So, for purposes of this paper, I will consider success of an information system to mean that it has been put into use by the intended users with a rate of usage equal to or greater than that which was foreseen by the designers and that the system is fruitfully addressing the task areas for which it was intended. That is to say that the system is providing warrantable information and that the users are aware of such and are accepting its information as an adjunct to their own cognitive faculties. Implicit in this definition is the idea of purpose. It is impossible to discuss success without first having an idea of what the purpose or goal a system is intended to address. Low road design has dispersed responsibility throughout the organization.
High road is a top down, centralized control.
Low road leads to speed and innovation, but at the cost of efficiency, integrity and lack of organization level coherency. High road efforts are, by contrast, more efficient, have greater integrational power, but are more expensive, and may well have flexibility problems as well as the problem of lack of adoption by users whose true informational needs may not have been met. Allen et al. see a need for a balanced perspective, utilizing a mix of methods within the organization. They do not inform us as to what the criteria for structuring such a division might be. Goodhue, et al.