Software process improvement with weak management support: an analysis of the dynamics of intra-organizational alliances in IS change initiatives

Software Process Improvement (SPI) projects are large-scale, complex organization-wide change initiatives. They require considerable investments in personnel, time and money and impact just about every aspect of software firms. The group charged with conducting an SPI project has, however, little formal authority to influence or force software professionals to engage in SPI work or to define and implement changes. The SPI literature suggests that successful SPI initiatives depend on strong commitment from top management. But what should the SPI group do if management support is weak? In this paper, we present an analysis of how an SPI group can use alliances to obtain influence and succeed when management support is weak. Our study is based on a 3-year longitudinal field study of SPI change initiatives at Denmark Electronics. Our findings show that a lack of top management support is not necessarily incompatible with success. This research opens an important new area of research on intra-organizational alliances and information system (IS) implementation. It has the potential to offer new theories and practical advice on how IS implementation projects can be more effectively managed.

[1]  S. Ghoshal,et al.  Social Capital and Value Creation: The Role of Intrafirm Networks , 1998 .

[2]  N. Lin Social Capital: Frontmatter , 2001 .

[3]  K. Cook,et al.  Power, Equity and Commitment in Exchange Networks , 1978 .

[4]  DybåTore Factors of software process improvement success in small and large organizations , 2003 .

[5]  Mark S. Granovetter The Strength of Weak Ties , 1973, American Journal of Sociology.

[6]  R. Putnam The Prosperous Community: Social Capital and Public Life , 1993 .

[7]  Tom DeMarco,et al.  Management-aided software engineering , 1994, IEEE Software.

[8]  Ezra W. Zuckerman,et al.  Networks, Diversity, and Productivity: The Social Capital of Corporate R&D Teams , 2001 .

[9]  Ojelanki K. Ngwenyama,et al.  Building and Maintaining Alliances in SPI Projects: Implications for Organizing Effective SPI , 2005, ECIS.

[10]  Peter R. Monge Theoretical and Analytical Issues in Studying Organizational Processes , 1990 .

[11]  Bob McFeeley,et al.  IDEAL: A User's Guide for Software Process Improvement. , 1996 .

[12]  Tore Dybå,et al.  Factors of software process improvement success in small and large organizations: an empirical study in the scandinavian context , 2003, ESEC/FSE-11.

[13]  Bo Edvardsson,et al.  Critical incident techniques: Towards a framework for analysing the criticality of critical incidents , 2001 .

[14]  Pekka Abrahamsson,et al.  Rethinking the Concept of Commitment in Software Process Improvement , 2001, Scand. J. Inf. Syst..

[15]  Peter Axel Nielsen,et al.  Organizational Influence Processes In Software Process Improvement , 2002, ECIS.

[16]  K. Klein,et al.  How Do They Get There? An Examination of the Antecedents of Centrality in Team Networks , 2004 .

[17]  Charles Chowa,et al.  Information System Success: Individual and Organizational Determinants , 2006, Manag. Sci..

[18]  K. Hambridge Action research. , 2000, Professional nurse.

[19]  David L. Bradford,et al.  Influence Without Authority , 1989 .

[20]  Daniel J. Brass Being in the right place: A structural analysis of individual influence in an organization. , 1984 .

[21]  ReagansRay,et al.  Networks, Diversity, and Productivity , 2001 .

[22]  James William Coleman,et al.  Competition and the Structure of Industrial Society: Reply to Braithwaite , 1988, American Journal of Sociology.

[23]  Lars Mathiassen,et al.  Collaborative Practice Research , 2000, Scand. J. Inf. Syst..

[24]  Blake Ives,et al.  Executive Involvement and Participation in the Management of Information Technology , 1991, MIS Q..

[25]  K. Eisenhardt Building theories from case study research , 1989, STUDI ORGANIZZATIVI.

[26]  A. Pettigrew Longitudinal Field Research on Change: Theory and Practice , 1990 .

[27]  K. Popper,et al.  The Logic of Scientific Discovery , 1960 .

[28]  Timo Jokela,et al.  Development of Management Commitment to Software Process Improvement , 2000 .

[29]  M. Lynne Markus,et al.  Change Agentry - The Next IS Frontier , 1996, MIS Q..

[30]  Jonathon N. Cummings,et al.  Structural properties of work groups and their consequences for performance , 2003, Soc. Networks.

[31]  Jeremy Rose,et al.  Prescription, description, reflection: the shape of the software process improvement field , 2004, Int. J. Inf. Manag..

[32]  D. Harrison,et al.  TIES, LEADERS, AND TIME IN TEAMS: STRONG INFERENCE ABOUT NETWORK STRUCTURE'S EFFECTS ON TEAM VIABILITY AND PERFORMANCE , 2006 .

[33]  Lars Mathiassen,et al.  Managing Risk in Software Process Improvement: An Action Research Approach , 2004, MIS Q..

[34]  Mark C. Paulk,et al.  Capability Maturity Model for Software , 2001 .

[35]  Richard Baskerville,et al.  Generalizing Generalizability in Information Systems Research , 2003, Inf. Syst. Res..

[36]  J. Coleman,et al.  Social Capital in the Creation of Human Capital , 1988, American Journal of Sociology.

[37]  Peter Axel Nielsen,et al.  Competing values in software process improvement: an assumption analysis of CMM from an organizational culture perspective , 2003, IEEE Trans. Engineering Management.

[38]  Chee-Sing Yap,et al.  Top Management Support, External Expertise and Information Systems Implementation in Small Businesses , 1996, Inf. Syst. Res..

[39]  Jan Pries-Heje,et al.  Improving Software Organizations: From Principles to Practice , 2001 .

[40]  Gary James Jason,et al.  The Logic of Scientific Discovery , 1988 .

[41]  Nan Lin,et al.  SOCIAL NETWORKS AND STATUS ATTAINMENT , 1999 .

[42]  Elizabeth Chell,et al.  Critical incident technique. , 2003 .

[43]  Gerard Delanty The Foundations of Social Theory , 2009 .

[44]  M. Kendall,et al.  The Logic of Scientific Discovery. , 1959 .

[45]  Wenpin Tsai Social capital, strategic relatedness and the formation of intraorganizational linkages , 2000 .

[46]  M. Markus,et al.  Implementation Politics: Top Management Support and User Involvement , 2011 .

[47]  Charles H. House ACM 97: an event to remember , 1997, CACM.

[48]  M. Lynne Markus,et al.  Power, politics, and MIS implementation , 1987, CACM.

[49]  Izak Benbasat,et al.  The Case Research Strategy in Studies of Information Systems , 1987, MIS Q..

[50]  Watts S. Humphrey,et al.  Managing the software process , 1989, The SEI series in software engineering.

[51]  Steven B. Andrews,et al.  Structural Holes: The Social Structure of Competition , 1995, The SAGE Encyclopedia of Research Design.

[52]  A. Zaheer,et al.  Does Trust Matter? Exploring the Effectsof Interorganizational and Interpersonaltrust on Performance , 1998 .

[53]  Lars Mathiassen,et al.  Improving software organizations: agility challenges and implications , 2005, Inf. Technol. People.

[54]  Allen S. Lee A Scientific Methodology for MIS Case Studies , 1989, MIS Q..

[55]  D. Campbell III. “Degrees of Freedom” and the Case Study , 1975 .

[56]  Jonathon N. Cummings,et al.  Tie and Network Correlates of Individual Performance in Knowledge-Intensive Work , 2004 .

[57]  N. Lin SOCIAL NETWORKS AND STATUS ATTAINMENT , 1999 .

[58]  Peter Axel Nielsen,et al.  Accessing Software Processes: Low Maturity or Sensible Practice , 2001, Scand. J. Inf. Syst..

[59]  Peter Axel Nielsen,et al.  Situated assessment of problems in software development , 1999, DATB.

[60]  K. Eisenhardt,et al.  Exploring the Black Box: An Analysis of Work Group Diversity, Conflict and Performance , 1999 .

[61]  J. C. Flanagan Psychological Bulletin THE CRITICAL INCIDENT TECHNIQUE , 2022 .

[62]  N. Lin Buidling a Network Theory of Social Capital , 1999, Connections.

[63]  Lars Mathiassen,et al.  A Conceptual MAP of Software Process Improvement , 2001, Scand. J. Inf. Syst..

[64]  G. Labianca,et al.  A Multilevel Model of Group Social Capital , 2006 .

[65]  R. Burt The contingent value of social capital. , 1997 .

[66]  James D. Herbsleb,et al.  Software quality and the Capability Maturity Model , 1997, CACM.

[67]  G. Labianca,et al.  Group Social Capital and Group Effectiveness: The Role of Informal Socializing Ties , 2004 .

[68]  Hans-Jürgen Kugler,et al.  Bootstrap: fine-tuning process assessment , 1994, IEEE Software.

[69]  P. Bourdieu,et al.  实践与反思 : 反思社会学导引 = An invitation to reflexive sociology , 1994 .

[70]  Raymond T. Sparrowe,et al.  Social Networks and the Performance of Individuals and Groups , 2001 .

[71]  A. Portes Social Capital: Its Origins and Applications in Modern Sociology , 1998 .

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

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

[74]  A. Krishna Mapping and measuring social capital : a conceptual and empirical study of collective action for conserving and developing watersheds in Rajasthan, India , 1999 .

[75]  James N. Baron,et al.  Resources and Relationships: Social Networks and Mobility in the Workplace , 1997 .

[76]  Leonard M. Freeman,et al.  A set of measures of centrality based upon betweenness , 1977 .