The politics of post-implementation reviews

Gwillim, D; Dovey, K; Wieder, B

The politics of post-implementation reviews

Gwillim, D Dovey, K

Wieder, B

Permalink

Publication Type:: Journal Article
Citation:: Information Systems Journal, 2005, 15 (4), pp. 307 - 319
Issue Date:: 2005-10-01

Closed Access

	Filename	Description	Size
	2005001995.pdf		1.23 MB	Adobe PDF	View/Open

Copyright Clearance Process

Recently Added
In Progress
Closed Access

This item is closed access and not available.

Full metadata record

Field	Value	Language
dc.contributor.author	Gwillim, D	en_US
dc.contributor.author	Dovey, K https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8182-2166	en_US
dc.contributor.author	Wieder, B https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7093-6213	en_US
dc.date.issued	2005-10-01	en_US
dc.identifier.citation	Information Systems Journal, 2005, 15 (4), pp. 307 - 319	en_US
dc.identifier.issn	1350-1917	en_US
dc.identifier.uri	http://hdl.handle.net/10453/4098
dc.description.abstract	The post-implementation review (PIR) literature emphasizes the benefits of ex post evaluations of information technology (IT) projects. However, empirical studies of actual practice show that few organizations undertake any substantive form of ex post evaluation. This article presents the results of case study research in the Australian offices of two global corporations. These results support the findings reported in the literature and contribute new insights into the political factors that discourage the undertaking of PIRs in organizations. Furthermore, the results reveal a significant gap between theory and practice with respect to IT investment and IT governance practices, with no evidence found of such practices influencing ex post evaluation behaviour in these two organizations. © 2005 Blackwell Publishing Ltd.	en_US
dc.relation.ispartof	Information Systems Journal	en_US
dc.relation.isbasedon	10.1111/j.1365-2575.2005.00198.x	en_US
dc.subject.classification	Information Systems	en_US
dc.title	The politics of post-implementation reviews	en_US
dc.type	Journal Article
utslib.citation.volume	4	en_US
utslib.citation.volume	15	en_US
utslib.for	080609 Information Systems Management	en_US
utslib.for	0806 Information Systems	en_US
utslib.for	1503 Business and Management	en_US
dc.location.activity	Fremantle, Australia
pubs.embargo.period	Not known	en_US
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/Faculty of Business
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/Faculty of Business/Accounting Discipline
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/Faculty of Engineering and Information Technology
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/Faculty of Engineering and Information Technology/School of Professional Practice and Leadership
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/Strength - HCTD - Human Centred Technology Design
utslib.copyright.status	closed_access
pubs.issue	4	en_US
pubs.publication-status	Published	en_US
pubs.volume	15	en_US

Abstract:

The post-implementation review (PIR) literature emphasizes the benefits of ex post evaluations of information technology (IT) projects. However, empirical studies of actual practice show that few organizations undertake any substantive form of ex post evaluation. This article presents the results of case study research in the Australian offices of two global corporations. These results support the findings reported in the literature and contribute new insights into the political factors that discourage the undertaking of PIRs in organizations. Furthermore, the results reveal a significant gap between theory and practice with respect to IT investment and IT governance practices, with no evidence found of such practices influencing ex post evaluation behaviour in these two organizations. © 2005 Blackwell Publishing Ltd.

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:

http://hdl.handle.net/10453/4098