Holistic Project Management Guidelines for Information Systems Evaluation
This chapter investigates current practice of Information Systems (IS) investment evaluation and proposes holistic guidelines for management. Qualitative research was undertaken through interpretive case studies of three Irish organisations on the evaluation context (life cycle stages, stakeholder and purpose). The guidelines proposed in this chapter include an eight-stage life cycle model, which details the purpose of evaluation, stakeholders' governance, benefits and measures at each stage.
KeywordsProject Management Information System Organisational Learning Organisational Context Life Cycle Stage
- Al-Shehab, A.J., Hughes, R. and Winstanley, G. (2004) ‘Using Causal mapping methods to identify and analyse risk in information system projects as a post-evaluation process’, in D. Remenyi (ed.) Proceedings of the 11th European Conference on IT Evaluation, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, pp. 9–16.Google Scholar
- Ashurst, C. and Doherty, N. (2003) ‘Towards the Formulation of a ‘Best Practice’ Framework for Benefits Realisation in IT Projects’ [Online] Available from: http://www.ejise.com/volume6-issue2/issue2-art1.htm[Accessed 5 June 2004].
- Bank of Ireland (2005) Company Information [Online] http://www.bankofireland.ie/html/gws/about_us/about_the_group/company_overview/index.html [Accessed 16 June 2005].
- Bannister, F (2001) ‘Citizen Centricity: A Model of IS Value in Public Administration’, Electronic Journal of Information systems Evaluation, 5(2).Google Scholar
- Byrd, T.A., Thrasher, E., Lang, T. and Davidson, N.W. (2005) ‘A process orientated perspective of IS success: examining the impact of IS on operational cost’, The International Journal of Management Science, 34(5): 448–460.Google Scholar
- Celtic Linen (2005) Market Analysis Report 2005.Google Scholar
- Denzin, N. and Lincoln, Y. (2005) The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Research (3rd ed.). New York: Sage.Google Scholar
- Deschoolmeester, D., Braet, O. and Willaert, P. (2004) ‘On a balanced methodology to evaluate a portfolio of IT investments’ in D. Remenyi (ed.) Proceedings of 11th European Conference on IT evaluation proceedings, pp. 115–126.Google Scholar
- Eason, L. (1998) Information Technology and Organisational Change. London: Taylor & Francis.Google Scholar
- Farbey, B., Land, F. and Targett, D. (1993[G2]) How to Assess Your IT Investment: A Study of Methods and Practice. Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann.Google Scholar
- Fitzgerald, B. (1998) ‘Executive Information Systems without Executives’, in D. Avison and D. Edgar-Nevill (eds.) Matching Technology with Organisational Needs, Proceedings of Third Conference of the UK Academy for Information Systems, Lincoln University, UK, McGraw-Hill, pp. 298.Google Scholar
- Frisk, E. and Planten, A. (2004) ‘IT Investment Evaluation — A survey amongst managers in Sweden’, in D. Remenyi (ed.) Proceedings of the 11th European Conference on IT Evaluation, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, pp.145–154.Google Scholar
- Galliers, R. and Leidner, D.E. (2003) Strategic Information Management: Challenges and Strategies in managing Information Systems. Boston, MA: Butterworth-Heinemann.Google Scholar
- Goulielmos, M. (2003) ‘Outlining organisational failure in information systems development’, Disaster Prevention and Management: An International Journal, 12(4): 319–327.Google Scholar
- Gregory, A.J. and Jackson, M.C. (1991) ‘Evaluating organizations: a systems and contingency approach’, Systems Practice, 5(1): 37–60.Google Scholar
- Hogbin, G. and Thomas, D. (1994) Investing in Information Technology — Managing the Decision Making Process., London: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
- Huang, Y.M. and Trevisan, M.S. (2003) ‘Evaluability assessment: a primer’, Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 8(20).Google Scholar
- Hughes, B and Cotterell, M. (2002[G3]) Software Project Management (3rd ed.). London[G4]: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
- Mangan, A. and Stahl, B.C. (2002) ‘Who is responsible for ISIS? The Irish Credit Unions Problem of Introducing a Standardised Information System’ in R. Hackney (ed.) Business Information Technology Management: Semantic Futures. Manchester: Manchester Metropolitan University Business School, Manchester, UK.Google Scholar
- Naughton, E. (2004) ‘Room for better project management’ [Online] Available from: http://www.projectmanagement.ie[Accessed 21 January 2005].
- Nijland, M. (2004) ‘Understanding the use of IT evaluation methods in organisations’, Ph.D. thesis, University of London.Google Scholar
- Patton, M.Q. (2001) Qualitative Evaluation and Research Methods (3rd ed.). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
- Pressman, R. (2000) Software Engineering: A Practioners Approach. London: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
- Remenyi, D. (1999) IT Investment Making a Business Case. Oxford: Butterworth-Heineman.Google Scholar
- Remenyi, D., Money, A. and Sherwood-Smith, M. (2000) The Effective Measurement and Management of IT Costs and Benefits (2nd ed.). Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann.Google Scholar
- Silvius, A.J. (2004) ‘ROI Doesn't Matter: Insights in the True Business Value of IT’ in D. Remenyi (ed.) Proceedings of the 11th Conference on IT Evaluation, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
- Walsham (1993) Interpreting Information Systems in Organisations. Chichester: Wiley.Google Scholar
- VHI (2005) http://www.vhi.ie/about/index.jsp[Accessed 24 June 2005] About page.