ABSTRACT
A N A L Y S I N G STAGES OF IT D E V E L O P M E N T
evaluation of stages of growth models, centre on the lack of empirical evidence to support a consistent set of stages.
In spite of the views of its critics, many have found the Nolan model a useful tool for analysing stages of IT development in the organisation, and have used it as a basis for their own models. For example, Earl (1986, 1987, 1988, 1989, 1991), Bhabuta et al. (1988), Hirschheim et al. (1988), Galliers (1987), Cash, McFarlan and McKenney (1992) have all developed stages of IT growth models which build on the work of Nolan and Gibson. A recent paper by Friedman (1994) suggests four reasons for the continuing influence of the Nolan model:
First it is the only explicit model of the time pattern of IS function development. Second, it is clear and easily leads to testable hypotheses. For this it has appealed to academics. Third, the model has clear prescriptive content. For this it has appealed to managers and to management consultants. Fourth, and perhaps most controversially, we would suggest that the model does summarise certain experiences of many organisations. The model has tested poorly because it is underspecified. Other influences on the time pattern of IS development within user organisations should be considered.
