A Suggested Theoretical Framework for Software Project Success

Hroon Tarawneh

.

DOI: 10.4236/jsea.2011.411076                

Abstract

Current literature on software project management indicates that the majority of software projects either are considered a failure or challenged. These projects are characterized by exceeding budget, exceeding time, and failing to meet customer expectations. The fact that most projects fail highlights the need for research regarding the factors that lead to software project success or failure. This paper presents a theoretical framework for software project success. Based on deep analysis of current literature on software success factors, a theoretical framework is formulating. The suggested framework shows factors that have to be carefully considered in order to achieve software project success. The factors included in the framework are dividing into four categories: organizational factors, technical factors, people factors, and culture factors. The suggested framework is new in the sense that it includes many factors that are not founding together in any of the previous similar frameworks.

Keywords

Software Projects, Success Factors, Technical Factors, People Factors, Culture Factors, Organizational Factors

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

[1]	C. Jones, “Applied Software Measurement: Assuring, Productivity and Quality,” 2nd Edition, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1997.
[2]	W. Gibbs, “Software’s Chronic Crisis,” Scientific American, September, Vol. 167, No. 4, 1999, pp. 468-473.
[3]	Standish group, extreme chaos, 2001, Standish group international. http://www.standishgroup.com
[4]	L. J. May, “Major Causes of Software Project Failures,” 2002. http://stsc.hill.af.mil/crosstalk/1998/jul/causes.asp
[5]	A. Taylor, “IT Projects: Sink or Swim,” The Computer Bulletin, 2000, pp. 24-26. doi:10.1093/combul/42.1.24
[6]	J. Ropponen and K. Lyytinen, “Components of Software Development Risk: How to Address Them?” IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, Vol. 26, No. 2, 2000, pp. 98-111. doi:10.1109/32.841112
[7]	D. R. Denison, Corporate Culture and Organizational Effectiveness, John Wiley & Sons, New York, 1990.
[8]	F. J. Heemstra and R. J. Kusters, “Dealing with Risk: A Practical Approach,” Journal of Information Technology, Vol. 11, 1996, pp. 333-346. doi:10.1057/jit.1996.7
[9]	D. Radcliffe, “Project Leadership,” Software Magazine, Vol. 18, No. 5, 1998, pp. 38-44.
[10]	N. H. Arshad, A. Mohamed and Z. Matnor, “Software Development Projects: Risk Factors and Occurrences,” WSEAS Transactions on Computer Research, Vol. 2, No. 2, 2007, pp. 1991-8755.
[11]	T. Addison and S. Vallabh, “Controlling Software Project Risks—An Empirical Study of Methods Used by Experienced Project Mangers,” Proceedings of SAICSIT, 2002, pp. 128-140.
[12]	A. Mursu, H. A. Soriyan and K. C. Olufokunbi, “Toward Successful ISD in Developing Countries: First Results from a Nigerian Risk Study Using the Delphi Method,” 1996.
[13]	B. Boehm and R. Ross, “Theory-W Software Project Management Principles and Examples,” IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, Vol. 15, No. 7, 1989, pp. 902-916. doi:10.1109/32.29489
[14]	E. W. Martin, D. W. Dehayes, J. A. Hoffer and W. C. Perking, “Managing Information Technology: What Mangers Need to Know,” 2nd Edition, Prentice Hall, New Jersey, 1994.
[15]	B. Farbey, F. Land and D. Targett, “Moving IS Evaluation Forward: Learning Themes and Research Issues,” Journal of Strategic Information Systems, Vol. 8, 1999, pp. 189-207. doi:10.1016/S0963-8687(99)00021-9
[16]	T. Eldabi, R. J. Paul and H. Sbeih, “Operational Use Evaluation/Post Implementation Evaluation of IT,” In: M. Levy, A. Martin and C. Schweighart, Eds., Proceedings of UKAIS, 9-11 April, Warwick University, Warwick, 2003.