IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/orisre/v9y1998i3p233-255.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Attention Shaping and Software Risk—A Categorical Analysis of Four Classical Risk Management Approaches

Author

Listed:
  • Kalle Lyytinen

    (Department of Computer Science and Information Systems, University of Jyväskylä, Seminaarinkatu 15, PL 35, 40350 Jyväskylä, Finland)

  • Lars Mathiassen

    (Department of Computer Science, Aalborg University, Frederik Bajers Vej 7, DK-9220 Aalborg East, Denmark)

  • Janne Ropponen

    (Nokia Telecommunications, Network Management Systems, P.O. Box 759, 33101 Tampere, Finland)

Abstract

This paper examines software risk management in a novel way, emphasizing the ways in which managers address software risks through sequential attention shaping and intervention. Software risks are interpreted as incongruent states within a socio-technical model of organizational change that includes task, structure, technology, and actors. Such incongruence can lead to failures in developing or implementing the system and thus to major losses. Based on this model we synthesize a set of software risk factors and risk resolution techniques, which cover the socio-technical components and their interactions. We use the model to analyze how four classical risk management approaches—McFarlan's portfolio approach, Davis' contingency approach, Boehm's software risk approach, and Alter's and Ginzberg's implementation approach—shape managerial attention. This analysis shows that the four approaches differ significantly in their view of the manager's role and possible actions. We advise managers to be aware of the limitations of each approach and to combine them to orchestrate comprehensive risk management practices in a context. Overall, the paper provides a new interpretation of software risk management which goes beyond a narrow system rationalism by suggesting a contingent, contextual, and multivariate view of software development.

Suggested Citation

  • Kalle Lyytinen & Lars Mathiassen & Janne Ropponen, 1998. "Attention Shaping and Software Risk—A Categorical Analysis of Four Classical Risk Management Approaches," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 9(3), pages 233-255, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:inm:orisre:v:9:y:1998:i:3:p:233-255
    DOI: 10.1287/isre.9.3.233
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/isre.9.3.233
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/isre.9.3.233?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Orlikowski, Wanda J. (Wanda Janina), 1993. "CASE tools as organizational change : investigating incremental and radical changes in systems development," Working papers WP 3579-93., Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Sloan School of Management.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Mark A. Serva & Susan A. Sherer & Janice C. Sipior, 2003. "“When Do You ASP?” The Software Life Cycle Control Model," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 5(2), pages 219-232, April.
    2. Jengchung Victor Chen & I-Han Lu & David C. Yen & Andree E. Widjaja, 2017. "Factors affecting the performance of internal control task team in high-tech firms," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 19(4), pages 787-802, August.
    3. Kobelsky, Kevin & Hunter, Starling & Richardson, Vernon J., 2008. "Information technology, contextual factors and the volatility of firm performance," International Journal of Accounting Information Systems, Elsevier, vol. 9(3), pages 154-174.
    4. Jengchung Victor Chen & I-Han Lu & David C. Yen & Andree E. Widjaja, 0. "Factors affecting the performance of internal control task team in high-tech firms," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 0, pages 1-16.
    5. Sanjeev Dewan & Charles Shi & Vijay Gurbaxani, 2007. "Investigating the Risk-Return Relationship of Information Technology Investment: Firm-Level Empirical Analysis," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 53(12), pages 1829-1842, December.
    6. Judy E. Scott & Iris Vessey, 2000. "Implementing Enterprise Resource Planning Systems: The Role of Learning from Failure," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 2(2), pages 213-232, August.
    7. King, Stephen F. & Burgess, Thomas F., 2006. "Beyond critical success factors: A dynamic model of enterprise system innovation," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 26(1), pages 59-69.
    8. Jean-Grégoire Bernard & Suzanne Rivard & Benoit Aubert, 2002. "Évaluation du risque d'implantation de progiciel," CIRANO Project Reports 2002rp-15, CIRANO.
    9. Kobelsky, Kevin W. & Robinson, Michael A., 2010. "The impact of outsourcing on information technology spending," International Journal of Accounting Information Systems, Elsevier, vol. 11(2), pages 105-119.
    10. Jaegul Lee & Nicholas Berente, 2012. "Digital Innovation and the Division of Innovative Labor: Digital Controls in the Automotive Industry," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(5), pages 1428-1447, October.
    11. Jong Uk Kim & Rajiv Kishore, 2019. "Do we Fully Understand Information Systems Failure? An Exploratory Study of the Cognitive Schema of IS Professionals," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 21(6), pages 1385-1419, December.
    12. Michael L. Harris & Rosann Webb Collins & Alan R. Hevner, 2009. "Control of Flexible Software Development Under Uncertainty," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 20(3), pages 400-419, September.
    13. Bahli, Bouchaib & Rivard, Suzanne, 2005. "Validating measures of information technology outsourcing risk factors," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 175-187, April.
    14. Narayan Ramasubbu & Chris F. Kemerer, 2016. "Technical Debt and the Reliability of Enterprise Software Systems: A Competing Risks Analysis," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 62(5), pages 1487-1510, May.
    15. Andrea MAKINGS & Brian BARNARD, 2019. "The Heuristics of Entrepreneurs," Expert Journal of Business and Management, Sprint Investify, vol. 7(2), pages 179-203.
    16. Jong Seok Lee & Mark Keil & Eliezer Shalev, 2019. "Seeing the Trees or the Forest? The Effect of IT Project Managers’ Mental Construal on IT Project Risk Management Activities," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 30(3), pages 1051-1072, September.
    17. Hansen, Bo & Rose, Jeremy & Tjørnehøj, Gitte, 2004. "Prescription, description, reflection: the shape of the software process improvement field," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 24(6), pages 457-472.
    18. Michael Lapke, 2010. "Injecting Security Into Information Systems Development," Portuguese Journal of Management Studies, ISEG, Universidade de Lisboa, vol. 0(2), pages 235-248.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Lehmann, Hans & Gallupe, Brent, 2005. "Information systems for multinational enterprises--some factors at work in their design and implementation," Journal of International Management, Elsevier, vol. 11(2), pages 163-186, June.
    2. Vincent Mangematin, 2011. "How do Academics adopt new practices during a reform ? The Evolution of doctoral education in France 1992-2009," Working Papers hal-00658038, HAL.
    3. Denis Dennehy & Kieran Conboy & Jaganath Babu, 2023. "Adopting Learning Analytics to Inform Postgraduate Curriculum Design: Recommendations and Research Agenda," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 25(4), pages 1315-1331, August.
    4. Balasubramaniam Ramesh & Kannan Mohan & Lan Cao, 2012. "Ambidexterity in Agile Distributed Development: An Empirical Investigation," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 23(2), pages 323-339, June.
    5. Sunday C. Eze & Vera C. A. Chinedu-Eze & Hart O. Awa, 2021. "Key Success Factors (KSFs) Underlying the Adoption of Social Media Marketing Technology," SAGE Open, , vol. 11(2), pages 21582440211, April.
    6. Richard J. Boland & Kalle Lyytinen & Youngjin Yoo, 2007. "Wakes of Innovation in Project Networks: The Case of Digital 3-D Representations in Architecture, Engineering, and Construction," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 18(4), pages 631-647, August.
    7. Jong Uk Kim & Rajiv Kishore, 2019. "Do we Fully Understand Information Systems Failure? An Exploratory Study of the Cognitive Schema of IS Professionals," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 21(6), pages 1385-1419, December.
    8. Sven Heidenreich & Katrin Talke, 2020. "Consequences of mandated usage of innovations in organizations: developing an innovation decision model of symbolic and forced adoption," AMS Review, Springer;Academy of Marketing Science, vol. 10(3), pages 279-298, December.
    9. Joseph Feller & Patrick Finnegan & Brian Fitzgerald & Jeremy Hayes, 2008. "From Peer Production to Productization: A Study of Socially Enabled Business Exchanges in Open Source Service Networks," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 19(4), pages 475-493, December.
    10. Irsa, Wolfram, 2019. "The Silent Diffusion of Sticky Costs in the HoReCa Industry," Proceedings of the ENTRENOVA - ENTerprise REsearch InNOVAtion Conference (2019), Rovinj, Croatia, in: Proceedings of the ENTRENOVA - ENTerprise REsearch InNOVAtion Conference, Rovinj, Croatia, 12-14 September 2019, pages 130-136, IRENET - Society for Advancing Innovation and Research in Economy, Zagreb.
    11. Havelka, Douglas & Merhout, Jeffrey W., 2013. "Internal information technology audit process quality: Theory development using structured group processes," International Journal of Accounting Information Systems, Elsevier, vol. 14(3), pages 165-192.
    12. Maria Chiara Di Guardo & Francesca Cabiddu, 2015. "E-service innovation: combining directed and practice-based approaches," The Service Industries Journal, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 35(1-2), pages 81-95, January.
    13. Hunter, Starling David, 2003. "Same Technology, Different Outcome? Lessons on Dummy Variables & Dependent Variable Transformations," Working papers 4308-03, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Sloan School of Management.
    14. repec:dgr:rugsom:95b26 is not listed on IDEAS
    15. Karin Olesen, 2014. "Technological Frames," SAGE Open, , vol. 4(1), pages 21582440145, March.
    16. Shu-Kung Hu & James J. H. Liou & Ming-Tsang Lu & Yen-Ching Chuang & Gwo-Hshiung Tzeng, 2018. "Improving NFC Technology Promotion for Creating the Sustainable Education Environment by Using a Hybrid Modified MADM Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-24, April.
    17. Lakshmi Balachandran Nair, 2021. "From ‘Whodunit’ to ‘How’: Detective Stories and Auditability in Qualitative Business Ethics Research," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 172(2), pages 195-209, August.
    18. Cuellar, Michael J. & Gallivan, Michael J., 2006. "A framework for ex ante project risk assessment based on absorptive capacity," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 173(3), pages 1123-1138, September.
    19. Ahmed, Zafor, 2018. "Explaining the unpredictability: A social capital perspective on ICT intervention," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 38(1), pages 175-186.
    20. Walid Cheffi & Sonia Abdennadher, 2019. "Executives’ Behaviour and Innovation in Corporate Governance: The Case of Internet Voting at Shareholders’ General Meetings in French Listed Companies," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 156(3), pages 775-798, May.
    21. Gregory D. Moody & Laurie J. Kirsch & Sandra A. Slaughter & Brian Kimball Dunn & Qin Weng, 2016. "Facilitating the Transformational: An Exploration of Control in Cyberinfrastructure Projects and the Discovery of Field Control," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 27(2), pages 324-346, June.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:inm:orisre:v:9:y:1998:i:3:p:233-255. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Asher (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.