Path constitution theory has emerged as a promising combination of two contrasting perspectives on technological innovation: path dependence, which focuses on historically embedded, contingent processes that are more or less beyond the control of actors, and path creation, which emphasizes mindful contributions from powerful actors. However, the current path constitution literature focuses on macro- and multi-level inquiry without addressing the specific processes, opportunities, and challenges related to organizational (micro-level) technological innovation. Against this backdrop, we draw on the innovation and path literature as well as a case study of telehealth innovation in a public health organization to theorize how technological innovation paths constitute in organizational contexts. The proposed theory distinguishes between innovation path status and innovation path trajectory to help researchers understand and explain how organizations transform and reinforce path constitution patterns, how innovation paths may merge with or separate from other paths, and how organizations may arrive at a lock-in that challenges them to break out from dominant and seemingly irreversible action patterns.
Although institutional theory has become a more dominant perspective in information systems research, studies have only paid scant attention to how field dynamics and organizational processes coevolve during information technology institutionalization. Against this backdrop, we present a new conceptualization based on the “traveling of ideas” metaphor that distinguishes between theorization of ideas about IT usage across an organizational field and translation of such ideas into practical use of IT within particular organizations. Drawing on these distinct analytical views, we posit that IT institutionalization is constituted through recursive intertwining of theorization and translation involving both linguistic and material objects. To illustrate the detailed workings of this conceptualization, we apply it to a longitudinal study of mobile IT institutionalization within Danish home care. We demonstrate how heterogeneous actors within the Danish home care field theorized ideas about mobile IT usage and how these ideas translated into different local arrangements. Further, our account reveals a complex institutionalization process in which mobile IT was first seen as a fashionable recipe for improvement but subsequently became the subject of controversy. The paper adds to the emerging process and discourse literature on IT institutionalization by shedding new light on how IT ideas travel across a field and within individual organizations, how they transform and become legitimized over time, and how they take on different linguistic and material forms across organizational settings.
Examining action research publications in leading Information Systems journals as a particular genre of research communication, we develop the notion of style composition to understand how authors structure their arguments for a research contribution. We define style composition as the activity through which authors select, emphasize, and present elements of their research to establish premises, develop inferences, and present contributions in publications. Drawing on this general notion, we identify a set of styles that is characteristic of how IS action researchers compose their argument. Premise styles relate to the dual goals of action research through practical or theoretical positioning of the argument; inference styles combine insights from the problem-solving and the research cycles through inductive or deductive reasoning; and contribution styles focus on different types of contributions-experience report, field study, theoretical development, problem solving method, and research method. Based on the considered sample, we analyze the styles adopted in selected publications and show that authors have favored certain styles while leaving others under explored;further, we reveal important strengths and weaknesses in the composition of styles within the IS discipline. Based on these insights, we discuss how action research practices and writing can be improved, as well as how to further develop style compositions to support the publication of engaged scholarship research
Many software organizations engage in software process improvement (SPI) initiatives to increase their capability to develop quality solutions at a competitive level. Such efforts, however, are complex and very demanding. A variety of risks makes it difficult to develop and implement new processes. We studied SPI in its organizational context through collaborative practice research (CPR), a particular form of action research. The CPR program involved close collaboration between practitioners and researchers over a three-year period to understand and improve SPI initiatives in four Danish software organizations. The problem of understanding and managing risks in SPI teams emerged in one of the participating organizations and led to this research. We draw upon insights from the literature on SPI and software risk management as well as practical lessons learned from managing SPI risks in the participating software organizations. Our research offers two contributions. First, we contribute to knowledge on SPI by proposing an approach to understand and manage risks in SPI teams. This risk management approach consists of a framework for understanding risk areas and risk resolution strategies within SPI and a related process for managing SPI risks. Second, we contribute to knowledge on risk management within the information systems and software engineering disciplines. We propose an approach to tailor risk management to specific contexts. This approach consists of a framework for understanding and choosing between different forms of risk management and a process to tailor risk management to specific contexts.
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.