This study uses a survey of U.S. state government information technology (IT) project management practitioners to investigate the utilization of IT project selection and evaluation methodologies-financial and qualitative–and to assess the empirical relationship between the chosen methods and several measures of perceived project success. The analysis presents evidence that financial project selection and evaluation methodologies appear to be important in obtaining better control over project costs.
BaconC. J. (1992). The use of decision criteria in selecting information systems/technology investments. MIS Quarterly, 16(3), 335–353.
2.
BajjalyS. (1999). Managing emerging information systems in the public sector. Public Productivity & Management Review, 23(1), 40–47.
3.
BallantineJ., & StrayS. (1998). Financial appraisal and the IS/IT investment decision making process. Journal of Information Technology, 13, 3–14.
4.
BannisterF., & RemenyiD. (2000). Acts of faith: Instinct, value, and IT investment decisions. Journal of Information Technology, 15(3), 231–241.
5.
BeloutA., & GauvreauC. (2004). Factors influencing project success: The impact of human resource management. International Journal of Project Management, 22, 1–11.
6.
BozemanB., & BretschneiderS. (1986). Public management information systems. Public Administration Review, 46, 475–487.
7.
BozemanB., & KingsleyG. (1998). Risk culture in public and private organizations. Public Administration Review, 58(2), 109–118.
8.
BretschneiderS. (1990). Management information systems in public and private organizations: An empirical test. Public Administration Review, 50, 536–545.
9.
BrownM. (2003). Technology diffusion and the “knowledge barrier” the dilemma of stakeholder participation. Public Performance & Management Review, 26(4), 345–359.
10.
Cabral-CardosoC., & PayneR. L.(1996). Instrumental and supportive use of formal selection methods in R&D project selection. IEEE Transactions in Engineering Management, 43(4), 402–410.
11.
Capability Maturity Model Integration (CMMI). (1993). CMU/SEI-93-TR-24, Capability Maturity Model for Software, V1.1. Pittsburgh, PA: Carnegie Mellon University.
12.
CaudleS., GorrW., & NewcomerK. (1991). Key information systems management issues for the public sector. MIS Quarterly, 15(2), 171–188.
13.
ChapmanC. B., WardS. C., & KleinJ. H. (2006). An optimized multiple test framework for project selection in the public sector, with a nuclear waste disposal case-based example. International Journal of Project Management, 24(5), 373–384.
14.
ChengE.W. L., & LiH. (2005). Analytic network process applied to project selection. Journal of Construction Engineering & Management, 131(4), 459–466.
15.
DietzR., & RenkemaT. (1995). Planning and justifying investments in information technology: A framework with case study illustrations. In BrownA. & RenkemaD. (Eds.), Proceedings of the Second European Conference on Information Technology Investment Evaluation (pp. 28–41). Birmingham, UK: The Operational Research Society.
16.
DuarteB. P. M., & ReisA. (2006). Developing a projects evaluation system based on multiple attribute value theory. Computers & Operations Research, 33(5), 1488–1504.
17.
EvansJ. R., & OlsonD. L. (2003). Statistics, data analysis, and decision modeling(2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
18.
FarbeyB., LandF., & TargettD. (1992). Appraising investments in IT. Journal of Information Technology, 7, 109–122.
19.
FessP. C., & WarrenC. S. (1993). Accounting principles.New York: Thomson.
20.
FinchP. (2003, September). Applying the Slevin-Pinto project management profile to an information systems project. Project Management Journal, 34(3), 32–39.
21.
FitzgeraldG. (1998). Evaluating information systems projects: A multidimensional approach. Journal of Information Technology, 13, 15–27.
22.
FlaigJ. J. (2005). Improving project selection using expected net present value analysis. Quality Engineering, 17(4), 535–538.
23.
GabrielS. A., KumarS., OrdóñezJ., & NasserianA. (2006). A multiobjective optimization model for project selection with probabilistic considerations. Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, 40(4), 297–313.
24.
GinzbergM. J., & ZmudR.W. (1988). Evolving criteria for information systems assessment. In Bjorn-AndersonN. & DavisG. B. (Eds.), Information systems assessment: Issues and challenges (pp. 41–52). Amsterdam: North Holland.
25.
HintonM., & KayeR. (1996). Investing in information technology: A lottery?Management Accounting, 74(10), 52.
26.
HochstrasserB. (1992). Justifying IT investments. Proceedings of the Advanced Information Systems Conference (London) (pp. 17–28).
27.
JiangJ. J., & KleinG. (1999). Information system project-selection criteria variations within strategic classes. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 46(2), 171–176.
28.
JiangJ., KleinG., & BallounJ. (1996, December). Ranking of system implementation success factors. Project Management Journal, 27, 49–53.
29.
KeilM. (1995). Pulling the plug: Software project management and the problem of project escalation. MIS Quarterly, 19(4), 421–447.
30.
KeilM., MannJ., & RaiA. (2000). Why software projects escalate: An empirical analysis and test of four theoretical models. MIS Quarterly, 24(4), 631–664.
31.
KleinG., & BeckP. O. (1987). A decision aid for selecting among information system alternatives. MIS Quarterly, 11(2), 177–185.
32.
KulakO., KahramanC., ÖztaysiB., & TanyasM. (2005). Multi-attribute information technology project selection using fuzzy axiomatic design. Journal of Enterprise Information Management, 18(3), 275–288.
33.
LiesiöJ., MildP., & SaloA. (2007). Preference programming for robust portfolio modeling and project selection. European Journal of Operational Research, 181(3), 1488–1505.
34.
MohantyR. P., AgarwalR., ChoudhuryA. K., & TiwariM. K. (2005). A fuzzy ANP-based approach to R&D project selection: A case study. International Journal of Production Research, 43(24), 5199–5216.
35.
MullenR., & DonnellyJ. T. (2006). Keeping it real—Building an ROI model for an ambulatory EMR initiative that the physician practices espouse. Journal of Healthcare Information Management, 20(1), 42–52.
36.
NuttP. (1999). Public-private differences and the assessment of alternatives for decision making. Journal of Public Administration Theory and Research, 9, 305–350.
37.
OlsonD. (2004). Introduction to project management (2nd ed.). New York: Irwin/McGraw-Hill.
38.
OmitaomuO. A., & BadiruA. B. (2007). Fuzzy present value analysis model for evaluating information system projects. The Engineering Economist, 52, 157–178.
39.
PaisittanandS., & OlsonD. L. (2006). A simulation study of IT outsourcing in the credit card business. European Journal of Operational Research, 175(2), 1248–1261.
40.
PattonN., & ShechetA. (2007). Earned value management: Are expectations too high?CrossTalk, 20(1), 10–15.
41.
PintoJ., & SlevinD. (1989). Critical success factors in R&D projects. Research in Technology Management, 32(1), 31–35.
42.
PowellP. (1992). Information technology evaluation: Is it different?Journal of the Operational Research Society, 43(1), 29–42.
43.
SchellG. P. (1986). Establishing the value of information systems. Interfaces, 16(3), 82–89.
44.
SondeT. (2004). 11 ways to leave your legacy systems behind—FAR behind. Government Procurement, 12(1), 6–8.
YuA. G., FlettP. D., & BowersJ. A. (2005). Developing a value-centered proposal for assessing project success. International Journal of Project Management, 23(6), 428–436.
