This document summarizes a research study that explored IT professionals' acceptance of software development risk assessment frameworks. The study was conducted in Malaysia and examined professionals' intentions to use the Malaysia Risk Assessment Methodology (MyRAM) and Corrective and Preventive Action (CAPA) model. The results showed that professionals had positive perceptions of the frameworks and key acceptance factors like perceived usefulness, ease of use, and subjective norms were strongly correlated with intention to use. Acceptance was higher when professionals found the frameworks useful and easy to comply with, and were influenced by others at their workplace. The study provides insights but was limited to one company, and future research could explore other organizations and locations.

1. EXPLORING IT PROFESSIONALS’ INTENTION TO
USE SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT RISK
ASSESSMENT FRAMEWORK
Elnaz Farhang Darehshori &
Norshidah Mohamed, PhD (Presenter)
WSEAS 12th International Conference on Applied Computer and Applied
Computational Science (ACACOS’13)
Renaissance Kuala Lumpur MALAYSIA
International Business School
http://www.ibs.utm.my
Universiti Teknologi Malaysia

2. OUTLINE
• Introduction
• Problem formulation
• Problem solution
• Conclusion
2

3. INTRODUCTION
3

4. INTRODUCTION
• Software projects have shown an increase
in size, complexity and number [1].
• While the success of software projects is
becoming more critical for these
companies [2], a high percentage of
software projects still fail to meet their
objectives [3].
4

5. RESEARCH QUESTIONS
1. What is the acceptance of risk assessment
framework among IT professionals?
2. Do subjective norm, perceived awareness
and perceived importance correlate to risk
assessment framework acceptance?
5

6. PROBLEM FORMULATION
6

7. THEORETICAL BASIS
Theory of Reasoned Action (Fishbein and Ajzen, 1975)
7

8. THEORETICAL BASIS .. cont’
Perceived
Usefulness
(U)
Attitude Behavioral Actual
External
towards intention to system use
variables
using (A) use (BI)
Perceived
Ease of use
(E)
Technology Acceptance Model (Davis, Bagozzi and Warshaw, 1989)
8

9. RESEARCH MODEL
ACCEPTANCE OF
RISK ASSESSMENT
FRAMEWORK
EXTERNAL VARIABLES H2
Perceived
ease of compliance
Subjective norm
H3
H5b
Perceived Perceived
importance usefulness
H1
Perceived
awareness Intention to use
framework
9

10. PROBLEM SOLUTION
10

11. RESEARCH CONTEXT
• Selected software development company in
Malaysia
• Cross-sectional survey approach
• Research participants: IT professionals e.g.
system administrator, programmer etc.
• Risk assessment framework : Malaysia Risk
Assessment Methodology (MyRAM) &
Corrective and Preventing Action (CAPA) model
based on learning from prior experiences
11

12. RESEARCH CONTEXT .. cont’
Source:
http://www.mampu.gov.my/pdf/surat_arahankp24nov10/SAMPEL%20DOKUMEN%20IS
MS/Sampel%20dokumen%20P1/RA%20Guideline%20%28MAMPU-BPICT-ISMS-P1-
008%29.pdf
12

13. POPULATION & SAMPLING
• Estimated population: 202
• Sample: 150
• Total usable responses: 100
• Convenient sampling approach
13

14. PROFILE OF RESPONDENTS
Profile of respondents Percentage
Gender Male 54
Female 46
Total 100
Age 20-29 36
30-39 43
40-49 20
Missing 1
Total 100
Education Bachelor 46
Master 52
Doctorate 2
Total 100 14

15. PROFILE OF VARIABLES
Measures / code / mean Factor α
loading
Intention to use (overall mean score: 3.49)
It is worth to use MyRAM and 0.865 0.861
CAPA in software development.
(ITU1) mean: 3.91
In developing software, I will 0.841
frequently use MyRAM and CAPA.
(ITU2) mean: 3.67
I will strongly recommend others to 0.840
use MyRAM and CAPA when
developing software. (ITU3) mean:
3.08
When developing software, I plan to 0.838
use MyRAM and CAPA. (ITU4)
15
mean: 3.30

16. PROFILE OF VARIABLES ..
cont’
Measures / code / mean Factor α
loading
Perceived usefulness (overall mean score: 3.43)
Using MyRAM and CAPA improves my 0.764 0.880
performance in assessing software
development risks. (PU1) mean: 3.46
In software development, using MyRAM 0.694
and CAPA enhances my effectiveness in
assessing software development risks.
(PU2) mean: 3.38
Using MyRAM and CAPA improves the 0.885
quality of software development risk
assessment. (PU3) mean: 3.33
Overall, I find using MyRAM and CAPA 0.823
useful in assessing software development
risks. (PU4) mean: 3.55 16

17. PROFILE OF VARIABLES ..
cont’
Measures / code / mean Factor loading α
Perceived ease of compliance
(overall mean score: 3.68)
MyRAM and CAPA are easy for me to comply to. 0.890 0.879
(PEOU1) mean:3.51
I find it is easy to comply to MyRAM and CAPA. 0.894
(PEOU2) mean: 3.43
It would be easy for me to become skilful at 0.747
complying to both MyRAM and CAPA. (PEOU3)
mean: 3.85
Overall, I find MyRAM and CAPA as software 0.654
development risk assessment tool easy to comply to.
(PEOU4) mean: 3.92
17

18. PROFILE OF VARIABLES ..
cont’
Measures / code / mean Factor loading α
Subjective norm (overall mean score: 3.48)
Most people (e.g. my team members, colleagues) 0.850 0.895
who are important to me would think that I
should use MyRAM and CAPA. (SN1) mean:
3.48
The organisation that I work for would think that 0.817
I should use MyRAM and CAPA. (SN2) mean:
3.53
My superior and/or sponsor who influence(s) my 0.826
behaviour would think that I should use
MyRAM and CAPA. (SN3) mean: 3.44
18

19. PROFILE OF VARIABLES ..
cont’
Measures / code / mean Factor loading α
Perceived importance (overall mean score: 3.40)
For me personally, in my job, MyRAM and 0.835 0.899
CAPA are important. (PI1) mean: 3.42
For me personally, in my job, MyRAM and 0.837
CAPA are relevant. (PI2) mean: 3.41
For me personally, in my job, MyRAM and 0.816
CAPA are needed. (PI4) mean: 3.28
For me personally, in my job, MyRAM and 0.780
CAPA are essential. (PI3) mean: 3.48
19

20. PROFILE OF VARIABLES ..
cont’
Measures / code / mean Factor loading α
Perceived awareness (overall mean score: 3.70)
I understand what software development risks 0.894 0.824
are. (PA1) mean: 3.64
I understand the procedure to deal with 0.889
software development risks. (PA2) mean: 3.54
I understand what software risk assessment 0.675
process is. (PA3) mean: 3.78
I understand what MyRAM is. (PA4) mean: 0.932
3.81
I understand what CAPA is. (PA5) mean: 3.72 0.786
20

21. CORRELATION ANALYSIS
ITU PU PEOU SN PI PA
ITU 1
PU 0.808** 1
PEOU 0.708** 0.491** 1
SN 0.591** 0.565** 0.483** 1
PI 0.699** 0.711** 0.390** 0.626** 1
PA 0.845** 0.774** 0.546** 0.596** 0.641** 1
Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed) 21

22. CONCLUSION
22

23. SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
1. What is the acceptance of risk assessment
framework among IT professionals?
• IT professionals at the software company
had positive perceptions of risk assessment
framework acceptance.
• All measures of risk framework acceptance
were valid and internally consistent in the
context of Malaysian software development
environment. 23

24. SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
..cont’
2. Do subjective norm, perceived awareness
and perceived importance correlate to risk
assessment framework acceptance?
• All hypotheses were supported
• Strong correlation is found for acceptance
of risk assessment framework (intention to
use, perceived usefulness and perceived
ease of compliance).
24

25. SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
..cont’
2. Do subjective norm, perceived awareness
and perceived importance correlate to risk
assessment framework acceptance?
• When IT professionals perceive usefulness of
the risk assessment framework, they will have
intention to use it at their workplace.
• Besides, they perceive that the framework is
easy to comply to. Owing to its ease of
compliance, they are likely to see it as being
useful to them. 25

26. SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
..cont’
2. Do subjective norm, perceived awareness
and perceived importance correlate to risk
assessment framework acceptance?
• People who matter to IT professionals at the
workplace will promote the professionals’
acceptance of the risk assessment framework.
• With awareness and perception of importance
of the assessment framework, they see it as
useful and are likely to use it. 26

27. LIMITATIONS & FUTURE
RESEARCH
• Data was collected on a convenient basis at
a particular software company and in
Malaysia
• Future research may explore other
companies and in countries other than
Malaysia.
27

28. THANK YOU
norshidah@ic.utm.my
28