Real options thinking helps individuals cope with uncertainties in the information technology (IT) investment decision-making process. Our study examines the intertwining of cognition and a specific emotion, regret, in IT real options decision making using a multisite case study of IT investments. We develop a process model that explains the context in which regret is triggered, the strategies used to regulate regret, and how these strategies influence the valuation, creation, exercise, and revaluation of several types of IT real options. Our research highlights that while some regret regulation strategies may be productive, others are counterproductive. Our findings extend the studies on cognition-based models of IT real options by including emotion, which allows us to explore human behavior on a psychological level and offer a more fundamental understanding of IT real options thinking. Practitioners must recognize the presence of regret that could cloud cognition-based analysis and must be sensitive to its impact. > >
Two types of information technology (IT) outsourcing governance-contractual and relational-are commonly employed to address different goals in IT service management in outsourcing arrangements. Contractual governance helps improve efficiency in an outsourcing relationship, whereas relational governance facilitates satisfying changing business needs. Past literature argues that both forms of governance are important and that an appropriate balance between them is necessary. This study finds that these two forms of governance often conflict with one another. We contribute to the research on IT outsourcing governance by opening the black box of the evolutionary process of achieving ambidexterity in this context. Organizations shift their focus between contractual and relational forms of governance in an attempt to develop practices that address conflicts between the two forms. We present the findings from a qualitative study of an organization that outsourced its IT services. Our findings reveal how a balance between contractual and relational governance can be achieved through a process we call the ambidexterity pendulum.
Distributed software development has become a common reality with the advent of off-shore development and the need to be close to markets. Also, the dynamic nature of the environment in which businesses operate suggests the use of agile development methods. Whereas distributed software development requires the use of formal processes advocated by plan-driven approaches, rapidly changing environments are appropriate candidates for the use of agile development methods. This tension in agile distributed development poses conflicting demands between alignment and adaptability in the software development process. We conducted a multisite case study of three projects that use agile distributed development to examine how these organizations developed contextual ambidexterity-the ability to pursue conflicting demands simultaneously. Our findings, presented as a conceptual framework, indicate that conflicting demands between alignment and adaptability posed by agile distributed development can be addressed by a set of balanced practices that shape performance management and social context-two important antecedents of contextual ambidexterity.