Determining information requirements: A contingency method for selection of a requirements assurance strategy

Naumann, J. David; Davis, Gordon B.; McKeen, James D.

doi:10.1016/0164-1212(79)90029-3

Cited by 58 publications

(27 citation statements)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The major contribution of this paper is its support for the contingency approach for methodology selection (Grernillion and Pyburn, 1983;Naumann, Davis, and McKeen, 1980). From our results, we offer the following model of method selection: a. first make a preliminary selection of methodology based on information system type and problem structure.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

An Empirical Evaluation of System Development Methodologies

Nosek

Palvia

1990

Information Resources Management Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:Many methodologies and techniques may be used in the development of information systems. Two widely used methodologies are: system development life cycle, and proto-typing. In this article, we have extensively evaluated the two methodologies based on field data collected from information systems professionals in business and industry. Specifically, the two methodologies are evaluated for their applicability during various life cycle phases, by types of systems, and by the amount of problem structure. Various attributes associated with the methodologies have also been assessed. Our results support the use of a contingency approach for the selection of a proper methodology for systems development. Article:There are numerous methods available and used for developing information systems (IS). These methods may be categorized into three classes (DB Directions, 1985): methodologies, which are organized, systematic approaches for handling the system life cycle or its major parts; techniques, which are means of accomplishing specific tasks in the system life cycle; and tools, which are software packages to support one or more techniques. Characteristics, usage, and applicability of the techniques and methodologies have been reported in the literature (Colter, 1984; Couger, Colter, and Knapp, 1982;Doke and Myers, 1986;Gingberg and Ariav, 1986;Necco, Gordon, and Tsai, 1987: Palvia andNosek, 1989;Vessey and Weber, 1986;Wells and Naumann, 1985). In this article, we focus on methodologies for information system development.Several methodologies are reported in the literature (Davis, 1982; Davis and Olson, 1985;Gore and Stubbe, 1983;Gremillion and Pybum, 1983; McDonald, Riddle, and Youngblut, 1986; Naumann, Davis, arid McKeon, 1980;Naumann and Jenkins, 1982;Nosek, 1988;Sumner and Sitek, 1986). The most widely used methodology is the system development life cycle (SDLC), which comprises of a sequence of well-defined linear tasks. The tasks are derived by breaking the system's stages (analysis, design, development, and implementation) into phases, activities, and tasks (Davis and Olson, 1985;Necco, Gordon, and Tsai, 1987). In response to various shortcomings of the SDLC approach as well as an ever-growing backlog of IS applications, alternate methodologies are being utilized. According to Gremillion and Pybum (1983), other approaches for system development are: using commercial application software packages, prototyping, and user-developed systems. Of these, using software packages precludes organizational IS development (although, the package developer must have used some methodology), and user-developed systems are usually ad-hoc, simplistic, narrow in scope, and prone to being of poor quality (Davis, 1982). Therefore, any large-scale comprehensive organizational information systems are developed using one of the two methodologies: system development life cycle and prototyping. The predominant use of SDLC and prototyping is also supported by surveys of information systems professionals and organizations (Palvia and ...

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

An Empirical Evaluation of System Development Methodologies

Nosek

Palvia

1990

Information Resources Management Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…M atching context and approac hÐ In model 6, Episkopou and W ood-H arper (1986) argue for a ® t between context and approach, but the only guidelines they offer are those of Naumann et al (1980). M odels 5 and 13 do not address the ® t between context and approach at all.…”

Section: Level Of Planning Formalizationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Moreover, collective learning processes will also have to take place (Argyris andScho È n 1978, Swieringa andW ierdsma 1992). At the tactical level, learning processes shoul d be stimula ted by an iterative process m odel (Naumann et al 1980) , thereby providing the necessary feedback loops. M odels, prototypes and pilot sites can be part of such an interactive approach.…”

Section: Propositionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Scenarios for system development: Matching context and strategy

Offenbeek¹,

Koopman²

1996

Behaviour & Information Technology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract.A comparison of seventeen contingency models for system development (SD) led to the conclusion that no model supports all requested activities: diagnosing the context, describing alternative approaches, matching context and approach, looking at social organizational issues, and supporting a dynamic ® t between context and approach. This study paid special attention to the social and organizational aspects of system development. Our contingency model speci® es ® ve possible types of risk (functional uncertainty, con¯ict potential, technical uncertainty and resistance potential) in system development that should be controlled. For each type, a corresponding proposition about its control was derived from this m odel and analysed in seven system development processes. We succeeded in explaining the outcome of the development process through the ® t between context and situation, thereby gaining some preliminary support for the model. Still, the limitations of such a contingency model are to be taken seriously.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…There are strong proponents and critics of each method; however, there is limited research concerning their effectiveness. Studies usually compare a few methods (often two or three) on a limited set of attributes [10,11,13,18,23,24].Designers, analysts, programmers, end users, and MIS managers are confronted with a wide array of methods and are poorly informed on their utility and desirability. Therefore, a comprehensive approach is essential to understand the attributes and appropriateness of these methods.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

A field examination of system life cycle techniques and methodologies

Palvia

Nosek

1993

Information & Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:There is a myriad of system development methodologies, techniques, and tools that have been developed ever since businesses started using computers for information processing. However, there is no real consensus on the aptness or applicability of these methods. There are proponents and critics of each method, and different organizations use different methods. This article identifies many of the system development methods in use today. It, then, empirically assesses these methods on a comprehensive set of attributes. It also makes a contingency analysis of the applicability of the methods based on system life cycle stage, system type, and problem structure. These results should serve as a valuable set of inputs in method selection for system development. Keywords: System development life cycle; System development methodologies; System development techniques; System development method use; System development method evaluation; System type; Problem structure Article: Introduction 1 Many methodologies, techniques and tools (termed "methods" here) exist and continue to be developed [e.g., see 1,3,9,10,14] for accomplishing various tasks in the system life cycle (SLC). There are strong proponents and critics of each method; however, there is limited research concerning their effectiveness. Studies usually compare a few methods (often two or three) on a limited set of attributes [10,11,13,18,23,24].Designers, analysts, programmers, end users, and MIS managers are confronted with a wide array of methods and are poorly informed on their utility and desirability. Therefore, a comprehensive approach is essential to understand the attributes and appropriateness of these methods. Elements of such an approach were outlined in the Data Base Directions workshop of 1985 [5]. One comprehensive approach that was pursued was the STAR methodology [16], in the context of the ADA environment for the Department of Defense. Another approach by Doke and Myers [6] focused on the overall productivity aspects of the methods. An important contribution is by Colter [1], where he subjectively evaluated characteristics of various tools and techniques. With respect to DSS methodologies, Ginzberg [7] subjectively evaluated hem and presented a contingency model for their use.The literature does not present a comprehensive evaluation based on field experience. It is important to know how these methods fare with their users (i.e., IS professionals). Here, we examine a comprehensive set of techniques and methodologies from a field perspective. First, in order to clarify the distinction between the terms, we adopt the following definitions from [5]:Methodology: is an organized and systematic approach for handling the system life cycle or its parts. It will specify the individual tasks and their sequence.Technique:is a means of accomplishing a task in the system life cycle (SLC). Sometimes, it may become synonymous with the task.

show abstract

Determining information requirements: A contingency method for selection of a requirements assurance strategy

Cited by 58 publications

References 2 publications

An Empirical Evaluation of System Development Methodologies

An Empirical Evaluation of System Development Methodologies

Scenarios for system development: Matching context and strategy

A field examination of system life cycle techniques and methodologies

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About