Information and Knowledge Management using ArcGIS ModelBuilder

Correspondence failure
Process failure
Interaction failure
Expectation failure.
Information
Quality
System
Quality
Service
Quality
Juha Kontio
Intention
to use
User
Satisfaction
Use
Net
Benefits
Figure 1: Updated DeLone & McLean IS success model (DeLone and McLean, 2003)
Correspondence failure emphasizes the management view of IS. The IS is a failure if the overall goal
of the IS is not met. Process failure has two dimensions: the IS project cannot produce a workable
system or the project develops a workable IS, but the timetable or budget is overrun. Interaction
failure relates to usage level of the information system. Finally, expectation failure happens when the
certain goals of the information system cannot be met such as low maintenance costs. For this paper
the process failure category is the most interesting. This category relates to problems of management
in predicting the required resources, budgets and possible problems. (Lyytinen and Hirschheim, 1987)
Managers need to be aware of alarming signals during the project and they have to seek
opportunities to turn the troubled project around. In addition, it must be understood that project
conditions might change rapidly during implementation. The most important challenge is that
managers do not focus on how to fix a problem rather they recognize that a problem exists and needs
to be fixed. (Pan et al., 2008) Different failures could be caused by unrealistic expectations
(correspondence failure), lack of resources (process failure), weak management of contractors
(process failure) (Brown and Jones, 1998). The literature review by Fowler and Horan (2007)
identified six most regularly cited risk factors associated with IS failure:
Lack of effective project management skills/involvement,
Lack of adequate user involvement,
Lack of top-management commitment to the project,
Lack of required knowledge/skills in the project personnel,
Poor/inadequate user training and
Lack of co-operation from users.
To avoid failures organizations should address certain questions (Gauld, 2007): 1) Are the risks in the
project fully understood and manageable?, 2) Ensure that key persons are leading the project, 3)
Ensure that staff and other end-users see the benefits of a proposed new IS and 4) Is the large
project essential or could a series of smaller projects suffice? Furthermore, three effective practices
for IT projects are identified (Thomas and Fernandez, 2008): 1) Agree on the definition of success, 2)
Measure success consistently, 3) Use the results.
This paper presents a case study of an information system project that falls into process failure
definition. The project is still continuing and in this paper we will analyze the reasons why the project
is way behind its’ original schedule. In the next sections, we will introduce the project, the research,
the results and finally discuss the observations.
280