Responsible Risk Assessment with Software Development: Creating the Software Development Impact Statement

Limiting the focus of risk analysis to quantifiable factors and using a narrow understanding of the scope of a software project are major contributors to significant software failures. A Software Development Impact Statement (SoDIS) process is presented which extends the concept of software risk in three ways; --it moves beyond the limited approach of schedule, budget, and function, --it adds qualitative elements, and --it recognizes project stakeholders beyond those considered in typical risk analysis. As the types of risks increase, the range of stakeholders that need to be considered also expands. Using this expanded view of risk analysis reduced or eliminated the impacts of many previously undetected risks of software development. The SoDIS process and its software associate development tasks with relevant stakeholders through the application of structured questions. This process was incorporated effectively into the software development life cycle and applied to software development projects in different domains on several continents. The successes of the SoDIS process provide strong evidence that a significant side-effect of narrowing project objectives is a root cause of IT project failures.

[1]  Rudy Hirschheim,et al.  Four paradigms of information systems development , 1989, CACM.

[2]  Watts S. Humphrey,et al.  Introduction to the Team Software Process , 1999 .

[3]  Efraim Turban,et al.  Information Technology for Management: Improving Quality and Productivity , 1996 .

[4]  David Mason,et al.  Computerising work: people, systems design and workplace relations , 1987 .

[5]  Barry W. Boehm,et al.  Using the WinWin Spiral Model: A Case Study , 1998, Computer.

[6]  Joan A. Ballantine,et al.  How to assess your IT investment: A study of methods and practice: B Farbey, F Land and D Targett Butterworth-Heinemann (1993) 158 pp £19.99 ISBN 0 7506 0654 1 , 1995, J. Strateg. Inf. Syst..

[7]  Kalle Lyytinen,et al.  Information systems failures—a survey and classification of the empirical literature , 1988 .

[8]  P. I. Zorkoczy,et al.  Oxford Surveys in Information Technology , 1985 .

[9]  Ashley A. Bush,et al.  Reconciling user and project manager perceptions of IT project risk: a Delphi study 1 , 2002, Inf. Syst. J..

[10]  Kalle Lyytinen,et al.  Components of Software Development Risk: How to Address Them? A Project Manager Survey , 2000, IEEE Trans. Software Eng..

[11]  Herbert A. Simon,et al.  The new science of management decision , 1960 .

[12]  Kathy Schwalbe,et al.  Information Technology Project Management , 1999 .

[13]  Anastasia Papazafeiropoulou,et al.  Use of Stakeholder analysis for Electronic Commerce Applications in the Public Sector: Different Development Scenarios , 1999, ECIS.

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

[15]  Adel M. Aladwani.  IT project uncertainty, planning and success: An empirical investigation from Kuwait , 2002, Inf. Technol. People.

[16]  Capers Jones,et al.  Software Assessments, Benchmarks, and Best Practices , 2000 .

[17]  S. IiI..  “Redesigning the future” , 2007, Journal of General Internal Medicine.

[18]  Simon Rogerson,et al.  Strategic Management Support Systems , 1996 .

[19]  Galal H. Galal-Edeen,et al.  Stakeholder identification in the requirements engineering process , 1999, Proceedings. Tenth International Workshop on Database and Expert Systems Applications. DEXA 99.

[20]  Watts S. Humphrey,et al.  Introduction to the Personal Software Process , 1996 .

[21]  Ronald K. Mitchell,et al.  Toward a Theory of Stakeholder Identification and Salience: Defining the Principle of who and What Really Counts , 1997 .

[22]  P. Kuruppuarachchi,et al.  IT project implementation strategies for effective changes: a critical review , 2002 .

[23]  A. Pouloudi,et al.  Stakeholder identification in inter-organizational systems: gaining insights for drug use management systems , 1997 .

[24]  B. Shneiderman,et al.  Social impact statements: engaging public participation in information technology design , 1996, CQL '96.

[25]  Prasanta Kumar Dey,et al.  Benchmarking project management practices of Caribbean organizations using analytic hierarchy process , 2002 .

[26]  Enid Mumford,et al.  Systems Design Ethical Tools for Ethical Change , 1996 .

[27]  Kalle Lyytinen,et al.  Identifying Software Project Risks: An International Delphi Study , 2001, J. Manag. Inf. Syst..

[28]  Tom DeMarco,et al.  Waltzing with Bears: Managing Risk on Software Projects , 2003 .

[29]  Kenneth C. Laudon,et al.  Essentials of Management Information Systems: Managing the Digital Firm , 2004 .

[30]  S. Martin,et al.  “Redesigning the future” , 1987, Journal of general internal medicine.

[31]  Kalle Lyytinen,et al.  A framework for identifying software project risks , 1998, CACM.

[32]  Mark Keil,et al.  The reluctance to report bad news on troubled software projects: a theoretical model , 2003, Inf. Syst. J..

[33]  K. Goodpaster.  Business Ethics and Stakeholder Analysis , 1991, Business Ethics Quarterly.

[34]  Mark Keil,et al.  An investigation of risk perception and risk propensity on the decision to continue a software development project , 2000, J. Syst. Softw..

[35]  Darren Dalcher,et al.  Learning from Failures , 2002, Softw. Process. Improv. Pract..

[36]  Aaron J. Shenhar,et al.  Improving PM: Linking Success Criteria to Project Type A paper presented to the Southern Alberta Chapter, Project Management Institute, Symposium "Creating Canadian Advantage through Project Management", Calgary, May 1996. , 2001 .