Exploring the Nature of Information Systems Development Methodology: A Synthesized View Based on a Literature Review

Abstract

New Information Systems Development Methodologies (ISDMs) are suggested in the belief that their deployment would be beneficial to consultants in their work. A large number of ISDMs already exist but their value has been questioned and at the same time new methodologies continue to be introduced in an attempt to support and improve the practice of information systems development work. What is not always clear from current studies is that ISDM is a multi-perspective and cross-discipline phenomenon. Although a large amount of knowledge of ISDM is available, different disciplinary interests have resulted in fragmented assessments of it. This paper intends to identify theoretical perspectives applied in the conceptualization of ISDM. A review of the literature on ISDM was conducted and four different theoretical perspectives were identified: 1) system, 2) structure, 3) innovation, and 4) knowledge. While each perspective provides various overarching depictions of ISDM, the synthesized view of ISDM provided in this study reveals the complexities and ambiguities of a multifaceted phenomenon such as ISDM. Suggestions for an alternative conceptualization of ISDM are provided in an attempt to facilitate the investigation of ISDM

Establishment Patterns of Model Diffusion Theory

“…Using models for software development projects can also be supportive for the knowledge base of an organization or information systems community. However, this 209 study does not clearly state the strategies or intentions behind establishing models for knowledge transfer, such as between experienced developers and beginners, or within or between communities, projects, and organizations (as described by Mihailescu and Mihailescu 2010). Practitioners are more focused on model Usage and what Rogers (2003) describes as 'felt needs/problems' of the project or organization.…”

“…The models can also be classified according to theoretical perspectives. For instance, Mihailescu and Mihailescu (2010) identify four different theoretical perspectives on models: innovation; knowledge; system; and structure. 'Models as innovations' is about how system developers perceive the model's relative advantage, compatibility and trialability.…”

“…Practitioners criticize models because they need to be modified by the skills of individuals, they are subject to a reluctance to use them, and that the existing knowledge in academia could be added. Mihailescu and Mihailescu (2010) demonstrate three key factors that impact the feasibility of model diffusion. Namely, whether the model: improves upon the previous model; aligns with past experiences and user needs; and undergoes testing.…”

“…The new focus can also alter the quality characteristics. There could be a multi-perspective focus on models that also considers other disciplines, for instance as described by Mihailescu and Mihailescu (2010). Two of the four perspectives from that study are investigated here, namely innovation and knowledge.…”

“…This may be a reason and motivation for improvements to previously developed models, namely to have a different model focus to fit another perspective, or to achieve a deeper understanding of the business and technological contexts in which the model will be used (see also Benbasat & Zmud 1999). Since the model is considered 'best practice' (see Mihailescu & Mihailescu 2010) and to considered to encompass knowledge on the business and technological contexts in which it will be used, it may also be the target for improvement efforts, concerning the knowledge management included in the model. Academics are thus triggered by problems in practice as well as by a gap in research, where an improvement effort targets the improvement of model quality.…”