=Paper=
{{Paper
|id=Vol-2120/paper5
|storemode=property
|title=Scalability Factors in an ICT4D Context: A Literature Review
|pdfUrl=https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-2120/paper5.pdf
|volume=Vol-2120
|authors=Melchior Keijdener,Sietse Overbeek,Sergio Espãna.
|dblpUrl=https://dblp.org/rec/conf/websci/KeijdenerOE18
}}
==Scalability Factors in an ICT4D Context: A Literature Review==
https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-2120/paper5.pdf
Scalability factors in an ICT4D context
A literature review
Melchior Keijdener Sietse Overbeek Sergio España
Department of Information and Department of Information and Department of Information and
Computing Sciences, Utrecht Computing Sciences, Utrecht Computing Sciences, Utrecht
University University University
Utrecht, The Netherlands Utrecht, The Netherlands Utrecht, The Netherlands
M.N.C.Keijdener@uu.nl S.J.Overbeek@uu.nl S.Espana@uu.nl
ABSTRACT The issue of scalability is not a new one. Haikin [17] established
This research investigates possible scalability factors that influence parallels between the problems in ICT4D projects and problems
an ICT4D project. By performing a literature study on four strands that plagued the regular software industry several years ago. He
of literature, which include: technical literature (1), development states that the regular industry has dealt with a scalability problem
studies (2), technology adoption (3) and ICT4D literature (4), it was as well, as the increase in size of software projects leads to the
found that there are seventeen factors that need to be accounted for delivery of a system that becomes too big and too complex, thus
in the development process. Furthermore, a general outline of an becoming unusable. One important contributor to the solution of
ICT4D development process is presented and scalability factors are this problem has been the adoption of agile methods. Therefore,
related to phases in this ICT4D process. Future research could focus the use of agile methods will likely benefit ICT4D projects as well.
on validating these factors by using them in a development cycle However, most of these current methods are tailored towards
and determining the precise influence, rather than determining an Western needs and knowledge which makes them incompatible
overall positive or negative influence. with a development context [14, 31]. For example, it is not possible
to perform pair programming when there is only one software
KEYWORDS developer on the team and it cannot afford more developers due to
budget size. Therefore, to counteract this problem, different kinds
Agile framework, Development process, ICT for development, ICT4D,
of development methods are required. Fortunately, as ICT4D gains
Scalability
more interest in the scientific community, scholars like Haikin and
ACM Reference Format: Duncombe [11], Ferrario et al. [10], Bon et al. [5] and Doerflinger
Melchior Keijdener, Sietse Overbeek, and Sergio España. 2018. Scalability and Dearden [7], combine agile methods with development prac-
factors in an ICT4D context: A literature review. In Proceedings of The Web tices to create robust frameworks for ICT4D development.
and Digital Divide: 5th International Symposium "Perspectives on ICT4D" (The
However, these frameworks are no silver bullets. Issues as sus-
Web and Digital Divide). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 4 pages.
tainability and scalability still remain a problem to be solved and
this is not aided by the fact that the terms are interlinked in litera-
1 INTRODUCTION ture [18, 20]. As Haikin and Flatters [12] stress that a distinction
The failures in ICT for development (ICT4D) projects is a topic should be made between the two terms, this paper will aim to focus
heavily discussed in the academic world. Although there are many on scalability only, which can be defined as the process of expand-
possible explanations for these failures, they can be summarized ing the size and scope of an ICT project within a particular setting
into three categories: a lack of sustainability (1), evaluation (2) and or incorporating it into other settings [29].
scalability (3) [14]. First, Heeks [14] noted that many projects are Despite that multiple authors already came up with sustainability
not sustainable as ICT4D developers often aim for a quick-fix of the factors and evaluation models [21, 26], to the best of our knowledge,
problem, but fail to deliver a complete and comprehensive system no work exists that focuses on systematically identifying scalability
which lasts after the cooperation with the developers ends. Second, factors in ICT4D projects. Therefore, the main goal of this paper is
ICT4D projects are often not evaluated. Therefore, mistakes are to identify multiple factors that help designing for a scalable ICT4D
repeated, lowering the quality of the development project. Third, project. Additionally, it will propose a way of incorporating these
scalability is not always accounted for. This results in many ICT4D factors in the agile development process, to prevent the return to a
projects that are aimed at a small community of not more than a linear development process.
couple of villages maximum. As ICT4D projects are hardly ever The paper is structured as follows. In section two, the concept of
implemented on a provincial or national scale, this leaves a lot of scalability is studied from four different fields. Then, section three
untapped potential. provides an overview of all found scalability factors (groups) and
Permission to make digital or hard copies of part or all of this work for personal or
proposes to incorporate these factors in a method. Next, section four
classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed discusses a related work. Finally, limitations are given in section
for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation five and the research is concluded in section six.
on the first page. Copyrights for third-party components of this work must be honored.
For all other uses, contact the owner/author(s).
The Web and Digital Divide, May 27 - May 30, 2018, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
© 2018 Copyright held by the owner/author(s).
The Web and Digital Divide, May 27 - May 30, 2018, Amsterdam, The Netherlands Keijdener, Overbeek and Espãna
2 SCALABILITY FACTORS adoption model. This model identified five attributes that a tech-
This research analyzes scalability in four different contexts and nology needs to possess to be adopted. First, it should provide a
derives factors from those strands of literature. First, factors that clear advantage over the old technology. The technology should
technically limit growth are derived from technical literature (1). improve someone’s life, otherwise people will not see the added
Then, as development studies (2) are oftentimes concerned with size value of it. Second, the technology must fit into the mindset of the
growth in regular development projects, factors from this strand consumer (compatibility). Especially in ICT4D projects this can lead
of literature are analyzed. Next, factors that might limit the accep- to problems, as many of the rural poor are unfamiliar with ICTs and
tance of a new technology are found in literature on technology their capabilities. Therefore, a process of familiarization is required.
adoption (3). Finally, factors from existing ICT4D literature (4) are Third, a technology should be easy to understand and use (complex-
incorporated. ity). If it is too hard to use or learn, people will not use it. Therefore,
it is emphasized to use human centered design techniques when
developing ICT4D solutions [14]. Fourth, a technology needs to be
2.1 Technical literature accessible and testable (trialability). People are more keen to adopt
In technical literature, a system has a scalability problem when a technology they have tried before and can try without obligations.
any resource is overloaded or exceeded [30]. Weinstock and Goode- Finally, the more visible a technology is, the more likely it is to
nough [30] have identified five kinds of bottlenecks that can occur. be adopted (observability). Interest in the technology will grow as
Administrative bottlenecks (1) occur when the workload on the more people are exposed to it while small technologies are likely
system increases and the staff cannot keep up. Capacity limits (2) is to remain unnoticed. Therefore, the fulfillment of these attributes
a bottleneck that is often hard-coded, which can limit growth even- all increase the scalability potential of a project.
tually. The user interface (3) can become a bottleneck in multiple
cases. First, the change of the UI in case of an increased workload;
more information in general means that there is more to commu- 2.4 ICT4D literature
nicate with the user. Second, a growth in information means a In ICT4D literature, there are already many known, positive factors
growth in waiting times for the user. The user might need some that affect scalability. To begin with, there is a required level of tech-
sort of selection/termination system to control the waiting times. nical competence of the staff [29], as a high competence is needed
Algorithmic performance (4) can become a bottleneck when the to successfully scale a product. Furthermore, the use of human
workload becomes larger than the algorithm can deal with. Finally, centered design techniques should ensure a (simplified) fitting user
centralized control (5) can lead to resource bottlenecks. Therefore, interface [1]. A less complex product is easier to scale. Additionally,
a move towards decentralized control might be necessary for large a reliable infrastructure is needed (i.e. hardware, electricity, Internet
scale systems. access). This can be done in three ways. First, using low-cost robust
terminals that can withstand the harsh local conditions [25], second,
2.2 Development studies keeping in mind the access to electricity [1] and third, using satellite
(3g/4g) over land-based systems [14]. Next, the entry barrier to the
In development studies, an important requirement for achieving
market should be kept low and the project should be decentralized
scalability is planning [9, 13, 16, 19]. Farrington and Lobo [9] sug-
to enhance scalability potential, allowing it to run locally without
gested a couple of mechanisms that should be in place; for promot-
interference from the development team [1]. Furthermore, Sæbø
ing the approach for political and administrative boundaries, and
and Thapa emphasized that salient stakeholders are vital for scaling
for channeling the funds as efficiently as possible. Also, cooperation
up a pilot study, as the lack of these stakeholders prevents a pilot
with local parties and government is emphasized [8]. Mansuri and
study from being successfully replicated [23].
Rao [16] also suggest using a bottom-up approach, bringing change
Additionally, high financial sustainability has been pointed to as
through incremental iterations. Hartmann and Linn [13] have de-
an important positive factor in scalability [6, 15, 18, 29]. A viable
veloped a framework with several spaces and values. A key element
business model is essential as donors only temporarily support
of this framework is vision. To scale a project successfully, many
a project. On the contrary to the positive factors, bureaucracy in
actors must share an ideal or goal where they wish the technology
developing nations might play a role. A high bureaucracy slows
to grow to. They define the following spaces: fiscal, political, eco-
down the implementation of an ICT4D project [6]. Finally, Tongia
nomic, capacity, cultural, learning and partnership. All these spaces
and Subrahmanian have noted the importance of geographical
must exist, if there is a wish to grow the project. Additionally, it
location [27]. Some projects might work only in a specific culture
is important to start thinking about scaling from the beginning,
or region, scaling is only possible if the esteemed area has similar
as it takes time for scaling to have any effect [4]. Many of these
institutions. High geographical limitations therefore reduce the
thoughts have been incorporated in a scalability strategy [19]. In
scalability potential.
conclusion, a correct set of mechanisms, sufficient space for growth
On a related note, much research has been performed to study
and a clear scalability strategy all have a positive influence on the
the combination of information systems in (ICT) development con-
scalability of a project.
text (ISDC). One noteworthy thing is that scaling is a term not
often discussed in ISDC literature and when it is, it usually focuses
2.3 Technology adoption on the technical artifacts rather than on social issues [24]. In this
In the field of technology adoption, Rogers [22] was one of the context, scalability can be defined as the extension of a project to a
first sociologists to formally describe technology adoption with his fully operational information system [3]. Here, a low technological
Scalability factors in an ICT4D context The Web and Digital Divide, May 27 - May 30, 2018, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
complexity, high political support and sufficient human resources From analyzing these PDDs, it becomes clear that the frame-
positively influence the scalability potential. Unanticipated effects works have a similar structure. Most start with a phase of prepara-
can either positively or negatively influence the scalability poten- tion, where the environmental factors and stakeholders are identi-
tial, depending on the situation [3]. A final important aspect about fied. The goal of this phase generally is to gain an understanding of
the ISDC is impact [2]. Avgerou [2] defines two types of impact how the environment works, to make initial partnerships and to get
that ISDC have: progressive transformation and disruptive trans- an idea of what the research team needs to cope with. Factors that
formation. Progressive transformation considers ICTs as an enabler correspond with this phase are e.g. the analysis of political support
of innovation and welfare. These are accommodated with existing and the assessment of infrastructure. Bon et al. [5] and Doerflinger
institutions and social order, thus improving the scalability poten- and Dearden [7] especially mention the establishment of a research
tial. Disruptive transformation often brings change to the target team, so human resources should be gathered in this phase. This
audience, but also reveals conflicts of interests and struggles of phase has been named understanding. The second phase is often
power. Even though ICTs have potential to increase democratic one of requirement gathering. Its goal is to get an idea of what
structures within the world, countries with widespread bureaucracy the local population needs, i.e. the project that the research team
and corruption might not be willing to accept them, thus decreasing will design. This will include all scalability factors that relate to
the scalability potential. the needs of the local population. The third phase is therefore its
formalization (design), where requirement analysis techniques are
3 TOWARDS A SCALABILITY MODEL used to get clear requirements and formulate a design. Popular
From the literature, it is evident that there are many factors that techniques are user interface drawings and prototyping. A relating
have an influence on the scalability of an ICT4D project. In table 1 scalability factor is the use of human centered design techniques.
an overview of these factors have been given. All factors have also The fourth phase is often a sustainability assessment (sustainability
been provided with an effect on the scalability in ICT4D projects; analysis). A corresponding factor here is the high financial sustain-
a positive one (+), a negative one (–) or one that is unknown or ability. The precise position in the process changes, where some
context depended (+/-). place it before the requirements analysis [11], some between the re-
quirement analysis [5, 7] and the build and some after the build [10].
The final phase is the build (development), where the prototype is
Scalability factor Effect
iteratively developed into the final product and implemented. Here
Use of human centered design [1] + for example, it is determined which algorithms are used. After this,
Low entry barrier to market [1] + a feedback loop ensures that bugs can be fixed and the prototype is
Decentralization of network [1] + updated.
Good application of algorithms [30] +
High political support [3] + Scalability factor Proposed phase
Sufficient human resources [29] + Low entry barrier to market [1] Understanding
High financial sustainability [18] + High geographical limitations [27] Understanding
Correct mechanisms in place [9] + Sufficient space for growth [13] Understanding
Proper infrastructure [1] + High amount of bureaucracy [6] Understanding
Fulfillment of adoption attributes [22] + High political support [3] Understanding
Use of robust hardware [25] + Sufficient human resources [29] Understanding
Sufficient space for growth [13] + Correct mechanisms in place [9] Understanding
Use of a well planned strategy [19] + Proper infrastructure [1] Understanding
Nature of transformation [2] +/– Use of human centered design [1] Design
Unanticipated effects [3] +/– Nature of transformation [2] Design
High geographical limitations [27] – Fulfillment of adoption attributes [22] Design
High amount of bureaucracy [6] – Use of robust hardware [25] Design
Table 1: Scalability factors on ICT4D projects Well planned strategy [19] Sustainability analysis
High financial sustainability [18] Sustainability analysis
Decentralization of network [1] Development
3.1 Common ICT4D development phases Good application of algorithms [30] Development
By analyzing the frameworks of Haikin and Duncombe [11], Fer- Unanticipated effects [3] All phases
rario et al. [10], Bon et al. [5] and Doerflinger and Dearden [7], an Table 2: Scalability factors and their corresponding phases
outline of a development method has been derived to clarify what
phases and characteristics an ICT4D project generally has. The
3.2 Applied factors to each phase
frameworks have been compared through the use of Process Deliv-
erable Diagrams (PDD)1 to create meta-models of the framework As discussed by Begovic et al. [4], it is important to start a plan to
and to gain insight in what phases, activities, steps and deliverables scale from the beginning. However, since not all factors are imme-
are part of it [28]. diately relevant at the start of a development project, each factor
has been classified on the specific characteristics of its correspond-
1 The PDDs can be found at: https://osf.io/ujpa7/
ing phase, as shown in table 2. This is done by a single researcher
The Web and Digital Divide, May 27 - May 30, 2018, Amsterdam, The Netherlands Keijdener, Overbeek and Espãna
but is reviewed by two others until an inter-reviewer agreement [5] Anna Bon, Hans Akkermans, and Jaap Gordijn. 2016. Developing ICT services in
is reached. A notion is required for unanticipated effects (such as a low-resource development context. CSIMQ 9 (2016), 84–109.
[6] Jørn Braa, Eric Monteiro, and Sundeep Sahay. 2004. Networks of action: sus-
natural disasters), which can occur at any time in the development tainable health information systems across developing countries. MIS quarterly
process, meaning that in all phases the research team should be (2004), 337–362.
[7] Joerg Doerflinger and Andy Dearden. 2013. Evolving a software development
capable to deal with them. methodology for commercial ICTD projects. Information Technology and Interna-
tional Development 9, 3 (2013), 43–60.
4 A RELATED WORK [8] Michael Edwards and David Hulme. 1992. Scaling up NGO impact on develop-
ment: learning from experience. Development in practice 2, 2 (1992), 77–91.
Haikin and Flatters [12] discuss scalability and identify specific [9] John Farrington and Crispino Lobo. 1997. Scaling up participatory watershed
problems through an industry survey. They found that the biggest development in India: Lessons from the Indo-German watershed development
programme. Natural Resource Perspectives 17, 6 (1997).
challenge to scalability is not the scaling of size or reach itself, but [10] Maria Angela Ferrario, Will Simm, Peter Newman, Stephen Forshaw, and Jon
to keep it sustained over a longer period of time. An interesting Whittle. 2014. Software engineering for’social good’: integrating action research,
participatory design, and agile development. In Companion Proceedings of the
notion is that there is a gap in literature and their survey results: 36th International Conference on Software Engineering. ACM, 520–523.
around fifty percent of their sample admitted to scale their project [11] Matt Haikin and Richard Duncombe. 2013. A framework for assessing participa-
successfully. However, even though they emphasize distinguishing tory ICT4D. (2013).
[12] Matt Haikin and George Flatters. 2017. Digital Development: What Is the Role for
scalability from sustainability, the paper does not provide a clear International NGOs? Technical Report. Oxfam Discussion Paper.
answer on what is meant with these terms. [13] Arntraud Hartmann and Johannes F Linn. 2007. Scaling up: A path to effective
development. Twenty twenty (2020) focus brief on the world’s poor and hungry
people/International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI) (2007).
5 DISCUSSION [14] Richard Heeks. 2009. The ICT4D 2.0 manifesto: Where next for ICTs and interna-
tional development? University of Manchester. Institute for development policy
As with every research, this one is not without its limitations. First, and management (IDPM). Development informatics group.
there is no way to check for the completeness of the factors. Ad- [15] Laura Hosman and Elizabeth Fife. 2008. Improving the prospects for sustainable
ditionally, the connectivity between the terms sustainability and ICT projects in the developing world. International journal of media & cultural
politics 4, 1 (2008), 51–69.
scalability might cause these factors not to exclusively influence [16] Ghazala Mansuri and Vijayendra Rao. 2004. Community-based and-driven de-
scalability, but sustainability as well. This also means that there velopment: A critical review. The World Bank Research Observer 19, 1 (2004),
1–39.
can be factors which influence scalability, but are not mentioned [17] March Matt Haikin. 2013. Reflections on applying iterative and incremental
as such in the literature. Next, this research does not answer the software development methodologies (Agile, RAD etc.) to aid and development
problem of factor trade-off. Even though it is estimated that a factor work in developing countries. (2013).
[18] Jussi Nissilä et al. 2016. Promoting Scalability and Sustainability of ICT4D Projects
is negative or positive, it does not provide an answer to how big Using Open Source Software. (2016).
this impact is. Finally, these factors have not yet been sufficiently [19] World Health Organization et al. 2010. Nine steps for developing a scaling-up
validated. This paper merely proposes the connection of the factors strategy. (2010).
[20] Caroline Pade-Khene and John Lannon. 2017. Learning to Be Sustainable in ICT
to the phases, but further research is needed to validate these links. for Development: A Citizen Engagement Initiative in South Africa. In Interna-
tional Conference on Social Implications of Computers in Developing Countries.
Springer, 475–486.
6 CONCLUSIONS AND FUTURE RESEARCH [21] Caroline Pade-Khene and Dave Sewry. 2012. The rural ICT comprehensive
The conclusions of this research are twofold. First, seventeen factors evaluation framework: Implementing the first domain, the baseline study process.
The Electronic Journal of Information Systems in Developing Countries 51, 1 (2012),
that affect scalability have been identified. Second, a proposition 1–34.
is given of when these factors affect a project and in which phase [22] Everett M Rogers. 2010. Diffusion of innovations. Simon and Schuster.
of the development process they should be dealt with. This way, [23] Øystein Sæbø and Devinder Thapa. 2012. Towards scalability of ICT4D projects:
a salience stakeholder perspective. In SIG GlobDev Annual Workshop: 16/12/2012-
developers of an ICT4D solution can incorporate these factors dur- 16/12/2012. 1–13.
ing the development process, resulting in an easier scaling of the [24] Sundeep Sahay and Geoff Walsham. 2006. Scaling of health information systems
in India: Challenges and approaches. Information Technology for development 12,
solution if desired (assuming their project has successfully met local 3 (2006), 185–200.
needs). Based on the discussion, there is some future work that can [25] Stefan Schlobach, Victor De Boer, Christophe Guéret, Stéphane Boyera, and
be performed. One, is to figure out how large the impact of each Philippe Cudré-Mauroux. 2014. From Knowledge Engineering for Development to
Development Informatics. In International Conference on Knowledge Engineering
factor is on the scalability of a project, and how this might differ per and Knowledge Management. Springer, 18–29.
project. Two, is to use these factors during an ICT4D development [26] Anton Talantsev, Aron Larsson, Florence Nameere Kivunike, and David Sundgren.
process to see if they fully cover the scalability aspect of the project, 2014. Quantitative Scenario-Based Assessment of Contextual Factors for ICT4D
Projects: Design and Implementation in a Web Based Tool. In New Perspectives
thus increasing their validity and completeness. in Information Systems and Technologies, Volume 1. Springer, 477–490.
[27] Rahul Tongia and Eswaran Subrahmanian. 2006. Information and Communica-
tions Technology for Development (ICT4D)-A design challenge?. In Information
REFERENCES and Communication Technologies and Development, 2006. ICTD’06. International
[1] Sheetal Agarwal, Dipanjan Chakraborty, Swati Challa, Nandakishore Kambhatla, Conference on. IEEE, 243–255.
Arun Kumar, Sougata Mukherjea, Amit Anil Nanavati, and Nitendra Rajput. [28] Inge van de Weerd and Sjaak Brinkkemper. 2008. Meta-modeling for situational
2008. Pyr. mea. it: permeating it towards the base of the pyramid. ACM SIGOPS analysis and design methods. Handbook of research on modern systems analysis
Operating Systems Review 42, 1 (2008), 108–109. and design technologies and applications 35 (2008).
[2] Chrisanthi Avgerou. 2008. Discourses on innovation and development in infor- [29] Geoff Walsham and Sundeep Sahay. 2006. Research on information systems
mation systems in developing countriesâĂŹ research. Journal of Information in developing countries: Current landscape and future prospects. Information
Technology 23, 3 (2008), 133–146. technology for development 12, 1 (2006), 7–24.
[3] Chrisanthi Avgerou. 2008. Information systems in developing countries: a critical [30] Charles B Weinstock and John B Goodenough. 2006. On system scalability.
research review. Journal of information Technology 23, 3 (2008), 133–146. Technical Report. carnegie-mellon univ pittsburgh pa software engineering inst.
[4] Miliça Begovic, Johannes F Linn, and Rastislav Vrbensky. 2017. Scaling up the [31] Heike Winschiers. 2006. The challenges of participatory design in a intercultural
impact of development interventions: Lessons from a review of UNDP country context: designing for usability in namibia. In PDC. 73–76.
programs. Brookings Global Working Paper Series (2017).