Effect of Control on Information Systems Development Performance: A Meta-Analysis

References

• Aladwani A. M. An empirical examination of the role of social integration in system development projects. Information Systems Journal, 2002, 12(4): 339–353.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aladwani A. M. An integrated performance model of information systems projects. Journal of Management Information Systems, 2002, 19(1): 185–210.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Andres H P and Zmud R. W. A contingency approach to software project coordination. Journal of Management Information Systems, 2001, 18(3): 41–70.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Anthony R. N. The Management Control Function, Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA, 1988.
   Google Scholar
• Barki, H and Hartwick J. Interpersonal conflict and its management in information systems development. MIS Quarterly, 2001, 25(2): 195–228.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Borenstein M, Hedges L, Higgins J, Rothstein H. Comprehensive meta-analysis, version 2. Biostat Inc Englewood, New Jersey, 2005.
   Google Scholar
• Cardinal L B, Sitkin S B and Long C. P. Balancing and rebalancing in the creation and evolution of organizational control. Organization Science, 2004, 15(4): 411–431.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Choudhury V and Sabherwal R. Portfolios of control in outsourced software development projects. Information Systems Research, 2003, 14(3): 291–314.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Crisp C. B. Control Enactment in Global Virtual Teams. Doctorl Dissertation. University of Texas at Austin, 2002.
   Google Scholar
• Das T K and Teng B. S. Between trust and control: Developing confidence in partner cooperation in alliances. Academy of Management Review, 1998, 23(3): 491–512.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Deci E L and Ryan R. M. Intrinsic Motivation and Self Determination in Human Behavior., Plenum Press, New York, 1985.
   Google Scholar
• Eisenhardt K. M. Control: Organizational and Economic Approaches. Management Science, 1985, 31(2): 134–149.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eisenhardt K. M. Agency Theory - an Assessment and Review. Academy of Management Review, 1989, 14(1): 57–74.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Faraj S and Sproull L. Coordinating expertise in software development teams. Management Science, 2000, 46(12): 1554–1568.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Field A. P. Meta-Ananlysis of Correlation Coefficients: A Monte Carlo Comparison of Fixed- and Random-Effects methods. Psychological Methods, 2001, 6(2): 161–180.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Glass G V, McGraw B and Smith M. L. Meta-analysis in Social Research. Sage Publications, Bevelry Hills, CA, 1981.
   Google Scholar
• Guinan P J, J. G. Cooprider and Faraj, S. Enabling software development team performance during requirements definition: A behavioral versus technical approach. Information System Research, 1998, 9(2): 101–125.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Henderson J C and Lee S. Managing I/S Design Teams - a Control Theories Perspective. Management Science, 1992, 38(6): 757–777.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hunter J E and Schmidt F. L. Methods of Meta-analysis: Correcting Error and Bias in Research Findings. Sage Publications, London, 2004.
   Google Scholar
• Jarvenpaa S L, Shaw T R and Staples D. S. Toward contextualized theories of trust: The role of trust in global virtual teams. Information Systems Research, 2004, 15(3): 250–267.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jaworski B. J. Toward a Theory of Marketing Control: Environmental Context, Control Types and Consequences. Journal of Marketing, 1988, 52: 23–39.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Joseph D, Ng K Y and Ang S. Turnover of Information Technology Professionals: A Narrative Review, Meta-analytic Structural Equation Modeling, and Model Development. MIS Quarterly, 2007, 31(3): 547–577.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• King W R and He J. Understanding the Role and Method of Meta-Analaysis in IS Research. Communications of the AIS, 2005, 16(32).
   Google Scholar
• Kirsch L. J. The management of complex tasks in organizations: Controlling the systems development process. Organization Science, 1996, 7(1): 1–21.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kirsch L. J. Portfolios of Control Modes and IS Project Management. Information Systems Research, 1997, 8(3): 215–239.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kirsch L. J. Deploying Common Systems Globally: The Dynamics of Control. Information Systems Research, 2004, 15(4): 374–395.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kirsch L J and Cummings L. L. Contextual Influences on Self Control of IS Professionals Engaged in Systems Development. Accounting, Management and Information Technology, 1996, 6(3): 191–219.
   Google Scholar
• Kirsch L J, Ko D G and Haney M. H. Investigating the Antecedents of team-Based Clan Control: Adding Social Capital as a Predictor. Organization Science, 2010, 21(3): 469–489.
   Google Scholar
• Kirsch L J, Sambamurthy V, Ko D G and Purvis R. L. Controlling information systems development projects: The view from the client. Management Science, 2002, 48(4): 484–498.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Klein G, Beranek P, Martz B and Jaing J. The relationship of control and learning to project performance. Cybernetics and Systems: An International Journal, 2006, 37: 137–150.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lipsey M W and Wilson D. B. Practical Meta-analysis. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA, 2001.
   Google Scholar
• Mähring M. IT project governance: A process-oriented study of organizational control and executive involvement. SSE/EFI Working Paper Series in Business Administration, 2002, 15.
   Google Scholar
• Malone T. W. Is Empowerment Just a Fad? Control Decision-making and IT. Sloan Management Review, 1997, 38(2): 23–35.
   Google Scholar
• Manz C C and Angle, H. Can group self-management mean a loss of personal control: Triangulating a paradox. Group Organizational Study, 1986, 14: 309–334.
   Google Scholar
• Nidumolu S. R. The Effect of Coordination and Uncertainty on Software Project Performance: Residual Performance Risk as an Intervening Variable. Information System Research, 1995, 6(3): 191–219.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nidumolu S. R. A comparison of structural contingency and risk based perspectives on coordination in software development projects. Journal of Management Information Systems, 1996, 13(2): 77–113.
   Google Scholar
• Nidumolu S. R. Standardization, requirements uncertainty and software project performance. Information & Management, 1996, 31(3): 135–150.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nidumolu S R and Subramani M. R. The matrix of control: Combining process and structure approaches to managing software development. Journal of Management Information Systems, 2003, 20(3): 159–196.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ouchi W. G. A conceptual framework for the design of organizational control mechanisms. Management Science, 1979, 25(9): 833–848.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ouchi W. G. Markets, bureaucracies, and clans. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1980, 25(1): 129–141.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Patnayakuni R, Ruppel C and Rai A. Managing the complementarity of knowledge integration and process formalization for systems development performance. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 2007, 7(8): 545–567.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rai A and Al-Hindi H. The effects of development process modeling and task uncertainty on development quality performance. Information & Management, 2000, 37(6): 335–346.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rasch H R and Tsoi L. H. Factors affecting software developers performance: An integrated approach. MIS Quarterly, 1992: 395–413.
   Google Scholar
• Ravichandran T and Rai A. Total quality management in information systems development: Key constructs and relationships. Journal of Management Information Systems, 1999, 16(3): 119–155.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Robey D, Farrow D and Franz C. R. Group process and conflict in systems development. Management Science, 1989, 35(10): 1172–1191.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rosenthal R. The ‘file drawer’ Problem and tolerance for null results. Pychological Bulletin, 1979, 86: 638–641.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rosenthal R and DiMatteo M. R. Meta-Analysis: Recent Developments in Quantitative Methods for Literature Reviews. Annual Review of Sociology, 2001, 52(1): 59–82.
   Google Scholar
• Santana M and Robey D. Perceptions of control during systems development; Effects of Job Satisfaction of systems professionals. Computer Personnel, 1995: 20–34.
   Google Scholar
• Sharma R and Yetton P. The contingent effects of management support and task interdependence on successful information systems implementation. MIS Quarterly, 2003, 27(4): 533–555.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sundaramurthy C and Lewis M. Control and collaboration: Paradoxes of governance. Academy of Management Review, 2003, 28(3): 397–415.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tannenbaum A. Control in organizations. McGraw-Hill, 1968.
   Google Scholar
• Tiwana A. Governance-Knowledge Fit in Systems Development Projects. Information Systems Research, 2009, 20(2): 180–197.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tiwana, A. (2010) “Systems Development Ambidexterity: Explaining the Complementary and Substitutive Roles of Formal and Informal Controls” Journal of Management Information Systems 27(2): 87–126.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tiwana A and Keil M. Does peripheral knowledge complement control? An empirical test in technology outsourcing alliances. Strategic Management Journal, 2007, 28: 623–634.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tiwana A and McLean E. R. Expertise integration and creativity in information systems development. Journal of Management Information Systems, 2005, 22(1): 13–43.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wanous J, Sullivan S and Malinak J. The role of judgment calls in meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 1989, 74: 259–264.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wood J. Methodology for Dealing with Duplicate Effects in Meta-analysis. Organizational Research Methods, 2008, 11(1): 79–95.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar