Why Information Systems Project Postmortems Fail: An Attribution Perspective Based on a Case Study Analysis

Information system project failure is a costly and common problem despite advances in development tools and technologies. In this paper, we argue that one reason for this is the failure of project postmortems to generate constructive lessons learned from previous projects for organizations to use to improve their development practices. Over time, these ineffective practices would persist in organizations which in turn eventually might become resistant to change. Worse, organizations may even learn to fail. The attribution literature provides a promising theoretical base for explaining why project postmortems fail. A case study of a project postmortem undertaken for an abandoned e-procurement system project is discussed and analyzed. The results suggested that attribution errors were influenced by conditions such as presence of self-appointed mindsets, a general persistence of a negative belief, memory decay and selective recall of project events. The research and practical implications of these findings are discussed along with prescriptions for how to minimize the problem of attribution errors during project postmortems.

[1]  Kalle Lyytinen,et al.  Learning failure in information systems development , 1999, Inf. Syst. J..

[2]  Dane K. Peterson,et al.  The perceptions of information systems designers from the United States, Japan, and Korea on success and failure factors , 2002, Int. J. Inf. Manag..

[3]  David Graham Wastell,et al.  Learning Dysfunctions in Information Systems Development: Overcoming The Social Defenses With Transitional Objects , 1999, MIS Q..

[4]  Mark J. Martinko,et al.  An Attributional Analysis of the Rejection of Information Technology , 1997 .

[5]  Gary S. C. Pan,et al.  Information Systems Project Abandonment: A Case of Political Influence by the Stakeholders , 2003, Technol. Anal. Strateg. Manag..

[6]  Chris Sauer,et al.  Why information systems fail: a case study approach , 1993 .

[7]  Michael D. Myers,et al.  A Set of Principles for Conducting and Evaluating Interpretive Field Studies in Information Systems , 1999, MIS Q..

[8]  Gary S. C. Pan,et al.  An Integrated Framework for Information Systems Project Abandonment , 2002 .

[9]  Barry M. Staw,et al.  Commitment to a Policy Decision: A Multi-Theoretical Perspective. , 1978 .

[10]  H. Kelley,et al.  Attribution theory and research. , 1980, Annual review of psychology.

[11]  Mark S. Urban,et al.  Self-Serving Bias in Group Member Attributions of Success and Failure , 1990 .

[12]  Kweku Ewusi-Mensah,et al.  Critical issues in abandoned information systems development projects , 1997, CACM.

[13]  Rex Karsten,et al.  An Analysis of IS Professional and End User Causal Attributions for User-System Outcomes , 2002, J. Organ. End User Comput..

[14]  Barton A. Weitz,et al.  Attributions in the Board Room: Causal Reasoning in Corporate Annual Reports , 1983 .

[15]  Tom DeMarco,et al.  A defined process for project post mortem review , 1996, IEEE Software.

[16]  Geoff Walsham,et al.  Interpretive case studies in IS research: nature and method , 1995 .

[17]  Wanda J. Orlikowski,et al.  Studying Information Technology in Organizations: Research Approaches and Assumptions , 1991, Inf. Syst. Res..

[18]  M. Patton,et al.  Qualitative evaluation and research methods , 1992 .

[19]  Geoff Walsham,et al.  The Emergence of Interpretivism in IS Research , 1995, Inf. Syst. Res..

[20]  Helen Kelley,et al.  Attributional analysis of computer self-efficacy , 2001 .

[21]  Kuldeep Kumar,et al.  Post implementation evaluation of computer-based information systems: current practices , 1990, Commun. ACM.

[22]  Gary S. C. Pan,et al.  Gaining Knowledge From Postmortem Analyses To Eliminate Electronic Commerce Project Abandonment , 2002, ECIS.

[23]  Norman L. Kerth,et al.  Project Retrospectives: A Handbook for Team Reviews , 2001 .

[24]  DeMarcoTom,et al.  A Defined Process For Project Postmortem Review , 1996 .

[25]  Helga Drummond,et al.  The politics of risk: trials and tribulations of the Taurus project , 1996, J. Inf. Technol..

[26]  Mark Keil,et al.  Turning runaway software projects around: The de-escalation of commitment to failing courses of action , 1997, ICIS '97.

[27]  W. Bowerman Subjective Competence: The Structure, Process and Function of Self‐referent Causal Attributions* , 1978 .

[28]  Andrew D. Brown,et al.  Doomed to Failure: Narratives of Inevitability and Conspiracy in a Failed IS Project , 1998 .

[29]  Simha R. Magal,et al.  The Role of Causal Attributions in Explaining the Link Between User Participation and Information System Success , 1993 .

[30]  M. L. Gibson,et al.  An attribution model of decision support systems (DSS) usage , 1987, Inf. Manag..

[31]  Joseph G. Weber The Nature of Ethnocentric Attribution Bias: Ingroup Protection or Enhancement? , 1994 .

[32]  Zbigniew H. Przasnyski,et al.  Learning from abandoned information systems development projects , 1995, J. Inf. Technol..

[33]  Torgeir Dingsøyr,et al.  Postmortem: Never Leave a Project without It , 2002, IEEE Softw..