Information systems project management: An agency theory interpretation

Journal of Systems and Software

Volumn 68, Issue 1, 2003, Pages 1-9

  Mahaney, Robert C ^a   Lederer, Albert L ^b  

^a NORTHERN KENTUCKY UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY   (United States)

Author keywords

Agency theory; Incentives; Information systems; Monitoring; Project management

Indexed keywords

PROJECT MANAGEMENT; SOCIETIES AND INSTITUTIONS; SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT;

AGENCY THEORY;

MANAGEMENT INFORMATION SYSTEMS;

EID: 0041828594     PISSN: 01641212     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0164-1212(02)00132-2     Document Type: Article

References (33)

1. Austin R.D. The effects of time pressure on quality in software development: an agency model. Information Systems Research. 12(2):2001;195-207.
2. Baiman S. Agency research in management accounting: a survey. Journal of Accounting Literature. 1:1982;154-213.
3. Baiman S. Agency research in managerial accounting: a second look. Accounting, Organizations and Society. 15(4):1990;341-371.
4. Balkin D.B., Markman G.D., Gomez-Mejia L.R. Is CEO pay in high-technology firms related to innovation? Academy of Management Journal. 43(6):2000;1118-1129.
5. Baugh S.G., Roberts R.M. Professional and organizational commitment among engineers: conflicting or complementing. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management. 41(2):1994;108-114.
6. Bergen M., Dutta S., Walker O.C. Jr. Agency relationships in marketing: a review of the implications and applications of agency and related theories. Journal of Marketing. 56:1992;1-24.
7. BusinessWeek, 1998. A Day Late and (Many) a Dollar Short. p. 8.
8. Cafasso R. Few IS projects come in on time, on budget. Computerworld. 28(50):1994;20.
9. Controllers Update, 1996. MIS Projects: Over Budget and Late, vol. 138, p. 2.
10. DeLone W.H., McLean E.R. Information Systems Success: The Quest for the Dependent Variable. Information Systems Research. 3(1):1992;60-95.
11. Deutsch M.S. An exploratory analysis relating the software project management process to project success. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management. 38(4):1991;365-375.
12. Dunn S.C. Motivation by project and functional managers in matrix organizations. Engineering Management Journal. 13(2):2001;3-9.
13. Eisenhardt K.M. Agency- and institutional-theory explanations: the case of retail sales compensation. Academy of Management Journal. 31(3):1988;488-511.
14. Eisenhardt K.M. Agency theory: an assessment and review. Academy of Management Review. 14(1):1989;57-74.
15. Eisenhardt K.M. Building theories from case study research. Academy of Management Review. 14(4):1989;532-550.
16. Ford R.C., McLaughlin F.S. Successful project teams: a study of MIS managers. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management. 39(4):1992;312-317.
17. Guinan P.J., Cooprider J.G., Faraj S. Enabling software development team performance during requirements definition: a behavioral versus technical approach. Information Systems Research. 9(2):1998;101-125.
18. Harrell A., Harrison P. An incentive to shirk, privately held information, and managers' project evaluation decisions. Accounting, Organizations & Society. 19(7):1994;569-577.
19. Jiang J.J., Klein G., Means T.L. Project risk impact on software development team performance. Project Management Journal. 31(4):2000;19-26.
20. Johnson J. Turning chaos into success. Software Magazine. 19(3):1999;30-34.
21. Kirby S.L., Davis M.A. A study of escalating commitment in principal-agent relationships: effects of monitoring and personal responsibility. Journal of Applied Psychology. 83(2):1998;206-217.
22. LaPlante A. Scope grope. Computerworld. 29(12):1995;81-84.
23. Laslo Z., Goldberg A.I. Matrix structures and performance: the search for optimal adjustment to organizational objectives. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management. 48(2):2001;144-156.
24. Lederer A.L., Prasad J. Software management and cost estimating error. Journal of Systems and Software. 50:2000;33-42.
25. Linberg K.R. Software developer perceptions about software project failure: a case study. Journal of Systems and Software. 49:1999;177-192.
26. Little D., Little A. Escalation of commitment in systems development: a study of tendencies in matrix and functional organizations. The Journal of Computer Information Systems. 40(2):1999;7-13.
27. Might R.J., Fischer W.A. The role of structural factors in determining project management success. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management. EM-32(2):1985;71-77.
28. Parks J.M., Conlon E.J. Compensation contracts: do agency theory assumptions predict negotiated agreements? Academy of Management Journal. 38(3):1995;821-838.
29. Pinto J.K., Mantel S.J. Jr. The causes of project failure. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management. 37(4):1990;269-276.
30. Pinto J.K., Slevin D.P. Critical success factors in effective project implementation. Cleland D.I., King W.R. Project Management Handbook. 1988;479-512 Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York.
31. Shenhar A.J. From theory to practice: toward a typology of project-management styles. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management. 45(1):1998;33-48.
32. Stroh L.K., Brett J.M., Baumann J.P., Reilly A.H. Agency theory and variable pay compensation strategies. Academy of Management Journal. 39(3):1996;751-767.
33. Tosi H.L., Katz J.P., Gomez-Mejia L.R. Disaggregating the agency contract: the effects of monitoring, incentive alignment, and term in office on agent decision making. Academy of Management Journal. 40(3):1997;584-602.