Conceptualising the Causes and Consequences of Uncertainty in IS Development Organisations and Projects

This paper is concerned with the situational causes and behavioural consequences of uncertainty in ISD organisations and projects. The paper draws on a social action theory perspective and select contributions from the fields of or about ISD, organisational studies, sociology, and psychology to discuss uncertainty as a concept and in terms of its’ causes and influence on individual as well as on social action. The paper defines uncertainty, shows that it is an under-researched phenomenon, and provides a theoretical framework for further conceptual and empirical research into what makes IS developers feel uncertain, how they consequently act and interact, and what might promote the positive and prevent the negative effects of uncertainty in practice.

[1]  K. Lyytinen,et al.  Exploring the intellectual structures of information systems development: A social action theoretic analysis , 1996 .

[2]  M. Csíkszentmihályi.  Flow: The Psychology of Optimal Experience , 1990 .

[3]  Irving L. Janis,et al.  Stress, Attitudes, and Decisions: Selected Papers , 1982 .

[4]  C. Slappendel.  Perspectives on Innovation in Organizations , 1996 .

[5]  Erik Stolterman,et al.  The 'transfer of rationality': Acceptability, adaptability and transparency of methods , 1994, ECIS.

[6]  Kalle Lyytinen,et al.  A Framework for software risk management , 1996, Scand. J. Inf. Syst..

[7]  D. Schoen.  The Reflective Practitioner , 1983 .

[8]  D. Norman,et al.  New technology and human error , 1989 .

[9]  Philip H. Mirvis.  Flow: The Psychology of Optimal Experience , 1991 .

[10]  Brian Fitzgerald,et al.  The use of systems development methodologies in practice: a field study , 1997, Inf. Syst. J..

[11]  Philip J. Streatfield,et al.  The paradox of control in organizations , 2001 .

[12]  Gordon B. Davis,et al.  Strategies for Information Requirements Determination , 1982, IBM Syst. J..

[13]  Nimal Jayaratna,et al.  Understanding and Evaluating Methodologies: NIMSAD, a Systematic Framework , 1994 .

[14]  Richard Baskerville,et al.  Amethodical systems development: the deferred meaning of systems development methods , 2000 .

[15]  Mark Keil,et al.  Pulling the Plug: Software Project Management and the Problem of Project Escalation , 1995, MIS Q..

[16]  Peter Axel Nielsen,et al.  Understanding the implementation of software process improvement innovations in software organizations , 2004, Inf. Syst. J..

[17]  W. Bion,et al.  Experiences in groups. , 1961, Human relations; studies towards the integration of the social sciences.

[18]  V. Sambamurthy,et al.  PRIOR LITERATURE : CATEGORIZATION Identification of the Relevant Literature Base , 2007 .

[19]  Richard T. Vidgen,et al.  A framework for understanding how a unique and local IS development method emerges in practice , 2006, Eur. J. Inf. Syst..

[20]  Enid Mumford,et al.  Review: Understanding and Evaluating Methodologies , 1995 .

[21]  E. Shils.  The Constitution Of Society , 1982 .

[22]  Susan Gasson,et al.  A social action model of situated information systems design , 1999, DATB.

[23]  Karlheinz Kautz,et al.  Applying System Development Methods in Practice , 2002 .

[24]  Rajiv Sabherwal,et al.  The role of trust in outsourced IS development projects , 1999, CACM.

[25]  A. Giddens.  The Constitution of Society , 1985 .

[26]  Susan Gasson,et al.  The Dynamics of Sensemaking, Knowledge, and Expertise in Collaborative, Boundary-Spanning Design , 2005, J. Comput. Mediat. Commun..

[27]  Jeremy Rose,et al.  Socio-Theoretic Accounts of IS: The Problem of Agency , 2005, Scand. J. Inf. Syst..

[28]  Dietrich Doerner,et al.  On the Difficulties People Have in Dealing With Complexity , 1980 .

[29]  D. Wastell,et al.  The behavioral dynamics of information system development: A stress perspective , 1993 .

[30]  L. Mathiassen,et al.  The Principle of Limited Reduction , 1992 .

[31]  Erik Stolterman,et al.  How System Designers Think about Design and Methods: Some Reflections Based on an Interview Study , 1992, Scand. J. Inf. Syst..

[32]  Richard T. Vidgen,et al.  Method Emergence in Practice - Influences and Consequences , 2005, ECIS.

[33]  S. Simister.  Understanding and Evaluating Methodologies: NIMSAD, A Systemic Framework , 1996 .

[34]  Jorgen P. Bansler,et al.  A reappraisal of structured analysis: design in an organizational context , 1993, TOIS.

[35]  David Wastell,et al.  The fetish of technique: methodology as a social defence , 1996 .

[36]  Brian Fitzgerald,et al.  An empirical investigation into the adoption of systems development methodologies , 1998, Inf. Manag..

[37]  D. Schoen,et al.  The Reflective Practitioner: How Professionals Think in Action , 1985 .

[38]  M. Markus,et al.  Information technology and organizational change: causal structure in theory and research , 1988 .

[39]  David Graham Wastell,et al.  The fetish of technique: methodology as a social defence , 1996, Inf. Syst. J..

[40]  R. J. Bogumil,et al.  The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action , 1985, Proceedings of the IEEE.

[41]  Donald A. Schön.  The reflective practitioner : how professionals think in action , 1986 .

[42]  Jan Stage,et al.  The principle of limited reduction in software design , 1990 .

[43]  Karlheinz Kautz.  The Enactment of Methodology: The Case of Developing a Multimedia Information System , 2004, ICIS.