The politics of post‐implementation reviews

Abstract

The post-implementation review (PIR) literature emphasizes the benefits of ex post evaluations of information technology (IT) projects. However, empirical studies of actual practice show that few organizations undertake any substantive form of ex post evaluation. This article presents the results of case study research in the Australian offices of two global corporations. These results support the findings reported in the literature and contribute new insights into the political factors that discourage the undertaking of PIRs in organizations. Furthermore, the results reveal a significant gap between theory and practice with respect to IT investment and IT governance practices, with no evidence found of such practices influencing ex post evaluation behaviour in these two organizations.This article reports on research conducted in the Australian offices of two global corporations with respect to the factors which influence post-implementation reviews (PIRs) of information technology (IT) projects in these organizations. In particular, it focuses on the factors affecting the evaluation decision . The findings confirm claims made in the PIR literature that few companies engage in ex post evaluation of IT projects, and provide new insights into the inhibitors of ex post evaluation practices. Using an interpretative research methodology, the study illuminates the political factors that inhibit PIRs in organizations and highlights the failure of IT governance practices to address these factors effectively. In addition to the problems that are well covered in the literature, such as those relating to time, measurement and cost, this study found that the socio-political consequences of evaluation were far more pertinent to the evaluation decision . By providing evidence of significant disincentives for managers to undertake ex post evaluation, regardless of the success of a project, this article concludes that evaluation occurs within a socio-political organizational context where power relations and vested individual interests influence the evaluation decisions made by individuals. The article also explores the influence of IT governance on ex post evaluation practices and the role of organizational structure in relation to the absence of ex post evaluation and, in particular, the prob-

Moderation of Enterprise Social Networks _ A Literature Review from a Corporate Perspective

“…[24]) or bring a post implementation review with it (e.g. [25]; even though sufficient ex-post reviews are not that prevalent). As the communication in the ESN evolves over time (e.g.…”

Approaching information system evaluation methodology and techniques: a comprehensive review

“…Nijland (2004) concludes from a study of the financial sector in the Netherlands that ex-post evaluations are almost never performed. Tingling and Parent (2004), Brown (2005) and Gwillim et al (2005) suggest that it may be neglected when:…”

“…Its purpose is to support the justification of the investment. It is complex in nature but only requires estimates of costs and benefits (Al-Yaseen et al, 2006;Doherty and King, 2001;Farbey et al, 1999b;Gwillim et al, 2005;Irani et al, 2014;Arora and Arora, 2013). Irani and Love (2002) summarise the ex-ante evaluation process in terms of largely bureaucratic stages, as presented in Figure 1.…”

“…It can be used to justify investment (Al-Yaseen et al, 2010;Love and Irani, 2001;Irani and Love, 2002), to assess how well an IS project has met stakeholder expectations (Irani et al, 2005b), to measure the extent of IT use and user satisfaction (Sarosa and Zowghi, 2003), to estimate the direct cost of the system, to assess the tangible benefits of the system (Liu et al, 2003), to evaluate the actual impact of a system (Smithson and Hirschheim, 1998), to ensure that the system meets requirements (Irani, 2002), to measure the system's effectiveness and efficiency (Poon and Wagner, 2001), to assess the quality of programmes, to estimate indirect and other costs (Love and Irani, 2001) and to measure the quality of programmes (Eldabi et al, 2003). Ex-post evaluation provides the organisation with an assessment technique serving as a foundation of comparison with predicted ex-ante performance; the consequent organisational learning and feedback contribute to enhanced future decision making and benefit realisation (Al-Shehab et al, 2005;Gwillim et al, 2005).…”

Understanding Technology Adoption from the “Multiple Cultures Perspective”: The Case of a Successful Post-Implementation Recovery

“…Il a pour mission la promotion et la valorisation de la recherche. www.erudit.org T he successful implementation of Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) systems is vital to the performance of global firms, and yet many ERP projects run into trouble at some point (Azan and Beldi, 2009;Burton-Jones and Gallivan, 2007;Davenport et al, 2004;Gwillim et al, 2005;Saint-Léger and El Amrani, 2011). One of the potential causes of failure that have been identified in the literature is the clash of values linked to information technology (IT) with the values of IT end-users, raising questions of crosscultural management.…”