Stages-of-growth model is a theoretical model for the growth of information technology (IT) in a business or similar organization. It was developed by Richard L. Nolan during the early 1970s, and with the final version of the model published by him in the Harvard Business Review in 1979.
Development
Both articles describing the stages were first published in the Harvard Business Review. The first proposal was made in 1973 and consisted of only four stages. Two additional stages were added in 1979 to complete his six-stage model.
Stage I – Initiation
In this stage, information technology is first introduced into the organization. According to Nolan's article in 1973, computers were introduced into companies for two reasons. The first reason deals with the company reaching a size where the administrative processes cannot be accomplished without computers. Also, the success of the business justifies large investment in specialized equipment. The second reason deals with computational needs. Nolan defined the critical size of the company as the most prevalent reason for computer acquisition. Due to the unfamiliarity of personnel with the technology, users tend to take a "hands off" approach to new technology. This introductory software is simple to use and cheap to implement, which provides substantial monetary savings to the company. During this stage, the IT department receives little attention from management and work in a "carefree" atmosphere.
Legacy
Critics agree that Nolan's model presents several shortcomings and is slightly out of date. As time has progressed, Richard Nolan's Stages of Growth Model has revealed some apparent weaknesses. However, many agree that this does not take away from his innovative look into the realm of computing development.
More recent research has shown that the stages of growth model does not necessarily reflect a fixed or sequential progression. Empirical studies suggest that organizations may skip stages, revisit earlier stages, or progress in alternative orders, indicating that growth patterns can be more fluid than originally proposed.
Criticism
An argument posed dealt with the main focus on the change in budget, and whether it is “reasonable to assume that a single variable serves as a suitable surrogate for so much.”