The role of management incentives in successful information systems development and implementation

Because organizations are making large investments in Information systems (IS), efficient IS project management has been found critical to success. This study examines how the use of incentives can improve the project success. Agency theory is used to: identify motivational factors of project success, help the IS owners to understand to what extent management incentives can improve IS development and implementation (ISD/I). The outcomes will help practitioners and researchers to build on theoretical model of project management elements which lead to project success. Given the principal-agent nature of most significant scale of IS development, insights that will allow for greater alignment of the agent’s goals with those of the principal through incentive contracts, will serve to make ISD/I both more efficient and more effective, leading to more successful IS projects.

Administrative Placement of the Information Systems Discipline in Universities - A SWOT Analysis of Queensland University of Technology

In some Queensland universities, Information Systems academics have moved out of Business Faculties. This study uses a pilot SWOT analysis to examine the ramifications of Information Systems academics being located within or outside of the Business Faculty. The analysis provides a useful basis for decision makers in the School studied, to exploit opportunities and minimise external threats. For Information Systems academics contemplating administrative relocation of their group, the study also offers useful insights. The study presages a series of further SWOT analyses to provide a range of perspectives on the relative merits of having Information Systems academics administratively located inside versus outside Business faculties.

The information systems discipline in Australian universities : a contextual framework

This chapter presents the contextual framework for the second phase of a multi-method, multiple study of the information systems (IS) academic discipline in Australia. The chapter outlines the genesis of a two-phase Australian study, and positions the study as the precursor to a larger Pacific-Asia study. Analysis of existing literature on the state of IS and on relevant theory underpins a series of individual Australian state case studies summarised in this chapter and represented as separate chapters in the book. This chapter outlines the methodological approach employed, with emphasis on the case-study method of the multiple state studies. The process of multiple peer review of the studies is described. Importantly, this chapter summarises and analyses each of the subsequent chapters of this book, emphasising the role of a framework developed to guide much of the data gathering and analysis. This chapter also highlights the process involved in conducting the meta-analysis reported in the final chapter of this book, and summarises some of the main results of the meta-analysis.

Formative and reflective measurement and validation mismatch in survey research : an archival analysis of information systems success constructs 1985-2007

The generic IS-success constructs first identified by DeLone and McLean (1992) continue to be widely employed in research. Yet, recent work by Petter et al (2007) has cast doubt on the validity of many mainstream constructs employed in IS research over the past 3 decades; critiquing the almost universal conceptualization and validation of these constructs as reflective when in many studies the measures appear to have been implicitly operationalized as formative. Cited examples of proper specification of the Delone and McLean constructs are few, particularly in light of their extensive employment in IS research. This paper introduces a four-stage formative construct development framework: Conceive > Operationalize > Respond > Validate (CORV). Employing the CORV framework in an archival analysis of research published in top outlets 1985-2007, the paper explores the extent of possible problems with past IS research due to potential misspecification of the four application-related success dimensions: Individual-Impact, Organizational-Impact, System-Quality and Information-Quality. Results suggest major concerns where there is a mismatch of the Respond and Validate stages. A general dearth of attention to the Operationalize and Respond stages in methodological writings is also observed.