Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Paradox of “Structured” Methods for Software Requirements Management: A Case Study of an e-Government Development Project

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Book cover Information Systems Development

Abstract

This chapter outlines the alternative perspectives of “rationalism” and “improvisation” within information systems development and describes the major shortcomings of each. It then discusses how these shortcomings manifested themselves within an e-government case study where a “structured” requirements management method was employed. Although this method was very prescriptive and firmly rooted in the “rational” paradigm, it was observed that users often resorted to improvised behaviour, such as privately making decisions on how certain aspects of the method should or should not be implemented.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 169.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Alexander, C. (1971) The State of the Art in Design Methods. Design and Manufacturing Group (DMG) Newsletter 5(3): 3.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Avgerou, C. and Cornford, T. (1993) A Review of the Methodologies Movement. Journal of Information Technology 8(4): 277–286.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Avison, D. E. and Fitzgerald, G. (1999) Information Systems Development. In: Currie, W. L. and Galliers, B. (eds) Rethinking Management Information Systems, pp. 250-278 Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Baskerville, R., Travis, J. and Truex, D. (1992) Systems without Method: The Impact of New Technologies on Information Systems Development Projects. In: Kendall, K. E. et al. (eds) IFIP Transactions A8, The Impact of Computer Supported Technologies on Information Systems Development, pp. 241–269. Elsevier Science Publishers (North-Holland).

    Google Scholar 

  5. Buchanan, R. (1992) Wicked Problems in Design Thinking. Design Studies 8(2): 5–21.

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  6. Ciborra, C. U. (1999) A Theory of Information Systems Based on Improvisation. In: Currie, W. L. and Galliers, B. (eds) Rethinking Management Information Systems, pp. 136–155. Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Cusumano, M. A. and Yoffie, D. B. (1998) Competing on Internet Time/Lessons from Netscape and Its Battle with Microsoft. New York: The Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Fitzgerald, B. (1997) The Use of Systems Development Methodologies in Practice: A Field Study. Information Systems Journal 7(3): 201–212.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  9. Fitzgerald, G. (1991) Validating New Information Systems Techniques: A Retrospective Analysis. In: Nissen, H.-E. et al. (eds) Information Systems Research: Contemporary Approaches and Emergent Traditions, pp. 657–672. Elsevier Science Publishers B.V. (North-Holland).

    Google Scholar 

  10. Glass, R. L. (1995) Software Creativity. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  11. Hardy, C. J., Thompson, J. B. and Edwards, H. M. (1995) The Use, Limitations and Customization of Structured Systems Development Methods in the United Kingdom. Information and Software Technology 37(9), 467–477.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Hirschheim, R. (1992) Information Systems Epistemology: An Historical Perspective. In: Galliers, R. (ed) Information Systems Research: Issues, Methods and Practical Guidelines, pp. 28–60. Oxford: Blackwell Scientific Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Hooks, I. and Fellows, L. (1998) A Case for Priority – Classifying Requirements. In: Proceedings of International Council on Systems Engineering 8th Annual Symposium, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada, July 26–30, 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Introna, L. D. and Whitley, E. A. (1997) Against Method-ism: Exploring the Limits of Method. Information Technology & People 10(1), 31–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Jones, J. C. (1977) How My Thoughts About Design Methods Have Changed During the Years. Design Methods and Theories 11(1): 48–62.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Lindblom, C. E. (1959) The Science of 'Muddling through'. Public Administration Review 19(2): 79–89.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. McPhee, K. (1997) Design theory and software design. Technical Report TR-96-26. Department of Computing Science, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada. May.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Parnas, D. L. and Clements, P. C. (1986) A Rational Design Process: How and Why to Fake It. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 12(2): 251–257.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Paul, R. J. (1994) Why Users Cannot 'Get What They Want'. International Journal of Manufacturing Systems Design 1(4): 389–394.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Robinson, H. (2001) Reflecting on Research and Practice. IEEE Software 18(1): 110–112.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Schön, D. A. (1984) The Reflective Practitioner: How Professionals Think in Action. New York. Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Simon, H. (1973) The Structure of Ill-Structured Problems. Artificial Intelligence Review 4: 181–201.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Simon, H. (1981) The Sciences of the Artificial, 2nd edition. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Stolterman, E. and Russo, N. (1997) The Paradox of Information Systems Methods: Public and Private Rationality. In: Proceedings of the 5th British Computer Society Conference on Information System Methodologies, Lancaster, England.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Suchman, L. A. (1987) Plans and Situated Actions. Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Taylor, F. W. (1911) The Principles of Scientific Management. New York: Harper and Row.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Business Information Systems Group, J.E. Cairnes School of Business & Economics, NUI Galway, Galwya, Ireland

    Kieran Conboy & Michael Lang

  2. Department of Accountancy & Finance, National University of Ireland, Galway, Ireland

    Kieran Conboy & Michael Lang

Authors
  1. Kieran Conboy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Michael Lang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kieran Conboy .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Durham University, Durham, DH1 3LE, United Kingdom

    William Wei Song

  2. , School of Information Technology, Jiangxi University of Finance and Econom, Nanchang, 330013, Jiangxi, China, People's Republic

    Shenghua Xu

  3. Finance & Economics, School of Information Management, Jiangxi University of, Fenglin Rd., Nanchang, 330013, Jiangxi, China, People's Republic

    Changxuan Wan

  4. UFIDA Software Technology College, Jiangxi University of Finance & Economic, Fenglin Rd., Nanchang, 330013, Jiangxi, China, People's Republic

    Yuansheng Zhong

  5. College of Business & Economics, Dept. Information Technology &, Boise State University, Univesity Dr. 1910, Boise, 83725-1615, Idaho, USA

    Wita Wojtkowski

  6. College of Business & Economics, Dept. Information Technology &, Boise State University, Univesity Dr. 1910, Boise, 83725-1615, Idaho, USA

    Gregory Wojtkowski

  7. Fac. Information Technology, Monash University, Clayton, 3800, Victoria, Australia

    Henry Linger

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2011 Springer Science+Business Media, LLC

About this paper

Cite this paper

Conboy, K., Lang, M. (2011). The Paradox of “Structured” Methods for Software Requirements Management: A Case Study of an e-Government Development Project. In: Song, W., et al. Information Systems Development. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-7355-9_19

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-7355-9_19

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, New York, NY

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-4419-7205-7

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-4419-7355-9

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation