process. The search space methodology define the concept differently. The lack of was limited to six databases which covered the identified consistency creates ambiguity around project success and project management concepts. Forward and backward distorts how it should be measured. snowballing was also employed when performing the content analysis. Forward snowballing searches literature Researchers have embarked on expelling ambiguity around which has cited the literature in question, while backward project success by empirically investigating what constitutes snowballing searches the reference list of literature project success. Two distinct concepts encapsulate project (Badampudi, Wohlin & Petersen 2015; Jalali & Wohlin 2012; success, viz. project management success and project product Schön et al. 2017). The final process was to conduct a manual success (Baccarini 1999; Cooke-Davies 2002; De Wit 1988; Ika scan of the literature sources to ensure adequate concept 2009; Jugdev et al. 2013; Van der Westhuizen & Fitzgerald 2005). TABLE 1: Content analysis search criteria. Concept Keywords Databases Initial results Project success • Project success • ScienceDirect • Baccarini 1999 • Project management success • Emerald Insight • Bannerman 2008 • SpringerLink • Shenhar et al. 2001 • Scopus • Taylor & Francis Online • ACM Digital Library Project lifecycle • Project lifecycle • ScienceDirect • Pinto & Winch 2016 • Project management lifecycle • Emerald Insight • Varajão, Colomo-Palacios & Silva 2017 • Project process • SpringerLink • Ward & Chapman 1995 • Project management process • Scopus • Wideman 1989 • Taylor & Francis Online • ACM Digital Library Project complexity • Project complexity • ScienceDirect • Baccarini 1996 • Project management complexity • Emerald Insight • Bakhshi, Ireland & Gorod 2016 • Complex project management • SpringerLink • Bosch-Rekveldt et al. 2011 • Scopus • Dunović, Radujković & Škreb 2014 • Taylor & Francis Online • Floricel, Michela & Piperca 2016 • ACM Digital Library • Geraldi et al. 2011 • Remington & Pollack 2007 • Senescu, Aranda-Mena & Haymaker 2013 • Vidal & Marle 2008 • Williams 1999 Project types • Project types • ScienceDirect • Pinto & Covin 1989 • Project classification • Emerald Insight • Shenhar 2001 • Types of project • SpringerLink • Shenhar & Dvir 1996

Load more