Control Balancing in Offshore Information Systems Development: Extended Process Model
Zafor Ahmed, Evren Eryilmaz, Vinod Kumar, Uma Kumar
This study investigates how project controls are managed and adjusted over time in offshore information systems development (ISD) projects. Using a case-based, grounded theory methodology, the researchers analyzed four large-scale offshore ISD projects to understand the dynamics of 'control balancing'. The research extends existing theories by explaining how control configurations shift between client and vendor teams throughout a project's lifecycle.
Problem
Managing offshore information systems projects is complex due to geographic, cultural, and organizational differences that complicate coordination and oversight. Existing research has not fully explained how different control mechanisms should be dynamically balanced to manage evolving relationships and ensure stakeholder alignment. This study addresses the gap in understanding the dynamic process of adjusting controls in response to changing project circumstances and levels of shared understanding between clients and vendors.
Outcome
- Proposes an extended process model for control balancing that illustrates how control configurations shift dynamically throughout an offshore ISD project. - Identifies four distinct control orientations (strategic, responsibility, harmony, and persuasion) that explain the motivation behind control shifts at different project phases. - Introduces a new trigger factor for control shifts called 'negative anticipation,' which is based on the project manager's perception rather than just performance outcomes. - Finds that control configurations transition between authoritative, coordinated, and trust-based styles, and that these shifts are directly related to the level of shared understanding between the client and vendor. - Discovers a new control transition path where projects can shift directly from a trust-based to an authoritative control style, often to repair or reassess a deteriorating relationship.
Host: Welcome to A.I.S. Insights, the podcast where we turn complex research into actionable business knowledge. I’m your host, Anna Ivy Summers. Host: Today, we're diving into a fascinating new study titled "Control Balancing in Offshore Information Systems Development: Extended Process Model". Host: It explores how the way we manage and control big, outsourced IT projects needs to change and adapt over time. With us to unpack this is our analyst, Alex Ian Sutherland. Alex, welcome. Expert: Great to be here, Anna. Host: So, let's start with the big picture. Anyone who's managed a project with an offshore team knows the challenges. Why did this area need a new study? Expert: You're right, it's a well-known challenge. The problem is that traditional management—rigid contracts, strict oversight—often fails. It doesn’t account for the geographic, cultural, and organizational differences. Expert: Existing research hadn't really explained how to dynamically balance different types of control. We know we need to build a "shared understanding" between the client and the vendor, but how you get there is the puzzle this study set out to solve. Host: How exactly did the researchers approach such a complex problem? Expert: They took a very deep and practical approach. They conducted a case study of four large-scale information systems projects within a single government organization. Expert: Crucially, two of these projects were successes, and two were failures. This allowed them to compare what went right with what went wrong. They didn't just send a survey; they analyzed over 40 interviews, project documents, and emails to understand the real-life dynamics. Host: That sounds incredibly thorough. So, after all that analysis, what were the key findings? What did they discover? Expert: They came away with a much richer model for how project control evolves. They found that teams naturally shift between three styles: 'Authoritative,' which is very client-driven and formal... Host: Like, "Here are the rules, follow them." Expert: Exactly. Then there's 'Coordinated,' which is more of a partnership with joint planning. And finally, 'Trust-based,' which is highly collaborative and informal. The key is knowing when to shift. Host: So what triggers these shifts? Expert: This is one of the most interesting findings. It's not just about performance. They identified a new trigger called 'negative anticipation.' This is the project manager's gut feeling—a sense that something *might* go wrong, even if no deadline has been missed yet. Host: That’s fascinating. It’s about being proactive based on intuition, not just reactive to failures. Expert: Precisely. And they also discovered a new, and very important, transition path. We used to think that if a high-trust relationship started to fail, you'd slowly add more oversight. Expert: This study found that sometimes, you need to jump directly from a Trust-based style all the way back to a strict Authoritative one. It’s like a 'hard reset' on the relationship to repair damage and get back on the same page. Host: This is the most important part for our listeners, Alex. I'm a business leader managing an outsourced project. How does this help me on Monday morning? Expert: The biggest takeaway is that there is no 'one size fits all' management style. You have to be a control chameleon. Host: Can you give me an example? Expert: At the start of a project with a new vendor, you might need an 'Authoritative' style. Not to be difficult, but to use formal processes to build a solid, shared understanding of the goals and rules. The study calls this a 'strategic orientation'. Host: So you start strict to build a foundation. Then what? Expert: As the vendor proves themselves and you build a real rapport, you can shift towards a 'Coordinated' or 'Trust-based' style. This fosters what the study calls 'harmony' and empowers the vendor to take more ownership, which leads to better outcomes. Host: And what about that 'hard reset' you mentioned? The jump from trust back to authoritative control. Expert: That is your most powerful tool for project rescue. If you're in a high-trust phase and suddenly communication breaks down or major issues appear, don’t just tweak things. Expert: The successful teams in this study knew when to hit the brakes. They went back to formal reviews, clarified contractual obligations, and re-established clear lines of authority. It’s a way to stop the bleeding, reassess, and then begin rebuilding the partnership on a stronger footing. Host: So to summarize, effective offshore project management isn't about a single style, but about dynamically balancing control to fit the situation. Host: Managers should trust their gut—that 'negative anticipation'—to make changes proactively, and not be afraid to use a firm, authoritative hand to reset a relationship when it goes off the rails. Host: Alex Ian Sutherland, thank you for making this complex research so clear and actionable. Expert: My pleasure, Anna. Host: And to our audience, thank you for tuning into A.I.S. Insights, powered by Living Knowledge. We’ll talk to you next time.
Control Balancing, Control Dynamics, Offshore ISD, IS Implementation, Control Theory, Grounded Theory Method
