11.1 organisational themes; people themes semester 2, 2005 ims3230 - information systems development...
Post on 20-Dec-2015
226 views
TRANSCRIPT
11.1
Organisational Themes;People themes
Semester 2, 2005
IMS3230 - Information Systems Development Practices
11.2
References
Avison, D.E. & Fitzgerald, G. (2003). Information Systems Development: Methodologies, Techniques and Tools. (3rd ed), McGraw-Hill, London. Chapters 1, 4.2-4.6, 6.6, 7, 15, 16
Kolb, D.A., Rubin, I.M. and Osland, J. (1995). Organisational Behaviour: An Experiential Approach. (6th ed) Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs.
Schermerhorn, J.R., Hunt, J.G. and Osborn, R.N. (2000). Managing Organizational Behavior. (7th ed). Wiley, New York.
11.3
Strategic information systems Business process re-engineering (BPR) Information systems planning Organisational change
Organisational themes in ISD
11.4
strategic information systems:
early computerisation focused on basic transaction processing:
cost savings quantifiable, perform same processing more efficiently
limitations of further efficiency gains:
opportunities limited as more projects completed
some opportunities unlikely to demonstrate these types of savings
emergence of an additional role for information systems and IT:
a direct tool for gaining competitive advantage
Organisational themes in ISD
11.5
strategic information systems
use information systems to improve the business in the market place:
competitive advantage:
- redefine the boundaries of specific industries
- develop new products and services
- change the relationships between customers and suppliers
- establish barriers to deter new entrants to the market place
cost justifications more difficult:
- benefits are not reduced costs
- need to show that benefits (e.g. improved service) will be recognised
- implications for methodologies
11.6
business process re-engineering (BPR):
opportunity to re-engineer business processes which is enabled by technology:
“the fundamental rethinking and radical redesign of business processes to achieve dramatic improvements in critical, contemporary measures of performance, such as cost, quality, service, and speed”
Hammer and Champy (1993)
what an organisation should do, how it should do it, what its concerns should be, not what they currently are
Business process re-engineering (BPR)
11.7
motivations for re-engineering
- no choice commercially
- competitive forces require re-aligning business processes with strategic positioning
- organisation management see re-engineering as an opportunity to streamline and to overtake their competitors
- the “band wagon” effect: copy the competitors
Business process re-engineering (BPR)
11.8
Hammer and Champy’s model
- combine several jobs which are performed by a “case worker” responsible for an entire process
- “case team” members are empowered to find ways to:
improve service and quality, reduce costs and cycle times
- process integration means less checks and controls
- less defects as the entire process is completed by those responsible for the final product
- process steps determined by those completing the task
- parallel processing of entire operations is possible
Business process re-engineering (BPR)
11.9
BPR: experiences of project failures (and failure rates)
- senior managers lack motivation for organisational change: BPR must be driven from the top
- extent of necessary change not fully recognised
- piecemeal approaches mean individual process gains not translated into organisational level improvement
- failure by top management to adequately define future operations
- non-critical business operations addressed
- motivation is publicity/bandwagon or management’s reputation
- short-term financial pressures result in lack of resources
- BPR is radical change, not TQM etc.
Business process re-engineering (BPR)
11.10
planning approaches:
stress the planning required to develop an organisation’s information systems
top management involved in analysing the organisation’s objectives
plan for the use of IS/IT to achieve the business objectives
avoid a piecemeal approach to IS development
align IS/IT with the business
planning at three levels: long term, medium term, short term
Information systems planning
11.11
- organisation-wide perspective promotes integration
- involvement of top management
- IBM's BSP (Business Systems Planning 1975)
• strategic management view of entire organisation
• top management defines organisational needs
and priorities
• establish a stable information architecture
• implementation from bottom up
Information systems planning approaches
11.12
introducing and managing organisational change:
- new information systems
- new information technology
for systems development:
- new system development methodologies
- new system development technologies
- new system development techniques user perspectives systems developers as users: changing roles and technology
Organisational change
11.13
organisational targets for change (Kolb et al 1991) the people subsystem:
personnel flow, education the authority subsystem:
formal authority relationships, informal leadership patterns the information subsystem: formal, informal the task subsystem: job satisfaction, technology the policy/culture subsystem: formal explicit, informal implicit the environmental subsystem: internal physical environment,
external environment
Organisational change
11.14
resistance to change: feedback that can be used constructively by the change agent why do people resist change?
- fear of the unknown
- doubts about future competence
- comfort with the status quo
- vested interests threatened
- “surprise” factor
- poor timing
- lack of resources
- job security
Organisational change
11.16
Organisational change
acceptance criteria for changes:
changes must have clear, appropriate benefits
changes must be compatible with existing values and experiences
changes must not be too complex
changes should be able to be tried on an incremental or experimental basis
11.17
Organisational change
strategies for gaining support for change:
force - coercion: legitimacy, rewards, punishment
rational persuasion: expert power, rational argument
shared power: trust-based, common vision
11.18
Organisational change
dealing with resistance to change:
(Schermerhorn et al 1994)
• education and communication
• participation and involvement
• facilitation and support
• negotiation and agreement
• manipulation
• explicit and implicit coercion
11.19
SCOUTING
ENTRY
DIAGNOSIS
PLANNING
ACTION
EVALUATION
INSTITUTIONALISATION
The Process of Planned Change
Kolb et al (1991) p. 593
Initiating and managing change
11.20
scouting
determine readiness for change, obvious obstacles
entry
negotiate a "contract" with entry point representatives
diagnosis
the perceived problem, goals, resources available
planning
define change objectives, alternative solutions, strategies
action
implement change: activities, resistance, monitor
evaluation
relate to objectives
institutionalisation
complete vs continuous
Initiating and managing change
11.21
Some potential solutions:
Participative approaches Management commitment/leadership Improved human-computer interfaces Training and education: developers and business
users End user computing JRP and JAD sessions
People themes in ISD
11.22
User participation
early systems development approaches:
- focus on technical aspects of computer systems
- little actual decision-making by users
problems:
- users resented developers as “outsiders” with little understanding of the business environment
- systems “imposed” on users and not “user friendly”
- systems did not adequately support business needs
11.23
User participation: definitions
Barki and Hartwick (1989) distinguish between:
user participation
a set of activities and behaviours performed by users
user involvement
a subjective, psychological state when a user considers a system to be both important and personally relevant
How do these affect system usage and user satisfaction?
How can we define and measure user satisfaction?
11.24
User participation: definitions
participation as user involvement in systems design:
“ a process in which two or more parties influence each other in making plans, policies or decisions. It is restricted to decisions that have future effects on all those making the decisions or those represented by them”
(Mumford 1983, p. 22)
participation may have different meanings for different groups:
e.g. morally right, employee commitment, management tool, empowerment of employees etc.
11.25
three levels are identified by Mumford (1983): consultative
all users are consulted about/contribute ideas to the design process but the design task is carried out by systems analysts
representative
design groups formed from elected or selected representatives take design decisions
consensus
design group members constantly discuss ideas and solutions with all users
Mumford’s three levels of user participation
11.26
expected benefits of user participation: improved system quality:
more complete, accurate requirements
provides expertise about the organisation
avoids development of unacceptable or unimportant features
improves user understanding of the system increased user acceptance:
realistic expectations
“arena” for conflict resolution
users more committed to the system
decreased user resistance
User participation
11.27
User participation and ISD methodologies Structured analysis
user walkthroughs, users select implementation option SSADM
user walkthroughs, user representation in development teams, users select technical option,
Information Engineering
users active in design activities, management involved in ISP and BAA, user reviews
SSM
users part of team: problem owners and solvers ETHICS
users do the design
11.28
End-user computing Enabled by PCs and application packages for non-IT
people
e.g. spreadsheets, database, VisualBASIC etc Users in business organisations were able to build their
own business applications, either stand-alone or integrated with organisational systems
Definitions of end-user computing:
e.g.
“the practice of end-users developing, maintaining, and using their own information systems”
(Mirani and King 1994)
11.29
Early 1980s: user-driven computing
-end-user computing enabled by introduction of PCs
-decentralisation of computing resources
Resulted in user satisfaction:
-met needs unlikely to be satisfied by IT departments
-some pressure off IT departments
-end-users “close” to the business problems
-systems resourced/costed within user department budgets
End-user computing
11.30
problems of control:
validity and integrity of data
lack of documentation
security issues
maintainability
application “islands”
duplication and inconsistencies
assistance required by users
End-user computing
11.31
A “solution”: Information Centres
-Staffed and run by IT department
-Provide consultation, software and tools, liaison with vendors etc. to assist users in developing their own departmental information systems
Significant in 1980s and early 1990s Increasingly sophisticated users of today have no need
for Information Centres Users today need support from IT corporate specialists
when developing customer-oriented systems in particular
i.e. change from the tactical, problem-solving role of the past to a strategic, consultant role
End-user computing
11.32
can be for analysis and/or design originated in late 1970s at IBM bring together key users, managers, systems analysts in a group
meeting with a specific structure of roles and agenda JRP (Joint Requirements Planning): key system requirements JAD: specify the system’s design (external design only) group meeting:
avoid distractions
identify areas of agreement and conflict
resolve conflicts during the period of sessions
JAD (Joint Application Development)
11.33
JAD participants:
facilitator: organise and run the sessions scribe(s): takes notes on a PC, CASE tool etc users: understand the system requirements managers: organisational overview systems analysts: technical knowledge,
learn about the system sponsor: senior executive who commits and funds
the process
JAD sessions: roles
11.34
JAD sessions: from one to five days structured meeting room with white boards etc.,
CASE tools located away from users’ workplace outcome is documents detailing the system:
workings of/requirements for the system/design
Joint Application Development (JAD)
11.35
JAD sessions
benefits: reduced time to move requirements/design forward
(group vs one-on-one, details worked on between meetings)
key people work together to make important decisions commitment is focused and intensive, not dissipated
over time conflicts and differences can be understood and
resolved
improved quality and productivity