Critical failure factors in information system projects

Yeo, K.T.

doi:10.1016/s0263-7863(01)00075-8

Cited by 276 publications

(209 citation statements)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

194

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The problem in this case is not at the level of construction or usage, but at that of outcomes: we refer to expectation failure when the system does not meet the expectations of one or more groups of stakeholders. Unlike other concepts, this notion takes into account multiple stakeholders' views, and hence fits particularly well with a sociotechnical vision of IS (Yeo, 2002). But the key reason why this concept is relevant is that it evaluates systems according to their objectives, and can therefore state the difference between desired and actual achievements, through the eyes of the multiple stakeholders involved (Lyytinen, 1988, p. 54).…”

Section: Ict Failure In Developing Nations: Design-reality Gapsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Origins of Failure: Seeking the Causes of Design–Reality Gaps

Masiero

2016

Information Technology for Development

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Ict Failure In Developing Nations: Design-reality Gapsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Origins of Failure: Seeking the Causes of Design–Reality Gaps

Masiero

2016

Information Technology for Development

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Stage 1: Implementation of the top-down method; authors formulated four project success criteria, namely: efficiency [5], [40], [50]- [51], effectiveness [27], [51], fulfillment of the functional requirements [47], [52], and stakeholder satisfactions [23], [24], [27], [47], [53]. These criteria is formulated based on four project dimensions: resources [24], [27], [33], [39]- [43], managerial [24], [27], [38], [39], [44], directional [5], [22], [24], [37], [43], and environmental [5], [19], [22], [24], [37], [43], [48] dimensions.…”

Section: Results and Discussion: Implementation Of The Proposed Methomentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Wateridge [44] described that each of stakeholders has different attentions in each stage because of their natures. Therefore, the success can be measured based on various stakeholder interests [47] according to the technical issues (short-term), the tactical issues (medium-term), and the strategic issues (long-term).…”

Section: Dimensions Of the Is Project Successmentioning

confidence: 99%

An Alternative Method for Determining Critical Success Factors of Information System Project

Subiyakto¹,

Ahlan²,

Sukmana³

2014

TELKOMNIKA

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Historically, information system (IS) IntroductionProject performance studies in IS environment have been the interest of both researchers and practitioners for many years [1], but few of them focused on the methodological aspects in particularly the CSFs determination method. This method described how to identify critical areas that affect significantly performances of the project [2]. Although, this method as an IS methodology has introduced by John Rockart [3] using top-down approach in the late 1970s, but numerous researchers [4]- [12] have been using the bottom-up in their studies. Boynton and Zmud [2] described that the top down approach lends a sense of consistency and completeness. On the other side, they have also indicated that this nonautomated methodology is difficult to use and needs direction from a skilled analyst. It is may be one of the reasons why numerous researchers [4]-[12] utilized the bottom up in their studies because its easiness in the utilization, even by non-professional audiences [13]. Nevertheless, researchers [14] who used this method in their empirical studies concluded that they did not successful to prove the critical connection between most of the used CSFs and the project outcome. However, each of these methods has strengths and weaknesses, but the challenges here are how the IS project managers can determine the right CSFs that affect significantly in their projects using the appropriate method.In addition, researchers and practitioners will get an alternative choice to determine CSFs of their projects if both methods are combined in term of sharing the strengths and weaknesses. This combination is aimed to give a new perspective on understanding the IS project environment related to the organizational, managerial, and environmental issues. This paper presents combination of two methods abovementioned using the compatibility analysis. As described by Belout and Gauvreau [15] that most of models are developed using the previous theories rather than on empirical proofs. Based on this description, authors tried to make a logical sense to combine the top down [2] and the bottom up [4]- [12] methods. The aim is to provide an alternative method in order to deal a new method in the CSFs determination process. The following sections describe literature review, research method, the proposed method, its implementation in a case study, and lastly, this article is concluded with suggestion for the further studies.

show abstract

“…Similarly, Hislop et al, (2000) suggests that factors influenced knowledge networks involved in change, such as the type of structure, the power of authority and political involvement. Likewise, Yeo (2002) and Lutz et al, (2013) claim that poor decision making in IT intervention occurs because of the lack of alignment between information technology systems and business objectives as a result of missing key details. These missing details will influence decision-making processes which determine the capacity to change of an organisation in terms of pre-selecting an appropriate change strategy, at the implementation stages and during the post-implementation period (Shipton, Budhwar & Crawshaw, 2012;Judge & Elenkov, 2005).…”

Section: A Conceptual Framework For Decision Support -Cmknmmentioning

confidence: 99%

Knowledge network modelling to support decision-making for strategic intervention in IT project-oriented change management

Alkhuraiji

Liu

Oderanti

et al. 2014

Journal of Decision Systems

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper focuses on knowledge management to enhance decision support systems for strategic intervention in IT project-oriented change management. It proposes a model of change management knowledge networks (CMKNM) to support decision by tackling three existing issues: insufficient knowledge traceability based on the relationships between knowledge elements and key factors; lack of procedural knowledge to provide adequate policies to guide changes; and lack of "lessons learned" documentation in knowledge-bases. A qualitative method was used to investigate issues surrounding knowledge mobilisation and knowledge networks. Empirical study was undertaken with industries to test the CMKNM. Results are presented from the empirical study on the key factors influencing knowledge mobilisation in IT project-oriented change management, knowledge networks and connections. The CMKNM model allows key knowledge mobilisation factors to be aligned with each other; it also defines the connections between knowledge networks allowing knowledge to be mobilised by tracing knowledge channels to support decision.

show abstract

Critical failure factors in information system projects

Cited by 276 publications

References 2 publications

The Origins of Failure: Seeking the Causes of Design–Reality Gaps

The Origins of Failure: Seeking the Causes of Design–Reality Gaps

An Alternative Method for Determining Critical Success Factors of Information System Project

Knowledge network modelling to support decision-making for strategic intervention in IT project-oriented change management

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About