Deaf Effect in Escalation of Is-projects: an Exploratory Multi-casestudy on Causes and Auditor- Manager Interaction

Cuellar defined the phenomenon of Deaf Effect as occurring “when a decision maker doesn’t hear, ignores, overrules a report of bad news to continue a failing course of action” (Cuellar, 2009). Based on interviews with internal IS auditors, Keil (Keil & Robey, 2001) described the Deaf Effect as a failure to respond to messages of impeding IS project failure. The auditors recalled instances in which they had reported bad news about projects only to find that their concerns were ignored by executive management. Several auditors underscored the importance of developing relationships with managers in the organization. The following account of a whistle blowing incident by an IS auditor illustrates this point. "I think," the auditor said, "the way we handled it made a difference. We suggested they really look at these issues. We have got some major problems, and I think just the way we came about it, as a team player instead of a policeman. And that 'We want to help you; we see that this project's out of control; we can see that maybe some things you're not getting the truth on because you're so close to it; but this is what we see.' Even though we are an independent appraisal organization, we are still part of the same corporate team, and our goals are their goals basically. We all want the company to do well." (Case #182). Keil (Keil & Robey, 2001) concluded that effective whistle blowing may depend on organizational factors, like organizational size, the historical commitment by executive management to the internal audit function and the independence of auditing from management authority. However, as the citation confirmed – a partnership relation between the Bad News Messenger and the project owner is crucial for effective whistleblowing as well.