Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

How and Why Software Outsourcing Projects Drift—An Actor-Network-Theoretic Investigation of Control Processes

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Book cover Information Systems Outsourcing

Part of the book series: Progress in IS ((PROIS))

  • 1664 Accesses

Abstract

This study seeks to explain the perplexing phenomenon that many software outsourcing projects drift, i.e., they enter into a creeping process of targeting emergent goals often at the expense of losing sight of initial goals. Such drift is difficult to reconcile with the traditional logic of control found in the literature. According to this logic, clients should be able to ensure goal achievement through close monitoring. If drift occurs despite rigid control, this suggests that within the control process forces are at work that divert controls from their initial objectives. To better understand these forces in the control process and how they relate to drift, we contrast the logic of control with concepts and assumptions from actor-network theory (ANT). ANT allows us to understand the process of designing, enacting, and adapting controls as one of creating and changing actor-networks. Our longitudinal case study of four software outsourcing projects reveals that drift processes differ depending on three interconnected changes in the actor-networks, i.e., changes in who partakes in the (re-) negotiation of control mechanisms, what specific control mechanisms are (re-) defined, and how they are inscribed in the software artifact and the software task.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 149.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 199.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 199.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Aubert, B. A., Kishore, R., & Iriyama, A. (2015). Exploring and managing the “innovation through outsourcing” paradox. The Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 24(4), 255–269.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baldwin, C. Y., & Clark, K. B. (2000). Design rules: The power of modularity. Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Benaroch, M., Lichtenstein, Y., & Fink, L. (2016). Contract design choices and the balance of ex-ante and ex-post transaction costs in software development outsourcing. MIS Quarterly, 40(1), 57–82.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Charmaz, K. (2006). Constructing grounded theory: A practical guide through qualitative research. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen, Y., & Bharadwaj, A. (2009). An empirical analysis of contract structures in IT outsourcing. Information Systems Research, 20(4), 484–506.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Choudhury, V., & Sabherwal, R. (2003). Portfolios of control in outsourced software development projects. Information Systems Research, 14(3), 291–314.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ciborra, C. (1999). A theory of information systems based on improvisation. In Robert Galliers Wendy (Ed.), Rethinking management information systems: An interdisciplinary perspective, C. Oxford (UK): Oxford Unviersity Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ciborra, C. (2000). From control to drift: The dynamics of corporate information infrastructures, Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (1990). Grounded theory research: Procedures, canons, and evaluative criteria. Qualitative sociology, 13(1), 3–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cram, W. A., Brohman, K., & Gallupe, R. B. (2016). Information systems control: A review and framework for emerging information systems processes. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 17(4), 216–266.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cullen, S., Seddon, P., & Willcocks, L. (2005). Managing outsourcing: The life cycle imperative. Management Information Systems Quarterly Executive, 4(1), 229–246.

    Google Scholar 

  • D’Adderio, L., & Pollock, N. (2014). Performing modularity: Competing rules, performative struggles and the effect of organizational theories on the organization. Organization Studies, 35(12), 1813–1843.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dibbern, J., Goles, T., Hirschheim, R., & Jayatilaka, B. (2004). Information systems outsourcing: A survey and analysis of the literature. ACM SIGMIS Database, 35(4), 6–102.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eisenhardt, K. M. (1985). Control: Organizational and economic approaches. Management Science, 31(2), 134–149.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eisenhardt, K. (1989). Agency theory: An assessment and review. Academy of Management Review, 14(1), 57–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elbanna, A. R. (2006). The validity of the improvisation argument in the implementation of rigid technology: The case of ERP systems. Journal of Information Technology, 21(3), 165–175.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gewald, H., & Dibbern, J. (2009). Risks and benefits of business process outsourcing: A study of transaction services in the German banking industry. Information & Management, 46(4), 249–257.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goo, J., Kishore, R., Rao, H., & Nam, K. (2009). The role of service level agreements in relational management of information technology outsourcing: An empirical study. MIS Quarterly, 33(1), 119–145.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gopal, A., & Gosain, S. (2010). The role of organizational controls and boundary spanning in software development outsourcing: Implications for project performance. Information Systems Research, 21(4), 960–982.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gopal, A., & Koka, B. R. (2012). The asymmetric benefits of relational flexibility: Evidence from software development outsourcing. MIS Quarterly, 36(2), 553–576.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gopal, A., Sivaramakrishnan, K., Krishnan, M., & Mukhopadhyay, T. (2003). Contracts in offshore software development: An empirical analysis. Management Science, 49(12), 1671–1683.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gregory, R. W., Beck, R., & Keil, M. (2013). Control balancing in information systems development offshoring projects. MIS Quarterly, 37(4), 1211–1232.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hanseth, O., Aanestad, M., & Berg, M. (2004). Guest editors’ introduction: Actor-network theory and information systems. What’s so special? Information Technology & People, 17(2), 116–123.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hanseth, O., & Monteiro, E. (1997). Inscribing behaviour in information infrastructure standards. Accounting, Management and Information Technologies, 7(4), 183–211.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huber, T. L., Fischer, T. A., Dibbern, J., & Hirschheim, R. (2013). A process model of complementarity and substitution of contractual and relational governance in IS outsourcing. Journal of Management Information Systems, 30(3), 81–114.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kim, H., Shin, B., & Lee, H. (2013). The mediating role of psychological contract breach in IS outsourcing: Inter-firm governance perspective. European Journal of Information Systems, 22(5), 529–547.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kirsch, L. J. (1996). The management of complex tasks in organizations: Controlling the systems development process. Organization Science (7:1), 1–21.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kirsch, L. (2004). Deploying common systems globally: The dynamics of control. Information Systems Research, 15(4), 374–395.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lacity, M., Khan, S., & Willcocks, L. (2009). A review of the IT outsourcing literature: Insights for practice. The Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 18(3), 130–146.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lacity, M. C., Khan, S., Yan, A., & Willcocks, L. P. (2010). A review of the IT outsourcing empirical literature and future research directions. Journal of Information Technology, 25(4), 395–433.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Langley, A. (1999). Strategies for theorizing from process data. Academy of Management Review, 24(4), 691–710.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Latour, B. (1996). On actor-network theory: A few clarifications. Soziale welt, 47(4), 369–381.

    Google Scholar 

  • Latour, B. (1999). On recalling ANT. The Sociological Review, 47(S1), 15–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Law, J. (1987). Technology and heterogeneous engineering: The case of Portuguese expansion. In The social construction of technological systems: new directions in the sociology and history of technology (No. 1, pp. 1–134).

    Google Scholar 

  • Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Monteiro, E. (2000). Actor-network theory and information infrastructure (pp. 71–83). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moody, G., Kirsch, L. J., Slaughter, S. A., Dunn, B. K., & Weng, Q. (2016). Facilitating the transformational: An exploration of control in cyberinfrastructure projects and the discovery of field control. Information Systems Research, 27(2), 324–346.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ouchi, W. G. (1979). A conceptual framework for the design of organizational control mechanisms. Management Science, 25(9), 833–848.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Poole, M. S., Van de Ven, A. H., Dooley, K., & Holmes, M. E. (2000). Organizational change and innovation processes: Theory and methods for research. USA, New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Remus, U., & Wiener, M. (2012). The amount of control in offshore software development projects. Journal of Global Information Management, 20(4), 1–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rustagi, S., King, W. R., & Kirsch, L. J. (2008). Predictors of formal control usage in IT outsourcing partnerships. Information Systems Research, 19(2), 126–143.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sarker, S., Sarker, S., & Sidorova, A. (2006). Understanding business process change failure: An actor-network perspective. Journal of Management Information Systems, 23(1), 51–86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Srivastava, S. C., & Teo, T. S. (2012). Contract performance in offshore systems development: Role of control mechanisms. Journal of Management Information Systems, 29(1), 115–158.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Subramanyam, R., Ramasubbu, N., & Krishnan, M. (2012). In search of efficient flexibility: Effects of software component granularity on development effort, defects, and customization effort. Information Systems Research (23:3-part-1), 787–803.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thomas, D. M., & Bostrom, R. P. (2010). Vital signs for virtual teams: An empirically developed trigger model for technology adaptation interventions. Management Information Systems Quarterly, 34(1), 115–142.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tiwana, A. (2010). Systems development ambidexterity: Explaining the complementary and substitutive roles of formal and informal controls. Journal of Management Information Systems, 27(2), 87–126.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tiwana, A., & Keil, M. (2009). Control in internal and outsourced software projects. Journal of Management Information Systems, 26(3), 9–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tjornehoj, G., & Mathiassen, L. (2008). Between control and drift: Negotiating improvement in a small software firm. Information Technology & People, 21(1), 69–90.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ulrich, K. (1994). Fundamentals of product modularity. In S. Dasu, & C. Eastman (Eds.), Management of design, Springer, Heidelberg, pp. 219–231.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiener, M., Mähring, M., Remus, U., & Saunders, C. S. (2016). Control configuration and control enactment in information systems projects: Review and expanded theoretical framework. MIS Quarterly, 40(3), 741–774.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yin, R. (2009). Case study research: Design and methods. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Paris, France

    Thomas L. Huber, Jens Dibbern & Thomas Fischer

Authors
  1. Thomas L. Huber
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jens Dibbern
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Thomas Fischer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Thomas L. Huber .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Ourso College of Business, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA, USA

    Rudy Hirschheim

  2. School of Business, University Mannheim, Mannheim, Germany

    Armin Heinzl

  3. Institute for Information Systems, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland

    Jens Dibbern

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Huber, T.L., Dibbern, J., Fischer, T. (2020). How and Why Software Outsourcing Projects Drift—An Actor-Network-Theoretic Investigation of Control Processes. In: Hirschheim, R., Heinzl, A., Dibbern, J. (eds) Information Systems Outsourcing. Progress in IS. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-45819-5_12

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation