Determinig Feasibility And Choosing An Alternative

 

At one time, the information services department usually decided what applications to undertake. As demands for service increased, problems began to develop because some user requests had to be denied. As more systems of importance to the organization developed, may IS departments competing applications. The IS department is not in a position to decide whether a system is feasible or which processing alternative to choose if a system is to be developed.

 

Selection Committee:  One answer to the problem of choosing information systems is to convene a selection committee of users and other managers and IS department personnel. When representatives of various functional areas are included, each department is able to see why certain decisions are made. Selection of application alternatives seem less arbitrary under these conditions. With management guidance, the committee can select applications and processing alternatives consistent with functions  currently emphasized in the organization.

 

Problems with Committees: If the ideas expressed above are good, why have a number of organizations become dissatisfied with selection committees? First, the goals of the committees are often not clear, resulting in little direction or continuity during meetings. Frequently, the committees appear to be ratifying decisions already made by the information services department. No alternatives for a given application are suggested. Instead, the IS department presents the option of either developing a complete, elaborate system or doing nothing. Almost no systems are rejected at the feasibility stage.

 

When decisions are made, there seems to be a failure to apply consistent decision criteria. Finally, in making any decision when costs and benefits are difficult to estimate, it is important to include subjective considerations. Members of committees report the lack of a mechanism for successfully including subjective factors in the decision process.