An exploratory study investigating the perception that ICT capital projects are different Evidence from the Czech Republic

An exploratory study investigating the perception that ICT capital projects are different... Purpose – The purpose of this study/paper is evidence to suggest that information communication technology (ICT) capital projects are different from non‐ICT projects and that as a result the appraisal of such projects is more difficult. This may suggest that organisations would use dissimilar financial and risk assessment models or place different importance levels on such models between the two types of investment. The purpose of this paper is to investigate this issue and present the results of research into the practices of organisations in Czech Republic that have recently undertaken an appraisal of both ICT and non‐ICT capital projects. Design/methodology/approach – A factual and attitudinal survey was developed and conducted during the end of 2011, addressed to organisations based in the Czech Republic. The object of the survey was the identification of current practices in respect of the appraisal of both ICT and non‐ICT projects and the opinions of senior executives on a number of important issues regarding such practices. This paper focuses on the issues relating to ICT projects being “different” from non‐ICT projects. Findings – The empirical findings support the literature in that ICT projects are, in many respects, different from non‐ICT projects. However, the evidence indicates that, in practice, there is no significant difference in the financial and risk assessment models used in their appraisal. This indicates that any perceived difficulties, which may infer that the projects are “different”, are overcome (or ignored), to some extent, when it comes to the formal financial and risk assessment stage of project appraisal. There is also evidence to suggest that practitioners use assessment models that academics regard as unsophisticated. The findings also show that strategic issues are more important with respect of ICT projects than non‐ICT projects. The research therefore supports the view that ICT projects are perceived to be different, but that the current conventional (financial and risk) appraisal models are adequate to appraise such capital projects, provided they are supported by a strategic assessment. Research limitations/implications – As the findings are based on a survey of companies in the Czech Republic only, we accept that the research results may have some limitations in terms of drawing general conclusions. The concern over drawing general conclusions is also brought about by the relatively low response rate, although the rate is in line with previous published research. Practical implications – ICT projects are different and as such these differences must be taken into account when appraising capital projects. The evidence supports the need for practitioners to review their appraisal of ICT capital projects, by adopting more sophisticated financial and risk models (as prescribed by academics) and linking their appraisal to corporate strategic goals. Future research should be aimed at identifying the formal and informal strategic approaches adopted by practitioners in the appraisal of ICT capital projects. Originality/value – This is the only survey to simultaneously address the appraisal issues concerning both ICT and non‐ICT projects in the Czech Republic. As such, it gives a valuable insight into the practices of Czech Republic organisations in their appraisal of ICT and non‐ICT capital projects. The identification of the four main problem areas with respect to the appraisal of ICT projects will help to focus academic research in the future. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Management Research Review Emerald Publishing

An exploratory study investigating the perception that ICT capital projects are different Evidence from the Czech Republic

Management Research Review, Volume 37 (10): 16 – Sep 9, 2014

Loading next page...
 
/lp/emerald-publishing/an-exploratory-study-investigating-the-perception-that-ict-capital-xq0NPR7jjU
Publisher
Emerald Publishing
Copyright
Copyright © 2014 Emerald Group Publishing Limited. All rights reserved.
ISSN
2040-8269
DOI
10.1108/MRR-09-2013-0218
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Purpose – The purpose of this study/paper is evidence to suggest that information communication technology (ICT) capital projects are different from non‐ICT projects and that as a result the appraisal of such projects is more difficult. This may suggest that organisations would use dissimilar financial and risk assessment models or place different importance levels on such models between the two types of investment. The purpose of this paper is to investigate this issue and present the results of research into the practices of organisations in Czech Republic that have recently undertaken an appraisal of both ICT and non‐ICT capital projects. Design/methodology/approach – A factual and attitudinal survey was developed and conducted during the end of 2011, addressed to organisations based in the Czech Republic. The object of the survey was the identification of current practices in respect of the appraisal of both ICT and non‐ICT projects and the opinions of senior executives on a number of important issues regarding such practices. This paper focuses on the issues relating to ICT projects being “different” from non‐ICT projects. Findings – The empirical findings support the literature in that ICT projects are, in many respects, different from non‐ICT projects. However, the evidence indicates that, in practice, there is no significant difference in the financial and risk assessment models used in their appraisal. This indicates that any perceived difficulties, which may infer that the projects are “different”, are overcome (or ignored), to some extent, when it comes to the formal financial and risk assessment stage of project appraisal. There is also evidence to suggest that practitioners use assessment models that academics regard as unsophisticated. The findings also show that strategic issues are more important with respect of ICT projects than non‐ICT projects. The research therefore supports the view that ICT projects are perceived to be different, but that the current conventional (financial and risk) appraisal models are adequate to appraise such capital projects, provided they are supported by a strategic assessment. Research limitations/implications – As the findings are based on a survey of companies in the Czech Republic only, we accept that the research results may have some limitations in terms of drawing general conclusions. The concern over drawing general conclusions is also brought about by the relatively low response rate, although the rate is in line with previous published research. Practical implications – ICT projects are different and as such these differences must be taken into account when appraising capital projects. The evidence supports the need for practitioners to review their appraisal of ICT capital projects, by adopting more sophisticated financial and risk models (as prescribed by academics) and linking their appraisal to corporate strategic goals. Future research should be aimed at identifying the formal and informal strategic approaches adopted by practitioners in the appraisal of ICT capital projects. Originality/value – This is the only survey to simultaneously address the appraisal issues concerning both ICT and non‐ICT projects in the Czech Republic. As such, it gives a valuable insight into the practices of Czech Republic organisations in their appraisal of ICT and non‐ICT capital projects. The identification of the four main problem areas with respect to the appraisal of ICT projects will help to focus academic research in the future.

Journal

Management Research ReviewEmerald Publishing

Published: Sep 9, 2014

Keywords: Information technology; ICT; Information systems; Risk; Capital investment; Financial appraisal

References

You’re reading a free preview. Subscribe to read the entire article.


DeepDyve is your
personal research library

It’s your single place to instantly
discover and read the research
that matters to you.

Enjoy affordable access to
over 18 million articles from more than
15,000 peer-reviewed journals.

All for just $49/month

Explore the DeepDyve Library

Search

Query the DeepDyve database, plus search all of PubMed and Google Scholar seamlessly

Organize

Save any article or search result from DeepDyve, PubMed, and Google Scholar... all in one place.

Access

Get unlimited, online access to over 18 million full-text articles from more than 15,000 scientific journals.

Your journals are on DeepDyve

Read from thousands of the leading scholarly journals from SpringerNature, Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford University Press and more.

All the latest content is available, no embargo periods.

See the journals in your area

DeepDyve

Freelancer

DeepDyve

Pro

Price

FREE

$49/month
$360/year

Save searches from
Google Scholar,
PubMed

Create folders to
organize your research

Export folders, citations

Read DeepDyve articles

Abstract access only

Unlimited access to over
18 million full-text articles

Print

20 pages / month