Advertisement

Information Technology and Management

, Volume 18, Issue 1, pp 83–96 | Cite as

Enhancing development team flexibility in IS projects

  • Yuzhu Li
  • Morgan Shepherd
  • Julie Yu-Chih Liu
  • Gary Klein
Article
  • 475 Downloads

Abstract

Information system development projects face tremendous challenges because of business changes and technology changes. Research has shown that software team flexibility has a positive effect on project outcomes, but specific requirements for enhancing flexibility are lacking. Drawing from the input-mediator-outcome (IMO) team effectiveness framework, this research investigates the contextual inputs and team processes that lead to development team flexibility and how well team flexibility improves project outcomes. A survey was developed to consider a model derived from the IMO framework. One hundred fourteen members of information systems development project teams in China responded to the survey. Partial least squares analysis was used served to analyze the data. Results indicate that a participatory culture and cooperative norms are an effective foundation for improving required processes that include project coordination of the project and knowledge sharing activities. In turn, the improved process performance extends responses to changes in technology and the business climate. The improved flexibility in meeting change is predictive of outcomes related to project performance and quality of the final product.

Keywords

Team flexibility Information systems development Project learning Coordination Team norms 

References

  1. 1.
    Han J, Hovav A (2013) To bridge or to bond? Diverse social connections in an IS project team. Int J Project Manag 31(3):378–390CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Lee G, Xia W (2010) Toward agile: an integrated analysis of quantitative and qualitative field data. MIS Q 34(1):87–114Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Maruping LM, Venkatesh V, Agarwal R (2009) A control theory perspective on agile methodology use and changing user requirements. Inf Syst Res 20(3):377–399CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Lee G, Xia W (2005) The ability of information systems development project teams to respond to business and technology changes: a study of flexibility measures. Eur J Inf Syst 14(1):75–92CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Li Y, Chang K-C, Chen H-G, Jiang JJ (2010) Software development team flexibility antecedents. J Syst Softw 83(10):1726–1734CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Feldman MS, Pentland BT (2003) Reconceptualizing organizational routines as a source of flexibility and change. Adm Sci Q 48(1):94–118CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Byrd TA, Turner DE (2000) Measuring the flexibility of information technology infrastructure: exploratory analysis of a construct. J Manag Inf Syst 17(1):167–208Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    McGrath JE (1964) Social psychology: a brief introduction. Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Mathieu J, Maynard MT, Rapp T, Gilson L (2008) Team effectiveness 1997–2007: a review of recent advancements and a glimpse into the future. J Manag 34(3):410–476Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Cohen SG, Bailey DE (1997) What makes teams work: group effectiveness research from the shop floor to the executive suite. J Manag 23:239–290Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Boehm B, Turner R (2003) Balancing agility and discipline: a guide for the perplexed. Addison-Wesley Professional, BostonGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Chatman JA, Flynn FJ (2001) The influence of demographic heterogeneity on the emergence and consequences of cooperative norms in work teams. Acad Manag J 44(5):956–974CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Hulsheger UR, Anderson N, Salgado JF (2009) Team-level predictors of innovation at work: a comprehensive meta-analysis spanning three decades of research. J Appl Psychol 94(5):1128–1145CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Akgun AE, Byrne JC, Keskin H, Lynn GS (2006) Transactive memory system in new product development teams. IEEE Trans Eng Manag 53(1):95–111CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Faraj S, Sproull L (2000) Coordinating expertise in software development teams. Manage Sci 46(12):1554–1568CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Kumar RL, Stylianou AC (2014) A process model for analyzing and managing flexibility in information systems. Eur J Inf Syst 23(2):151–184CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Ilgen DR, Hollenbeck JR, Johnson M, Jundt D (2005) Teams in organizations: from input-process-output models to IMOI models. Annu Rev Psychol 56:517–543CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Henderson JC, Venkatraman N (1993) Strategic alignment: leveraging information technology for transforming organizations. IBM syst J 32(1):4–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Nelson K, Ghods M (1998) Measuring technology flexibility. Eur J Inf Syst 7(4):232CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Nidumolu S (1995) The effect of coordination and uncertainty on software project performance: residual performance risk as an intervening variable. Inf Syst Res 6(3):191–219CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Grant RM (1996) Prospering in dynamically-competitive environments: organizational capability as knowledge integration. Organ Sci 7(4):375–387CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Ives B, Margrethe HO (1984) User involvement and mis success: a review of research. Manag Sci 30(5):586–603CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Barki H, Jon H (1989) Rethinking the concept of user involvement. MIS Q 13(1):53–63CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Barki H, Jon H (1994) Measuring user participation, user involvement, and user attitude. MIS Q 18(1):59–82CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Baroudi JJ, Olson MH, Ives B (1986) An empirical study of the impact of user involvement on system usage and information satisfaction. Commun ACM 29(3):232–238CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Burke CS, Stagl KC, Salas E, Pierce L, Kendall D (2006) Understanding team adaptation: a conceptual analysis and model. J Appl Psychol 91(6):1189CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Kan SH (2002) Metrics and models in software quality engineering. Addison-Wesley Longman Publishing Co., Inc, BostonGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Van Vliet H, Van Vliet JC (1993) Software engineering: principles and practice, vol 3. Wiley & Sons, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Dromey RG (1995) A model for software product quality. IEEE Trans Softw Eng 21(2):146–162CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Jung H-W, Kim S-G, Chung C-S (2004) Measuring software product quality: a survey of ISO/IEC 9126. IEEE Softw 21(5):88–92CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Ortega M, Pérez M, Rojas T (2003) Construction of a systemic quality model for evaluating a software product. Softw Qual J 11(3):219–242CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Kraut RE, Streeter LA (1995) Coordination in software development. Commun ACM 38(3):69–81CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Ledford GE Jr, Lawler EE III (1994) Research on employee participation: beating a dead horse? Acad Manag Rev 19(4):633–636Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Wagner JA, Gooding RZ (1987) Shared influence and organizational behavior: a meta-analysis of situational variables expected to moderate participation-outcome relationships. Acad Manag J 30(3):524–541CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Daniels AL (2009) Participative culture: impact on organizational colleague commitment and productivity. Ball State University, MuncieGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Guthrie JP (2001) High-involvement work practices, turnover, and productivity: evidence from New Zealand. Acad Manag J 44(1):180–190CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Angermeier I, Dunford BB, Boss AD, Boss RW (2009) The impact of participative management perceptions on customer service, medical errors, burnout, and turnover intentions. J Healthc Manag 54(2):127Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Hackman J (1987) The design of work teams. In: Lorsch J (ed) Handbook of organizational behavior. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, pp 315–342Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Postmes T, Spears R, Cihangir S (2001) Quality of decision making and group norms. J Pers Soc Psychol 80(6):918CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Cohen WM, Levinthal DA (1990) Absorptive capacity: a new perspective on learning and innovation. Adm Sci Q 35(1):128–152CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Ke W, Wei KK (2008) Organizational culture and leadership in ERP implementation. Decis Support Syst 45(2):208–218CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Baskerville R, Pries-Heje J, Ramesh B (2007) The enduring contradictions of new software development approaches: a response to “persistent problems and practices in ISD”. Inf Syst J 17(3):241–245CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Beldi A, Cheffi W, Dey PK (2010) Managing customer relationship management projects: the case of a large French telecommunications company. Int J Project Manag 28(4):339–351CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Verganti R (1997) Leveraging on systemic learning to manage the early phases of product innovation projects. R&D Manag 27(4):377CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Xu X, Zhang W, Barkhi R (2010) IT infrastructure capabilities and IT project success: a development team perspective. Inf Technol Manag 11(3):123–142. doi: 10.1007/s10799-010-0072-3 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Verganti R (1999) Planned flexibility: linking anticipation and reaction in product development projects. J Prod Innov Manag 16(4):363–376CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Edmondson A (1999) Psychological safety and learning behavior in work teams. Adm Sci Q 44(2):350–383CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Lam SSK, Chen X-P, Schaubroeck J (2002) Participative decision making and employee performance in different cultures: the moderating effects of allocentrism/idiocentrism and efficacy. Acad Manag J 45(5):905–914CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Eng T-Y (2006) An investigation into the mediating role of cross-functional coordination on the linkage between organizational norms and SCM performance. Ind Mark Manag 35(6):762–773CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Calantone RJ, Cavusgil ST, Zhao Y (2002) Learning orientation, firm innovation capability, and firm performance. Ind Mark Manag 31(6):515–524CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Lynn GS, Reilly RR, Akgun AE (2000) Knowledge management in new product teams: practices and outcomes. IEEE Trans Eng Manag 47(2):221–231CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Barua A, Kriebel CH, Mukhopadhyay T (1995) Information technologies and business value: an analytic and empirical investigation. Inf Syst Res 6(1):3CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Liang T-P, Wu JC-H, Jiang JJ, Klein G (2012) The impact of value diversity on information system development projects. Int J Project Manag 30(6):731–739CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Podsakoff PM, MacKenzie SB, Lee J-Y, Podsakoff NP (2003) Common method biases in behavioral research: a critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. J Appl Psychol 88(5):879–903CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Löhmoller J (1989) Latent variable path modeling with partial least squares. Physica-Verlag, HeidelbergCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Chin WW (1998) The partial least squares approach to structural equation modeling. Lawrence Erlbaum, MahwahGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Fornell C, Bookstein FL (1982) Two structural equation models: LISREL and PLS applied to consumer exit-voice theory. J Mark Res 19(4):440–452CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Polites GL, Roberts N, Thatcher J (2011) Conceptualizing models using multidimensional constructs: a review and guidelines for their use. Eur J Inf Syst 21(1):22–48CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Hulland J (1999) Use of partial least squares (PLS) in strategic management research: a review of four recent studies. Strateg Manag J 20(2):195CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Ghiselli EE, Campbell JP, Zedeck S (1981) Measurement theory for behavioral sciences. W.H. Freeman, San FranciscoGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Fornell C, Larcker DF (1981) Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. J Mark Res 18(1):39–50CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Hoegl M, Parboteeah KP (2006) Team reflexivity in innovative projects. R&D Manag 36(2):113–125CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Hartwick J, Barki H (1994) Explaining the role of user participation in information system use. Manag Sci 40(4):440–465CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    He J, King WR (2008) The role of user participation in information systems development: implications from a meta-analysis. J Manag Inf Syst 25(1):301–331CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Cockburn A, Highsmith J, Boehm B (2001) Agile software development: the people factor. Computer 34(11):131CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Highsmith J, Cockburn A, Boehm B (2001) Agile software development: the business of innovation. (Cover story). Computer 34(9):120CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    Williams L, Cockburn A (2003) Agile software development: it’s about feedback and change. Computer 36(6):39CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Yuzhu Li
    • 1
  • Morgan Shepherd
    • 2
  • Julie Yu-Chih Liu
    • 3
    • 4
  • Gary Klein
    • 2
  1. 1.Charlton College of BusinessUniversity of Massachusetts DartmouthDartmouthUSA
  2. 2.College of Business and AdministrationThe University of Colorado Colorado SpringsColorado SpringsUSA
  3. 3.Department of Information ManagementYuan Ze UniversityTaoyuanTaiwan
  4. 4.Center for Big Data & Digital ConvergenceYuan Ze UniversityTaoyuanTaiwan

Personalised recommendations