Top Management Support:
  mantra or necessity?

  Raymond Young & Ernest Jordan
        Macquarie University
Overview
•   Background – IT Project Failure
•   Methodology – Case Study Analysis
•   Results
•   Discussion
2/3 projects realise no benefits!
$1,000 billion pa spent on IT. (Seddon & al 2002)                     ROI
30% on project...
2/3 projects realise no benefits!


•   IT project failure has been an issue almost since the dawn of
    business computi...
2/3 projects realise no benefits!


             “dimensions thought to be important
divide tasks, requirements scrubbing,...
2/3 projects realise no benefits!
                                                       ROI
                             ...
Re-examining the traditional wisdom

            Standish (1996)                  •   Project methodologies (35)
2.    Use...
Methodology

  Case Study
What is Top Management Support?
Garrity (1963), O'Toole and O'Toole (1966), Rockwell
     (1968), Freeman (1969)
Brandon (...
The many criteria for success
 EDP Success:      MIS Success:                         SIS Success:
Technical focus     Use...
Project Management
                                       vs Project Success
                                             ...
Project Management Success
 Very strong emphasis in practice
Summary of literature offering
                                                           advice to top managers
         ...
What is Top Management Support?
•    Garrity (1963)
     –    Devote time to the [IT] program in proportion to it’s cost a...
A model to test the traditional wisdom
                                            Chief Executive Officer (2.1)

        ...
Models of top management support

     Initiate            Plan    Develop      Implement                  Benefits
Projec...
Top Management support
Case Studies
                                       HB280 – 2006
                                                         ...
Analysis
                  What is the most important CSF?


    CSF                   T-Serv    T-Medi a   ABS       Agen...
Research findings (1)

      Hypothesis         T-Serv   T-Media   ABS   Agency   SkyHigh   Conclusion
     Top management...
Implications
• If TMS is the most important CSF, then much of our
  current research is misdirected.
   – HB280 has inform...
Refuting McGolpin & Ward




           SkyHigh



                     TechMedia
Refuting Akkermans & van Helden

“The core process on any successful
    implementation consists of mutually
    reinforci...
What is top management support?
                     ICT Project Governance
                                    2
        ...
The 6 Key Questions
           for senior management and boards
1. What are the expected business benefits?               ...
Top management support activities
                         Hard & Soft prescriptions



                     Business Plan...
Evaluation:
a multi-rational sense-making process




                                      Se
                           ...
Application to practice
   Key IT Project Governance Questions
Initiate/Evaluate
2.     What are the expected business ben...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Top Management Support - Mantra or Necessity?

3,078

Published on

This research provides evidence that top management support is the most important critical success factor for project success and is not simply one of many factors. There are implications for practice because it appears that the conventional project management and technical advice has less impact on project success than previously thought. Boards and top managers may have to personally accept that they have more influence on whether a project succeeds or fails.

Published in: Business, Technology
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
3,078
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
51
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Transcript of "Top Management Support - Mantra or Necessity?"

  1. 1. Top Management Support: mantra or necessity? Raymond Young & Ernest Jordan Macquarie University
  2. 2. Overview • Background – IT Project Failure • Methodology – Case Study Analysis • Results • Discussion
  3. 3. 2/3 projects realise no benefits! $1,000 billion pa spent on IT. (Seddon & al 2002) ROI 30% on projects (?) 30% Some OK 10-20% (Clegg et al 1997) 2/3 of projects 30-40% No deliver no benefits (Willcocks and Margetts 1994) whatsoever Fail 15% (Standish 1999,2003)
  4. 4. 2/3 projects realise no benefits! • IT project failure has been an issue almost since the dawn of business computing (Caminer 1958). • It has been studied intensively for the past 40 years (Lucas 1975, Lyytinen and Hirschheim 1987) • but it remains a poorly understood phenomena (Sauer 1993, 1999). • An enormous number of largely untested methodologies have been proposed and adopted (Checkland 1981, Strassmann 1995, Clegg et al. 1997).
  5. 5. 2/3 projects realise no benefits! “dimensions thought to be important divide tasks, requirements scrubbing, KISS, reduce scope, simulation/scenarios, prototyping, pilots, testing, user participation, user surveys, publicising participation results, team meetings, user led teams, user committees and good relationships, user managed decisions and development, user commitment, monitor progress and promote open discussion, critical task focus, project organisation, external contracts and outsourcing, formal procedures, cost allocation structures, pre-scheduling, cost and schedule estimation, incremental approach, path-analysis, risk-driven project planning, physical arrangements, staff with top talent, seek champions, cross training, morale building, manage expectations, implementation games, training, role playing, study and screen potential actors, specification standards and methods, task and organisational analysis techniques, information hiding/abstraction and modelling, bench marking, flexible governance structures, task matching, contingency models, managing technology options, adapt authority and decision structure, modify process model, technical analysis, service assessment, gain management support, appropriate leadership, change authority or workflow, adopt/configure new organisational technologies (Lyytinen, Mathiassen et al) have no consistent impact on the success of computing” (Kraemer & King 1986).
  6. 6. 2/3 projects realise no benefits! ROI 30% Some OK 10-20% (Clegg et al 1997) 2/3 of projects 30-40% No deliver no benefits (Willcocks and Margetts 1994) whatsoever Fail 15% (Standish 1999,2003) The traditional wisdom must be revisited
  7. 7. Re-examining the traditional wisdom Standish (1996) • Project methodologies (35) 2. User involvement (19) – Clear statement of requirements (15), 3. TMS (16) – Proper planning (11), – smaller project milestones (9) 4. Clear statement of requirements (15) • User (25): 5. Proper planning (11) – User involvement (19), 6. realistic expectations (10) – ownership (6) 7. smaller project milestones (9) • TMS (16) 8. Competent staff (8) • High level planning (13): 9. ownership (6) – realistic expectations (10), 10. clear vision & objectives (3) – clear vision & objectives (3) 11. hard working, focussed staff (3) • Project staff (11): – Competent (8), – hard working and focussed (3) Hypothesis: Top Management Support: mantra or necessity?
  8. 8. Methodology Case Study
  9. 9. What is Top Management Support? Garrity (1963), O'Toole and O'Toole (1966), Rockwell (1968), Freeman (1969) Brandon (1970), Dinter (1971), Adams (1972), Schmitt and Kozar (1978) Markus (1981), Rockart and Crescenzi (1984) Lane (1985), Doll (1985) Lederer and Mendelow (1988), Delone (1988), Doll and Vonderembse (1987), Izzo (1987), Rockart (1988) Reich and Benbasat (1990), Henderson (1990), Emery (1990), Jarvenpaa and Ives (1991), Bassellier and Pinsonneault (1998), McGolpin and Ward (1997), Rochleau (2000), Mähring (2002), Sharma and Yetton (2003)
  10. 10. The many criteria for success EDP Success: MIS Success: SIS Success: Technical focus User focus Organisational focus Information Quality Intention Use to use System Net Benefits Quality User Satisfaction Service Quality Delone, W. H. and McLean, E. R. (2003) The Delone and McLean Model of Information Systems Success: a ten-year update Journal of Management Information Systems, 19:4, 9-30.
  11. 11. Project Management vs Project Success project management success is less Scope of project success important (Baccarini 1999) Scope of project management success “benefits are not delivered or realised by 1 2 3 4 5 6 the project manager and project team, they require the actions of operations management.” (Cooke-Davis 2002) 1 2 3 4 5 6 Initiation Planning Development Implementation Benefit Closedown there is not a strong relationship between project management success and project success or between project management failure and project failure (Markus et. al. 2000)
  12. 12. Project Management Success Very strong emphasis in practice
  13. 13. Summary of literature offering advice to top managers Scope of TMS advice (Delone & McLean 2003) IT in general IT Projects IT Function Realisation of (Garrity 1963; O'Toole and (Rockwell 1968; Adams benefits O'Toole 1966; Rockart and 1972; Delone 1988; Reich Crescenzi 1984; Lane 1985; and Benbasat 1990; (Seddon, Staples et al. 1999) Criteria for success Doll and Vonderembse McGolpin and Ward 1997; 1987; Rockart 1988; Rochleau 2000) Henderson 1990) User (Freeman 1969; Dinter (Markus 1981; Mähring satisfaction 1971; Jarvenpaa and Ives 2002; Sharma and Yetton Technical or No direct interest 1991; Bassellier and Pinsonneault 1998) 2003) (Schmitt and Kozar 1978; (Brandon 1970; Doll 1985; project management success to top managers Izzo 1987; Lederer and Mendelow 1988) Emery 1990)
  14. 14. What is Top Management Support? • Garrity (1963) – Devote time to the [IT] program in proportion to it’s cost and potential • (O'Toole and O'Toole 1966; Rockart and Crescenzi 1984; Lane 1985; Doll and Vonderembse 1987) 2. Review Plans 3. Follow up on results 4. Facilitate “problems…integrating computer systems with [business processes] ” • (Rockart 1988; Henderson 1990; Sharma and Yetton 2003) • Project Champions (Beath 1991, Morton 1983)
  15. 15. A model to test the traditional wisdom Chief Executive Officer (2.1) Chief Operating Officer (1.7) Business unit leader (1.6) Top Business unit CIO (1.3) Management Chief Financial Officer (1.2) Chief Information Officer (1.0) IT Project Governance Activities ICT Projects Changed Operations ICT Operations Changed Business processes Business Processes
  16. 16. Models of top management support Initiate Plan Develop Implement Benefits Project Chartering The project Shakedown Onward & Upward Select Change Manage Change Initiate Outcomes Enablers Implementation Longer Idea Competitive Development project Early adoption term Generation advantage penetration Management Support COBIT Initiate Meta-Structural Support Monitor Direct Evaluate Structural Change Implement Benefits Support Required
  17. 17. Top Management support
  18. 18. Case Studies HB280 – 2006 Organisations with a reputation for consistent 'Typical' organisations success with IT projects TechServ TechMedia ABS The Agency SkyHigh A routine low ERP Enhancing IT ERP ERP Project Characteristics profile IT implementation Project implementation implementation project. Governance Abandoned (15-31%) - On time on budget (16-34%)   -   Some benefits (52-62%)      Meet perf. target (10-20%)      Main factors contibuting to outcome • Descriptive Case Studies Board -  () ()  Senior Goles and Hirschheim 2000; managers Tashakkori () () () and Teddlie 2003; Benbasat and Zmud 1999  ()   • Multiple-case study  Project sponsor PM / PM methodology design    - ()  2 typical organisations, Project●team  3 exemplary organisations   ()  Business managers ● - Case history developed  through interviews with:()   User involvement - - () ()  ● project Technical issues sponsors,      ● top managers, ● project team, ● stakeholders from multiple levels ● Rigour through multiple sources of evidence: interviews, project documentation, observation, critical review (at 3 levels) Young and Jordan 2002a; Young and Jordan 2002b; Young 2003; Young and Jordan 2003
  19. 19. Analysis What is the most important CSF? CSF T-Serv T-Medi a ABS Agency SkyHigh Top management 3 Full Full Full Full Full support User 2 Partial Partial Partial Partial Partial involvement High level 4 No Partial Partial Partial Full project planning Project 1 Partial No - Partial Full methodologies 5 Project staff No Partial No Partial Full
  20. 20. Research findings (1) Hypothesis T-Serv T-Media ABS Agency SkyHigh Conclusion Top management 1. support      Strong support Enable 2. improvements in      Supported work practices Project 3. Governance      Strong Support structure. Operational staff 4. vs project teams.      Supported High level 5. project planning      Inconclusive Project 6. methodologies   -   Inconclusive User 7. involvement      Inconclusive 8. Project staff      Not supported
  21. 21. Implications • If TMS is the most important CSF, then much of our current research is misdirected. – HB280 has informed AS8015 which has just been accepted as an international standard on the corporate governance of IT (ISO29832) – HB280 findings are being incorporated into AS8016 • A major shift in emphasis may be required: – Boards and top managers may have to accept that they personally have the most influence whether a project succeeds or fails – Boards, top managers and their advisors may have to accept that the current ‘expert advice’ has less impact on success than previously believed. • Further research is needed to explain how TMS influences success and to develop credible guidelines for practice.
  22. 22. Refuting McGolpin & Ward SkyHigh TechMedia
  23. 23. Refuting Akkermans & van Helden “The core process on any successful implementation consists of mutually reinforcing communication and collaboration between project team members from different departments and business functions” “If this core process is … under-performing, it is highly likely that presence or attitude of several of the key stakeholders (top management …) are also insufficient” • conflicts of interest almost always exist … hence communication and collaboration will tend not to be mutually reinforcing – Hence the core process is actually the identification and resolution of conflicts of interest: an aspect of IT Governance
  24. 24. What is top management support? ICT Project Governance 2 Evaluate 1 Initiate Top Management Direct & Support Monitor 3 4 6 ICT Projects 5 Changed Operations ICT Operations Changed Business processes Business Processes
  25. 25. The 6 Key Questions for senior management and boards 1. What are the expected business benefits? 2. How much change is required 2 to realise the benefits? Evaluate 1 Initiate Top 4. Who should Management Direct & Support sponsor Monitor the project? 3 4 3. How will they be measured and rewarded? (ie. how will the realisation of benefits be measured?) 6. Are the benefits being realised ? 6 ICT Projects 5 Changed Operations ICT Operations 5. Is the culture right for unexpected issues to be raised? Changed Business processes Business Processes Illustrated version
  26. 26. Top management support activities Hard & Soft prescriptions Business Plan Champion Project Team Project Plan •PM, consultants, IT, •Operations 3.Support 4.Support 1.Initiate 2.Evaluate 5.Implement 6.Benefits Meta-structural structural Culture Sponsor Project-image Governance Structure Motivation Beliefs •Consensus •Passion •Reward Accountability •Will to change
  27. 27. Evaluation: a multi-rational sense-making process Se ns CEO e- g iv Communal ing Top team ing Polarised Project ak Team -m Fragmented e ns Se Organisation members Issues & Alternative views Adapted from Bryant (2004)
  28. 28. Application to practice Key IT Project Governance Questions Initiate/Evaluate 2. What are the expected business benefits? 3. How much change is required to realise the benefits? 4. Are there any other risks to be considered? 5. Do the benefits justify the risks and the effort required? Support 7. Who should sponsor the project? (ie. who has the authority, ability and motivation to resolve the potential conflicts that will arise) 8. Who will be accountable for the benefits and how will they be measured and rewarded? (ie. how will the realisation of benefits be measured?) Implement/Benefits 10. Is there a project plan and has rigorous change management planning been done? 11. Is the project meeting time/cost/quality and business targets and expected to continue to meet them? Have any significant new risks been identified? 12. Is there an appropriate governance structure? 13. If time/cost/quality and business targets change because of issues that arise and decisions taken, should the project continue?
  1. A particular slide catching your eye?

    Clipping is a handy way to collect important slides you want to go back to later.

×