Towards a conceptualisation of quality in information technology projects

Geraldi, Joana; Kutsch, Elmar; Turner, Neil

doi:10.1016/j.ijproman.2010.06.004

Cited by 36 publications

(29 citation statements)

References 42 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Individual projects utilise elements of standardised technology solutions together with well-defined operational processes and structures, emphasising exploitation. However, since each customer requirement offers its own unique set of challenges, this must be supported by exploratory activities (Geraldi et al, 2011b). This project-based context is therefore one that provides an ideal environment to examine the mechanisms by which ambidexterity is achieved at an operational level.…”

Section: Case Context and Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ambidexterity in projects: An intellectual capital perspective

Turner

Maylor

Swart

2015

International Journal of Project Management

Self Cite

119

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We identify the desirability of simultaneously using knowledge assets both to exploit and explore (ambidexterity) and highlight the significance of this for the project context. We use an intellectual capital perspective and theorise that managing projects draws upon human, social and organisational capital. We examine how this is used by managers, in a qualitative study in technology projects, to explain better how ambidexterity is achieved.Ambidexterity in the use of knowledge assets is shown to exist in the practices of managers but without them necessarily having a conscious strategy for it. We identify the mechanisms by which this happens and note the distinctive role of social capital. We demonstrate the integrative nature of the mechanisms, and how each mechanism can involve the deployment of either single or multiple elements of intellectual capital. In so doing we extend the existing theory to the operational level and demonstrate the utility of this approach.

show abstract

Section: Case Context and Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ambidexterity in projects: An intellectual capital perspective

Turner

Maylor

Swart

2015

International Journal of Project Management

Self Cite

119

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Care must be taken in interpreting its benefits, though, as a single factor such as sales growth rate (e.g. He and Wong 2004) may be achieved by trading‐off other aspects, whereas achieving multiple, potentially contradictory, objectives can be understood in terms of ambidexterity (Geraldi et al . 2011).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mechanisms for Managing Ambidexterity: A Review and Research Agenda

Turner

Swart

Maylor

2012

Int J Management Reviews

Self Cite

404

405

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Ambidexterity is of central importance to the competitive advantage of the firm, yet to date there is limited understanding of how it is managed. The theorization of ambidexterity is inadequate for complex, practical realities and, in turn, this hinders the way in which it can aid the management of ambidexterity in practice. This paper asks: What are the mechanisms for achieving ambidexterity? The authors use a systematic review to develop a research framework which integrates intellectual capital resources (organizational, social and human capital) across various levels of analysis (organization, group and individual). This review extends understanding of the generic mechanisms (i.e. temporal, structural and contextual ambidexterity) that dominate the literature. This allows for a more fine‐grained understanding of how ambidexterity is achieved and enables avenues for further research to be identified.

show abstract

“…However, software project risk management seems to be rather immature as risks are still not managed effectively (Aloini et al, 2007;Bannerman, 2008;de Bakker et al, 2010;Geraldi et al, 2011;Kappelman et al, 2006;Kutsch and Hall, 2005;Osipova and Eriksson, 2013). In addition to technical risks, software projects are subjected to organizational risks since they affect or are affected by the way of doing things in an organization (Benaroch et al, 2006;Sanderson, 2012;Sharma and Gupta, 2012).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%