Formalized systems development methodologies: a critical perspective

Abstract

Systems development issues occupy a position of central importance in the information systems field and much has been prescribed in the quest for successful systems developmenf. However, given the well-documented 'software crisis', success is far from guaranteed for systems development projects. Many researchers see the solution to the software crisis in terms of increased control and the more widespread adoption of rigorous and formalized system development methodologies. This paper presents some arguments and pressures which support the use of methodobgies and some evidence of the literature bias which favours methodologies is provided. However the problems associated with the use of methodologies have not perhaps received as much attention in previous research. This paper identifies a number of arguments and pressures which question the value of methodologies, and reports ihe results of a field study which investigated the role of methodologies in practice. The critical perspective adopted throughout shows that, contrary to the predominant view in literature, the assumption that increased adoption of mefhodologies addresses the problems inherent in systems develupment is by no means proven.

Why situational method engineering is useful to information systems development

“…Method engineering is the systematic discipline of designing, constructing and adapting ISD methods (Kumar & Welke, 1992), and is primarily focused on the relationship between methodologies and methods (Brinkkemper, 1995;Iivari et al, 2000). There is empirical evidence that method engineering has already had impact on methods, if informally, as existing research on method use in practice has consistently found that information systems methods, as far as they are used, are applied adaptively, customized to fit the organization and project in question without regard for the tools' consistency or appropriateness with the methodology involved (Wynekoop & Russo, 1993;Hardy et al, 1995;Chatzoglou & Macaulay, 1996;Fitzgerald, 1996). Situational method engineering assumes that the developer can obtain detailed knowledge about the development situation (using a methodology) and make decisions about the applicable method.…”

Models in action: how management models are interpreted in new product development

“…systems development, management consulting) have demonstrated large discrepancies between the formal models and observed actions. For example, studies of the use of formal models for software development have repeatedly shown that the models are not rigidly followed (Leonard-Barton, 1987;Hardy et al, 1995;Fitzgerald, 1996Fitzgerald, , 1997Fitzgerald, , 1998Sauer and Lau, 1997). In fact, several studies in the context of systems development even suggest that a rigid use of models may lead to less efficient development work (Hardy et al, 1995;Wastell, 1996).…”

Distilling a body of knowledge for information systems development

“…As a term, Methodology is often confused with methods and techniques. Although the suffixlogy suggests Methodology is the 'study of methods', the term is often used as a more grandiose term for methods (Fitzgerald 1996). Hence, the traditional SDLC methodology may apply the same interview methods as the object-oriented methodology, but they differ in concepts, beliefs and expectations (Sircar et al, 2001).…”

“…There are even signs of cumulative tradition in agile development (Fitzgerald 2006) and object-orientation (Agarwal et al, 1996; Burton-Jones and Meso 2006), which are also topics within the Methodology knowledge area. Advanced methodological issues such as the move away from formal and traditional methodologies (Naumann and Jenkins 1982;Fitzgerald 1996) and how methodologies are actually applied in practice (Fitzgerald 1997;Hardgrave et al, 2003) have also been extensively studied and demonstrate cumulative tradition.…”