Towards a Critical-Pragmatic Theory Of
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
CONSTITUENTS AND THEIR EXPECTATIONS: TOWARDS A CRITICAL-PRAGMATIC THEORY OF INFORMATION SYSTEMS PROJECT MANAGEMENT Phillip William James Brook BSc DipCS University of Western Sydney Submitted as fulfilling the requirements for the Doctor of Philosophy Degree March 2004 Certificate of Originality I hereby declare that this dissertation is my own work and that, to the best of my knowledge and belief, it contains no material previously published or written by another person, nor material which to a substantial extent has been accepted for the award of any degree or diploma of the University or other institute of higher learning except where due acknowledgement in made in the text. I also declare that the intellectual content of this thesis is the product of my own work, even though I may have received assistance from others in style, presentation and language expression. Signature _____ ____ ii Acknowledgements First and foremost my appreciation for all her efforts go to Dubravka Cecez- Kecmanovic, whose continual encouragement to undertake doctoral studies has finally borne fruit. Thanks also to Alan Buttery for his support and encouragement, and to Owen Hanson who was a willing sounding board for what I wanted to say. The members of the Information Systems and Knowledge Management Research Group provided a supportive environment in which I could present and refine my ideas, so to them I also extend my appreciation. iii Abstract This dissertation presents a theoretical model of information systems (IS) project management that aims to improve the rate of project success, estimated currently to be less than 50% despite over thirty years of experience. IS project management has traditionally adopted the practices developed for engineering projects, focusing on tasks, tools and techniques, driven by the project team. The end-users, although consulted to elicit their requirements, are seen as outside the project team, a resource to be accessed by the project team. The result is delivered systems that do not meet the needs and expectations of those who have to use them in practice. Failure is the likely outcome. The inquiry into IS project management and the development of the CED Model of IS Project Management presented in this dissertation were informed by critical social theory and pragmatics. IS projects are conceptualised as a collaborative undertaking by everyone affected by the project: the constituents. The model identifies the central role of constituents’ expectations and their critical examination of the intended, desired and feared outcomes. This examination is facilitated by a project discourse and active knowledge sharing leading to inter- subjective understandings of the future IS. The model emerged from practice through an action research project located in an international insurance company, and was tested and developed further through a meta-study using government audit reports of ten large IS projects (from the US, UK and Australia). By being based in the political, economic, technical and social dimensions of IS projects, this dissertation makes a theoretical contribution to the IS discipline. Furthermore, by establishing a set of prescriptions for how a project should be conducted by identifying who should take part (the constituents), how they should interact (engaging in the project discourse) and how the processes should be managed (driven by the constituents’ expectations), the model provides guidance for IS practitioners to increase the likelihood of successfully implementing the project. From a research perspective, this dissertation presents an example of empirically grounded IS research, informed by critical-pragmatic theoretic concerns, that is highly relevant for IS practice. iv Contents CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION......................................................................................1 1.1 BACKGROUND TO THE RESEARCH................................................................................... 1 1.2 THE RESEARCH AGENDA................................................................................................ 3 1.3 JUSTIFICATION FOR THE RESEARCH................................................................................. 4 1.4 RESEARCH APPROACH ................................................................................................... 6 1.5 OUTLINE OF THE DISSERTATION ..................................................................................... 7 1.6 DELIMITATIONS OF SCOPE AND KEY ASSUMPTIONS......................................................... 8 1.7 CONCLUSION................................................................................................................. 9 CHAPTER 2: BACKGROUND TO THE RESEARCH ..................................................10 2.1 INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................ 10 2.2 THE NATURE OF IS PROJECT SUCCESS AND FAILURE...................................................... 11 2.3 ANALYTICAL FRAMEWORK .......................................................................................... 14 2.4 ANALYSIS OF CURRENT RESEARCH............................................................................... 20 2.5 ANALYSIS OF CURRENT RECOMMENDED PRACTICE ....................................................... 31 2.6 THE CHANGING ORGANIZATIONAL LANDSCAPE ............................................................ 36 2.7 PEOPLE-CENTRED IS DEVELOPMENT METHODOLOGIES ................................................. 37 2.8 THE NEED FOR A CHANGE IN IS PROJECT MANAGEMENT PRACTICE................................ 43 2.9 POSSIBLE PROJECT MANAGEMENT APPROACHES ........................................................... 45 2.10 CONCLUSION ............................................................................................................. 49 CHAPTER 3: RESEARCH METHODS.........................................................................51 3.1 INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................ 51 3.2 PHILOSOPHICAL FOUNDATIONS .................................................................................... 52 3.3 RESEARCH FRAMEWORK.............................................................................................. 55 3.4 PART 1: ACTION RESEARCH.......................................................................................... 64 3.5 PART 2: META-STUDY.................................................................................................. 74 3.6 THE THREE RS: RELEVANCE, RIGOR AND RELIABILITY.................................................. 78 3.7 ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS .......................................................................................... 84 3.8 CONCLUSION............................................................................................................... 85 CHAPTER 4: THE ACTION RESEARCH PROJECT ..................................................86 4.1 INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................ 86 4.2 THE CANDIDATE IS PROJECT ......................................................................................... 87 4.3 THE RESEARCH ENVIRONMENT ..................................................................................... 90 4.4 THE FIRST ITERATION – PROJECT INITIATION ................................................................. 92 4.5 THE SECOND ITERATION – PROJECT EXECUTION ...........................................................107 4.6 THE THIRD ITERATION – PROJECT CLOSURE..................................................................122 4.7 CONCLUSION..............................................................................................................128 v CHAPTER 5: DEVELOPING THE THEORY-BASED MODEL................................. 131 5.1 INTRODUCTION...........................................................................................................131 5.2 THEORETICAL FOUNDATIONS......................................................................................132 5.3 A MODEL OF IS PROJECT MANAGEMENT GROUNDED IN CRITICAL PRAGMATICS............142 5.4 IMPLICATIONS FOR THE PROJECT MANAGEMENT METHODOLOGY..................................160 5.5 CONCLUSION..............................................................................................................164 CHAPTER 6: META-STUDY ...................................................................................... 165 6.1 INTRODUCTION...........................................................................................................165 6.2 THE PROJECTS THAT WERE ANALYSED ........................................................................165 6.3 META-DATA-ANALYSIS: MAKING SENSE OF THE REPORTS............................................172 6.4 META-THEORY: A MODEL EMERGES FROM THE DATA..................................................186 6.5 META-SYNTHESIS: FROM MODEL TO THEORY..............................................................194 6.6 CONCLUSION..............................................................................................................200 CHAPTER 7: DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS.................................................... 201 7.1 INTRODUCTION...........................................................................................................201 7.2 THE MEASURES-BASED METHODOLOGY......................................................................201