Advanced

Selection method for COTS systems

Andersson, Bo LU and Hedman, Jonas LU (2014) In Procedia Technology - Elsevier 16. p.301-309
Abstract
Historically, organizations developed their information systems in-house. Today, a large portion of information systems development is based on the acquisition of pre-made information systems, so-called commercially off-the-shelf (COTS) systems. This approach for developing information systems requires new skills and methods supporting the process of evaluating and selecting information systems. This paper presents a method for selecting COTS systems. The method includes the following phases: problem framing, requirements and appraisal, and selection of systems. The idea and distinguishing feature behind the method is that improved understanding of organizational ‘ends’ or goals should govern the selection of a COTS system. This can also... (More)
Historically, organizations developed their information systems in-house. Today, a large portion of information systems development is based on the acquisition of pre-made information systems, so-called commercially off-the-shelf (COTS) systems. This approach for developing information systems requires new skills and methods supporting the process of evaluating and selecting information systems. This paper presents a method for selecting COTS systems. The method includes the following phases: problem framing, requirements and appraisal, and selection of systems. The idea and distinguishing feature behind the method is that improved understanding of organizational ‘ends’ or goals should govern the selection of a COTS system. This can also be expressed as a match or fit between ‘ends’ (e.g. improved organizational effectiveness) and ‘means’ (e.g. implementing COTS systems). This way of approaching the selection of COTS systems as viewing them as a ‘means’ to reach organizational ‘ends’ is different from the mainstream views of information systems development, namely the view that sees information systems development as a problem-solving process, and the underlying ontological view in other COTS selection methods, which focus on selection of functionality not reaching organizational ends. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
organization
publishing date
type
Contribution to journal
publication status
published
subject
keywords
competing values framework, COTS systems
in
Procedia Technology - Elsevier
volume
16
pages
301 - 309
publisher
Elsevier
external identifiers
  • wos:000360404800035
ISSN
2212-0173
DOI
10.1016/j.protcy.2014.10.096
language
English
LU publication?
yes
id
e74ae8c9-4c99-40b8-ab55-c0ec7d4b6c7a (old id 4814588)
date added to LUP
2014-11-28 17:04:00
date last changed
2016-04-16 02:26:36
@article{e74ae8c9-4c99-40b8-ab55-c0ec7d4b6c7a,
  abstract     = {Historically, organizations developed their information systems in-house. Today, a large portion of information systems development is based on the acquisition of pre-made information systems, so-called commercially off-the-shelf (COTS) systems. This approach for developing information systems requires new skills and methods supporting the process of evaluating and selecting information systems. This paper presents a method for selecting COTS systems. The method includes the following phases: problem framing, requirements and appraisal, and selection of systems. The idea and distinguishing feature behind the method is that improved understanding of organizational ‘ends’ or goals should govern the selection of a COTS system. This can also be expressed as a match or fit between ‘ends’ (e.g. improved organizational effectiveness) and ‘means’ (e.g. implementing COTS systems). This way of approaching the selection of COTS systems as viewing them as a ‘means’ to reach organizational ‘ends’ is different from the mainstream views of information systems development, namely the view that sees information systems development as a problem-solving process, and the underlying ontological view in other COTS selection methods, which focus on selection of functionality not reaching organizational ends.},
  author       = {Andersson, Bo and Hedman, Jonas},
  issn         = {2212-0173},
  keyword      = {competing values framework,COTS systems},
  language     = {eng},
  pages        = {301--309},
  publisher    = {Elsevier},
  series       = {Procedia Technology - Elsevier},
  title        = {Selection method for COTS systems},
  url          = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.protcy.2014.10.096},
  volume       = {16},
  year         = {2014},
}