The way in which project teams respond to problems and manage risks during IT project developments is affected by the organizational context. In particular, it is affected by the implicit ‘contract’ between the team and the organization. This contract is controlled through the adherence to formal methodologies and the use of organizational control system. This paper looks at risk management from the point of view of team behaviour, focusing on behavioural response to risks in terms of effort and risk aversion. Three case studies of project team behaviour are used to illustrate the types of risk management behaviour which may arise under different contracts between project team and organization.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BeathC., and IvesP. (1989). The information technology champion: aiding and abetting, care and feeding. Oxford Institute of Information Management Research and Discussion Papers RPD89/2, Templeton College Oxford.
2.
BessantJ. (1991). Managing advanced Manufacturing Technology: The Challenge of the Fifth Wave (NCC-Blackwell, Manchester).
3.
BoehmB.W. (1988). A spiral model of software development and enhancement. ACM Sigsoft, Software Engineering Notes, 11(4) 14–23.
4.
BurnsR.M., and DennisA.R. (1985). Selecting an appropriate application development methodology. DataBase, Fall, 19–23.
5.
CashJ., McFarlanW., and McKenneyJ. (1992). Corporate Information Systems Management (Irwin, Boston).
6.
CorderC. (1989). Taming Your Company Computer (McGraw-Hill, London).
7.
DavisG.B. (1982). Strategies for information requirements determination. IBM Systems Journal21(1) 4–29.
8.
JensenM.C., and MecklingW.H. (1976). Theory of the firm: managerial behaviour, agency costs and ownership structure. Journal of Financial Economics, 3305–60.
9.
KearneyA.T. (1990). Breaking the Barriers: IT Effectiveness in Great Britain and Ireland (CIMA, London).
10.
KwonT., and ZmudR. (1987). Unifying the fragnemented models of information systems implementation, in Critical issues in Information Systems Research, BolanJ., and HirschheimR. (eds) (Wiley, Chichester).
11.
LevinthalD. (1988). A survey of agency models of organizations. Journals of Economic Behaviour and Organization9, 153–85.
12.
LyytinenK., and HirschheimR. (1987). Information systems failures – a survey and classification of the empirical literature in Oxford Surveys of Information Technology, ZorkoczyP. (ed), Vol. 4 (Oxford University Press, Oxford).
13.
MathiassenL., and StageJ. (1990). Complexity and uncertainty in software design. IEEE, 482–89.
14.
McFarlanF.W., and McKennyJ.L. (1983). Corporate Information Systems Management – The Issues Facing Senior Management (Irwin, Illinois).
15.
OuchiW. (1979). A conceptual framework for the design of organisation control mechanisms. Management Science, 25, 833–48.
16.
OTR group (1992). Reported Computer Weekly, 12 December.
17.
ParkerM., BensonR., and TrainorE. (1988). Information Economics: Linking Business Performance to Information Technology (Prentice-Hall, New Jersey).
18.
PettigrewA., FerlieE., and McKeeL. (1992). Shaping Strategic Change (Sage, London).
19.
SaarinenT. (1990). System development methodology and project success: an empirical assessment of situational approaches. Information Systems and Management, 19, 183–93.
20.
SaarinenT., and SaaksjarviM. (1989). Success of information systems in large Finnish organisations. Helsinki School of Economics Series D: 116.
21.
SaarinenT., and VepsalainenA. (1993). Managing the risks of information systems implementation. European Journal of Information Systems, 2(4), 283–95.
22.
Scott MortonM. (ed.) (1991). The Corporation of the 1990s (Oxford University Press, Oxford).
23.
WillcocksL., and MargettsH. (1993). Risk assessment and information systems. European Journal of Information Systems3(2), 127–38.
24.
WillcocksL., and GriffithsC. (1994). Predicting risk of failure in large-scale information technology projects. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 47, 205–28.
