Weighing the benefits and costs of flexibility in making software: Toward a contingency theory of the determinants of development process design

Information Systems Research

Volumn 20, Issue 3, 2009, Pages 462-477

  Austin, Robert D ^a,b   Devin, Lee ^c  

^a Copenhagen Business School ^*  (Denmark)

^b HARVARD BUSINESS SCHOOL   (United States)

^c SWARTHMORE COLLEGE   (United States)

Author keywords

Process design; Software development; Software methodologies; Work design

Indexed keywords

JOB ANALYSIS; PROCESS DESIGN; SOFTWARE ENGINEERING;

APPROPRIATE DESIGNS; BENEFITS AND COSTS; CONTINGENCY PERSPECTIVE; CONTINGENCY THEORY; DEVELOPMENT PROCESS; INDUSTRIAL PRODUCTION; SOFTWARE METHODOLOGIES; WORK DESIGN;

SOFTWARE DESIGN;

EID: 76949095170     PISSN: 10477047     EISSN: 15265536     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1287/isre.1090.0242     Document Type: Note

References (79)

1. Agerfalk, P. J., B. Fitzgerald. 2006. Flexible and distributed software processes: Old petunias in new bowls? Comm. ACM 49(10) 27-34.
2. Amabile, T. 1996. Creativity in Context. Westview Press, Boulder, CO.
3. Austin, R. D. 2001. Ford Motor Company: Supply chain strategy. Harvard Business School Case 699-198, Harvard Business School Publishing, Boston.
4. Austin, R. D. 2008. High margins and the search for aesthetic coherence. Harvard Bus. Rev. 86(1) 18-19.
5. Austin, R. D., L. Devin. 2003. Artful Making: What Managers Need to Know About How Artists Work. Financial Times Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ.
6. Baldwin, C. Y., K. B. Clark. 2000. Design Rules: The Power of Modularity. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
7. Banker, R., C. Kemerer. 1989. Scale economies in new software development. IEEE Trans. Software Engrg. 15(10) 1199-1205.
8. Banker, R., S. Slaughter. 1997. A field study of scale economies in software maintenance. Management Sci. 43(12) 1709-1725.
9. Beck, K. 1999. Extreme Programming Explained: Embrace Change. Addison-Wesley, Boston.
10. Beck, K., M. Beedle, A. van Bennekum, A. Cockburn, W. Cunningham, M. Fowler, J. Grenning, et al. 2001. Manifesto for agile software development, Accessed January 25, 2008, http://agilemanifesto.org/.
11. Boehm, B. W. 1988. A spiral model of software development and enhancement. IEEE Comput. 21(5) 61-72.
12. Boehm, B. W., R. Turner. 2003. Balancing Agility and Discipline: A Guide for the Perplexed. Addison-Wesley Professional, Boston.
13. Bohm, C., G. Jacopini. 1966. Flow-diagrams, turing machines, and languages with only two formation rules. Comm. ACM 9 366-371.
14. Brooks, Jr., F. P. 1995. The Mythical Man-Month: Essays on Software Engineering: Anniversary Edition. Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA.
15. Brooks, Jr., F. P. 1987. No silver bullet: Essence and accidents of software engineering. IEEE Comput. 20(4) 10-19.
16. Christensen, C. M. 1997. The Innovator's Dilemma: When New Technologies Cause Great Firms to Fail. Harvard Business School Press, Boston.
17. Clark, K., T. Fujimoto. 1991. Product Development Performance: Strategy, Organization, and Performance in the World Auto Industry. Harvard Business School Press, Boston.
18. Conboy, K. 2009. Agility from first principles: Reconstructing the concept of agility in information systems development. Inform. Systems Res. 20(3) 329-354.
19. Cooper, R. G. 1986. Winning at New Products. Holt, Rinehart, Winston, New York.
20. Cooper, R. G. 1988. The new product process: A decision guide for managers. J. Marketing Management 3(3) 238-255.
21. Cotteleer, M. J., R. D. Austin, R. L. Nolan. 1998. Cisco Systems, Inc.: Implementing ERP. Case No. 699-022, Harvard Business School, Harvard Business School Publishing, Boston.
22. Cox, B. J. 1990. Planning the software industrial revolution. IEEE Software 7(6) 25-33.
23. Dahl, O. J., K. Nygaard. 1967. SIMULA '67 common base proposal. Norwegian Computing Center, Oslo, Norway.
24. Dahl, O. J., E. W. Dijkstra, C. A. R. Hoare. 1972. Structured Programming. Academic Press, London and New York.
25. David, P. A. 1990. The dynamo and the computer: A historical perspective on the modern productivity paradox. Amer. Econom. Rev. 80(2) 355-361.
26. Dijkstra, E. W. 1968. Go to statement considered harmful. Comm. ACM 11(3) 147-148.
27. Dijkstra, E. W. 1969. Notes on structured programming (circulated manuscript). Accessed January 25, 2008, http://www.cs.utexas.edu/users/EWD/ewd02xx/EWD249.PDF.
28. Edmondson, A. C., S. E. McManus. 2007. Methodological fit in management field research. Acad. Management Rev. 32(4) 1155-1179.
29. Eisenhardt, K. M. 1989. Building theories from case study research. Acad. Management Rev. 14(4) 532-550.
30. Eisenhardt, K. M., B. N. Tabrizi. 1995. Accelerated adaptive processes: Product innovation in the global computer industry. Admin. Sci. Quart. 40(1) 84-110.
31. Ford, H. 1922. My Life and Work. Garden City Publishing, Garden City, NY.
32. Franke, N., E. Von Hippel. 2003. Satisfying heterogeneous needs via innovation toolkits: The case of Apache security software. Res. Policy 32(7) 1199-1215.
33. Fröberg, J. 2002. Software components and COTS in software system development. I. Crnkovic, M. Larsson, eds. Building Reliable Component-Based Software Systems. Artech House, Boston.
34. George, J. F. 2000. The origins of software: Acquiring systems at the end of the century. R. W. Zmud, ed. Framing the Domains of IT Management Research: Glimpsing the Future Through the Past. Pinnaflex Educational Resources, Cincinnati.
35. Harris, M., R. Collins, A. Hevner. 2009. Control of flexible software development under uncertainty. Inform. Systems Res. 20(3) 400-419.
36. Hayes, R., S. Wheelwright. 1979. Link manufacturing process and product life cycles. Harvard Bus. Rev. 57(1) 133-140.
37. Hayes, R., S. Wheelwright. 1984. Restoring Our Competitive Edge: Competing Through Manufacturing. Wiley, New York.
38. Highsmith, III, J. H. 1999. Adaptive Software Development: A Collaborative Approach to Managing Complex Systems. Dorset House, New York.
39. Highsmith III, J. H. 2002. Agile Software Development Ecosystems. Addison-Wesley, Boston.
40. Hopp, W. J., M. L. Spearman. 2004. To pull or not to pull: What is the question? Manufacturing Service Oper. Management 6(2) 133-148.
41. Iansiti, M., A. MacCormack. 1996. Team New Zealand (A). Case 9-696-040 Harvard Business School, Harvard Business School Publishing, Boston.
42. Iansiti, M., A. MacCormack. 1997. Developing products on Internet time. Harvard Bus. Rev. 75(5) 108-117.
43. Jacobson, I., G. Booch, J. Rumbaugh. 1999. The Unified Software Development Process. Addison-Wesley, Boston.
44. Kanigel, R. 1997. The One Best Way: Frederick Winslow Taylor and the Enigma of Efficiency. Viking, New York.
45. Kay, A. C. 1993. The early history of smalltalk. ACM SIGPLAN Notices 28(3) 69-95.
46. Keller, C. M., J. Dixon Keller. 1996. Cognition and Tool Use: The Blacksmith at Work. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
47. Kemerer, C. 1992. How the learning curve affects case tool adoption. IEEE Software 9(3) 23-28.
48. Knuth, D. 1974. Structured programming with goto statements. Comput. Surveys 6(4) 261-301.
49. Krafcik, J. F. 1988. Triumph of the lean production system. MIT Sloan Management Rev. 30(1) 41-52.
50. MacCormack, A. D., R. Verganti, M. Iansiti. 2001. Developing products on Internet time: The anatomy of a flexible development process. Management Sci. 47(1) 133-150.
51. MacCormack, A., J. Rusnak, C. Y. Baldwin. 2007. The impact of component modularity on design evolution: Evidence from the software industry. Unit Research Paper 08-038, Harvard Business School Technology & Operations Management, http://ssrn.com/abstract=1071720.
52. MacDuffie, J. P. 1995. Human resource bundles and manufacturing performance: Organizational logic and flexible production systems in the world auto industry. Indust. Labor Relations Rev. 48(2) 197-221.
53. Martin, J. 1991. Rapid Application Development. McMillan, New York.
54. Marwaha, S., S. Patil, R. Tinaikar. 2006. The next generation of inhouse software development. McKinsey Quart. Online J. McKinsey & Co (February).
55. McCalley, B. W. 1994. Model T Ford: The Car That Changed the World. Krause Publications, Iola, WI.
56. Mills, H. 1971. Top-down programming in large systems. R. Ruskin, ed. Debugging Techniques in Large Systems. PrenticeHall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
57. Mirsky, J., A. Nevins. 1952. The World of Eli Whitney. The Macmillan Company, New York.
58. Mitchell, W. J. 2004. Constructing complexity in the Digital Age. Science 303(5) 1472-1474.
59. Nambisan, S. 2003. Information systems as a reference discipline for new product development. MIS Quart. 27(1) 1-18.
60. Nevins, A. 1954. Ford: The Man, the Company. With the collaboration of F. F. Hill. Charles Scribner and Sons, New York.
61. Northrop, L. M., P. C. Clements, F. Bachmann, J. Bergey, G. Chastek, S. Cohen, P. Donohoe, et al. 2007. A framework for software product line practice. Working paper, Version 5.0, Software Engineering Institute, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh (July).
62. Osterweil, L. 1987. Software processes are software too. Proc. 9th Internat. Conf. Software Engrg., Monterey, CA (March), 2-13.
63. Parnas, D. 2006. Agile methods and GSD: The wrong solution to an old but real problem. Comm. ACM 49(10) 29.
64. Paulk, M. C. 2002. Agile methodologies and process discipline. Crosstalk: J. Defense Software Engrg. Accessed January 25, 2008, http://www.stsc.hill.af.mil/crosstalk/2002/10/paulk.html.
65. Royce, W. W. 1970. Managing the development of large software systems: Concepts and techniques. Proc., WESCON (August).
66. Sannella, D. 2008. Algebraic and logical foundations of formal software development. Accessed January 25, 2008, http://homepages.inf.ed.ac.uk/dts/alf/.
67. Sannella, D., A. Tarlecki. 1997. Essential concepts of algebraic specification and program development. Formal Aspects Comput. 9 229-269.
68. Schrage, M. 2000. Serious Play: How the World's Best Companies Simulate to Innovate. Harvard Business School Press, Boston.
69. Shah, R., P. T. Ward. 2003. Lean manufacturing: Context, practice bundles, and performance. J. Oper. Management 21(2) 129-149.
70. Slaughter, S. A., D. Harter, M. Krishnan. 1998. Evaluating the cost of software quality. Comm. ACM 41(8) 67-73.
71. Slaughter, S. A., L. Levine, R., Balasubramaniam, J. Pries-Heje, R. Baskerville. 2006. Aligning software processes with strategy. MIS Quart. 30(4) 891-918.
72. Spear, S., H. K. Bowen. 1999. Decoding the DNA of the Toyota production system. Harvard Bus. Rev. 77(5) 97-106.
73. Staats, B. R., D. M. Upton. 2007. Lean principles, learning, and software production: Evidence from Indian software services. Working Paper 08-001, Harvard Business School, Boston.
74. Thomke, S. 2003. Experimentation Matters. Harvard Business School Press, Boston.
75. Voas, J. 1998. COTS software: The economical choice? IEEE Software 15(2) 16-19.
76. Wirth, N., J. Gutknecht. 1992. Ten years after: From objects to components. Project Oberon: Design of an Operating System and Compiler. Addison-Wesley, Boston, p. 434, 2005 (original 1992), http://www.oberon.ethz.ch/WirthPubl/ProjectOberon.pdf.
77. Womack, J. P., D. T. Jones, D. Roos. 1990. The Machine That Changed the World: The Story of Lean Production. Rawson Associates, New York.
78. Wood, J., D. Silver. 1995. Joint Application Design, 2nd ed. John Wiley & Sons, New York.
79. Yin, R. 1994. Case Study Research: Design and Methods, 2nd ed. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA