Previous Table of Contents Next


Structuring

A manager has several alternatives that can alter the balances of influence. The first alternative — choosing project participants — has the greatest impact. In an ideal situation, a manager can choose from a pool of personnel that includes both users and developers with varying degrees of skill, expertise, and knowledge. Unfortunately, if the pool is small, the number of possible combinations is reduced. As a result, training may prove to be a valuable tool for users becoming more knowledgeable about technology and developers becoming more knowledgeable about the business processes and functions.

As suggested in the framework presented, the goals of these individuals may be the most important factor in improving the social process of system development. For example, involving novice or less experienced individuals on a project is desirable when the project participants perceive their goals as positively related; however, serious communication problems arise if these same participants have negatively related goals.

To increase cooperation, the goals of the development team should be structured so that the individuals’ goals are positively related. This may be accomplished in a number of ways.

Make Project Team Members Equally and Jointly Accountable. This may be in terms of a bonus or merit system under which each of the project team members is equally and jointly accountable for the success or failure of the information system. In other words, both the users and developers should be concerned with such issues as the functionality of the system and with cost/schedule overruns.

Goals Should Be Made Explicit. Each individual involved in the development of the information system should have a clear, consistent perception that his or her goals are related in such a way that all sink or swim together. It is important not only that users and developers be held accountable using the same reward or merit system, but also that they are aware that each is held accountable in the same way.

Management’s Actions Must Reinforce Project Team Goals. It is important that management not allow project team members the opportunity to point fingers or assign blame. Subsequently, the actions of management must be consistent with the goals of the project team members. This is the most difficult challenge of all, because a change in values, attitudes, and possibly culture is required. For example, if goals are to be positively related, there can be no “us versus them” ideology. Instead, both users and developers should see themselves as part of the same team.

Monitoring

The goals and perceptions of the individuals may change over the course of the project. Just as the allocation of time and resources must be monitored during a project, the social process between the project participants should be monitored as well. Monitoring should be continual during the project to identify any problems or negative conflict before they adversely affect the project. Similar to assessment, a manager may want to look for warning signs. Examples of warning signs include:

Finger Pointing When Problems Arise. Project team members should fix the problem, not the blame.

Negative Conflict. Individuals focus on petty issues that do not move them closer to their goals but only serve one party at the expense of the other. However, users and developers should agree to disagree. Conflict can be positive, especially when developing innovative approaches or refining new ideas.

Lack of Participation or Interest. All members of the project should be involved actively. However, even when all members perceive themselves as having a cooperative relationship, some individuals may become less involved. This may occur when the balance of influence is one sided. Too often systems developers take control of the IS project and attempt to act in the best interest of the users. Although the developers may mean well, they may attempt to develop a system that the user never asked for and does not want.

Assessment, structuring, and monitoring should be a cycle. If specific problems are identified, a manager should assess the balance of influence and goals of the project team members. Changes can be made to alter or fine-tune the balances of influence or goals among the members. By managing this social process between users and developers, a manager increases the likelihood that systems that meet the objectives originally envisioned are developed on time and within budget.

SUMMARY

This chapter suggests that even though users and developers may work for the same organization, they do not always share the same goals. Subsequently, problems in ISD arise, especially when the user is more interested in functionality and the developer is more interested in maintaining cost/time schedules.

Cooperation facilitates improved communication and leads to greater productivity, because individuals perceive their goals as being positively related. In addition, the goals of the individuals provide some insight as to how each party uses its influence in the development of an information system. This idea was presented through a classification of user and developer relationships that considered their interdependency of goals and their balance of influence. Using this framework, a manager can assess, structure, and monitor the social relationship between users and developers. Managing this social relationship may result in more systems being developed within budget and on schedule and that meet the needs of the user.


Previous Table of Contents Next

Copyright © CRC Press LLC