The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Determinants of Commitment to Information Systems Development: A Longitudinal Investigation
Abstract
Commitment to an information systems (IS) development project is widely believed to affect the eventual success of the system. Problems arising from low commitment have also been described. However, there has been little research on the factors that influence the level of commitment to an IS project. This paper provides some initial insights into the determinants of commitment based on a longitudinal study of an IS project that was stopped and then restarted on several occasions over a 17-year period (1975-1992). The paper draws four types of determinants — project, psychological, social, and structural — from the organization behavior literature and uses them to explain six decisions that were made during the 17-year period. A comparison of these six decisions suggests that project determinants play a central role during the initial commitment decision, but the other determinants assume greater importance in later stages. Moreover, it seems that in this case study, project and psychological determinants affected the decision to increase commitment, whereas social and structural determinants influenced the decision to withdraw commitment to the project. Some implications for practice and future research are examined.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision under Risk
Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1979) · Econometrica · doi:10.2307/1914185 · Cited by 48,524
Knee-deep in the big muddy: a study of escalating commitment to a chosen course of action
Staw, B. M. (1976) · Organizational Behavior and Human Performance · doi:10.1016/0030-5073(76)90005-2 · Cited by 2,061 · cited 2×
“…cause of setback (Keil, 1994) * This taxonom Attributes of the decision maker's relationship with the project ¯ Personal responsibility for failure (Staw, 1976; Bazerman et al., 1982; Davis and Bobko, 1986; Haunschild, et al., 1994; Keil, 1994) ¯ Information processing errors (Ross and Staw, 1986,…”
BackgroundThe Escalation of Commitment To a Course of Action
Staw, B. M. (1981) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.5465/amr.1981.4285694 · Cited by 1,693
Attention and automaticity in the processing of self-relevant information.
Bargh, J. A. (1982) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.43.3.425 · Cited by 536
Cited by
Dubé, L., & Paré, G. (2003) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.2307/30036550 · Cited by 976
Liberating HR through technology
Shrivastava, S., & Shaw, J. B. (2003) · Human Resource Management · doi:10.1002/hrm.10081 · Cited by 152
Hughes, D. L., Dwivedi, Y. K., Rana, N. P., & Simintiras, A. C. (2016) · Production Planning & Control · doi:10.1080/09537287.2016.1217571 · Cited by 120
Metadata
- Authors
- Newman, M., & Sabherwal, R.
- Venue
- MIS Quarterly
- Publisher
- MIS Quarterly
- Published
- 1996-03-01
- Volume
- 20
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 23-54
- ISSN
- 0276-7783 (ISSN-L)
- 2162-9730
- OpenAlex
- W1516485291
- Cited by
- 290
- References
- 4
- FWCI
- 36.03
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.