Search

There is considerable debate in the information systems literature on how systems development methods (SDMs) are used in practice. On one side are those who take the position that these methods are not used at all. The other side posits that SDMs are used but not in the manner intended by the method developers. In practice, SDMs are adapted and modified to meet project exigencies, which results in unique methods-in-use in each project. We subscribe to the latter view and extend the argument by proposing that SDM modifications happen due to mismatches between the paradigmatic values inherent in the SDM, the method users and the organizational context. Further, planned modifications themselves result in shifts of paradigmatic values inherent in the SDM. To examine our contention, we conduct a case study in which we trace an SDM from its development to its deployment and use in an organization. We show where the mismatches occurred and provide explanations for the mismatches. Our results indicate that paradigm differences explain most of the mismatches, and different factors contribute to the paradigm drifts simultaneously, even towards diverging orientations. We conclude that the true value of an SDM, in addition to its tool and technique use, is a basis for examining and self-reflecting about paradigmatic values. This is an essential part of learning to develop systems.

The Finnish Centre for Pensions (FCP) is a government organization acting as the central body for private pension institutions in Finland. One of its central tasks is to produce and publish guideline documents for ensuring that the pension institutions carry out pension provisioning in a unified way. Due to problems in the maintenance of the documents and requests for faster information delivery by the Internet, FCP carried out a content management development initiative during 2002-2004. The case follows the changes in components of the content management environment: in the activities of work processes, actor roles, systems, and content items. The case shows that in content management redesign, the work processes, roles of people in the processes, content items, and systems are deeply intertwined. Changes in one component often cause changes in others, and thereby iterative development efforts are needed. The case highlights the challenges encountered and describes the tools utilized for redesign activities.