mustafa degerli - 2010 - dissertation review - is 720 research methods in information systems

Middle East Technical University

Informatics Institute

Department of Information Systems

IS 720 Research Methods in Information Systems

Dissertation Review Report

Fall 2010

Mustafa DEĞERLİ - 1382142 11/4/2010

1

Preface

This report has seven clauses, namely General Information, Introduction of the Dissertation,

Literature Review of the Dissertation, Methodology of the Dissertation, Results of the

Dissertation, Conclusions, Implications, Recommendations, and Summary of the

Dissertation, and Adoption for My Study.

In General Information clause, Title, Author, Location, Time, Intended Purpose of the

Completion of the Dissertation, Contributors, and the Citation of the Dissertation are provided.

In Introduction of the Dissertation, Literature Review of the Dissertation, Methodology of

the Dissertation, Results of the Dissertation, Conclusions, Implications, Recommendations,

and Summary of the Dissertation clauses, each of these special chapters of the dissertation are

reviewed. Additionally, the outlines of the each chapter of the dissertation are provided and the

information provided in each chapter is summarized and commented. In this context, main

purpose or outcome of the study (as stated by the author), methodology that is used in the

literature review part (inductive vs. deductive or both), research design model (single linear or

multi method), and data collection methods and instruments (self developed or adopted or

standardized) of the study, and the quality of the last chapter in terms of answering research

questions are explained in each related clauses.

In Adoption for My Study clause, potential of any data collection/analysis techniques that I

think I can adopt for my own study and other sorts of adoptions and benefits that I am to take

into account in my own study are explained.

2

Table of Contents

Preface ..............................................................................................................................................1

Table of Contents ...............................................................................................................................2

1 General Information ...................................................................................................................5

1.1 Title ..................................................................................................................................................... 5

1.2 Author ................................................................................................................................................. 5

1.3 Where ................................................................................................................................................. 5

1.4 When ................................................................................................................................................... 5

1.5 For ....................................................................................................................................................... 5

1.6 With ..................................................................................................................................................... 5

1.7 Citation ................................................................................................................................................ 6

2 Introduction of the Dissertation ..................................................................................................7

2.1 Outline of the Chapter ........................................................................................................................ 7

2.2 Problem Statement ............................................................................................................................. 7

2.3 Goal ..................................................................................................................................................... 8

2.4 Hypotheses and Research Questions .................................................................................................. 8

Hypothesis 1 (H1) .................................................................................................................................. 8

Research Question 1 (RQ1) ................................................................................................................... 9


Hypothesis 2 (H2) .................................................................................................................................. 9



2.5 Assumptions, Barriers and Issues ....................................................................................................... 9

Assumptions .......................................................................................................................................... 9

Barriers and Issues .............................................................................................................................. 10

2.5 Overall Evaluation of the Chapter ..................................................................................................... 10

Table 1: Maturity Table for the 1st Chapter of the Dissertation ..................................................... 10

3 Literature Review of the Dissertation ........................................................................................ 11

3.1 Outline of the Chapter ...................................................................................................................... 11

3.1 Defining IS/IT ..................................................................................................................................... 11

3

3.2 Methodology used in the Literature Review .................................................................................... 12

Figure 1: Literature Review – Deductive Methodology Flow ......................................................... 12

Figure 2: Literature Review – Inductive Methodology Flow ........................................................... 13


Table 2: Maturity Table for the 2nd Chapter of the Dissertation..................................................... 14

4 Methodology of the Dissertation .............................................................................................. 15


4.2 Research Design Model..................................................................................................................... 15

Figure 3: Phases of the Research Design ........................................................................................ 16


Table 3: Maturity Table for the 3rd Chapter of the Dissertation ..................................................... 17

5 Results of the Dissertation ........................................................................................................ 18


5.2 Results ............................................................................................................................................... 18

Figure 4: Model Development ........................................................................................................ 19

Table 4: Content-analytic Summary ................................................................................................ 20


Table 5: Maturity Table for the 4th Chapter of the Dissertation ..................................................... 21

6 Conclusions, Implications, Recommendations, and Summary of the Dissertation ....................... 22


6.2 Summary and Evaluation of the Last Chapter of Dissertation .......................................................... 23

Table 6: Constructs, Descriptions and Sub-classifications .............................................................. 24

Figure 5: Developed Conceptual Model ......................................................................................... 25

Table 7: Checklist for Conducting IS/IT Evaluations ........................................................................ 26

6.3 Quality of the Last Chapter Concerning Answers for Research Questions ....................................... 27

Hypothesis 1 (H1) ................................................................................................................................ 27

Research Question 1 (RQ1) ................................................................................................................. 27


Hypothesis 2 (H2) ................................................................................................................................ 27



Answer for Research Question #1: ..................................................................................................... 28

4


Conclusion for Hypothesis #1: ............................................................................................................ 28



Conclusion for Hypothesis #2: ............................................................................................................ 30

Table 8: Maturity Table for the 5th Chapter of the Dissertation ..................................................... 30

7 Adoption for My Study ............................................................................................................. 31

7.1 My Study’s Title and Abstract ........................................................................................................... 31

Title ..................................................................................................................................................... 31

Abstract ............................................................................................................................................... 31

7.2 Adoptions .......................................................................................................................................... 32

5

1 General Information

1.1 Title

The title of the reviewed dissertation is “A Model for the Evaluation of IS/IT Investments.”

1.2 Author

The author of the reviewed dissertation is “Paul M. Tuten.”

1.3 Where

The reviewed dissertation is completed in “Graduate School of Computer and Information

Sciences in Nova Southeastern University.”

1.4 When

The reviewed dissertation is completed in “January 2009.”

1.5 For

The reviewed dissertation is completed as a “Dissertation Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of

the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Information Systems.”

1.6 With

The reviewed dissertation is completed by Paul M. Tuten with the following academic staff:

John Scigliano, Ed.D. as Chairperson of Dissertation Committee

William L. Hafner, Ph.D. as Dissertation Committee Member

Sumitra Mukherjee, Ph.D. as Dissertation Committee Member

6

1.7 Citation

The reviewed dissertation’s citation is provided below.

Tuten, P. M. A model for the evaluation of IS/IT investments. Ph.D. dissertation, Nova

Southeastern University, United States - Florida. Retrieved October 31, 2010, from

Dissertations & Theses: Full Text. (Publication No. AAT 3344877).

7

2 Introduction of the Dissertation

2.1 Outline of the Chapter

The “Introduction” part of the reviewed dissertation has the following parts:

Problem Statement,

Goal,

Hypotheses, Research Questions & Assumptions,

Relevance & Significance,

Barriers and Issues,

Limitations / Delimitations of Study,

Resource Requirements,

Summary, and

Definition of Terms.

2.2 Problem Statement

The problem investigated in the study was the complexity and difficulty faced by practitioners in

evaluating investments in IS/IT.

The researcher tries to criticize that evaluation of the investments in IS/IT by practitioners is a

complex and difficult task to do under the current conditions.

8

2.3 Goal

The researcher’s goals were

to examine IS/IT evaluation, together with its approaches, techniques, and methods, as

well as their application in organizations, and

to develop a theoretical model to offer guidelines for organizations to occupy

contextually-sensitive evaluation methods.

2.4 Hypotheses and Research Questions

The researcher proposed two hypotheses and two research questions for each of these

hypotheses. Specifically, there are two hypotheses and four research questions in the related

reviewed dissertation.

Hypothesis 1 (H1)

Existing models of IS/IT evaluation are inadequate because they fail to include all of the relevant

constructs:

the purpose of conducting the evaluation (why);

the subject of the evaluation (what);

the specific aspects to be evaluated (which);

the particular evaluation methods and techniques used (how);

the timing of the evaluation (when);

the individuals involved in, or affected by, the evaluation (who); and

the external and internal environmental conditions under which the organization operates

(where).

9

Research Question 1 (RQ1)

What models of the IS/IT evaluation process are presented in the literature?


How do the constructs (identified in H1) relate to the process of IS/IT evaluation?

Hypothesis 2 (H2)

An improved conceptual model of IS/IT evaluation provides an effective tool for describing and

analyzing evaluation practices.


Is the researcher’s conceptual model valid for describing IS/IT evaluation practices?


What guidelines may be derived from using the researcher’s conceptual model as an analytical

tool to existing IS/IT evaluation case studies?

2.5 Assumptions, Barriers and Issues

Assumptions

The researcher provides three major assumptions in the dissertation.

1. Putting on one side philosophical and epistemological arguments about the “true” nature

of reality, the researcher assumes that individuals’ perceptions or interpretations of reality

drive their actions.

2. The researcher believes that the conceptual model of IS/IT evaluation should be. That is,

it should be able to describe equally well the activities of individuals regardless of the

correctness or value of their actions.

10

3. Despite the need for contextual appropriateness in IS/IT evaluation, the researcher

assumes that practitioners require a sufficient degree of methodological guidance with the

aim of “get-the-job-done” successfully as well.

Barriers and Issues

Purposely, the following barriers and issues were identified by the researcher.

Philosophical challenges inherent in conceptual modeling.

Philosophical and practical difficulties associated with assessing theoretical

contributions.

The intractable challenges inherent in IS/IT evaluation.

The mystery of balancing contextual-sensitivity with sufficient methodological guidance.

The potential lack of industrial awareness and use by practitioners.

2.5 Overall Evaluation of the Chapter

As this chapter of the dissertation explicitly and clearly provides information about the problem

statement, goal, hypotheses, research questions & assumptions, relevance & significance,

barriers and issues, limitations and delimitations, and the resource requirements of the

dissertation study, this chapter is evaluated as “Fully Implemented.”

Table 1: Maturity Table for the 1st Chapter of the Dissertation

Clauses vs. Implementations

Not

Imple

men

ted

Part

iall

y

Imple

men

ted

Larg

ely

Imple

men

ted

Fu

lly

Imple

men

ted

Chapter

1 Introduction

X

11

3 Literature Review of the Dissertation


The “Literature Review” part of the reviewed dissertation has the following parts:

Defining IS/IT Evaluation,

Why: The Purpose of Evaluation,

Where: Extra- and Intra-Organizational Environmental Conditions,

When: The Timing of Evaluation,

What: The Object of Evaluation,

Who: The People Involved in Evaluation,

Which: Evaluation Criteria/Measures,

How: IS/IT Evaluation Methods, Techniques, and Approaches,

Examining the Puzzle: Understanding Evaluation in Context,

Literature Review: Key Themes, and

Summary.

3.1 Defining IS/IT

The researcher first acknowledges distinction between information systems (IS) and information

technology (IT), as IT is referred as an organization’s hardware, software, and related

infrastructure, and IS is referred as the design of information flows that attempt to meet an

organization’s informational needs. Additionally, the researcher notes that in theory, IS may or

may not be primarily based on information technology, in practice, however, IS -especially ones

subjected to a formal evaluation process- contain some IT element. For the purpose of this study,

12

the researcher generally used the terms interchangeably and noted any particular instances in

which a distinction between the concepts was to the point.

3.2 Methodology used in the Literature Review

The researcher used both deductive and inductive methodology in the literature review part of

the dissertation. From the deductive perspective, the researcher explored IS/IT evaluation by

examining the underlying assumptions, professional practices, and continuing concerns of both

practitioners and academicians. For this purpose, the researcher deconstructed IS/IT evaluation

into a mass of contextual elements. In this context, each of these elements was considered

independently and then, in relation to each other. Subsequently, the researcher identified themes

that span this varied body of literature with the purpose of drawing provisional conclusions about

the current state-of-the-art.

IT/IS Evaluation Deconstruction

Contextual Elements

Drawing

Provisional

Conclusions

Figure 1: Literature Review – Deductive Methodology Flow

Mostly, the researcher demonstrated that the contextual elements of IS/IT evaluation must be

better understood in order to advance the field’s effectiveness and significance. Eventually, as

13

the researcher note, this improved understanding should take the form of a conceptual model of

IS/IT evaluation, which may be utilized for both descriptive and normative purposes.

From the inductive perspective, the researcher synthesized the fragmented, disjointed, and

contradictory insights into a unified-whole, including following themes:

IS/IT Evaluation is Problematic for Researchers and Practitioners

IS/IT Evaluation is about More Than Estimating or Measuring Outcomes

IS/IT Evaluation Practice is (and should be) Pragmatic

IS/IT Evaluation is Moving beyond the Positivist / Interpretivist Dualism

IS/IT Evaluation Involves Many Complex, Related Contextual Elements

IS/IT Evaluation Needs a Theory for Descriptive and Normative Purposes

Fragmented Insights

Disjointed Insights

Contradictory Insights

SynthesizeUnified-whole Themes

Figure 2: Literature Review – Inductive Methodology Flow


In the literature review, the researcher established that IS/IT evaluations are comprised of

several, interconnected contextual elements that shall be better understood.

14

These elements, as noted by the researcher, include:

the purpose of conducting the evaluation (why);

the subject of the evaluation (what);

the specific aspects to be evaluated (which);

the particular evaluation methods and techniques used (how);

the timing of the evaluation (when);

the individuals involved in, or affected by, the evaluation (who); and

the external and internal environmental conditions under which the organization operates

(where).

Each of these constructs was examined in detail by the researcher in the literature review part of

the dissertation, including special emphasis on the specific criteria or measures of evaluation

(which question), and the methods or techniques of evaluation (how question).

Additionally, the researcher reviewed existing models which depicted the process of IS/IT

evaluation, as he note down the limitations and differences found in each example.

Owing to above details, this chapter is also evaluated as “Fully Implemented.”

Table 2: Maturity Table for the 2nd Chapter of the Dissertation


Not

Imple

men

ted

Part

iall

y

Imple

men

ted

Larg

ely

Imple

men

ted

Fu

lly

Imple

men

ted

Chapter

1 Introduction

X

Chapter

2 Literature Review

X

15

4 Methodology of the Dissertation


The “Methodology” part of the reviewed dissertation has the following parts:

Step 1: Conduct Comprehensive Literature Review

Step 2: Develop IS/IT Evaluation Conceptual Model

Step 3: Validate and Apply the IS/IT Evaluation Conceptual Model

Step 4: Report Study Results

Limitations / Delimitations / Assumptions

Summary

4.2 Research Design Model

The researcher utilized a multiphase approach in the study. There are four main stages for the

related dissertation’s research.

These are:

The implementation of all-inclusive literature review,

The development of the conceptual model of IS/IT evaluation to provide better

understanding of the process’s entity constructs and their possible relationships,

The validation of the conceptual model via a meta-analysis of multiple case studies and

the development of guidelines for conducting contextual evaluations within particular

organizations, and

The reporting of the results of this study.

16

Comprehensive

Literature Review

Development of

Conceptual Model Validation of

Conceptual ModelReporting of

the Results

Figure 3: Phases of the Research Design


The researcher conducted a comprehensive literature review to address Hypothesis 1 and endow

with answers to Research Question 1 and Research Question 2.

After this, by using the literature review findings the researcher developed the conceptual model

in the study.

The researcher’s conceptual model represents the innermost work of art of the study, to provide

the decisive link between Hypothesis 1 and Hypothesis 2.

Subsequently, the researcher validated the conceptual model based upon case studies and then

utilized it to develop normative guidelines meant for conducting evaluations, in that way

17

addressing Hypothesis 2 by means of answering Research Question 3 and Research Question 4

correspondingly.

After all, the researcher reported the findings associated with each of the hypotheses and

research questions and discussed implications for both future academic research and professional

practices.

As seen above, in four steps the researcher is done. That is to say, the research is completed in

these four steps by justifying two hypotheses with reference to four research questions. Please

see Sub-clause 2.4 of this document for hypotheses and research questions.

In consequence of above details, this chapter is also evaluated as “Fully Implemented.”

Table 3: Maturity Table for the 3rd Chapter of the Dissertation


Not

Imple

men

ted

Part

iall

y

Imple

men

ted

Larg

ely

Imple

men

ted

Fu

lly

Imple

men

ted

Chapter

1 Introduction

X

Chapter

2 Literature Review

X

Chapter

3 Methodology

X

18

5 Results of the Dissertation


The “Results” part of the reviewed dissertation has the following parts:

Assembling the Puzzle: A Conceptual Model of IS/IT Evaluation

Introduction to Case Study Analysis for Model Validation

Case Study #1: UK Insurance Company’s IS/IT Evaluation Practices

Case Study #2: Dutch Insurance Company’s IS/IT Evaluation Practices

Case Study #3: UK Manufacturing Company’s Evaluation of IS Infrastructure

Case Study #4: UK Manufacturing Company’s Evaluation of MRPII System

Case Study #5: US Department of Defense Evaluation of an E-Business System

Validating the Conceptual Model: Is it a “Good” Theoretical Contribution?

In Search of Normative Guidelines: Cross-Case Analysis

Summary

5.2 Results

Throughout the Results chapter, the researcher reported the results using a sequence of events

style. The reason for the researcher to do this is to reflect the iterative and cyclical processes

associated with analyzing, writing, and reflecting throughout this study. Furthermore, the

researcher selected this sort of reporting structure in response to Yin’s (2003) call to use the

writing and editing process as an analytical tool and mechanism to clarify thoughts.

In the chapter, the researcher described the construction of a conceptual model of the process of

IS/IT evaluation based on the findings from the literature review. The researcher began by

describing the limitations associated with existing conceptual models. Next, the researcher

19

identified seven constructs associated with the context of an evaluation. Finally, the researcher

developed these constructs into a conceptual model, which resulted after multiple iterations of

model development.

Describe Limitations

of Existing Models

Identify Constructs

of Evaluation

Develop

Conceptual Model

Figure 4: Model Development

After developing conceptual model, the researcher validated it using a multi-case study analysis.

In this context, the researcher followed the steps explained in Methodology part, and reviewed

and coded five case studies to discover confirming or disconfirming evidences.

The researcher confirmed that the conceptual model that is developed represented a “good”

theoretical contribution based on Whetten’s (2002) standard, which required the conceptual

model to be complete and systematic in its rationalization.

In conclusion, the researcher performed a cross-case analysis to identify elements that could

serve as the basis for methodological guidelines for conducting more contextually appropriate

IS/IT evaluations.

20

In this context, the researcher described similarities and differences among the narratives of the

case studies. Likewise, the researcher also identified four “drivers” of contextual evaluations, as

well as at least two examples of how each driver was implemented in practice, Table 4. Based

upon these findings, the researcher constructed IS/IT evaluation guidelines that are described in

the last chapter o the dissertation, including a checklist for practitioners support.

Table 4: Content-analytic Summary


Using the procedures explained in Methodology chapter of the dissertation, the researcher

resented a proposed conceptual model of the process of IS/IT evaluation based on the

study’s literature review,

21

validated the proposed model using a multi-case study analysis, and

performed a comprehensive cross-case analysis to identify key observations that

informed the researcher’s proposed methodological guidelines.

The above steps are satisfactorily done with enough information. Therefore, this chapter is

evaluated as “Fully Implemented.”

Table 5: Maturity Table for the 4th Chapter of the Dissertation


Not

Imple

men

ted

Part

iall

y

Imple

men

ted

Larg

ely

Imple

men

ted

Fu

lly

Imple

men

ted

Chapter

1 Introduction

X

Chapter

2 Literature Review

X

Chapter

3 Methodology

X

Chapter

4 Results

X

22

6 Conclusions, Implications, Recommendations, and Summary of the

Dissertation


The “Conclusions, Implications, Recommendations, and Summary” part of the reviewed

dissertation has the following parts:

Conclusions

Hypothesis #1: The Contextual Elements of an Evaluation

Research Question #1: Models of IS/IT Evaluation in the Literature

Research Question #2: Contextual Elements and the Evaluation Process

Hypothesis #1: Conclusion

Hypothesis #2: Validity and Usability of an Improved Conceptual Model

Research Question #3: Is the Conceptual Model of Evaluation Valid?

Research Question #4: What Guidelines May Be Derived from the Model?

Hypothesis #2: Conclusion

Reflections on Validity: Limitations, Assumptions, and Concerns

Implications

Recommendations

Recommendations for Future Research

Recommendations for the Improvement of Professional Practice

Summary: Recommendations for the Improvement of Professional Practice

Summary

23

6.2 Summary and Evaluation of the Last Chapter of Dissertation

Having

accomplished a comprehensive literature review,

defined a research method, and

discovered a number of findings;

the researcher finalized the study by drawing a number of conclusions and recommendations.

Additionally, the researcher considered the implications of the study’s outcomes for practitioners

and researchers.

The researcher utilized the model to develop a series of guidelines and a checklist to aid

organizations in conducting context-based IS/IT evaluations.

In particular, the researcher provided recommendations to assist evaluators in:

Engaging in critical and reflective practice

Increasing stakeholder participation

Aligning evaluation criteria (which) with the organizational context

Aligning evaluation methods (how) with the organizational context

Learning from experience

In addition to providing guidelines for improved professional practice, the researcher set forth a

series of recommendations for subsequent academic research. These recommendations included

a call for further validating the conceptual model, making additional refinements and/or

extensions to it, developing a comprehensive theory of IS/IT evaluation rooted in the conceptual

model, and the exploring the implications for pedagogy of the researcher’s findings.

24

To summarize the literature review findings, the researcher developed a summary including

description of each construct and any relevant sub-classifications available in the literature. See

Table 6 for details.

Table 6: Constructs, Descriptions and Sub-classifications

The researcher’s conceptual model describes the interactions between the unique conceptual

elements above comprising the process of IS/IT evaluation. See Figure 5 for the developed

conceptual model.

25

Figure 5: Developed Conceptual Model

The researcher believes that the development of a holistic and full-bodied conceptual model that

resulted from the study serves as a significant step in advancing of IS/IT evaluation theory.

Additionally, the researcher’s guidelines and checklist to assist practitioners in conducting

context-based IS/IT evaluation offers a significant contribution to industrial practice. See Table 7

for checklist for conducting better IS/IT evaluations developed in the scope of the dissertation.

26

Table 7: Checklist for Conducting IS/IT Evaluations

27

6.3 Quality of the Last Chapter Concerning Answers for Research Questions

Hypothesis 1 (H1)

Existing models of IS/IT evaluation are inadequate because they fail to include all of the relevant

constructs: the purpose of conducting the evaluation (why); the subject of the evaluation (what);

the specific aspects to be evaluated (which); the particular evaluation methods and techniques

used (how); the timing of the evaluation (when); the individuals involved in, or affected by, the

evaluation (who); and the external and internal environmental conditions under which the

organization operates (where).


What models of the IS/IT evaluation process are presented in the literature?


How do the constructs (identified in H1) relate to the process of IS/IT evaluation?

Hypothesis 2 (H2)

An improved conceptual model of IS/IT evaluation provides an effective tool for describing and

analyzing evaluation practices.


Is the researcher’s conceptual model valid for describing IS/IT evaluation practices?


What guidelines may be derived from using the researcher’s conceptual model as an analytical

tool to existing IS/IT evaluation case studies?

28

Answer for Research Question #1:

For this purpose, the researcher wanted to identify conceptual models of the context and process

of IS/IT evaluation and the researcher distinguished between these meta-models of evaluation

versus more specific models of a particular evaluation method. Set this limitation, the researcher

found a few instances. Moreover, the vast majority of the examples were rooted in the work of

Symons (1990. Overall, the researcher found five meta-models of the process of IS/IT

evaluation. In each of these models, one or more of the seven evaluation constructs identified in

the researcher’s literature review were not there.


In Methodology chapter of the dissertation, the researcher presented underlying principles for

including each of the seven identified conceptual elements of IS/IT evaluation, and a

comprehensive literature review specific to each construct. Based upon these findings, the

researcher followed Whetten’s (2002) methodology for developing theoretical contributions,

such as conceptual models. Following numerous iterations and revisions, the researcher created

the conceptual model of IS/IT evaluation that appeared consistent with the findings of the

literature review.

Conclusion for Hypothesis #1:

The researcher concluded that the results support the first hypothesis in this study. The process of

IS/IT evaluation consists of seven contextual elements. Although there are number of existing

models of IS/IT evaluation in the literature, these models mostly failed to explicitly include all of

these relevant constructs. For that reason, the existing models have not either sufficient or

inclusive explanations of the process of IS/IT evaluation in organizations. In contrast, the

29

researcher in this study utilized these existing models, and the findings of the literature review in

order to develop an alternative conceptual model of IS/IT evaluation that included all seven

contextual elements with sufficient or inclusive explanations.


In the study, the researcher wanted to ensure that the proposed conceptual model represented a

“good” theoretical contribution. To that end, the researcher applied Whetten’s (2002) standard

for strong theoretical contributions. To assess whether or not the proposed model of IS/IT

evaluation represented a good theoretical contribution, the researcher explored its descriptive

ability with respect to the previously published case studies. In all of the examined cases, the

researcher established that the conceptual model’s constructs were valid and relevant. Thus, the

researcher concluded that the conceptual model did not contain superfluous constructs.

Therefore, the researcher concluded that the conceptual model was sufficiently complete. The

researcher provided that the model provides a systematic description of the process of IS/IT

evaluation.


Having established the descriptive validity of the conceptual model, the researcher investigated

its application as an investigative tool. In order to accomplish this task, the researcher performed

a cross-case analysis using the conceptual model as a framework, thereby facilitating

comparisons across the various instances. In doing so, the researcher found clear evidence

supporting the assertion.

30

Conclusion for Hypothesis #2:

The researcher noted that there is adequate evidence supporting the second hypothesis in the

study. The researcher’s conceptual model represents an effective tool for both describing and

analyzing evaluation practices. The researcher’s application of the conceptual model to the cases

examined in this study yielded a number of normative guidelines for contextually appropriate

IS/IT evaluation practices.

As the main research questions receive explicit answers and the whole study is well-summarized

in the last chapter, this chapter is also evaluated as “Fully Implemented.”

Table 8: Maturity Table for the 5th Chapter of the Dissertation


Not

Imple

men

ted

Part

iall

y

Imple

men

ted

Larg

ely

Imple

men

ted

Fu

lly

Imple

men

ted

Chapter

1 Introduction

X

Chapter

2 Literature Review

X

Chapter

3 Methodology

X

Chapter

4 Results

X

Chapter

5

Conclusions,

Implications, Recom.,

and Summary

X

31

7 Adoption for My Study

7.1 My Study’s Title and Abstract

Title

Identifying the Managers’ Consciousness about the Importance of Management of Information

Technologies and Its Relation to the Success of Organizations

Abstract

Today, organizations greatly spend money on hardware and software systems or more precisely

on information technologies (IT), grown in power and ubiquity recently. The fundamental reason

for this is that organizations view IT as more and more decisive to their success in the sector. IT

organizations’ chief executive officers (CEOs) and senior managers persistently note that they

interpret IT as a strategic asset to be successful and thereby leader in the sector. However, this is

something problematic. For a business asset to be interpreted as strategic it has to be scarce and it

ought to require exceptional and grounded interpretation and application. Given that IT ubiquity

everywhere, it is not possible to interpret IT as a strategic business asset. Yet, it is possible to do

so for the management of IT. Today’s organizations may create a sustained competitive

advantage by means of management of IT rather than IT of itself.

This thesis aims to identify the CEOs’ and senior managers’ consciousness about the importance

of management of IT and its relation to the organizations’ success in the sector. In this context,

first the 50 IT organizations’ CEOs and senior managers are provided and asked to complete a

questionnaire to know their consciousness about the importance of management of IT and their

organizations’ culture and success. After this, results of these questionnaires are analyzed and

interpreted. In addition, theoretical and practical evidences for this consciousness and its impacts

32

to success are provided and exemplified. As a result, a consciousness frame is proposed for the

IT organizations’ CEOs and senior managers to appreciate the importance of management of IT

rather than IT of itself.

7.2 Adoptions

As my study also requires contextual and conceptual analysis and comparisons, just like

the dissertation that I reviewed, I am to utilize a multiphase approach in my study.

To develop my own IT management consciousness framework survey, I will follow the

similar way that the dissertation’s owner followed in the development of the conceptual

model of IS/IT evaluation to provide better understanding of the process’s entity

constructs and their possible relationships.

For the validation of my framework, I will follow the similar way that the dissertation’s

owner followed the validation of the conceptual model via a meta-analysis and cross-

analysis of multiple case studies and the development of guidelines for conducting

contextual evaluations within particular organizations.

This dissertation, both in content and context will let me continue my study as I also plan

to a similar but not the same occurrence in my thesis.

I also will use the outcome of this study as an input for my thesis as I am to investigate

the IT investments versus IT management consciousness relations.

mustafa degerli - 2010 - dissertation review - is 720 research methods in information systems

Technology