Information Technology Reference
In-Depth Information
interrelated factors (Dwivedi, Henriksen, & Rahul De', 2013). Managers should
not only take into account the factors of D&M but should also be sensitive to other
determinants of IS success/failure. Some factors or determinants are within the
control of IS managers. Others may be outside their control, but managers may still
be able to influence these (Petter et al., 2013).
The additional causes of failure point out that IS managers should try to get local
management support, create trust, match user expectations, and create willingness
to invest in interoperable IT infrastructures along the organizational competence.
The Updated D&M model takes a rational project management view. One could
wonder if this management technique is sufficient to influence factors of IS success/
failure. Only focusing on step-by-step developments and on achieving goals, mana-
gerial or organizational structures within budget and time constraints, might not be
sufficient (Fincham, 2002). Managing interorganizational IS requires attention to
processes of “consensus building” and “cooperative behavior.” A process management
approach recognizes that organizations may be driven by self-interest and accepts that
decision-making takes place in various not predefined arenas. Process managers seem
more able to deal with the dynamics and nature of interorganizational relationships
(Homburg & Bekkers, 2002). Petter et al. (2013) recognize that the impact of the
project management technique to warrant IS success needs further research.
The research presented in this chapter has some limitations. Because the out-
comes were based on a sample of two IS, this research can be considered only
a basic exploratory case study. Furthermore, our analysis is a snapshot in time.
Another limitation is that our scope was delimited to the causal lens of the Updated
D&M model on IS success/failure. Other lenses such as a social process lens exist
and might provide additional insights on G2G IS failure (Fincham, 2002).
8.6 Conclusion and Future Research
IS managers must be aware that G2G e-government systems face multiple chal-
lenges. Intergovernmental IS failure is multifaceted and omnipresent. There is a
need to assess failure to base actions on these assessments.
Concerning RQ1, the Updated D&M model appeared to be transferable for assess-
ing the causes of failure of the studied G2G IS. In answer to RQ2, although transferable,
this model appeared to be incomplete. It did not detect a lack of trust, path dependency
on IT infrastructure, insufficient organizational competence, unfulfilled user expecta-
tions, and a lack of local management support as causes of failure. These causes are in
line with findings of other researchers. Additionally, several causes of failure that match
determinants from “the road map for determinants of IS success” were found.
For future IS managers in the public sector, having insight on the potential
causes of intergovernmental IS failure is a useful skill. The Updated D&M model
as well as the road map of IS success determinants might be useful managerial
tools. Being aware of different stakeholders' views and communication with the
Search WWH ::
Custom Search