Arguing for information systems project definition

Abstract

This paper is about project definition. The authors are concerned that the inquiry method, argumentation, is not fully appreciated with respect to how it can be used to critique attempts at the definition of projects. Therefore, and being upfront about it, this paper will argue that argumentation is useful for critiquing project definitions. The evidence presented in support of this argument includes definitions and descriptions of the attributes of both project definition and argumentation and then tries to formalize the way to apply argumentation to project definition drawing on recent experience by the authors with having to negotiate 14 six-month information systems (IS) project definitions with novice consultants. Space constraints permit us to elaborate upon only one of these. The implications of accepting the argument presented is to give more thought to this structured discourse approach to critiquing IS project definitions. © 2003 by Springer Science+Business Media New York.