The fiction of methodological development: a field study of information systems development

This paper describes the findings of a field study that explores the process of information systems (IS) development in a large organization. The paper argues that traditional IS development methodologies are treated primarily as a necessary fiction to present an image of control or to provide a symbolic status, and are too mechanistic to be of much use in the detailed, day-to-day organization of systems developers' activities. By drawing on the insights gained from this study, the paper outlines some implications for IS development methodologies. A secondary purpose of the paper is to illustrate the use of an `̀ ecological'' research approach to IS development as advocated by Shneiderman and Carroll. Introduction While new IS development methodologies and selection frameworks are continuously proposed by researchers, only a few field studies have been carried out to investigate how systems analysts design IS in practice and how methodologies are used in this process (Lyytinen, 1989; Baskerville et al., 1992; Wynekoop and Russo, 1995, 1997; Introna and Whitley, 1997). IS development methodologies bring together various, often vendor-specific procedures, techniques, tools and documentation aids relevant to different parts of the IS development life-cycle. IS development methodologies differ in the techniques they recommend, the contents of the development phases they specify and in some cases their whole perspective on IS. They are intended to improve many aspects of IS development, such as understanding the development process, communicating the knowledge acquired, improving productivity of the programming task and making IS easier to maintain (Avison and Fitzgerald, 1995). New methodologies and approaches are often proposed as solutions to problems in IS development (Fitzgerald, 1996). Although the move towards the development and promotion of new IS development methodologies and the provision of tools for complete automation of the IS development process is continuing, many researchers (Curtis et al., 1988; Jones and Walsham, 1992; Newman and Robey, 1992; Orlikowski, 1993; Robey and Markus, 1984; Wastell, 1996; Fitzgerald, 1996; Introna and Whitley, The authors would like to thank the participants of the company in which the field study was carried out for their help and support for this project, and Matthew Jones (University of Cambridge) for his valuable comments and suggestions for the development of this paper. Fiction of methodological development 177 1997) call for more field studies to understand how IS are developed in today's organizations and how well methodologies are used before proposing improvements or new methodologies. This paper describes the findings of a field study of the IS development process in a large organization. We argue that the traditional IS development methodologies are treated primarily as a necessary fiction to present an image of control or to provide a symbolic status, and are too mechanistic to be of much use in the detailed, day-to-day organization of systems developers' activities. Further, in order to provide suitable ways of supporting and managing the IS development process, alternative approaches that recognize the particular character of work in such environments are required. By drawing on the insights gained from this study, the paper outlines some implications for IS development methodologies. A secondary purpose of the paper is to illustrate the use of an `̀ ecological'' research approach to IS development as advocated by Shneiderman and Carroll (1988). The next part of this paper explores views on the IS development process that are prevalent in the literature. In the following section, the research approach adopted in this study is outlined and the research setting described. The findings of the research are then discussed in detail. The discussion section draws together our interpretations to illustrate some significant features of the IS development process and the use of IS development methodologies, and to outline some implications for IS development methodologies. Views on the IS development process The mainstream of IS development literature is primarily associated with methodological systems development. Much of the literature is concerned with describing particular methodologies (see Avison and Fitzgerald, 1995), specifying how a systems project should be broken down into discrete stages, the tasks to be carried out at each stage, the deliverables and tools to be used. The development of new methodologies has tended to be technology-driven, often being influenced by the introduction of improved techniques and software tools (object-oriented modelling and CASE tools use are obvious examples). The literature also focuses on expanding the scope of existing methodologies to address further stages of the life-cycle ± for example, the strategy and planning phases in information engineering. There are also `̀ new'' methodologies developed by blending together what are considered to be the strong features of existing methodologies. Methodologies may also be developed by combining different types of methodologies to overcome the drawbacks of each. An example of this is provided by Multiview (Avison et al., 1998). Closely linked to methodology is the literature on techniques and tools. Techniques can be broadly divided into those focusing on data objects and those on process objects. Methodology vendors often recommend software tools. Automated tools, such as IEF (Information Engineering Facility), provide support for data analysis, design and construction stages of information engineering and also for managing the project.