Focusing on maturity levels for the effective management of end users involved in software project teams

Abstract

This paper introduces a model of three maturity levels, which helps managers to evaluate end user involvement during systems development. This model is based on research done in terms of how relationships between IT departments and end users are constructed. The value of the three levels lies therein that it gives the IT department the advantage of understanding and supporting the end user in a more effective way during systems development. The model also enhances more efficient interaction between all participants of a project team. Furthermore, it gives management on the IT and business side the ability to establish training needs for both the end users and IT professionals of software project teams. End users on the other hand, who are aware of their level of maturity, could play a more efficient role during the systems development process.

A Review of User Involvement in Information System Projects

“…Although methodologies have evolved and interest in user participation played a significant role in many methodologies, the best method for integrating user involvement into system development has yet to be identified (Iivari et al, 2010;Iivari, N., 2009). This may be due to viewing them as inconsequential users of a technology and not actors in an organizational setting (Iivari, N., 2009;Leonard, 2004). Amoako-Gyampah & White (1997) argue that user involvement must be managed deliberately since membership alone or simple review and approval activities are insufficient.…”

“…In this survey we identified twelve user activities (see Table 2). Activities are often grouped to facilitate comprehension and analysis; for example informative, consultative and participative (Damodaran, 1996), direct and indirect (Iivari, 2009), technical or process (White & Leifer, 1986), physical and abstract (Leonard, 2004), approving, defining and assisting (McKeen & Guimaraes, 1997), technology interaction, tasktechnology adaptation, and individual adaptation (Barki et al, 2007), and finally information resource and co-developer (Fang, 2008). Future research should identify critical activities with appropriate measures leveraging a taxonomy as suggested by prior research.…”

Organisational maturity and functional performance

“…Processes cannot be improved before they are well understood. The term maturity can be seen as an indication of how well employees or organisations 'cope' with a given process (Leonard 2004). The maturity approach to determine organisational abilities has its roots in quality management (Tiku et al 2007).…”