Change agent’s competencies in successfully implementing IT projects: A multiple case study

Change agent’s competencies in successfully implementing IT projects: A multiple case study

Master thesis, MSc Human Resource Management University of Groningen, Faculty of Economics and Business

July, 2016

Marlinde Uri Student number: 2022451 Nieuwe Boteringestraat 7D

9712 PE Groningen Tel: +31 (0)622300704 E-mail: m.uri.1@student.rug.nl

Supervisor

Prof. Dr. Nijstad

Word count: 17.804

Abstract

Organisations have become more and more dependent on technologies that automate organisational processes and increase efficiency. However, over 60 percent of these IT projects fail: Most of them do not meet their initial budgets, they lack functionality and employees are sceptical towards accepting the change. Although many studies have shown the importance of having competent change agents in implementing IT projects successfully, the literature is both incomplete and contradicting. This research consists of a multiple case study of IT projects in both the private and public sector and improves the quality of the current literature on competencies of change agents in IT projects by adding relevant findings. First, the results show that social competencies are crucial to have by change agents for implementing IT projects successfully and that they are not influenced by the social

complexity of the IT project. Moreover, an explanation of why contradicting results exist on technical competencies is given. Finally, two types of competencies that were not often mentioned in the literature are added to the list of important competencies: Project and change management competencies.

Key words: IT projects, competencies change agents, social competencies, political

competencies, technical competencies, project management competencies, change management

competencies, characteristics of IT projects.

Introduction

On the second of May 2015 the Dutch newspaper NRC in Holland announced that Dutch minister of Defense, Hennis-Plasschaert, has intentions to cancel the largest ICT project of the Dutch government ever: ‘SPEER’, with estimated costs ranging from 433 million to 900 million Euros. Most of the budget was spent on external distributors of the new technology (NOS

).

Organisations face tremendous challenges in today’s technology-driven world with automating their processes, updating systems, and implementing smart information technology (IT) solutions (Ekman, Erixon, & Thilenius, 2015; Lapointe & Rivard, 2005). Even though technological change is not new as a subject in practice and the literature, the connectivity and reliance between organisational change and new technologies has substantially increased in the past ten years. Whereas in previous decades a new IT system only affected the IT department, nowadays it often influences and involves the whole organisation and its members (Zammuto, Griffith, Majchrzak, Dougherty, & Faraj, 2007).

Moreover, the costs of and risks involved in implementing IT projects and the complex challenges change agents face have increased (Lapointe & Rivard, 2005). It has been found that almost 70 percent of all technological changes fail, often with delayed deadlines, exceeding budgets, functionality issues and a lack of trust among employees (Kendra & Taplin, 2004; Markus, 2004). As the example of the Dutch government shows, large IT projects which have the intention to substitute or digitise processes formerly done by humans are costly, especially when they fail (Volkoff, Strong, & Elmes, 2005).

The role of a change agent in implementing these IT projects successfully is crucial, as a capable change agent can solve problems and improve the success rate of IT projects (Jiang, Klein &

Balloun, 1996). A change agent is someone who leads the change efforts within an IT project and is responsible for successfully implementing, initiating and maintaining the change (Harison & Boonstra, 2009; Kendra & Taplin, 2004). Studies of Jiang et al. (1996), Haron, Gui and Lenny (2014) and Kendra and Taplin (2004) have shown that when there is a fit between the competencies of a change agent and the requirements of an IT project, there is a higher possibility of IT project success.

1

http://nos.nl/artikel/2033520-hennis-wil-peperduur-ict-project-defensie-staken.html Accessed on 02-05-2015

Information technological (IT) change differs from other types of organisational change: It entails technical and functionality challenges, but also resistance, task-related and cultural challenges.

Moreover, it is often larger in scope than other types of organisational change and impacts many stakeholders in the organisation (Markus, 2004). Consequently, change agents implementing IT projects are challenged by the scope and diversity of the change, facing high levels of resistance or functionality issues (Rivard & Lapointe, 2012). Jiang, Klein and Margulis (1998) argue that most IT projects fail, because change agents lack the required competencies and are therefore incapable to deal with the challenges related to IT projects successfully. However, even though many IT change projects fail and the importance of having a capable change agent is clear, several important problems in the literature exist (Faraj & Sambamurthy, 2006; Gilley, Dixon, & Gilley, 2008; Karahanna & Watson, 2006).

For example, studies on this subject have yielded contradicting and limited findings on which competencies fit best with IT projects. Some scholars suggest that IT related competencies, such as an understanding of the new technology, do not increase IT project success, while others suggest the contrary (Avgerou & McGrath, 2007; Harison & Boonstra, 2009; Kendra & Taplin, 2004). Coiera (2006) argues that many scholars ignore the importance of technical competencies and that they focus too much on social competencies. Harison and Boonstra (2009) also acknowledge the ambiguity that exists in the literature and question scholars who focus entirely on social competencies. On the other hand, Jiang et al. (1998) and Kendra and Taplin (2004) argue that technical competencies are simply no longer needed. This ambiguity leads to an immature and incomplete literature field, while the necessity for more conclusive research is high (Faraj & Sambamurthy, 2006; Mähring & Keil, 2008).

Furthermore, some findings exist on competencies of change agents and IT projects success,

but why and when IT change success is influenced by these competencies remains unclear. Also,

whether the current list of important competencies is complete has not been proven. Kendra and

Taplin (2004) explain that the role of the change agent is crucial, but findings on why certain

competencies lead to IT project success needs to be extended. Whether the competencies that were

found in previous studies are sufficient is questionable. As technologies and organisations evolve

rapidly, competencies that were found to be important a decade ago may no longer be important today

and new competencies may be needed (Von Urff Kaufeld, Chari, & Freeme, 2009). Moreover, Harison and Boonstra (2009) suggest that the importance of competencies of change agents may be dependent on the type of IT project: How complex this project is in terms of social and technical challenges and in what organisation it is implemented.

Many improvements can be made in this research area. First, whether the current list of competencies that were shown to be important for change agents implementing IT projects is complete and still relevant today is unclear (Von Urff Kaufeld et al., 2009). Second, whether or not technical competencies are less important than social competencies remains undecided (Avgerou & McGrath, 2007; Harison & Boonstra, 2009). Third, little is known about how and when change agents and their competencies influence the success of an IT change. For example, the importance of competencies may be influenced by the complexity of the IT project (Harison & Boonstra, 2009). Jiang and Klein (2014) also acknowledge that the current literature on IT projects is immature, because it is largely based on separate case studies and not based on a comprehensive and broad understanding.

This qualitative research will present improvements for this immature literature field, by conducting a multiple case study. Due to the highly explorative nature of this research case studies will provide rich and qualitative data, which may develop new insights (Eisenhardt & Graebner, 2007). These insights may develop an understanding why currently contradicting findings on technical competencies exist, add new important competencies to the literature and provide an understanding of how and when competencies influence IT project success. Hence, the following explorative research question is proposed: How is the success of IT projects influenced by the competencies of a change agent and which situational factors may play a role in this?

Literature review

Literature background

It is widely accepted that effective competencies of change agents increase organisational

performance and organisational change success, since the change agent will be more capable in

dealing with challenges and to motivate subordinates (Karahanna & Watson, 2006). For instance, a

change agent with good leadership skills will be more likely to resolve conflicts within project teams

(Jiang et al., 1996). Competencies of a change agent are a common set of principles and core elements of human behaviour that predict performance. “They define the skills of individuals within

organisations. They are essential for carrying out the various business and organisational practices, including those related to organisational and technical changes” (Harison & Boonstra, 2009, p. 286).

Technical competencies in specific are “a set of IT-related explicit and tacit knowledge that a business manager possesses that enables him or her to exhibit IT leadership in his or her area of business”

(Basselier, Reich & Benbasat, 2001, p.165). Moreover, they consist of explicit technical skills related to knowledge of the technology, applications and systems development and management of IT and access to IT knowledge. Tacit technical knowledge is related to experience and cognition, such as having a vision for the role of IT in the organisation and being able to manage IT projects (Basselier et al., 2001).

Figure 1

Adopted from Basselier et al. (2001) – IT competence: Dimensions and components

The current list of competencies of change agents that were found to be important for

implementing IT projects successfully in the literature is presented in table 1. Some competencies that were mentioned in the literature overlap, such as social and interpersonal skills or were described at

IT competence

Explicit IT knowledge Tacit IT knowledge

- Technology - Applications

- Systems development - Management of IT - Access to IT knowledge

- Experience

- Personal use of IT - IT projects

- Management of IT - Cognition

- Process view

- Vision for the role

of IT

different construct levels, such as IS skills or the ability to increase functionality. Some competencies are described as specific skills, while other competencies consist of multiple skills and knowledge bases. The findings are therefore presented as best as possible in five categories, even though some may overlap: Social, political, technical, project management and change management competencies.

Incomplete list of competencies. The first issue with the current literature is that it is unclear whether the current list of important competencies is sufficient or not. For example, many studies are based on the findings of Jiang et al. (1996) and Jiang et al. (1998), who present a list of 18 important competencies of change agents for implementing IT projects successfully and is based on a

questionnaire. They developed this list based on a study conducted by Green (1989), but did not seem to ask change agent to add possible important competencies to this list (see Jiang et al., 1998). Instead, they tested the 18 competencies for their influence on IT project success (Jiang et al., 1996). Whether the researchers excluded possible important competencies is unclear, even though this list is often used by other scholars (see Harison & Boonstra; Kendra & Taplin, 2004).

Dated literature. Moreover, many studies on competencies of change agents and IT project

success are relatively old and their findings may be outdated. The findings of Green (1989) and Jiang et al. (1996) have not been tested in the past decade. As explained earlier, technologies change

constantly and current literature could be dated and no longer relevant. Only a few articles were found that were published between 2010 and 2016, while technological innovations have developed very rapidly. A study of Von Urff Kaufeld et al. (2009) shows that IT projects and their technologies change rapidly and require other competencies of change agents. For example, software packages that were used ten years ago are no longer used today and new technologies such as cloud software and internet of things emerge (Forman, King, & Lyytinen, 2014). Moreover, change agents are also expected to have business skills, so they are able to connect new technologies to for instance

marketing tasks (Von Urff Kaufeld et al., 2009). These competencies were not needed a decade ago, as

IT projects were not used to change entire functional departments. More recent research is therefore

needed, which better grasps the characteristics of today’s IT projects.

Table 1

Overview of literature

Competence Skills Description Source

Social competencies Social skills

Communicating skills

Interviewing skills

Emotional skills

Listening skills

Organisational development (OD) skills

Cooperation skills

Skills and knowledge that increase the effectiveness of a person in social interaction.

Speaking, listening, writing and nonverbal communication.

Nonverbal communication consists of reinforcing the message to others through gestures and expressions.

Being able to ask the right questions in order to obtain the information needed.

Identifying and interpreting social cues and adjust behavioural responses (self-monitoring).

Paying attention to and

concentrating on what is being said, and asking questions to refine points about which one is uncertain.

Focused on open communication and active participation to enable individual and collective

commitment.

Working with others productively;

resolving conflict in an effective manner.

Faraj and Sambamurthy (2006);

Karahanna and Watson (2006); Lee and Lee (2006)

Gilley et al. (2008); Harison and Boonstra (2009); Jiang et al. (1998);

Kendra and Taplin (2004); Schwalbe (2011)

Jiang et al. (1998); Kendra and Taplin (2004)

Groves (2005)

Jiang et al. (1998); Schwalbe (2011)

Kendra and Taplin (2004)

Gilley et al. (2008); Jiang et al.

(1998); Kendra and Taplin (2004);

Schwalbe (2011) Political competencies Political skills Understanding what motivates

individuals; determining sources of power and influence in an

organisation.

Bloomfield and Danieli (1995);

Faraj and Sambamurthy (2006);

Jiang et al. (1998)

Building coalitions/networking skills

Persuading skills Tactfulness

Diplomacy and sensitivity skills

Building power relations and an individual’s capacity to act upon the actions of others.

Persuading clients of what can be achieved by using an IT system.

Being aware of the implications of design and change for the user community.

Being able to say ‘no’ without being too blunt; displaying tact in dealing with others.

Avgerou and McGrath (2007)

Bloomfield and Danieli (1995) Jiang et al. (1998)

Jiang et al. (1998)

Technical competencies Explicit technical knowledge

Tacit technical knowledge IS skills

Information technology skills Information management skills

Information behaviours and values skills

Security

IT and IS know-how

The ability to understand risks and success

Technical skills related to

technology, applications and systems development.

Experience and cognition.

Advising on or implementing hardware or software.

The capability to manage IT applications and infrastructure.

The capability to manage

information effectively over its life cycle.

The capability to instil and promote behaviours and values for effective use of information.

No definition given by Schwalbe (2011).

Insight into new IT applications and system development processes.

Understanding the crucial success factors of change: Completeness, implement ability, appropriateness of benefits.

Basselier et al. (2001)

Basselier et al. (2001)

Bloomfield and Danieli (1995);

Karahanna and Watson (2006); Lee and Lee (2006); Von Urff Kaufeld et al., (2009)

Marchand et al. (2000) Marchand et al. (2000)

Marchand et al. (2000)

Schwalbe (2011)

Harison and Boonstra (2009)

Harison and Boonstra (2009); Faraj

and Sambamurthy (2006)

The ability to align business requirements and IS capabilities

No definition is given by Karahanna and Watson (2006).

Karahanna and Watson (2006) Project management competencies Leading skills

Process management skills

Business skills

Planning, evaluating change, team building, directing, delegating and controlling.

Managing the organisational and people side of change.

Understanding of the business processes. Functional knowledge of business and management principles and practices.

Faraj and Sambamurthy (2006);

Gilley et al. (2008); Harison and Boonstra (2009); Jiang et al. (1998);

Von Urff Kaufeld et al. (2009) Harison and Boonstra (2009);

Karahanna and Watson (2006);

Schwalbe (2011)

Harison and Boonstra (2009);

Kendra and Taplin (2004); Schwalbe (2011); Von Urff Kaufeld et al.

(2009) Change management

competencies

Organisational change skills

Conflict management skills The ability to understand the consequences of change

Insight in general nature of change and effective individual response to change

No definition is given by Nikolaou et al. (2007)

Ability to oversee and anticipate the consequences of change.

Harison and Boonstra (2009); Lee and Lee (2006); Schwalbe (2011) Nikolaou et al. (2007)

Harison and Boonstra (2009)

Contradicting literature. As explained earlier, contradicting results exist regarding which competencies are most important for change agents to acquire in order to implement IT projects successfully (Faraj & Sambamurthy, 2006; Harison & Boonstra, 2006). The next section presents three different perspectives towards competencies of change agents and IT project success. The first

perspective describes that technical competencies are no longer important, due to the changed nature of IT projects, and describes that social competencies are more important. The second perspective entails arguments of why technical competencies are still needed by change agents to implement IT projects successfully. The third perspective explains that the importance of competencies depends on several situational factors, such as social and technical complexity of the IT project and the

characteristics of the organisation where the IT project is implemented.

Social competencies are more important than technical competencies. The first perspective

consists of arguments suggesting that technical competencies are no longer important to implement IT projects successfully. In general, it is believed that IT projects nowadays require social competencies, as social challenges have become more crucial than technical ones (Lapointe & Rivard, 2005). Instead of just a technical change, where a new system is being introduced, the organisational changes are larger. For example, procedures, ways of working and communication lines are changed due to IT projects which often lead to uncertainty and resistance of employees (Lapointe & Rivard, 2005;

Lyytinen & Newman, 2008). Social competencies are therefore more and more important according to this perspective, because social competencies allow a change agent to manage resistance of employees effectively.

Jiang et al. (1998) found that only social and political competencies are required of change agents to implement IT project successfully. They list for example interviewing, directing, managing, speaking and listening skills as the top five most important skills and knowledge types. An

understanding of the technology and technical infrastructure and technical competencies are not

mentioned in the research methodology and findings, even though the authors do believe that technical

skills are important (Jiang et al., 1998). However, social and political competencies of change agents

are found to be significantly more important for implementing IT projects successfully.

Moreover, Gilley et al. (2008) and Kendra and Taplin (2004) do not mention technical competencies either and only focus on inter-personal and organisational competencies. For example, Gilley et al. (2008) found that communicating and motivating skills were most important in effectively implementing change. Additionally, Kendra and Taplin (2004) highlight the importance of

organisational development (OD) skills, as they believe that IT project management is very similar to the principles of OD. The six competencies that they found to be important are: Communication, teamwork, process management, leadership, training and continuous learning (Kendra & Taplin, 2004). They focus on these principles, as they are closely related to collaboration and therefore believe that these skills will help the change agent to implement an IT project successfully. Finally, they argue that these competencies will help a change agent to continuously adapt and learn new technologies (Kendra & Taplin, 2004). It is surprising that they only mention ‘the ability to understand general technologies’ very briefly, but do not connect these to their findings.

Technical competencies are still needed. Other arguments are given of why change agents

still need to have technical competencies. For example, Coiera (2006) argues that it is still crucial to hold technical skills and knowledge to manage IT projects successfully, even though many scholars have forgotten about the technical side of IT projects. Without technical knowledge or skills it is simply impossible to understand the technical infrastructure and system of an organisation and it will be troublesome when trying to change it (Avgerou & McGrath, 2009). Moreover, change agents need to understand technologies to translate business demands to project characteristics (Coiera, 2006).

Organisations often do not know what type of technology they want, but expect the change agent to offer technical solutions that fit the business demands. Translating business demands to project characteristics requires technical competencies of the change agent to assess and understand the technology (Coiera, 2006). However, it probably also requires social competencies, such as communicating and listening skills to translate technical knowledge to business plans.

Furthermore, the change agent should be able to assess the possibilities and risks associated with the new technology (Harison & Boonstra, 2009). Knowledge about the characteristics and possible downsides of a system is necessary, to correctly assess what needs to be changed.

Additionally, as the organisation grows, the technologies or infrastructure within that organisation

need to grow as well (Von Urff Kaufeld et al., 2009). This will require some level of technical knowledge or skills in order to adjust the technologies to the organisational desires or requirements.

Marchand et al. (2010) also found that technical competencies, such as increasing functionality of the IT system, are important to have as a change agent. Adding value to the entire organisation is often an important goal of the IT project (Faraj & Sambamurthy, 2006).

This perspective acknowledges that the role of the change agent has changed from the IT professional to the change agent/business agent. Compared to an IT professional, a change agent is mainly concerned with implementing IT change on a project basis with an end date and tries to change or improve current technologies or structures within an organisation (Von Urff Kaufeld et al., 2009).

Even though IT change agents often encounter social challenges, some scholars believe that an overemphasis on social competencies and negligence of technical competencies is wrong: Technology is still a key part of IT projects and technical competencies can therefore not be overlooked according to them (Coiera, 2006; Harison & Boonstra, 2009).

Importance of competencies depends on situational factors. The final perspective consists of

an understanding or explanation of why some competencies were found to be important in one study, while they were seen as unimportant in another (Harison & Boonstra, 2009). Several moderating and situational factors which may influence the importance of the competencies of change agents are presented. This perspective is presented in the next section as it also gives answer to how and when competencies may be important.

Influence of situational factors on the importance of competencies. One important issue with current literature in this field is that why certain competencies of change agents lead to a higher success rate of IT projects remains unclear. Although some scholars list which competencies and type of knowledge are effective, the question still remains why some competencies were found as

important in one study, but as unimportant in another. Most of the studies did not control for

situational factors, such as size of the organisation, type of IT project or position of the change agent in the organisation.

Organisational and technical complexity. Harison and Boonstra (2009) provide us with an

explanation of why there may be contradicting findings. They argue that the effectiveness of the

change agent’s competencies may be highly dependent on the type of IT project and its impact on the organisation (see also Avgerou & McGrath, 2007). For example, the influence of the IT project on the social context of an organisation may determine if technical and project competencies are enough or if social and political competencies may be required as well.

Harison and Boonstra (2009) make a distinction between the complexity of an IT project in terms of organisational and technical complexity. Figure 2 shows the matrix presented by Harison and Boonstra (2009). They argue that an IT project with low technical complexity, but high organisational complexity may require different competencies than an IT project with different characteristics.

Organisational complexity consists of possible changes in strategy, processes, structure or culture, as a result of the IT project. Technical complexity is determined by the level of risk and failure of the IT project (Harison & Boonstra, 2009). They also mention that the organisation where the IT project is being implemented may influence which competencies are needed, but they do not explain which characteristics of the organisation are important.

Technical complexity

Low High

Organisational Low complexity

High

New release local operational system

Development and implementation of new planning software Organisation-wide

implementation of Intranet

ERP adaptation and implementation Figure 2

Adopted from Harison and Boonstra (2009) – Moderating effects of IT projects

IT project uniqueness. Schwalbe (2011) argues that the uniqueness of the project determines

which skills will be most effective in successfully implementing the project. They explain that every

project has its own characteristics, such as the level of uncertainty and number of resources that are

needed. “Project managers need to have a wide variety of skills and be able to decide which particular skills are more important in different situations” (Schwalbe, 2011, p. 22). Harison and Boonstra (2009) and Schwalbe (2011) both argue that the importance of competencies of change agents depends on situational factors, such as the characteristics of the IT project and the organisation. This may explain why there are contradicting findings in the literature on competencies of change agents and IT project success.

Project teams. Harison and Boonstra (2009) also argue that the project team members

influence which competencies the change agent will need. Change agents only need to manage the project team and the IT project in terms of deadlines, budget and goals, e.g. project managing (Kendra

& Taplin, 2004). This project team often consists of multiple team members who are specialised in programming, building applications and other technical fields. As a consequence, the change agent does not need to have this specific knowledge. Instead, he or she needs to be a good leader in order to guide the project team (Harison & Boonstra, 2009; Kenda & Taplin, 2004). However, the change agent needs to have technical competencies to manage technical aspects of the IT project when the IT project team members do not have technical competencies or when these are insufficient.

Combination of competencies. Researchers in other change fields often combine multiple

competencies and argue that some competencies work well together. By combining several

competencies the change agent will be more able to implement change in an organisation. Karahanna and Watson (2006) argue that change agents implementing IT projects need to combine technical and project management competencies. Due to the fact that IT projects are complex and large projects, a blend of multiple different competencies is needed (Karahanna & Watson, 2006). Although no research has been done on combinations of competencies in the IT literature field, it may be valuable to study if certain combinations of competencies by change agents lead to higher IT project success.

Goal. It is clear that a unified perspective towards change agents implementing IT projects is still missing, even though studies have shown the great importance of having a competent change agent (Coiera, 2006; Jiang et al., 1996; Kendra & Taplin, 2004). For example, the study of Jiang et al.

(1996) shows that a competent change agent gets the job done and knows how to deal with problems

related to IT project. Moreover, they argue that IT projects not only fail due to their high complexity

and large scope, but due to the fact that most change agents lack the required competencies and are therefore unable to respond to problems. The goal of this research is to build new propositions and insights which will explain which competencies or combinations of competencies are important to increase IT project success and when. The next section describes which methods are being used for this explorative and qualitative research.

Methodology

Methods

To answer the research question a qualitative methodological approach using a multiple case study was selected. The strength of qualitative research is discovering and exploring phenomena in fields where currently little understanding exists (Johnson, 2015). Due to the fact that the literature on change agent’s competencies in IT projects is limited, gathering data to develop new theories and hypothesis for further research is required (Bamford, 2008). Next, current literature on which

competencies are essential for change agents to implement IT change successfully is contradicting and a better understanding of these situations is therefore needed (Faraj & Sambamurthy, 2006; Mähring

& Keil, 2008).

A qualitative research design suited the explorative nature of this research best, since rich data and new insights can be collected. Instead of testing expected relationships, real situations are

analysed to build new theory and an understanding of IT project success and change agents’

competencies: It answers the ‘how’ and ‘why’ questions (Eisenhardt & Graebner, 2007).

Case studies and grounded theory. This study collected data through a multiple case study to

provide an understanding of the dynamics and processes in a particular situation. Collecting data for answering explorative research questions is often done through case studies, as it provides an

understanding of the dynamics and processes in a particular situation (Eisenhardt, 1989).“Case studies are discrete experiments that serve as replications, contrasts, and extensions to the emergent theory.

But while laboratory experiments isolate the phenomena from their context, case studies emphasise

the rich, real-world context in which the phenomena occur” (Eisenhardt & Graebner, 2007, p. 25).

Moreover, phenomena found in the case studies can be compared and used to new propositions or theory (Eisenhardt & Graebner, 2007).

Additionally, according to Bamford (2008) grounded theory is a very applicable method in the organisational change field. Grounded theory is a qualitative research design with an interpretive perspective where theories and explanations are build based on the views of the participants and interpretation of the researcher. It is one of the most often used methods in qualitative research and IT research in specific for building new theory (Johnson, 2015; Myers & Klein, 2011; Rowlands, 2005).

Through induction findings from real life settings are used to generate new hypotheses or theories.

These findings are often gathered with observations or interviews and no manipulation of the situation (Eisenhardt & Graebner, 2007). Compared to other methodological approaches, grounded theory offers the researcher an inductive and iterative approach to gather raw data. This iterative process is a fundamental characteristic of the grounded theory: The research process is continually changing due to new insights from the data and interpretation by the researcher. (Johnson, 2015).

Data collection

Case studies generally involve multiple ways of gathering data (Eisenhardt & Graebner, 2007). This research consisted of interviews with semi-structured protocols and open ended questions and a follow-up questionnaire. Interviews were used to gather data, as it allows to collect rich and empirical data directly from the source (Eisenhardt & Graebner, 2007). To gather data from a different methodological approach as well, questionnaires were used to test certain relationships between competencies and IT project success based on a literature review. Appendix D shows the questionnaire. The questionnaire was used to collect data from a different angle and in a more quantitative nature. Findings from the questionnaire were used to categorise types of IT projects.

Respondents. Twelve male change agents with an average age of 34, ranging from 23 to 46

years, who implemented different IT projects were interviewed and completed the follow-up

questionnaire. Although theoretical sampling suits this type of research best, random sampling and

snowballing were used to find respondents due to the difficulty of finding enough respondents who

were willing to participate. One respondent was approached based on his role in an unsuccessful IT

project, while the rest was contacted through the personal network of the researcher and snowballing.

The first three respondents that were interviewed suggested some other experienced IT change agents who were willing to share their knowledge. Despite the lack of theoretical sampling, the IT projects differed highly in both social and technical complexity, so it was possible to analyse the moderating effects of these variables. Moreover, change agents with different IT roles and years of experienced were interviewed to decrease the possibility of having homogenous perspectives.

The interviews lasted between 45 and 60 minutes and were conducted within two months. One person filled in the questionnaire, but cancelled the interview due to time restrictions. Most change agents were experienced IT change agents. Five respondents were younger than 30 and had managed less than ten IT projects. Six respondents were quite experienced as project leaders. One respondent used to work as an IT change agent more than a decade ago, but now works as an expert, advising organisations on projects and connecting the change agents to the projects. He therefore had a good overview of IT projects and which competencies of change agents worked best and he could compare multiple IT projects. Table 2 shows the demographics and characteristics of the interviewees and their IT projects

Table 2

Overview of respondents

Age Experi ence*

Role Type of project Organisation Length of interview Respondent A 29 5 Test

manager

E-commerce Large retail organisation

49.31 min

Respondent B 23 0 Power user New data warehouse IT company 34.17 min Respondent C 44 25 Lead

architect

Digitising and automating processes

Large bank 52.07 min

Respondent D 31 7 Agile coach

Development of a customer portal

Large health insurer Large lightning company

51.29 min

Respondent E 46 6 Solution architect

Digitising and automating processes

Large bank 63.07 min

Respondent F 43 20-25 Solution architect

Digitising and automating processes

Large bank 53.16 min

Respondent G 39 15 Innovator and tech, project lead

Data warehouse cloud based

Waste processor

60.07 min

Respondent H 27 20 Software developer

New app Energy

provider

32.40 min

Respondent I 27 0 Project leader

HRM intranet Flight operator

57.48 min

Respondent J 28 4 Tester Bridge/tunnel Government 60.50 min Respondent K - - Consumer

products &

Retails expert

Overview Overview 41.02 min

Respondent L 33 5 Game developer

Gamification Multiple projects

42.58 min

* Experience measured in number of IT projects completed

Selected cases . The case studies consisted of eleven IT projects that were implemented successfully or unsuccessfully within the past three years. The change agents were asked to describe these projects and compare them briefly with previous IT projects, if they had experience with other IT projects. Moreover, the change agents were asked to describe their role and whether they were responsible for the IT project or if they worked in a project team. Thirteen IT change agents were chosen initially, but only eleven IT projects were found suitable for this research. One case study was excluded, as this IT project was completed between twenty and thirty years ago. An interview with this change agent was still held, because his position today have him a broad overview of multiple IT projects and the change agents who worked on these projects. He was therefore able to explain why certain change agents were selected to do a specific IT project. Another case study was excluded, as the change agent cancelled the interview due to time restrictions.

The selected projects varied both in social and technical complexity. For example, one IT

project changed the entire infrastructure of the organisation, while another IT project added a

relatively small new application for customers. Both public and private organisations were researched and nine hired external change agents to implement the IT projects. Two organisations led a project manager implement the change. Finally, ten projects were considered successful in terms of

functionality, budget costs and reaching organisational goals, but one was not. The change agents assessed the IT projects they implemented in the questionnaire based on functionality, if the project was on time and within budget and if the client was satisfied. For example, change agents were asked how successful this project was according to them on a 7 point Likert scale. Moreover, the level of social or technical complexity was measured with a 7 point Likert scale as well. Appendix D shows the questionnaire. Figure 3 presents the results from the questionnaire.

Figure 3

Overview of IT projects

Interview protocol. An introduction of the researcher and the topic was given at the beginning

of each interview. Moreover, the respondents were asked if they agreed with recording the interview

and whether they had any questions upfront. The interview protocol consisted of around 35 open-

ended questions, divided into six categories: (1) introduction, (2) about the organisation where the IT

project was completed, (3) technical complexity of the IT project, (4) social complexity of the IT project, (5) competencies and (6) closing. The interview protocol was semi-structured, so answers from the different respondents could be compared. Semi-structured interviews provide comparison between interviews, but also allow room for specific questions related to a specific case or finding.

Appendix C shows the interview protocol.

Some respondents sent detailed information about their IT project before the interview took place for the researcher to review. This allowed to get a deeper understanding of the IT project.

Moreover, each respondent was asked if he or she wanted to review the transcript of the interview. No alterations demanded by the respondents were made to the transcripts. After each interview, the answers and interview questions were analysed and revised if necessary. Based on the results of each interview, new insights were gained and some questions were therefore added to the interview protocol.

Questionnaire. A digital survey was held in Dutch and English and distributed among Dutch consultancy firms and one German consultancy firm as a follow-up on the interview. The online questionnaire measured three categories of competencies: Social, political and technical. These categories were chosen based on the results found in literature on competencies in IT projects. Moreover, validated question sets of Riggio (1986) and Ferris et al. (1999) were used to measure competencies of change agents. Finally, technical complexity, social complexity and success level of the IT project were measured. Technical and social complexity were used as moderating factors influencing the relationship between certain types of competencies and IT implementation success.

The change agents evaluated their social, political and technical competencies through the

survey including multiple items which will be assessed on a Likert scale ranging from 1 (not at all like

me) to 7 (exactly like me). Examples of questions related to social competencies are: (1) “I feel sure in

most situations” and (2) “people think I listen well to them”. Examples of questions related to political

competencies are: (1) “I am good at noticing the motivation and hidden agendas of others” and (2) “I

always seem to know instinctively what to say or what to do to influence others”. Examples of questions

related to technical competencies are: (1) “I understand how the technology functions within the

organisation” and (2) “I know how to adjust the technology”. Finally, social and technical complexity

was measured with ten items. For example: (1) “the work values were changed due to the IT project”

and (2) “compared to other IT projects that you have implemented was this one more challenging in technical terms?”

The change agents were asked to fill in the questionnaire anonymously and voluntarily, to decrease the possibility of biased answers due to social pressure. However, the change agents were asked about their role during the IT project, so the survey is not completely anonymous and respondents could be connected to the interviews. Respondents were asked explicitly to fill in the survey honestly and to assess their competencies as best as possible. To make sure respondents did not evaluate their or others competencies in general, respondents were asked to think about the implementation process and write a short description of the implementation of the IT project. Appendix D shows the complete questionnaire.

Data analysis

As explained earlier, grounded theory was used to analyse the collected data from the interviews and the questionnaire. Grounded theory has an interpretivist perspective, which provides the researcher with a research approach to understand and interpret data (Orlikowski & Baroudi, 1991). Since the case studies resulted in a large volume of data, a within-case analysis was firstly done. A brief description of each of the cases is presented in appendix E. After that, findings from the interviews and the questionnaire are reviewed and interpreted.

Interviews. The data was analysed according to the methodological steps of grounded theory.

First, based on a literature review categories and codes were made, which resulted in a set of questions for both the interviews as the questionnaire. Second, after conducting the interviews, findings from the interviews were analysed and questions were added or removed to the interview protocol. Third, transcripts of the interviews were made and with the use of Atlas.ti important quotes, patterns and findings were highlighted and connected to the coding scheme. Some new codes and categories emerged during the analysis of the interviews. The coding process was highly iterative, switching between analysing the interviews and revising questions and codes (Rowlands, 2005).

In the final process, transcripts were compared to search for phenomena that occurred in more

than one interview. Relationships between which competencies were seem as important by the change

agents and the characteristics of the IT projects were examined. Some codes and categories were

removed or changed. Codes that led to the same phenomena were not deleted, but pooled. After that, the remaining codes were assigned to certain categories. The initial code book based on the literature consisted of eight categories and 28 codes. After careful analysis, eight categories and 39 codes were used. Appendix A shows the codebook based on the literature review and appendix B shows the final codebook.

Questionnaire. The descriptive results from the questionnaire were used to complement the findings from the interviews.

Results

The next section presents the findings from the case studies. First, an analysis of which projects were successful or unsuccessful is given. Next, five general findings related to competencies of change agents are presented. These conclusions are used to answer the explorative research question and to present new theoretical insights.

IT projects. Out of the eleven projects, only one was described as unsuccessful (project D).

This IT project was considered to be unsuccessful, because it required, but did not reach a high level of integration between multiple systems and organisational departments. Moreover, the organisation used to implement IT projects in a very traditional, non-flexible manner, which resulted in a very bureaucratic IT project with many procedures and rules. The way the organisation responded to the complexity of the IT project was relatively static and resulted in more problems. “Yes that is really, to [company X] is that program, for making generic services, sort of a drama. It has become really expensive and it still does not work completely” (respondent D).

IT project success. The change agents described a successful project as a project that was

completed relatively on time, within budget and which met the most important business criteria or

expectations. However, there were no IT projects that were completely on time, within budget and

who had the maximum functionality. As one respondent explains about his project: “Yes, that may be

a cliché perhaps, but it works you know. Yeah, it works. So the, the fact that someone attaches his car

to, ehm, makes and eventually, ehm, that it charges properly till a certain time until it is fully charged

and that he has his saving, yes, then it works. In that case you are from end to end. And everything

there in between, how, details, did not always matter… And the customer was happy” (respondent H).

Consequently, an IT project is considered to be successful according to the change agents when it functions properly and it meets the most prioritized business goals.

Disconnect. Most of the respondents explain that problems with IT projects often arise when

the project team does not translate the wishes of the organisations properly to a new IT system. As a result, the functional characteristics of the IT system do not always match with the needs of the organisation. Subsequently, adjustments are being made to the IT system, new procedures are written and complexity increases. Respondent K: “Yes, definitely, definitely. And that is ehm, what you see is an enormous movement in that area, what is so beautifully called business alignment. And that is definitely needed, because that was the old way of working, that there was a huge disconnect”.

This disconnect is often caused by a lack of understanding between the IT project team and the organisation. The main issue is that organisations change and grow, while the IT project is still

working with their initial and probably outdated plan. As a consequence, the characteristics and functionalities of the IT project no longer fit with what the organisation wants or needs. The IT project is then changed according to the new requirements of the organisation, which is often costly, time consuming and complex, as current procedures and systems need to be adjusted. “Yes, time changes as well. If you ehm, in a research of five years, there, and the technology changes, the methodologies change, people change, the organisation changes. So when you are done writing, well yeah, you can throw away four years of your research” (respondent E).

Finding one: Incomplete list of competencies

The first found issue with the current literature on competencies of change agents and IT project success is a combination of dated and incomplete findings. As explained before, many studies were conducted over a decade ago, while technologies and organisations change. Competencies that were found important then may no longer be important today. The next section describes which competencies were important according to the change agents from the case studies and whether earlier findings are indeed dated and incomplete.

The top five competencies that were mentioned most often during the interviews are: (1) The

ability to translate business needs to IT solutions, (2) communication skills, (3) the ability work

flexibly and agile, (4) the ability to align business requirements to information technologies (IT) and (5) technical knowhow.

Comparing these findings to the findings of the literature review, there are several

competencies that were often not mentioned in the literature review: The ability to translate business needs to IT solutions, the ability to work flexibly and agile, the ability to have a helicopter view, prioritising skills and the ability to work under pressure. These results show that five competencies were often not mentioned in previous studies, while these five competencies were cited by the respondents. For example, translating business needs to IT solutions is even the most important competence in implementing IT projects successfully according to the change agents, while this competence was only described by Coiera (2006). Due to the many disconnect issues between organisational requirements and IT solutions, the change agents argue that the translation of what the organisation wants to real IT solutions is most important for IT project success. If a change agent is unable to translate accurately and correctly, the IT project will already be doomed to fail. “… And that is badly needed. Because the old way of working often resulted in a large disconnect” (respondent K).

Moreover, the ability to work flexibly and according to the agile method is a new competence

to the literature. Working in an agile and scrum way means that the project is cut down into small

pieces and the most crucial thing is done first. After two weeks, the next most important thing is done

and so on. During these ‘sprints’, the project team works on each small piece and receives feedback

after each delivery. This way of working allows project teams to adjust the next piece of IT with new

insights, learned from the previous pieces. Consequently, large disconnects are prevented. Being

extremely flexible and being able to work with many insecurities is crucial. There is no large project

plan where every small detail is written down, so the change agents needs to trust his or her own skills

and knowledge. “They were used to work eh, large scale, planned. So to plan and describe everything

upfront. Developing a large plan and then trying to implement that plan. As a result, it takes quite

long before you get results” (respondent D).

The results show that probably due to the fact that change agents needed to respond to the high failure rates of IT projects, new competencies have become important today. These competencies allow the change agent to manage disconnect problems by translating organisational requirements better and by creating small plans with lots of feedback moments. Therefore, different competencies are found to be important for implementing IT projects successfully (see Jiang et al. 1998; Harison &

Boonstra, 2009; Kendra & Taplin, 2004).

The second issue described about the current literature is the fact that there exist contradicting findings about the importance of social and technical competencies. The next two sections present which social and technical competencies were found to be important and why.

Finding two: Undisputed importance of social competencies

All of the respondents argue that social and technical competencies are the most important type of competence for change agents implementing IT projects. One change agent explained that people will intervene when the technical part of the IT project is not done properly. Consequences of a lack of technical competencies are much more visible than a lack of social or political competencies.

Subsequently, technical problems are noticed earlier and interventions can being made on time. Social competencies of change agents are therefore more important to increase IT project success. “I do not know why, if there is someone who is not capable at that [technical], off course the project will not succeed, but I believe that people will ring alarm quickly, because it will be obvious quite quickly. And I believe that when the social aspect is less well arranged, that you yeah, you will still continue with the project” (respondent H).

Communication skills. Moreover, social and change management competencies are needed to

deal with social challenges associated with the IT change, such as resistance or communication issues.

Since resistance is often a response by employees or stakeholders due to insecurity or disagreement, being able to deal with this is important. Part of having a successful IT project is that it is used by stakeholders, but this will be delayed or even leads to failure if change agents do not manage

resistance (Lapointe & Rivard, 2005). For example, respondent A: “Yes, they needed to learn how to

work with the systems. That was ehm, yeah, people never had, there were things they never had done

before or in a different way”. Communication is needed to decrease the level of insecurity of stakeholders.

Communication is also a crucial part of social and change management competencies, because without effective communication, people do not understand how to change and how to work with the new technology (Lapointe & Rivard, 2005). Writing procedures and instructions, but also explaining people how to IT project will change their ways of working is according to the change agents an effective way to increase the implementation success. “You always need to communicate what the impact… and consequences are of something” (respondent A). Moreover, “And I noticed that ehm, that the whole policy was not explained properly. Or at least, yes, everyone explains the policy differently, so that is why I tried very well to explain it as clearly as possible and then also the role of well, the IT and the automation. Well, people responded positively. Lots of good feedback”

(respondent I).

Interviewing skills and listening skills. Communication also works as a tool for translating

business wishes to technological solutions. People from the business do not always speak the same language as IT people, which may lead to misunderstandings and eventually disconnect between organisational requirements and the IT project. Respondent E: “Yes, yes. That is indeed ehm, ehm, imagine that you are buying a car. And ehm, the car seller asks, well what kind of car do you want?

Yes, I want a big car. Ok… Then you still have the choice between a large Opel, large Mercedes or a large Ferrari. And then ehm, as the salesmen, that is actually the architect, yes, but how do you see that? I assume that you want four wheels, I assume you want a steering wheel. No, I do not want a steering wheel, I want a car that drives itself. Ah oke… But we can also hire a chauffeur that will drive the car for you. That will cost for example twenty thousand per year and if you want it to drive

completely automatically it will cost you fifty thousand a year. So what do you want exactly? Do you really want the car to drive itself? Or can you agree to something simpler?” This respondent tries to tell how important it is to have great interviewing and listening skills in order to understand business demands correctly.

Translating business demands to an IT project. Interviewing, listening and communicating

skills are closely related to the ability to translate business demands to an IT project. As explained

earlier, many IT projects fail because the change agent is not able to translate business demands to IT solutions (Karahanna & Watson, 2006). Respondent K explains: “And the project leaders of today, the managers of today, they need to have skills to really understand what the business wants and to move along with them”… “Because in the end you want to do something, to deliver something that is relevant to the context of the client, and that is a common language that you can use”. An

understanding of what the business wants is needed first, which requires interviewing and listening skills. After that, the change agents needs to explain what the characteristics of the IT project will be to the organisation and the project team, which requires communicating skills. The example of the car seller shows how important it is to ask good questions in order to find out what someone wants and trying to understand how this can be translated to a solution. Otherwise, disconnects between the organisation and the IT solution emerge and may cause IT project failure.

Moreover, “and ehm, if you do not know how to realise that then you cannot offer a solution to the client. So you do need experience [technical conceptual knowledge] if you want to develop

concrete solutions”… “Or someone who can think in economic terms, but hopefully still enough in technical terms, so he is able to make the translation to technique” (respondent F). There are often multiple stages of writing technical solutions for the organisation, as the change agent is continually asking for feedback and adjustments to the system. Moreover, the IT project team that needs to implement those technical solutions needs to get instructions of the change agent. The change agent is in that situation someone who transfers knowledge and instructions both ways, which requires proper communicating skills. “You make the translation from business needs to assignments for the teams”

(respondent G).

When are social competencies important? The respondents who worked at an IT project with

low social complexity (projects E, H, J and L) and high social complexity (D) argued that social

competencies are the most important competencies to have. There were no different opinions about the

importance of social competencies between the IT projects, which suggests that the level of social

complexity of the IT project does not influence the importance of social competencies of change

agents. Even in IT projects with a low social complexity social competencies such as communicating,

interviewing, listening and translating skills are perceived to be important. A possible explanation is

the fact that IT projects always cause social challenges that need to be managed. Moreover, social competencies help change agents to make a translation of business needs to IT solutions. Respondent E: “I see them [translating business demands to IT solutions and communicating skills] as one of the most important skills, otherwise you will lose a lot of time explaining things”. Respondent H also explains that social competencies are important for every project: “Yes, that social aspect is important.

I believe that this is important in every project”.

Finding three: Importance of technical competencies may depend on technical complexity Four respondents argue that change agents do need technical competencies to implement IT projects successfully, but that a conceptual understanding of the technologies is sufficient. Explicit technical knowledge of programming and changing the technology is not needed. They argue that they do not need to be able to program the technical solutions themselves. Instead, they need to know what is available and which IT package would suit the organisation best: “Due to my experience I

understand what there is available [technologies] and I understand in general how something works.

Ehm, but I cannot program. And ehm, that is not necessary, because I trust the people who can, the people who get hired to program, that they, they are the experts. I will not tell them how they need to program” (respondent D). This knowledge or experience can be best described as tacit technical knowledge of change agents, who are able to offer technical solutions in terms of IT packages to organisations.

When are technical competencies important? However, how much technical knowledge a

change agent exactly needs to implement IT projects successfully may be influenced by the technical complexity of the IT project. One change agent argues that an organisation can be divided in multiple technical modularities: The technical landscape, small applications and everything in between. The technical landscape is the core of the organisation and requires high level of integration, large

volumes, data and reliability. Changing this landscape is therefore quite complex and will require very

specific technical expertise, while smaller applications are relatively simple to integrate with the

organisation. As a consequence, according to this change agent it depends on the technical complexity

if you need technical competencies or if a general understanding is enough. “But it is about the

combination, eh. Eh, at the top ehm, that is partly true. Because there are more and more cloud

technologies… For those you need way less eh, you do not even need to control those systems, the integration with IBE’s etcetera, you can get standardised products, so you could say those are less complex. But in a more broad setting, how do you want to be successful as a company you will definitely need technological expertise” (respondent K).

However, some change agents did not share this perspective: They believe that a conceptual understanding of the IT project is sufficient, regardless of the level of technical complexity of that IT project. One change agent argued that his IT project team has the explicit technical competencies to program and implement the IT project, while he needs to have the ability to come up with general IT solutions. “The technical ehm, I had an application engineer, so someone who really worked with the programmers and knew the details of the technique. They built a Java, well, I never built a Java. I understand the concepts he, but that is where it ends for me. Ehm, I can hold a conversation with a programmer on patterns or concepts, but if you really ask about the details, well, I do not know anything about that. That is why I do not say technical [as the most important competence]”

(respondent C). On the other hand, another change agent argues that change agents do need to have technical competencies, otherwise one is probably not able to offer proper solutions to the

organisation. This change agent implemented an IT project which was technically complex. “To develop a proper advice, you can only do that when you are knowledgeable about the stuff and work with it. Because only by encountering problems in practice and how to use the technique, you can give specific advice” (respondent J).

These findings suggest that change agents need to have technical competencieson a tacit level at least to implement IT projects successfully. However, whether the level of technical complexity influences this relationship is not clear, as the answers of the respondents were contradicting on this point.

Finding four: Political competencies are only partially important

The importance of political competencies depends on the organisation where the IT project is

being implemented: How bureaucratic and political is this organisation and how many different

stakeholders with different wishes are there? “Well, politics can be positive and negative…So ehm, to

address conflicts or different opinions, only to side with one of the conflicting teams… You always