To manage work interdependencies, online communities draw on a variety of arm's length coordination mechanisms offered by information technology platforms and associated practices. However, Òunresolved interdependenciesÓ remain that cannot be addressed by such arm's length mechanisms. These interdependencies reflect, for example, unidentified or emerging knowledge-based dependencies between the community members or unaccounted relationships between ongoing community tasks. At the same time, online communities cannot resort to hierarchical coordination mechanisms such as incentives or command structures to address such interdependencies. So, how do they manage such interdependencies? To address this question, we conduct an exploratory, theory-generating case study involving qualitative and computational analyses of development activities within an open source software community: Rubinius. We analyze the ongoing management of interdependencies within the community and find that unresolved interdependencies are associated with alternatively structured sequences of activities, which we define as routines. In particular, we observe that two distinct classes of interdependenciesÑdevelopment and developer interdependenciesÑare associated with alternative forms of routine variation. We identify two generalized routine componentsÑdirect implementation and knowledge integration, which address these two distinct classes of unresolved interdependencies. In particular, direct implementation deals with development interdependencies within the code that are not already coordinated through modular interfaces, while knowledge integration resolves unaccounted interdependencies between developers. We conclude with implications for research into organizing principles for online communities and note the significance of our findings for the study of coordination in organization studies in general.
The dominant way of producing knowledge in information systems (IS) seeks to domesticate high-level reference theory in the form of mid-level abstractions involving generic and atheoretical information technology (IT) components. Enacting such epistemic scripts squeezes IS theory to the middle range, where abstract reference theory concepts are directly instantiated or slightly modified to the IS context, whereas IT remains exogenous to theory by being treated as an independent variable, mediator, or moderator. In this design, IT is often operationalized using proxies that detect the presence of IT or its variation in use or cost. Our analysis of 143 articles published in MIS Quarterly and Information Systems Research over the past 15 years demonstrates that over 70 percent of published theory conforms to this mode of producing IS knowledge. This state of play has resulted in two negative consequences: the field (1) agonizes over the dearth of original and bold theorizing over IT and (2) satisfices when integrating theory with empirics by creating incommensurate mid-range models that are difficult to consolidate. We propose that one way to overcome these challenges is to critically examine and debate the negative impacts of the field's dominant epistemic scripts and relax them by permitting IS scholarship that more fluidly accommodates alternative forms of knowledge production. This will push IS inquiry to the ÒedgesÓ and emphasize, on the one hand, inductive, rich inquiries using innovative and extensive data sets and, on the other hand, novel, genuine, high-level theorizing around germane conceptual relationships between IT, information and its (semiotic) representations, and social behaviors. We offer several exemplars of such inquiries and their results. To promote this push, we invite alternative institutionalized forms of publishing and reviewing. We conclude by inviting individual scholars to be more open to practices that permit richer theorizing. These recommendations will broaden the field's knowledge ecology and permit the creation of good IS knowledge over just getting Òhits.Ó We surmise that, if such changes are carried out, the field can look confidently toward its future as one of the epicenters of organizational inquiry that deal with the central forces shaping human enterprise in the 21st century.
The information systems field started with the expectation that information and technology will significantly shape the nature of work. The topic provides ample scope for significant scholarly inquiry. Work content, process, and organization are now different from what they were in the 1960s and 1970s, which provided a foundation for theories and understanding. Although investigations about the changing nature of work have been made for years, this special section recognizes that the time of reckoning has come again. There is a growing need for deeper understanding of information, technology, and work. The specific contributions of this special section are at the heart of new frontiers of research in information, technology, and work. We observe a continued need to study their relationships, and to separate short-term and long-term effects. We expect continued surprises and conclude that patience is required to achieve increased understanding in this important domain.
In this paper, a computational, mixed methods approach that combines qualitative analysis with a novel approach to sequence analysis for studying the entanglement of human activities and digital capabilities in organizational routines is described. The approach is scalable across multiple contexts and complements the dominant idiographic modes of sociomaterial inquiry. The approach is rooted in the epistemology of a “rational reconstruction” consistent with the interpretive stance underlying the sociomaterial position. It arms researchers with the means to seek and uncover regularities in the ways human activities and digital capabilities become entangled across contexts by enabling the identification and articulation of generalizable patterns of sociomaterial activity. The computational approach is founded on sequence-analytic techniques that originated from the field of computational biology (genetics), but are now gaining popularity in the study of temporally ordered social phenomena such as organizational routines. These techniques are extended by drawing upon theoretical insights gained within sociomaterial scholarship on how the digital and the social become entangled. By detecting the variation in activities, actors, artifacts, and affordances that comprise what we denote a sociomaterial routine, the approach directly attends to ways in which human actors and the material features of technology become entangled in patterns of practice. Beyond motivating and describing the approach, the different insights that researchers can generate through its application in the study of the digitalization of organizational routines are illustrated. We conclude by suggesting several lines of inquiry that can enrich sociomaterial research.
In this paper, we adopt the lens of absorptive capacity (ACAP), defined by two dimensions--the knowledge base (consisting of knowledge diversity, depth, and linkages) and routines (consisting of sensing and experimentation)--to explain how a software firm's knowledge endowments influence its level of radical information technology innovation during a technological breakthrough. We distinguish three types of IT innovations--base, processes, and service innovation--that form an innovation ecology. We posit that (1) ACAP is a relational construct where the impact of the knowledge base is mediated by routines; (2) IT innovations are either externally adopted or internally generated; and (3) knowledge antecedents associated with different types of innovations differ. We hypothesize a three-step, mediated path (knowledge base → sensing → experimentation → innovation) for external innovation adoption, and a two-step path (knowledge diversity/depth → experimentation → innovation) for internal innovation creation to explain the software firm's level of radical innovation across three IT innovation types. We validate the model through a cross-sector study that examined how 121 small software firms innovated with Internet computing. We confirm the mediated nature of ACAP for external base innovations, which are driven by all three knowledge-based factors as follows: (1) knowledge depth (direct positive effect); (2) knowledge diversity (mediated three-step path), (3) knowledge linkages (mediated three step path). Process innovations are externally driven by a three-step mediated path for knowledge linkages, as well as being directly affected by knowledge diversity, but negatively and directly impeded by knowledge depth. Service innovations are not driven by any mediated influence of ACAP, but driven directly by knowledge diversity. At the same time, both service and process innovations are strongly influenced by prior IT innovations: base and/or service. Several directions for future studies of radical IT innovation are proposed.
In unpredictable and unforgiving environments, organizations need to act with care and reliability, often referred to as collective mindfulness. We present a theory-generating, interpretative field study of a highly complex and successful building project by architect Frank O. Gehry. We argue that what has been labeled collective mindfulness is only possible through a dialectic process of collective minding, in which organizational actors simultaneously exhibit elements of being mindful and mindless. Our analysis reveals that collective minding emerges from struggling with contradictions in the five elements of mindfulness. We argue that when actors struggle with these dialectic tensions, the same information technology capabilities are enacted as multiple, contradictory technologies-in-practice. Implications for the further study of collective minding and the appropriation of IT capabilities are discussed.
In this essay, we argue that pervasive digitization gives birth to a new type of product architecture: the layered modular architecture. The layered modular architecture extends the modular architecture of physical products by incorporating four loosely coupled layers of devices, networks, services, and contents created by digital technology. We posit that this new architecture instigates profound changes in the ways that firms organize for innovation in the future. We develop (1) a conceptual framework to describe the emerging organizing logic of digital innovation and (2) an information systems research agenda for digital strategy and the creation and management of corporate information technology infrastructures.
Since the inauguration of information systems research (ISR) two decades ago, the information systems (IS) field's attention has moved beyond administrative systems and individual tools. Millions of users log onto Facebook, download iPhone applications, and use mobile services to create decentralized work organizations. Understanding these new dynamics will necessitate the field paying attention to digital infrastructures as a category of IT artifacts. A state-of-the-art review of the literature reveals a growing interest in digital infrastructures but also confirms that the field has yet to put infrastructure at the centre of its research endeavor. To assist this shift we propose three new directions for IS research: (1) theories of the nature of digital infrastructure as a separate type of IT artifact, sui generis; (2) digital infrastructures as relational constructs shaping all traditional IS research areas; (3) paradoxes of change and control as salient IS phenomena. We conclude with suggestions for how to study longitudinal, large-scale sociotechnical phenomena while striving to remain attentive to the limitations of the traditional categories that have guided IS research.
This article discusses several published reports within the issue including one by James Backhouse, Carol Hsu and Leiser Silva on standards in information systems and one by Lynne Markus, Charles Steinfield, Rolf Wigand and Gabe Minton on information systems in the U.S. residential mortgage industry.
The short history of Information Systems suggests persistent anxiety about the field's purported lack of academic legitimacy. A common refrain in the anxiety discourse is that legitimacy can be obtained only by creating a strong theoretic core for the field. This essay takes exception with this view, attributing the anxiety to the field's relative youth, its focus on technology in a technophobic institutional environment, and academic ethno-centrism within and without the field. While developing stronger theory might be helpful, it is more important that the IS field pushes back against the hegemony of IS critics outside the field whose arguments masquerade as concerns about academic quality. The anxiety discourse should be replaced by the IS field's aggressive pursuit of new instructional and research opportunities that cross traditional institutional barriers and the pursuit of excellence on academic criteria deemed important by the field itself.
Information technology (IT) innovation can be defined as the creation and new organizational application of digital computer and communication technologies. The paper suggests that IT innovation theory needs to be expanded to analyze IT innovations in kind that exhibit atypical discontinuities in IT innovation behaviors by studying two questions. First, can a model of disruptive IT innovations be created to understand qualitative changes in IT development processes and their outcomes so that they can be related to architectural discontinuities in computing capability? Second, to what extent can the observed turmoil among systems development organizations that has been spawned by Internet computing be understood as a disruptive IT innovation? To address the first question, a model of disruptive IT innovation is developed. The model defines a disruptive IT innovation as an architectural innovation originating in the information technology base that has subsequent pervasive and radical impacts on development processes and their outcomes. These base innovations establish necessary but not sufficient conditions for subsequent innovation behaviors. To address the second question, the impact of Internet computing on eight leading-edge systems development organizations in the United States and Finland is investigated. The study shows that the adoption of Internet computing in these firms has radically impacted their IT innovation both in development processes and services.
A nomadic information environment is a heterogeneous assemblage of interconnected technological, and social, and organizational elements that enable the physical and social mobility of computing and communication services between organizational actors both within and across organizational borders. We analyze such environments based on their prevalent features of mobility, digital convergence, and mass scale, along with their mutual interdependencies. By using a framework that organizes research topics in nomadic information environments at the individual, team, organizational, and interorganizational levels and is comprised of both service and infrastructure development, we assess the opportunities and challenges for IS research. These deal with the design, use, adoption, and impacts of nomadic information environments. We conclude by discussing research challenges posed by nomadic information environments for information systems research skills and methods. These deal with the need to invent novel research methods and shift our research focus, the necessity to question the divide between the technical and the social, and the need to better integrate developmental and behavioral (empirical) research modes.
Advocates of software risk management claim that by identifying and analyzing threats to success (i.e., risks) action can be taken to reduce the chance of failure of a project. The first step in the risk management process is to identify the risk itself, so that appropriate countermeasures can be taken. One problem in this task, however, is that no validated lists are available to help the project manager understand the nature and types of risks typically faced in a software project. This paper represents a first step toward alleviating this problem by developing an authoritative list of common risk factors. We deploy a rigorous data collection method called a "ranking-type" Delphi survey to produce a rank-order list of risk factors. This data collection method is designed to elicit and organize opinions of a panel of experts through iterative, controlled feedback. Three simultaneous surveys were conducted in three different settings: Hong Kong, Finland, and the United States. This was done to broaden our view of the types of risks, rather than relying on the view of a single culture--an aspect that has been ignored in past risk management research. In forming the three panels, we recruited experienced project managers in each country. The paper presents the obtained risk factor list, compares it with other published risk factor lists for completeness and variation, and analyzes common features and differences in risk factor rankings in the three countries. We conclude by discussing implications of our findings for both research and improving risk management practice.
I found the article by Benbasat and Zmud both interesting and provocative. Because it is written by two leading North American information systems (IS) scholars--both former or current editor-in-chiefs of MISQ--the paper's call for a greater concern for relevance in our research should not be taken lightly. I think that the propositions Benbasat and Zmud suggest are welcome and help set up directions for future research procedures in IS. As a European scholar who has taught and done research on both sides of the Atlantic, I do not see all issues raised, however, in the same light. In this commentary I highlight some of these differences.
This paper examines software risk management in a novel way, emphasizing the ways in which managers address software risks through sequential attention shaping and intervention. Software risks are interpreted as incongruent states within a socio-technical model of organizational change that includes task, structure, technology, and actors. Such incongruence can lead to failures in developing or implementing the system and thus to major losses. Based on this model we synthesize a set of software risk factors and risk resolution techniques, which cover the socio-technical components and their interactions. We use the model to analyze how four classical risk management approaches--McFarlan's portfolio approach, Davis' contingency approach, Boehm's software risk approach, and Alter's and Ginzberg's implementation approach--shape managerial attention. This analysis shows that the four approaches differ significantly in their view of the manager's role and possible actions. We advise managers to be aware of the limitations of each approach and to combine them to orchestrate comprehensive risk management practices in a context. Overall, the paper provides a new interpretation of software risk management which goes beyond a narrow system rationalism by suggesting a contingent, contextual, and multivariate view of software development.