The interplay between evidence and judgment in the IT project prioritization process

Shollo, Arisa; Constantiou, Ioanna D.; Kreiner, Kristian

doi:10.1016/j.jsis.2015.06.001

Cited by 14 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 50 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Under such conditions, ranking may be impossible. Instead, selection here depends much more on ambitions about an organisational future which is justified by emotion, motivation (Boedker and Chua, 2013) and judgment (Karpik, 2010;Shollo, Constantiou and Kreiner, 2015). The eventual decision is a promise in the sense that much has to be done after it has been made partly because it is obvious that accounting does not remember much about how the links to technology, markets and environment are constituted.…”

Section: Processes Of Alternative Generation: From Solutions To Problmentioning

confidence: 99%

Accounting, decisions and promises

Mouritsen

Kreiner

2016

Accounting, Organizations and Society

Self Cite

120

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

One aim of this paper is to revisit relations between accounting and decision making. It goes beyond the important but now classical perspective on accounting as answer, ammunition, learning and rationalisation machines. Another aim is to add to literature about the relationship between accounting and managerial work by introducing a temporal perspective on decision making. Decisions are endings which stop a process of decision making, but they are also beginnings in the form of promises for the future. The decision maker valorises information at hand, but the promiser knows that the future is uncertain. Therefore, the promissory economy is not primarily concerned with solidifying a decision; it is more concerned with the extra investments and adjustments that continually have to be developed to move the promise forward in spite of adverse conditions. The paper argues that promises invite a stream of changes when unacknowledged conditions turn up. This requires the hope that such changes will honour the commitments, which may differ from the words of the decision. Thus, decision making and promising are made believable by some measure of forgetfulness and forgiveness: forgetfulness about the tenuous presuppositions on which the decision is premised; and forgiveness for all the disappointed hopes and expectations that previous promises produced and current promises may inadvertently lead to in the future. The paper considers the role of accounting in the dialectic between solidifying the decision and negotiating or developing the promise in organisational situations. The paper ends by suggesting how a research agenda for studying decision making as promises moves interest from causality to effectuation and from ranking procedures to generation of alternatives.

show abstract

Section: Processes Of Alternative Generation: From Solutions To Problmentioning

confidence: 99%

Accounting, decisions and promises

Mouritsen

Kreiner

2016

Accounting, Organizations and Society

Self Cite

120

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…As our online supplement shows, members of the EBM Collaborative place high importance on the need for more research regarding evidence usage. Useful studies might be conducted in both the lab (e.g., to identify individual differences in evidence use; Caprar et al 2016) and in the field (e.g., to learn what happens in different organizational units under less controlled conditions; e.g., Ferlie et al 2005, Shollo et al 2015, Pritchard et al 2008. Rousseau (see the July 21, 2016, entry in the online supplement, Future Research Suggestions from the Evidence-Based Management Google Group, by following the Supplemental Material link in the online version of this article or at http://www.annualreviews.org/) suggests that such research can be organized by phases of the complete EBP process: inputs, throughputs or processes, outputs, and outcomes.…”

Section: Supplemental Materialsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evidence-Based Management: Foundations, Development, Controversies and Future

Rynes

Bartunek

2017

Annu. Rev. Organ. Psychol. Organ. Behav.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We review the recent development of evidence-based management (EBMgt), tracing its origins to longstanding gaps between research and practice, discrepant findings across studies, and the emergence of evidence-based medicine (EBMed). We provide a definition of EBMgt and review four foundational articles advocating its use. We then review categories of articles that comprise the EBMgt canon: advocacy articles, essays or perspectives, teaching-related, empirical, reviews, and critiques and responses. Critiques include political, epistemological, and methodological issues directly pertinent to EBMgt as well as broader concerns about the scholarly research base on which EBMgt depends. Our suggestions for future research emphasize, first and foremost, increasing the production of high-quality empirical studies in EBMgt. Topics of particular interest include research co-creation by academics and practitioners, process and outcome studies of EBMgt implementations, and practitioners' use of evidence in their working environments. We also call for broader types of systematic reviews (SRs) than have generally been conducted in the organization sciences.

show abstract

“…Although many methods are available to companies, we found that there is a dissonance between the prescriptions and the prioritization embodied. For example, Shollo et al (2015) shed light on the fact that the literature is predominantly characterized by a normative discourse that promotes a variety of techniques and methods. However, the authors also indicate that there is a misunderstanding about the application of proposed models to real-life complexities.…”

Section: Prioritization Of Projectsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…One way a company can adjust the number of projects to be developed to its resource capacity is to use project prioritization methods. Indeed, many available prioritization methods can help companies make the best project decisions (Santhanam & Kyparisis, 1995;Shollo, Constantiou & Kreiner, 2015). However, it must be pointed out that no one method will meet all the needs of a company (Cooper, Edgett & Kleinschmidt, 2000;Dey, 2004).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Influence of sponsor's management style in project prioritization

Rodrigues

Silva

2020

JIEM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: The purpose of this paper is understand how the different styles of sponsor management influence the prioritization of projects.Design/methodology/approach: The empiric analysis used in-depth interviews with 11 executives as method for data collection and qualitative content analysis using theory and data driven categories for analysis is performed.Findings: This research points to the emergence of opportunistic management style, and to evidences of lack of strategic alignment in the project prioritization process.Research limitations/implications: The lack of prioritization methods evidences to compare with project management style. Also, the number of project managers to interview as experts.Practical implications: The analysis shows that committees and post-project evaluation be established to mitigate failures in the prioritization process impacted from sponsor’s management styles influence.Originality/value: The paper provides a critical perspective about sponsor’s management styles and project prioritization context; it is important to highlight how different management styles of the sponsor result in different behaviors in the companies.

show abstract

The interplay between evidence and judgment in the IT project prioritization process

Cited by 14 publications

References 50 publications

Accounting, decisions and promises

Accounting, decisions and promises

Evidence-Based Management: Foundations, Development, Controversies and Future

Influence of sponsor's management style in project prioritization

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About