The effect of control modes on enterprise IT project performance

Abstract

Abstract: Successfully controlling IT projects continues to be a primary concern by project managers and users. Based on the survey of IT projects from 128 Chinese enterprises, a model for examining the effect of four control modes (behavior, outcome, value, and self control) on IT project performance is created, and their relative importance are compared with each other. The results show that there are concordance and discordance on the effectiveness of control modes for project managers and users. From the perspective of both stakeholders, outcome control and value control have a positive effect on process performance, which is also positively related to product performance. However, self control does not have a significant effect on the performance. In addition, outcome control is relatively more important than behavior control on the process performance for the project managers, whereas the effect of these two control modes on performance has no significant different for the users.

Key words: IT project management, control mode, performance, enterprise informatization

CLC Number:

F270.7

Liu Shan, Zhang Jinlong, Chen Tao. The effect of control modes on enterprise IT project performance[J]. Science Research Management, 2012, 33(7): 112-120.

References

[1] The standish Group, New Chaos numbers show starting results . http://www1.standishgroup.com/newsroom/chaos_2009.php. 2009.
[2] Henderson, J. and Lee, S. Managing I/S Design Teams: A Control Theories Perspective [J]. Management Science, 1992, 38(6): 757-777.
[3] Choudhury, V. and Sabherwal, R. Portfolios of Control in Outsourced Software Development Projects [J]. Information Systems Research, 2003, 14(3): 291-314.
[4] Kirsch, L. The Management of Complex Tasks in Organizations: Controlling the Systems Development Process [J]. Organization Science, 1996, 7(1): 1-21.
[5] Kirsch, L. Portfolios of Control Modes and IS Project Management [J]. Information Systems Research, 1997, 8(3): 215-239.
[6] Beath, C. M. Managing the User Relationship in Information Systems Development Projects: A Transaction Governance Approach . in: Proceeding of Eighth International Conference of Information Systems, Pittsburgh, PA, USA, 1987, 415-427.
[7] Kirsch, L., Sambamurthy, V., Ko, D. and Purvis, R. Controlling Information Systems Development Projects: The View from the Client [J]. Management Science, 2002, 48(4): 484-498.
[8] Kirsch, L. Deploying Common Systems Globally: The Dynamics of Control [J]. Information Systems Research, 2004, 15(4): 374-395.
[9] Klein, G., Beranek, P., Martz, B. and Jiang, J. The Relationship of Control and Learning to Project Performance [J]. Cybernetics and Systems: An International Journal, 2006, 37(2/3): 137-150.
[10] Nidumolu, S. and Subramani, M. The Matrix of Control: Combining Process and Structure Approaches to Managing Software Development [J]. Journal of Management Information Systems, 2003, 20(3): 159-196.
[11] Markus, M. L. and Mao, J. Participation in Development and Implementation--Updating an Old, Tired Concept for Today’s IS Contexts [J]. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 2004, 5(11-12): 514-544.
[12] Eisenhardt, K. M. Control: Organizational and Economic Approaches [J]. Management Science, 1985, 31(2): 134-149.
[13] Ouchi, W. A Conceptual Framework for the Design of Organizational Control Mechanisms [J]. Management Science, 1979, 25(9): 833-848.
[14] Kirsch, L. and Cummings, L. Contextual Influences on Self-Control of IS Professionals Engaged in Systems Development [J]. Accounting, Management and Information Technologies, 1996, 6(3): 191-219.
[15] Ouchi, W. Markets, Bureaucracies, and Clans [J]. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1980, 25(1): 129-141.
[16] Jaworski, B. and Merchant, K. Toward a Theory of Marketing Control: Enviromental Context, Control Types, and Consequences [J]. Journal of Marketing, 1988, 52(3): 23-39.
[17] Nidumolu, S. The Effect of Coordination and Uncertainty on Software Project Performance: Residual Performance Risk as an Intervening Variable [J]. Information Systems Research, 1995, 6(3): 191-219.
[18] Wallace, L., Keil, M. and Rai, A. Understanding Software Project Risk: A Cluster Analysis [J]. Information & Management, 2004, 42(1): 115-125.
[19] Love, P. and Josephson, P. Role of Error-Recovery Process in Projects [J]. Journal of Management in Engineering, 2004, 20(2): 70-79.
[20] Petter, S., Straub, D. and Rai, A. Specifying Formative Constructs in Information Systems Research [J]. MIS Quarterly, 2007, 31(4): 623-656.
[21] Chin, W. W. The Partial Least Square Approach to Structural Equation Modeling [M]. in: G. A. Marcoulides (ed.) Modern Methods for Business Research. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, 1998, 150-170.
[22] Fornell, C. and Larcker, D. F. Evaluating Structural Equation Models with Unobservable Variables and Measurement Error [J]. Journal of Marketing Research 1981, 18(1): 39-50.
[23] Cohen, J., Cohen, P., West, S.G. and Aiken, L.S. Applied Multiple Regression / correlation Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences [M]. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 2003.