The Diversity of Information System Development Methodologies - Research Paper Example

Information System (IS) development philosophies and methodologies Information System (IS) development philosophies and methodologies The idea of information systems development methodology (ISDM) refers to a management technique that has been very much evolved in present age. In addition, at the present, there are hundreds of information systems development methodologies (ISDMs) that differ considerably from each other. However, the number of information systems development methodologies that an organization could consider for adoption or modification has to be quite small intended for practical causes. Thus, to make effective selection for preferred information systems development methodology a hierarchical categorization is required that detaches basic or “essential” characteristic from “accidental” particulars (Avison & Fitzgerald, 2002; Iivari et al., 1999). This paper presents a detailed analysis of the information system development philosophies and methodologies. Information systems development methodology is simply an instantiation that is established for one or more information systems development approaches (ISDAs). In addition, the information systems development approaches encompass the necessary features; those are then inherited for the information systems development methodologies belonging to that class. Additionally, one significant implication of systematizing the area of information systems development methodologies into an understandable amount of ISDAs is to move the influence from individual ISDMs to the characteristics of all-purpose information systems development methodologies, like terms of essence of their illustration methodology. Furthermore, the strong appearances of information systems development methodologies make it probable to widen the practical experience of systems developers. Since, they allow flexible, situation-oriented “methodology engineering” thus an information systems development methodology is adopted to a specific ISD project in the course of an instantiation of a suitable information systems development methodology (Iivari et al., 1999; Bielkowicz et al., 2002). Engineering and the socio-technological philosophies This section presents the comparison between engineering and the socio-technological philosophy to develop information systems as well as discuss the implications of IS development methodology: Socio-Technical Approach is a technique for information system development that facilitates future users to play a major role in the system designing, to fulfill requirements, additional technical and operational objectives, to make sure that the new technical system is enclosed with a well-matched and well-functioning business system (Fitzgerald et al., 1985; Walters et al., 1994). Socio-Technical Approach encompasses the guiding principles and beliefs that are about the self-design of a working system. In addition, the Socio-Technical Approach incorporates the minimal critical requirement. Since, the Socio-Technical Approach is an open-ended design procedure. Thus, it offers a fit among the technical, social and subsystems. Additionally, it offers the joint optimization and redundant functions. Also, the Socio-Technical Approach covers the fundamental concept of a technical system a social system having unit operation, variance, technical requirements and social requirements. Furthermore, the Socio-Technical Approach uses principles of the information system development procedure with socio-technical design, user participation and evolution (Walters et al., 1994; Fitzgerald et al., 2003; Avison & Fitzgerald, 2002). Information system development involves the engineering philosophy for offering a technical solution that could be optimized through utilization of formal notations to accurately define system procedures. In addition, the engineering philosophy of information system development involves the approach that addresses systems where the problem is effectively defined as well as a technical solution is suitable. However, the engineering based philosophy of information system development neglects the organizational, social, and human influence for the system development (Gasson, 1995; Yaghini et al., 2009). Engineering based philosophy for information system development encompasses a set of methodologies that involve some of the below given different steps (Yaghini et al., 2009; Gasson, 1995): Engineering based information systems development methodology involves the information strategic planning that covers the existing circumstances analysis, requirements analysis, and architecture description as well as information strategic plan management Engineering based information systems development methodology encompasses domain analysis that covers attributes analysis, existing systems analysis, interaction analysis, planning and designing confirmation Engineering based ISDM involves the programming and design system that is based on the technical and logical designing principles In engineering based ISDM we implement and build system through evaluating system and implementation system. Socio-technological information system development methodology I have chosen the socio-technological information system development methodology that involves the user of the information system like a real provider to achieve an acceptable fit between people and technology rather than forcing one or both to change as well as adapt to the other. In addition, the paradigm of socio-technology concerns with the individuals, organization, technical, analysis (‘what’ is needed), and design (‘how’ it will be attained), on the other hand, the engineering-based information system development approaches focus on the production of a requirements specification and its transformation into a software model. However, this course of action comprises stepwise refinement, for instance, using the iterative or waterfall lifecycle, like in rapid application development. However, the openly social side of system is often downplayed and even ignored in overall system development, but it constantly presents whether the developer likes it or not. Additionally, a most commonly used technique is the unified modeling language (UML), in that the use case is a fundamental notation intended for explaining the business procedures from the user’s point of view (Vidgen & Madsen, 2003). Zenith International Ltd business was established in 1991 as a business consultancy that is specialized in the drinks, food and packaging industries globally. This business is going to implement the web based supply chain management and web based business for managing business activities. In this scenario the establishment of web based platforms for the Zenith International Ltd. will be done through the socio-technological information system development methodology. Since, the socio-technological information system development methodology shares the user interface concern by considering users as well as their jobs, however in difference to user interface; socio-technological information system development methodology comes into view like cumbersome and ill-defined. Since, instead of identifying empirical techniques to be iteratively functional all through the design procedure, the socio-technical technique pays attention on the participation of stakeholders as well as the development of a designed implementation approach. In case of Zenith International Ltd. business system development, the socio-technological approach spotlights on the fundamentally unconscious drives of the whole organizational associates, practitioners and looks for ways of enhancing the users operational lives through technology. However, the Zenith International Ltd. system development apprehensions are not directly exchangeable into border design strategy or testing techniques. Since, a group of designers who requires answers to questions like that "which icons are majority significant?" or "what would be the size of window?" however, in this scenario, a socio-technical theorists appears irrelevant or vague (Vidgen & Madsen, 2003). In case of Zenith International Ltd. system development using socio-technological information system development methodology we could have some of the problems regarding the software design that is a costly, ill-structured procedure, and the search for apparent answers motivates someone seeking to design a working system. In addition, the Zenith International Ltd. system development is offering no clear guidance on user interface design. Additionally, this structure offers problems since the socio-technological information system development makes no claim to exclusive insights on this matter as well as transfers it to a second-order apprehensions in conceptualizing the users reaction to technology. In spite of the fact that, the hazard of socio-technological information system development seems irrelevant at vague or worst at best in the face of augmenting prospect of designers intended for clear responses to similar questions from social scientists. Furthermore, it is not simply the anticipation of designers, the lack of precise interface design direction is a regular criticism made of a lot of social science techniques (Dillon, 2000; Vidgen & Madsen, 2003). Information system problem New technology implementation at Zenith International Ltd. system development using socio-technological information system development methodology could create some problems. Here main problem that we can face is about the issue of complexity of system development. Since, the complexity lies at the heart of a Zenith International Ltd situation (there are a variety of business paradigms that need to be developed for the efficient web based working and operating. In addition, at Zenith International a variety of unfavorable and transforming environmental situations exist inside the business those are impossible to predict. Additionally, these business transformations are not predictable and are unfeasible to modify. Thus, in this scenario, the implementation of new technology at Zenith business using the socio-technological model is not flexible (with respect to complexity) (Vidgen & Madsen, 2003; Dillon, 2000). In typical organizations problems through the moving ‘ground’ and moving ‘figure’ frequently become extravagant in a great deal larger social space, in which there is a far bigger degree of hierarchical job interdependence. In this scenario, the socio-technological, and its capability to make a great deal more fine grained answers to the ‘ground’ condition, could be viewed as ‘agile’. The agility and internal regulation of the group offers solutions to the problems locally without propagation in the course of a bigger social space, therefore growing tempo (Luna-Reyes et al., 2005). Figure 1- Rich Picture Conclusion At the present, there are a huge number of information system development methodologies. However, these methodologies differ from each other in case of their use and system development nature. In addition, the diversity of information system development methodologies also depends on the system that is going to be developed. In this case the best information system development methodology is that which fulfills the system development needs and is effectively suitable for the system and business. This paper has presented an investigation and detailed analysis of the information system development methodologies, their compression and investigation in terms of their business implementation. I hope this research will offer a comprehensive overview of information system development methodologies and their relevance to effective system development. References 1. Avison, D. & Fitzgerald, G., 2002. Information Systems Development: Methodologies, Techniques and Tools. 3rd ed. New York: McGraw Hill Higher Education. 2. Bielkowicz, P., Patel, P. & Tun, T.T., 2002. Evaluating Information Systems Development Methods: A New Framework. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Object-Oriented Information Systems, 2425/2002, pp.473-81. 3. Dillon, A., 2000. Group dynamics meet cognition: combining socio-technical concepts and usability engineering in the design of information systems. In E. Coakes, D. Willis, and R. Lloyd-Jones (eds.), The new SocioTech: Graffiti on the long wall, pp.119-25. 4. Fitzgerald, G., Stokes, N. & Wood, J.R.G., 1985. Feature Analysis of Contemporary Information Systems Methodologies. The Computer Journal British Computer Society, 28(3), pp.223-30. 5. Gasson, S., 1995. The Role Of Methodologies In IT-Related Organisational Change. In Proceedings of BCS IS Methods Specialist Group. Northeast Wales Institute, UK, 1995. British Computer Society, London, UK. 6. Iivari, J., Hirschheim, R. & Klein, H.K., 1999. Beyond Methodologies: Keeping up with Information Systems Development Approaches through Dynamic Classification. In HICSS, Proceedings of the Thirty-second Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences-Volume 7. Maui, Hawaii , 1999. IEEE Computer Society Washington, DC, USA. 7. Luna-Reyes, L.F., Martir, S.C., Gil-Garcia, J.R. & Cresswell, A.M., 2005. Information systems development as emergent socio-technical change: a practice approach. European Journal of Information Systems, 14(1), pp.93 - 105. 8. Vidgen, R. & Madsen, S., 2003. Exploring the Socio-Technical Dimension of Information System Development: Use Cases and Job Satisfaction. In ECIS 2003, Proceedings of the 11th European Conference on Information Systems. Naples, Italy, 2003. 9. Walters, S., Broady, J. & Hartley, R., 1994. A Review of Information Systems Development Methodologies. Library Management MCB UP Ltd, 15(6), pp.5-19. 10. Yaghini, M., Bourouni, A. & Amiri, R.H., 2009. A Framework for Selection of Information Systems Development Methodologies. Computer and Information Science, 2(1), pp.3-11. Read More