Rational Versus Soft Management in Complex Software: Lessons from Flight Simulation

Mike Hobday and Tim Brady
Additional contact information
Mike Hobday: Science Policy Research Unit(SPRU), University of Sussex, Mantell Building, Falmer, Brighton, East Sussex BN1 9RF, England
Tim Brady: Centre for Research in Innovation Management (CENTRIM), University of Brighton, UK

International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), 1998, vol. 02, issue 01, 1-43

Abstract: This paper compares actual (A-type) software processes at work in flight simulation, one example of a software-intensive complex product system, with ideal, rational (B-type) processes as contained in company manuals, tools and procedures. The aim is to identify the causes and consequences of divergencies between A- and B-type processes in a complex product, and to draw implications for theory and practice. The paper also develops a simple partial model to show what A-type processes actually "look like" in practice. The evidence indicates that in response to industrial turbulence, uncertainty, technical complexity and difficulties in capturing user requirements, software engineers and project managers fall back heavily on A-type informal systems and "soft" management becomes essential to project success. Success under such circumstances, B-type rational systems are inadequate to the task at hand and soft factors such as goodwill, negotiation skills, rule breaking and informal communications become essential to project success. These findings contrast with most approaches to software engineering which try to impose highly rational processes and tend to ignore soft issues. The paper also indicates potential benefits of the rational approach, sometimes overlooked by contemporary organisational scholars, by arguing that it is the manner in which B-type processes are developed and implemented which leads to divergencies and difficulties, rather than the processes themselves which are an essential part of orderly progress. While the findings may not be relevant to more simple products and tasks, other complex product systems may well face similar divergencies and project management challenges.

Keywords: Software; innovation; complex product systems; rational management; organisational bahaviour (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 1998
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (3)

Downloads: (external link)
http://www.worldscientific.com/doi/abs/10.1142/S136391969800002X
Access to full text is restricted to subscribers

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:wsi:ijimxx:v:02:y:1998:i:01:n:s136391969800002x

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from

DOI: 10.1142/S136391969800002X

Access Statistics for this article

International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim) is currently edited by Joe Tidd

More articles in International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim) from World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Tai Tone Lim ().