Editorial

Abstract

Our first paper by Rajiv Sabherwal and Varun Grover (2010) looks at information system development (ISD) politics, that is, political maneuvers that impact on the success or otherwise of the information system. The paper uses 89 ISD projects to develop a taxonomy of political processes which identifies three distinct types (representing three clusters in the data): Tug of War, wherein multiple parties strive to gain control of the project; Obstacle Race, which involves efforts to both resist and pursue the project; and Empire Building, wherein the project is used as an instrument to enhance political or resource bases. As a look at the list of references makes clear, the ISJ has published a series of articles emphasizing the role of power in information systems (see, for example, Silva 2007) and the Journal has a strong history publishing research into non-technical causes of success and failure. Like most papers the process towards acceptance was not short. The original submission was in April 2008, and following reviews, resubmissions took place in November 2008, May 2009, and July 2009 before final acceptance. We hope that our procedures are not seen as an Obstacle Race but a genuine attempt at working with the authors to improve a paper so that it is most useful to readers when published. As usual, we thank our senior editor, associate editor, and referees for playing their part in ensuring this process of improvement. Taking an interpretive multi-case study approach, the paper of Balasubramaniam Ramesh, Lan Cao and Richard Baskerville (2010) looks into agile requirements engineering (RE) practices. Based on an analysis of data collected in sixteen U.S. software development organizations, the authors identify six agile practices and seven challenges that are created by the use of these practices. They also analyze how this collection of practices helps mitigate some, while exacerbating other risks in requirements engineering. The paper provides a framework for evaluating the impact and appropriateness of agile RE practices by relating them to RE risks. Two risks that are intractable by agile RE practices emerge from the analysis. First, problems with customer ability to generate shared understanding and a lack of concurrence among customers significantly impact agile development. Second, risks associated with neglecting non-functional requirements such as security and scalability are a serious concern. Tero Päivärinta, Maung Sein and Tuomo Peltola look at how systems development methods (SDMs) are used in practice. Again, possibly reflecting the research interests of two of the ISJ editors, the Journal has a strong history in publishing qualitative research into information systems development. The authors show how SDMs are adapted and modified to meet project exigencies, which results in unique methods-in-use in each project. In particular the research suggests that SDM modifications happen due to mismatches between the paradigmatic values inherent in the SDM, the method users and the organizational context. This is illustrated through case study research. These three papers are large, each around twice our ‘norm’ of around 6–8000 words. However, we feel that sometimes explanation and detail are warranted, as in these cases. This has necessitated restricting the number of papers to only three in this issue.