Understanding Information Syst PDF

INFORMATION TO USERS
This manuscript has been reproduced from the microfilm master. UMI films
the text directly from the original or copy submitted. Thus, some thesis and
dissertation copies are in typewriter face, while others may be from any type of
computer printer.
The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of th e

copy submitted. Broken or indistinct print, colored or poor quality illustrations
and photographs, print bleedthrough, substandard margins, and improper
alignment can adversely affect reproduction.
In the unlikely event that the author did not send UMI a complete manuscript
and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if unauthorized
copyright material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion.
Oversize materials (e.g., maps, drawings, charts) are reproduced by

sectioning the original, beginning at the upper left-hand comer and continuing
from left to right in equal sections with small overlaps.
ProQuest Information and Learning

300 North Zeeb Road, Ann Arbor, Mi 48106-1346 USA
800-521-0600
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
UNDERSTANDING INFORMATION SYSTEMS AS SOCIAL INSTITUTIONS:
DYNAMIC INSTITUTIONAL THEORY
A Dissertation
by
BONGSUG CHAE
Submitted to the Office o f Graduate Studies of

Texas A&M University
in partial fulfillment o f the requirements for the degree of
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
December 2002
Major Subject: Information and Operations Management
UMI Number: 3072420
_®
UMI
UMI Microform 3072420
Copyright 2003 by ProQuest Information and Learning Company.
All rights reserved. This microform edition is protected against
unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code.
ProQuest Information and Learning Company

300 North Zeeb Road
P.O. Box 1346
Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346
UNDERSTANDING INFORMATION SYSTEMS AS SOCIAL INSTITUTIONS:
DYNAMIC INSTITUTIONAL THEORY
A Dissertation
by
BONGSUG CHAE
Submitted to the Office of Graduate Studies of

Texas A&M University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
Approved as to style and content by:
'YfinjutLMvfci&Yhh — .-3 - __
Marshall Scott Poole /y James F. Courtney |
(Co-Chair o f Committee) </ (Co-Chair o f Committee)
]/-<?
Antonio Arreola-Risa
(Member)
Arnold Vedlitz
(Member) r
L su S ^ ih
Bala Shetty
(Head o f Department)
December 2002
Major Subject: Information and Operations Management
ABSTRACT
Understanding Information Systems as Social Institutions:
Dynamic Institutional Theory. (December 2002)
Bongsug Chae, B.A., City University o f New York;
M.B.A., St. John’s University
Co-Chairs of Advisory Committee: Dr. Marshall Scott Poole

Dr. James F. Courtney
The deployment of large-scale information systems such as enterprise resource
planning systems, knowledge management systems, customer relationship management
systems, and interorganizational information systems is a major trend in the corporate world.
However, in the information systems field there is a lack o f understanding of exactly what
these large-scale systems involve and how they evolve over time. This dissertation develops a
meta-theoretical framework, the Dynamic Institutional Theory, for understanding the design,
implementation, and use of large-scale information systems. The Dynamic Institutional Theory
integrates institutional theory with two influential social theories currently used in the
information systems field - structuration theory and actor network theory. It argues that
information systems are best construed as social institutions and their development and use as a
dynamic process of institutionalization.
The first seven chapters develop the Dynamic Institutional Theory based on analysis
and critique o f existing theory and research. The remainder o f the dissertation presents a case
study o f a large-scale information system in a university setting that is used to explore the
utility o f the Dynamic Institutional Theory as a framework for understanding the development
and use o f large-scale information systems. Results o f the case study are used to further
develop and refine the Dynamic Institutional Theory.
This dissertation attempts to make three types of contributions. First, it attempts to add
to our knowledge of large-scale information systems through providing critiques of extant
approaches and understandings o f such systems. Second, the dissertation attempts to contribute
to theory-building within the IS field through developing a meta-theoretical framework that
considers both local, contingent aspects of sociotechnical change and broader social structures
at the same time. Finally, the dissertation attempts to contribute to the tenets o f institutional
theory by developing a dynamic institutional theory that reconceptualizes the process of
institutionalization.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This dissertation has benefited from the contributions, intended and unintended, of
many people over the entire period o f my doctoral study in the Department o f Information and
Operations Management (INFO). All have enriched and supported my doctoral study in their
own way.
First, I feel very indebted to those who participated in this project and shared their time
and experience with me. In particular, I want to thank the MIS project team, particularly Janna
Keel, senior system analyst, Freda Strazelec, the FAMIS project manager, Mr. Tom Putnam,
the director of computer information services (CIS) at TAMU, a system auditor of TAMUS,
several top administrators of TEES, TEEX and TAES, and the founders o f FAMIS, who gave
me access to documentation and answered countless questions.
I have benefited from the help of people in INFO. I would like to thank all the faculty,
doctoral students and administrative staff who helped me through my study. In particular I
would like to thank Dr. Bala Shetty for his support and encouragement. I also would like to
thank my fellow students, Maggie Guo, Ahmed Mahfouz, Dianne Hall, Hope Koch and Vo
Van Huy for their friendship and love. I would like to extend my thanks to INFO
administrative staff, Bettie Poehl, Dawn Jefferson and Hose Peg, for their time and help in
many ways during my stay in INFO.
I am deeply indebted to my dissertation committee: Dr. Antonio Arreola-Risa, Dr.
Arnold Vedlitz, Dr. David Olsen, Dr. James F. Courtney, and Dr. Marshall Scott Poole, who
gave me the opportunity and support to explore and define my research topic. I thank them all
for their helpful and insightful comments at the early stages o f this study. I am appreciative of
the encouragement and support o f Dr. Arreola-Risa and Dr. Vedlitz, my committee members. I
would like to extend my appreciation to Dr. Olsen for formerly serving as my committee co
vi
chair and for his support and intellectual guidance. I am particularly grateful to Dr. Courtney
and Dr. Poole, my committee co-chairs. They are the greatest teachers I have ever had in my
life. In fact, my appreciation to Dr. Courtney and Dr. Poole could not be expressed sufficiently
in this short acknowledgement. Dr. Courtney accepted me as his doctoral student and trained
me from the beginning. He was always patient with my immaturity as an IS scholar and always
trusted and supported me sufficiently to pursue my research interests in different areas. He
always helped me develop a sense o f confidence in my work and an enthusiasm for research
ideas. I owe special thanks to Dr. Poole. Knowing him as a researcher and a person was my
greatest pleasure during my doctoral studies. I will forever appreciate the opportunities and
intellectual and personal guidance Dr. Poole has provided me throughout this project. He has
been an adviser, a mentor, and a friend. Without his support, encouragement and guidance, this
dissertation simply would never have been possible. In his scholarship and as a person, he is
the model o f what I hold as the highest achievement in my professional and personal life.
My thanks go to my friends and family in both the U.S. and Korea. I believe that my
basic philosophy and way of thinking were formed around 1990 and 1991 at a college in
Korea. I am indebted to my friends and fellow students who discussed various social, political
and economic issues and shared their ideas with me. I acknowledge that they have contributed
to this dissertation in their own way. My appreciation to my brothers and sister, Kwansug,
Woonsug, Jisug and Mihee, is special. Their support, encouragement and understanding have
helped me through my doctoral study. Finally, I dedicate this dissertation to two women, my
mother (Sungshim Kim) and my wife (Joungae Pu), and two men, my deceased father
(Kyuwon Chae) and my son (Chris Soobin Chae), without whose love, support, patience,
sacrifice, and prayers none of this would have been possible.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
ABSTRACT.................................................................................................................................... iii
ACKNOLWEDGMENTS............................................................................................................... v
TABLE OF CONTENTS............................................................................................................... vii
LIST OF FIGURES..........................................................................................................................x
LIST OF TA BLES..........................................................................................................................xii
CHAPTER
I INTRODUCTION................................................................................................... 1
1.1 Opening Statement....................................................................... 1

1.2 Problem Statement.......................................................................2
1.3 Goals and Research Questions....................................................4
1.4 Expected Contributions.............................................................. 9
1.5 Dissertation Organization........................................................... 9
II OVERVIEW OF LARGE-SCALE INFORMATION SYSTEMS.................... 12
2.1 Introduction.................................................................................12
2.2 Overview of Large-scale Information Systems..................... 12
2.3 Existing Dominant Views of Information Systems................ 16
2.4 The Ensemble V iew ..................................................................19
III DYNAMIC INSTITUTIONAL THEORY AS

A WAY FORWARD.............................................................................28
3.1 Critique of the Socio-Technical Approach and the

Structurational M odel.............................................................. 28
3.2 Overview o f Institutional Theory............................................30
3.3 IS Research and Institutional Theory......................................34
IV RECONCEPTUALIZING LARGE-SCALE INFORMATION SYSTEMS AS

SOCIAL INSTITUTIONS.................................................................................. 38
4.1 Prior Understandings o f Information Systems.......................38

4.2 Information Systems as Social Institutions: Dynamic
Institutional Theory................................................................. 46
CHAPTER Page
4.3 Premises o f a Dynamic Institutional Theory for Information

System s..................................................................................... 51
4.4 Theoretical and Practical Implications................................... 58
4.5 Conclusion................................................................................. 68
V RETHINKING THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN IT AND

ORGANIZATIONS: A MULTI-LEVEL MODEL OF DUALITY OF
TECHNOLOGY.................................................................................................70
5.1 Introduction............................................................................. 70
5.2 Conceptualization o f the Relationship between IS and
Organizations.......................................................................... 71
5.3 Theoretical B asis.................................................................... 72
5.4 A Multi-level Model o f Duality o f Technology.....................76
5.5 Conclusion...............................................................................95
VI REFRAMING THE INTERPLAY BETWEEN EXISTING INSTITUTIONS

AND AGENCY: DUALITY OF PREEXISTING INFORMATION
SYSTEMS........................................................................................................... 98
6.1 Prior Conceptualizations of History (or Preexisting

Information Systems).............................................................98
6.2 Reframing the Interplay between Existing Institutions and
Agency: D IT ...........................................................................101
6.3 Dual Surface of Emergence: Schemas and
Resources............................................................................... 106
6.4 Theoretical and Practical Implications.................................112
6.5 Conclusion.............................................................................. 121
VII TECHNOLOGY ADAPTATION AS DYNAMIC

INSTITUTIONALIZATION: DYNAMIC INSTITUTIONAL THEORY
122
7.1 Introduction............................................................................ 122

7.2 Prior Understandings o f Technology Adaptation................124
7.3 Technology Adaptation in the Case of
Large-scale I S ....................................................................... 126
7.4 Theoretical Basis o f Dynamic Institutional
Theory (D IT ).........................................................................129
7.5 Dynamic Institutional Theory (DIT) for Technology
Adaptation............................................................................ 145
ix
CHAPTER Page
7.6 Conclusion............................................................................... 150
VIII RESEARCH METHOD AND DESIGN........................................................... 152
8.1 Introduction.............................................................................. 152

8.2 Case S tudy................................................................................153
8.3 Research Design andMethod: A Case Study o f
FAM IS.....................................................................................156
8.4 Data Collection........................................................................ 163
8.5 Data A nalysis........................................................................... 173
8.6 Conclusion............................................................................... 176
DC CASE STUDY..................................................................................................... 177
9.1 Introduction............................................................................. 177

9.2 Case Overview and General Research Findings...................177
9.3 Case A nalysis.......................................................................... 212
9.4 Conclusion............................................................................... 270
X CONCLUSION....................................................................................................272
10.1 Introduction..............................................................................272
10.2 Propositions o f D IT .................................................................273
10.3 Summary o f the Theory and the C a se ................................... 277
10.4 Contributions........................................................................... 284
10.5 Limitations............................................................................... 287
10.6 Directions for Future Research...............................................290
REFERENCES............................................................................................................................296
APPENDIX A ............................................................................................................................. 326
APPENDIX B ............................................................................................................................. 329
V IT A ............................................................................................................................................ 332
LIST OF FIGURES
FIGURE Page
1. The Contribution o f Chapters IV through VII to the Development of DIT

As a Meta-Theoretical Framework.................................................................................... 6
2. Overview of Dissertation.................................................................................................. 10
3. Giddens’s Duality of Structure (1984)........................................................................... 23
4. Duality of Schemas and IT A rtifacts...............................................................................56
5. Duality of Technology (Adapted from Orlikowski 1992).............................................. 84
6. A Multi-level Model of the Duality o f Technology.......................................................85
7. Two Poles of IS and Institutional Innovation............................................................... 102
8. The Morphogenetic Sequence (Adapted from Archer 1995)...................................... 105
9. Three Alternative Strategies in the Middle Position.....................................................116
10. A Sequential Model of Institutionalization (Barley and Tolbert 1997).......................131
11. Component Processes of Institutionalization

(Adapted from Tolbert and Zucker 1996).................................................................... 132
12. Pressures for Deinstitutionalization (Adapted from Oliver 1992).............................. 138
13. Mechanisms o f Institutionalization (Adapted from Lawrence et al.2 001)..................144
14. A Dynamic Process of Technology Adaptation........................................................... 145
15. Institutional Formation in the Dynamic Process of Technology Adaptation............. 146
16. Institutional Development in the Dynamic

Process of Technology Adaptation................................................................................ 148
17. Institutional Decay in the Dynamic Process of Technology Adaptation.................... 150
18. Deduction, Induction and Retroduction.........................................................................159
19. FAMIS Transition Schedule...........................................................................................196
20. Duality of Schemas and Resources of FAM IS.............................................................217
xi
FIGURE Page
21. A Multi-level Model o f Duality o f FAM IS................................................................ 224
22. Institutional Formation in the Dynamic Process o f FAMIS Adaptation...................250
23. The Extent o f Institutionalization of FAM IS..............................................................257
24. Transition o f Institutional Modes for FAM IS............................................................. 259
25. Duality o f Schemas and Resources o f FAM IS............................................................278
26. Triadic Reciprocal Interplay of FA M IS....................................................................... 278
27. Structuration Located in the Interplay Across and Within Levels..............................280
28. Structuration Located in the Interplay Between Levels of Both IT and Agency 281
LIST OF TABLES
TABLE Page
1. Key Characteristics o f Large-scale I S .............................................................................14
2. Assumptions of Discrete-entity M odels..........................................................................18
3. Six Axioms of Information Systems as Social Institutions......................................... 58
4. Process of Building Theory from Case Study Research.............................................154
5. Case Study Tactics for the Quality o f Research D esign............................................. 156
6. A Star List of C odes.......................................................................................................164
7. Data Check M atrix.........................................................................................................166
8. Summary o f Documents Collected...............................................................................168
9. Detailed Interview Schedule......................................................................................... 172
10. Change ofTAMUS Leadership.....................................................................................181
11. A List o f Ten Alternative O ptions ................................................................190
12. Policy of FAMIS Implementation and Change of Leadership................................... 200
13. A List of the Resources o f FA M IS............................................................................... 213
14. Schemas of FAM IS........................................................................................................215
15. The Spirit o f FAM IS......................................................................................................220
1
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
1.1 Opening Statement
Today we are watching a “paradigm shift” both on the business and the technology
side o f organizations (Markus, 2000a). On the business side we have been seeing business
process reengineering, the management philosophies o f customer management and supply
chain management, electronic commerce, and business-to-business trading exchanges. On the
technology side, there is an emerging trend of moving from standalone or traditional
information systems to large-scale information systems such as enterprise resource planning
(ERP) systems, knowledge management systems (KMS), different IT solutions for enterprise
application integration (e.g. customer relationship management systems), interorganizational
systems (IOS), and standardization (e.g., the Internet, Electronic Data Interchange). Within this
flood o f business and technology innovations, the deployment o f large-scale information
systems is a major trend in corporate world (e.g., Davenport 1998; Braa and Rolland 2000;
Markus 2000b).
Several authors (e.g., Ives and Jarvenpaa 1991; Davenport 1998; Markus 2000a) have
recognized the importance o f large-scale IS or information infrastructure in the context of
information integration, globalization and strategic alignment with business processes. Grover,
Tang and Fiedler (1998) recent study o f IS investment priorities o f large U.S. companies shows
that IS investment priorities today are consistent with the evolution o f IS and its related
technologies over the years and currently infrastructural investments in coordination-intensive
(or corporate-wide) technologies are a high priority with organizations. This investment is
related to organizational restructuring and process reengineering projects. As an example, ERP
This dissertation follows the style and format o f Management Information Systems Quarterly.
2
systems have been adopted by over 60% o f Fortune 500 companies in the USA (Milford and
Stewart 2000) and the market is expected to grow to $66 billion by 2003 (Carlino and Kelly
1999).
1.2 Problem Statement
Despite the increase in the design and implementation o f large-scale IS within and
across organizations', in the IS field there is lack o f understanding of exactly what large-scale
1 In this note, some recent surveys o f IT projects are briefly introduced to help readers
understand the costs, failure rate, and user perceptions o f large-scale information systems,
particularly in the context o f ERPs. According to the 2002 ERP & CRM vendor report from
Peerstone Research, enterprise ERP and CRM software packages typically cost $2,000 to
$2,500 per user and up, depending on the number o f modules an organization purchases.
“Vendors charge another 20% or so per year for support and upgrades. Most companies spend
anywhere from one to ten additional dollars on hardware, network infrastructure and
professional services for each dollar they spend on the initial software license. The survey of
163 enterprise application users shows that users think the vendors have great technology, but
they don’t like the payback” (2002 ERP & CRM vendor report from Peerstone Research). Also
according to the report,
• SAP, Oracle, Peoplesoft and Siebel between them average A- for the breadth of their
feature sets and the technical quality o f their software.
• But they average C- for ease o f integration with other applications, and an abysmal D+ for
actual return on investment.
In a word, “there is a huge gap between features and benefit. User companies cut back
on big ticket applications in 2001 because they did not think they were getting a good enough
return for their money. One of the most powerful conclusions o f the survey is that big-ticket
enterprise applications by themselves do not enable firms to compete better. Respondents agree
that these packages have become a minimum requirement for doing business: Organizations
that do not use them will be left in the dust by the competition, but organizations that do use
them cannot expect an easy ride either”.
Several surveys indicated a high rate o f failure o f IT projects. The Robbings-Giola
survey (2001) included 232 respondents spanning multiple industries including government,
information technology, communications, financial, utilities, and healthcare. A total of 36% of
the companies surveyed had, or were in the process of, implementing an ERP system. Fifty one
percent viewed their ERP implementation as unsuccessful. The Conference Board Survey
(2001) interviewed executives at 117 companies that attempted ERP implementations. Forty
percent o f the projects failed to achieve their business case within one year o f going live. The
KPMG Canada Survey (1997) indicated that 61% reported details on a failed IT project. The
Standish Group survey (1995) reported that a staggering 31.1% o f projects are cancelled before
they ever get completed. The survey showed that 52.7% of projects will cost over 189% of
their original estimates. Almost 80,000 projects were cancelled in 1995. Eighty-one billion
dollars was spent for canceled software projects. On average only 16.2% of software projects
3
IS involve and how they evolve over time. Even though there is a large body of literature on
the topic o f large-scale information systems, particularly on ERPs (e.g., Bancroft 1996; Lee
and Lee 2000; Brehm et al. 2001; Davenport 2000; Ross and Vitale 2000; Holland and Light
1999; Ross 1999; Klaus et al. 2000; Scott and Kaindl 2000), this literature is full of normative
models on how to deploy such systems successfully (Hanseth et al. 2001) which are largely
written from the perspective o f management o f such systems (Howcroft and Truex 2001). Most
empirical studies are positivistic and descriptive, single-shot in design and no longitudinal
studies are found (Dong, Neufeld and Higgins 2002). This situation is very problematic when
we consider the global trend of large-scale IS deployment in profit as well as non-profit
organizations and the high failure rate o f such “mega” projects.
At the same time there have been ongoing debates among IS researchers about the
nature and concept o f today’s information systems, the core subject matter in the IS field (e.g.,
Baskerville et al. 2000; Markus 2000b; Alter et al. 2001; Orlikowski 2001; Russo et al. 2001).
This study extends this central issue by developing a metatheoretical framework in the genre of
“social theory” (Kling 1994) which is specific about the issues around large-scale information
systems in particular and focused enough to be applied not only by academic researchers but
also by practitioners to their imminent large-scale IT projects.
Two influential social theories that have been applied in IS research - actor network
theory (e.g., Callon 1986; Latour 1987) and Anthony Giddens’s (1984) structuration theory -
can provide insights into how an information system comes to be and how the information
are completed on-time and on-budget. In the larger companies, the news is even worse: only
9% o f their projects come in on-time and on-budget. Projects completed by the largest
American companies have only approximately 42% o f the originally-proposed features and
functions. It is expected that the failure rate has increased for the past five years due to the
complexity and size o f IT projects driven by the phenomenon o f large-scale information
systems.
4
system evolves and comes to be used, respectively. We believe that actor network theory can
provide an excellent explanation o f how large-scale IS come to be (the development), while
structuration theory can explain how they come to be used. However, while these theories
provide a good starting point for analysis, neither is adequate in its present form to give an
understanding of large-scale IS, as we will show in subsequent analysis.
In order to understand the design, implementation and use o f large-scale IS, this study
offers an alternative theoretical framework that integrates premises from the two theories,
“Dynamic Institutional Theory” (DIT). This framework is grounded in the tenets of
institutional theory (e.g., DiMaggio and Powell 1991; Scott 1995, 2001; Sewell 1992; Offe
1996; Covaleski, Dirsmith and Michelman 1993; Dryzek 1996; Goodin 1996; Hirsch 1997;
Tolbert and Zucher 1996) and draws on different ideas and concepts from other social theories
such as critical realism (Archer 1995; Bhaskar 1979), post-structuration theory (Jessop 2001;
Mouzelis 1995; Pickering 1995), and social studies of technology (Klein and Kleinman 2002;
Russell 1986). It views information systems as “social institutions”2 and the process o f their
change and evolution as a dynamic process o f institutionalization. This institutional framework
provides a way of understanding o f the nature, design, implementation and use of information
systems, particularly large-scale IS.
1.3 Goals and Research Questions
The goal o f this dissertation is to develop an institutional theory for the IS field.
Dynamic Institutional Theory (DIT), as a meta-framework that can provide adequate levels of
explanations for several emerging issues related to large-scale IS. The study addresses this
2 It is acknowledged that this reconceptualization is in line with a long effort (e.g., Kling and
Scacchi 1982; Mumford et al. 1985; Land and Hirschheim 1983; Monteiro and Hanseth 1995;
Lee 1999; Checkland 1981; DeSanctis and Poole 1994) discernible in the IS literature to
establish an understanding o f IS as a notion that does not refer primarily to technology.
5
objective by focusing on four specific areas in IS research: the reconceptualization o f IS, the
relationship between information systems and organizations, the design o f new IS and
technology adaptation in the case o f large-scale information systems. A case study o f a large-
scale information system in the Texas A&M University System is used to explore each of these
research questions and to develop DIT in the dissertation. The four areas are addressed in the
following manner:
First, there are diverse perspectives on what an information system is, but no
consensus on this issue. A large number o f studies, on the one hand, take a material or “actual”
view of information system and view it as a purely technical artifact or technology, while on
the other hand, numerous studies adopt a social or “virtual” view that construes an information
system as a social system or a mere “occasion for [social] structuring” without paying much
attention to its objective nature. This dissertation offers an alternative approach by
conceptualizing information systems as social institutions by emphasizing the material and
social elements of information system in a balanced way. The reconceptualization of IS as
social institutions opens a wide range o f new directions for IS research. Specifically, chapter
IV is devoted to this aim through developing DIT for the re-conceptual ization o f information
systems. Having answered the question o f what an information system is and how an
information system should be conceptualized, this chapter becomes the foundation for
investigating several other topics, specifically the relationship between IS and organization
(chapter V), IS design (chapter VI) and IS implementation and use (chapter VII). Chapters V
through VII develop the implications o f the reconceptualization of IS as social institutions that
is presented in chapter IV, as shown in Figure I .
6
/ C hV \
The development of a
DIT for the
meta-theory (pfT) to study
relationship between
numerous research topics
US and organization/
of large-scale IS
/ Ch IV T
DIT for the \ Ch VI
reconceptualization o f/* DIT for IS
development
Future research:
DIT for other Ch VII
research areas DIT for technology
adaptation
Figure 1. The Contribution o f Chapters IV through VII to the Development o f DIT As

a Meta-Theoretical Framework
As just noted, a critical issue in IS is the relationship between information systems and
organizations. Building on Chapter IV, chapter V proposes a multi-level model for the
interplay between information systems and organization which complements and extends
existing structurational models o f technology. The extant models, such as Orlikowski's (1992),
tend to state the relationship between technology and organizations too ambiguously by
suggesting that “IT enables/constrains action," without explaining what this means. The
7
proposed multi-level model attempts to develop a more specific view o f the technology-
organization relationship by addressing the following questions:
o To what extent and how do information systems (social institutions) enable and
constrain human action and organization?
o To what extent and how does agency produce and reproduce information systems?
o How and why can an information system that appears to be a structural constraint
for one actor appear as an opportunity for transformation to another actor?
o How and why can an information system that appears to be an opportunity at a
particular time appears as a constraint later?
o How do preexisting institutions constrain and enable the development of future
information systems?
Once we have established a model of the relationship o f organizations and technology,
a logically related topic important to the field o f IS concerns the design o f information systems.
Chapter VI explores this critical issue through articulating the implications of DIT specifically
for IS design. The literature suggests that there are two dominant views o f the role of
preexisting information systems in the development o f new information systems. One view
suggests that “history - that is, existing information systems - does not matter” and thus the
development or introduction o f new information systems has no relationship with preexisting
IS. The other suggests that “history matters” and that the development of new information
systems is constrained by preexisting ones. This dissertation proposes the notion o f the “duality
of preexisting information systems” arguing that preexisting information systems both
constrain and enable the development o f new ones. Based on this notion, several implications
for IS design are discussed.
8
Once a technology has been designed, the process o f technology adaptation becomes
important. Chapter VII o f this dissertation explores this process from the perspective o f DIT.
Reviewing extant literature on technology adaptation suggests that existing models have been
developed and adapted to traditional, small-scale information systems and communication
technologies. However, recent studies o f large-scale IS seem to suggest that extant models are
not adequate to the task o f explaining technology adaptation in the case o f large-scale IS. DIT
views the process o f technology adaptation in the case o f large-scale IS as a process of
institutionalization that is somewhat problematic, nondeterministic and dynamic, unlike what
most o f the extant models o f technology adaptation seem to suggest. In Chapter VII a three
phase model o f the institutionalization of IS is advanced that attempts to address key issues in
the implementation and use o f large-scale IS.
In summary, four important research questions for the IS field are investigated in
chapters IV through VII through developing DIT for each question. DIT introduced in chapter
4 offers a new way o f viewing information systems as social institutions and opens a door to
investigate several other areas o f IS research. Succeeding what is established in chapter IV,
chapters V through VII attempt to further explore three specific areas o f IS research: IS and
organization, IS design and technology adaptation. The results of chapters V through VII are
DIT for each o f the three areas. They not only demonstrate the usefulness of DIT for the
reconceptualization o f IS, but also strengthen DIT and illustrate the potential of the theory for
other areas o f IS research in future. As a result, DIT developed in chapters IV through VII
provides a meta-theoretical framework that can provide adequate levels of explanations for
several emerging issues with IS and large-scale IS in particular.
9
1.4 Expected Contributions
Through addressing the four specific areas in IS research, this dissertation attempts to
make three types o f contributions. First, the dissertation attempts to add to our knowledge of
large-scale information systems like Enterprise Resource Planning Systems (ERP), Knowledge
Management Systems (KMS), and extant legacy systems through providing critiques on extant
approaches and understandings o f such systems. Second, the dissertation attempts to contribute
to theory-building within the IS field through developing a meta-theoretical framework which
considers both local, contingent aspects of sociotechnical change and the broader social
structures at the same time. Finally, the dissertation attempts to contribute to the tenets of
institutional theory by developing a dynamic institutional theory, DIT that adds to our
knowledge o f social institutions and the process o f institutionalization.
1.5 Dissertation Organization
The remainder o f this dissertation is organized in the following manner. Figure 2
graphically illustrates the organization o f this dissertation.
10
Extant theory
(The structurational &
Socio-technical model
- Ch II & III A new theory development
(Dynamic Institutional
Theory -Ch IV, V, VI & VII)
Emergent data
(Case study - Ch IX)
Figure 2. Overview of Dissertation
II
Chapter II provides a background and overview of large-scale information systems and
existing views o f information systems by reviewing extant literatures. Also the implications o f
existing views for the design, implementation and use o f information systems are briefly
discussed. Chapter III introduces the theoretical basis o f this dissertation, which includes two
social theories - Giddens’ theory of structuration and actor network theory - followed by an
overview o f institutional theory in diverse academic disciplines and the application of such
theory in IS field.
The next four chapters discuss institutional perspectives on the design, implementation
and use of large-scale information systems. Specifically, Chapter IV provides a new way of
conceptualizing information systems as social institutions. Chapter V proposes a dynamic
model to understand the interplay between organizations and information technology. Chapter
VI stresses the significant roles o f existing information systems as both enabler and constraint
in the development o f a new information system and several implications are discussed.
Chapter VII proposes a dynamic institutional model for understanding technology adaptation
by viewing the process o f IT adaptation as a dynamic institutional process. The following two
chapters report a case study that was utilized to refine and further develop the theory. Chapter
VIII presents the research methodology and case design and Chapter IX offers the overview of
case study and the case analysis. Finally Chapter X summarizes the results and discusses
several topics for future research.
12
CHAPTER II
OVERVIEW OF LARGE-SCALE INFORMATION SYSTEMS
2.1 Introduction
The purpose o f this chapter is threefold. First, it reviews the literature on large-scale
information systems. This review demonstrates the differences between large-scale IS and
traditional, small-scale IS and communication technologies with respect to complexity,
institutional arrangements, cost and consequences. Second, it explores some existing ways of
conceptualizing information systems in order to see their suitability for the conceptualization of
large-scale information systems. This second section points out the limitations with popular
ways o f conceptualizing information systems primarily in terms of technology only and
suggests the need o f a more broad view for large-scale information systems. The final section
identifies two potential models for the need, which have their theoretical basis in two powerful
social theories, Giddens’ theory o f structuration (1979, 1984) and actor network theory (Latour
1987; Akrich 1992; Akrich and Latour 1992; Callon 1991) and furthermore the limitations with
the two models to study the design, implementation, and use o f large-scale information systems
are discussed as well. As a result, chapter II leads to the need of developing a new theoretical
framework for studying large-scale information systems that is further elaborated in the
following chapter.
2.2 Overview of Large-Scale Information Systems
Despite the popularity and the interest surrounding large-scale IS in industry, there
remain many questions regarding what they are, how they can be implemented and managed,
and how they come to be used. Considering the size and the impacts o f these systems on
individuals, organizations and society (Perrow 1999, Churchman 1982), it is imperative to
establish a theoretical framework to understand several new aspects o f large-scale IS.
13
In the literature large-scale IS are variously referred to as enterprise systems
(Davenport 1998), global IT infrastructure or information technology (Ives and Jarvenpaa
1991; Ives, Jarvenpaa and Mason 1993), horizontal information systems (Braa and Rolland
2000), and infrastructure (e.g., Star and Ruhleder 1996; Hanseth and Monteiro 1997). Among
IS researchers there is general acceptance that large-scale IS differ from traditional or
standalone IS with respect to its complexity, size, design, cost, purpose, etc (e.g.. Star and
Ruhleder 1996; Hanseth and Monteiro 1997; Markus 2000).
Markus (2000) claims that large-scale IS such as ERP systems are like an
“infrastructure” which is analogous to a city's roads and bridges. Similarly, Rolland (2000)
contends that large-scale IS deployed in an organizational setting should be characterized as
"infrastructures” rather than “tools”, because their deployment is often constrained by an
installed base. According to Star and Ruhleder (1996) infrastructure or a large-scale IS is
“sunk” into, inside of, other structures, social arrangements and technologies and does not
grow de novo. Enterprise systems often become hard to modify due to their complexity and
size (Davenport 1998). Horizontal ISs are different from traditional IS in how they handle
typical support for different communities in the organization or between organizations (Braa
and Rolland 2000; Hanseth and Braa 1998).
The design and implementation of large-scale ISs require huge resources and involve
both organizational and technical risk (e.g., Markus 1999; Robey, Ross and Bourdeau 2002).
For example, it is common for organizations to spend over $100 million to implement an ERP
system and the implementation costs are considerably higher for large-scale IS like ERP than
for traditional IS (e.g.. Glass, 1998; Robey et al., 2002). Further, large-scale IS imply that work
practices as well as different technologies become increasingly interconnected and integrated,
and accordingly, these systems become more vulnerable to unintended side-effects (Braa and
14
Rolland, 2000). Failure in one system often has catastrophic spillover effects (Markus 2000).
Markus (1999) illustrates this point:
The differences in scope and risk between traditional IS (e.g., a small financial
software package) and large-scale IS (e.g., Microsoft Corp’s SAP) are vast. Both
systems turn out to be challenging for both technical and organizational reasons. While
the risks associated with traditional IS are relatively minor, the implementation of
large-scale IS involves massive business and organizational risks. Today’s information
systems are often integrated much more tightly with many other systems, increasing
the chances that failure in one system will have catastrophic spillover effects. For
example, Microsoft’s SAP project involved not only enterprise software, but also
internetworking technology, data warehousing, and end-user computing tools
In a recent study, Star and Ruhleder (1996) view large-scale information systems as
information infrastructure by putting emphasis on the social relations constituting
infrastructures. They characterize information infrastructure in terms of several dimensions
(Table 1).
Table 1. Key Characteristics o f Large-Scale IS (Adapted from Star and Ruhler 1996)______
• Embdeddedness. Infrastructure is “sunk” into, inside of, other structures, social
arrangements and technologies.
• Built on an installed base. Infrastructure does not grow de novo; it wrestles with the
“inertia o f the installed base" and inherits strengths and limitations from that base.
Optical fibers run along old railroad lines; new systems are designed for backward
compatibility; and failing to account for these constraints may be fatal or distorting
to new development processes.
• Is fixed in modular increments, not all at once or globally. Because infrastructure is
big, layered, and complex, and because it means different things locally, it is never
changed from above. Changes take time and negotiation, and adjustment with other
______ aspects o f the systems involved.____________________________________________
These complicated, interconnected information systems “tend to grow gradually, accreting
layers of code on top of old code and new modules designed to enhance performance and fix
15
problems ... are tightly coupled and subject to nonlinear interactions mediated by commonly
used modules or functions” (Poole 1999).
The purpose for implementing large-scale information systems differs from that of
small scale or standalone IS. For example, ERP represents a class o f software that integrates an
organization’s diverse business (unctions into one system using a single, centralized database
(Hirt and Swanson 1999). While small scale ISs are designed to support individual groups or
functions and traditional IS like GDSS are for coordination o f relatively small groups of
people, the goals o f large-scale ISs are to acquire real-time data access, seamless organization-
wide integration, efficiency, and control (Hanseth and Braa. 2001; Galliers, Newell, Huang and
Pan 2002), all of which are claimed to offer significant cost savings and productivity for
organizations. The role o f large-scale ISs are to support and enable the coordination of
activities across broad expanses time and space and to support the development and use of
various forms offormalized information (Hanseth and Braa 2000, p. 52). Large-scale IS tend to
be packaged software, and the implementation and maintenance o f these packages differ from
those o f traditional information systems. Implementation o f these systems poses difficult
technological and organizational challenges. A typical ERP, for example, contains 8,000 to
10,000 configuration tables and 800 to 1,000 business processes (Alvarez 2002). Maintaining
ERP is likely to be more complex than that o f traditional systems due to the additional
technical and organizational complexity arising from the enterprise-wide integration and the
new roles now played by vendors and often third parties (Hirt and Swanson 1999).
However, despite the popularity and complexity o f large-scale IS, there is a lack of a
theoretical framework to understand and explain them. In the following section I offer an
overview o f existing ways o f conceptualizing information systems. This overview will be used
as a guide to investigate large-scale information systems.
16
2J Existing Dominant Views of Information Systems
In recent years, several views o f information systems which rely on different
philosophical underpinnings of organizations and the world have been introduced. A recent
study by Orlikowski and Iacono (2001) o f the full set o f articles published in Information
Systems Research over the past ten years identified five existing views o f information systems:
the tool view, the proxy view, the computational view, the nominal view, and the ensemble
view. The first four views o f information systems tend to share some commonalities and have
been dominant in the IS field. Below the four views are discussed
The tool view represents the “common, received wisdom about what information
systems are and mean” (p. 123). According to this view, an information system is an
engineered artifact, expected to do what its designers intend it to do. What information systems
are and how they work are seen to be largely technical matters. Such a view conceives o f
information systems independently of the social or organizational arrangements within which
they are developed and used and thus they are presumed stable, definable, unchanging and
easily transferable.
The proxy view focuses on “one or a few key elements in common that are understood
to represent or stand for the essential aspect, property, or value” (p. 124) o f the information
system. Such a view assumes that the critical aspects o f information systems can be captured
through some set o f quantitative measures such as people’s perceptions, diffusion rates, or
dollars spent. Information systems are often treated as either an independent or a dependent
variable.
The computational view has as its main focus the information-processing capabilities
of information systems. Similar to the tool view, information systems are treated as technical
artifacts, not taking into account the social and organizational aspects o f information systems.
17
A large number o f studies - 25 percent o f all the articles published in a decade o f Information
Systems Research (ISR) - take the nominal view which does not provide any explicit view of
information systems.
The above four views are dominant in the IS field and account for 88 percent of all the
articles published in ISR. They have in common that they take the technical artifact of
information systems seriously and an information system is treated as either a "software
package” or an “appliance” which can be plugged into any place and any time. These four
views may be labeled as what Kling (1987, 1994) called “discrete-entity” models, focusing on
explicit economic, physical, or information processing features o f information systems. The
social context in which the information system is designed, implemented, and used is largely
ignored in these views. While discrete-entity models offer the advantages of analytic simplicity
o f information systems, they provide little help in explaining many problems organizations
face in the design and implementation of information systems and also fail to explain the
impacts of information systems on individuals, organizations, and society (Kling 1987;
Walsham et al. 1988). From these views information systems are treated as value-neutral,
universal and fixed “black boxes” (Latour 1987).
Discrete-entity models (Table 2), which gain simplicity by ignoring the social context
of information systems (Kling and Scacchi 1982), may be able to explain the development and
use of standalone or traditional information systems. These tend to involve a small number of
key actors (human as well as nonhuman) and to be relatively easy to design and configure
compared to large-scale IS. However, these models offer little help in understanding today’s
large-scale ISs.
18
Table 2. Assumptions o f Discrete-entity Models___________________________________
1. A computing resource is best conceptualized as a particular piece o f equipment,

application, or technique which provides specifiable information processing
capabilities.
a. Each computing resource has costs and skill requirements which are largely
identifiable.
b. Computer-based technologies are tools, and socially neutral
2. Role o f infrastructure
a. The infrastructure for supporting the focal computing resource and the
organizational procedures by which it is organized and sustained are critical
elements
b. Each computer-based service is provided through a set o f structured
computing resources and organized infrastructure. Deploying, managing, and
setting procedures for these infrastructural resources is separable from
deployment o f the focal computer-based technology. Infrastructure, either
technical or administrative, is a neutral resource.
c. ‘Human factors’ must be taken into account to ensure that people are well
trained and motivated to do what is required. But, ‘human factors’ are
‘organizational problems' which are separable from ‘technical problems’.
3. Control over infrastructure: Organizations have ample resources to support all of their
computing developments and uses simultaneously. Elements o f infrastructure are
necessary for making the equipment or technique available to developers or users, and
they can be counted on to be o f adequate quality and available as necessary.
4. The focal computing resource and any element o f infrastructure can be analyzed
independent of:
a. Its interactions with other computing resources;
b. The social or organizational arrangements within which computer-based
services are developed and provided (infrastructure and macrostructures).
5. Social action:
a. Organizational behavior is best described by the formal goals, procedures, and
administrative arrangements o f the acting units.
b. The use of a computing resource is best described by its formal purposes and
features.
19
Based on this summary of the dominant views o f information systems, it seems clear
that the old but still popular view o f information systems primarily in terms o f technology have
several limitations for understanding large-scale information systems, since they lack the
ability to explain organizational, social, and political aspects o f IS. This suggests that we must
understand information systems from a broader perspective.
2.4 The Ensemble View
The ensemble view understands information systems within their social and
organizational contexts and focuses on dynamic interactions between action and technology. A
number o f researchers (e.g., Kling and Scacchi 1982; Hirschheim 1985; Walsham, Symon and
Waema 1988; Newman and Robey 1992; Davis, Lee, Nickles, Chatteijee, Hartung and Wu
1992; Hirschheim and Klein 1994: Myers 1994; Hirschheim, Klein and Lyytinen 1996; Lee
1999) have taken this view by conceptualizing an information system as a social system
(Hirschheim 1985; Walsham et al. 1988), an instantiation o f information technology (Lee
1999), and a “web o f computing” (Kling and Scacchi 1992). From the ensemble view
information systems development (ISD), equally, is a social process (Hirschheim 1985;
Walsham et al. 1988; Hirschheim et al. 1991; Robey and Newman 1996) which “consists of
coordinated sequences o f human actions” (Hirschheim, Klein and Lyytinen. 1991, p. 589) and
involves the use of information technology as part o f that process (Walsham et al. 1988, p.
191).
Hirschheim (1985) considers that “information systems are not technical systems
which have behavioral and social consequences, but are social systems which rely to an
increasing extent on information technology for their function.” Lee (1999) notes that “an
information system is an instantiation of information technology, where the same information
technology can be instantiated in different ways ... There are the rich organizational and
20
political processes whereby a given set o f information technology is instantiated and there are
the rich organizational and political processes pertaining to the continual managing,
maintaining, and changing o f the information technology so as to sustain the instantiation" (p.
7). As social systems or instantiations o f information technology, an analysis which treats them
as distinct from their infrastructure and context loses correspondingly in richness of
understanding (Walsham et al. 1988).
Within this view, there are two streams o f research in the IS field: one focuses on how
new information systems come to be and the other how new information systems come to be
used. The first stream of research focuses primarily on the ways in which information systems
come to be developed (with secondary emphasis on use) and the other on how information
systems come to be used in certain ways (with secondary emphasis on development)
(Orlikowski and lacono 2001). We label these two streams of research as the socio-technical
approach and the structurational model o f information systems respectively. While their
primary emphases are different, both the socio-technical approach (e.g., Latour, 1987, Akrich,
1992; Walsham and Sahay, 1999) and the structurational model (e.g., Barley 1986; Orlikowski
1992, 1996; DeSanctis and Poole 1994; Majchrzak et al. 2000) seem to share the following
premises regarding information systems which are offered by Orlikowski and lacono (2001).
1. “Information systems, by definition, are not natural, neutral, universal, or given. They
are shaped by the interests, values, and assumptions of a wide variety o f communities
of developers, investors, and users. This requires a shift o f attention from taking
information systemsfor granted towards explicit theorizing about specific information
systems with distinctive cultural and computational capabilities, existing in various
social, historical, and institutional contexts, understood in particular ways, and used for
certain activities
21
2. Information systems are always embedded in some time, place, discourse, and
community. Their materiality is bound up with the historical and cultural aspects of
their ongoing development and use, and these conditions, both material and cultural,
cannot be ignored, abstracted, or assumed ways. This requires that the detailed
practices o f their use be recognized and integrated into extant theories
3. Information systems are usually made up o f a multiplicity of often fragile and
fragmentary components, whose interconnections are often partial and provisional and
which require bridging, integration, and articulation in order for them to work together.
- This requires IS researchers to conceptualize and explain information systems as
multiple, fragmented, partial, and provisional
4. Information systems are neither fixed nor independent, but they emerge from ongoing
social and economic practices. As human interventions, artifacts undergo various
transitions over time (from idea to development to use to modification), while co
existing and co-evolving with multiple generations o f the same or new technologies at
various points in time.
5. Information systems are not static or unchanging, but dynamic. Even after a
technological artifact appears to be fixed and complete, its stability is conditional
because new materials are invented, different features are developed, existing functions
fail and are corrected, new standards are set, and users adapt information systems for
new and different uses. - This requires IS researchers to understand the emergence and
evolution of information systems as complex and changing sociotechnical processes
existing in time and over time” (p. 131).
22
These two streams o f research within the ensemble view o f information systems have
in common that they are related with what Kling (1994) describes as the genre o f “social
theory.” Kling examined five genres about computerization: technological utopianism,
technological antiutopianism, social realism, and social theory, and analytical reduction.
Researchers in the “social theory” genre develop or test concepts and theories that transcend
specific situations. For example, researchers in the socio-technical approach seem to heavily
rely on Latour’s (1987) actor network theory that is bom out o f the interdisciplinary field o f
science and technology studies (STS) (e.g., Bijker. Hughes and Pinch 1987: Bijker and Law
1992; Akrich 1992: Akrich and Latour 1992). On the other hand, the structurational model
relies on Anthony Giddens’s structuration theory (1979, 1984).
2.4.1 The Structurational Model and IS Research
Giddens' structuration theory may be seen as an attempt to resolve a fundamental
division within the social sciences between those who consider social phenomena as products
o f human action in the subjective side (e.g., hermeneutics, phenomenology), and others who
see them as caused by the influence o f objective social structures (e.g., structuralists). The
theory seeks to show how the knowledge agent's action discursively and recursively forms the
sets o f rules and routines which constitutes his or her conception o f structure or institution.
Thus, the main principles o f the theory set out: social practice constituted by the recursive
interaction o f structure and agency replicating and changing over time and space. People
through their actions reproduce and create structures that shape them. Structuration theory
emphasizes that social structures do not exist independently of human action.
Giddens identifies three dimensions o f structure (for the purpose o f analysis), which
are described as signification, domination, and legitimation (Figure 3). Structure of
signification refers to rules o f what make up meaning, domination asymmetries o f resources
23
people draw on to exercise power and legitimation norms and rules people draw on in
justifying their and other people's action. These are seen as interacting through modalities o f
interpretative scheme, facility, and norm respectively. Interpretative schemes are “the modes of
typification incorporated within actors’ stocks o f knowledge, applied reflexively in the
sustaining o f communication” (p. 29). The facility represents resources and is enacted as power
in interaction. The facility produces and reproduces social structures o f domination. Norms
communicate a set o f values and ideals about what is approved and what is disapproved. They
produce and reproduce structures o f legitimation.
Structure , Signification < t D omination <............................J Legitimation
Interpretative
(Modality Facility Norm
Schem e
Interaction Communication i Pow er Sanction
Figure 3. Giddens’s Duality o f Structure (1984)
24
Even though Giddens's structuration theory does not explicitly discuss information
technology, many IS researchers (e.g.. Orlikowski and Robey 1991; Orlikowski 1992;
Walsham 1993; DeSanctis and Poole 1994) have made reference to structuration in their work
(Jones 1997). Barley (1986), from a structurational perspective, describes how the same
technology led to quite different social organizations in the two nominally similar
environments. Barley (1990) extended his earlier study to examines how technologies change
organizational and occupational structures by transforming patterns o f action and interaction
and argued that a technology’s material attributes have an immediate impact on social
organizations (roles and social networks) which mediate a technology’s structural effects.
Orlikowski (1992) proposes a structural model o f technology, built on structuration theory,
which attempts to overcome both technological determinism and social determinism. From this
model, technology is interpretively flexible so that technology creates and change and also is
created and changed by human action. Her case study (1992) provides an excellent glimpse
into the history o f the use o f CASE tools in a software consulting organization and illustrates
how the information system is constructed and reshaped by human agents in use. In this vein,
DeSanctis and Poole (1994) develop adaptive structuration theory, which explains the process
by which information systems (e.g., group decision support systems) are adapted as consisting
structures, appropriations, and decision outcomes. Orlikowski (2000) propose another
structurational perspective on examining how people enact structures that shape their emergent
and situated use of that technology. In addition to these studies from the structurational model
other researchers (Tyre and Orlikowski 1994; Karsten 1995; Montealegre 1997; Rice and
Gattiker 1999) have investigated the implementation and use o f information systems. In
common they are interested in how technologies are structured by users and other human
25
agents in the context o f use - on the way in which information systems come to be used in
certain ways (with secondary emphasis on development).
2.4.2 The Socio-Technical Approach
The most popular theory adopted by IS researchers in the socio-technical approach is
actor network they (ANT). The theory sees the world full o f hybrid entities containing both
human beings and nonhuman actors such as technological artifacts. ANT has the important
assumption of “general symmetry” between the technical and social ones. Agency in actor
network theory is not confined to just humans but to artifacts with human purposes built in.
Thus, the theory offers the notion o f heterogeneity to describe a collection o f different human
and non-human entities.
There are several key concepts in ANT. First the notion o f inscription (Akrich 1992;
Akrich and Latour 1992) refers to the way technical artifacts embody certain patterns o f use.
Akrich (1992) explains the notion o f inscription in the following way:
Designers thus define actors with specific tastes, competences, motives, aspirations,
political prejudices, and the rest, and they assume that morality, technology, science,
and economy will evolve in particular ways. A large part of the work o f innovators is
that of “inscribing" this version o f (or prediction about) the world in the technical
content o f the new object (p. 208).
However, the inscribed patterns of use do not always succeed because of de-scription which
reinvents and reshapes technical artifacts in use (Akrich 1992). The notion o f translation
(Callon 1986. 1991) refers to the creation o f an actor network. This process consists o f three
major stages: problematization, interessement, and enrolment. From ANT, technology design is
translation which creates technical artifacts that would ensure the protection o f certain interests
(Latour 1992). Cation's (1991) notion of irreversibilization refers to the degree of
irreversibility of a translation which depends on two things:
26
1. The extent to which it is subsequently impossible to go back to a point where that
translation was only one amongst others; and
2. The extent to which it shapes and determines subsequent translations.
In contrast to many social theories, actor-network theory is both a theory and
methodology combined. Thus, it not only provides theoretical concepts as ways o f viewing
elements in the real world, it also suggests that it is exactly these elements, which need to be
traced in empirical work (Walsham 1997).
Actor network theory has been adopted by many IS researchers to explain how
information systems come to be (with secondary emphasis on their use). The reason for this is
that the theory is somewhat similar to the alignment approach: while the latter focuses upon the
results o f alignments between social and technical aspects, the actor network approach focuses
on the practical constructions of these alignments (Grint and Woolgar 1997). The theory takes
the work o f classification and standardization very seriously (Bowker and Star 1996).
Therefore, studies in IS field use the theory to explain the process o f constructing
technology standards, the diffusion o f different technologies, and the formation of information
systems. For example, Hanseth and Monteiro (1997), using ANT, examined the processes of
the standards are being developed and the way these standards “inscribe” behavior. Also
Bloomfield, Coombs, Cooper and Rea (1992) and Bloomfield (1995) take ANT approach to
explain how a hospital information system in the UK comes to be created. Monteiro (2000)
extends the ANT analysis o f the complex negotiation processes (translation, inscription, and
irreversibility) that surround the development o f a corporate infrastructure. From the ANT
perspective, information systems are seen as “heterogeneous combinations o f artifacts (the
hardware and software), inscriptions (including representations o f organizational phenomena).
27
and expectations about groups o f users—all o f these being political in nature" (Bloomfield et
al. 1997, p. 116).
In what follows Chapter III discusses a number of limitations with these social models
of IS for understanding the design, implementation, and use o f large-scale information systems
simultaneously. A new theoretical basis drawn upon the tenets of institutional theory is
proposed as a way forward by preserving those insights gained from the two social models.
28
CHAPTER HI
DYNAMIC INSTITUTIONAL THEORY AS A WAY FORWARD
3.1 Critique of the Socio-Technical Approach and the Structurational Model
Both the structurational model and the socio-technical approaches have greatly
enriched our understanding o f information systems. However, several IS researchers have
suggested that each o f the models alone may not be able to adequately explain both how
information systems come to be and how they come to used. Thus some suggest combining the
two approaches for IS research (See Monteiro and Hanseth 1995; Monteiro 2000; Walsham
1997). To understand the grounds for this argument, we must first consider criticisms that
have been registered against the two- approaches. The general criticisms that have been
advanced against the structuration model can be summarized as follows: First, some critics
charge that structuration theory accords too much leeway to action and does not take constraint
and channeling into account (Archer 1995; Clegg 1989, p. 138-148). This criticism has also
been advanced by researchers in the socio-technical approach, more specifically those adopting
ANT. For example, Monteiro and Hanseth (1995) argue that the structurational model takes a
subjectivist stance, as though it assumed that an IS can be interpreted and appropriated
relatively freely; this neglects the constraining effects the IS have on the social process of
interpretation and use. Therefore the structurational model suggests that IT enables/constrains
action but it is ambiguous on how and where IT restricts and enables action.
Secondly, there are few tools for considering broader environment or institutions in
structuration theory. In this line, Walsham (1997) noted that:
Giddens's work, from the perspectives o f an IS researcher, is that it offers little in the
way o f methodological guidelines (p. 473 ).3
3 In fact, this is equally true o f the study o f action.
29
This makes it difficult for IS researchers to answer some important questions such as why one
system is successful while another is not.
Thirdly. Giddens himself has written very little that could be seen as directly
discussing IT (Jones 1999), and thus the material world o f technology is not treated in any
depth (Walsham 1997). With few exceptions (e.g., DeSanctis and Poole 1994), most
structurational accounts fail to pay due attention to the specifics o f IT and are lacking in
describing, with a satisfactory level o f precision, how specific elements and functions o f an IS
relate to organizational changes (Monteiro and Hanseth 1995; Monteiro 2000). This may be the
reason the structurational model focuses primarily on how information systems come to be
used while it largely ignores how they come to he developed.
The socio-technical approach has also been criticized on several grounds.. A major
strand of criticism o f ANT is that it addresses the local and contingent, but that it pays little
attention to broader social structures which influence the local (Walsham 1997). ANT cannot
properly deal how institutions shape actions at the same time as the very same actions shape
the institutions (Monteiro and Hanseth, 1995). We believe that this makes it difficult for ANT
to explain “technology or information infrastructure in use” and also how pre-existing
institutions constrain the construction o f a new technology or actor network (Kleinman 1998).
On the other hand, ANT is excellent for explaining how and why the information system
comes to he developed - the construction of the alignments. Also it has been argued that the
ANT approach seems to overlook the possibility that the benefits o f relations in the network
may be asymmetrical. In the ANT approach, “translation implies a kind of ultimate
compatibility of interests in which benefits of alliance are mutual ...[and] ignores the
possibility that enrolled actors may benefit less than the enrollers" (Kleinman 1998, p. 289).
30
Monteiro and Hanseth (1995) believe that in order to explain the constitution and
structuration o f information technology in an organization, both structuration and ANT theories
need to be complementary each other. Similarly, Walsham (1997) suggests that “one approach
for IS researchers is to combine the methodological approach and conceptual ideas o f actor-
network theory with insights and analyses drawn from theories o f social structure” (p. 473).
They suggest that a combination o f the work in the structurational model with the methodology
and concepts o f ANT would offer more than either one even though there is no clear guideline
for doing that. One effort (Jones 1999) proposes the “double mangle” model as a way of
combining insights from the two influential theoretical approaches in the IS field.
While we agree with these authors’ suggestions that the two approaches could be
complementary and also believe that a combination o f the two may offer more than either
alone, present analyses give few clear guidelines for merging the perspectives which may
embody conflicting epistemologies (Jones 1997; Rose and Truex 2000). We believe that an
adequate approach requires more than the simple combination o f two somewhat disparate
views, because they are both lacking in one key respect. Since both structuration theory (and
the structurational model) and ANT (and the socio-technical model) are weak in terms of the
role of institutions an integrative approach should incorporate tenets o f institutional theory as
well.
3.2 Overview of Institutional Theory
Institutional theory is one o f the more robust sociological perspectives within
organizational theory (Perrow 1986). Institutional theory goes back to an older tradition of
political economy associated with Thorstein Veblen and John Commons and to the efforts of
sociologists like Emile Durkheim and Mention Selznick (DiMaggio and Powell 1991). The
theory had a revival in organizational studies during the mid-1970s (Meyer and Rowan 1977)
31
and has enjoyed a good deal o f popularity within sociology (e.g.. DiMaggio and Powell 1983;
Zucker 1988; Powell and DiMaggio 1991) and political science (e.g., March and Olsen 1984;
Goodin 1996) over the past two decades (Scott 1995a). There are “institutional turns" in
different academic areas (Jessop, 2001).
Institutional theory is a very diverse school o f thought across several disciplines. Each
academic discipline focuses on different institutions (Goodin 1996) such as political,
economical, and regulative institutions, and adopts somewhat different approaches as a result.
In his earlier review article, Scott (1987) suggested that institutional theory was at the stage of
adolescence because there was a lack o f consensus on key concepts and substantial variation
among approaches. In their review o f the state o f institutional theory, DiMaggio and Powell
(1991, p. 13) distinguished between the old and the new institutionalism. In the old
institutionalism, issues o f influence, coalitions, and competing values were central, along with
power and informal structures (Selznick, 1957). This focus contrasts with the new
institutionalism with its emphasis on legitimacy, the embeddedness o f organizational fields,
and the centrality o f classifications, routines, scripts, and schema (DiMaggio and Powell 1983;
Meyer and Rowan 1977).
Hall and Taylor (1996) provide a typology o f three new institutionalisms in political
science: historical institutionalism, rational choice institutionalism, and sociological
institutionalism. Peter’s (1998) book distinguishes among seven different approaches to
institutions in political science - normative, rational choice, historical, empirical, international,
sociological, and mediational institutionalism -. DiMaggio (1998) distinguishes three new
institutionalisms: rational-action, social-constructivist, and mediated-conflict
neoinstitutionalism.
32
Revising his opinion from 1987 Scott (1995, 2001) noted that institutional theory had
made considerable progress and the areas in which there was agreement among different
approaches were growing. He provides the most comprehensive review o f institutional theory
in diverse academic disciplines through discussing what he called “three pillars” o f institutional
theory - its cognitive, normative, and regulative aspects. Scott (1995a) argues that there are
three dimensions to all institutions: regulative (legally sanctioned, coercive), normative
(morally right and governed), and cognitive (culturally supported belief systems, mimetic) and
that “institutions consist of cognitive, normative, and regulative structures and activities that
provide stability and meaning to social behavior” (p. 33). These distinctions parallel Giddens’s
(1984) three modalities of structuration.
It should be noted that institutional themes in a variety o f disciplinary contexts are
essentially and importantly complementary (Goodin 1996). For example, Hirsch and
Lounsbury (1997) advocate a reconciliation between these theoretical currents that would
provide a more balanced approach to the interplay between institution and human action. The
three pillars in institutional theory are not independent but interdependent and can contribute to
a powerful social framework (Scott 1994; Hoffman 1999; Hirsch 1997). In this line, Powell
(1998) noted.
Each o f the neoinstitutionalisms has its place, and there are some analytic tasks for
which each is self-sufficiently well-suited. The most productive forms of cross-
pollination, I suspect, are those that flow from common attempts to address significant
problems of explanation that prove intractable from any single perspective (p. 703).
This dissertation adopts these authors' suggestion when developing a meta-framework for IS
research through reviewing various approaches in diverse disciplinary contexts rather than
taking an approach from one particular discipline.
33
In order to integrate different views o f institutions, we will take a dynamic view of
institution and institutionalization. But, first we need to consider prevailing understandings of
institutions and institutionalization. One notable tendency in the literature is to see institutions
in terms o f stability and inertia as central defining characteristics. For example, consider the
following definitions and statements:
• Institutions are social structures that have attained a high degree o f resilence ...
provide stability and meaning to social life ... by definition connote stability (Scott
2001)
• Institutions are humanly devised constraints that structure political, economic and
social interaction (North 1990, p. 97)
• Institutions represent a social order or pattern that has attained a certain state and
property (Jepperson 1991, p. 145)
• Institutionalization (Institutions) constrains in two ways: by bringing it within a

normative order, and by making it hostage to its own history (Selznick 1992, p. 232)
• Institutions are formal constraints, such as patent laws, formal criteria for allocating
resources to science, peer review procedures, technical standards and norms, etc. and
informal constraints, such as norms of behavior, conventions, codes o f conduct, etc
(Galli and Teubal 1997, p. 345-346)
• Institutions tend to be transmitted across generations, to be maintained and reproduced

(Zucker 1977)
• Institutions by definition are the more enduring features o f social life ... giving
‘solidity’ across time and space (Giddens 1984, p. 24)
In these statements the concept o f institution connotes stability and persistence (Scott
1995). Institutional theorists stress the stability of organizational arrangements and the
characteristics o f inertia rather than change (Tolbert 1985; Tolbert and Zucker 1983).
Jepperson (1991) insisted that the hallmark o f an institution is its capacity for automatic
maintenance, for self-restoration. This stability of an institution will increase with its
connectedness to other institutions (Zucker 1988). This stability or inertia tends to increase
34
over time, what is called ‘institutionalization’ (Tolbert and Zucker 1996). Thus, existing
institutions are seen to constrain the range of institutional alternatives from which actors
choose thereby limiting the extent to which new institutions differ from old ones and mitigating
against more radical and abrupt institutional change. This prevalent view ignores the fact that
institutions are changing and also socially constructed entities (Scott 2001). Structuration
theory, for example, argues that institutions exist due to their production and reproduction in
day to day activity (Giddens 1984; Barley and Tolbert 1997). There is a need to recognize the
potential for change in this social construction (Scott 2001). Therefore, this dissertation
proposes dynamic institutional theory (DIT) as a meta-framework to understand information
systems as social institutions, which can keep the insights gained from the two social models
presented and further provide new insights to large-scale IS. In developing DIT, this
dissertation will focus on several dualities-as duality within institution (e.g., Sewell 1992;
Dryzek 1996; Offe 1996; North 1990), duality o f schemas and resources (Sewell 1992; Jessop
2001; Sabel and Zeitlin 1997; Emirbayer and Mische 1998), duality o f institutions (Mouzelis
1995; Jessop 2001), and duality o f preexisting institutions (Archer 1995; Barley and Tolbert
1997)-as key nexuses o f social organization that shape the creation and implementation of IT.
In addition it will consider the nature o f agency within institutions and the variety o f ways in
which institutions constrain and enable action as regulative, normative and cognitive regimes.
The object is to develop a framework for understanding large-scale IT that addresses each of
the four goals introduced on Ch 1. The best way to lay a foundation for these developments is
to present an overview o f IS research having adopted institutional theory is presented.
3.3 IS Research and Institution Theory
Institutional theory is relatively new in information systems research. In the 1980’s
there were only few studies focusing on the development, use, and management o f information
35
systems from an institutional perspective. Kling (1980) criticized a rationalistic approach to
information systems and instead advocated a different approach what he called “segmented-
institutionalist analyses” to understand information systems in the workplace. Laudon (1985)
proposed an institutional model of system development. Through empirical study of a national
computerized criminal history system he suggested that institutional factors play important
roles in the adoption, utilization, and management o f computer systems.
Recently, a number o f studies have adopted an institutional lens to explain technology
innovation, system development, interorganizational information systems (IOS)
implementation, IT diffusion, use, and other IT-related phenomena. With respect to the
diffusion and use of IT, King, Gurbazani, Kraemer, McFarlan, Raman, and Yap '1994) work
has been influential. Considering the role o f institutions as an essential component in any
theory o f technology innovation, they suggested the importance o f the institutional shift for
understanding the evolution o f information technology in production and in use. Several other
studies (e.g., Dholakia et al. 1992; Kling 1996) have adopted an institutional analysis of the
diffusion of information technologies, examining the role of culture and social/political
institutions in shaping the diffusion and use o f information technologies.
In the area o f IT innovation, Swanson and Ramiller (1997) introduce the concept of
“organizing vision" of IT innovation that is central to decisions and actions affecting IT
development and diffusion. The authors note that organizing vision represents the product of
the efforts of the members o f an interorganizational community, comprised o f a heterogeneous
network o f parties with a variety o f material interests in an IS innovation and its development
and influence is determined by various institutional forces. Recently the concept of “organizing
36
vision” has been applied to study IS innovation and diffusion by their colleagues and students
(e.g.. Firth 2001: Wang 2001). In a similar context, a growing number o f studies examine the
implementation process o f large-scale IS from an institutional perspective and show that
implementation cannot be viewed solely in instrumental terms. Alvarez (2002) investigates the
implementation o f an ERP system as a social process o f “mythmaking” (Tolbert 1988) in
institutional contexts.
Avgerou (2000) argues that IT innovation cannot be adequately explained as an
enabler o f organizational objectives (Hammer and Champy 1993) or as a contributor to situated
processes o f organizational change (Ciborra 1991, 1996). Instead, using institutional theory,
the author suggests that IT innovation is itself “a process combining technical-rational and
social forces, neither driving, nor subsumed in the forces of organization change, but
interacting with them” (p. 234).
Within the context o f system development, Nicolaoou (1999) adopts institutional
theory and uses the three mechanisms of institutional isomorphism (coercive, mimetic, and
normative) (DiMaggio and Powell, 1991) to examine the symbolic role o f social institutions in
exerting control over information system development decisions. The study demonstrates that
these institutional forces have a strong influence in the case o f system development decisions.
Christiaanse and Huigen (1997) analyzed the implementation o f inter-organizational systems
(IOS) by viewing it as a social and political process in which institutional factors can play an
important role. Taking an institutional perspective, Damsgaard and Lyytinen (1998, 2001) also
studied the creation o f electronic trading infrastructures. Purvis et al. (2001) examined the role
o f institutional forces in the assimilation o f information systems. They concluded that
organizational transformation using new information technology involves a dynamic interplay
37
amongst workers, work processes, work structures, tasks, and technologies—an interplay
embedded within multiple institutional contexts.
Most recently, Orlikowski and Barley (2001) note that the:
IS field’s practical interest in the development, use, and management o f information

systems may have diverted analysts to lower levels o f analysis and, hence, away from
studying how regulative processes, normative systems, and cultural frameworks shape
the design and use o f technical systems (p. 19).
They ask the IS community to pursue further study o f the design, use, and consequences of
technologies using institutional theory.
This dissertation is one response to their call, developing Dynamic Institutional Theory
as a framework for understanding large-scale information technologies. In the following four
chapters the four research objectives are presented sequentially and DIT for the four specific
areas of IS research is developed and presented with the relevant concepts. As a result of doing
this, the outcome is the development of a meta-theoretical framework to study the design.
implementation and use o f large-scale information systems.
Specifically, Chapter IV develops DIT for the reconceptualization o f information
systems as social institutions, offers a method to explain general IS phenomenon and finally
becomes the basis to study more specific topics o f IS research in the next three chapters. Based
on what is already established in Chapter IV, Chapter V investigates the relationship between
information systems and organization, Chpter VI IS design and the role o f preexisting
information on the development o f new ones, and chapter VII technology adaptation in the
case of large-scale IS. This was graphically illustrated in Figure 1 in Chapter I.
38
CHAPTER IV
RECONCEPTUALIZING INFORMATION SYSTEMS AS SOCIAL INSTITUTIONS
The goal o f Chapter IV is to discuss the limitations of existing views o f information
systems in IS literature for understanding large-scale IS and to propose an alternative way of
conceptualizing large-scale IS as social institutions. Since the extant views of information
systems have been introduced in Chapter II, in this chapter only a short overview of each
perspective is provided, and the focus is on their limitations for understanding large-scale IS.
Following this we propose a new conceptualization and discuss several implications for IS
research.
4.1 Prior Understandings of Information Systems
4.1.1 Discrete-entity Models
As described by Orlikowski and lacono (2001), the dominant views in IS literature -
the tool view, the proxy view, the computational view, and the nominal view - belong to what
Kling (1987) labeled “discrete-entity" models. These view the essence of information systems
to be technologies, even while focusing on explicit economic, physical, or information
processing features o f the technologies. These positions treat information technology as
separable from social and organizational contexts and thus as fixed, independent, natural,
neutral, universal, and static. This is a narrow, rationalistic view o f information systems (e.g.,
Hirschheim 1986; Lyytinen 1987). Despite their advantages o f analytic simplicity, these
positions fall short o f providing adequate explanations for many problems in the design,
implementation, and use o f large-scale IS (e.g., Walsham et al. 1988; Kling 1987; Orlikowski
and lacono 2001). Particularly, these models are not able to provide adequate explanations for
important issues and problems in the deployment o f large-scale IS that have been found and
discussed in empirical studies, including irreversibility and installed base (e.g., Rolland 2000;
39
Davenport 1998; Braa and Rolland, 2000; Markus, 2000; Star and Ruhleder 1996; Hanseth and
Monteiro 1998). This is because, as already noted in chapter II, they focus primarily on
technology that is regarded as independent, value-free, unitary and easy-to-change,
4.1.2 Ensemble Models
Over the years, a number of researchers dissatisfied with the discrete-entity models
have proposed different understandings of information systems, described by Orlikowski and
lacono (2001) as the ensemble view. These alternative views of information systems include
information systems as social systems (e.g.. Land and Hirschheim 1983; Walsham, Symons
and Waema 1988). information infrastructure (e.g.. Star and Ruhleder 1996: Braa 2000:
Hanseth and Monteiro 1998), and information systems as complex social objects (Klmg 1987).
Others use the term information technology rather than information systems and view
technology as embodied structure (Poole and DeSanctis 1990, 1992; DeSanctis and Poole
1994; Orlikowski 1992) and emergent structure (Orlikowski 2000). These ensemble views o f
“IT artifacts” seem to share several premises (Orlikowski and lacono 2001).
• IT artifacts, by definition, are not natural, neutral, universal, or given

• IT artifacts are always embedded in some time, place, discourse, and community
• IT artifacts are usually made up of a multiplicity o f often fragile and fragmentary
components
• IT artifacts are neither fixed nor independent, but they emerge from ongoing social and
economic practices
• IT artifacts are not static or unchanging, but dynamic
One important question is whether these extant ensemble views are suitable for conceptualizing
information systems; particularly large-scale ones, by considering both material and social
elements o f information systems.
4.1.2.1 IS as Social Systems
Land & Hirschheim (1983) define an information system as a social system, which
may or may not use information technology to support its operation. Hirschheim (1985)
40
considers that information systems are not technical systems which have behavioral and social
consequences, but are social systems which rely to an increasing extent on information
technology for their function. Similarly, Walsham et al. (1988) argued that computer-based
information systems should be conceptualized as social systems in which technology is only
one of the dimensions.
In contrast to discrete-entity models of information systems, this is a very broad view
o f information systems. This broader perspective on information systems offers opportunities
for a deeper understanding o f their development and use. Researchers within this school tend to
take the power-behavioral perspective that stresses the importance o f the political context of
the organization in influencing decision on computer adoption, the selection of technologies,
the development o f systems and the choice o f systems users (Walsham et al. 1988). Within this
view, as implied by Land and Hirschheim’s definition o f information systems, the
material/physical world (e.g., software, hardware, technological features) of information
systems is pushed into the background. Large-scale information systems such as ERP and
KMS bring with them the necessity to deal with large-scale social and organizational contexts
(e.g., installed bases such as existing culture and social arrangements) and complex, integrated
technologies. It implies that a social systems view is less able to account effectively for
infrastructural characteristics (e.g., embeddedness, installed base) of large-scale IS (Star and
Ruhleder 1996; Rolland 2000; Hanseth 1999). Also this view may suggest that large-scale IS
can be “designed” with purposively and that its design may be “controllable.” However,
empirical research shows that large-scale IS often “drift" (Ciborra and Hanseth 1999) and
appear to have a “life of their own" (Hanseth 1999). Since the work of such theorists
(Hirschheim 1985) this social view has not been further developed or studied by other
researchers and thus it may be less useful to explain emerging issues o f large-scale IS (e.g., IT
41
standards. ERP systems. EDIs) than recent empirical studies have found. For the same reason
this social view may be less effective in accounting for large-scale technology in use.
4.1.2.2 Technology as Structure
“Adaptive structuration theory” (Poole and DeSanctis 1990, 1992: DeSanctis and
Poole 1994) focuses on the structures (rules and resources) built into such technologies as
group decision support systems. They argue that the effects of a technology must be
understood through the processes by which systems (such as organizations or groups) are
produced and reproduced through members’ use o f rules and resources o f the technology. This
process is termed structuration (Giddens 1984). They noted, “technology presents an array of
social structures for possible use in interpersonal interaction, including rules and resources. ...
there are structures in technology” (p. 125). However this should not be read too literally. As
embodiment, these structures are potential but only actualized by appropriation; they are what
may be termed as “potential structure”. Thus AST is somewhere in between the material
position and Orlikowski’s (2000) virtual position. DeSanctis and Poole further claim that the
social structures provided by information technology can be described in two ways: the
structural features of the given technology and the spirit of this feature set. In the theory
“structural features are the specific types o f rules and resources” (p. 126) like public display
screens, voting procedures, alternative voting algorithms for making group choices, etc. Then
the theory brings in the notion o f spirit, defined as values and goals underlying a given set of
structural features that the technology aims to promote (such as democratic decision making).
Thus, AST suggests that technology is more than material elements.
By adopting Giddens’s duality o f structure, Orlikowski and Robey (1991) posit a
structurational model of interaction consisting of three elements: institutional properties,
information technology, and human actors. The model recognizes four key influences that
42
operate continuously and simultaneously in the interaction between technology and
organization: (1) information technology is the outcome o f human action, being developed and
used by humans: (2) information technology is also the means o f other human action, serving
to facilitate the accomplishment o f computer-mediated work or communication; (3)
information technology is built and used within particular social contexts; and (4) interaction
with information technology influences the social contexts within which it is built and used.
Orlikowski (1992) defined technology as “material artifacts (various configurations of
hardware and software)” which are “interpretively flexible” (Pinch and Bijker 1987),
constrained by the material characteristics of that technology and the institutional contexts and
different levels of knowledge and power affecting actors during the technology’s design and
use.
Later, Orlikowski (2000) changed her early position on technology as material artifacts
with embodied structure (Orlikowski 1992) to one that held that technological artifacts have
particular symbolic and material properties, not structure. This view of technology comes from
her own interpretation o f Giddens’s (1984) understanding o f structure, noted as “structure is a
virtual order o f transformative relations ... structure exists, as time-space presence, only in its
instantiations in such practices and as memory traces orienting the conduct o f knowledgeable
human agents” (p. 17).
Researchers within this structurational circle, adopting Giddens’s structuration theory,
use the term (information) technology rather than information systems and focus on
technology-in-use. Compared to the social systems view these structurational models seem to
suggest a relatively narrow view o f information systems by not distinguishing information
systems from information technology. These studies prefer the term “technology or
information technology” rather than information systems.
43
Their interest seems to be not in explaining what an information system is but in
understanding the role o f technology in organizational change and other processes as well, such
as how decisions are made and how work is done. In common, these structurational or
emergent models have been applied to small-scale information systems and coordination
technologies such as GDSS and groupware applications. Many studies (Monteiro and Hanseth
1995; Star and Ruhleder 1996; Hanseth and Monteiro 1997; Markus 2000; Davenport 1998) o f
large-scale IS suggest that they significantly differ from small scale ones and groupware
applications with respect to nature, design, malleability (Orlikowski 2000) as well as several
other dimensions relevant to structurational explanations, such as temporal scope, spatial
distribution, complexity, and anchoring to other structures. It is not certain whether extant
structurational models can be utilized to understand both material and social elements o f large-
scale information systems.
4.1.2.3 Web Models
Kling’s web models see information systems as “complex social objects” constrained
by their context, infrastructure and history (Kling and Scacchi 1982). Within this view,
computerized systems are treated as a form o f social organization with information processing,
social, and institutional properties: they are not only flexible information processing tools.
“Their shape, the way they are used, the leverage they provide, and the interests they serve
depend upon the interplay of stakeholders, resources, and social games within which they are
deployed” (Kling 1987, p. 309). The models focus on information systems in large institutional
contexts and they often do not articulate and explore that action under extensive descriptions of
the organizational constraints computing operates under. Kling and Iacono's later work (1989)
shows that large-scale information systems such as MRP have important institutional
dimensions which limit the abilities o f key actors to transform them rapidly. They can be
44
exceptionally difficult to replace. More recent studies (e.g., Rolland 2000; Braa and Rolland
2000; Hanseth and Braa 1998; Star and Ruhleder 1996) o f large-scale IS make a similar point.
Kling and lacono view institutions (information systems) as constraints (Walsham and
Han 1991) while viewing them from a macro-level. However, extant empirical studies,
particularly those employing structurational models of technology, offer duality o f structure:
structures are both constraints and enablers. Also studies o f large-scale IS suggest that the
installed base or ‘the social organization o f computing’ (Kling and lacono 1989) both constrain
and enable for the ways new IS are used (Rolland 2000) and new IS are developed (Star and
Ruhleder 1996). While emphasizing the stability and institutional inflexibility of large-scale IS,
this view cannot explain adequately the dynamics of such systems in practice or micro-level.
Large-scale IS may not be as static but more emergent than this view suggests. Any given IS
has interpretive flexibility (Orlikowski 1992; Weick 2001) and tends to drift when put to use
(Ciborra 2000).
4.1.2.4 IS as Information Infrastructure
Researchers (Hanseth and Monteiro 1997; Monteiro 1999; Hanseth and Braa 1998;
Hanseth, Monteiro and Hatling 1996) within this view argue that “over a long period, the focus
of IS work has changed from the development o f isolated information systems towards the
integration o f large numbers o f systems across organizational and geographical borders,
including the “development” o f the Internet, solutions for electronic commerce, EDI networks,
implementation o f ERP’s in large and distributed organizations, etc” (Hanseth 1999). They
argue that these large systems would better be conceptualized as information infrastructure, not
system (Hanseth 1999). This perspective is drawn from actor network theory (Callon and
Latour 1992: Akrich and Latour 1992; Callon 1991) and other approaches (Bijker et al 1987;
Law 1991; Bijker and Law 1992; Williams and Edge 1996; Hughes 1987) in science and
45
technology studies (STS). Using key concepts - an actor network, inscription, translation,
irreversibility, and black-boxing - o f actor network theory-they argue that:
(1) information infrastructure is an actor network which is an evolving shared, open,
and heterogeneous installed base
(2) technology inscribes designers' assumptions and it becomes an actor imposing its
inscribed program of action on its users
(3) design is translation: “Users' and others' interests may, according to typical ideal
models, be translated into specific 'needs’; the specific needs are further translated
into more general and unified needs, so that these needs can be translated into one
and the same solution. When the solution (system) is running, it will be adopted
by the users, who translated the system into the context o f their specific work
tasks and situations” (Monteiro 2000, p. 77)
(4) a key feature of information infrastructure is the difficulty of making changes:
information infrastructure has 'momentum’ (Hughes 1987) and may easily
become 'irreversible’ (Callon 1991) as it grows (Monteiro and Hanseth 1995).
Conceptualizing (large-scale) information systems as information infrastructure is a
significant advance from earlier views o f information systems because this conceptualization is
able to account for extant issues and problems found in empirical research on the development
and implementation of large-scale IS such as standards, ERP (Hanseth and Braa 2000:
Monteiro and Hepso 2000), CRM (Ciborra and Failla 2000), and KMS (Braa and Rolland
2000). However, this position has some limitations that result from its theoretical basis in actor
network theory. First, the theory cannot properly deal with institutions (Kleinman 1998)
because it focuses so strongly on actors' relations and processes of construction o f
technological artifacts: how they shape actions at the same time as the very same actions shape
46
the institutions (Monteiro and Hanseth 1995). Second, this view cannot account properly for
the openness o f large-scale IS. The theory suggests that an actor-network (or IS) becomes
irreversible when it grows due to numbers o f and relations between the actors, organizations
and institutions involved (Callon 1993; Monteiro 2001; Hanseth and Monteiro 1998).
However, we have seen that existing technologies or IT standards are often changing and new
ones are developed (e.g.. Hard and Jamison 1997; Hanseth, Monteiro and Hatling 1996) and in
technology development diversions and even returns to prior states often occur (Chrisman
2002). Third, as in earlier views of information systems the installed base is seen as constraints
on the modification o f existing IS and the development o f new information systems However,
the installed base or pre-structures always enable and constrain future action (Poole 1983)
rhis review suggests that there are various ways o f conceptualizing information
systems: Some views put overemphasis on one pole - technology - of information systems and
others emphasize the other pole - social and organizational dimensions. Certainly even though
all o f these viewpoints have merits, none o f them appears to be a strong theoretical framework
for understanding the phenomenon o f large-scale IS. To respond, the following section
proposes a new way o f conceptualizing information systems as dynamic social institutions
which emphasize in a more balanced manner the two poles of large-scale systems.
4.2 Information Systems as Social Institutions: Dynamic Institutional Theory
This research proposes an alternative conceptualization o f information systems as
dynamic social institutions which extends and complements extant ensemble views. This
conceptualization distinguishes information systems and information technology by viewing
information systems as a broader term and situating it as the “subject matter o f IS research.” In
this conceptualization, information systems are understood as both material (or actual) and
47
cultural (or virtual), not as one or the other: information systems imply both stability and
change: they both constrain and enable human action.
4.2.1 Dynamic Institutional Theory
Institutional theory itself is very diverse and there are various approaches to the
definition o f institutions. Dynamic institutional theory (DIT) draws on extant studies in
institutional theory. The central concepts of DIT, duality within information systems and
duality of schemas and IT artifacts provide a dynamic picture o f information systems that are
both actual and virtual and encompass inherently both stability and change. This way of
conceptualizing information systems is consistent with many findings from recent empirical IS
studies (e.g., Orlikowski 1992; DeSanctis and Poole 1994; Hanseth and Monteiro 1998;
Ciborra 2000), resolves many contradictory consequences o f information technology (e.g.,
Robey and Boudreau 1999), and offers several new insights and avenues for future research.
4.2.1.1 Duality within Institutions
DIT's understanding o f institutions is based on the work o f such writers as Sewell
(1992). Dryzek (1996), Offe (1996), and North (1990), among others, who discern both actual
and virtual aspects o f institutions and equally emphasize both dimensions o f institutions. We
call this aspect of institution as “duality within institutions”. These theoretical reformulations
have generated an increasingly rich appreciation o f the conditions, mechanisms, and processes
that account for durability and change in institutions (Clemens and Cook 1999).
Political scientist John Dryzek (1996) argues that there are two dimensions in
institutions: discourses, which he terms “institutional software," and more formal aspects of
organizational structure, which he terms “institutional hardware”. As he notes (p. 103) “a
discourse is a framework for apprehending the world embedded in language, enabling its
adherents to put together diverse bits of sensory information into coherent wholes. These
48
adherents therefore share assumptions and capabilities, which they will typically take for
granted, often unaware even o f the possibility o f alternatives to them”. Thus discourses may be
treated as institutional software while institutional hardware exists in the form of rules, rights,
operating procedures, customs, and principles. He notes,
If, as Robert Goodin (1996) suggests, institutions are metabehavioral entities featuring
continuity, longevity, and stable contexts for action; if they are ... in ‘arrangements
that coordinate the behavior o f individuals in society”; or if they are, as Talcott Parsons
defined them, sets o f regulatory norms; then discourses and institution have much in
common. No institutions can operate without an associated and supportive discourse
(or discourses) (p. 103-104)
Institutional software is more often taken for granted. Dryzek argues that understanding both
discourses and institutional hardware is important for institutional design.
Other institutional theorists understand (political) institutions in terms o f two similar
dimensions; formal and informal (North 1990) and cultural infrastructure and hardware (Offe
1996). Offe (1996) uses the terms “institutional software” (or ‘cultural infrastructure’ of
institutions) and “hardware”. Institutional software tends to be cultural, informal, not easily
exchanged and replaced, and supported by institutional hardware. Formal institutions are such
as rules that human beings devise while informal institutions such as conventions and codes of
behavior (North 1990, p. 4).
A more comprehensive understanding of two dimensions o f institutions can be found
in the work o f Sewell (1992), which is further elaborated in Clemens and Cook (1999). Sewell
(1992) pointed out that Giddens’s definition o f structures as “virtual” (Orlikowski 2000) does
not take into account material resources and argued that all resources are actual rather than
49
virtual4. Thus he reformulated a set of institution as schemas (virtual) and resources (actual)
rather than rules and resources.
What Sewell meant to get at by the term schemas is “not formally stated prescriptions
but the informal and not always conscious schemas, metaphors, or assumptions presupposed by
such formal statements” (p. 8). The various schemas are “generalizable procedures applied in
the enactment/reproduction of social life” such as rules o f etiquette, aesthetic norms, and
recipes for group interaction or democratic vote, etc. Schemas can be generalized and
transposed or extended to new situations when the opportunity arises. He argues that this
generalizabiIity or transposability o f schemas is the reason they must be understood as virtual.
“To say that schemas are virtual is to say that they cannot be reduced to their existence in any
particular practice or any particular location in space and time: they can be actualized in a
potentially broad and unpredetermined range of situations” (p. 8). In a communication
perspective, schema may be understood as what Taylor, Groleau, Heaton and Every (2001)
term “frame knowledge”, which is “the sum of acquired understandings that makes it possible
for us to recognize a situation and to formulate our interpretation in language” (p. 84). Thus
4 Most IS researchers seem to believe that Giddens understood structure as “virtual”. This
understanding is based on Giddens’s comments in The Constitution of Society (1994),
“structure is a ‘virtual order’ of transformative relations ... structure exists ... only in its
instantiations in such practices and as memory traces orienting the conduct o f knowledgeable
human agents (p. 17) ... structure exists only as memory traces, the organic basis of human
knowledgeability, and as instantiated in action (p. 377).” However, Stones (2001) argues that
structuration theory’s position on the pre-existence and causally influential role o f structures
can be clarified by looking at Giddens’s different comments on the nature o f constraints upon
agency. “Constraints stems from the ‘objective’ existence of structural properties that the
individual agent is unable to change. As with the constraining qualities o f sanctions, it is best
described as placing limits upon the range o f options open to an actor, or plurality’ o f actors, in
a given circumstance or type o f circumstances [original emphasis]. Stones argues that
structuration theory recognizes the ‘objective’ existence o f structures o f significance,
domination, and legitimation.
50
they are community constructs (Taylor, Groleau, Heaton and Every 2001; Hutchins 1995;
Suchman 1996) not located in a particular individual or place.
On the other hand, resources are such material objects as factories owned by
capitalists, stocks o f weapons controlled by kings or generals, land rented by peasants, etc. (p.
10). Also there are human resources such as knowledge and dexterity. They exist in time and
space. Thus all resources are actual rather than virtual. They are observable characteristics in
particular times and spaces. Thus, institutions should be defined as composed simultaneously
of schemas, which are virtual, and o f resources, which are actual. Also resources include
formal rules and procedures (Zhou 1993) such as those policies, regulations, guidelines, formal
routines, etc. which are the storage of organizational memory. Sewell (1992) argues on this
point that “publicly fixed codifications of rules are actual rather than virtual and should be
regarded as resources ...” (p. 8).
4.2.1.2 Duality of Schemas and Resources
Schemas are the effects o f resources, just as resources are the effects o f schemas
(Sewell 1992). For example, a factory is not an inert pile of bricks, wood, and metal but it
incorporates or actualizes schemas, meaning that schemas can be inferred from the material
from of the factory. The factory gate, the punching-in station, the design o f the assembly line:
all of these features o f the factory teach and validate the rules of the capitalist labor contract. If
resources are instantiations or embodiments o f schemas, they inculcate and justify the schemas
as well. Resources are read like texts, to recover the cultural schemas they instantiate. They are
instantiations of schemas in time-space that can be used by actors to generate power.
Schemas are effects of resources also. If schemas are to be sustained or reproduced
over time they must be validated by the accumulation o f resources that their enactment
engenders. Schemas not empowered or regenerated by resources would eventually be
51
abandoned and forgotten, just as resources without schemas to direct their use would
eventually dissipate and decay. Thus, we can say that the virtual existence o f institutions
presupposes the actual existence and vice versa (Sewell 1992).
To illustrate, consider recent attempts to introduce the institutions o f a capitalist market
in Eastern Europe (Dryzek 1996). This introduction has run into difficulties in large measure
because there were no cultural schemas available to direct the use of the new market system.
People simply did not know what to make o f these resources, or what it means to behave as an
instrumentally rational, maximizing market actor. Dryzek argues that the resource o f the
capitalist market lacks a supportive cultural schema. “In the discourse (schemas) o f the
capitalist West, people who accumulate personal wealth are entrepreneurs; in the popular
discourse o f Russia, they are mafia” (p. 104).
4.3 Premises of a Dynamic Institutional Theory for Information Systems
Information systems and information technology are not same. Information technology
is part of information systems, but the opposite statement is not true. Like an institution, an
information system has both actual and virtual elements that presuppose one another. Below
are introduced three notions: duality within information systems, duality o f schemas and IT
artifacts, and elements of schemas and IT artifacts.
4.3.1 Duality within Information Systems
The term ‘duality within’ is not the same as the notion o f ‘duality’ o f structure, which
is the main premise o f Giddens’s theory. Rather the term is used to show that two basic
categories - schemas and IT artifacts - in an information system can be regarded as logically
exclusive o f each other. Thus, the term implies the ‘dualism’ o f the two categories. Dualism5 is
5 The notion of dualism used here is different from the traditional notion of Cartesian dualism
that views institutions and action as independent entities (See Stones 1995).
52
the form o f thinking in which basic categories are regarded as logically exclusive o f each other
(Parker 2000).
The concept o f duality within information systems identifies prior understandings of
information systems—as either material (IT) artifacts or social things (cultural schemas)—as a
false dichotomy. Information systems are comprised of both IT artifacts or technology, which
are actual, and schemas, which are virtual. The concept implies that they are held to be
irreducible to each other and causally efficacious, yet necessarily interdependent. To study and
understand information systems is to study and understand both dimensions and their
interaction and interdependence.
4.3.2 Schemas of Information Systems
Schemas o f information systems are “generalizable procedures” (Giddens 1984; Sewell
1992) derived from preexisting institutions or “formative contexts” (Unger 1987; Blackler
1990; Ciborra and Lanzara 1994; Lanzara 1999) and applied in the enactment/reproduction of
IT artifacts or technology. In the context of the design, implementation, and use of information
systems, schemas can refer to the installed base, ‘social organization of computing’ (Kling and
lacono 1989), institutional properties (Orlikowski and Robey 1991; Orlikowski 1992), or social
and organizational contexts (Hirschheim 1987). Schemas can be inferred from an array of
extant institutional arrangements and cognitive imageries which include an organization’s (or
group’s, intra-organization’s) structure and history, value systems, norms, organizational
routines and informal procedures, individual and collective memory, culture, and existing
bodies o f rules, laws, and regulations. They are the source for ‘enactment’ (Weick 1990) of
technology.
Different schemas are instantiated in different institutional realms of information
systems such as governance, design, implementation, and use. For example, in the realm o f IS
53
design system developers draw on the values and conventions of their organization,
occupation, and training to build information systems while in the realm o f IS use, various user
groups draw on embedded knowledge, assumptions, experiences, and rules (Orlikowski and
Robey 1991; Orlikowski 2000). As a result o f this diverse base o f structures, when huamn
actors interact with information technology between-groups and within-groups o f they draw on
diverse schemas that may be in part contradictory but not totally exclusive o f each other.
Actors also vary in terms of their capability to access schemas. Agency arises from the
actor’s knowledge o f schemas and thus agency exercised by different persons is far from
uniform (Sewell 1992). Different social positions (Mozuelis 1995) or practices and roles
(Bhaskar 1979; Archer 1995) may give people knowledge of different schemas and access to
different kinds and amounts o f resources and hence different possibilities for transformative
action (Sewell 1992). Emirbayer and Mische (1998) discuss differences in agentic capacity.
Actors belonging to multiple social milieu (Whittington 1994) and at the intersections of
multiple temporal-relational contexts (Emirbayer and Mische 1998) can have greater capacities
to access some schemas rather than others. In addition, as actors become more experienced in a
position, they can develop greater capacities for creative and critical intervention in
structuration (Emirbayer and Mische 1998).
To understand an information system, it is important to understand schemas of the
information system first. They consist o f “cultural infrastructure” or “software” of the
institution or information system. In IS design and use, they are agency-specific, multiple, and
even incompatible. These characteristics make an information system very dynamic and rather
unpredictable.
54
4.3.3 Resources of Information Systems
Resources o f information systems are actual and can be described in two ways: IT
artifacts (Orlikowski and lacono 2001) and the schemas o f the artifacts. An IT artifact can be
conceptualized as “an ensemble o f equipment, applications and techniques with identifiable
information-processing” (Kling 1987 p. 312) and network capabilities. It includes not only
"material artifacts” (various configurations o f hardware and software) (Orlikowski 1992) and
“the structural features o f the given technology” (DeSanctis and Poole 1994) but also
programming languages and logics, developers’ skills and knowledge, IS development
methods and methodologies, and other non-material but actual resources invested and used for
IS design, implementation and use. A CASE tool, ERP, CRM, or KMS would be examples of
IT artifacts. In case o f a SAP R/3 the IT artifacts may include several modules, client/server
architecture, one centralized or several decentralized database(s), variable interfaces,
middleware architecture, business, workflow, the ABAP/4 development work bench,
correction and transport system, data dictionary, etc. (Bancroft et al. 1998).
Like resources (Sewell 1992), IT artifacts embody cultural schemas. Schemas that can
be inferred from IT artifacts are understood as their spirit in this dissertation. “The factory gate,
the punching-in station, the design o f the assembly line: all o f these features of the factory
teach and validate the rules o f the capitalist labor contract” (Sewell 1992, p. 13). The term
spirit is borrowed from Weber’s terminology in The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of
Capitalism (1958). Weber explained the role of Calvinism in the development o f capitalism
through "the spirit o f capitalism". According to him a new morality and its religious framework
of Protestant Work Ethic (PWE) encouraged hard work and productivity. He argued that "the
spirit o f capitalism" was a feature o f Protestant groups and PWE played an important role in
the development o f capitalism in the West (Arslan 2001).
55
The spirit o f an institution encompasses a set o f standards, obligations, and
expectations from people and implies moral commitments, codes o f appropriate conduct, a
reasonable measure o f trust in the institution's proper functioning, and the like (Offe 1996).
The term is used similarly in this dissertation in that the spirit is the underlying philosophies of
the IT artifacts and motives for its development. Thus, spirit includes values and goals of its
founder(s) and adopters, assumptions and intentions of designers, 'technical and instrumental’
(Scott 1987) circumstances o f its development, and possibly others. In this sense, spirit is not
entirely actual, but it is in part actual and in part virtual. Spirit can be identified by treating the
IT artifacts as a ‘text’ (Sewell 1992; DeSanctis and Poole 1994; Woolgar 1991) in different or
multiple levels (e.g.. micro, meso, and macro-analysis) such as from structural features of
GDSS (DeSanctis and Poole 1994), organizational behavior inscribed in technology (Hanseth
and Monteiro 1997), a modem business philosophy of control o f global logics behind a shared
SAP installation based on (Hanseth and Braa 2000) and others. It also can come from different
sources such as written texts (e.g., manuals, brochures, promotional material, critical reviews
of others, etc. about the IT artifacts) and unwritten texts (e.g., a historical and interpretive study
including interviews). Therefore, the IT artifact has politics (Winner 1993; Berg 1998;
Bloomfield 1995) and its design has social consequences (Kling 1991).
However, this does not imply technological determinism. The spirit is never entirely
unambiguous. Different parties may get different readings o f the text, depending on their
position. “The form o f the factory embodies and therefore teaches capitalist notions of property
relations. But, as Marx points out, it can also teach the necessarily social and collective
character o f production and thereby undermine the capitalist notion of private property”
(Sewell 1992, p. 19). Those features of the factory can teach and validate something other than
the rules o f the capitalist labor contract. Similarly, to many people the spirit of capitalism is
56
never entirely unambiguous. Therefore, the spirit is capable o f being interpreted in varying
ways. The spirit is also capable o f empowering different actors and some actors may explicitly
mobilize the spirit. The spirit of the IT artifacts is not fixed but open to different interpretations
and change.
4.3.4 Duality of Schemas and IT Artifacts
The term ‘duality o f is used here similarly to the notion o f ‘duality o f structure in
Giddens’s theory. Information systems have a dual character. They are defined as composed o f
simultaneously o f schemas and IT artifacts. To understand information systems is to
understand the interplay between the two (Figure 4).
IT artifacts
Figure 4. Duality o f Schemas and IT Artifacts
If information systems are dual in this sense, it is true that schemas are the effects o f
the IT artifacts, just as the IT artifacts are the effects o f schemas. This is the reason that
schemas can be inferred from the IT artifacts and they serve as its spirit. The IT artifacts are
instantiations or embodiments of schemas and therefore they inculcate and justify the schema
as well. We can further say that the IT artifacts are instantiations o f schemas in time-space that
can be used by actors to generate power.
If schemas are to be sustained or reproduced over time, they must be validated by the
accumulation o f the IT artifacts that their enactment brings into existence. Schemas not
57
empowered or regenerated by the IT artifacts would eventually be abandoned and forgotten,
just as IT artifacts without cultural schemas to direct their production and use would eventually
dissipate and decay or perhaps be incoherent. The persistence o f this mutuality between
schemas and IT artifacts implies the stability o f information systems, while decrease in
mutuality implies the institutional decay o f the formation system or even the
deinstitutionalization and reinstitutionalization (Jepperson 1991; Scott 2001) of a new
information system.
For instance, democratic structural features in GDSS (DeSanctis and Poole 1994)
without (democratic) cultural schemas to direct their use would less likely be utilized in group
meetings and eventually dissipate and decay. This may imply that attempting to change
organizational culture or structure (e.g., management theories o f IT-enabled changes, BPR)
through new technology may be an attractive idea to management but a very difficult one to
accomplish (due to the incongruence between cultural schemas and new technologies and lack
o f support by cultural schemas for the new resources). This may lead to lack of adoption and
even ignorance o f new IT and resistance by those using the installed base.
However, this does not deny the possibility that technologies are actually used fro
some other purposes that were not planned by designers. For example, ‘modem’ IT-based
control technologies like a shared SAP implementation in a global corporation (Hanseth and
Braa 2001) for control o f global logistics processes may be actually used for cooperation and
knowledge sharing. Collaboration technologies are actually used for individual productivity
(Orlikowski 2000). This is because actors are knowledgeable (Giddens 1984) and existing
schemas allow them the ability to interact with the IT artifacts creatively. On the other hand,
schemas such as existing democratic and cooperative organizational culture need the
accumulation o f resources (e.g., GDSS and/or other resources) to be validated and reproduced.
58
Without this process, such cultural schemas would likely be forgotten in practice and replaced
by different ones.
4.4 Theoretical and Practical Implications
The distinction between schemas and resources provide a framework for thinking
about sources o f information systems change (Sewell 1992; Clemens and Cook 1999) as well
as stability: within or among schemas; within or among resources; or between schemas and
resources. This way o f understanding (large-scale) IS offers several theoretical and practical
implications for the design, implementation, and use o f IS, which are summarized in Table 3.
Table 3. Six Axioms of Information Systems as Social Institutions______________________

1. Multiplicity o f Information Systems
2. Incompatibility o f schemas and IT artifacts
3. Transposability o f Schemas
4. Unpredictability o f the IT artifacts’ Accumulation
5. Polysemy of IT Artifacts
6. The intersection o f multiple information systems______________________________
4.4.1 Multiplicity of Information Systems
“Societies are based on practices that derive from many distinct structures, which exist
at different levels, operate in different modalities, and are themselves based on widely varying
types and quantities o f resources” (Sewell 1992, p. 16). The multiplicity o f information
systems means that the knowledgeable social actors whose practices constitute a society are far
more versatile than Bourdieu’s account o f a universally homologous habitus would imply;
social actors are capable o f applying a wide range of different and even incompatible schemas
and have access to heterogeneous arrays o f the IT artifacts. Simply put, human actors, whether
they are planners, developers, and users are simultaneously experiencing not one information
system but multiple ones. Human actors belong to multiple communities o f practice (Brown
59
and Duguid 1991; Hutchins 1991; Wenger 1998) or social milieus, which provide them with a
wide range of schemas and different IT artifacts. Schemas and the IT artifacts from an
information system inspire and inform a greater sense of agency (Whittington 1994) when they
interact with others. However they may not always increase agency. It is possible that they
could decrease it as well.
Orlikowski (2000) illustrates the multiplicity o f information systems. For example,
participation in professional or industry conferences often allows people to exchange ideas and
stories about their work practices, including how they use technology in their work practices.
Such awareness o f alternative ways o f using technology may motivate people to make changes
in their technology and the use o f it. Montealgre (1997) makes a similar point through the case
study o f an agro-industrial organization in a less-developed country. Giddens (1984) argues
that people reside in multiple social milieus and can draw on and respond to a multiplicity of
rules and resources. Montealgre's study shows, for instance, that IT implementation leaders
employed at least three sets of structural rule and resources. The first stemmed from external
relations with outside organizations such as academic institutions, the consulting companies,
and the Ministry o f Economy. The second set came from the internal ambiguity and plurality of
the rules governing the firm, including the strategy to become a low-cost sugar company, the
need to improve operational efficiency, the loose control over operational workers, and the lack
of information. The third set o f rules and resources stemmed from the IT tools and systems that
were acquired, developed, and used, as well as from the rules governing the IT organizational
unit, such as IT policies, trial and error practices, the system analysis and design methodologies
that were used, and systems operations. Would it be appropriate to briefly discuss how these
different sets of structures interacted with each other? Readers are likely to be curious about
60
this.
4.4.2 Incompatibility of Schemas and IT Artifacts
The term “incompatibility of schemas and IT artifacts" refers to such incoherence
between the two within the information system. Among several potential reasons for this
problem, a main reason is the difference in the temporal pace o f chang
e of these two dimensions o f information systems. As institutional theorists suggest, the pace at
which schemas and resources change differs and this difference may negatively impact on
institution building and transformation. Schemas or cultural infrastructure of institutions tend
to change slowly, compared to resources, which may be changed and replaced quickly. This
aspect o f duality of institutions causes difficulties in institutional building or transformation.
Offe (1996) noted that cultural infrastructure of institutions is not only time consuming to
consolidate, but equally time consuming to abolish. They are not easily exchanged and
replaced, as it is generated by institutional hardware itself in the process in which people “get
used to” and “make sense o f ’ or “cope with” the information systems.
In the case of large-scale IS, the problem with existing cultural infrastructure or the
installed base is becoming more significant since “large-scale” means that not only are
resources large (Grindley 1995; Kling and lacono 1989; Hanseth 1999) but also schemas are
complex, multiple, and anchored in with many other structures. While the IT artifacts may be
changed and replaced quickly, there is always a problem with cultural infrastructure, which
61
seems to take a longer time to be developed. The importance o f cultural infrastructure can
never be overemphasized. “If anything, the success and the survival capacity o f the newly built
institutions is likely to depend more on people's trust, compliance, and patience in enduring the
transition costs involved than in the quality of the design o f these institutions themselves”
(Offe 1996. p. 215).
This characteristic o f information systems can have several implications for IS design
and implementation and also for high failure rates of IS projects in reality even when they are
well designed in a technical sense. For IS design, this suggests that there is the need for
systematic approaches to the informal aspects o f IS design. As is well documented by IS
development theorists (e.g., Avison et al. 1998; Galliers and Swan 1997; Hirschheim et al.
1996; Lyytinen and Hirschheim 1988; Avison and Wood-Harper 1990; Newman and Robey
1992; Hirschheim and Klein 1994; Lee 1999) extant ISD methods and techniques heavily rely
on formalism and engineering tradition and thus focus on IT artifacts by ignoring cultural
infrastructure.
There have been attempts to address this issue. One o f them is the concept of
'cultivation' (Dahlbom and Mathiassen 1993). In construction or engineering cultivation is
rather a conservative approach to systems design. In a similar vein Ciborra (2000) also
proposes three concepts o f care, hospitality, and cultivation. Care is the “mood” o f supporting
and taking care o f the design and use of IT applications. Hospitality describes “the
phenomenon o f dealing with new technology as an ambiguous stranger” (Ciborra 2002, p.
110). The concept o f cultivation is like “helping a wound to heal” (Ciborra 2000, p. 31) to
develop a new information system from the installed base. Hanseth (1999) argues that large-
scale systems such as the Internet are not possible to change using a construction or
engineering approach. They must be cultivated. A more systematic approach is needed to
62
develop a better comprehension o f how existing frames o f knowledge, institutional contexts,
and histories affect the design o f new ISs (Olsen 2001; Dryzek 1996) and how to utilize them
for the development o f new ISs.
4.43 Transposability of Schemas
Pre-existing cognitive frames and organizational contexts usually prevent designers
and sponsors from seeing and exploiting the potential for innovation (Ciborra and Lanzara
1994). However, schemas are also transposable.
The transposability o f schemas means that the schemas that an actor has access to are
usefully applied across contexts. Bourdieu notes that habitus is “a system o f lasting
transposable dispositions which, integrating past experiences, functions at every moment as a
matrix o f perceptions, appreciations, and actions and makes possible the achievement of
infinitely diversified tasks, thanks to analogical transfers of schemes permitting the solution of
similarly shaped problems” (1977, p. 83). Borrowing the term “transposable” from Bourdieu,
Sewell argues that there is no fixed limit to the possible transpositions of schemas. He notes,
“to say that schemas are transposable. in other words, is to say that they can be applied to a
wide and not fully predictable range o f cases outside the context in which they are initially
learned ... Knowledge o f a rule or a schema by definition means the ability to transpose or
extend it— that is, to apply creatively ... then agency, which I would define as entailing the
capacity to transpose and extend schemas to new contexts, is inherent in the knowledge of
cultural schemas that characterizes all minimally competent members of society" (p. 17-8).
Social actors are capable of applying a wide range of different and even incompatible schemas
and transpose them in developing new institutions. Therefore schemas not only constrain but
also enable the development o f new institutions.
63
Human actors do not design, implement or use IT artifacts in vacuum. They always
draw on existing schemas such as past experiences o f different IT artifacts, organizational
culture and politics, norms, etc. When schemas are transposed by human actors whether by
designers, planners, users, or else they both constrain and enable human action. Not is only
technology the medium and outcome of human action (e.g., Orlikowski 1992 and Orlikowski
and Robey 1992), but also the schemas are the medium and outcome of human action.
Schemas are the repertoire o f stability and change o f information systems. Existing
interpretive schemes are the source for IT innovations (Campbell 1997).
4.4.4 Unpredictability of the IT Artifacts* Accumulation
As Robey and Boudreau (1999) noted, “although much contemporary thought
considers advanced information technologies as either determinants or enablers o f radical
organizational change, empirical studies have revealed inconsistent findings” (p. 167), The
contradictory empirical findings both across studies and within studies are very common. In
our view these contradictory findings or outcomes o f information technology in organizations
are not a surprising fact, but rather a very expected output. This is because of what we term as
“unpredictability o f IT artifacts” accumulation.
“The very fact that schemas are by definition capable of being transposed or extended
means that the resource consequences of the enactment o f cultural schemas is never entirely
predictable” (Sewell 1992, p. 18). The resource accumulation is unpredictable because schemas
can create unpredictable quantities and qualities o f resources. This further means that schemas
will be in fact be differentially validated when they are put into action and therefore will
potentially be subject to modification (p. 18). The IT artifacts’ consequence of the enactment of
a cultural schema is never entirely predictable, especially when used in a 'different' realm. It
64
means that the deployment or introduction o f the same IT artifact into two different groups and
organizations is likely to produce different outcomes (Barley 1986) and even also different ISs.
Consistent with the results o f Barley’s study. Orlikowski (2000) found that the same
groupware application resulted in three different types of enactment and concluded that
technology use seems to be always situated and emergent. To give another example, even when
there is a democratic organizational culture and structure to direct the use o f democratic
structural features o f GDSS, there is no guarantee that such GDSS features are actually utilized
in practice (DeSanctis and Poole. 1984). It is because of “the unpredictability o f the IT
artifacts’ accumulation”. The institutions o f a capitalist market in US and Eastern Europe are
not same. The implementation o f US capital market in other countries was more unpredictable
(Dryzek 1996) than many people thought and desired. Similarly, a researcher who is
conducting a study of a same ERP technology with two organizations should expect two
somewhat different outcomes and also be aware that he or she is actually studying two
information systems based on the same technology.
4.4.5 Polysemy of IT Artifacts
As discussed earlier, IT artifacts have multiplicity of meaning since they embody
cultural schemas that we have termed spirit. The fact that resources are endowed with cultural
schemas means that their meaning is often ambiguous. This leads to different interpretations of
events, and thus different interactions. Therefore, their meaning is interpretively flexible (e.g.,
Bijker et al., 1987; Orlikowski 1992; Weick 1990). Their meaning would be different among
key groups in organizations such as managers, designers, and user as pointed out by
Orlikowski and Gash (1994). However, while it is expected that the meaning is similar within
key groups (Orlikowski and Gash 1994), it may be the case that the meaning o f the IT artifacts
is agency specific depending on the actor’s capacity to access schemas and IT artifacts. In
65
addition to the fact that IT artifacts are capable of being interpreted in varying ways, the
polysemy o f IT artifacts also refers to the actor's capacity to (1) initially constitute the meaning
o f the IT artifact and later (2) reinterpret and mobilize an array o f IT artifacts in terms o f
cultural schemas other than those that initially constituted in the array.
For example, according to Orlikowski (2000), Notes technology was initially designed
by five developers o f the company called Iris Associates.
As a group o f individuals we share the same beliefs about how we’d like to see people
work—the Iris values. And so, we implemented a very different software development
methodology here that relies on distributed management, distributed security, and
distributed development ... Distribution is a value that pervades our philosophy. So
technically and architecturally the product embraced distribution (p. 14)
Therefore, a group o f developers initially constituted the meaning o f the IT artifact. Like that
of other communication-based K.MS, the spirit of the Notes technology was “distribution”,
“coordination”, and “collaboration”. However, as Orlikowski’s case studies show, the IT
artifact was reinterpreted and mobilized differently in terms o f cultural schemas o f those who
used the technology. In particular, the technology was reinterpreted and mobilized as an
individual productivity technology in the cultural schemas characterized by hierarchical and
competitive group culture.
Furthermore, this concept refers to the possibility that the meaning o f a particular
technology is constructed prior to its introduction and even its development. Using the notion
of ‘organizing vision’ Swanson and Ramiller (1997) suggest that institutional processes are
engaged from the beginning o f IS development and diffusion. The development and influence
of an organizing vision is determined by a variety of institutional forces such as the
community’s discourse, business commerce, the IS practitioners’ schemas, the motivating
business problematic, the core technology, etc. Bloomfield and Best (1992) employ the concept
o f the ‘sociology o f translation’ (Callon 1986; Latour 1987) to theorize the process by which
66
the organizational problem is constituted and for which the appropriate IT artifact is proposed
as the solution. The meaning of the IT artifact is often constituted by an actor or groups of
actors through the exercise of power (Bloomfield et al. 1992; Bloomfield and Vurdubakis
1997). IT artifacts are designed and introduced with a purpose much more directly linked to
social interests (Russell 1986, p. 337). The first aspect opens the possibility that at the later
stage o f IS development and use, the meaning o f the IT artifact can be mobilized by a new
powerful actor or groups o f actors by the exercise of power. However, it is important to
understand that there are the inherent limits o f potential control over the meaning (Offe 1996)
of the IT artifact.
For example, consider the case o f the UK National Health Service (e.g., Bloomfield,
Coombs, Cooper, and Rea 1992; Jones, 1994; Brown 1995). The NHS’s “reforms” or “visions”
that were articulated through vocabularies o f efficiency, effectiveness, the centrality of
information in management, management by objectives, etc. were translated into specific
organizations o f vision such as a large number o f financial and management information
systems. Thus the meaning of the IT artifacts was already formed in the course of discourse or
corporate strategy (Jones 1994) prior to the introduction o f the IT artifacts. There was
considerable interpretative flexibility surrounding the understandings o f the nature and purpose
of such IT artifacts (Bloomfield, Coombs, Cooper, and Rea 1992). However, Brown’s (1995)
case study with a large Hospital Information Support System (HISS) illustrates that, in their
attempt to gain user acceptance for the HISS, a select group of individuals (the implementation
team) managed to engineer others’ understandings o f the IT artifact through calculated
argument, control over the flow of information, and symbolic acts, so that they viewed it more
favorably than might otherwise have been the case. However, the meaning o f the HISS could
67
not be fully controlled. Brown's study shows some evidence that aspects of the system were
subverted, not used, and diverted to other purposes by certain user groups.
4.4.6. The Intersection of Multiple Information Systems
Institutions overlap (Zucker 1988) and are nested within other institutions (Holm 1995:
Goodin 1996). The intersection of information systems means that in general there are multiple
information systems in an organization or a group and as institutions these information systems
interest and overlap and possibly nested. For example, a university system may have multiple
information systems running such as several student information systems, payroll information
systems, accounting information systems, a large-scale system-wide financial management
information system, etc. Certainly, they intersect and overlap. Also these systems would be
nested such that small systems are nested within large-scale financial management information
system. Possibly, an information system in an organization or group may intersect with
information systems in other organizations or groups. The system-wide MIS at a university
intersects and overlaps with other universities’ MIS and also state-wide financial management
IS.
The intersection takes place in both the schema and the IT artifact dimensions (Sewell
1992). Not only can a given array of IT artifacts be claimed by different actors embedded in
different structural complexes (or differentially claimed by the same actor embedded in
different structural complexes), but schemas can be borrowed or appropriated from one
structural complex and applied to another. For example,
This axiom implies that the stability and change o f an information system may be
dependent on other information systems. As argued by Zucker (1988), the stability o f an
information system will increase with its interconnectedness to other information systems.
However, it is also true that a change in an information system affects many other information
68
systems. Thus, such interconnectedness in nested information systems sometimes can produce
dynamic change patterns. Depending on the degree o f coupling, changes in one system may
have repercussions in other systems (Holm 1995). All large-scale ISs face this ironic situation
in that interconnectedness contributes both stability and change o f a particular information
system as well as the system as a whole.
4.5 Conclusion
Extant views o f information systems are not adequate to explain the stability and
change of large-scale information systems. Some views largely focus on the resources of
information systems and often lead to managerial approaches to IS design, implementation and
use. On the other hand, others overemphasize the schemas of information systems or social and
organizational contexts by largely ignoring other dimensions of information systems such as
the IT artifact itself and spirit. While more recent developments - structurational and socio-
technical models - offer alternative but better ways of conceptualizing IS, it was argued that
they have some weaknesses that prevent them from providing a comprehensive explanation of
the dynamic nature of large-scale IS and their complexity. They have not resolved yet many
contradictory consequences o f information technology found in the IS literature (e.g., Robey
and Boudreau 1999) and not explained the simultaneity (e.g., both local and global) o f an
information system.
To answer the challenge of the dynamic nature o f large-scale IS, this chapter proposed
Dynamic Institutional Theory which views them as social institutions. DIT first identified two
dimensions of information systems and emphasized both o f them in a balanced way rather than
conflating one side (or reducing one to the other), coining the concept o f duality within
institutions. Then the theory introduced the concept o f duality of schemas and resources to
discuss the inherently dynamic nature o f a typical information system. Like institutions, large-
69
scale IS are dual in that they are simultaneously stable and shifting, simultaneously pervasive
and idiosyncratic (March and Olsen 1989), simultaneously micro and macro, simultaneously
empowers and controls, and simultaneously subjective and objective. Drawing upon the theory,
several implications for the design, implementation, and use of large-scale IS are sketched.
Drawing upon DIT. the following chapters attempt to address more specific research questions.
70
CHAPTER V
RETHINKING THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN IT AND ORGANIZATIONS:
A MULTI-LEVEL MODEL OF DUALITY OF TECHNOLOGY
5.1 Introduction
Earlier we noted that there were two dominant models for understanding the
relationship between information systems and organizations: the technological imperative and
the social imperative (Markus and Robey 1988: Orlikowski 1992). The two models may be
explained in terms o f the objectivist and subjectivist positions in social theory respectively
(Orlikowski and Robey 1991). By pointing out the problems with these positions, Orlikowski
(1992) proposed a structurational model of technology, built on Giddens’s theory of
structuration (1984), to depict the dialectical interaction between technology and organizations.
It appears that many researchers are fundamentally committed to avoiding both the
technological and social imperatives in theorizing the relationship between IT and
organizations. There seems to be a general consensus in the IS field that IT both enables and
constrains action.
This chapter is an attempt to move beyond an “IT enables/constrains” position (e.g..
Barley 1986; Orlikowski 1992) and to propose a multi-level model o f the duality of IT. The
proposed multi-level model builds on the work of “post-structurationalists” (e.g., Archer 1995,
Mouzelis 1995, Sewell 1992; Jessop 1996, 2001). These authors, like other social theorists
including Giddens (1994), are fundamentally committed to avoiding both objectivism and
subjectivism in social theory. All try to show how subject and object are related as equally
essential elements in the structuration process. They all argue that Giddens’s version of social
reality is essentially ‘flat’ and instead they contend that in social reality there are both weak
and strong agencies and strong and weak structures. Drawing on these works, a multi-level
71
model o f duality o f IT is developed. That attempts to expand the extant structurational model of
technology and enrich our understanding o f the relationship between IT and organizations.
In what follows, the extant structurational model o f IT is briefly reviewed and the need
for a multi-level model o f IT is discussed. Then the theoretical basis o f the model is discussed
and the model is presented. Following this several implications are drawn from the new model
for understanding the relational interplay between IT and organizations.
5.2 Conceptualization of the Relationship between IS and Organizations
In the theory o f structuration Giddens (1984) rejected the dualism that treats agency
and structure as logically exclusive, and argued that they are mutually constitutive. The
adoption of Giddens’s and other similar structuration theories has led to the wide acceptance in
IS research that IT both enables and constrains human action (e.g.. Barley 1986; Orlikowski
and Robey 1991; Orlikowski 1992; Walsham 1993; DeSanctis and Poole 1994; Roberts and
Grabowski 1996). In IS research this dialectical understanding has meant a significant
advancement over the two deterministic views of the relationship between IT and
organizations.
While acknowledging the insights offered by this approach, there is a need for more
detailed specification o f the dynamic interplay between IT and organizations. For example,
Monteiro and Hanseth (1995) note that an “IT enables/constrains position” is convincing but it
is necessary to push further; to describe in some detail how and whether IT restricts and
enables action. They argue that we need to learn more about how this interplay works, not only
that it exists. They pointed out that the effort o f using structuration theory for grasping IT fails
to pay due attention to the specifics o f IT.
To complement the structurational model Monteiro and Hanseth (1995) attempted to
explain how specific elements and functions o f an IT relate to organizational issues using some
72
key concepts such as translation, inscription, and irreversibility in actor network theory. On the
other side, drawing on Giddens’s theory o f structuration DeSanctis and Poole (1994) proposed
Adaptive Structuration Theory (AST). AST is "propositional” to some extent, in that through
using such concepts as structural features o f GDSS, spirit, and appropriation the theory tried to
specify the structuration o f IT in group and organizational contexts.
It is important to explore the interwoven relationship between IT and organizations to
learn, not just that this interplay exists, but how it works (Monteiro 2000). In our view, the
extant "IT enables/constrains action” position tends to overgeneralize IT and actors
respectively: It does not consider the variability o f IT (social structures) and actors (subject)
across specific times and places where structuration occurs.
5.3 Theoretical Basis
Why do the extant structurational models provide only a general view of the duality of
IT and organizations? We understand this through reviewing the critique o f other social
theorists o f Giddens's theory o f structuration, which is used as the theoretical basis o f much
structurational work. This review will offer ideas to develop a more detailed (dynamic) model
o f the duality o f IT.
One criticism o f Giddens’s duality is that Giddens gives an ontological primacy to the
knowledgeable social actor and treats agency and structure asymmetrically (e.g.. Archer 1990;
Mouzelis 1995; Jessop 1996). This is shown in Giddens’s definition o f structure: structure
cannot exist apart from agency and has only “virtual” existence: it only exists in and through
the activities o f human agents (1984, p. 256). In writing o f the duality of structure, he is
concerned with structures underlying human action, rather than any particular set of
institutions. According to Giddens, structures exist only insofar as they are instantiated in
73
everyday action. Thus, structure becomes the responsibility o f actors present at any given
time/space position (Archer 1990).
This does not provide us with stringent grounds for the assignment o f logical and
explanatory priority to either structure or agency (Archer 1990: Barley and Tolbert 1997). In
most accounts based on Giddens, actors are seen to choose a course of action more or less
freely and skillfully within structures (Jessop 2001). This is problematic since it is certainly the
case that past institutions (information systems) constrain present possibilities for action (e.g.,
Hanseth 1999; Kling and lacono 1989; also see Poole 1983). New systems do not grow de
novo; they wrestle with the “inertia o f the installed base” (Star and Ruhleder 1996). Ciborra
and Lanzara, using the notion of “formative context” that refers to preexisting structures,
explain the failures o f IT-based innovation and change. They argue that people use formative
contexts for executing and designing routines in situated action. In a case study o f a knowledge
management system deployed in a global company Rolland (2000) also illuminated how
deployment of large-scale IS are constrained by the preexisting structures such as paper-based
documents, information in a database and the related work practices.
Another criticism is tied to Giddens’s methodological individualist position. A central
theme of Giddens’ account is that the concept o f agency implies that a person ‘could have done
otherwise’: ‘an agent who has no options whatsoever’, he insists, 'is no longer an agent’
(Thompson 1989, p. 73). Giddens conceptualizes agency as equi-possible for everyone, at an
every moment, on the grounds that everyone engages in practice and uses rules and resources
on the basis o f knowledgeability (Parker 2000). He attributes power as an existential principle
o f the humanity o f agents irrespective o f position (Parker 2000). An existential ‘given’ of
individuals means that nobody can fail to be an agent (Thompson 1989). In Giddens’s theory,
intentionality is associated with individual choice (Taylor et al. 2001). No one is without power
74
in the 'dialectic o f control’ (Parker 2000). Thus Giddens’s theory o f action is centered on the
individual (Taylor et al. 2001). His theory does not address collective agency and power
exercised through struggles, as a mechanism for explaining the structuration o f what he calls
systems. The theory cannot identify collective agents or analyze social integration in terms of
relations between collectivities (Parker 2000).
Jessop (2001) raises a similar point. While noting that Giddens makes two key
innovations: the introduction o f time and space and the connection of institutions with specific
forms o f power and domination Jessop (2001) argues that Giddens gives an ontological
primacy to the knowledgeable social actor. Giddens’s theory shows an exaggerated concern for
individual agents/identities at the expense o f collective agents and organizational identities and
learning. In part this may stem from the fact that Giddens regards language as the archetypal
structure even though its rules and resources are not inherently limited the way that material
structures such as the procedures built into factory machinery are. Thus he overestimates the
range of possible structures that there can be and the degree to which they can be changed.
Giddens’s theory tends to lead to a neglect o f hierarchically-organized collective actors and
their differential contribution to the reproduction and transformation o f social systems
(Mouzelis 1995).
The structurational position could be strengthened by including the concept of
collective agency. This concept underscores the facts that agency is made possible by
collectives, which could be aggregates o f individual agents. Agency is profoundly social or
collective (Sewell 1992) and always operates within and through a social structure (Ratner
2000 ).
The transposition of schemas and remobilization o f resources that constitute agency are
always acts o f communication with others ... the extent o f the agency exercised by
individual persons depends profoundly on their positions in collective organizations ...
75
agency characterizes individuals but the agency exercised by persons is collective in

both its sources and its mode o f exercise. Personal agency is. therefore laden with
collectively produced differences o f power and implicated in collective struggles and
resistances (Sewell 1992. p.21).
For example, drawing on Activity Theory, Engestrom (1990) introduces the notion of
community, which tries to include collective actors who are socially related. Also consider
Bandura's (2001) conception o f collective agency. Bandura’s social cognitive theory
distinguishes among three different modes o f human agency: personal, proxy, and collective.
The conception o f proxy agency refers to the socially mediated mode o f agency. “In many
spheres of functioning, people do not have direct control over the social conditions and
institutional practices that effect their everyday lives. Under these circumstances, they seek
their well-being, security, and valued outcomes ... by means o f another to get those who have
access to resources or expertise or who wield influence and power to act at their behest to
secure the outcomes they desire” (p. 13). For example, children turn to parents and citizens to
their legislative representatives to act for them. The social cognitive theory extends the
conception of human agency to collective agency. People’s shared belief in their collective
power to produce desired results is a key ingredient of collective agency. Collective agency is
exercised through socially coordinated and interdependent efforts.
Agency does not precede society and create it as a voluntary agreement o f independent
individuals. Individuals are always socially related (Ratner 2000). Personal agency operates
within a broad network o f sociostructural influences (Bandura 2001, p. 13).
More specifically agency differs in both kind and extent (Sewell 1992). As far as kind,
What kinds o f desires people can have, what intentions they can form, and what sorts
o f creative transpositions they can carry out vary dramatically from one social world to
another depending on the nature o f the particular structures that inform those social
worlds (p. 20-21)
Agency also differs in extent, both between and within societies.
76
Occupancy o f different social positions—as defined, for example, by gender, wealth,

social prestige, class, ethnicity, occupation, generation, sexual preference, or
education—gives people knowledge o f different schemas and access to different kinds
and amounts o f resources and hence different possibilities for transformative action (p.
21)
A final criticism o f Gidden’s notion o f structuration is that it has an inherent bias for
stability and reproduction o f existing orders (Sewell 1992) even though structuration does not
guarantee perfect reproduction (Ranson et al. 1980). Weick (1993) asks us to pay attention to
the possibility of reversals o f structuration that is often characterized by the use of descriptive
words such as “continually produced," “recreated in interaction,” and “constituted". Using a
case analysis of the Mann Gulch fire disaster that resulted in the death o f 13 firefighters, Weick
(1993) shows that the structuration between structural frameworks o f constraint and agency
was destroyed rather than constructed one another. He further suggests that structuration is
more unstable than is sometimes supposed.
Thus the notion makes it awkward to deal with change (Sewell 1992). Rather we need
to more carefully respond to empirical evidence of fractures, inconsistencies, deviations from
current routines, emergent properties in the process o f change (Ciborra and Lanzara 1994).
5.4 A Multi-level Model of Duality of Technology
We believe that the extant model is not sufficiently detailed to describe the relationship
between IT and organizations in practice. This makes it difficult to explain several emerging
issues in IS research such as:
• To what extent and how does IT enable and constrain human action and organization?
• To what extent and how does agency produce and reproduce IT?
• Why and how does an IT that appears to be a structural constraint for one actor appear
as an opportunity for transformation to another actor?
• Why and how does an event in design influence the mode o f use and vice versa?
77
• Why does technology drift occur?
Issues 1 through 4 are difficult to address since the current “IT enables/constrains” position
does not give much consideration to the variability o f both IT and agency in the model. Issue 5
is difficult to address since (1) the position relies heavily on the notion of structuration as
reproduction and/or routinization and (2) as pointed out early, there is a predisposition toward
stability in structuration theory.
Thus, here we propose a multi-level model of the duality o f IT by postulating inherent
variability in IT and agency across levels. In this model ITs are conceptualized as ‘social
institutions’ (Goodin 1996; Holm 1995; Zucker 1988; Jepperson 1991). The interplay between
IT and organizations is explained by the duality of institutions (Mouzelis 1995; Archer 1996).
Some authors (e.g., Monteiro and Hanseth 1995; Kling 1991; DeSanctis and Poole 1994) have
attempted to be more specific about IT, but they have not considered actors more specifically.
A multi-level model attempts to be specific about both IT and actors (or organizations) through
examining IT in relation to agencies and agencies in relation to IT. In the following we first
discuss two notions that our model will draw on- the variability o f IT and the variability of
agency. Then, a multi-level model o f the duality o f IT is proposed followed by several
implications for understanding the interplay between IT and organizations.
5.4.1 Variability of IT
In the model the variability o f IT refers to three institutional realms within an IT
governance, production, and use. The concept is based on our understanding of institutions as
nested: governance, production, use are nested. Recent studies in institutional theory indicate
that institutions are seen as nested (Goodin 1996; Offe 1996).
From a nested perspective (Holm 1995) a local government is nested within a state
government, which is nested within a federal government. Professional soccer is played on
78
teams that operate by rules set down by the internal soccer federation, FIFA. This illustrates
how institutions can vary at different levels (Holm 1995) and implies that there are different
institutional realms, which can be understood as nested and hierarchically organized. The
higher level rules are more powerful than those at the lower levels. Goodin and Klingemann
(1996) note, institutions are “nested within an ever-ascending hierarchy o f yet-more-
fundamental. yet-more-authoritative rules and regimes and practices and procedures” (p. 18).
The more deeply nested rules and resources tend to be more robust than the other lower level
rules and resources since they exercise their influence unobtrusively, passing unnoticed and
unquestioned (Goodin and Klingemann 1996). However, hierarchy does not always prevail.
The specific rules and resources at the lower levels should be seen as a reservoir o f potential
resistance to the contingent pressures o f institutions (Clegg 1990, p. 161-163) and the source of
change at the higher levels.
Three institutional realms - governance, production, and use - within an IT are located
at different levels within the formation and maintenance o f an IT. This is similar to Garud and
Kamoe (2001) who identify three stylized frames - governance, production, and use - in a
technological field. We understand that the three institutional realms are located at different
levels within IT; the realm o f use is nested within that o f production, which is nested within
that o f governance. The institutional arrangements at one level (e.g., production) constitute the
subject matter o f an institutional system at a higher level (e.g., governance) (Jepperson 1991).
Each institutional realm tends to have its rules and resources. For example, the institutional
realm o f governance within an IT includes informal rules (e.g., culture, conventions o f decision
making), formal rules (e.g., organization's IT strategic plan, security guidelines, IT operating
plan) and resources (e.g., project budget, available computer networks, hardware and software
for IT project) while the institutional realm of production includes informal rules (e.g., local
79
designing practices, project management practices, programmers’ culture), formal rules (e.g.,
formal IS development methodology, software quality assurance methods and techniques) and
resources (e.g., programming languages and skills, technical knowledge, mainframe computers
or servers).
The rules o f higher institutional realms are more influential on the formation and
maintenance o f IT overall. However, there is not only the downward influence, but also
influence from lower levels to higher. For example, the availability o f new resources (e.g.. web
browsers, internet connection) at the institutional realm o f IT use may lead to changes at the
institutional realm o f IT production due to dropping existing resources (e.g., a 3rd generation
programming language) and rules (e.g., system development life cycle) to adopt new rules
(e.g., object-oriented IS development methodology) and resources (e.g., visual programming
languages and SQL based relational databases). The three levels are closely interwoven in
reality and should only be analytically distinct; there are interconnections among them.
The high level institutional realm tends to be relatively more stable than that of the
lower levels. For example, while the directives o f a company’s IT strategic plan can greatly
influence the rules and resources at the institutional realm o f IT production and use, those rules
are often invisible and/or unnoticed to (or by) individual users and it is rare that individual
users question the rules and resources of the IT governance. However, restructuring is possible
at the macro level (Zucker 1988) or the institutional realm o f governance within an IT.
Discontinuous or radical change (Tyre and Orlikowski 1994) may be possible and is more
likely at the institutional realm o f governance as well design. However, attempts to restructure
institutions at the local level are likely to encounter similar constraints o f ‘path dependence’ or
as Offe puts it, ‘the long arm o f the past’ (1996, p. 219). The founding fathers of the IT are
faced with the task o f deinstitutionalizing old rules, norms, and work practices at the
80
institutional realm o f use. However this is always problem at the local level. On the other hand,
once an IT is deployed, the “constant buzz o f change” is likely on the micro level (Zucker
1988). A situated change perspective (Orlikowski 1996) is more appropriate for the
institutional realms o f use. Rather than "iterative modes': the design mode and the use mode
(Orlikowski 1992), which have time-space distanciation, the three institutional realms within
an IT would be better understood as nested.
5.4.2 Variability of Agency
The way in which a multi-level model understands the action' side o f duality o f IT
significantly differs from that of extant models. Most structurational work (e.g., Orlikowski
1992: Orlikowski and Robey 1991; Orlikowski and Gash 1994) tends to group actors as
designers or technologists and users. Discussing technological frames, Orlikowski and Gash
(1994) suggest three key groups in organizations— managers, technologists, and users—and
argue that their technological frames are different.
This analysis relies on the SCOT (Social Construction o f Technology) tradition (e.g.,
Bijker and Pinch 1987; Bijker and Law 1992), specifically the concept of the relevant social
group. Pinch and Bijker (1987) intended to refer to ‘relationships’ between a technological
artifact and social groups. However, as critics suggest, it may also reinforce an impression of
social groups effectively equal in power (Russell 1986) and the assumption that all relevant
social groups are present in the design process. This fails to adequately attend to power
asymmetry between groups (Klein and Kleinman 2002). Along with the concept o f relevant
social group, most structurational work also considers the concept o f ‘interpretive flexibility’.
The concept suggests that technological artifacts are culturally constructed and interpreted ...
there is flexibility in how people think o f or interpret artifacts but also there is flexibility in
81
how artifacts are designed’ (Pinch and Bijker 1987. p. 40). This notion recognizes that there is
flexibility in the design, use, and the interpretation o f technology (Orlikowski 1992).
A criticism is that ‘interpretive flexibility' alone is not sufficient to allow
operationalization o f the relationship between the wider milieu and the actual content of
technology. We need to show “not only what different social groups think about an artifacts,
but also what they are able to do about it— their differing abilities to influence the outcome of
its development and adoption. Thus we must relate not only their objectives to their social
location, but also the resources o f knowledge and power with which they can bring about
change to suit those objectives” (Russel 1986).
The new model needs to map out not only the relationship o f social groups to the
technology, but their relations to other structures such as the economic, political and
ideological constraints (Russell 1986). Group capacity should be understood in broadly
organizational or structural terms, as it is such factors that fundamentally shape group capacity
... variation in the structurational characteristics o f producers/developers and consumers can
dictate their relative capacity to shape artifact development (Klein and Kleinman 2002).
Following these arguments, a multi-level model explicitly considers power
asymmetries among agencies. The variability o f agency refers to three hierarchical levels o f
agency, termed macro, meso, and micro by Mouzelis (1995). Agency varies across and within
these levels, and how it is exercised by different actors is far from uniform (e.g., Archer 1995;
Mouzelis 1995; Sewell 1992). We need to bring some precision by conceptualizing agency in
terms of different actors’ power and responsibility for what actually happens (Archer 1995).
Social structures constrain and enable the projects o f agents by creating differential opportunity
costs for people in different positions, and consequently vested interests in change or stability
for those sharing a position o f relative advantage or disadvantage (Archer 1995).
82
It is likely that agencies in a technological field have different capacities to influence
IT (e.g., Klein and Kleinman 2002; Russel 1986; Kleinman 1998). We need more precision on
how agency operates in an IT. We need to show not only what these agencies think about an
IT, but also what they are able to do about it—their differing abilities to influence the outcome
of its governance, production, and use. In fact, Williams and Edge (1996) noted that the key
research question that opened up the SCOT program concerns the circumstances and manner in
which technologies may be hard’ or 'malleable’ to particular social groups.
Is everyone in a technological field directly dealing with the institutional realm o f
governance or design within an IT? Obviously, the answer is No. A certain actor or group o f
actors has power and responsibility for the governance of IT, while other actors are responsible
for the design and use of IT. More precisely, a certain actor or group(s) o f actors are in the
institutional realm of IT governance (e.g., CIOs, CFOs) while others prevail in the realms of
design (e.g., programmers, system analysts) or use. To take this into account we need to
consider the variability o f agency in the multi-level model of the duality o f technology.
The hierarchical variability o f agency allows that some actors, because o f their
collectives, by virtue o f their positions in hierarchies and/or by consequent orientations to rules
and resources, may have macroscopic power (Mouzelis 1995). This “macro-agency” is more
powerful than “meso-” and “micro-agency” with respect to its capacity to transform the IT.
Whether an agency is macro, meso or micro may be determined in terms o f its role, practices
and responsibility. The properties o f those agencies are not pre-given, but socially constructed,
and the properties need to be understood interactionally, meaning that the relationships
between technology and actors as well as the interaction among actors should be considered
and for this we should also look directly at social interaction to understand it
83
Thus, this suggests that an agency should be examined in relation to IT. For example,
the macro agency (e.g., CIOs, steering committees, advisory councils. CEOs, CFOs) oversees
the acquisition and use of technology within an organization. This agency is generally
responsible for
• Planning information resources investments, operations, and support

• Managing IR human, technological, and financial resources
• Organizing local information resources for efficient and effective uses
• Reporting on IT investment and benefits to executive management and other
higher decision bodies
• Overseeing management o f major IT projects through implementation
• Adopt IT standards, policies, practices, and procedures that address strategic
planning, risk management, disaster recovery, security, and process improvement
The meso agency is those (e.g, system analysts, change management specialists, programmers,
project manager) who are responsible primarily for the production o f IT including logical and
physical design and analysis of information systems and their implementation and post
implementation. The micro agency refers to different types and levels o f users who do not have
direct control over both the governance and production o f technology. The primary practice of
the micro agency is the use of technology.
Goodin and Klingermann (1996) noted, “as many have recently discovered, even
constitution-writers do not enjoy a completely free hand" (p. 18). In reality even those
“highest” agencies in an organization have to respond to even “higher” actors such as the board
and the State.
Finally, the proposed model posits that the boundaries between different levels of
agency tend to blur and an actor or a group o f actors’ role and responsibilities belong to more
than one level o f agency. No one agent or level o f agency has direct control over diverse rule
and resources o f IT that affect their actions. Thus it is likely that they will rely on the exercise
84
o f proxy agency. Also different actors at each level may develop “collective agency” based on
their shared beliefs in their collective power to produce desired results.
The prevalent structurational model (Figure 5) can be depicted as follows, which
indicates that “IT is the medium and the outcome of human action"
T e c h n o lo g y Macro
H u m an a c to r s Micro
Figure 5. Duality o f Technology (Adapted from Orlikowski 1992)
Our model would posit a more complex configuration for the relationship between IT and
agency, which can be depicted as follows (Figure 6).
85
» Macro agency
IT G overnance
4
IT Production Meso agency
IT Use « * Micro agency

Figure 6. A Multi-level Model of the Duality o f Technology
This multi-level model considers the variability o f IT and agency at three levels. This
way o f understanding IT, agency and the relationship between the two leads us to several new
insights more than a general “IT enables/constrain action” position. The relationships between
actors and IT vary and different modalities are in operation.
First, when we understand IT and agency in terms of three levels there may be the
ever-present gap or mismatch between the macro, meso, and micro levels that is often pointed
out by institutional theorists (Zucker, 1988; Sjostrand 1993). There seem to be significant gaps
between the social facts institutionalized at the macro level and those present at the micro level
(Zucker 1988).
This mismatch is then explained by the distance between on the one hand the
experiences and thoughts o f the many single individuals on the micro level and, on the
other hand, the content and regulations embedded in the more formalized institutions
on the macro level, reflecting a more holistic perspective on society (Sjostrand 1993, p.
329)
86
Thus the pattern of practice at the micro level cannot be completely defined at the
meso and macro level, nor can the pattern of practice at the meso level be completely defined
at the macro level. This has at least two implications: substantial disturbances at the first level
may be absorbed at that level and there sometimes will be institutional drift such that
institutions at the lower levels can be modified without this being noticed or sanctioned at
higher levels (Holm 1995).
The existence o f a mismatch between micro and macro levels is suggested as an
important initiating force in institutional change processes (Sjostrand 1993). Entropy in IT as
an institution is increased by inconsistencies or even conflict between social order at the
macro- and microlevels (Zucker 1988).
The IT strategy literature generally expects a high degree o f reproduction on the micro
level (e.g.. Lederer and Salmela 1996; Reich and Benbasat 1996). However, many aspects of
micro order undermine the macro order (Zucker 1988). For example, the implementation o f a
large-scale knowledge management system which required the standardization of the work
done in different communities o f practice faced challenges from local practices and cultures
(Braa and Rolland 2000). Similarly the case of a large-scale, multi-sites ERP project
implementation launched in Norway illustrates that the project focused on high centralization
using a centrally defined, standardized set of administrative tools and administration had to be
reversed due to diverse local needs and requirements. The tight, top-down control of IT is
attractive but not likely to happen in the real world.
Also the current IT management literature advocating the alignment between IT and
business strategy may be misleading (Bloomfield et al. 1997; Knights et al. 1997; Ciborra
2000). The effort to control and manage at the macro levels will very often lead to institutional
drift. As March and Olsen (1989) noted that actual change often differs from the change that
87
was intended. This is because "change rarely satisfies the prior intentions o f those who initiate.
Change cannot be controlled precisely" (March and Olsen 1989, p.65). The six company case
studies by Ciborra and his colleagues (2000) illustrate that large-scale IS or infrastructures tend
to 'drift': they deviate from their planned purpose often outside anyone's influence. As
institutional drift continues and increases, there is a simultaneous decrease in trust in macro
level institutions (Zucker 1988). This results in a "vicious circle” that leads businesses from the
tight, top-down control of the information infrastructure to the actual drift of the infrastructure
itself (Ciborra 2000): The more institutional drift occurs, the less trust in macro level. This
leads to more effort by management to control that is likely to result in further more
institutional drift and less trust.
Second, when we consider an IT and agency in the context o f the three institutional
realms, the change o f IT and organization overall can originate from any of the three levels. If
this is true, there will be less stability in IT and organization overall. For instance, an event
(e.g., a new accounting rule) at the institutional realm o f governance may cause changes in the
realm of production and use and the opposite may also occur. An action at a lower level would
be absorbed at a higher level and can result in changes at the higher level and in the overall
system. New' practices at the micro level of action can be converted to a new power
constellation at the meso and/or macro level and thereby establish a foundation for further
institutional change (Holm 1995). It is likely that micro-changes need to be cumulated in the
long run to the point of producing emergent, con figurative properties in the overall IT and
organization. To study this phenomenon needs a longitudinal case study o f IT use.
For example, Orlikowski (2000) introduces six different cases of technology-in-use:
one of them is about improvisation technology-in-practice in which users "involved their use of
Notes technology to respond artfully to unanticipated problems and unexpected opportunities
88
tSiat arose in their work” and another case is about individual productivity technology-in-
practice in which a set o f consultants in an organization used the collaboration technology to
enhance their own individual effectiveness rather than collaboration with other consultants.
Both cases show new practices at the micro level of action. The author can revisit the case site
and see whether such micro-changes actually established a foundation for institutional change
in the IT and organization.
Third, even though change in IT and organization can originate from any of the three
levels it should be noted that actions are hierarchically ordered. In a more general way.
“decisions about rules taken at a certain hierarchical level tend to become taken-for-granted
decision premises at lower hierarchical levels. The decision premises then become the basis on
which lower-placed organizational participants take decisions of a more limited or
circumscribed nature” (Mouzelis 1995). This does not deny the possibility of resistance at
lower levels e.g. lower level agency independent o f meso or macro agency (This aspect is
discussed later in this chapter). Micro agencies face micro IT in everyday activity. The macro
level IT is relatively hidden to micro (and meso) agencies and thus there is a relatively low
possibility micro agencies can change the macro IT. For example, the decision on the
acquisition o f an ERP from a particular vendor over others is relatively hidden to departmental
users. In most cases these people have little influence on such decisions. Micro agencies are
likely to have relatively less influence on the production o f the macro IT while their actions
tend to engage in the reproduction o f the meso and macro IT. For example, micro agencies
like individual users may not be allowed to participate in the production or creation of the
company’s IT security or strategic plan while their daily actions often reproduce rather than
radically transform such rules.
89
On the other hand macro agencies are more powerful in the sense that a decision to
deploy a new IT at the realm o f governance may replace an existing IT, which is regarded as
legitimate and efficient by its primary micro level user groups. For this, the macro agencies
often employ the process termed “sociology o f translation” (Callon 1986; Latour 1987) by
which "the organizational problem is constituted and for which the appropriate IT solution is
proposed” (Bloomfield and Best 1992). The case o f London Ambulance Service Dispatch
System (Flowers 1996; Wastell and Newman 1996; Beynon-Davies 1995) in 1990 is
illustrative. A new Chief Executive Officer of the LAS appointed and supported by the RHA
(Regional Health Authority) problematized the existing system which users were accustomed
to and proposed a new IS as the solution which turned out to be one o f the most notorious IS
failure in UK history. Most user groups had a negative interest (and perspective on) in the IT
project and were against it, but the macro agency was enough powerful to initiate such project
that led many experienced ambulance staff leave the organization. Similar cases in which
macro agencies construct the problem and propose a new IT as the solution are found in other
studies o f UK National Health Service’s information technology (e.g., Bloomfield and Best
1992; Brown 1995).
Fourth, the possibility o f IT being changed and transformed by micro agency can be
also significant. First of all since the micro agency faces the micro IT in everyday activity, thus
the chance o f rules and resources (e.g., technical features) o f micro IT to be challenged and
transformed by micro agency becomes stronger. It may also be true that micro agencies interact
with and reproduce the meso or macro IT. They would interact and influence the meso and/or
macro IT in three ways. First, their action changes the micro IT, which has the potential to
originate some and possibly significant changes in the meso and/or macro IT. Also, they could
influence the meso and/or macro agencies through the exercise o f proxy agency. For example.
90
departmental users often turn to senior executives to influence the IT project team for meso or
micro level IT. Thirdly, micro agencies can strategically develop collective agency to compete
with meso and/or macro agencies and influence the production and/or governance o f IT. Fifth,
as the figure 4 indicates there are many possible interactions between IT and agency at
different hierarchical levels. This implies that diverse modalities are operating at those
interactions. To illustrate.
Professional soccer is played by rules set down by the internal soccer federation. FIFA.
Players might be unhappy with the rules. To change them, however, they must engage
in a rather differently structured game than soccer, i.e., that of influencing FIFA’s
policy-making bodies (Holm 1995, p. 400).
While the mode of action by micro agency at the micro level can be characterized as practical,
the mode o f action by the same agency at the meso or macro level may be political (Holm
1995)
The multi-level model suggests that IT represents all three types o f modalities o f
structuration (Orlikowski and Robey 1991). The model also suggests that the modality may be
specific to the type of interaction. While the mode o f action at the micro level can be
characterized as practical, the mode o f action at the meso and/or macro level can be political.
The former (practical) are actions taken within a given framework of understandings,
norms, and rules, serving to reproduce the institutional structure or, at most, and rules,
serving to reproduce the institutional structure or, at most, stimulate incremental
changes. The latter political processes are action taken whose purpose is to change the
rules or frameworks governing actions (Scott 2001. p. 197)
Sixth, the multi-level model suggests that we should distinguish action (of micro
agency) guided by the meso and/or macro IT and action aimed explicitly at manipulating the
meso and/or macro IT. To illustrate, consider the structural model (Orlikowski 1992). The
model argues that IT is the medium and simultaneously the outcome of action. We believe that
91
this should be carefully understood since action refers to two different things: action by macro
agencies and action by micro agencies.
It may be argued that IT is the medium o f the micro agency’s action while it is the
outcome o f the macro agency's action. This suggests an important expansion o f structurational
theories, structuration across levels. Orlikowski’s structural model, for instance, argues simply
that technology is the medium and outcome o f human action. "Technology is physically
constructed by actors working in a given social context, and technology is socially constructed
by actors through the different meanings they attach to it and the various features they
emphasize and use” (p. 406). However, if we distinguish levels o f agency it is possible that
technology is primarily the medium o f micro agencies (e.g.. users) structuration and primarily
the outcome of meso agencies (e.g., designers) structuration.
Thus, in her model we are talking about one identical technology but multiple actors
and/or groups of actors. The outcome o f one’s action becomes the medium o f another’s action.
The micro IT is at least the initial outcome of meso and macro agencies. Their action varies in
terms of power and responsibilities. And structuration is not a simple duality, but a duality
spread across levels o f institutions and different agencies that coact in structuration.
Seventh, an IT spans three institutional realms. The use o f IT is the means/resource for
micro agencies while the production of IT and governance IT are accomplished by meso and
macro agencies. But, what is the meaning of the governance o f IT for meso and/or macro
agencies? Is the structure that they draw on for their action? Rather for them the micro IT
becomes the focus. “The same rules can therefore be means/resources at one hierarchical level,
and topics at another, higher level” (Mouzelis 1995, p. 140). The macro and/or meso ITs tend
to be become taken-for-granted premises in the micro IT even though there is still room for
92
resistance and decoupling. What is a transformable, malleable structure to a high-level agency
tends to be external, intractable, immutable for lower-level agencies.
Eighth, the variability o f IT does not necessary lead to more changes in the IT. Instead,
if an IT is understood an institution of ‘nested rules and resources’ this may further imply
greater stability for the IT. At each successive level up the hierarchy, the rules are increasingly
costly to change (Goodin 1996, p. 23). This further suggests that the institutional realm o f IT
governance is more costly to change than the production o f IT, which is more costly than the
use o f IT. For example, the decision by the steering committee at a university to replace an old
payroll information system by an ERP system is costly since it often entails a major
restructuration at lower institutional realms, production and use. which have high sunk costs
and experience uncertainty in the face of the change. Thus, without any “compelling reason”
the governance o f IT is hard to change due to the stability and reliability of the more deeply
nested rules and resources.
Another process that lends stability is what we term ‘allowance’. The notion o f
‘allowance’ refers to the potential for strategic use o f ‘decoupling’ and/or drifting. According
to Meyer and Rowan (1977), this situation produces elements of structure ‘decoupled’ from
activities and from each other. Decoupling is the primary method that institutionalized
organizations use to resolve conflicts and inconsistencies in their efforts to conform to
ceremonial rules and technical activities and demands for efficiency. For instance, the
Department of Information Resources (DIR) in the state o f Texas legally requires state
agencies to use a particular IS development methodology and quality assurance for large IT
projects. Several state agencies apparently comply with the letter o f the law but not with its
spint. Then they could claim “we have followed it!” The consequence is institutional drift. The
93
concept of drift has been used to represent emergent changes through the introduction of IT
such as groupware (Ciborra 1996) and ERPs (Ciborra 2000; Quattrone and Hopper 2001).
The notion o f allowance implies the exactly opposite situation, where the governance
of IT itself ‘allows’ decoupling by the micro or lower levels. The allowance is often done
‘strategically’ during the governance (and possibly the production) o f IT. For instance, DIR
recognizes some powerful state agencies and strategically allows them to use other IS
development methodologies and homegrown quality assurance programs. Allowance might
occur due to different strategic reasons. For example, this sometimes occurs when the State and
DIR expect strong resistance from one powerful agency or a network o f agencies against those
methods and techniques, which they view as more internal control by the State. In such a case,
the State or DIR explicitly exclude from the legislation any legal statement about the
requirement for a particular IS development methodology or quality assurance technique. This
enables the governance o f IT itself to avoid mobilizing resistance or outcry from lower levels
and thereby escape the need to be explicitly designed anew.
Drift does not necessarily represent ‘outside control’ only, as Ciborra (2000) argues.
Instead, it may be the consequences o f ‘structurally inscribed strategic selectivities' and
‘structurally oriented strategic calculations’6. Then both the purely rationalistic design - IT as
designed -- and emergent view (Ngwenjama 1998) - IT as emergent rather than designed -- do
not seem to provide an accurate description about IT-related organizational change. Instead, IT
may be both designed and emergent simultaneously.
Ninth, the multi-level model developed in this chapter suggests that to explain the
duality o f technology accurately is to study the phenomenon at multiple levels. Privileging one
6 The terms are borrowed from Jessop (2001).
94
level of analysis over another leads to overdominance o f its own causal structures by
emphasizing either local practices or macro-organizational changes (Orlikowski and Barley,
2002) and may lead to either technological determinism or social determinism (Misa, 1994).
Instead, the interplay between technology and organizations is neither strictly micro nor macro
in character (Rousseau, 1985). Like others (e.g., Walsham 1998, 2000: Korpela et al. 2001) this
model addresses the need of multi-level analysis to provide an adequate level o f precision in
conceptualizing technology and organizations.
This model may also offer a way of investigating technology and organizational
relations more systematically. Rousseau's (1983) review o f the theoretical and operational
definitions found in technology research reveals the systematic differences in definitions of
technology across individual, departmental, and organizational levels of analysis. An IT as a
system o f nested rules and resources on three levels - governance, production, and use -
potentially provides a compositional model for conducting the multi-level analysis, rather than
using the same definition across levels or different definitions o f technology across levels
which has basis in theory (Rousseau 1985).
Finally, recognizing the possibility o f the variability o f IT and agency leads us to
rethink social responsibilities of those who have social positions and roles to transform IT. As
Kling notes, “not distinguishing more closely between different parts and variants of the
elements of the IS is an instance of the aforementioned convenient fiction (1991, p. 356)... an
unintended consequence of not being fine-grained enough is removing social responsibility
from the designers” (p. 343). Ignoring the variability o f IT and agency may remove social
responsibility from those agencies. All agencies contribute to the formation and maintenance of
IT and changes in IT can be caused by any of the institutional realms o f IT. However, our
model implies that certain agencies are more powerful than others and those rules and
95
resources at a certain hierarchical level are more influential than those at lower hierarchical
levels. Thus, this model reemphasizes the importance of ethics and social responsibility in the
development o f information systems and further points out the significant role o f IS planner
and designer in this process (Mason et al. 1995; Boland 1987; Walsham 1993, 2001; Carlson et
al. 1999; Kling 1992; Churchman 1971, 1982).
5.5 Conclusion
Which order should be seen as generative o f IT and organizations? And how do IT and
organizations interact with each other? Most IS studies have assumed a high degree o f
reproduction on the microlevel and thus offered a relatively stable picture o f IT and
organizations. Rather, the duality o f technology (e.g., Barley 1986; Orlikowski 1992), based on
Giddens’ theory o f structuration and/or the SCOT theory, has made a significant contribution
in our understanding o f the interplay between IT and organizations. In a similar vein several IS
studies (e.g., Barley 1986; Orlikowski 2000; Ngwenyama 1998; Karsten 1999; Mitev 2000)
have suggested that macro structures do not control or determine micro-events. However, we
argued that the extant structurational model has some limitations in that the model itself is not
sufficiently detailed to illuminate the dynamic interplay between IT and organizations. These
studies tended to see IT as macro structures and users and their practices as local or micro
events. Therefore, the interplay between IT and organizations was described as that o f macro
structures and micro agencies. This assumption portrays a relatively static picture o f IT and
organizations and their relationship. In order to understand and explain the dynamic nature of
IT and organizations, this chapter proposed a multi-level model o f the duality o f technology
that draws upon recent studies of institutional theory and/or ‘modified realisnf. In the model
ITs are conceptualized as dynamic social institutions o f nested rules and resources and
structuration is located in the interplay across and within levels. The model assumes that both
96
institutions and agencies can be micro as well as macro and it explicitly considering the
variability o f institutions or IT and agency.
The multi-level model adds new insights to our understanding o f IT and has
advantages over extant models. Among them,
• Through conceptualizing IT as an institution o f nested rules and resources the model
illuminates why IT cannot be restricted in “its scope to material artifacts (various
configurations o f hardware and software)” (Orlikowski 1992, p. 403) and why the
increasing large-scale IS or information infrastructure must be understood more than
“multiple technological artifacts” (Orlikowski 2000)
• The model suggests that change in IT and organizations can originate from any level o f IT
and agency rather than either IT or agency. Also an interplay occurs between and within
levels. Then, IT and organizations become more dynamic than has been described in the
literature
• By revealing the hierarchical nature of IT and organizations and their relationship, the
model is capable of explaining why IT and organizations maintain some stability and the
outcomes o f IT can be predictable to some level (DeSanctis and Poole 1994) rather than
“never predictable” and “out o f control”
• The model addresses the key research question that opened up the SCOT research
(Williams and Edge 1996) that concerns the circumstances and manner in which
technologies may be ‘hard’ or ‘malleable’ to particular social groups
• While acknowledging the interpretive flexibility and technology-in-use and -practice the
model addresses the importance of the initial design o f IT. This is because the outcome (an
IS) of someone’s action becomes the structural condition and the medium for the other’s
action.
97
• While acknowledging the significant role o f users in the reproduction and transformation
of IT, the model addresses the importance o f social responsibility and ethics in IS
development and IT project, not only for IS planners and designers (e.g.. Mason et al.
1995: Walsham 2001: Kling 1992: Churchman 1971) but also for “users”
• The model illuminates ways o f influencing IT though extending the conception o f human
agency to proxy agency and collective agency and also opens up the potential to use
“collective efficacy” for productive technology adaptations, particularly in the case of
large-scale IS which are often deployed at diverse sites and across communities o f practice
• The model may be helpful for practitioners to develop improved IS development and
implementation strategies that promote the IT project success
98
CHAPTER VI
REFRAMING THE INTERPLAY BETWEEN EXISTING INSTITUTIONS AND
AGENCY: DUALITY OF PREEXISTING INFORMATION SYSTEMS
This chapter investigates the significant role of existing information systems in the
development o f new information systems. Following chapters VI and V, in this chapter we
reconceptualize information systems as social institutions, which include not only technology
but also institutional properties in which technology is instantiated. Therefore, information
systems, like institutions, are simultaneously materia! and virtual (Friedland and Alford 1991;
Sewell 1992).
The review of current literature shows there are two main polarized approaches to the
development o f information systems: the “History Does Not Matter” (HNM view) and, at the
opposite, the path dependent (history as constraints or PD) view. The HNM view may refer to
such vocabularies as “architectural”,” ex ante design”, (Lanzara 1999) and typical of much
constitutional engineering or formal IS development while the PD view basically posits
“undesignable” evolutionary dynamics (Lanzara 1999). This study proposes a third approach to
the design and implementation o f IS by viewing history or existing information systems as both
enabler and constraint in the development of future information systems.
6.1 Prior Conceptualizations of History (or Preexisting Information Systems)
A review o f the literature indicates that there are two dominant views on the role of
history on the development o f new information systems.
6.1.1 “History Does Not Matter” (HNM)
This perspective on history is dominant in the IS community in general, and among IS
practitioners in particular. This approach understands information systems as separable from
social and organizational contexts in which they are instantiated, appropriated, and enacted.
99
Thus this view tends to view information systems as technical artifacts that are relatively
stable, discrete, independent, and fixed. In this sense this perspective is very close to
“technological imperative” (Markus and Robey 1988; Orlikowski 1992). “decision-making
school” (DeSanctis and Poole 1994), and tool view o f technology (Orlikowski and lacono
2001). Since an information system is understood as independent o f human behavior and
institutional properties, the introduction o f a new information system into an organization is
regarded as unproblematic. History has nothing to do with the development o f new information
systems.
This model o f understanding history has appeared as the technocentric view of
Business Process Reengineering (BPR) and more recently as the wave o f Enterprise Resource
Planning (ERP). The technocentric view omits the issue of human agents and the existing
organizational and social contexts in the introduction o f new technology (Sarker and Lee 2002)
and believes that organizations can be fully “redesigned” through new technology. “Re-
everything or re-engineering is good and possible.” This model can also be found in popular
management perspectives to IS-strategy and information infrastructure deployment and
investment (Ives et al. 1993; Broadbent and Weill 1993). For instance, Broadbent and Weill
(1997) noted, “creating appropriate infrastructure services involves decisions based on a sound
understanding of where a firm is going, rather than on where it has been" (p. 91). These
studies view the development o f new information infrastructure as free from history but rather
fully controllable.
This view is similar to neoclassical economics in which the influence of prior
institutions on human behavior is largely neglected. Instead, a purely individualistic,
instrumental model o f action is emphasized. This model seems to disregard the simple fact that
“history matters” (North 1990; Offe 1996). The model ignores extant empirical findings of
100
many studies o f IS development and implementation that new technology is always
problematic when facing the history o f organization (e.g., existing practices, culture,
technologies, users, politics). Simply, this model underestimates the role o f history in designing
new information systems.
6.1.2 Path Dependency (History as Constraints)
Several studies (e.g.. Hanseth and Braa 1998; Ciborra and Hanseth 1998; Monteiro
2000) in the IS field recently have argued that the HNM perspective is overly rationalistic
regarding IS development and implementation. Using actor-network theory (ANT) (Callon
1991; Latour 1987) these studies take a radically different view of information systems
(particularly large-scale information systems such as ERP and KMS) as information
infrastructures that are more than “pure” technology. They are rather socio-technical networks
(Hanseth 1996).
The authors o f these studies argue that one key characteristic o f information
infrastructure is that new infrastructures derive from the installed base - the old infrastructure.
The focus on infrastructure as ‘installed base’ implies that infrastructures are considered as
always established facts: The installed base heavily influences how the new can be designed
(Monteiro and Hepso 2002). History matters here and heavily influences the design of new
information systems. For example, Star and Ruhleder (1996) noted, “infrastructure is ‘sunk’
into, inside of. other structures, social arrangements and technologies and does not grow de
novo; it wrestles with the 'inertia o f the installed base.’ Rolland (2000) studies the difficulty of
deploying a large-scale information system in a global organization due to the installed base.
Some authors go further and suggest “the irreversibility of the installed base” which
emphasizes the difficulty of changing existing systems and viewing the installed base as actor.
Drawing on the work o f such writers as Arthur (1989), David (1986), and Grindley (1995) in
101
the field of institutional economy, they discuss self-reinforcing mechanisms (e.g., lock-in, sunk
costs) and path-dependency as key characteristics o f the installed base and information
infrastructure. The most familiar example o f this phenomenon is the QWERTY layout of
typewriter and computer keyboards (David 1986). When a technology has been adopted it will
be impossible to develop competing technologies (Arthur 1989)
In contrast to the HNM view, the PD approach seems to overestimate the role of
history in the development o f new information systems. The path dependence approach is too
linear (Campbell 1997) and insensitive to the situated reflexivity of actors who may adopt a
variety of coping strategies rather than being forced into commitments that may be difficult to
reverse (Sabel and Zeitlin 1997). The PD position views information infrastructures or
institutions as stable and as a constraint for future development by overemphasizing the
process of institutionalization of the old while not investigating the enabling role o f the
installed base on the development o f new information systems. This may be because the
theoretical basis of these studies rests on social (or institutional) theories like Bourdieu's notion
o f habitus and actor network theory that emphasize stability and reproduction (Hanseth and
Monteiro 1998).
6.2 Refraining the Interplay between Existing Institutions and Agency: DIT
The above discussion has been a brief and somewhat critical examination o f extant
understandings o f previously existing institutions or IS. This review reveals that a large group
o f IS researchers has not taken seriously the impact o f pre-existing institutions on designing
new information systems. In this view “existing institutions do not matter.” On the other hand
the PD perspective does consider pre-existing institutions seriously, but focuses largely on how
the selection process is constrained by the old. In this view institutions are seen as stable and
inertia. The role of agency is largely ignored.
102
The HNM approach represents one extreme on a continuum o f possible positions
regarding IS and institutional innovation. It represents the voluntarist pole: Actors are free of
preexisting institutions and new institutions can be deliberately introduced and - provided the
design is appropriate and they are effectively implemented - readily and successfully
established. This overemphasizes the design role of deliberate human decision and action,
arguing for the possibility and the necessity o f centralized process guidance (Lanzara 1999). At
the other extreme, the PD approach represents a type of historical determinist view which
assumes that institutional legacies determine the future. Rather they will change in an organic
way independent o f purposeful action (Nielsen et al., 1995). This approach has little place for
collective human will and plans (Lanzara 1999) (Figure 7).
HNM view .
??? PD view
Figure 7. Two Poles o f IS and Institutional Innovation
In this chapter we employ the tenets o f institutional theory to propose a framework for
investigating the relationship between pre-existing information systems and human actors in
establishing new information systems. This framework subscribes to neither o f these polar
positions, but attempts to take a middle position that combines elements o f the HNM and PD.
This framework considers the temporal dimension in institutions and agency and reframes the
interplay between two.
103
In what follows, the notion o f ‘duality of institutions' (Giddens 1984) is presented. By
extending the notion, we develop the notion of ‘duality o f existing information systems’, which
is used to explain the significant role played by existing information systems in the
development o f new ISs. The concept ‘duality of existing information systems refers to a dual
role o f preexisting information systems as enablers as well as constraints in the designing o f a
new IS.
6.2.1 Prior Understanding of Duality of Institutions
Institutional theorists (Giddens 1984; Powell and DiMaggio 1991; Scott 1995, 2001)
have conceived institutions as both enabler and constraint. These institutional theorists agree
that institutions have a dual role: institutions are not merely constraints (Jepperson 1991). but
socially constructed templates for action, generated and maintained through ongoing
interactions (Zucker 1977; Meyer and Rowan 1977). Institution is both medium and outcome
o f the reproduction o f practices (Giddens 1984). Jepperson (1991) defines institutions as
“socially constructed, routine-reproduced, program or rule systems” (p. 149).
“All institutions simultaneously empower and control” (Jepperson, 1991, p. 146) and
thus simultaneously constitute and are constituted by human action. Actors and institutions
presuppose one another. Institutions are the outcome o f the behaviors o f the social group or
community (Bums and Scapens 2000). Institutions are not just constraint structures;
institutions represent a constraint/freedom duality (Fararo and Skvoretz 1984). We believe that
most social theorists agree with this dual nature of institution.
6.2.2 Temporal Dimensions of Institutions and Agency
Even though recent studies, discussed above, recognize the duality o f institutions, few
studies understand this duality in terms o f preexisting institutions. These studies are relatively
inattentive to the relation between institution and agency in time. However, the proposed
104
dynamic institutional model for the development o f new IS makes a temporal distinction
between institution (information system) and agency to explain how preexisting institutions
and agency interplay each other in developing new institutions.
We propose the notion of duality o f preexisting institutions, which is based on extant
understanding and agreement on duality o f institutions and adds to this the temporal distinction
between institutional realm and action realm. The notion of preexisting or predecessor
institutions contains meanings in both time and space. They can be both previously existing
institutions at the same or nearly the same place and those spatially distant. For example, in the
context o f institutional change in several East-European countries in 1990's, both former
socialism having existed for several decades in their countries and capitalism imported from
Western countries became predecessor institutions for post-socialism (e.g.. Stark 1996;
Nielsen. Jessop and Hausner 1995).
Recent work (e.g.. Archer, 1995; Barley and Tolbert 1997; Reed 1997; Stones 2001) in
institutional theory suggests that institutions exist prior to action. For example. Barley and
Tolbert (1997) argue that
Institutions are historical accretions o f past practices and understandings that set
conditions on action. Unless an institution exists prior to action, it is difficult to
understand how it can affect behavior and how one can examine its implications for
action or speak o f action’s subsequent affects on the institution (p. 99)
Archer takes a strong position on this matter, arguing that “institution and agency work
on different time intervals, however small the gap between them” (1990, p. 83). Her
morphogenetic approach is more explicit about this temporal distinction between institution
and agency and advances two propositions: that institution necessarily pre-dates the action(s)
which transform it: and that institutional elaboration necessarily post-dates those actions. The
morphogenetic analysis (Figure 8) allows the investigation o f the temporally defined interplay
105
between institution and agency: between institutional conditioning (time 1), social interaction
and its immediate outcome (times 2 and 3) and institutional elaboration (time 4).
Structure
T1
Interaction
T2 T3
Structural elaboration
T4
Figure 8. The Morphogenetic Sequence (Adapted from Archer 1995)
Stones (2001) argues that agency draws on the social structures o f domination,
legitimation and signification (Giddens 1984). “These structures must either pre-exist the
moment in which the agent draws upon them or, at the very least (and to a lesser degree), exist
at the moment the agency draws upon them” (p. 181). He argues that Giddens also recognizes
structural constraints and the preexistence o f structures.
Constraint stems from the "objective’ existence of structural properties that the
individual agent is unable to change. As with the constraining qualities o f sanctions, it
is best described as placing limits upon the range o f options open to an actor, or
plurality o f actors, in a given circumstance or type o f circumstance (Giddens 1984, p.
176-7)
All these theorists contend that we need to see the temporal dimension o f duality of
institutions. The notion o f duality of institutions would not be valid unless institutions preexist
106
action. For instance, a language has to preexist interaction so actors enact and reproduce or
transform the institution (Fararo and Skvoretz 1984). Then the preexisting institution
(language) not only constrains but also enables human action. “The past shows its face as both
restrictions and possibilities” (Hakansson and Lundgren 1997, p. 166). In contrast to those two
dominant views o f the role o f existing IS introduced earlier, we posit that existing IS are pre
existing institutions that simultaneously both enable and constrain the development of new IS.
Rather than whether it works, the relevant question is then how does this work?
6.2.3 Duality of Preexisting Information Systems
The temporal dimension in the duality o f institutions suggests that institutions always
precede agency. Then agency builds a new institution (or information system) upon the old
ones. The old ones always both enable and constrain the development of a new institution. No
institution is created de novo (Ricker 1995; Lanzara 1998). “Designed" institutions are almost
always “successor” institutions. They are not built on a tabula rasa. Successor institutions are
affected by the long arm o f their predecessors (Offe 1996, p. 217). Institutions always have a
history o f which they are the products (Berger and Luckmann 1967). At any point in
institutional development, humans start with some preexisting customs that influence new
departures. Most o f the institutions observable in civilized life are also observable in
contemporary primitive societies, though o f course in rudimentary form (Ricker 1995). Clearly,
institutions do not emerge in a vacuum; they always challenge, borrow from, and, to varying
degrees, displace preexisting institutions (Scott 2001). Thus, preexisting institutions are a path
as well as repertoire for the development o f new institutions.
6.3 Dual Surface of Emergence: Schemas and Resources
According to Pickering (1995), who borrowed a concept “surface o f emergence” from
Foucault, scientific inquiry is a kind o f "dance o f agency" in which the scientist acts and nature
107
responds. What makes it possible for the respective agencies to interact at all is that they meet
on a common "surface." The surface is provided by what has already been going on, so that
scientific inquiry is always highly contingent. Using the concept, Pickering stated his idea of
how existing (technical and social) institutions prediscipline the extended temporality of
human intentionality.
Building on Pickering (1995), we propose two concepts: material surface o f emergence
and virtual surface o f emergence. The material surface of emergence refers to the temporarily
emergent aspects o f the material element (resources) of preexisting information systems while
the virtual surface of emergence the temporarily emergent aspects o f the cultural elements
(schemas) o f IS. These two concepts are used to illustrate how preexisting information systems
both enable and constrain the development o f a new IS and how new IS are built with the old
ones.
6.3.1 Material Surface of Emergence
“If the field o f existing machines serves as a surface o f emergence for the goals of
scientific practice, then human intentions are bound up and intertwined (in many ways)
with prior captures o f material agency in reciprocal tuning o f machines and disciplined
human performances ... the world o f intentionality is, then, constitutively engaged
with the world o f material agency, even if the one cannot be substituted for the other”
(Pickering 1995, p. 20)
IS developers can be never free from the material aspects o f preexisting IS. Instead,
they have no option but to combine and/or mobilize the preexisting resources (or IT artifacts)
when designing a new IS. When they try to develop a new IS, the existing material elements
such as existing programming language, software modules, and IS development methodology
emerge as the material surface.
108
No IS can be designed and implemented from scratch. Designers start building up with
the materials they have at hand (Lanzara 1999; Star and Ruhleder 1996). For instance, the case
o f the development o f Post-it Notes shows that the designer did not invent such a new
technology by mistake or from scratch. But the designer described his discovery as a cultivated
breakthrough from combining and mobilizing existing ways o f mixing molecules (Garud and
Kamoe 2001). This is similar to Schumpeter’s idea of combinations. Schumpeter (1934)
considered entrepreneurship as acts reconstituting existing resources to create new ones.
Similarly, Usher (1954) argued that innovation is a cumulative synthesis o f evolutionary ideas
that lead to revolutionary outcomes. Schumpeter defines production (new institutions) as the
combinations or materials and forces that are within our reach. The producer is not an inventor.
All components that are needed for the production, whether physical or immaterial, already
exist and are in most cases also readily available.
In the study o f CSCW systems in Denmark and Japan, Taylor and his colleagues
(2001) found the process of designing a new IS to have its own systemic logic. Each new
design becomes in turn a surface o f emergence on which designers build another generation o f
artifacts. From the case study they show that each new technology becomes the basis for yet
another: an accumulation of artifacts, each bearing a family resemblance to its predecessor.
The material surface of emergence often occurs spatially (Offe 1996). Most often
designing new institutions occur through the replication of (or being imported from) spatially
distant ones (Offe 1996). Offe contends that imitation or ‘'mimetic isomorphism” (DiMaggio
and Powell 1983, 1991) is a powerful device o f institutional innovation. For example, countries
in East Europe borrowed an institutional model, capitalism, from spatially distant ones such as
the US.
109
This process always operates through combining with preexisting resources. Analyzing
the resulting failure o f attempts to create capitalism in East and Central Europe, particularly in
Hungary, for example. Stark (1996) observes that the collapse of the formal structures o f the
socialist regimes does not result in an institutional vacuum. Instead, a wide range o f resources
such as organizational forms, routines, and social ties might block or redirect attempts to
introduce new institutions; but they could also become assets, resources, the basis for credible
commitments and coordinated actions. He notes,
We examine how actors in the postsocialist context are rebuilding organizations and
institutions not on the ruins but with the ruins of communism as they redeploy
available resources in response to their immediate practical dilemmas, Such a
conception o f path dependence does not condemn actors to repetition or retrogression,
for it is through adjusting to new uncertainties by improvising on practice routines that
new organizational forms emerge (p. 995).
IS designers always rely on the availability of programming languages, technologies
(e.g., ERPs, CRMs, DB technology), IS development methodology, and other material
elements of IS. When they develop a new IS, these existing materials o f IS that are spatially
distanced from them or their organizations emerge as the surface that both enables and
constrains the development of a new IS. As Taylor et al.’s (2001) study shows, CSCW systems
in Denmark are often designed using participative design methodology. This methodology is
borrowed from a spatially distant country, Norway. Sweden and other countries in Scandinavia
also borrowed the schema o f IS from Norway also. In contrast to that, CSCW systems in Japan
are designed more in the engineering tradition. Korea picks up the similar IS development
methodology from Japan and US.
Also, the ready-to-hand instrumentalities were profoundly different (even though
training in software engineering skills is the common property of both). In the Danish group,
such instrumentalities include a mixture o f technology, philosophy, and sociology and a
110
reliance on techniques o f social animation they have developed to facilitate interaction with
workers. In Japan, on the other hand, instrumentalities include a mixture o f software and
hardware engineering practices, undiluted by sociological influences. In Scandinavia, iterative
design models and usability testing are integral components o f basic computer science,
education, and philosophy and ergonomics are common subjects. In Japan, basic computer
science and engineering is weighted much more to mathematics and physics (Taylor et al.
2001).
6.3.2 Virtual Surface of Emergence
The virtual elements of IS to which actors have access can be applied across a wide
range of circumstances (Sewell 1992). Existing schemas always emerge as the virtual surface
when a new IS is developed. This virtual surface both enables and constrains the development
of a new IS.
For example, in his work Campbell (1996) stresses that the development o f new
institutions is constrained by preexisting institutional arrangements, power relations, political
struggles, state actions and cultural traditions, whence institutional path dependence. In later
work Campbell (1997) discusses the enabling role of institutions, particularly schemas, in
developing new institutions. He argues that institutions provide schemas and patterns of
interaction that influence how actors define their problems, interests and solutions in ways that
facilitate evolutionary change - something that most evolutionary theories neglect due to their
preoccupation with constraints (p. 11). Existing interpretive schemes always emerge as the
virtual surface when actors define the problem in a new situation. They have a bearing on
institutional change because the way actors define problems when confronted with a pressure
for change influences the outcome. Specifically, he points out that changes in interaction and
focus o f interaction can precipitate changes in defining problems and interests. Extant
Ill
institutions do not just impose constraints on innovation: they “are also enabling to the extent
that they provide a repertoire o f already existing institutional principles (e.g.. models,
analogies, conventions, concepts) that actors use to create new" institutions. Thus, new
institutions differ from but resemble with old ones (Douglas 1986).
Agencies enact the storage o f existing schemas (Weick 2001). The virtual surface of
emergence may be agency-specific, multiple, and even incompatible. Potentially, agencies
have different levels of the capacity to transpose or extend it (Sewell 1992). Some actors are
capable o f applying a wide range o f different and even incompatible schemas and transpose
them in developing new institutions while others are limited in terms o f the ability (Sewell
1992).
The virtual surface o f emergence explains why IS are designed differently in different
contexts. From empirical studies, we know that different IS planners and designers develop
different IS using the same or at least similar material surface of emergence. This is because
the virtual surface of emergence is different in different contexts such as different groups,
organizations, and nations. Taylor and his colleagues (2001) argue that the surfaces of
emergence for their CSCW systems in Denmark and Japan were very different in the first
place: already installed systems in an ordinary working environment in Denmark, and
abundantly funded engineering laboratories in Japan. The differences between the two
environments can be explained by the very different social, cultural, philosophical and political
premises on which the designers are building. Danish CSCW systems reflect a deep concern
for democratic process and a view o f work as self-management. The systems tend to stay close
to current work practices, eschewing more radical innovations. In contrast to this, Japanese
CSCW systems are different, imbued with a preoccupation with the subtle dynamics of
112
interpersonal interaction. This reflects deeply engrained cultural assumptions about sense-
making, the exercise o f power, and what is legitimate in a social setting.
6.4 Theoretical and Practical Implications
This chapter has proposed that information systems always preexist human action and
that the schemata and resources of information systems emerge as virtual and material surfaces
in the process o f developing a new IS. These surfaces always both enable and constrain the
development o f a new IS. Through this way of conceptualizing the existing ISs, we can
overcome the limitations o f both the HNM and the PD perspective on the role o f the existing
ISs while gaining the insights from them. Below several theoretical and practical implications
for the design and implementation of IS are discussed.
6.4.1 Dilemma of IS Design
The idea that no IS is created de novo implies that IS design suffers either from
‘hyperrationality’ or from ‘the long arm of the past’. Hyperrationality refers to “willingness
what cannot be willed” (Offe 1996). This kind o f dilemma often appears with IS designers and
planners in the HNM tradition who tend to believe that the design and implementation of IS
can be fully designed and planned and its outcomes are predictable and controllable: simply a
‘switch over” is possible.
However, IS designers and planners are not those ‘economic men’ who make perfectly
rational decisions with complete information; they are limited by bounded rationality. All IS
design and implementation are inherently incomplete. Thus, the design of new IS cannot be
willed “because it is seen as willed, it will be more controversial and less binding than if it is
seen as a legacy or imitation” (p. 214). At any rate, too much ‘tinkering’ with ISs, an excessive
effort to design and redesign them in order to make them turbulence-proof and fit for their
purposes will almost certainly have the unintended effect of both undermining trust and
113
committing the founding fathers of such innovations to ever more and ever hastier
readjustments (Offe 1996). Furthermore this could unintentionally cause excessive rule change
and instability (Zhou 1993: Lanzara 1998). Hyperrationality may lead to an instance o f self-
defeating plans.
Ciborra (2000) captures this aspect in IT infrastructure design. He portrays this process
as the ‘vicious cycle’ that leads business from the tight, top-down control o f the information
infrastructure to the actual drift of the infrastructure itself. Infrastructure design and
implementation deviate from their planned purpose for a variety o f reasons often outside
anyone’s influence. As March and Olsen (1989) imply, IS design ‘rarely satisfies the prior
intentions o f those who initiate it. Change cannot be controlled precisely’ (p. 65-66).
The other dilemma ‘the long arm of the past or the installed base’ has to do with the
fact that “designed” IS are almost always “successor” IS. They are not built on a tabula rasa.
Successor ISs are affected by the long arm of their predecessors or ‘formative context’ (Ciborra
and Lanzara 1994; Hanseth 1998; Braa 2000; Star and Ruhler 1996). Designers in the HNM
school often tackle the ‘the long arm of the past’ by undercutting the validity o f old routines in
an effort to create a kind o f tabula rasa as a prelude to winning the loyalty o f constituents to
the newly designed institutional arrangements or IS. This is attractive but dangerous. As Offe
(1996) implies, if the design and implementation o f a new IS is too rapid and too
comprehensive, this situation may easily overtax the support o f those affected by them, or it
will frustrate the expectation generated by the restructuration process itself that rapid
transformation also means rapid success.
The development tn the PD tradition may suffer from a different kind o f dilemma.
Researchers and practitioners do not conform to a notion o f tabula rasa and tend to stress the
necessity of evolutionary IS design, not deprived from the installed base. This approach may
114
lead to less sunk costs, unpredictability, and political conflict (Genschel 1997). As Offe implies
(1996), however, if newly designed ISs can be depicted as being not so new after all, but rooted
in some respectable past, that may add to their obligatory power from that past, they will be
constantly asked by people what’s new? This approach is likely to become effective in the
short run but self-destructive in the long run (March 1991; Lanzara 1998).
6.4.2 IS Design as Learning
The discussion above seems to suggest that IS designers and planners need the
capacity to learn from both the past and the future, whose process would be named as
exploitation and exploration in organizational learning (March 1991). In fact, this is a middle
position between the HNM and the PD view of the preexisting IS that offers the answer to the
dilemmas that those planners and designers face in practice.
Organizations engage in exploration - the pursuit of new knowledge, o f things that
might come to be known (Levinthal and March 1993). This includes things captured by terms
such as search, variation, risk taking, experimentation, play, flexibility, discovery, and
innovation (March 1991). And they engage in exploitation - the use and development of thing
already known (Levinthal and March 1993). This includes such things as refinement, choice,
production, efficiency, selection, implementation, and execution. The HNM view o f IS design
and implementation tends to overemphasize exploration in organizational learning in system
design. On the other hand, the PD view emphasizes exploitation in organizational learning.
While each is needed and valuable in system design, overemphasizing one at the expense of the
other results in self-destructive outcomes in IS development both in the short and long run.
Organizations that engage in exploration to the exclusion of exploitation are likely to
find that they suffer the costs o f experimentation without gaining many o f its benefits, while
systems that engage in exploitation to the exclusion o f exploration are likely to find themselves
115
trapped in suboptimal stable equilibria (March 1991). Maintaining an appropriate balance
between exploration and exploitation is a primary factor in the success o f an IS project. This is
complicated not only by the difficulty o f determining what the appropriate balance should be,
but also by several ways in which learning itself contributes to imbalances. Finding an
appropriate balance is made particularly difficult by the fact that the same issues occur at levels
o f a nested system (March 1991 )-at the macro (IT governance), meso (IT production), and
micro (IT use) system level. In IS development, learning could lead organizations into
dynamics o f accelerating exploitation or exploration, and learning makes negative as well as
positive contributions to competitive position (Levinthal and March 1993).
6.4.3 Strategies in the Middle Position
Based on the preceding analysis, three alternative strategies - transposition, patching-
up, and anticipated IS - for balancing exploitation and exploration in the development o f IS are
presented (Figure 9). These strategies consider the fact that preexisting IS both enable and
constrain the development o f IS. Thus, this is important to pursue both path dependence and
path finding at the same time (Garud and Kamoe 2001; Hauser et al. 1995). These strategies
are based on the belief that the inertia of institutional structure closes some avenues for
institutional adjustments but at the same time it opens others (Genschel 1997). Thus they
presume that new ISs are built with (the ruins of) existing IS rather than on (the ruins of) old IS
(Rao and Singh 1999) or nothing.
116
HNM view Anticipated Patching-Up Transposition PD view

Institution
Figure 9. Three Alternative Strategies in the Middle Position
6.4.3.1 Transposition
Bourdieu notes that habitus is “*a system o f lasting transposable dispositions which,
integrating past experiences, functions at every moment as a matrix of perceptions,
appreciations, and actions and makes possible the achievement o f infinitely diversified tasks,
thanks to analogical transfers o f schemes permitting the solution of similarly shaped problems”
(1977. p. 83). Borrowing the term “transposable” from Bourdieu, Sewell argues that there is no
fixed limit to the possible transpositions o f schemas. He notes, “to say that schemas are
transposable, in other words, is to say that they can be applied to a wide and not fully
predictable range o f cases outside the context in which they are initially learned ... Knowledge
of a rule or a schema by definition means the ability to transpose or extend it—that is, to apply
it creatively ... then agency, which I would define as entailing the capacity to transpose and
extend schemas to new contexts, is inherent in the knowledge o f cultural schemas that
characterizes all minimally competent members o f society” (p. 17-8). Social actors are capable
of applying a wide range of different and even incompatible schemas and transpose them in
developing new institutions. Therefore schemas not only constrain but also enable the
development o f new institutions. The schemas to which actors have access can be applied
across a wide range of circumstances (Sewell 1992).
117
Borrowing the term “transposable”. Genschel (1997) shows how stable structures can
be adapted to evolving conditions by transposing them to new functions. He called this process
as transposition. The process o f transposition bears close resemblance to Levi-Strauss‘ concept
of bricolage. The bricoleur makes do with what’s there, with what he encounters. In that, he
differs from the engineer (Louridas 1999). The process of transposition is marked by backward
looking and improvisation and starts with retrospection. The designers turned back to already
existent institutions and tried to figure out who could be used to tackle whatever was the new
problem at hand.
Using this concept o f bricolage, Lanzara (1999) contends that no system can be
designed and implemented from scratch but designers start building up with the materials they
have at hand. They start small and rely on preexisting arrangements. This strategy privileges
combinatory logics, loose coupling, and garbage can processes. It exploits the properties of
existing structures for interactive and generative purposes, it successfully mediates the
dilemmas o f hyperrationality and the long arm of past (Lanzara 1999).
Ciborra and his colleagues (2000) conducted a research project which investigated the
dynamics o f IT infrastructure at six companies in seven different countries, including the USA
and found that in fact bricolage is one o f the most frequent approach in the company cases,
irrespective o f whether management was planning or strategy oriented, or inclined to react to
contingencies. Based on the findings o f a field study that explores the process o f executive
information systems (EIS) development in a large organization Nadhakumar and Avison
(1999) argued that traditional ISD methodologies are best suited to building large-scale
application from scratch in a low-level language but they are not appropriate to EIS
development, where much o f the work involves the enhancement of an established package
using fourth generation languages. They argue that then it would suggest that there is likely to
118
be a growing problem in supporting effectively the increasing proportion o f IS (e.g.. Web-
based applications) that are more similar to the EIS than traditional IS. The concluded that the
improvisational character o f the developers’ work practices would seem to be similar to the
bricolage in the development o f systems.
6.4.3.2 Patching-up
Transposition is a conservative approach to IS design and implementation. Patching-up
is a less conservative strategy while following the same combinatory logic. It refers to patching
old structures (or information systems) up with new structures. Unlike transposition, patching-
up looks forward to solving new problems by creating new institutions (Genschel 1997).
However, rather than trying to undercut the validity o f old routines in an effort to create a kind
of tabula rasa or keeping old inefficient structures due to lock-in mechanism and path
dependency, this strategy aims at relieving specific bottlenecks and deficiencies o f the existing
IS through patching up them with new IS (either or both of schemas and resources o f IS).
Consider, for instance, a case in which an airline company has been running an old
reservation system for almost two decades. This kind o f system may have specific bottlenecks
and deficiencies like lack o f web presence and integration of internal and external business
operations. Rather than simply replacing the old system with an ERP or other web-based
integration systems, the company patches up the old system with new gateway or middleware
technologies such as XML, EntireX Broker and the Simple Object Access Protocol (SOAP).
Patching up tends to proceed in a decentralized manner in that all initiatives to make up
for the deficiencies of an existing IS by adding new ISs tend to be organized locally. There
may be less central coordination with patching up the old IS with new ones. It seems likely that
patching up takes precedence over a switchover (Genschel 1997). For instance, consider an
organization with multiple divisions and units that has developed a large-scale financial and
119
accounting information system. Even though this system offers centralized financial
management, it may not meet the need of individual divisions and units for local accounting
practice. This creates the specific bottleneck and deficiency o f the large-scale IS. In this
situation, the central coordination for patching up may be very difficult or even not allowed.
Rather all initiatives for patching up are likely to be organized locally. In the design o f a large-
scale IS there may be no single design or designer. There may be lot of localized attempts at
partial design cutting across one another (Goodin 1996).
Patching up does not mean the total replacement o f the existing IS, which results in
high sunk costs and political conflict. Instead, patching-up strategy seeks less noise and
confusion in the transformation, less uncertainty than a switchover to a totally new IS, and less
political conflict than a switchover to a new IS may cause. Patching up diffuses conflict by
allowing for inconsistency (Genschel 1997).
6.4 J J Anticipated Institutions
The third strategy, “anticipated institution,” is more radical than the two previous
strategies. While maintaining the combinatory logic, this strategy focuses on path-finding
(Hauser et al. 1995) or path creation (Garud and Kamoe 2001) rather than path dependence. It
understands the limitation o f “design de novo", but at the same time stresses the need of
considering a teleological character of transformation (Federowicz 2000) or the importance of
intentionality (Goodin 1996) in the design.
While Federowicz (2000) recognizes that the idea o f institutional path dependencies is
valuable, he criticizes its exclusive stress on institutional legacies as obstacles to change and its
limited capacity to explain radical changes. He suggests that post-socialist institutional change
can only be properly understood by taking into account, alongside path dependent processes,
the teleological role o f what he calls “anticipated institutions”. He argues that these “future
120
oriented mechanisms o f mobilization of social resources” or “blueprint ideas, no matter
whether true or false, simplistic or sophisticated” partly explain institutional change. This
strategy suggests that no deep change necessary for the development o f a new IS is possible
without a future oriented turn in people’s minds and behavior. People (planners, designers, and
users) need to develop their expectations o f the plausible institutional change. People’s
expectations matter not only at the cognitive level and at the behavioral level for the success of
IT project. Thus, this strategy may offer a way o f higher order learning to occur in the process
o f system development (Stein and Vandenbosch 1996).
As many empirical studies suggest, IS design and implementation always entails
unexpected outcomes, side effects, drifting, emergence, accidents, etc (e.g., Dahlbom et al.
2000; Ciborra and Aailla: Orlikowski 2000; Hanseth and Braa 2000). Simply they are
unpredictable and uncontrollable. Like institutions, they evolve according to a logic of their
own, in ways altogether impervious to intentional intervention and direct human design.
However. Goodin (1996) argues that
Accidents happen: but the frequency and direction o f accidents can be significantly
shaped by intentional interventions o f social planners ... What theories o f social
change as accident or evolution are telling us is that social outcomes themselves are
not directly subject to intentional change, design, or redesign. Such theories strive to
limit the scope for intentionality in descriptive, or hence prescriptive, models o f social
life. Whatever their aims, however, what these other theories are actually pointing to
are possibilities of design and redesign at one level up. Outcomes may be the product
of accident but accident rates might be intentionally altered. Outcomes may be the
product o f evolutionary forces, but the selection mechanisms that guide that evolution
might be intentionally altered. Design and redesign might still have some scope, even
in those less intentional social worlds (p. 29).
Thus, it is important to understand that IS planners and designers not only “play” within the
existing framework o f rules defining the pre-given opportunities, but also they can choose
strategically “where to go” within the limits defined by the inherited constraints and can even
121
formulate the rules of the game to eventually eliminate certain constraints over time (Hausner
etai. 1995).
Institutional change through anticipation and intentionality helps to understand why radical
change can happen in spite of the path dependent factors constraining it and of the
fundamentally stabilizing role of existing schemas and resources o f IS in the development of a
new IS. While the two earlier strategies underline the importance of recombination in the
search process to understand IS design and implementation, the third strategy “anticipated
institution” adds that teleological elements may come into play in the search mechanism and
recognized the significant role of intentionality o f IS planners and designers in the life of IS.
6.5 Conclusion
This chapter aims at illuminating the role o f preexisting IS in the development o f new
ISs and ultimately proposing the strategies for the successful IS development. For this, we
explored two existing views of preexisting IS in the development of new ISs and argued that
they represent two extreme (the voluntarist and historical determinist pole) on a continuum of
possible positions regarding ID and institutional innovation. Instead, by extending the concept
“duality o f institutions” and suggesting “duality o f preexisting IS”, information systems always
preexist human action, which will lead to the development of new ISs. Thus, borrowing the
concept “surface o f emergence” from Pickering (1995) we argued that existing information
systems always enable and constrain the development o f new ISs. Finally several theoretical
and practical implications for IS design and implementation were presented.
122
CHAPTER VII
TECHNOLOGY ADAPTATION AS A DYNAMIC PROCESS OF
INSTITUTIONALIZATION: DYNAMIC INSTITUTIONAL THEORY
7.1 Introduction
This chapter aims at investigating the process of technological adaptation in the case of
large-scale information systems. Since the deployment of large-scale information systems is
relatively new, the process of technological adaptation o f such systems has not been the focus
of many IS researchers and practitioners.
According to Tyre and Orlikowski (1994) there are several reasons that it is important
to understand the process of technological adaptation. First, users’ adaptations of technologies-
in-use often help to shape further development and research activities (von Hippel, 1988).
Second, efficient operation ultimately achieved with a new technology depends heavily on
users’ modifications since several empirical studies (e.g., DeSanctis and Poole, 1994;
Majchrzak et al., 2000; Poole and DeSanctis, 1990) indicate that users are not passive receivers
of technology but actively choose to appropriate given technology structures in different ways.
Third, modifications affect not just the technology-in-use, but also its physical and
organizational context to overcome any misalignments through a dynamic process of mutual
adaptation between the technology and its environment (Leonard-Barton, 1988). Therefore, by
understanding how such adaptations occur we can begin to build more adequate theories of
technological change in organizations.
Despite its significance, however, the adaptation process for new technology in general
is not yet well understood (Majchrzak et al., 2000; Tyre and Orlikowski, 1993, 1994). Some
earlier models (e.g., Cooper and Zumd 1990; Markus 1990) of technology adaptation took a
rather deterministic approach and assumed a liner and stepwise process of technology
123
adaptation. Several empirical studies have shown that the process o f technology adaptation is
neither deterministic nor linear (Barley 1986: DeSanctics and Poole 1994). Later, several
different models of technology adaptation viewing technology adaptation as emergent have
been suggested and their utility has been shown in different studies (e.g. Leonard-Barton 2000:
Orlikowski 1996; Majchrzak et al. 2000). However, these models have been extensively
applied to traditional information systems and coordination technologies (e.g.. Ciborra, 1996:
DeSanctis and Poole, 1994; Griffith, 1999; Karsten. 1995. 1999: Majchrzak et al., 2000;
Orlikowski, 2000). None o f them has been applied to large-scale information systems,
integration and control technology, or information infrastructure. Also we believe that these
emergent models are less capable o f dealing with complex institutional arrangements in which
large-scale IS are designed, implemented and ultimately used.
In the meantime several studies in the area o f large-scale IS have recently suggested
that large-scale IS are very different from traditional, small-scale IS with respect to complexity,
institutional arrangement, degree o f flexibility, etc. (e.g., Hanseth and Braa 1998: Ciborra
2001). Several studies have implied that the technology adaptation of large-scale IS may be
quite different from that o f traditional, small-scale IS (e.g., Orlikowski 2000: Majchrzak et al.
2000; Pinch and Bijker 1987; Star and Ruhleder 1996)
In this chapter it is claimed that extant models o f technology adaptation cannot provide
adequate levels o f explanation about the technology adaptation o f large-scale IS. What is
required is a more complex model that can reflect insights gained from extant models while
overcoming their limitations. Thus, this chapter starts with a review o f extant models of
technology adaptation and investigates the process of technology adaptation o f large-scale IS
through developing an institutional model o f technology adaptation. Following chapters 4
through 6, the new model conceptualizes information systems as social institutions and views
124
the process of technology adaptation as a process o f institutionalization. The new model is
developed through an extensive review o f literature on institutional theory, particularly on the
topic o f institutionalization (e.g.. Barley and Tolbert 1997; Tolbert and Zucker 1996;
Hasselbladh and Kallinikos 2000).
7.2 Prior Understandings of Technology Adaptation
7.2.1 Diffusion and Infusion Approaches
Several adaptation models based on diffusion perspectives (Cooper and Zmud, 1990;
Kwon and Zmud, 1987; Rogers, 1995) and critical mass theory (Markus, 1990), are found in
the literature. These models view information technology implementation as part o f the
organizational diffusion process, with the innovation as the focal technology (Scheepers and
Rose, 2000). They tend to assume a linear technological adaptation and view technology
deployment as a stepwise process that starts with awareness and ends with adoption and
adaptation to the user’s needs. In the population of users, this individual adoption builds to a
point o f critical mass, at which point the technology use “takes off” and is firmly established.
This perspective views users as reactive in their relationship with technology, failing to
recognize human action as a possible predictive factor (e.g., Barley, 1990; Orlikowski and
Robey, 1991).
7.2.2 Emergent Approaches
On the other hand, in the emergent perspective (Markus and Robey, 1988) on
technology adaptation, there are several different understandings o f how the adaptation process
unfolds. Adaptive Structuration Theory (AST) (DeSanctis and Poole, 1994) based on Giddens’
(1984) structuration theory, explains the process by which technologies are adapted as
consisting o f structures, appropriations, and decision outcomes. The theory focuses on the
structures built into such technologies as group decision support systems. According to the
125
theory some aspects o f pre-existing structures become incorporated in the new technology as it
is implemented and appropriated by users. These organizational structures can become
reinforced or modified through technology use, leading to new structures within the
technology. The technology becomes a structure for social interaction, which then influences
the organizational structure. DeSanctis et al (2000) maintain that general predictions regarding
technology use and outcomes can be drawn using AST.
Leonard-Barton (1988) suggests that the technology adaptation should be viewed as a
cyclical, spiral-shaped process o f misalignments, followed by alignments, followed by more
but smaller misalignments, gradually evolving to a state in which the technology, the delivery
system and the performance criteria are aligned. She views technology adaptation as a mutual
adaptation between technology and user environments. Taking a situated change (1996) or
practice lens perspective (2000), Orlikowski argues that people can (and do) redefine and
modify the meaning, properties, and applications o f technology after development. Grounded
in micro-level changes, technological adaptation is ongoing, emergent and continuous rather
than planned and discontinuous. Some other researchers suggest that the use o f the technology
itself is emergent (Ngwenyama, 1998) and characterized by improvisations o f various sorts
(e.g., Ciborra, 1996, 1999).
A recent study by Majchrzak et al (2000) reviews extant structurational models of
technology adaptation and investigates the process o f technology adaptation in the case o f a
computer-supported inter-organizational virtual team. They propose a modified model o f
technology adaptation based on the findings o f the study, including
• If a workgroup is allowed to modify its structures, it is possible that all structures

may be changed, including the technology’s initial spirit (DeSanctis and Poole
1994).
126
• Pre-existing structures do not constrain but instead the structures are in fact
changed; the notion of pre-existing structures constraining the adaptation process is
too simple.
• In the context o f unpredictable work environments, having the opportunity to

modify existing structures is not enough to eliminate the need for further
adaptation; indeed some groups may never converge on a set of revised
adaptations, spending most o f their effort in adjusting, and finally achieving limbo,
failure, or dissolution.
• Leonard-Barton's (1988) model o f a gradual reduction o f misalignment is too

simple for the virtual team in the study; Tyre and Orlikowski's (1994) model of
discontinuous adaptations responding to windows o f opportunities did not fit well
to the virtual team they studied: The discrepant events did not occur in batches;
they occurred sporadically.
Even though these studies differ in terms of their position on the specifics of
technology adaptation, they share the same assumptions. The implementation and use o f new
technology are not deterministic: technology has interpretative flexibility and users of the
technology are engaged in its constitution during development or use (Orlikowski, 1992); users
of a technology are a source o f innovation (von Hippel, 1988) and reinvention (e.g., Johnson
and Rice, 1984). Thus the technology is appropriated in diverse ways by diverse users
(DeSanctis and Poole, 1994; Orlikowski, 1992, 2000). These models tend to assume that the
process o f technological adaptation is ongoing and continuous rather than discontinuous,
radical and often so much periodic developments (Tyre and Orlikowski, 1993, 1994).
7.3 Technology Adaptation in the Case of Large-scale IS
Our question is whether these models can well explain the process of technology
adaptation of large-scale IS, for example integration and control technology (ERP), since they
have been mainly applied for traditional IS and groupware applications. This question is raised
based on many authors’ claim that large-scale IS differ from traditional IS with respect to its
complexity, purpose, design, institutional arrangements, etc (Davenport 1998; Braa and
Rolland 2000; Markus 2000; Hanseth and Braa 1998; Star and Ruhleder, 1996).
127
These studies o f large-scale IS, enterprise systems or information infrastructure lead us
to investigate if the process o f adaptation o f such systems may differ from that for traditional
IS. In fact, some authors have implied that the process o f adaptation o f large-scale IS may
differ from that o f coordination technologies and traditional IS. For example, Orlikowski
(1996) notes that the change process for a more rigid, fixed-function technology may be
different from more open-ended, generic, and user-customizable tools what Malone et al.
(1992) refer to as radically-tailorable tools or to groupware applications. Also Majchrzak et al.
(2000) maintain that technology adaptation may become discontinuous when the costs of
change are very high, and when the technology is large and complex (e.g., ERP or integration
technology): but when the costs to not adapt are high, and when the technology (e.g..
groupware, coordination technology) is more malleable, the adaptations may become ongoing,
if not continuous. Volkoff (1999) suggests that the implementation o f large-scale IS like ERP
is fundamentally different from traditional IS, and is also distinct from system use: since an
ERP does have a basic built-in structure the technology adaptation o f software and
organizational processes is an iterative process that is constrained by both the structural
properties of the organization and the built-in properties of the software. The implementation is
a long-term and complex process with a high degree o f interdependencies and a mandatory
context for its users (Pozzebon, 2000). Orlikowski (2000) notes that in larger technological
systems or infrastructures such integration is likely to reduce the degrees o f freedom available
to users to experiment with and modify their technological artifacts in use. As users become
more dependent on using integrated technologies, the variety of technologies-in-practice that
they will enact may decrease (restriction in malleability). Further she suggests that there is the
need for an empirical research about whether such restriction in malleability actually occurs in
any situation.
128
These authors seem to be assuming that large-scale or integrated IS tend to be less
flexible and restrict users' interpretive flexibility. Therefore, the process o f technology
adaptation of large-scale IS which are complex and often rigid differs from that o f flexible or
non-integrated technologies. In a similar vein. Pinch and Bijker (1987, p. 40) refer to the notion
o f the interpretative flexibility o f technology, not just to the “flexibility in how people think o f
or interpret artifacts, but also [the] flexibility in how artifacts are designed.” Therefore
technologies vary in their level o f interpretative flexibility (Orlikowski, 1992). From a systems
theory perspective Hughes (1994) argues that “a technological system can be both a cause and
an effect: it can shape or be shaped by society. As they grow larger and more complex, systems
tend to be more shaping of society and less shaped by it.” Drawing from actor-network theory,
information infrastructures or large-scale IS are seen as more than pure technology; rather they
are socio-technical networks (e.g., Rolland, 2000) and develop through extending and
improving the installed base (Star and Ruhleder. 1996). Thus large-scale IS may be hard to
change due to the inertia of the installed base (Monteiro, 1998) and could constrain redesigns
and modifications (Braa and Rolland, 2000). A number o f other empirical studies (e.g.,
Hanseth and Braa, 1998; Kling and lacono, 1989; Leonard-Barton, 1988; Newman, 1989;
Rolland, 2000) illustrate similar points by addressing the difficulties o f redesigns and
modifications o f large-scale IS caused by the inertia o f the installed base, their technical
complexity, the inherent nature o f inflexibility, etc.
These studies seem to imply that (1) in cases o f large-scale IS implementation
organizational changes predominate, while technical changes are relatively less important
(Leonard-Barton, 1988), (2) characteristics o f large-scale IS tend to make local adaptation of
the technologies very hard, even though it is necessary for effective the implementation
(Cordelia and Simon, 1998). (3) large-scale IS can often be institutionalized before the system
129
is deployed in the focal organization (Rolland, 2000). (4) when time passes the use of
technology becomes habitual or "routinized" and the adaptation drops off (Tyre and
Orlikowski. 1993, 1994). and (5) finally technology adaptation is likely to reach closure, while
the technology itself gains momentum (Hughes, 1994) and stabilization (Pinch and Bijker.
1987) or becomes a black-box (Latour, 1987). This closure may be or need to be broken by
external forces (Hughes. 1987) or discrepant events (Tyre and Orlikoswski, 1993, 1994) such
as the introduction of new systems, adoption of new versions o f the system or IT standards, or
mergers and acquisition. These events may initiate another large-cycle adaptation (Leonard-
Barton. 1988). Large-scale IS, like “technological momentum” (Hughes, 1994), is not
irresistible. It can be challenged and redesigned and frequent adaptations, if not reinventions, of
the initial solution are required in the implementation of large-scale IS (Ciborra 2000).
Based on these basic understandings of large-scale information systems and the
adaptation process of such systems, we may argue that the technological adaptation o f large-
scale IS can be best understood as the process of institutionalization. To adequately portray this
process, dynamic institutional theory (DIT) for technology adaptation is proposed.
7.4 Theoretical Basis of Dynamic Institutional Theory (DIT)
The concept of institutionalization is located in the tenets o f institutional theory (e.g.,
Scott 1995; Powell and DiMaggio 1991; Giddens 1984). Many prior studies have understood
institutionalization with the self-reproducing nature of institutions that exhibit stability and the
end of institutionalization as routinization and stabilization (e.g., Tolbert and Zucker 1996:
Barley and Tolbert 1997). Thus, isomorphism and homogeneity are encountered in almost all
accounts o f the effects of institutionalization (e.g., Meyer and Rowan 1977; Tolbert and Zucker
1983). In the IS field, for example, using structuration theory Orlikowski (1992) sees the
reconfiguration process as linear, by predicting the institutionalization of technology over time.
130
Hanseth and Monteiro (1998) linked infrastructure (e.g., ERPs, network technologies) to
institutions by emphasizing the aspects of their stability and reproduction.
Our understanding o f institutionalization differs by following recent advances in
institutional theory in general and in explaining the process o f institutionalization as somewhat
unpredictable, problematic, and dynamic rather than pre-determined, liner, and static (Barley
and Tolbert 1997; Tolbert and Zucker 1996; Hasselbladh and Kallinikos 2000; Oliver 1992).
DIT for technology adaptation is developed to explain as a process o f institutionalization the
process o f technology adaptation in the case o f large-scale IS. This theory does not grow de
novo but is developed based on prior studies o f institutionalization (e.g., Meyer and Rowan
1991; Covaleski et al. 1993; Jepperson 1991; Barley and Tolbert 1997; Tolbert and Zucker
1996; Hasselbladh and Kallinikos 2000; Oliver 1992). In the following sections, those studies
of institutionalization which DIT for technology adaptation is drawn from are briefly
introduced.
7.4.1 Institutionalizations as Structuration
The dynamic interaction between institutions and human action is well explained by
Barley and Tolbert’s (1997) recursive model of institutionalization based on Giddens’s concept
of structuration (Figure 10). Since Giddens’s models do not incorporate historical time (Bums
and Scapens 2000) and are implicitly temporal (Barley and Tolbert 1997). Barley and Tolbert
(1997) translate Giddens’s static portrayal of structuration into a more dynamic model that
describes the relationship between agency and institutions over time.
131
Institutional
Realm
Scripts at T i Scripts at T2 Scripts at T3
T2 T3
TI
Realm of Action
Key: a = encode, b = enact, c = repiicate or revise, d = externalize and objectify
Figure 10. A Sequential Model of Institutionalization (Barley and Tolbert 1997)
This model has been widely used by different authors (e.g., Barley 1986; Yates and
Orlikowski 1992; Caglio and Newman 2001). A modified version o f the model is proposed by
Bums and Scapens (2000) for studying management accounting change. While Barley and
Tolbert’s model is mainly composed of diachronic elements, their modified framework
combines both synchronic and diachronic elements: “whereas institutions constrain and shape
action synchronically (i.e. at a specific point in time), actions produce and reproduce
institutions diachronically (i.e. through their cumulative influence over time)” (p. 9-10). The
significant insight o f this work is that the process of this dynamic interplay between the two is
understood as institutionalization.
132
7.4.2 Processes of Institutionalization
Following Zucker (1977), institutionalization is defined as both a process and a
property variable. In a process-based approach to institutionalization like Barley and Tolbert
(1997), “institutionalization is almost treated as a qualitative state: structures are
institutionalized or they are not." (Tolbert and Zucker 1996, p. 175). Consequently, the
determinants o f variations in levels o f institutionalization and o f how such variation might
affect the degree of similarity among sets of organizations are not addressed (Tolbert and
Zucker 1996).
The insight of Tolbert and Zucker’s work for our proposed dynamic model is its
account for varying levels o f institutionalization. Drawing on the work of Berger and
Luckmann (1967) which identified institutionalization as a core process in the creation and
perpetuation o f enduring social groups, the authors offer a set o f sequential processes -
habitualization, objectification and sedimentation (Figure 11).
Habitualization -------------------- m Objectification J Sedimentation 1

!
I
i
l
!
i
!
!
’ :
Figure 11. Component Processes o f Institutionalization (Adapted from Tolbert and Zucker
1996)
Studies (e.g., Peters 2000) on the extent of institutionalization can complement extant
structurational or process models o f institutionalization. As suggested by many prior studies on
technology adaptation, as time passes, technology tends to become taken-for-granted in use.
133
For example, by using Giddens' theory of structuration Orlikowski (1992) sees the
reconfiguration process as linear, by predicting the institutionalization of technology over time.
The use o f information technology encourages its institutionalization and reification. In studies
o f science and technology. Pinch and Bijker (1987) stress the concept of closure. An area of
technology is closed when all ‘relevant social groups’ attribute the same meaning to it. There is
no ‘interpretive flexibility’ after closure, and everyone involved regards all fundamental
problems connected with this technology as being solved. They claim that there is no dissent
after stabilization has taken place. The insight from these studies is that DIT must consider the
extent or degree o f institutionalization in the technology adaptation.
7.4.3 Formation of Institution in Institutionalization
Extant studies on the process o f institutionalization often neglect the formation of
institutions, the early stage o f institutional process (Hasselbladh and Kallinikos 2000). There
would, roughly speaking, be three basic ways in which social institutions might arise, through
accident, evolution, and intention (Goodin 1996). In the formation of institutions the role of
self-interested individual or collective actors is critical. Institutions are created to resolve
conflict among self-interested parties who are interdependent in a world of scarcity. These
institutions are created through bargaining, partisan mutual adjustments, arbitration, and
ultimately the courts o f law among conflicting parties (Van de Ven I9xx). In a similar vein,
DiMaggio (1988) asserts that new institutions arise when organized actors with sufficient
resources see in them an opportunity to realize interests that they value highly (p. 14). Thus,
what self-interested agents intentionally do (or fail to do) is important even in modeling the
emergence of social institutions as essentially accidental (Goodin 1996). Thus institutions are
social arrangements which are designed to settle potential conflicts (Offe 1996). Purely
accidental instances of emerging new social institutions are unlikely. Any actual instance of
134
emerging new social institutions is almost certain to involve a combination o f all three of these
elements (Goodin 1996). Thus, any instance of new institutions is political due to its highly
competitive nature (e.g.. the involvement o f self-interested actors).
Hasselbladh and Kallinikos (2000) argue that extant approaches to institutionalization
cannot address the fundamental issue o f how institutions come into being due to various forms
and practices of objectification. The study conceives institutions as consisting of basic ideals
that are developed into distinctive ways o f defining and acting upon reality (i.e. discourses),
supported by elaborate systems o f measurement and documentation for controlling action
outcomes” (p. 704). Thus, they suggest an analytical distinction between ideals, discourses and
techniques o f control. Ideals are stable, pervading and valorized ideas that delineate social
expectations. Narrative knowledge provides the stability that makes it possible to communicate
ideals in new contexts. When ideals are developed and specified into elaborate systems of
relationships and causal models, they are transformed into a discourse. Discourses achieve both
a kind o f closure in the significative content or meaning o f ideals and the specification o f the
relations and items involved. A discourse is primarily constructed by means of written
language. Techniques o f control are usually expressed in numerical or other forms of
codification such as software packages and accounting systems. Thus, the process of
institutional formation involves (1) ideals, (2) discourses, and (3) techniques of control.
Extant models o f technology adaptation assume that the process of technology
adaptation begins with the moment o f technology introduction in an organization by neglecting
early stages in the process o f technology adaptation. With the exception o f a few studies (e.g.,
Poole and DeSanctis 1992; DeSanctis and Poole 1994; Majchrzak et al 2000), these models do
not consider the impact o f prior structures on the process o f technology adaptation. This is
problematic since the adaptation o f a new technology is always constrained (Hanseth and Braa
135
2000: Braa and Rolland 2000) and also enabled by the installed base. In our view, technology
adaptation begins prior to the moment o f technology introduction. The institutionalization of
technology can often occur even prior to its introduction (Swanson and Ramiller 1997). DIT
explicitly considers the formation o f institutions (or information technology) as one o f the
major phases in technology adaptation.
7.4.4 Decoupling as a Component of Institutionalization
According to Meyer and Rowan (1977/1991) prevailing theories o f formal structure
assume that the rationalized formal structure arose as it was the most efficient form, and that
coordination and control of activity are the critical dimensions on which formal organizations
have succeeded in the modem word. However, this study argues that organizations do not
actually function according to their blueprints. Many formal organizational structures arise as
reflections o f rationalized institutional rules. Institutional rules function as myths which
organizations incorporate, gaining legitimacy, resources, stability, and enhanced survival
prospects. In their study institutionalization is viewed as involving the processes by which
social processes, obligation, or actualities come to take on a rule-like status in social thought
and action. They argue that there are conflicts between ceremonial rules and efficiency that can
be resolved through employing decoupling. “Because attempts to control and coordinate
activities in institutionalized organizations lead to conflicts and loss o f legitimacy, elements of
structure are decoupled from activities and from each other” (p. 1977, p. 357). Decoupling
enables organizations to maintain standardized, legitimating, formal structures while their
activities vary in response to practical considerations.
Other institutional theorists point out that institutional theories, by virtue o f their focus,
have tended to limit their attention to the effects of the institutional environment on structural
conformity and isomorphism and have tended to overlook the role of active agency and
136
resistance in organization-environment relations (Covaleski and Dirsmith 1988; Covaleski et
al. 1993; DiMaggio 1988; Kondra and Hinings 1998). Strategic responses such as decoupling
are more common than used to be believed (Zucker 19881; Oliver 1992; Greenwood and
Hinings 1996; Westphal and Zajac 2001: Goodstein 1994). Structuration does not produce
perfect reproduction (Rason et al.. 1980; Goodrick and Salancik 1996). “The use o f descriptive
words in structuration theory such as "continually produced’, "recreated in interaction’,
'constituted', and "constitutive’ directs attention away from changes in frameworks and losses
of meaning" (Weick 1993, p. 645). This fugitive quality o f meaning and frameworks in Mann
Gulch suggests that that the process of structuring itself may be more unstable than we realize
(Weick 1993).
In the process o f technology adaptation, human actors are not passive to preexisting
and new structures; they are reflexive, capable of reformulating within limits and able to
engage in strategic calculation about their current situation (Jessop 1996). Misalignment
(Leonard-Barton 1988) is unlikely to be completely resolved but rather tends to persist in the
process o f technology adaptation. The goal o f achieving alignment between technology and
organization is “hunting for the treasure at the end of the rainbow" (Hanseth and Braa 2001).
Not only is decoupling a strategic response o f actors against institutions, but also an
institution or information technology itself can employ decoupling as a strategy for survival.
There is an ever-present gap or mismatch between the social facts institutionalized at the macro
level - information technology - and those present at the micro level (Zucker 1988).
This mismatch is then explained by the distance between on the one hand the
experiences and thoughts o f the many single individuals on the micro level and. on the
other hand, the content and regulations embedded in the more formalized institutions
on the macro level, reflecting a more holistic perspective on society (Sjostrand 1993, p.
329)
137
Under this reality a too rigid institution or IT implementation is expected to face
intense resistance from various actors at the micro levels, especially from those actors with
resources and power. Thus, rather than enforcing structural conformity on every actor, the
institution strategically allows decoupling to certain actors to minimize potential resistance,
which could reduce the power of the institution or even threaten its status and authority.
7.4.5 Deinstitutionalization in Institutionalization
Structuration often implies ‘convergence’ (Star 1997) o f structure and social action (or
reproduction o f social patterns). Star points out that lack of convergence often occurs in reality.
DiMaggio (1988. p. 12) argues that institutional theory tells us relatively little about
‘institutionalization’ as an unfinished process (as opposed to an achieved state). Covaleski et al
(1993) argue that institutionalization is political, not just a neutral ongoing process.
Sedimentation (Tolbert and Zucker 1996) may not be the end o f institutionalization.
“The persistence and longevity o f institutionalized values and activities may be less
common than the emphasis in institutional theory on cultural persistence and the diffusion of
enduring change implies” (Oliver 1992). Using language proposed by Giddens, institutionalists
have focused attention on structuration processes but have neglected processes leading to
destructuration or restructuration (Scott 2001, p. 1821-182). Institutionalization never becomes
complete (DiMaggio 1988, Zucker 1988). Institutions are neither eternal and immutable
(Goodin 1996; Hodgson 1999) nor irresistible. At the end o f institutionalization, there is
always deinstitutionalization (Oliver 1992), reinstitutionalization (Jepperson 1991), or
destructuration (Scott 2001) (Figure 12).
138
Entropy
Pressures
Political
Pressures
1
Dissipation
Functional ♦ Or rejection + Deinstituti Erosion or
Pressures onalization discontinuity
I
Social Inertial
Pressures Pressures
Figure 12. Pressures for Deinstitutionalization (Adapted from Oliver 1992)
Unlike diffusion and critical mass theory suggesting technology deployment as a finite
process with a progressive succession o f steps leading to diffusion and critical mass, DIT
considers the process o f institutional decay in technology adaptation.
7.4.6 Three Mechanisms of Institutional Change & Three Institutional
Elements in Institutionalization
DiMaggio and Powell (1983, 1991) made a contribution in understanding
institutionalization. They identify three mechanisms through which institutional isomorphic
change occurs - coercive, mimetic, and normative. Scott (2001) noted, “institutions are
composed o f cultural-cognitive, normative, and regulative elements together with associated
activities and resources, provide stability and meaning to social life” (p. 48). These elements
are highly interdependent and not separable in practice. Institutions comprise and are
comprised of all three elements or sub-institutions. Scott’s thee sub-institutions tend to
correspond to DiMaggio and Powell’s three mechanisms o f institutional change - regulative
institutions and coercive mechanism, normative and normative, cognitive and mimetic.
139
Regulative institutions (or information systems) include regulative principles which
“organize most o f the activities of individuals in a society into definite organizational patterns
from the point o f view o f some of the perennial, basic problems of any society or ordered life
(Eisenstadt, 1968). Regulative institutions represent institutional rules, laws, and politics which
expose surveillance and resistance in social interaction. Force, fear, and expedience are central
ingredients o f regulative institutions (Scott 2001). Johnson (1992) defines [regulative]
institutions as “sets o f habits, routines, rules, norms and laws, which regulate the relations
between people and shape human interaction” (p. 26). North defines an institution as:
"Regularities in repetitive interactions, ... customs and rules that provide a set o f incentives
and disincentives for individuals" (1986. p. 231) and ”[H]umanly devised constraints that
structure political, economic and social interaction" (1990, p. 97). Regulative institutions
operate through “coercive” mechanisms (DiMaggio and Powell 1983), the regulative process
which involve "the capacity to establish rules, inspect or review others’ conformity to them,
and as necessary, manipulate sanctions—rewards or punishments—in an attempt to influence
future social behavior" (Scott 1995, p. 35). Coercive processes stem from political influence
and the problem of legitimacy (DiMaggio and Powell 1983).
“To emphasize the normative aspects o f institutions (or information systems) is to give
priority to moral beliefs and internalized obligations as the basis of social meaning and social
order” (Scott 1995, p. 15). Normative institutions can be seen as “organized patterns o f socially
constructed norms and roles, and socially prescribed behaviors expected o f occupants o f those
roles, which are created and recreated over time” (Goodin, 1996, p. 19). Normative systems
include both values and norms. “Values are conceptions o f the preferred or the desirable,
together with the construction o f standards to which existing structures or behavior can be
compared and assessed and norms specify how things should be done: they define legitimate
140
means to pursue valued ends. Normative systems define goals or objectives but also designate
appropriate ways to pursue them” (Scott 2001. p. 54-55). “Normative systems are typically
viewed as imposing constraints on social behavior, and so they do. But they also empower and
enable social action. They confer rights as well as responsibilities, privileges as well as duties,
licenses as well as mandates” (Scott 2001. p. 55). The mechanism o f constraining and enabling
social behavior by these institutions turns out to be “normative”, employing DiMaggio and
Powell's (1983, 1991) typology, in that values, norms, social obligations, rights, etc. stem from
memberships or associations.
Cognitive institutions are symbolic, cultural, and meaning systems. To emphasize
cognitive elements o f institutions (or information systems) is to take seriously the cognitive
dimensions o f human experiences o f institutions: the shared conceptions that constitute the
nature o f social reality and the frames through which meaning is made. Cognitive institutions
are not so much bundles of regulations or collections of norms (Scott 1995) as noted by Powell
and DiMaggio (1991, p. 15) “not norms and values but taken-for-granted scripts, rules and
classifications are the stuff of which institutions are made”. However, they should be treated
not simply as subjective beliefs but also symbolic systems perceived to be objective and
external to individual actors (Scott 2001). Thus they control behavior by controlling our
conception o f what the world is and what kinds of action can be taken by what types of actors
(Scott 1995) and further play an essential role in providing a cognitive framework for
interpreting sense data and in providing intellectual habits or routines for transforming
information into useful knowledge (Hodgson 1988). The mechanism o f constraining and
enabling social behavior by cognitive institutions is “mimetic” (DiMaggio and Powell 1983,
1991) rather than “coercive” in the sense that wider belief systems and cultural frames are
imposed on or adopted by individual and collective actors. Compliance occurs because other
141
types of behavior are inconceivable and certain social behaviors are taken for granted as “the
way we do these things." (Scott 2001).
This way o f understanding institutions and institutional change in institutional ization-
deinstitutionalization is expected to provide new insights on the interplay between information
technology and organizations. So far, many studies (e.g., Orlikowski and Robey 1991;
Crowston et al. 2001) in information technology and organizational change have adopted
Giddens’ theory o f structuration in general and his three modalities of structuration
(interpretive scheme, resources, and norms) in particular. These studies seem to suggest that an
information system will have all three institutional elements, regulative, normative and
cognitive (Roberts and Scapens 1985: Alam et al. 1997; Macintosh and Scapens 1990;
Orlikowski 1992). They seem to assume that those three modalities operate with equal force at
any time and space and that those three corresponding structures - structure of significance,
structure o f domination, and structure o f legitimation - are also experienced by all actors at all
times.
Recent studies suggest that while the regulative, normative and cognitive institutions
are connected and not analytically and operationally distinct (Scott 1995; Giddens 1984; Hirsch
1997). transitions among the three are possible (Hirsch 1997; Hoffman 1999). For example,
through a study that measured changes in the constituency o f an organizational field centered
around the issue o f corporate environmentalism in the period 1960-93, Hoffman (1999)
suggests that institutions evolve over time and that there are transitions among the three sub
institutions. He found four historical stages - ( 1 ) a questioning o f prior institutional fields, (2) a
regulative institution, (3) a normative institution, and (4) a cognitive institution - and during
each stage, there was the dominant institution. Also sub-institutions other than the dominant
institution were still noted as active and were sometimes at odds with and sometimes consistent
142
with the dominant institution. Thus, we believe that one institutional aspect may be dominant at
any given time and space in the process of institutionalization (Hoffman 1999). Institutions are
time-specific (Jessop 1996, 2001). For example, at an early stage o f institutionalization, a
regulative institution could be dominant while a cognitive institution would be the dominant
one at a later stage in institutionalization.
Also, institutions are agency-specific (Jessop 1996, 2001). All three institutional
aspects might not be experienced by all actors involved in technology adaptation. An
institution at any given time may privilege some actors and actions over others (Jessop 2001).
Attempts at strategic guidance on one level of agency can appear as an evolutionary trajectory
on other levels of agency (Perkmann 1998). In other words, it seems likely that what appears to
be a structural constraint for one actor appears as an opportunity for transformation to another
actor (Jessop 1996). Perhaps the type of institutional aspect experienced relies primarily on two
factors: time (when) and space (where or agency).
Also it is important to see the relationships—interaction, conjoint effects, conflicts—of
regulative, normative, and cognitive institutional aspects (Scott 2001) in technology adaptation.
The interactions among cognitive, normative, and regulative elements might vary in different
mixtures (Hoffman and Ventresca 1999). In complex situations o f technology adaptation,
individuals or organizations may be confronted by conflicting institutional requirements and
standards and they find it difficult to take action (Scott 2001).
Along with this, one key issue in developing DIT for technology adaptation is the
degree to which the three types o f institutional elements—regulative, normative, and cognitive-
can be distinguished, or whether they act in terms o f one another7. Once this question is
7 Two approaches to institutions are recognized: one is an inclusive model (Hoffman 1997;
Hirsch 1998; Scott 1994) and the other is an analytical approach by (Scott 1995; 2001). I
143
answered, DIT considers specifically what is the dominant institution at a given time and
whether this varies among different actors and may be able to answer why this happens in
institutionalization or technology adaptation.
7.4.7 Temporal Dynamics of Institutionalization
Finally, DIT for technology adaptation considers the temporal dynamics of
institutionalization. Recent studies in institutionalization examine the relationship between time
and processes of institutionalization. Institutionalization is presumed by most researchers to
occur along something like an S-Shaped curve that characterizes most diffusion paths
involving both contagion and noncontagion processes (Rogers 1995; Strang and Tuma 1993).
As discussed above, recently researchers stress the process of institutions being weakened
(Scott 2001; Scott et al. 2000).
Recently there have been a few studies that explicitly recognize the temporal dynamics
of institutionalization. Lawrence et al (2001) argue that pace and stability, two temporal
dimensions o f institutionalization, depend on the mechanism used by agents to support the
institutionalization process. Drawing on the power framework, they develop different types of
mechanisms—influence, force, discipline, and domination (Figure 13). When
institutionalization is supported episodically and the target is assumed to have agency, the form
o f support is influence. Episodic support o f institutionalization that objectifies the target
involves force as the institutional mechanism. When agency o f the target is assumed and power
is systemic, rather than occurring on an episodic basis, institutionalization is supported in the
form of discipline. Finally, when institutionalization is supported in a systemic manner by a
expect that rather than either, both approaches are required to understand technology adaptation
as institutionalization. My expectation is that three elements are distinguishable and also they
act in terms o f one another.
144
form of power that treats the target as an object, the institutional mechanism at work is
domination.
Target as subject
Target as object
Influence Force
• Decision making • Incarceration
Episodic • Non-decision making • Seizure o f property
• Manipulation • Dissolution o f
• Coercion corporations
• Physical violence
Discipline Domination
• Surveillance • Material technologies
jysiciniL
• Normalization • Actuarial practices
• Examination • Systemic discrimination
Figure 13. Mechanisms of Institutionalization (Adapted from Lawrence et al. 2001)
They argue that (I) each type will produce a distinctive pattern o f pace and stability,
and (2) more complex patterns of pace and stability will result from the combined use of
multiple mechanisms. Jepperson (1991) distinguishes four major types o f institutional change:
institutional formation, institutional development, deinstitutionalization, and
reinstitutionalization. Institutional formation is an exit from social entropy, or from
nonreproductive behavioral patterns. Institutional development represents institutional
continuation rather than an exit. Deinstitutionalization represents an exit from
institutionalization, toward social entropy or nonreproductive patterns. Reinstitutionalization
represents exit from one institutionalization, and entry into another institutional form,
organized around different principles or rules.
145
The insights from these studies in institutionalization suggest that DIT for technology
adaptation should consider various stages in the process, like diffusion models of technology
adaptation, but unlike them, the model also needs to include the stage o f institutional decay.
7.5 Dynamic Institutional Theory (DIT) for Technology Adaptation
Based on the insights gained from existing studies on institutionalization, DIT for
technology adaptation is developed through synthesizing those insights. DIT considers three
phases in the process of institutionalization or technology adaptation - institutional formation,
institutional development, and institutional decay (Figure 14). The theory presupposes a highly
dynamic and non-deterministic nature o f the process o f institutionalization or technology
adaptation in the three phases. Also it suggests that different generative mechanisms operate in
the three phases and different types o f dynamics are resulted from that.
c
o
CD
N
c 2 Institutional
x £ Development
ixi 2
(/)
c
Tim e
Figure 14. A Dynamic Process of Technology Adaptation
146
The first phase, institutional formation, explicitly takes the formation o f a new
technology into account in explaining technology adaptation. This phase focuses on the period
prior to the actual implementation o f the technology in organizations. The formation of
technology is understood in the following sequence: ideals, discourses, and techniques of
control (Hasselbladh and Kanllinikos 2000). In any case of a new IT development and
implementation, first, the ideals o f the new IT are developed and communicated and discourses
are constructed through different genres. Then, techniques of control are expressed in the
formation o f the new IT (Figure 15). This early phase of technology adaptation is expected to
have significant implications for the second phase, institutional development.
Forms of
Social States
Objectification
Ideals Discourses Techniques of control
Oral language
VUitten language
IT artifacts
T1 12 13
Figure 15. Institutional Formation in the Dynamic Process o f Technology Adaptation

(Adaptedfrom Hasselbladh and Kanllinikos 2000)
147
It is argued that the phase o f institutional formation is very influential on the next
phases in the process o f technology adaptation. At this phase, even though the technology has
not been formally introduced and is not in use, it is possible that actors already enact the
technology (Weick 1990) and that their technological frames (Orlikowski and Gash 1994) for
the technology are already formed. Thus it seems likely that either congruent or incongruent
technological frames are already established prior to the development o f the technology. For a
practical purpose, we may need early articulation, reflection, discussion, negotiation, and
possibly change of inconsistencies and incongruence to reduce the likelihood of unintended
misunderstandings and delusions around the implementation, use (Orlikowski and Gash 1994),
and design o f a new IT.
Even though user-centered design or participative design principles are becoming more
accepted in system design and implementation, significant benefits have not been found
directly from using such IS development methodology (e.g., Gasson 1999; King and Lee 1991;
Kappleman and McLean 1992; Cavaye 1995). To refer to this situation, some studies suggest
that even though the idea is good a user-oriented or participative design approach is not
rewarding. However, it is likely that when a participatory approach is adopted, users and the
micro agency might be encouraged to be involved in the sequence o f techniques of control in
the form of formal “requirement analysis”. On the other hand, in practice they tend to be
excluded from the social states o f ideals and discourses which precede techniques o f control.
Most often, they either do not realize the fact or are not informed that there were the sequence
of ideals and discourses. DIT implies that for successful IT adaptation various actors need to be
included in the state of not only techniques o f control but also ideals and discourses.
The second phase can be explained though considering temporal and spatial
dimensions of institutions (Jessop 1996. 2001), decoupling (Meyer and Rowan 1977/1991),
148
transitions o f three institutions (Scott 2001) over time (Hoffman 1999), and three mechanisms
of institutional change (DiMaggio and Powell 1983, 1991) in the process o f structuration
(Barley and Tolbert 1997) (Figure 16).
IretiUicnEi
icom
— ►
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
5 a 11
11
11
11
11
11
i 11
h i w
14 15
Action
Figure 16. Institutional Formation in the Dynamic Process o f Technology Adaptation
Arrow A illustrates that the institution is agency specific and thus the technology may
be constraints to some actors while enablers to others. A also illustrates that the same
technology could mean a different one o f the three institutions - regulative, normative, and
cognitive - to different actors. Arrow B illustrates that since different actors enact the same
technology in different ways and their actions to the technology could vary. Arrows C l, C2,
149
and C3 represent the transitions among institutions over time. For example, the technology
may be enacted by most actors mainly as a regulative institution at T2 & T3 (early stages of
technology adaptation), as 3 normative institution at T5. and as a cognitive institution at later
stages. Arrows D l. D2, and D3 represent different modes o f actions to the technology as a
regulative, normative, or cognitive institution. Arrow E represents the occurrence of
decoupling. Actors may strategically employ decoupling while interacting with the technology.
Also the technology and the actors in charge o f the governance o f the technology may
strategically allow decoupling to minimize any potential, strong resistance from powerful
actors or users. Arrow E can be placed at any given time, meaning that actors take strategic
responses at any given time during technology adaptation.
The third phase, institutional decay, suggests that the process o f technology adaptation
is always an unfinished one. This phase can be explained through considering three general
types of pressures toward deinstitutionalization: functional, political, and social (Oliver 1992)
in the process o f structuration (Barley and Tolbert 1997). Functional pressures are those that
arise from perceived problems in performance levels associated with the technology. Political
pressures result from shifts in interests or underlying power distributions that provided support
for the technology and existing institutional arrangements. Social pressures for change often
deinstitutionalize established IT use in the absence of an organization's conscious recognition
or control o f these changes or in the spite o f contrary organizational intentions to sustain the
status quo (Figure 17).
150
Institutional
Realm
Functional Pressure
Political Pressure
Social Pressure
T20 T21 T22 T23 T24 Realm of

Action
Figure 17. Institutional Decay in the Dynamic Process o f Technology Adaptation
The figure illustrates that in the third phase, institutional decay, the pressures for
deinstitutionalization increase over time and there is a weaker form o f reproduction of the
technology. In this phase, the institution or the technology faces all the “logic of collective
action” problems (Jepperson 1991). In this phase, “actions” are becoming stronger and for the
institution to secure its persistence, proponents of the technology need to repeatedly
(re)mobilize and (re)intervene in the process of structuration. In this phase, those proponents
are always in danger o f “promising too much,” thereby inadvertently encouraging the quest for
the formation of a new IT (Offe 1996).
7.6 Conclusion
This chapter offers an understanding o f the dynamic process o f technology adaptation
in the case of large-scale information systems. First, this study discusses the insights and
151
limitations o f extant approaches to explain the process o f technology adaptation in the case o f
large-scale information systems. Then, the study argued that large-scale information systems
differ from small scale, traditional, and standalone information systems and proposed a
dynamic institutional theory that sees technology adaptation in the case o f large-scale IS as the
dynamic process o f institutionalization. The nondeterministic model o f institutionalization
developed in this chapter may be useful in different contexts other than technology adaptation.
152
CHAPTER VIH
RESEARCH METHOD AND DESIGN
8.1 Introduction
This study employs qualitative research methods to conduct a case study o f large-scale
IS development of the Financial Accounting Management Information System (FAMIS) in a
major US university. Qualitative research is “a field o f inquiry in its own right and it crosscuts
disciplines, fields, and subject matters” (Denzin and Lincoln 2000, p. 2). Qualitative research
involves the systematic use and collection of a variety o f empirical materials—case studies;
personal experiences; introspection; life stories; interviews; artifacts; cultural texts and
productions; observational, historical, interactional, and visual texts (Denin and Lincoln 2000).
In the IS field the acceptance of qualitative research had been slow but recently many
researchers have used it to study the complex phenomenon surrounding the design,
implementation, and use of IS (Nissen et al. 1990; Lee et al. 1997; Trauth 2001). Several
different methods have been employed in IS qualitative research. Examples include case study,
ethnography, action research, and critical social theory (Markus 1997). Among them, this
dissertation uses case study research, which includes a single case study o f Financial
Accounting Management Information Systems (FAMIS) at the Texas A&M University
System.
In order to decide on a research method from among several major research strategies
(e.g., experiment, survey, archival analysis, histories, case studies), according to Yin (1994),
three conditions need to be considered: (a) the type of research question posed, (b) the extent of
control an investigator has over actual behavioral events, and (c) the degree o f focus on
contemporary as opposed to historical events. The FAMIS case did not require control over
behavioral events but focused on both contemporary and historical events. As presented earlier,
153
also the form o f research questions was "how” and “why” rather than “who” and “where”.
Thus, a case study method was considered appropriate for the purpose o f the study. Another
important consideration was the goal o f the dissertation. As noted earlier the dissertation was
aimed at understanding large-scale information systems and building a theory - Dynamic
Institutional Theory (DIT) -- from the FAMIS case. For the purpose of building theories, case
study research is considered an appropriate method by many authors (e.g., Eisenhardt 1989; d
Strauss and Corbin 1998; Yin 1994; Miles and Huberman 1984). Since the study required both
historical and contemporary data case study research with combination of archival analysis was
considered an appropriate method.
This chapter consists o f two sections. The first section offers an overview o f case study
research by reviewing relevant literature and the second section presents the actual research
design and method used for the case study o f FAMIS.
8.2 Case Study
The design of this case study followed the guidelines offered by Yin (1994) and
Eisenhardt (1989). Yin (1994) provides the details o f designing case study research. Eisenhardt
(1989) describes the process o f developing theories from case study research.
According to Yin (1994) a case study is an empirical inquiry that investigates a
contemporary phenomenon within its real life context, especially when the boundaries between
phenomenon and context are not clearly evident. Case studies are the preferred strategy when
how and why questions are being posed and the researcher has little control over events.
The case study strategy can be contrasted with the ethnographic approach to qualitative
research. Some qualitative research follows ethnographic methods and seeks to satisfy two
conditions: (a) the use o f close-up, detailed observation o f the natural world by the investigator
and (b) the attempt to avoid prior commitment to any theoretical method. However,
154
ethnographic research does not always produce case studies, nor are case studies limited to
these two conditions. Instead, case studies can be based on any mix o f quantitative and
qualitative evidence. In addition, case studies need not always include direct, detailed
observations as a source o f evidence (Yin 1994, p. 14). The process o f conducting a case study
is well presented by Eisenhardt (1989) in Table 4.
Table 4. Process of Building Theory from Case Study Research (Adapted from Eisenhardt
1989)_______________
Step Activity
Getting Started Definition of research question
Development o f a priori specification o f constructs
Selecting Cases Retain theoretical flexibility
Specify population to constrain extraneous variation
Crafting Instruments and Protocols Multiple data collection methods
Qualitative and quantitative data combined
Multiple investigations
Entering the Field Overlap data collection and analysis, including field
notes
Analyzing Data Within-case analysis
Shaping Hypotheses Iterative tabulation o f evidence for each construct
Replication, not sampling, logic across cases
Search evidence for ‘why’ behind relationships
Enfolding Literature Comparison with conflicting literature
Comparison with similar literature
Reaching Closure Ends process when marginal improvement becomes
small (theoretical saturation)
In general terms, a research design is “the logic that links the data to be collected (and the
conclusions to be drawn) to the initial questions o f a study” (Yin 1994, p. 18). For case studies,
According to Yin (1994), five components o f a research design are especially important.
1. A study’s questions: The form of the question— in terms o f “who," “what,” “where,”
“how,” and “why”—provides an important clue regarding the most relevant research
strategy to be used. The case study strategy is most likely to be appropriate for “how” and
“why” questions, so the initial task is to clarify precisely the nature of the study questions
in this regard.
155
2. Its propositions, if any: In addition to these “how” and “why” questions, it is often
necessary to state some propositions. However, some studies may have a legitimate reason
for not having any propositions, for instance, inductive studies.
3. Its unit(s) o f analysis: This component is related to the fundamental problem of defining
what the “case” is. As a general guide, the definition o f the unit o f analysis is related to the
way the initial research questions have been defined. Thus selection o f the appropriate unit
o f analysis results from accurately specifying the primary research questions.
4. The logic linking the data to the propositions: One promising approach for this task is the
idea o f “pattern-matching”.
5. The criteria for interpreting the findings: There is no precise way o f setting the criteria for
interpreting the findings (Yin 1994). For this, the study implicitly followed the principles
of interpretive study proposed by Klein and Myers (1999).
To establish the quality o f any empirical social research, four tests have been
commonly used: construct validity, internal validity, external validity, and reliability (Yin
1994). The four tests also are relevant to case study research. Construct validity refers to
establishing correct operational measures for the concepts being studied. This test is especially
problematic in case study research since “subjective” judgments are used to collect the data.
Internal validity is a concern for causal case studies to determine whether event x led to event
y. If the investigator incorrectly concludes that there is a causal relationship between x and y
without knowing that some third factor—z—may actually caused y, the research design has
failed to deal with some threat to internal validity. For case study research, the concern over
internal validity is extended to the broader problem o f making inferences. External validity
deals with the problem of knowing whether a study’s findings are generalizable beyond the
immediate case study. This concern arises in a single case research design. Reliability is to be
sure that, if a later investigator followed exactly the same procedures as described by an earlier
investigator and conducted the same case study all over again, the later investigator should
arrive at the same findings and conclusions. In case study research some general tactics can be
used to increase these validity and reliability tests (Table 5).
156
Table 5. Case Study Tactics for the Quality o f Research Design (Adapted from Yin 1994)
Phase of
Tests research in
Case study tactic
which tactic
occurs
• Use multiple sources of evidence Data collection
• Establish chain o f evidence Data collection
Construct validity
• Have key informants review draft case study Composition
report
• Do pattern-matching Data analysis
Internal validity
• Do explanation-building Data analysis
External validity • Use replication logic in multiple-case studies Research design
• Use case study protocol Data collection
Reliability
• Develop case study data base Data collection
Yin discussed six sources of evidence: documentation, archival records, interviews,
direct observations, participant-observation, and physical artifacts. These sources have their
comparative strengths and weaknesses. No single source has a complete advantage over all the
others. In fact, the various sources are highly complementary, and a good case study will
therefore want to use as many sources as possible - triangulation (Yin 1994; Eisenhardt 1989).
Analyzing case study evidence consists o f examining, categorizing, tabulating, or otherwise
recombining the evidence to address the initial propositions o f a study. Every investigation
should start with a general analytic strategy—yielding priorities for what to analyze and why.
Within such a strategy, four dominant analytic techniques should be used: pattern matching,
explanation-building, time-series analysis, and program logic models (Yin 1994).
8.3 Research Design and Method: A Case Study of FAMIS
8.3.1 Design of the Study
Two elements o f research design are discussed in this subsection: the research question
and the unit o f analysis. The research question came out o f reviewing the extant literature on
large-scale information systems such as ERP, K.MS, and large-scale accounting systems. The
157
research question is used in this study to direct data collection and the construction of a
historical narrative. O f interest is the period o f design and development of a large-scale
information system, FAMIS. As discussed in Chapters 1 through 3, this study is to study how
large-scale IS come to be and to be used and our specific questions, developed in Chapters IV
through VII are:
1. In what way should we conceptualize large-scale information systems? (Chapter IV) -

The point o f this question is to understand the nature o f large-scale IS and their
differences from small scale IS.
2. How do large-scale information systems interrelate to organizations or human actors?

(Chapter V) - The point of this question is to understand the relationship between
large-scale IS and organizations.
3. How does a new large-scale information system come to be developed? What are the
roles o f preexisting information systems? (Chapter VI) - The point o f these questions
are to understand the design of large-scale IS.
4. In what way can the technology adaptation of large-scale information systems be

understood? (Chapter VII) - The point o f this question is to understand technology
adaptation in the case of large-scale IS.
Different research questions require different units o f analysis, and several units of
analysis were used in this study. For the general questions specified in Chapter II, the unit of
analysis is the design and implementation context o f FAMIS, from the earliest inception o f the
system (going back to late 1980’s) to the present. For question 1, the unit o f analysis is same as
that of the general question. The system has connections with several other information
systems (e.g., student information systems, executive information system, accounting
information systems, budget & payroll systems) owned by the state of Texas and the
158
components o f the Texas A&M University System. The unit of analysis for the second research
question is the interaction between FAMIS and the 18 components o f the university system
including universities and state agencies. The unit o f analysis for question 3 is the interplay
between old information systems having existed prior to FAMIS and FAMIS. “Old”
information systems include several similar information systems implemented at other
university systems and ones existed with the Texas A&M University System prior to FAMIS.
The unit o f analysis for question 4 is same as that o f question 2 - the interplay between FAMIS
and the components o f the university system.
8.3.2 Research Strategy: Retroduction
Regarding the design o f case study this dissertation adopts some o f the general
guidelines offered by Yin (1994) and Eisenhardt (1989), which may be considered as in the
positivist tradition. However, the ontological and epistemological basis o f this study would be
interpretive rather than positivistic. Also there are some other differences between my own
research design o f this case and their guidelines.
There are several approaches for conducting and evaluating case studies. Among them,
there are two main ones: induction and deduction. Deduction implies that theories without facts
are possible. Popper’s writings have been very influential in this respect in this respect, with
his proposal that we should ‘guess’ about a theory and then see whether it can be falsified
(Diesing 1991). Deductive approaches use theory to specify expected categories, which are
then written into rules (Poole et al., 2000).
The notion of induction implies that data can be decoupled from theory (Ragin 1994).
This assumes that there exist data that are not theory laden (Churchman 1971). Inductive
approaches go first to the data and sift through the various instances, deriving categories from
159
the group up, using the constant comparative method (Poole et al. 2000). In this tradition many
studies make reference to Glaser and Strauss (1967) and Strauss and Corbin (1998).
In this study, instead a “retroductive” approach is used (Figure 17). According to Poole
et al. (2000, p. 115), Peirce (1955) defined retroduction as “the inference in which we posit a
theory or substantive hypothesis to explain previously observed patterns”. Retroductive
research strategy combines inductive and deductive strategies to capitalize on their strengths
and minimize their weaknesses (Wallace 1979; Ragin 1994). In fact what field researchers
actually do when they use analytical induction would be described more properly by
philosophers of science as "retroduction" than as induction or deduction (Poole et al. 2000;
Goulding 1998) (Figure 18). “A retroductive approach includes a literature search to derive a
synthetic category scheme that seems to fit what the researcher sees in the data, then
adjustment of categories in view of what is workable and informative after trying them out on
the data ... another retroductive approach is to generate a set o f categories based on theory and
then refine and adjust them as they are applied to data. This permits the theoretically driven
scheme to grow and to adapt in response to the exigencies o f the data” (Poole et al. 2000, p.
143).
Retroductive
Deductive
Theory 4 Data
Inductive
Retroductive
Figure 18. Duduction, Induction and Retroduction
160
This study started after reviewing the literature on large-scale IS. Two social theories -
Giddens' theory o f structuration and actor network theory (ANT) — were identified as
theoretical guides for conducting and evaluating the case study. While data collection and
analysis was done simultaneously, the strong need for a different theoretical framework, rather
than the two social theories and the combination o f the two, was identified to explain and
understand the nature o f large-scale IS. This need led to the development o f a framework
drawn from the tenets of institutional theory. The process has been iterative.
8.3.3 “Interpretive” Case Study
Qualitative research can be done with a positivist, interpretive, and critical stance
(Chua 1986; Klein and Myers 1999). This depends on the underlying philosophical
assumptions of the researcher (Myers 1997). Generally speaking, according to Orlikowski and
Baroudi (1991), IS research can be classified as positivist if there is evidence o f formal
propositions, quantifiable measures of variables, hypothesis testing, and the drawing of
inferences about a phenomenon from a representative sample to a stated population while as
interpretive if it is assumed that our knowledge o f reality is gained only through social
constructions such as a language, consciousness, shared meanings, documents, tools, and other
artifacts. The goal of interpretive study in the IS field is to understand the context of the
information systems and the process where by the information systems influences and is
influenced by the context (Walsham 1993).
In the IS field, interpretive case studies have been adopted in a growing number of
studies (e.g., Orlikowski 1993: Walsham 1993; Myers 1994; Walsham 1995). Thus, the study
tries to capture the details o f the case and provide ‘thick’ description o f the case. In IS field
161
Klein and Myers (1999) provide a set o f principles for the conduct and evaluation of
interpretive research in IS.
1. Fundamental principle o f the hermeneutic circle: posits that human understanding is

achieved by iterating between consideration o f the independent meaning o f the parts and
the whole that they form.
2. Principle o f contextualization: needs critical reflection o f the social and histoncal

background o f the research setting, so that the intended audience can see how the current
situation under investigation emerged.
3. Principle of interaction between researchers and subjects: needs critical reflection on how
the research materials (or ‘data’) were socially constructed through the interaction between
the researchers and participants.
4. Principle of abstraction and generalization: require relating the idiographic details revealed
by the data interpretation to theoretical, general concepts that describe the nature o f human
understanding and social action.
5. Principle of dialogical reasoning: requires sensitivity to possible contradictions between

the theoretical preconceptions guiding the research design and actual findings with
subsequent cycles o f revision.
6. Principle o f multiple interpretations: requires sensitivity to possible differences in

interpretation among the participants as are typically expressed in multiple narratives or
stories o f the same sequence o f events under study.
7. Principle of suspicion: needs sensitivity to biases and systematic distortions in the

narratives collected from the participants.
These principles are interdependent and create a “whole”. They cannot be applied
mechanically. It is incumbent upon interpretive scholars to appropriate them and use their own
judgment as to their specific application (Klein and Myers 1999). These seven principles
presented above are implicitly followed while conducting and analyzing the case study.
As for the principle “fundamental principle o f the hermeneutic circle,” the study
iterated between the separate sentences and even words o f individual e-mail messages and
interoffice memorandums as parts and the global context of FAMIS that determines the full
162
meaning o f the separate segments to interpret the memos and e-mail message exchange as a
whole.
As for the principle o f contextualization, the study attempted to be ‘rich' in the
description o f the case by collecting and interpreting a large volume o f contemporary as well as
historical data from diverse sources such as individuals, vendors, the state of Texas and others.
Also the study presents the multi-level analysis of data.
As for the principle o f interaction between researchers and subjects, the primary
investigator tried to become self-conscious and questioned his earlier assumptions which came
from the reading of structuration and ANT-based studies on large-scale information systems.
Also his advisor has played a role o f devil’s advocate during the informal and regular meetings.
The self-conscious activities improved the overall understanding o f large-scale information
systems and helped to an alternative framework to be emerged.
As for the principle o f abstraction and generalization. Initially the study tended to
generalize to social theories such as structuration theory and actor network theory, but after
making some progress on data collection and analysis a number o f abstract categories from the
tenets o f institutional theory emerged and were given greater prominence in the analysis. The
principle o f dialogical reasoning helped the primary investigator to confront his preconceptions
(prejudices) which guided the original research design with the data that emerged through the
research process.
As for the principle o f multiple interpretations, the study includes the discussion o f the
multi-level and multi-site analysis and introduces different and even contradictory
interpretations of the FAMIS system. Finally, even though there is considerable disagreement
among interpretive researchers concerning the extent to which social research should be critical
(Klein and Myers 1999) the study had to follow the principle o f suspicion. It was because the
163
study was aimed at investigating not only Giddens’s structures o f signification and
legitimization but also domination. As presented earlier, particularly in Chapters V and VII, the
study used the lens o f “social construction of technology” but also “modified realism” and
showed how social constructions o f reality can favor certain groups and interests. In following
this principle, the self-conscious activities and his advisor helped the primary investigator to
maintain a balanced position and consider the existence of Giddens's “dialectic o f control”.
8.4 Data Collection
The literature review on large-scale IS and extant studies in IS using two social
theories, structuration theory and ANT, provided a starting point for analysis. Therefore our
approach was different from purely inductive approaches. Miles and Huberman argue that a
start-list helps to orient the researcher to the conceptual purposes of the study. “The risk is not
that o f imposing a self-blinding framework, but that an incoherent, bulky, irrelevant,
meaningless set o f observations might be produced, which no one can (or even wants to) make
sense o f ’ (Miles 1983, p. 119). As noted earlier, the research strategy for this study is
retroduction rather than induction and deduction. Thus, the start-list for the study was
developed informed by some combination of prior knowledge of the FAMIS system,
speculation, and literature review on structuration theory, actor network theory, and
institutional theory. The start-list consisted of codes and code definitions in a matrix table
(Table 6).
164
Table 6. A Star List of Codes

Creation o f Institutions
Cl: Motives CI-MO
Cl: Plan CI-PL
Cl: Event Chronology CI-EC
Cl: Actors CI-AT
Cl: Change of Scope CI-CS
Cl: Old System CI-OS
Cl: Technical needs CI-TN
Regulative Institution
RI: Governance System RJ-GS
RJ: Power System RIPS
RJ: Authority Systems RI-AS
RI: Objects W/ Mandated Specifications RI-O
Normative Institution
NI: Protocols NI-PT
NI: Standard Operating Procedures NI-SOP
NI: Roles NI-RO
NI: Objects W/ Conventions, Standards NI-O
Cognitive Institution
Cl: Cognitive Frames CI-CF
Cl: Widely Held Beliefs CI-WHB
Cl: Shared Values CI-SV
Cl: Objects W/ Symbolic Value CI-O
External Forces
EF: State Agents EF-SA
EF: State Laws EF-SL
EF: General Accounting Principles EF-GAP
EF: Reporting Requirements by Other Systems EF-RROS
EF: Other Higher Institutions EF-OHI
EF: Industry Trends e f - it
EF: Other Legislators EF-OL
EF: Others EF-OT
Internal Forces
IF: Board o f Regents IF: Board o f Regent
IF: Rationale of One System IF: Rationale of One System
IF: Users IF: Users
165
Table 6. Continued
Institutionalization (Adoption Process)
IN: Event Chronology - Planned IN-ECP
IN: Event Chronology - Actual IN-ECA
IN: Critical Events IN-CE
IN: Actors IN-A
IN: Resistance IN-R
IN: Leadership (Chancellor) IN-L
IN: State Audit IN-SA
Decoupling
DP: WTAMU DP-WTAMU
DP: TEEX DP-TEEX
DP: TEES DP-TEES
DP: Leadership (Chancellor) DP-L
DP: Independence (Budget) DP-I
DP: Departmental Information Systems DP-DIS
Deinstitutionalization
DI: General Accounting Principles DI-GAP
DI: Actors DI-A
DI: User DI-U
DI: ERP (& SIMS, Payroll, HR System) DI-ERP
DI: Reporting Capability DI-RC
DI: Web-based Interface DI-WI
DI: Board o f Regents DI-BOR
Reinstitutionalization
RI: State Laws RI-SL
RI: General Accounting Principles RI-GAP
RI: Leadership RI-L
Level (Degree) o f Institutionalization
LI: Autonomy LI-AT
LI: Adaptability LI-AP
LI: Complexity LI-CP
LI: Coherence LI-CH
166
While conducting data collection, the status o f data collection was checked informally
using a similar matrix table (Table 7)
Table 7. Data Check Matrix (an example)

Level of Collection4 Low Medium High
Creation o f Institutions
Cl: Motives X
Cl: Plan X
Cl: Event Chronology X
Cl: Actors X
Cl: Change o f Scope
Cl: Old System X
Cl: Technical needs X
Regulative Institution
RI: Governance System X
RI: Power System
RI: Authority Systems
RI: Objects W/ Mandated Specifications
*The terms Low, Medium, and High were used to indicate the amount of data collected.
167
Data collection was guided by an informal protocol derived from one general and the
four specific research questions (Yin 1994). As suggested by Yin (1994) and Eisenhardt
(1989). all six sources o f evidence: documentation, archival records, interviews, direct
observations, participant-observation, and physical artifacts were sought in data collection.
Specifically, we collected:
• Documentation: Internal memorandums, agendas, minutes o f meetings, documents

o f systems analysis and design, project management plans, implementation plans,
software manuals, e-mail messages, and other written reports o f events.
• Archival records: Organizational charts, personal records, record o f historical

events.
• Interviews: Interview subjects include founders o f the system, project directors,

programmers, representatives o f each agency, users, system auditors.
• Direct observations: Indirect observations o f the system through informants.
• Participant-observation.
• Physical artifacts: Interaction with FAMIS.
In particular document collection was accomplished through follow-ups on interviews, private
collections o f selected key individuals, site-visits at the department o f internal system audit,
library search, archival research at the FAMIS project site, contacting the Department of
Information Resources in the state of Texas and software vendors, and WWW search (Table 8).
168
Table 8. Summary o f Documents Collected

Number of
Title Type
Pages
Agency Strategic Plan (all universities and agencies o f
Archival records 950
TAMUS)
Other sponsored research and purchasing system related
Archival records 980
documents (year 1989 - 1995)
The State Auditor’s reports (1994, 1995, 1996, 1998) Archival records 300
General documents (e.g.. software assurance) from
Department of Information Resources (DIR) in the state ol Archival records 200
Texas
TAMUS internal audit report Archival records 200
Other USAS, SPA related documents Archival records 100
Documents from SCT Corporation Archival records 100
USAS Review Archival records 60
The state’s DIR goals, objectives and strategies Archival records 50
Connecting Texas in the Digital Age Archival records 50
Documents from Software AG Archival records 50
Texas A&M University System Integrative plan Archival records 47
University of Texas Information Resources Strategic Plan
Archival records 31
1999-2003
University of Texas Information Resources Strategic Plan
Archival records 22
2003-2007
The State Auditor's reports on University of Houston Archival records 20
Agency history and background Archival records 20
Individual resumes Archival records 10
General Description o f FAMIS service Archival records 10
Texas Connection Consortium Overview Archival records 8
Financial Management Service Mission Statement Archival records I
TAMUS organizational chart Archival records 1
Organizational chart o f SAGO Archival records 1
Organizational chart o f Financial Management Service Archival records 1
FAMIS priority E-mail messages 1
Other inter-office memoranda E-mail messages 10
169
Table 8. Continued
Number of
Title Type
Pages
Implementation
FAMIS implementation schedule 13
document
Implementation
FAMIS System member module status 4
document
Proposed Training program for TAMU colleges and Implementation
4
departments on the FAMIS purchasing system document
Implementation
FAMIS implementation training guidelines 3
document
Planning document for implementation o f purchasing Implementation
system at TAMU departments 2
document
Implementation o f FAMIS with engineering research Internal
agencies 50
memorandum
Recommended FAMIS system priorities for Texas A&M Internal
4
University memorandum
Internal
Texas A&M University FAMIS advisory Council 2
memorandum
Interoffice
Texas State Board o f Public Accountancy 2
memorandum
Government code - Chapter 2054 Legal document 30
Board's Minutes o f Meeting Minutes o f meeting 50
Programming
NATURAL Programming Standard 30
language Manuel
Advanced Certification Document FAMIS System document 350
Request for Proposal Financial Accounting Management
System document 100
Information System
Budget/Payroll/Personnel System General description System document 40
Data warehousing architecture & presentation System document 10
Comprehensive training & user services plan Training document 14
FAMIS Training Course & Topic List Training document 7
Purchasing module training scope document Training document 3
FAMIS training Manuel User Manuel 100
Documents from Peoplesoft Vendor document 20
Documents from Software AG's affiliates Vendor document 3
+ 100 or
Others
more
170
The total number o f interviews conducted as of today is 25. The interviews have been
conducted with the founders o f the FAMIS system. CFOs o f TAMUS’ components, members
of steering committees, agency-level and department-level users, directors of IT departments in
a number o f member organizations, system analysts o f the FAMIS system, the former and
current project leaders and a system auditor. The average duration o f the interviews was 76
minutes.
The format o f the interviews was semi-structured in that each participant was asked
some general, open-ended questions and there was no formal questionnaire. The study used
three types of interviews together: interview guide approach, standardized open-ended
interviews, and dialogic interviews (Rossman and Rallis 1998). The purpose of guided
interviews is to elicit the participant's worldview. We identified a few broad topics (e.g.,
design, implementation, use o f FAMIS) and framed them as questions to uncover the
participant’s meaning. Also since we conducted a multi-site case study, the standardized open-
ended interviews were needed. We had a number o f fixed questions that were asked of many
participants in a particular order. Finally, we combined dialogic interviews that are “true
conversations in which researcher and participant together develop a more complex and
understandings of the topic” (p. 125). In each interview the three types were used in
combination.
In general each interview contained three parts. First, the participant shared with the
researchers the circumstances in which they were or have been involved with the FAMIS
system and their perceptions and understandings o f FAMIS. Then, they were also asked some
general questions such as “what drives FAMIS to change”. The primary investigator and his
advisor could leam each participant’s role and responsibility from the second interview with
the FAMIS manager and a senior system analyst. This allowed the primary investigator to
171
develop a list o f questions for each participant in terms o f his or her (former or present) role
and responsibility in the context o f FAMIS. For example, to the former director o f the FAMIS
project we asked questions like “why was a particular software package chosen rather than
others” and “why was a particular database management system chosen”. Finally, the
participant freely shared their insights and other information not covered by the questions.
As for construct validity the study has attempted to seek triangulation among different
evaluators (investigator triangulation) (Yin 1994, Eisenhardt 1989). Most interviews were led
by the primary investigator. However, several major interviews with current project manager
and senior system analyst were conducted by the primary investigator and his advisor. After
interviews the two investigators have had time for discussing findings and understandings of
the data collected. The duration o f data collection was about 10 months from October 2001 to
present. It will be continued without any specific ending date (Table 9). Future data collection
will be used to strengthen and/or revise the institutional frameworks developed in this
dissertation.
172
Table 9. Detailed Interview Schedule

Interview Duration
Date Interviewee Current Affiliation & Title
No."’ (Minutes)
The FAMIS Manager
t 10/04/01 60
Senior system analyst
2 The FAMIS Manager
1/15/02 100
Senior system analyst
3 1/31/02 90 Senior system analyst
4 2/02/02 30 Departmental accountant
5 2/05/02 80 CFO o f Texas Tech
Assistant Vice President for
6 2/07/02 100
Financial Service Management
7 2/08/02 150 Director o f CIS
Associate Vice Chancellor for
8 2/15/02 120
TAMU Strategic Plan
TEEX deputy chancellor
9 2/18/02 70 Controller o f Finance, TEEX
Director o f IT, TEEX
Director o f Financial Reporting &
10 2/19/02 60 Comptroller o f Accounting &
Budget Office
Assistant Vice President for
11 2/25/02 90 This information
Finance, TAMU
is disguised fo r
12 2/27/02 60 President o f A&M Foundation
confidentiality
Associated Dean & Executive
13 3/05/02 60
MBA Director
Comptroller o f Accounting &
14 3/11/02 60 Budgeting Office, TAMU-
Commerce
15 3/12/02 60 Vice Chancellor, TEES
Director o f IT. Admission &
16 3/25/02 90
Records, TAMUS
17 4/04/02 60 SIMS Project Manager
18 4/03/02 30 Internal System Auditor
21 4/05/02 60 Senior Training Specialist, FAMIS
Director o f Data warehousing
22 4/17/02 90
Project
The FAMIS Manager
23 6/12/02 90
Senior System Analyst
24 6/21/02 90 Director o f CIS
25 7/19/02 90 CIO o f TTI
9 Chapter 9 presents the case analysis which includes many quotations from the interview data.
We developed a citation system for the quotations. Each quotation in Chapter 9 includes a
citation number. For example, 1.1 refers to interview #1 and paragraph #1, 2.5 refers to
interview #2 and paragraph #5 and so on.
173
8.5 Data Analysis
Two approaches to qualitative data analysis - Strauss and Corbin’s (1998) version of
grounded theory and Miles and Huberman (1994) tabular methods —were used to guide data
analysis. These approaches were not mechanically applied in this study; rather they were
adapted in this study. The overview of these approaches is provided below.
Grounded theory means theory that was derived from data, systematically gathered and
analyzed through the research process (p. 12). Strauss and Corbin emphasize that data
collection, analysis, and eventual theory stand in close relationship to one another. A researcher
should not begin a project with a preconceived theory in mind (unless his or her purpose is to
elaborate and extend existing theory). Rather, the research begins with an area o f study and
allows the theory to emerge from the data. In this method, data analysis is the interplay
between researchers and data and thus it is interpretive in nature. The grounded theory
approach specifies three coding procedures - open coding, axial coding, and selective coding -
and a range of heuristic strategies for them.
Open coding is “the analytic process through which concepts are identified and their
properties and dimensions are discovered in data” (p. 101). This process involves breaking
down, examining, comparing, conceptualizing, and categorizing data in terms of their
properties and dimensions and then later relating categories through hypotheses or states of
relationships. Growing out o f and feeding back into open coding is the process o f axial coding.
It refers to ‘the process of relating categories (identified in open coding) to their subcategories”
(p. 123). Selective coding is the process by which a fully grounded theory emerges. The
process involves the identification o f the “core category” and linking the different categories to
the core category using the paradigm model. The procedures involved are rather like those used
174
in axial coding. The difference is that they take place at a higher level o f abstraction. Selective
coding begins with the attempt to establish a story line.
Miles and Huberman (1994) argue that qualitative research is iterative in character. For
them qualitative analysis is inherently cyclical. Patterns, hypotheses and themes are discovered
inductively. Possible verification o f the emerging patterns is then sought using deductively
strategies. This in turn potentially yields further inductive insights. Miles and Huberman
suggest that a wide variety o f tactics is appropriate to this iterative process. Such strategies
range from noting emerging themes in the data, through the making o f contrasts and
comparisons between analytic elements, to the construction of an extensive and coherent
conceptual and analytic schema. In Miles and Huberman’s (1994) approach there are three
linked processes for data analysis.
Data reduction is an initial process by which material is selected and condensed on the
basis of an emerging conceptual framework. The use o f summaries o f various kinds, coding,
and review procedures is suggested. Coding is a fundamental part o f data reduction. They
distinguish between first-level and second-level coding. The aim of first-level coding is to
produce a working set o f codes. The research begins second-level coding by looking for
threads, leads, commonalities or recurrences that suggest some underlying pattern. They
suggest creating a start-list o f codes prior to fieldwork. Data display is the ‘organized,
compressed assembly o f information’ (p. 428) - “think display’ (p. 240). Devices used
included structured case summaries and synopses, the use o f vignettes, network diagrams and
matrix displays. Two major formats for data display are matrix displays in which data are
arrayed in rows and columns and network display, which is graphical representations made up
o f nodes and links. Network displays are particularly useful for showing flows and structures.
175
Conclusion drawing/verification is the process o f drawing broad, but substantiated,
interpretations from displayed data.
Data analysis was done in both informal and formal sessions. Informal data analysis
started as soon as the first interview was conducted in October 2001. In fact, the investigators,
particularly his advisor, had pre-knowledge about FAMIS through his interactions with people
involved directly and indirectly with the system. Also a large amount o f data collection on
large-scale information systems had been done through the literature review and the analysis of
multiple secondary case studies during the year o f 2001. Specifically, the following secondary
case studies were reviewed and the research findings o f these studies were implicitly compared
with that of this case study.
• Large-scale information systems in the UK National Health Service (Bloomfield et
al. 1992: Bloomfield et al. 1992: Bloomfield and Vurdubakis 1994; Jones 1994:
Bloomfield 1995; Brown 1995; Bloomfield and Vurdubakis 1997; Bloomfield
1997)
• A large-scale information system in a New Zealand hospital (Doolin 1999a, 1999b,
1999c. 2001a, 2001b; Lowe and Doolin 1999)
• A SAP ERP case at Norsk Hydro in Norway (Hanseth and Braa 1998, 2000)
• Information infrastructure at Statoil (Monteiro and Hepso 2000)
• Information infrastructure development at Astra Hassle (Cordelia and Simon2000)
• The case o f Customer Relationship Management System in IBM (Ciborra and

Failla 2000)
This pre-data collection from extant literature had allowed the primary investigator to
have some theoretical conceptions or knowledge about the phenomenon o f large-scale IS. As
176
already noted, the theoretical conceptions behind this study were drawn from two social
theories, structuration theory and ANT. However, the iterative process - open coding and axial
coding - -between literature and the data from the actual case study resulted in the emergence
of four “core categories” (Strauss and Corbin 1998) which later became the four specific
research topics presented in Chapters IV through VII. The emergence o f these four core
categories helped more specific questions to be framed and further the questions were
constructed to guide later analysis.
In order to organize information, different data display techniques were used (Miles
and Huberman 1994). In particular a number o f matrix displays, tables, and timelines were
used for data display (Appendix I and Chapter IX). Authors (Strauss and Corbin 1998; Miles
and Huberman 1994) suggested that memos are a fundamental tool for data reduction or coding
procedures in qualitative analysis. In this study memos were used for different purposes. They
served as a repository for “instant” ideas and research questions after interviews, a
communicative tool for conveying initial research findings and analytic ideas to and getting
comments and suggestions from the secondary investigator, and interim case summaries at
different stages o f the case study.
8.6 Conclusion
The methods and procedures presented in this chapter guided the collection and
analysis of the large volume of data for this study. The interpretations from displayed data are
presented in the following chapter
177
CHAPTER IX
CASE STUDY
9.1 Introduction
This chapter presents a case study of the Financial Accounting Management
Information Systems (FAMIS) o f the Texas A&M University System (TAMUS). This chapter
consists o f two main sections: the first section offers an overview o f this case study with
general research findings and the second section presents the discussion of the case in terms of
the framework of Dynamic Institutional Theory (DIT), which was developed in the preceding
chapters. Thus, the first section aims at offering a big picture o f the case, while the second
section presents the details o f the case by viewing FAMIS asa social institution and the
process of development and implementation as a dynamic processof institutionalization.
9.2 Case Overview and General Research Findings
9.2.1 Organization Overview
The Texas A&M University System (TAMUS) is one o f the more complex systems of
higher education in the nation. Currently TAMUS consists of nine universities, eight State
agencies and a health science center that serves over 94,000 students and reaches more than 4
million people each year through its service mission. Research projects under way today by
system universities and research agencies total roughly $400 million. The system employs
more than 23,000 faculty and staff members located throughout the State and serves all 254
Texas counties. The annual budget for the TAMU System is approximately $2.0 billion9.
9 Cited from the TAMUS’ web page.
178
The State established its first college in 1876 and named it the Agricultural and Mechanical
College of Texas. This marked the beginning o f the Texas A&M University System. The
"system," although not officially recognized as such until 1948, began as a group o f institutions
focused on agricultural and mechanical training for Texas youth. In addition to A&M College
(now Texas A&M University), the Texas Legislature created a branch college at Prairie View
(now Prairie View A&M University), which opened in 1878. John Tarleton College at
Stephenville (now Tarleton State University) joined the system in 1917.
As of October 1988 (when the FAMIS project was officially launched) TAMUS was
comprised of 4 universities and 7 agencies:10
1. System Administrative and General Offices (SAGO)

2. Texas A&M University (TAMU)
3. Tarleton State University (TSU)
4. Prairie View A&M University (PVAMU)
5. Texas A&M University at Galveston (TAMUG)
6. Texas Agricultural Experiment Station (TAES)
7. Texas Agricultural Extension Service (TAEX)
8. Texas Animal Damage Control Service (TADCS)
9. Texas Engineering Experiment Station (TEES)
10. Texas Engineering Extension Service (TEEX)
11. Texas Forest Service (TFS)
12. Texas Transportation Institute (TTI)
In 1989, the A&M System" experienced significant growth when three South Texas
universities joined the system: Texas A&M International University (formerly Laredo State
University) in Laredo, Texas A&M University-Corpus Christi (formerly Corpus Christi State
University) and Texas A&M University-Kingsville (formerly Texas A&I University). In 1990,
10 Cited from Advanced Certification Document Financial Accounting Management

Information System 1988.
11 It should be noted that there is Texas A&M Research Foundation, an independent non-profit
service organization whose focus is to facilitate research and development within TAMUS.
This organization is a user o f FAMIS also.
179
West Texas State University in the Texas Panhandle city o f Canyon joined the A&M System
and adopted the name West Texas A&M University in 1993.
The A&M System continues to grow and expand its reach in Texas. In September
1996, three additional institutions joined the A&M System: Baylor College o f Dentistry in
Dallas. Texas A&M University-Commerce (formerly East Texas State University-Commerce),
and Texas A&M University-Texarkana (formerly East Texas State University-Texarkana).
A strong commitment to health education and community service led the way in 1999
to the establishment o f the Texas A&M University System Health Science Center, comprised
of Baylor College o f Dentistry, the Institute of Biosciences and Technology in Houston, and
the College of Medicine, School of Rural Public Health, and Graduate School o f Biomedical
Sciences, all located in College Station. The following timeline summarizes recent growth:
1989 Texas A&M International University (TAMIU)

Texas A&M University-Corpus Christi (TAMCC)
Texas A&M University-Kingsville (TAMK)
1990 West Texas A&M University (WTAMU)
1996 Baylor College o f Dentistry in Dallas (BCD)
Texas A&M University-Commerce (TAMUC)
Texas A&M University-Texarkana (TAMUT)
1999 Health Science Center (HSC)
9.2.2 Organizational Culture & Internal Environment
The system is described as a young organization in comparison to many systems of
higher education. Many o f the system’s universities had long histories before joining the A&M
System and have been part o f the system for a decade or less. In addition to the youth of the
system, its members vary greatly in mission and purpose. Each member of the system has its
own goals, traditions, and culture. The system values diversity and honors the principle “one
size doesn’t fit all”12.
12Cited from The Integrative Plan of The System.
180
While focusing on the unique missions of the institutions and agencies of the system,
the more general issues related to the overall quality o f the system are addressed in The
Integrative Plan.
Too often, progress in one system or individual institution has been achieved
independent o f consideration for other institutions or for the enterprise o f higher
education in Texas as a whole. Long-term progress will only be achieved when the
whole o f higher education is improved. One o f our fundamental principles is that the
quality o f each component o f the A&M systems is dependent on the other components
(p. 13, The Integrative Plan o f The System)
One respondent described TAMUS as a confederated system. He compared TAMUS
with UT System, by noting “if UT System is said to be more centralized, our system (A&M) is
more decentralized.” Traditionally there had been a decentralized culture within the system,
even though everyone component is under one umbrella each is different and wants to maintain
its uniqueness and independence. On the other hand, at the system level collaboration among
member organizations has been emphasized and sought. The document called Agency Strategic
Plan for the fiscal year 2001-2005 by SAGO contains the following Statement,
The Texas A&M University System is strong when each university and agency pursues
its own mission with urgency and determination within the overall system mission.
The A&M System will achieve its greatest strength when the complementary but
distinctive missions interact in a more tightly coupled manner than is found among
free-standing organizations in a loose federation. Collaboration creates
interdependence, and it is desirable that all institutions within the A&M System have
this mutually dependent relationship with each other. Such interdependence will lead
to a stronger and more mature organization (p. 5).
Another respondent pointed out that there have been some changes in the culture o f the
system overall. Before 1994, most Chancellors came from TAMU. For example, Dr. Perry L.
Adkisson, who served between 1986 and 1990 as the Chancellor o f the System, was from the
College o f Agriculture at TAMU. The next two Chancellors, Dr. Herbet H. Richardson (1991-
1993) and Dr. William H. Mobley (1993-1994), were from the College of Engineering at
181
TAMU. Therefore, the view and culture o f TAMU has been very influential on other parts of
TAMUS and the System as a whole. This changed after Dr. Barry Thomson (1994-1999), who
was the President o f WTAMU, became the Chancellor in 1994. Since he came from a different
part than TAMU, he encouraged coordination with other agencies and started fostering the
value o f other agencies (Table 10).
Table 10. Change o f TAMUS Leadership _________________________________

Chancellor Background Serving Year
Dr. Perry L. Adkisson TAMU (Agriculture) 9/1986-8/1990
Dr. Herbert H. Richardson TAMU (Engineering) 1991-1993
Dr. William H. Mobley TAMU 1993-1994
Dr. Barry Thomson WTAMU 1994-1999
Howard D. Graves Army General 1999-Present
Also this was time when the State planned only three or four University systems within
the State. Thus, individual universities and State agencies had to join one. TAMUS wanted to
be attractive to them by showing “TAMUS is flexible and values uniqueness”. This also led
the culture o f the system to value uniqueness and differences among member institutions.
9.2.3 FAMIS Overview
FAMIS is a large-scale information system that responds to financial regulations
applicable to the members o f the Texas A&M University System (TAMUS). FAMIS integrates
systems of 30 databases that function as a unit across 5 interdependent modules or subsystems.
This data base system supports the financial and business functions for the most of the agencies
and universities of the A&M system. The primary users are the administrative functions
supported by the system. This database system is updated online by most o f the agencies and
universities of the A&M System.
182
FAMIS Services is responsible for the development and support o f FAMIS since 1990.
The FAMIS Services Department, formerly known as The MIS project team and now part of
the Department of Information Resources (DIR) within Texas A&M University System
Administrative and General Offices (SAGO), is mainly in charge o f the management and
maintenance o f FAMIS. This department has to report directly to the DIR within SAGO. The
SAGO DIR also oversees the following functions: Budget, Payroll, and Personnel (BPP) and
Microcomputers and Network Support. The SAGO DIR directly reports to Office o f the Vice
Chancellor for Business Services which directly reports to Chancellor of TAMUS.
FAMIS was first brought to production in September 1990 for Fiscal Year 1991. Three
components - SAGO, TAMU and TVMDL - began to utilize the basic functionality provided
by FAMIS. Since then, fifteen additional members of TAMUS and the Texas A&M Research
Foundation (RF) have gone through FAMIS adoption and implementation. Currently the
FAMIS system supports more than 4,000 users in 9 universities, 6 agencies, HSC, BCD, and
SAGO within the System and RF, an independent non-private organization.
Currently the FAMIS system consists of five major subsystems: Purchasing System
(PS), Financial Records Systems (FRS), Fixed Assets (FFX), Sponsored Research (SPR), and
Annual Financial Reporting (AFR). FRS is the most commonly used subsystem. Within FRS
there are several modules including the financial accounting module, accounts payable module,
accounts receivable module, payroll module, and budget preparation module:
o Financial Accounting - transactions relating to financial operations such as

budgets, revenues, expenses, and journal entries
o Accounts Payable - transactions relating to vendor payment including
preparation o f checks and files for State o f Texas warrants
o Accounts Receivable - transactions relating to billing and payment receipt for
goods or services rendered
o Payroll Distribution - processes relating to the distribution o f payroll expenses
for research projects
183
o Budget Preparation - processes relating to the preparation o f the annual budget

to be presented to the TAMUS Board o f Regents13
The FFX subsystem meets all inventory needs. This subsystem is especially useful for
property managers who need to research inventory information. The SPR subsystem meets
grants and proposal needs. Only Contract Administration and Financial Management Services
at research agencies receive access to SPR. Finally the AFR subsystem meets State reporting
needs. Only Financial Management Services (in the Division o f Finance of each member
organization) receives access to AFR. The purchasing susbsystem supports transactions
relating to ordering, receipt and initiation o f payment of goods and services. The FAMIS
system has continuously evolved through the introduction of new accounting rules, laws and
regulations mandated by the State, and additional features and functionality as defined by the
user community. Current development plans include a departmental bookkeeping module, a
travel module, and increased automation of production control among others.
9.2.4 Pre-FAMIS
Prior to FAMIS, the academic institutions within TAMUS were, for the most part,
running in-house systems that were developed at Texas A&M University. A former top
administrator o f TAMU fiscal office recalled:
Around 1972 or 1975, the first automatic accounting system called Vantage was
developed. This system was coded by only one person in a small office room at
YMCA or somewhere. IT took about 2-3 years to do that. The system was developed
in Fortran. The system was good computationally, but not user friendly
This system traces its roots and methodology, in an accounting sense, back to 1959 or
before. In the late sixties, a technology upgrade was made, but the base accounting concepts
remained intact. This system had been converted or transported to run at Tarleton State
13Cited from the User Manuel of FAMIS.
184
University, Prairie View A&M University, and Texas A&M University at Galveston. This
accounting system, over the years, had also evolved into separate systems supporting agency
accounting. This separation occurred in the late sixties and early seventies. Both TAES and
TEES had separate accounting systems running on the IBM Mainframe (3090-200E) at Texas
A&M University that supported the functionality required by their agencies.
The agency accounting systems did not emulate the Texas A&M University
accounting system. Instead, TAES enhanced its system with a departmental “shadow”
bookkeeping system running on a PRIME computer system. Four individual stand-alone
systems were running to support TAEX, TFS, TEEX, and TTI14.
9.2.5 Background of FAMIS Development
Several internal and external factors and institutional arrangements contributed to the
emergence o f the FAMIS system. Internally, in 1970s and 1980s, the TAMUS had experienced
tremendous growth in terms of several major areas: student enrollment, research expenditures,
and the TAMUS budget. Growth in student enrollment increased by 22% between 1977 and
1986. Actual research dollars spent at TAMU increased 193% and the budget increased 115%
during the decade. Also, as shown in the preceding section, the university system was
expecting more growth: since 1989, eight institutions joined TAMUS.
The growth o f the system led top administrators and particularly the TAMUS’ Board
of Regents to recognize the need for comparable and consolidated information to properly
manage the $800 million annual operation in late 1980s. The proper level o f coordination and
control among (and over) member institutions became the most important concern to system
administrators. However, the existence o f separate financial management systems supporting

185
diverse accounting rules and practices throughout the TAMUS created a major barrier for
enterprise-wide integration and control. In the mid-1980s the president o f TAMU and high
officials in fiscal and budget office at TAMU recognized the need for a large-scale fiscal and
administrative information system as the solution for the fiscal and administrative problems at
TAMU. They initiated the project to develop such a system with the capabilities o f decision
support, executive reporting, online purchasing, budgeting and planning, investment
management, streamlined integration across departments and colleges, and other functions.
Initially the idea was to develop such a system for TAMU only. This initial idea was adopted
by the System’s administration and the scope of the project was expanded from TAMU to all
members to develop a large-scale financial and administrative information system for all parts
of the TAMUS system. According to a top official o f the TAMU fiscal office, this was the
most significant change in the history of FAMIS, and it later created a lot of politics and
resistance from other members. There were several direct and indirect reasons for this shift.
First, there was the issue of costs to develop the large-scale information system. The initial
acquisition cost for such information system was expected to be over $ 1 million at that time.
When considering the costs for the full implementation and maintenance, the overall cost
appeared too high for a single university. Therefore, an information system for all parts of
TAMUS was an attractive idea for TAMU, since now the cost could be distributed to and
shared by other parts o f TAMUS. Secondly, the development o f “one integrated large-scale
fiscal and administrative information system” was part of the long-range plans of TAMUS and
thus satisfied the long-term objective o f the System and the Board o f Regents for one uniform
accounting system and centralized management of the rapidly-growing System.
These internal factors were also closely interwoven with the external environments and
institutional arrangements within which the TAMUS resided. Specifically, there were several
186
external pressures from the State, competition with other higher institutions in the State and
nation, and the emergence of new technological ideas or concepts such as Decision Support
Systems. Executive Information Systems, and computer use for centralized management.
The most direct external pressure came from the State, particularly the State auditors
and the development o f Uniform Statewide Accounting System (USAS). The State auditors
had found in their audits of the TAMUS system that proper fiscal procedures had not been
followed throughout the System and that there were inconsistencies in the way the various
parts of TAMUS reported certain financial transactions on their annual financial reports.
Along with this, the State had been continuing to emphasize the use o f automated
information systems by governmental bodies. First, the legislative and executive branches of
the State believed that advanced information systems could improve productivity and
efficiency. Also, they looked at advanced financial information systems as the means to
improve coordination, integration and control. The State auditors and top administrators of the
TAMUS believed that changing procedures are often very dependent upon computerized
information systems and systems like FAMIS would give TAMUS the opportunity to follow
uniform fiscal procedures across the System.
In 1987, the 70u> Legislature enacted legislation that required the State Comptroller’s
Office to make uniform the collection and reporting o f statewide payroll and personnel data. At
the direction o f the 70lh Legislature, a Uniform Statewide Accounting Systems (USAS) was
being designed for the Comptroller’s office. One original objective o f USAS, among others,
was to meet state agencies’ general accounting requirements and thus reduce the number of
separate accounting systems in the State. In fact, the best scenario for the State would be to
have “one financial information system” in the State by replacing all agencies’ financial
information systems with USAS, but the State recognized this was not possible because o f the
187
variability among state agencies in terms o f their size and the diversity and uniqueness o f their
needs. Thus, the Comptroller’s office proposed two approaches to the State agencies: either
using USAS or maintaining their own information systems and interfacing them with USAS.
The latter approach was supported by both the USAS team and TAMUS. This state
requirement became a "compelling reason” to replace existing in-house computer systems with
a large-scale fiscal and administrative information system. The FAMIS project was welcomed
by the USAS project team since such large-scale information system could provide the
Comptroller's office with a single channel to communicate with all parts o f TAMUS.
Also the trend of deploying large-scale financial accounting and management
information systems among other universities or university systems contributed to the
emergence of FAMIS. For instance, the University o f Texas had invested a great deal of time
and effort in developing a Departmental Financial Information Network (DEFINE) System,
which aimed to support departmental financial management. The University o f Texas Health
Science Center had a large-scale financial information system, which was a modified version
o f American Management Systems, Inc.’s (AMS) College and University Financial Systems
(CUFS) and aimed to integrate its several campuses. Texas Tech University has a customized
version o f the American Management Systems College and University Financial System
(CUFS). Higher institutions outside the State such as University o f Arizona, Arizona State
University, University of Kentucky at Lexington, and West Virginia University System had
already installed large-scale financial information systems from two major vendors, either
American Management System (AMS) or Information Associate (LA).
Several actors who were deeply involved in the development and implementation of
FAMIS pointed out that the emergence o f FAMIS cannot be properly explained without
considering what happened in the computing industry in 1980s. From 1970s to late 1980s new
188
concepts and technologies including model-oriented DSS. query and reporting tools, OLAP,
and Executive Information Systems were emerged and adopted by organizations. All these
technologies were very attractive to organizations and their management since they seemed to
promise the increase in productivity and efficiency. In the 1980’s these computer systems were
mainframe-based. After the concepts o f MRP in the 70s and mid 80s, the idea o f enterprise-
wide software, nowadays we call ERP, was developed rapidly through the vendor community
including SAP. Baan, JD Edwards, and PeopleSoft. The development o f the SQL relational
database management system by vendors such as IBM and Oracle in the late 1970s made it
possible for the concept o f enterprise-wide integration and enterprise software to be established
and become popular in user groups including private businesses and institutions o f higher
education. The role of one particular vendor, SCT, was recognized in the industry o f higher
education. SCT was established in 1968. In 1970s SCT marketed a commercial student system
for higher education. In 1980s they had promoted the concept o f enterprise software for higher
education. In 1989 SCT integrated an ERP system on RDBMS-Banner.
The ”founders" o f FAMIS were aware o f these technology trends and planned to
develop an enterprise information system which was aimed to support not only financial
management but also other administrative functionalities, including contracts and grants
management, purchasing, office automation and communication, cashiering, requests for travel
advances, enterprise and departmental accounting. State interfaces, ad hoc reporting, and
information management. Also they planned a centralized staff for all parts o f TAMUS so each
part would no longer need to dedicate computer/information systems personnel to support its
financial information systems. They believed that modifying the accounting systems to respond
to environmental changes such as the State laws and regulations would need to be done only
once, not many times by each agency, as was required with pre-FAMIS systems. One large-
189
scale information system for everyone was a very attractive idea to senior administrators in
TAMUS. Finally, in April 1987 the TAMUS Board o f Regents recognized the major strategic
role information systems would have in the future of TAMUS and delivered its directive for
the development o f FAMIS.
9.2.6 Design Process
As a result o f this resolution, the MIS project was initiated. The director of the MIS
project for FAMIS development was hired in October 1987. In November 1987, a survey
questionnaire was distributed to all parts of TAMUS to solicit input as to their management
information system needs. This survey was also distributed to all major departments within
TAMUS. The survey demonstrated the significant need, both real and perceived, to
substantially improve financial accounting management information within TAMUS. The
results o f the survey led to the formation of an implementation team to work on the
development of the Financial Accounting Management Information System (FAMIS). The
team was formed in March 1988. Four senior systems analysts were hired for the project. Three
o f them had been working for The Student Information Systems (SIMS) project since 1979 and
joined the new project (FAMIS. One senior analyst was previously worked for the Computing
Services Center (CSC)15 at TAMU.
From mid-November to December 1987, the MIS Survey was distributed to all parts of
the TAMUS system and completed. The team’s first task was to interview approximately
seventy-five key users. The interviews resulted in the compilation o f a Needs Inventory, the
baseline o f what was needed for TAMUS. With the recognition o f the need for a large-scale
information system, ten alternative approaches to meet the need were investigated (Table 11).
15 The Computing Information Services (CIS) department was not formed until Sept. 1993.
190
Table 11. A List o f Ten Alternative Options1 6 ___________________________________

Alternative options________________________________________________________
1. Install a system currently existing at another institution o f higher education within
the State
2. Use the Uniform Statewide Accounting System
3. Install a public domain software accounting system from out-of-State that could
be altered to fit the TAMUS system’s needs
4. Install a commercial system, adapting it to become a college, university, and
agency accounting system
5. Install one o f the computer systems currently existing within the TAMUS system
and tailor it to meet the System’s needs
6. Do nothing at all
7. Design and write a system in-house
8. Install a college and university financial system that was designed and written by
an outside vendor, making no modifications to the package
9. Modify and enhance a packaged system that has been purchased from a college
and university vendor
10. Install a college and university financial system designed and written by an
outside vendor but enhanced and modified to meet the TAMUS’, the Uniform
______ Statewide Accounting System’s, and the State’s requirements._________________
Site visits to other universities were made and detailed evaluations o f the various
information systems were performed. The last approach “Install a college and university
financial system designed and written by an outside vendor but enhanced and modified to meet
the TAMUS’, the Uniform Statewide Accounting System’s, and the State’s requirements” was
chosen as the best option available to TAMUS by considering functionality, risk, time of
implementation, and six other evaluation criteria. According to the former director the MIS
project team was asked to work on the project at a reasonable time frame, which meant one
year. The team was required to report the progress o f the project to the Steering Committee
consisting of 11 top administrators representing member institutions and the Board o f Regents.

191
In June 1988 the next task was conducted to prepare needs document which formed the
basis of the Request for Proposal. In October 1988 an over 300 page document. Advanced
Certification Document o f FAMIS, was submitted to the State o f Texas Automated
Information and Telecommunications Council (ATTC) for approval. At the same month, the
Request for Proposal was finalized and in November the team received the State AITC
approval to purchase a software package.
After Request for Proposal (RFP) and the evaluation of vendor proposals, in 1989 the
contract was signed with Information Associates17 for the Software AG
NATURAL18/ AD ABAS version o f the software. This was a three-way agreement among
TAMUS, Information Associates, and Software AG. TAMUS requested this agreement for the
purpose of acquiring a NATURAL/ADABAS version of the highly popular financial
information system developed by Information Associates. IA ’s COBOL based Financial
Records System (FRS) was redesigned and re-engineered using NATURAL, Software AG’s
fourth generation language and the ADABAS data management systems. The redesign of
NATURAL/FRS was completed in 1991.
In this selection process, the MIS project team had to make technical commitments to
existing information systems and computing environment of TAMU. In the mid 1980s TAMU
had made two major information system procurements affecting administrative computing.
Both SIMS and the IBM 3090-200E System had a functional impact on the approach to
17The Information Associates software, a company based in New York State, is now owned by
the SCT Corporation (www.sct.com) since 1992.
18 Launched in 1979, NATURAL now has an installed base of more than 3000 corporations. It
was designed specifically for building mission-critical applications. Natural applications
support many leading platforms and can be integrated with many major database systems
(ADABAS, DB2, Oracle, etc.). Developed in 1969 by Software AG, ADABAS is a popular
database management systems, which is currently installed on many organizations including
192
handling administrative functions. The basic system o f SIMS (Student Information
Management Systems) was purchased in 1984 and the project was implemented by 1986. The
system was in line with the focus o f long-range planning that was being redirected toward the
financial information system. The system included processes from admissions, registration,
student financial aid, billing, grading, transcripts, degree audit, and loan repayment. The
system used Software AG’s ADABAS as the main database system and COBOL and
NATURAL as the main development language. This procurement cost over $1.6 million. Also
FAMIS had to be based on the IBM 3090-200E mainframe computer, which was purchased
and installed in August 1987 and cost over $ 8.2 million. Also an upgrade to an IBM 3090-
400E (or its equivalent) was being planned by 19921'’. The project had to make technical
commitment to NATURAL as the main programming language since hired system analysts and
programmers were trained and had experience with NATURAL, among other 4Ih generation
languages, from the SIMS project. These resources available with existing information systems
could not be changed.
Also these commitments were interwoven with both the philosophy o f the MIS project
team and time pressure from the Board o f Regents and the steering committee o f the project.
The former project director noted that:
People (users) had little tolerance for changing and flexibility means not much to users.
It is not something what users want. They want what they are familiar with so we tried
to do as few changes possible
IS implementation has to be fast. The reasonable time for system implementation to me

is one year. Why? “Because key players leave and are changed. That’s a big problem.
You lose “focus” and then “give up”
FBI, EPA’s Office o f Information Resources Management, UPS, Merrill Lynch, and
University o f Texas.
w Cited from Advanced Certification Document Financial Accounting Management
193
In late 1988 administrators o f TAMUS, TAMU and other parts started to be concerned about
the implementation o f FAMIS and asked whether FAMIS would eventually be implemented.
The time pressure was very strong at that time. However, the selection o f vendor, which was
done in April 1989, increased confidence that FAMIS would be implemented. After the
modification of the purchased software package, FAMIS went live with the FRS (Financial
Record Systems) subsystem for 3 component parts - TAMUS, SAGO, and TVMDL - in
September 1990 for fiscal year 1991. In September 1990, the Sponsored Research (SPR)
subsystem went live with limited functionality. In September 1992 the Fixed Assets (FFX)
subsystem went live for 6 component parts - TSU, PVAMU, TAES, TAMUG, TAIU and
TAMU. In 1993 the purchasing system went live for TAMUS and in 1998 the Annual
Financial Reporting (AFR) system went live. Below some major dates for the development of
the FAMIS system are summarized.
10/87 Hired Director o f MIS Project for FAMIS Implementation

03/88 Hired 4 Senior Systems Analysts for the Project
06/89 Contract signed with Information Associates for the Software AG
NATURAL/ADABAS version o f the software
09/89 Hired 4 entry level programmers
11/89 Initial Code delivered
09/90 System went live with FRS (Financial Accounting and Accounts Payable) and FAR
(Accounts Receivable) for 3 component parts
09/90 SPR (Sponsored Research) module went live with limited functionality
09/93 Begin implementation o f first phase o f Purchasing module at Texas A&M University
Purchasing Department (Requisitioning and Purchase Orders)
01/94 TAMU began entering all departmental purchase orders into Purchasing system
02/98 Begin Budget Module implementation.
However, the current form of FAMIS is different from what was planned by the MIS
project team, the Board o f Regents, and the founders in the late 1980s. In contrast to the initial
grand plan of the project to develop “a fully integrated large-scale information systems" as the
solution for fiscal and administrative problems, the full development of FAMIS was not done
until 1990 when only FRS subsystem went live with three parts of TAMUS. Even though later
194
several additional subsystems were developed and integrated as part o f FAMIS, the present
form of FAMIS is not a fully integrated enterprise-wide fiscal and administrative system to
meet the needs of all levels of users from System-level to departmental-level and all parts of
FAMIS from large universities and research agencies to small universities. It turned out that as
of today the original intent and purpose o f FAMIS have been partially, but not completely
fulfilled.
For example, one o f the original objectives o f FAMIS was to provide the capability of
executive information systems to meet the information needs o f System-level users, such as the
Board of Regents and the System Administrative and General Offices (SAGO). However, the
1996 State audit of management controls at TAMUS pointed out the lack o f a comprehensive
management information system. The report recommended that:
System management should reevaluate the overall intent and purpose of FAMIS and
how best to meet the management reporting needs o f the Board and executive
management. Consideration should be given to the depth o f accounting functions that
FAMIS will provide, including general ledger, project accounting, and management
reporting. Alternative methods for meeting management reporting needs should be
fully identified and evaluated (p. 4)
To respond to the recommendation that “alternative methods” be adopted TAMUS
initiated the data warehousing project to develop an executive information system, rather than
altering FAMIS. This system went into operation in 2000. The system is loosely coupled with
FAMIS and other systems at TAMU and the System-level.
9.2.7 Implementation Process
The implementation process turned out to be the most difficult task for the MIS project
team and the founders) o f FAMIS as well as all parts of TAMUS. At the beginning of the
project the MIS project team and the founder(s) expected about 4 years for the full
195
implementation o f the full designed FAMIS at all parts of TAMUS. The initial projection of
impact assumed an implementation schedule20 as follows:
Year 1 - Implementation of TAMU (Fiscal Year 1990-91)

Year 2 - Implementation of a second university and a major research agency
Year 3 - Implementation o f a third university and a major research agency
Year 4 - Implementation of all other parts
At the initial stage o f FAMIS implementation, it was very clear that FAMIS would become “an
integrated fiscal and administrative information system” for “all” parts o f TAMUS. The
official document. Advanced Certification Document, recognized the importance of the “full
implementation” to realize substantial savings and many benefits from FAMIS.
Thus, the MIS project team visited each member institution and informed them of its
strong position about the mandatory implementation by all parts o f TAMUS. The former
director of the MIS project noted that:
The TAMUS’ and MIS Project Team’s initial position was that no waiver allowed and
no other option but FAMIS. We told them that for the members there were no options
but to adopt FAMIS
The mandatory policy for FAMIS implementation was supported by the Chancellor and the
Board of Regents at that time. However, the next Chancellor was not supportive of the
mandatory policy. In fact, he favored policy that made FAMIS implementation optional. The
implementation policy has been changed over the years depending the TAMUS’ leadership,
among other elements, which resulted in unpredictability and delay o f FAMIS implementation
over the past decade (Figure 19).

196
JU91 Apr93 N»94

QretlordFAMS OnecJthefardas InptaiErtabonof
prqectleft left TAMJS purtBsmg stfsystem
1991
X 1992
X
1998 1994
♦ 1995 1996 1997
, •
1996 1999
I
2000
1990 2001
TFS
TADCS TAMJC
.WMBC
Figure 19. FAMIS Transition Schedule
Below some of the major dates for the implementation o f FAMIS are summarized.
09/90 System went live with FRS (Financial Accounting and Accounts Payable) and FAR
(Accounts Receivable) for 3 component parts
09/90 SPR (Sponsored Research) module went live with limited functionality
01/91 Fixed Assets went live with conversion data from 3 component parts
09/91 Additional component parts (6) went live with FRS (Financial Accounting and
Accounts Payable), FAR (Accounts Receivable) and SPR (Sponsored
Research)
09/92 Fixed Assets current for 6 most recent component parts
09/92 Additional component parts (CCSU, TADCS. TFS) went live with FRS (Financial
Accounting and Accounts Payable), FAR (Accounts Receivable) and SPR
(Sponsored Research)
09/92 Begin Annual Financial Report preparation for nine parts
12/92 Begin Fixed Asset Training and Conversion for the new 92-93 components
04/93 Fixed Assets current for TFS
06/93 Fixed Assets current for TAES, TFS
06/93 Begin Fixed Assets conversion for TADCS, TAEX, and TTI
08/93 Complete installation o f remaining portions o f Sponsored Research Module
09/93 Additional component parts (TAEX, TTI) to go live with FRS (Financial Accounting
and Accounts Payable), FAR (Accounts Receivable) and SPR (Sponsored
Research)
09/93 Begin Annual Financial Report preparation for twelve parts
09/93 Begin implementation o f first phase o f Purchasing module at Texas A&M University
Purchasing Department (Requisitioning and Purchase Orders)
01/94 TAMU Begin entering all departmental purchase orders into Purchasing system
03/94 Begin Fixed Asset conversion for CCSU
06/94 Official Fixed Asset conversion for CCSU
11/94 Begin implementation o f Purchasing module at Texas A&M University departments
and Texas A&M University-Kingsville
01/95 Begin implementation o f departmental download capability
02/95 SAGO became its own business office
197
09/95 Texas A&M Research Foundation went live on FAMIS

09/96 Baylor College o f Dentistry went live on FAMIS
02/98 Begin Budget Module implementation.
07/98 Begin automated Annual Financial Report (AFR) Module implementation2
The original objective was full implementation within the projected four years (by
1994) in all parts o f TAMUS. However, like the design, the implementation o f FAMIS has
been long delayed due to several complex and interwoven elements such as local politics,
leadership change, the resignation of the former director o f the MIS project, strong resistance
from members, rules and policy changes mandated by the State, increases of user requests
regarding system maintenance and enhancements, user dissatisfaction with non-GUI interface,
functional deficiencies, lack o f resources, and the rapid pace o f technology change. Unlike the
selection process, the implementation of FAMIS had to face various challenges stemming from
technical (e.g., technical deficiencies of FAMIS) and institutional (e.g., changes o f leadership)
environments. Even though the key initiators o f the MIS project expected some level of
resistance from individual users and possibly member institutions, politics played a key role in
the FAMIS implementation, and resistance from a few member institutions was very strong.
This situation hindered progress on the MIS project for several years. Those challenges ranged
from minor ones like individual users’ dissatisfaction with FAMIS’ non-GUI interface to major
ones like refusing to adopt FAMIS by some parts o f TAMUS. These challenges were sourced
from internal environments (e.g., departmental users) as well as external environments (e.g.,
the State auditors, the availability o f new technologies).
9.2.7.1 User Reaction and User Resistance
Initially, there were two kinds of reactions by member organizations. Generally small
universities and agencies with lack of computer and financial resources were relatively
21 Cited from an internal document.
198
favorable to the implementation of FAMIS since it provided them with the interface with the
State’s Comptrollers' office, which was a requirement at the direction o f the 70,h Texas
Legislature. However, in the 1990s people started to use graphical user interfaces. Thus, a
common complaint from users was that FAMIS was not user friendly. On the other hand, a
number o f members, particularly engineering agencies TEES and TEEX and the newly joined
university WTAMU were strongly against the FAMIS implementation. This resistance was
based on more complex reasons than lack o f GUI interface. Even though they shared with
SAGO, the MIS project team and the Board the need for consolidated reports for System-level
management, they preferred to use their own financial systems and interface them with
FAMIS.
For example, WTAMU already had a new student information system and a financial
information system and did not want FAMIS. Two engineering research agencies - TEES and
TEEX - were strongly against FAMIS adoption. They advocated the need for maintaining
their own information systems based on two arguments. First, they pointed out the functional
deficiencies in FAMIS to support their needs o f contract and grant management and other
research related functionalities. The second argument was that as research agencies they
differed from other parts o f TAMUS.
In particular, TEES did not share the idea o f “one system for everyone” and expressed
concerns about FAMIS. Top administrators and the IT manager of the research agency argued
that FAMIS is not better than their own computer system, which was based on the Oracle
database. Moreover, they noted that FAMIS initially designated research (e.g., research
199
contract and grant management subsystem) as a low priority in terms o f implementation. A top
administrator o f the research agency insisted that
We will be asked to pay for a system we do not need nor want. We will be asked to pay
for a system that at the very best, will be mediocre. The TEES system can be interfaced
with the FAMIS system to provide required data on a monthly or more frequent time
period
Most respondents recognized and described the conflict between these agencies and the MIS
project team and SAGO over the issue of FAMIS implementation as “the battle". A top
administrator o f IT department at TAMU observed that
From the beginning of FAMIS implementation in 1990 until July 1995 when these
agencies were officially wavered from using FAMIS, there was a six-year battle
between the System and them. It was an unhappy time for everyone
The result of the battle was that in 1995 two research agencies, TEES and TEEX, and one
university, WTAMU were officially allowed to establish an interface with FAMIS rather than
adopting it as their main system.
9.2.7.2 Leadership and Politics
This battle was tightly interwoven with the change o f leadership in the System. Among
many events in the history of FAMIS, the resignation o f the former director o f the MIS project
team had significant impacts on the process o f FAMIS implementation. The former director
had been in charge o f the project team from the beginning in 1987 and left TAMUS on July
1991. His resignation caused serious problems on the continuation of FAMIS implementation.
Also another event made FAMIS implementation very difficult. One o f the founders of
FAMIS, who was Executive Deputy Chancellor o f TAMUS, left TAMUS. This series of events
- lack o f “sponsors or promoters” - negatively impacted on the continuation of FAMIS
implementation.
200
From 1986 to present there have been five Chancellors. Interestingly each Chancellor
had different visions for FAMIS have had significant impacts on the life o f FAMIS (Table 12).
A senior system analyst in the MIS team noted:
Every time a new Chancellor is in the office, things are changing. FAMIS shifts
depending on who the Chancellor is at that time. Vision of Chancellor is the powerful
source (3.2)
Table 12. Policy of FAMIS Implementation and Change o f Leadership

Chancellor Background Serving Year
Implementation
1st TAMU (Agriculture) 1986-1990 Mandatory
2nd Favor to engineering agencies
TAMU (Engineering) 1991-1993
&To be neutral to FAMIS
3rd TAMU 1993-1994 Mandatory
Favor to WTAMU
4th WTAMU 1994-1999
& To be neutral to FAMIS
5th Non-TAMUS 1999-Present No Interest
The MIS project was officially established during Is' Chancellor’s regime. The Chancellor and
the Board were very supportive of FAMIS design and implementation. He strongly supported
the mandatory policy for FAMIS implementation by all parts of TAMUS. Finally in 1990 three
parts joined the FAMIS.
In 1991 TAMUS had a new Chancellor, who was formerly Deputy Chancellor for
Engineering of TAMU. This event also threatened the continuation of FAMIS project. A
founder o f FAMIS noted that:
He initially saw FAMIS as “bad” and I had to convince him not to stop what we had
done so far. After becoming the Chancellor, he changed his view a little bit and put his
foot on both sides (us and engineering). He tried to take a neutral position but
understood engineering side more. That’s why TEEX and TEES could avoid using
FAMIS
201
In 1991 six more parts became the user of FAMIS and in 1992 three other parts joined the
FAMIS. During the regime o f 2nd Chancellor, the implementation tended to be optional.
This optional position for the FAMIS implementation was changed dramatically when
TAMUS the 3rd Chancellor, who was formerly President of TAMU, took over. He was
formerly on the steering committee of the MIS project and thus very supportive o f FAMIS. He
brought the mandatory position again and announced, “Everyone must be on FAMIS”. This led
a lot o f conflicts between the MIS project team and SAGO and those who wanted to avoid
FAMIS. A top IT administrator at TAMU recalled that "it was not a happy time for everyone".
However, the third Chancellor's regime lasted for only one year. In 1994 the Board of
Regents appointed the president of WTAMU as the new Chancellor. He was a non-TAMU
person and stressed the importance o f uniqueness and autonomy of each university and agency
of TAMUS. While he was not against FAMIS implementation, he experience had come at
WTAMU. Sensitive to local needs, he decided that WTAMU could avoid using FAMIS. He
also officially waived the two engineering agencies from using FAMIS.
This led a number o f those involved in the development and implementation of FAMIS
to believe that FAMIS implementation was very “political. Several respondents said.
If you want to understand FAMIS implementation you need to see how politics has
played over time in the history of FAMIS ... A lot o f local politics was played in
FAMIS adoption ... Politics was very powerful in the implementation o f FAMIS
9.2.7.3 Outside Institutions
For the past decade, there had been a few State audits and many new rules and policy
changes were mandated by the State. All these had been very influential on the design and
implementation o f FAMIS. Particularly the USAS that went into effect on September 1, 1993
for a limited number o f small state agencies have been influential in the maturity stage of
FAMIS implementation. Since this date, all parts o f TAMUS had to report information to the
202
central USAS database daily which has been controlled and managed by the State
Comptroller’s Office. This system was designed to maintain accounting data consistent with
Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) and National Association of College and
University Business Officers (NACUBO) standards. The system provides accounting services
to all State agencies using a uniform chart o f accounts. Also, USAS reflects any changes in the
State legislatures and policy. Thus, in the implementation and maintenance of FAMIS, priority
had to be given to processing requirements and maintenance requests that were mandated by
law or policy changes.
For instance, in 1999 the Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB)
Statements No. 34 and No. 35. Basic Financial Statements and Management's Discussion and
Analysis for State and Local Governments and Public Colleges and Universities, were issued.
For the first time, accrual accounting was required for all government activities and all capital
assets had to be depreciated. Thus, from fiscal 2002, the State is required to implement these
new rules. In response to this requirement, FAMIS had to develop depreciation capabilities to
report the depreciation of fixed assets. Priority had to given to this kind of mandated
requirements and policy changes rather than user requests.
Also, FAMIS was required to respond to the recommendations of management
controls by the State auditors. In the 1980s the State auditors found that consistent fiscal
procedures had not been followed throughout the System. This audit also contributed to the
development o f FAMIS. The State audit report 1995 pointed out that FAMIS did not provide
useful information at the departmental level.
The reporting capabilities of FAMIS have not been fully realized since the annual
financial report preparation is completed through a personnel accounting application
computer spreadsheet software. Even though FAMIS has had a general accounting
ledger since 1991, University departments have continued maintaining, purchasing,
and developing individual departmental accounting systems ... module implementation
203
was given a lower priority in favor of including more System parts on FAMIS ... (the
State auditors expect that) planned additions include purchasing, payroll interface,
departmental budgets, and support accounting (p. 38)
FAMIS responded to the recommendations o f the State audit in a number o f ways.
Immediately after the State audit FAMIS began the implementation of departmental download
capability. TAMUS finalized licensing agreements for a software package that allowed end
users to download FAMIS data to their microcomputer environments so that data could be
processed to meet end user’s needs. In 1998 FAMIS began the implementation of budget and
automated Annual Financial Report (AFR) subsystems. Recently, there has been an effort for
the conversion of the Budget/Payroll/Personnel (BPP) system to the same processing
environments (ADABAS) as the FAMIS system to develop the interface between the two
systems.
9.2.7.4 Different Users and Different Needs
As the original objective o f FAMIS, “one IS for everyone,” indicates FAMIS was
directed by a desire for centralization. The Board and the founders o f FAMIS believed that one
IS for all parts of TAMUS was good and could be realized. However, as the design and
implementation were proceeding, the size and diversity o f TAMUS emerged as a critical issue.
Every part had its own chart o f accounts and the accounting practices throughout
TAMUS were very diverse. Few wanted to change their accounting. FAMIS had to adapt to the
diversity o f their accounting practices. Also each part placed priority on different things. For
example, research agencies requested contracts and grants/research accounting capabilities in
order to administer programs and to assure compliance on sponsored research projects. They
argued that FAMIS initially designated research as the last priority and these capabilities were
virtually non-existent in FAMIS. TAMU, which had initially made a significant investment on
the acquisition o f the software package for FAMIS requested many other functionalities and
204
subsystems (e.g., purchasing, departmental-level accounting and administration) to be added
into FAMIS.
It turned out that different members had different needs and requested different things.
The situation resulted in many problems in the full design and implementation o f FAMIS.
According to the State audit report in 1996, as o f 1995 there was a backlog o f over 250 user
requests for system maintenance and enhancement, some o f which dated back to 1990 and
1991. According to TAMUS' management response to the State audit report, since September
1995. the FAMIS support staff had completed 219 service requests. During the same period, an
additional 271 maintenance items were identified by various system users.
Until 1991 the eleven-person steering committee, composed o f members from
universities' fiscal management, System parts, and the FAMIS team, played the role o f priority
setting. From late 1991 the “Gang o f Five,” the five top administrators from University fiscal
management, SAGO and the FAMIS team, took on this task and tried to set the priorities for
FAMIS. However, the complex and interwoven elements in FAMIS design and
implementation made it difficult for the group to perform this task. This is partly because every
component o f TAMUS including TAMU wanted to declare their project to be the top priority
and the group was not considered CIO in corporate world. This appeared in a e-mail message
sent from a member o f “Gang o f Five” to a top administrator at TAMU’s fiscal office.
It is important that there be a single priority setting group or process. Otherwise,

everyone will declare their project to be the top priority and no real progress will be
made. This is the situation that we are in now. This I think that the “Gang o f Five” is
the priority setting group for FAMIS
Since 1991. the FAMIS’ position has been that a priority has to given to those projects
that result in improved reporting and/or processing for “all” users o f FAMIS. With the
recognition o f the diversity of TAMUS the FAMIS team adopted a “customer-oriented” rather
205
than “enforcing" approach and tried to accommodate different needs o f different members.
According to a number of respondents the unintended consequence was that (by quoting the
statement o f a former member of Gang o f Five):
After accommodating all the differences and tailoring FAMIS. it turned out that
different information systems at different parts o f TAMUS are running under the name
o f FAMIS
9.2.8 Interconnection with other information systems
Also over the past decade the FAMIS system has become interconnected with several
other information systems in the TAMUS system and those owned by the State. This has added
more complexity to the development and maintenance o f FAMIS. As presented earlier, these
interconnections with diverse information systems have been caused by a number o f factors
such as the recommendations of the State audits, rules and policy changes mandated by the
State, and the effort to meet the original objectives o f FAMIS development. Information
systems interconnected with FAMIS are BPP, SIMS, EIS. ABBPBIS. USAS, and more. These
systems have both constrained and enabled each other.
9.2.8.1 BPP
The Budget/Payroll/Personnel (BPP) System is an integrated data management system
through which personnel operating budgets are created and maintained, payrolls are produced
and recorded, and personnel demographic data is maintained and reported. The basic concept
of this computer system is to provide a centralized administrative computer system to support
data processing and reporting requirements for these three functional areas. The primary users
are the administrative functions supported by the TAMU system.
The design concept for the BPP system was developed in the mid-1970s with the full
implementation occurring on July 1, 1979. COBOL was the development language for the BPP
system. The BPP System originally used the MVS computer system in the Computing and
206
Information Services (CIS) department at TAMU operating under IBM’s Information
Management System (IMS) data management software. Via batch mode, data collected are
electronically transmitted to the State Comptroller's Office in Austin, and shared by FAMIS.
The staff of the B/P/P Operations Center supports the system. Input into the system
occurs in an on-line environment through a series o f B/P/P ‘workstations’ or Payroll. Budget,
and/or Human Resource offices, each o f which is responsible for a segment o f the employee
population for a different university or agency. The B/P/P System is designed to allow
maximum flexibility for report generation to meet the processing needs o f each particular
System member. This allows for independent processing for a substantial portion of the payroll
cycle. However, most major processing (i.e., the actual gross-to-net calculation process) is
done for the entire Texas A&M University System as a whole. Many enhancements and new
functions have been added to the system since the initial implementation. The number of
payroll deductions has more than doubled. Added features include the Extended Pay Plan,
Direct Deposit o f pay checks, a method to estimate net pay and insurance coverage costs, the
ability to find employee records by name rather than social security number, and a
comprehensive insurance benefit billing system23.
From the early days o f FAMIS, these two systems have been interacting with each
other through sharing data. Until quite recently the process of sharing data was done in a
batching mode, which takes about two days for data to move from the BPP system to the
FAMIS system. Recently there has been an effort for the conversion of the BPP system to the
same processing environments (ADABAS) as the FAMIS system. There is a growing need to
share data between these two systems in a real-time manner. Now the BPP system and FAMIS
system are closely integrated. Data transaction between the two systems has become easier.
23 Cited from BPP Operations and User Manuel
207
9.2.8.2 SIMS
By 1986, the Student Information Systems (SIMS) project has been implemented and
the focus o f long-range planning was being redirected toward the financial information system.
The SIMS supports administrative processing o f student records for TAMU and TAMU at
Galveston. It is composed o f eight major modules - student records, telephone
registration/grades, admissions, student billing/receivables, student financial aid, degree audit,
and information distribution. The system includes processes from admissions, through
registration, student financial aid, billing, grading, transcripts, degree audit, and loan
repayment. The system use Software AG’s ADABAS as the main database system. The main
development languages are COBOL and NATURAL. In addition to the two languages, other
development languages such as FORTRAN, GML, IBM 370, NOMAD2, Cold Fusion, and
Visual Basic are used.
Accounting transactions are transmitted from SIMS to the FAMIS. Various data files
are transmitted to the FAMIS also. Various data files are transmitted and received from
Housing, Food Services, Health Center, Athletic Office, Bus Operations,
Parking/Transit/Traffic Services, Measurement & Research Services, Office of Institutional
Studies and Planning, Association o f Former Students, College o f Engineering, College o f
Business Administration, College o f Liberal Arts. SIMS reads data from the TAMUS B/P/P
System.
There are ongoing enhancements to SIMS as university requirements dictate (i.e.
federal changes involving Student Financial Aid, incorporating use o f the World Wide Web,
etc.). This system may be replaced during the latter part o f this planning period (year 2001-
2005).
9.2.8.3 Executive Information System
208
EIS is an integrated system o f multiple databases that support an integrated data
warehouse function for financial, human resource and academic information for all agencies
and universities in the TAMU system. This data warehouse supports the top executive and
administrative levels at each member organization for information query and data mining. The
system uses NCR’s Teradata database designed for decision support. A project team with 5
members is in charge o f the development and maintenance o f EIS. This is in operation since
2001.
The direct cause for developing EIS was the results o f State Auditors Management
Control Audit over the TAMU system in 1995. The report pointed out the ‘lack o f a
management information system’ and the ‘lack o f a user friendly ad-hoc reporting system’. In
response to the suggestions made by the report, the Management Information Systems Task
Force was formed, which was chaired by CFOs o f the member institutions. The MIS task force
was in charge o f developing a plan of action to address the need for a management information
system. The vision o f the EIS was that ‘the resulting system should address the information
needs of the Board o f Regents, System executive management, and the member institutions
and agencies’. In other words, the goal was to develop an executive-level decision support
system, with emphasis on ad-hoc query capability, summarization and aggregation o f millions
of records. In one of the documents about this project it was noted that EIS is not another
‘transaction processing system’ with set screens and reports and not a replacement for any
existing transaction processing systems such as FAMIS, BPP. SIMS, etc.
9.2.8.4 Automated Bookkeeping/Budget Preparation/Building Inventory

Systems
The Automated Bookkeeping System provides budgeting, purchase order, voucher and
payroll processing for individual departments in four TAMUS parts: TAES, TAEX, TAMUK,
and TAMU. The ABBPBIS system was initially developed for agricultural agencies in the
209
TAMU system by Computing Information Services (CIS) at TAMU. In its early days the
FAMIS did not provide the support for departmental level accounting and thus the computer
system is built on the top o f FAMIS. The ABBPBIS is a front-end system; the FAMIS is a
back-end system.
All information in ABBPBIS is real-time; customers generate reports on their own
using the report selection menus. The Budget Preparation System is used to define and create
the budget for all TAES departments for each fiscal year. The information from the Budget
Preparation System is used to establish the budget data in the Automated Bookkeeping System.
The Building Inventory System tracks critical information about the TAES owned buildings.
The Automated Bookkeeping Systems uses data provided by FAMIS.24 In turn. FAMIS uses
data from the Project Records database in the Bookkeeping System. Agencies using this system
are now planning to go back to the FAMIS since the FAMIS now provides more support than
the ABBPBIS.
9.2.8.S USAS
The Uniform Statewide Accounting System (USAS) began operation on September 1,
1993. and has been used as a statewide accounting system. USAS is a general ledger
accounting system that tracks both revenues and expenditures and compares them with agency
and university appropriations. The State Comptroller’s Office is responsible for developing,
implementing, and maintaining USAS. USAS provides both GAAP (Generally Accepted
Accounting Principles) and cash-basis accounting, and satisfies both State and agency
accounting requirements. USAS captures accounting activities supplied by State agencies and
institutions of higher education in Texas. Financial data in USAS is used by the Comptroller’s
office to produce State payments, agency reports, legislative reports, and reports for
24 Cited from SAGO Information Resources Strategic Plan 2001-2005
210
appropriation management and Statewide budgets. USAS also performs specialized functions,
such as budgetary and encumbrance accounting, cost allocation, payment processing, and
document tracking.
The idea for USAS was developed in late I980’s and the design o f the system was
going on around that time. USAS was part o f the efforts by the State o f Texas to continue to
emphasize the effective, efficient, and economical use o f automated information systems by
governmental bodies. More specifically the development of USAS was driven by the intention
of improving management and accounting control over State agencies and institutions of higher
education by the State and the Comptroller’s Office.
Thus, the MIS project team had to consider USAS as one o f several alternatives to
meet the need for a large-scale financial information system for TAMUS even though USAS
was not a favorable alternative to TAMUS for a number o f technical as well as political
reasons. According to the Advanced Certification Document (ACD), which was submitted to
Automated Information and Telecommunications Council (AITC) on October 1988, the USAS
accounting functionality was aimed at the smaller agencies. Larger agencies and higher
education require more specific and complicated accounting needs such as:
• Student accounts receivable support

• Full purchasing support from initial purchase requisition to property inventory
• Document tracking support
• More detailed budgeting and general accounting support
• Auxiliary enterprise accounting support
• Project / contract / grant research accounting
• Departmental accounting support-3
Also using USAS means a greater exposure of the internal operations of the TAMU
system to the State and the State Comptroller’s office. This was neither necessary nor desirable
for the TAMU system. Through several visits with the USAS project team by the MIS project
211
team, the following approach was agreed by both teams that large State agencies like the
TAMU system maintain their own accounting systems and instead interface them with USAS.
This approach was actually adopted and since the beginning date o f USAS the FAMIS system
has been feeding accounting data to USAS daily. Changes in USAS caused by the changes in
accounting rules and State legislation had significant impacts on the FAMIS system.
In addition to USAS, the FAMIS system maintains interfaces with other State systems,
including the Texas Identification Number Systems (TINS) and the State Property Accounting
(SPA) system. All vendors paid with State funds must have a valid record in TINS. In addition,
the State now requires that all requests for (1) creation o f new vendor records, (2)
modifications to records o f existing vendors and (3) vendor hold updates be processed
electronically. The FAMIS system sends one daily batch feed to State with the all TINS
records.
9.2.9 Impacts of FAMIS on other institutions of higher education
After the implementation at the TAMU system, Software AG began to market the
mainframe-based software to its existing client base which consisted o f many higher-education
institutions running NATURAL and ADABAS system software. Several more colleges and
universities purchased the financial records system (FRS) from Software AG. Today,
NATURAL/FRS has been installed at several higher institutions, including the TAMU system,
Cornell University Medical College, University of Houston, Brown University. University of
Hawaii, and Charles County Community College.
So far this subsection presented an overview of the FAMIS case and discussed several
general findings from the case study. The following subsection offers more specific findings
25 Cited from USAS User Manual
from the case and presents the discussion o f the case in terms o f the institutional framework of
Dynamic Institutional Theory, particularly the four research questions.
9.3 Case Analysis
As indicated, this study focused on two general questions: (1) how large-scale
information systems come to be developed and (2) how they come to be used. These two
questions led us to conduct the case study with FAMIS in a retroductive manner. While
conducting data collection and analysis simultaneously, four “core categories” (Strauss and
Corbin 1998) were identified: the reconceptualization o f large-scale IS as social institutions:
the multi-level relationship between large-scale IS and organizations; the design o f large-scale
IS as institution building and the role of preexisting IS; and Technology adaptation as the
process o f dynamic institutionalization. This second section presents the research findings with
the focus on these four core categories particularly: FAMIS as social institutions: duality of
FAMIS; duality of preexisting information systems; and FAMIS development and
implementation as a dynamic process of institutionalization. The theoretical basis for this
analysis was developed in Chapters 4 through 7.
9.3.1 FAMIS as an Institution
From its beginning FAMIS has been a complex and large-scale information system in
terms o f both virtual and material elements. FAMIS consists o f both schemas and resources.
The resources of FAMIS as an institution are actual and can be described in two ways: IT
artifacts and the spirit o f the artifacts. As an IT artifact, FAMIS include five subsystems, one
centralized database based on Software AG’s ADABAS, mainframe architecture based on IBM
mainframe computer, user interface, other TAMU’s computing resources (e.g.. workstations),
and network resources (e.g., ATM backbone data network). In addition, it also includes other
actual resources including the NATURAL programming language, formal user training, formal
213
security rules and procedures, stocks o f programmers’ and the MIS project directors’ technical
knowledge o f software development and cultural knowledge o f TAMUS’ conventions, values,
culture, and politics, the formal system development methodology (e.g., NASA model) used
and many other formal rules from accounting body, the State, and other institutions (e.g.. Chart
of Accounting standards, standard funding accounting, formal contracts and grants rules and
procedures, general accounting rules based on GAAB, GASB, formal reporting rules for
Annual Financial Report and the Legislative Appropriation Requests, the State guidelines for
purchasing).
Table 13. A List o f the Resources of FAMIS________________________________________

Resources of FAMIS_________ ______________________________________________
• IT Artifacts - five subsystems. ADABAS, mainframe architecture, user interface, other
TAMU’s computing resources (e.g., workstations), and network resources (e.g., ATM
backbone data network)
• Formal rules - NATURAL programming language, formal user training, formal security
rules and procedures, stocks of technical knowledge of software development and
cultural knowledge o f TAMUS’ conventions, values, culture, and politics, formal
system development methodology (e.g., NASA model) Chart of Accounting standards,
standard funding accounting, formal contracts and grants rules and procedures, general
accounting rules based on GAAB, GASB, formal reporting rules for Annual Financial
Report and the Legislative Appropriation Requests, the State guidelines for purchasing
• Spirit - the multiple interpretations of the philosophy and motive o f FAMIS
development ______
One interesting finding from the case study is that while FAMIS includes many formal
rules, policies and procedures imposed by the State and other institutions outside the TAMUS
system, there have been not many formal (or written) rules, policies, and procedures as far as
system design, implementation, and use. Several respondents including the former and current
direct of the MIS project said.
FAMIS does not have much documentation and actually the management o f FAMIS is
more informal than formal (18.2)
214
Project tracking is hard to do when things change and when the Board directives and
new Chancellor change the directions o f FAMIS. We keep track o f the project but not
using a formal system but this is rather done more informally (2.26)
This aspect is also found in the State auditor's reports. For example, the 1995 report pointed
out the lack of formal policies and procedures for system development, maintenance, and
control by noting
Without standardized policies and procedures for systems design, acquisition, and
support ... System documentation will reduce system maintenance costs ... Security
over end-user computing is necessary because of personnel changes, disk drive failure,
and a lack o f audit traits ... Security for personal computers is required in the
Information Resources Security and Risk Management Policy. Standards, and
Guidelines published by the Department o f Information Resources [in SAGO]
Also after reviewing FAMIS operation the State auditor’s 1998 report noted.
SAGO management does not have a comprehensive system development methodology

... lack of documentation ... incomplete documentation o f standards and applicable
quality review procedures for programming, coding, design, testing, promotion,
maintenance, and post implementation ... incomplete policies regarding access
security for SAGO’s key information systems ...
TAMUS published the Computer Security and Data Ownership: Rights and Responsibilities
document in 1992. The policy was revised and issued in 1995 and distributed to all TAMU
departments. This is not a formal rule at the system level, and is not complied with by all parts
of TAMUS. A senior FAMIS trainer said
Each part has different rules for security. In fac things are very different throughout the
TAMUS. Different parts have different user training program (21.1)
According to a senior system analyst in the FAMIS team, different parts have developed their
own training manuals since their business practices and procedures differ from others.
These quite interesting aspects with the resources of FAMIS need to be understood in
conjunction with the duality o f schemas and resources in FAMIS. The schemas o f FAMIS have
been changing and growing while the system became larger and more interconnected with
215
other information systems and more mandated rules and regulations by the State and other
accounting bodies and user requests had been incorporated into FAMIS. Those schemas
include TAMUS’ structure, history, culture, value systems, many informal rules, routines and
procedures, and other individual and organizational memory embedded on the FAMIS system.
They were identified from studying an array o f institutional arrangements and social and
organizational contexts where the system has been designed, implemented, and used over the
years. The schemas of large-scale IS like FAMIS are very large and complex and thus cannot
be easily identified by the researcher because o f the complexity and size o f such systems.
Table 14. Schemas of FAMIS

Schemas o f FAMIS
• TAMUS’ organizational structure
• Organizational culture, value system and history
• The MIS project team’s culture and history
• Many informal rules
• Routines and informal procedures
• Key individuals’ and organizational memory embedded on the FAMIS system
They also have made FAMIS different from the similar kind o f large-scale IS
implemented at other higher institutions or in the corporate world. As noted earlier, TAMUS
has a distinct cultural infrastructure, which is different from another large University system in
the State. It is a young organization and many of the system’s members had long histories
before joining the System. Thus, they greatly vary in mission, purpose, and culture. This has
led the culture o f the System to be more “decentralized”. The Integrative Plan for the System,
released in 2001, shared the view o f TAMUS’ decentralized culture by noting the uniqueness
of each university and agency. Several respondents shared the same view. Among them,
216
A&M is more decentralized and “consensus-based" while Austin is centralized and

“more-directed” (18.4)
TAMUS is a “confederated” system. I mean not a real hierarchical organization but

looser than union because o f this consensus-based culture and organizational structure,
FAMIS became a confederated system (20.8)
Higher institutions differ from private sections as far as IS is concerned. The

University is governed by committees so the attitude is “convince us” of why we need
such an information system. Therefore the design and implementation become tougher.
There is a lot less commitment by members (4.32)
These aspects of the schemas o f FAMIS have been interacting with aspects o f the resources of
FAMIS - lack of formal rules and procedures. Also they had significantly contributed to the
delay o f FAMIS development and the institutional drift o f FAMIS. For example, an auditor
who has greater experience o f accounting and IT in TAMUS commented.
There is no information strategic plan at the system level. Instead each part of TAMUS
has a different kind o f CIO [different from organizations in the corporate world].
However there is no CIO at system-level. The management o f information resources in
general and FAMIS particularly is very decentralized. Kevin [the name o f the primary
investigator], do you know who is responsible for FAMIS? Probably you may not be
able to find the answer. Probably no one knows who. Culture and politics overrule
formal rules and regulations. Each part maintains its own vendor list and chart of
accounts. Why? Again there is no CIO at system level. It's the culture of TAMUS!
(18.1, 18.4, 18.5)
Since its beginning, the formative contexts of FAMIS have been characterized by decentralized
culture, agency autonomy, and unique mission and purpose. These have made it very difficult
for SAGO and the MIS project team to develop any formal rules and procedures at the System
level. The resources o f FAMIS such as charts of account, income codes and accounting
procedures became the effects o f schemas of FAMIS and vice versa over the years (Figure 20).
217
S c h e m a s of R e s o u r c e s of
FAMIS FAMIS
Figure 20. Duality of schemas and resources o f FAMIS
Furthermore, the schemas o f FAMIS offer insights about why FAMIS differs from
those large-scale IS with other higher institutions and organizations in the corporate world. For
example, the other university system in the State has displayed different value systems and
culture - centralized and directed organizational culture and structure - partly due to the long
history of that system. The large-scale IS of that university system, which was developed upon
the same technologies (e.g., ADABAS, NATURAL), has been quite different from FAMIS in
the way the system was designed, maintained, and controlled. It is more like a centralized and
directed information system controlled and maintained by one office that sets the strategy,
priorities, and agenda o f the information system.
On the other hand, it is expected that a ERP recently implemented at a large university
system, which shares the similar value systems, organizational structure and culture, and
history with TAMUS may be more like FAMIS in terms o f the characteristics of its design,
implementation, and use, while the ERP is based upon different technologies such as oracle
database and client/server architecture.
The spirit o f FAMIS was identified from interview data with the founders of FAMIS
and various official documents including the Board’s 1987 meeting documents and The
218
Advanced Certification Document submitted to Automated Information and
Telecommunications Council in the State by the MIS project team and TAMUS in 1988. One of
the founders o f FAMIS said:
We had noticed our System growing rapidly and expected more universities and
agencies becoming part o f our System. Also there was high pressure for efficiency and
productivity from the State. Everyone knew that the pressure would be increased in the
future. The State wanted to have better control over us and other State agencies.
Similarly we (the Board and SAGO) wanted to have better control over our parts. At
that time, to the State one system for every State agency was very attractive, even
though they never tried ... they might have tried through the development o f USAS but
USAS was not for large State agencies like TAMUS. To TAMUS one system for all
parts o f the System was very attractive (12.4, 12.10, 12.15)
In regards to FAMIS, the Board o f Regent’s 1987 resolution stated the following directive for
TAMUS:
"Whereas there is a growing recognition that increased State investments in higher

education and research are critical to the diversification and future growth of the State
economy. And Whereas in conjunction with its requests for increase State
appropriations for higher education and research, the higher education community has
a concurrent obligation to continue its efforts to insure that our management of
physical, fiscal, human and information resources are as strong and cost-effective as
possible”
"Whereas Coopers and Lybrand recently completed a management audit of State’s

higher education for the Select Committee on higher education. And whereas their
report contains a number o f recommendations regarding resource management in
higher education that are worthy o f consideration”
“Whereas to demonstrate the continued commitment o f the Texas A&M University

System to effective resource management and cost-effectiveness, the Chancellor, with
the support o f the Board o f Regents, the assistance o f the Chief Executive Officers of
the System parts, and external expertise as needed, will initiate and/or accelerate a
number o f analyzes and actions designed to insure strong and effective fiscal and
resources management.
“Therefore be it resolved that the Board of Regents of the Texas A&M University
System commends the executives, managers, faculty, and staff of the System parts for
their past efforts in attaining strong fiscal and resource management, reaffirms the
Board o f Regent's commitment to the continuing efforts to seek out and implement
strong fiscal and resource management, and authorizes the Chancellor to initiate and/or
accelerate the following analyses and actions:
219
“Centralize cash and investment management functions and procedures to insure

optimal returns within objectives and policies approved by the Board o f Regents ...
Require monthly reports from System parts to the Chancellor o f unappropriated
balances on hand with detailed analysis o f anticipated uses ... Design and implement
management information systems that will insure compatibility and consolidatabilitv
o f accounting and fiscal information, analysis, and reports from all System parts”
However, the spirit of FAMIS was never entirely unambiguous (Table 15). A group of
respondents shared the view that the motive o f FAMIS was technical. According to one
member o f “Gang o f Five”, the spirit o f FAMIS was clear in that the motive of FAMIS
development was purely technical and aimed at overcoming technical deficiencies of old
information systems in TAMUS. Several other respondents shared the view that the philosophy
of FAMIS was centralization through technology. In a memorandum to the Chancellor of
TAMUS in 1993, one top administrator of a research agency stated:
It is important to clarify the directives of The Texas A&M University System Board of
Regents ... Centralization seems to be effective in smaller State systems with less
diversity o f missions. But the size and complexity o f TAMUS make centralization a
formidable task at b e s t... Traditionally, the System Administrative and General Office
(SAGO) had maintained a very workable interpretation o f its role by providing
overview and governance where a global perspective is necessary and where shared
services reap benefits to the TAMUS members. But the autonomy o f the System
members to exercise their authorities and means at which to do a good job is one that
members have long cherished. In my opinion, the current FAMIS philosophy threatens
the traditional role of the SAGO and threatens to share service even when such
services are costly to some System members. Such a change in philosophy could not
be implemented overnight. If such as a change was in order, then it should be
communicated as such and simply not be the results o f the [FAMIS] initiative ... the
autonomy o f the TAMUS members is their strength and their means o f attaining their
goals
220
Table 15. The Spirit o f FAMIS25__________________________________________________

___________________ Different interpretations o f the spirit o f FAMIS___________________
1) The motive of FAMIS development was purely technical and aimed at overcoming
technical deficiencies o f old information systems in TAMUS
• Replacement o f old information systems
• Compatibility and consoliditability o f accounting and fiscal information, analysis,
and reports for “all System parts”
2) FAMIS as an initiative for the centralization o f the System
• Increasing power o f SAGO
3) Consoliditability o f accounting and fiscal information, analysis, and reports for “the
System administrators” only
• System-level control
• Uniformity o f management practices o f different parts
• “Bureaucracy”2 6 _______________ ____________________________________
Therefore, the spirit o f FAMIS was not only ambiguous but also contradictory among different
actors. This became more complicated and confusing when actors interpreted differently the
directives of the Board, as reflected in the following remark:
Design and implement management information systems that will insure compatibility
and consolidatability of accounting and fiscal information, analysis, and reports from
all System parts
For SAGO, the MIS project team, and the steering committee, the directive was quite clear to
develop one large-scale IS that is used by all parts o f TAMUS, without any separate fiscal and
administrative information systems within TAMUS. In a memorandum to one research agency
in 1993, the comptroller o f finance wrote:
25 It is noted that even the founders of FAMIS had different understandings about the system
and they had different approaches to FAMIS development. For instance, a former director of
FAMIS noted, in the late 1980s and early 1990s there were two major actors: Both shared a
similar vision for FAMIS which came from different backgrounds. One mainly concerned
about losing control over the members and had more institutional reasons for FAMIS
development. There was fear of losing control. The other saw the potential of technology to
improve people’s productivity. The latter believed that technology can improve efficiency and
productivity.
221
It is mv understanding that ... the Board directive is very clear. Their directive calls
for The System to coordinate the joint development o f an administrative system
(FAMIS) that would benefit and meet the needs of each member. Additionally they
have directed that efforts and costs should be expended for the development and
operation o f FAMIS and not to develop maintain and operate independent
administrative accounting systems
However, the interpretations of other agencies were very different. They argued that the
directive did not mean one system for everyone. In a memorandum one top administrator of a
research agency responded that:
It is our understanding that The TAMUS Board of Regents directed that a management
information system be implemented that satisfies the need for consolidated financial
information. Additionally the MIS was to be in compliance with USAS guidelines as
issued by the State. (Our agency] wishes to comply with the Board’s directive via the
“compatibility option" by remaining on its current accounting system (SCT Banner)
and providing [our agency] data on a monthly basis to the System Offices (SAGO) in
“FAMIS” format. ... The fact that we are utilizing a separate accounting system should
be invisible to System administrators and the Board for these purposes
These members argued that they could meet the Board’s directive through “interfacing” their
separate information systems with FAMIS. On a different memorandum, another top
administrator representing engineering research agencies wrote to the Chancellor, “Gang of
Five”, and the MIS project team:
We fully agree that the Board directive is quite clear ... [Our] proposal [interfacing]
coincides exactly with the Board direction to implement systems to ensure compatible
and consolidated information ...
Here we can see that different actors tried to mobilize the spirit to meet their own interests and
objectives. Small universities and agencies had followed the interpretation o f the SAGO and
the MIS project team. When time had passed, the spirit became more open to different
interpretations and changing rather than fixed. Throughout the history o f FAMIS the diverse
26 A former member o f the steering committee stated, “Bureaucracy at the top led to the design
o f FAMIS. This was a big problem. Actually this became the main problem with later FAMIS
development”.
222
and even conflicting interpretations o f the spirit o f FAMIS made the design and
implementation o f FAMIS very difficult and delayed. That became one of the drivers of
institutional drift on FAMIS design, implementation, and use.
9.3.2 Relationship between IT and Organizations: A Multi-level Model of
Duality of FAMIS
The relationship between FAMIS and different agencies can be explained using the
multi-level model o f duality o f technology introduced on Chapter V. Due to the increasing
complexity and size of the FAMIS system the relationship between the technology and
organizations has been very dynamic and there is not any straightforward way to explain such
dynamic interplays.
FAMIS as a social institution contains diverse and complex rules and resources which
are embedded in many other institutions such as accounting principles, the State laws and
policies, the field of information systems, higher institutions, TAMUS’ and member
organizations’ culture, the community o f IS professions, and more. Since its initiation FAMIS
also has included and interacted with many human actors who have been directly and indirectly
involved in the development, implementation and use of that technology.
Some o f the rules and resources embedded in the FAMIS system had great impacts on
TAMUS and all parts o f the System throughout its history, while others did not. The rules and
policy changes mandated by the State exemplify this in that the Comptroller o f Public
Accounts’ Annual Financial Reporting Requirements fo r Colleges and Universities changed
FAMIS, while security rules for personal computers required in the Information Resources
Security and Risk Management Policy, Standards, and Guidelines published by the Department
of Information Resources (in the State) did not have much impact. Similarly, some actors (e.g.,
SAGO) have been very influential on the formation and transformation o f the FAMIS while
223
others (e.g., small universities) tended to be passive. FAMIS is best understood as a system o f
nested rules and resources at different institutional realms and the various actors involved in
the FAMIS system are hierarchically located. In this sense the multi-level model of duality o f
technology is a useful explanatory tool to understand the dynamic interplay between FAMIS
and actors.
FAMIS varies across the three institutional realms of governance, production and use.
Each institutional realm contains sets o f rules and resources located at different levels so that
the rules and resources o f the institutional realm o f use are nested within those o f the
institutional realm of production, which are nested within those o f the institutional realm o f
governance. They are closely interrelated and can be analytically separated as shown in Figure
21.
224
Rules and policies mandated by the

State; the MIS project team's, individual
chancellors', SAGO's position on the
FAMIS implementation; culture,
conventions, value systems of the IT Governance Macro agency
governance group and key actors in the
group, and others; TAMUS' IT long- The State (the Comptroller's
range plans; TAMUS' and member Office);
organizations' Information Resources the Chief Financial Offices for
Strategic Plans; the Board of Regent's each part in the TAMUS:
directives; formal IT governance rules SAGO Director of
from the State's Department of Information Resources:
Information Resources (DIR); SAGO: the Board of Regent:
the chancellors.
the steering committees.
cultures and conventions of the "Gang of Five”, the State's
MIS project team; in-house IS DIR
development methodology;
project management methods
and techniques; software quality
assurance program, Produc The MIS
programming tools (e.g.. Meso agency
NATURAL); database project team
technologies (e.g.. ADABAS);
CASE tools, and other existing
hardware, computer network
resources, and operating
svstems
culture, values systems, local

accounting practices and TAMU;
procedures; localized security rules TEES; TEEX
and user manuals; •‘shadow'’ TAEX; TAES;
information systems serving as
front-end systems; IT department Other parts of TAMUS
of each agency and university; ix u „ 4
+ Micro agency
window98/2000 based
workstations
Figure 21. A Multi-level Model of Duality o f FAMIS
The governance of FAMIS is organized around a multitude of informal, formal rules
and resources. The informal rules include diverse unwritten rules including the MIS project
team’s position on FAMIS implementation in all parts of TAMUS; individual Chancellors’
positions on FAMIS implementation in all parts of TAMUS; SAGO’s position on FAMIS
implementation; the implicit assumption o f “one system for every part o f TAMUS” by the
225
State Comptroller’s Office, the State auditors, and the State’s Department o f Information
Resources: the State’s general philosophy o f “cost-efficiency” regarding most IT projects by
state agencies and universities: culture; conventions: value systems of the governance group
and key actors in the group; and others not listed here. The formal rules include: TAMUS’ IT
long-range plans: TAMUS’ and member organizations’ Information Resources Strategic Plans;
the Board o f Regent’s directives: formal IT governance rules from the State's Department of
Information Resources (DIR); the lists o f priority on the FAMIS development from the steering
committee. "Gang o f Five” and other macro agencies: formal rules and policies mandated by
the State: accounting rules and formal procedures (e.g., GASB 34 & 35): the State auditor’s
reports; IT security and network management plans: disaster recovery/Business continuity
plan: and other not listed here. Resources at the governance level include: IT budgets;
administrative knowledge and skills: USAS; state funds: the State’s audit; and others not listed
here.
The rules and resources o f FAMIS production include: the cultures and conventions of
the MIS project team: in-house IS development methodology; project management methods
and techniques; software quality assurance program; programming tools (e.g., NATURAL);
database technologies (e.g., ADABAS); CASE tools; and other existing hardware, computer
network resources, and operating systems.
The institutional realm o f FAMIS use refers to very diverse rules and resources with
different parts of TAMUS and departments of each agency and university. They include:
culture and value systems; local accounting practices and procedures; localized security rules
and user manuals: “shadow” information systems serving as front-end systems; IT department
of each agency and university; window 98/2000 based workstations; and others not listed here.
226
These rules and resources are nested: for example, localized security rules and user
training are nested in IT security and network management plans and the System-level training
program is nested within SAGO’s Information Resources Strategic Plan. The rules and
resources o f FAMIS governance tend to affect a large community of actors. For example,
USAS is an institutionalized resources limited to all o f the agencies in the State, while a
“shadow” information system at TTI is an institutionalized resource limited to that particular
agency.
This hierarchy does not always prevail: those localized security plan and training
programs often deviate from higher level rules at the governance and/or production level of
FAMIS. Another example can be found in the State law. The State believes that:
Information and information resources possessed by agencies of state government are

strategic assets belonging to the residents o f this state that must be managed as
valuable state resources (Cited from the State’s Government Code Chapter 2054,
Subchapter 2054-001)
The same Government Code, the Information Resources Management Act, requires that each
state agency “develop and implement its own internal quality assurance (QA) procedures. “
According to the Department o f Information Resources (DIR) in the State, it has been
determined that these should “make use of widely adopted, non-proprietary standards, guides,
and templates wherever possible”. A few standards such as ISO 90000 Quality Management
and Quality Assurance Standards and The Software Engineering Institute’s Capability Maturity
Model for software are recommended by the State’s DIR. The DIR released the State Internal
Quality Assurance Guidelines that include six basic procedures. However, these formal rules
do not always overrule the rules at the institutional realm o f production. The DIRs of different
state agencies and universities tend to maintain their own rules and procedures for quality
227
assurance for software and IT projects, and which set o f rules will apply is sometimes
contested.
Also, the resources o f the lower levels often differ from those at higher levels. For
example, such a “shadow” information system has become a barrier to realizing the objective
of FAMIS to be a fully integrated information system. In fact, one shadow information system
within TAES was considered as an alternative for the grant and contract management
subsystem of FAMIS. The resources such as workstations with GUI and web interfaces at the
institutional realms o f use have had an impact on considering the adoption o f middle-ware
technologies at the institutional ream o f FAMIS production. Currently, the MIS project team is
studying different middleware technologies for web-based interfaces for departmental users.
It is also recognized that higher level rules and resources tend to be more stable than
those at the low level. Those formal rules and resources that appear on SAGO’s Information
Resources Strategic Plans tend to persist over several years. Higher level rules tend to be more
“formalized” and “written” than those at the lower level. When rules are formalized, this tends
to lead to unintended consequences that make deviations possible, and this sometimes
contributes to institutional drift. Referring to the government rule above, one of accountants in
TAMUS who has greater experience in both accounting and IT commented:
(By referring to the subchapter on Internal quality assurance) legislators are trying to
say that state agencies must follow certain management practices for IT projects. In my
opinion, this is kind o f dangerous since management practices are changing quickly.
Legislators try to make this as a law but it’s difficult to see how they are going to
enforce this new law to IT projects by state agencies ... this is a new law. DIR does
collect information from state agencies but does not do auditing or not have
enforcement power. State comptrollers’ office does not have time to oversee whether
agencies follow this law. Before this kind o f law, auditors had to be persuasive but
now they can say “here is law you need to follow and you got to follow, if not, you
need to do this because this management practices are “mandated” ... In general many
people (IT managers) don’t follow management practices. If you do not keep records
[about IT projects] then there is “no way to measure your performance”. Most people
don’t write. Even if there is such a law, people don’t meet the spirit o f such laws,
instead they tend to follow these laws by putting some necessary documents on the
228
shelf and say “we are following the law" but actually they are not following the law ...
they don't meet the spirit but follow the form" Making such things as formal rules is
very dangerous because state agencies have local practices (21.14)
Even at the same level rules are often found contradictory. For example, the belief (informal
rule) of the State’s Comptroller's Office on the mandatory nature o f FAMIS implementation
became contradictory with the formal rule o f the TAMUS when the former Chancellors
reversed their positions from mandatory to optional.
The variability o f agency is evident in the case. Different actors involved in the
evolution o f FAMIS tend to possess different agentic powers, and there are power asymmetries
between actors and/or groups o f actors. They not only had different interpretive flexibility but
also different abilities to influence the outcome o f FAMIS development and adoption. Here the
variability o f agency refers to three hierarchical levels o f agency, macro, meso, and micro in
the FAMIS system. These different agencies can be explicitly identified by their recognized
and/or formalized roles, practices, and responsibility in FAMIS design and adoption.
In this case, macro agency tends to occur mostly in the institutional realm o f IT
governance. Macro agents include the Chief Financial Offices for each part in the TAMUS,
SAGO’s Director of Information Resources, SAGO, the Board o f Regents, the State
Comptroller’s Office, the Chancellor, the steering committee, “Gang o f Five”, the State’s DIR,
and possibly others. Note that this list includes both individual and collective agents. To take
one example of a macro agent, SAGO’s general role and responsibilities are:
Under direction o f the Chancellor ... coordinate the activities of the component
universities, agencies, and the health science center within the System; initiate,
monitor, approve, and coordinate long-range planning for the System; approve short-
range institutional plans for operations and expenditures; ... perform such duties as
may be delegated by the Board (cited from SAGO’s Agency Strategic Plan)
229
More specifically, one o f SAGO’s objectives is to provide and support technology systems
such as FAMIS and BPP that enable the improved maintenance, manipulation, and exchange o f
information for strategic and operational decision making.
On the other hand, the level o f meso agency in this case is mostly vested in those
whose role and responsibilities are the development and maintenance of FAMIS. The MIS
project team has been representing this agency since the beginning of FAMIS. In a public
document, it can be found that
The FAMIS Services Department [the MIS project team] is part of the Department of
Information Resources (DIR) within the Texas A&M University University System
Administrative and General Offices (SAGO). FAMIS Services is composed of
individuals who are responsible for maintaining and developing the FAMIS and for
providing user services support to all TAMUS members who have chosen to
implement FAMIS in order to meet their accounting needs. Nineteen TAMUS
members and the Texas A&M Research Foundation utilize the functionality of
FAMIS.
In the case micro agency tends to occur in the institutional realm o f FAMIS use. It
appears that most parts of TAMUS except SAGO are micro agents.. They consist o f nineteen
TAMUS members and the Texas A&M Research Foundation utilizing the functionality o f
FAMIS with more than 4,000 users.
Some parts of the TAMUS have been very influential on the design and adoption of
FAMIS. For example, TAMU had initiated the idea o f a large-scale fiscal and administrative
information system that later was adopted by the System and expanded to all parts o f TAMUS.
Almost all respondents agreed that TAMU was the most powerful actor in the design and
evolution o f FAMIS. The CIS department of TAMU had made signficant contributions to the
design o f FAMIS and for the past two decades there had been the transer o f technical and
administrative knowledge from the CIS department to the FAMIS project team (this will be
discussed later). Also, the engineering and agricultural agencies have been powerful actors in
230
the TAMUS for many decades and in fact they were quite influential at early stages o f FAMIS
design and adoption. For example. TAES was asked to develop its own grant and contract
management information system as a front-end system for FAMIS by 1993. In this sense.
TAES could be considered as a meso agency for a short period of time.
In addtion to roles and responsibilities, the agency’s practices (e.g., Bourdieu 1977;
Cook and Brown; 1999) are used as the basis for identifying micro agency. Practices are the
recognizable patterned actions in which both individuals and groups engage (Bourdieu 1977).
The term “practices” can refer to the coordinated activities o f individuals and groups in doing
their "real work” as it is informed by a particular organizational or group context (Cook and
Brown 1999, p. 387-388). Thus, practices are neither a mechanical reaction to rules, norms or
models (Bourdieu, 1977) nor behavior and action that is seen as behavior imbued with meaning
(Cook and Brown 1999). They mean doing real work: the practice of system analysts, senior
managers, physicians, programmers, etc. (Cook and Brown 1999). Thus we understand that in
the context of FAMIS, TAMU’s and the research agencies’ practices are “using” the FAMIS
and “making requests” for maintenance and upgrading to the MIS project team (even though
their practices in the use o f FAMIS create and recreate the technology).
Agencies in FAMIS have different capacities to influence the technology. The rules
and resources at the institutional realm o f FAMIS governance tend to be malleable to the
macro agencies while they are more difficult to change for other lower level agencies, The
micro agencies, particularly small universities and small agencies have very limited capacities
to influence the formation and maintenance o f FAMIS.
It appears that some actors emerged as powerful at a certain period o f time but later
lost their agentic power. For example, the steering committee that was formed in the late 1980s
was a powerful group in the development o f FAMIS from 1987-1990. However later the
231
group's roleand responsibilities were succeeded by a new group called “Gang o f Five”
composed of five individuals from TAMU and SAGO. Now the Chief Financial Offices for
each agency and institution in the TAMUS have significant input in defining resource
allocation for major discretional projects (those not mandated by law or regulation).
It is also the case that actors within the same agency have different agentic power. As
noted earlier, TAMU is at the micro level o f agency, the same as other parts o f TAMUS were.
However, TAMU’s agentic capabilities were quite different from other parts, particularly from
small universities, non-engineering and non-agricultural research agencies, and the Research
Foundation (RF). Also, the Chancellor’s Office, which is at the macro agency level is
responsible to another higher agency, the Board o f Regents consisting o f nine regents
appointed by the State governor for staggered six year terms.
It is interesting to see the role of proxy agency and collective agency in the case of
FAMIS. For example, WTAMU, a small university, tried to influence macro (SAGO) and
meso (the MIS project team) agencies through the exercise of proxy agency (the former
Chancellor serving between 1994 and 1999). The university joined TAMUS in 1990 and had to
adopt FAMIS. The FAMIS adoption was not optional for small universities. However, the
university had already implemented its own student information system and a small-scale fiscal
and administrative system. Thus, the university was against FAMIS implementation. However,
the two recently implemented ISs could not be an excuse since FAMIS implementation was
mandatory at that time. The university delayed FAMIS implementation and in 1994 the
president of that university became the Chancellor o f the TAMUS. The university turned to the
Chancellor and in 1995 was finally allowed to use its own ISs rather than FAMIS. Research
agencies, particularly the two engineering research agencies used both proxy and collective
agency. As was noted earlier, they were very against FAMIS adoption and insisted on using
232
their own information systems. First, these two agencies had shared beliefs in their collective
power to produce desired results. A former IT manager of one o f the research agencies said:
[In the late 1980s] I was invited to several meetings by the MIS project team. My boss
and I firmly believed that FAMIS was being designed based on old technologies.
Particularly we pointed out the lack o f a research module in FAMIS. That was the
main reason we did not want to adopt FAMIS. The team did not have much resources
to develop the subsystem to support research activities such as grant and contract
management, investment management ... We knew it will take a long time to develop
such a subsystem. They [The team] knew this too. So our agency was allowed to
purchase a software from SCT Corporation which was based on advanced technologies
such as Oracle database and GUI interface. The director o f the MIS project team said
that it is temporary. When we develop the research subsystem you [our agency] got to
be on FAMIS. He said it is temporary! But we knew it would be permanent! (25.2,
25.13)
These two agencies shared the belief that they were different from other parts o f TAMUS. A
respondent said
We are not universities. We are research agencies that are very different from
universities. FAMIS is for universities not for us (9.3)
The development o f collective agency was supported by the exercise o f proxy agency when the
Dean of engineering at TAMUS became the Chancellor in 1991. A member o f the steering
committee said:
The Chancellor came from the engineering side so he understood the two agencies
well. That’s why they [the two engineering agencies] could avoid FAMIS (12.4)
However, in contrast to our initial prediction that proxy agency and collective agency would
tend to be formed or exercised by micro agencies, they were found with macro and meso levels
o f agency also. For example, the FAMIS system as “the solution for fiscal and administrative
problems” for TAMU and later “one system for everyone” represent an interesting
development o f management discourse. A single person could not bring this idea and interest
into realization: rather, the founders o f FAMIS had to develop “collective agency” through the
process of translating (Callon 1986, 1991) their interests. They enrolled different actors such as
233
the Board o f Regents, the USAS project team, TAMU fiscal office and others in an “actor
network” (Latour 1987). Collective interests were developed and the actor network began to
exercise a powerful collective agency. However, this actor network had all resources except
one. technical knowledge of IT. They turned to an individual actor (proxy agency) with enough
technical knowledge and strong leadership which was strongly needed to implement the
ambitious, large-scale project. A member o f “Gang of Five” said:
We [the founders o f FAMIS] had enough experience o f different areas such as

accounting, procurement, legal aspects, and so on but not on technical things. We hired
a technical person and he became the director of FAMIS (11.3)
A system analyst who worked with the director recalled him:
He was very dynamic, visionary, always pushed hard. He is the person who works 80
hours per week. He always demonstrated a strong leadership in the team and FAMIS
development (2.20)
“In this socially mediated mode o f agency [proxy agency], people try by one means or another
to get those who have access to resources or expertise or who wield influence and power to act
at their behest to secure the outcomes they desire” (Bandura 2001, p. 13). The actor network
required the exercise of proxy agency to secure the outcomes o f the FAMIS project. However,
it is not clear from the case data whether micro agency used meso agency as a proxy agency to
influence FAMIS. If meso agency is often used as proxy agency by macro agents only but not
by micro agency then it seems to suggest that in this case information systems represent power
and domination (Kling 1974: Orlikowski and Robey 1991; Macintoch and Scapens 1990). The
design and deployment o f information systems would in this case constitute a system of
domination (Orlikowski and Robey 1991; Sewell and Wilskinson 1992) o f macro agency.
Information systems embody (“inscribe”) the world o f the designers (Akrich, 1992). As IS
designers' expertise is commodified (Scarbrough, 1993) and they are often in the position
234
where expected to facilitate or “translate” (Latour 1992) the interests of macro agency (e.g., top
management) to the design, IS designers can reproduce systems of domination in technical
designs (Scarbrough 1993; Myers and Young 1997; Bloomfield et al., 1997).
However, macro agency cannot exercise “absolute power” over micro agency because
(1) their resources and status often come from and/or need to be supported by micro agency
and (2) macro agency is often responsible for providing good “customer service” to micro
agency. In this context a top official of an agricultural agency who was a member of the
steering committee noted that:
Actually the State wanted every state agency to use USAS but things in universities
were very different so it was impossible to use USAS. Kevin [the primary
investigatory], your boss [the State] cannot tell you [TAMU] directly what to do,
maybe indirectly (8.18)27
Another respondent also said that:
We (TAMU] are a big customer to the State. They [the State] ask us “what can we do
to help you” (4.27)
Macro agency has power over and at the same time is responsible to micro agency. SAGO is
another example. For example, revenue sources for SAGO (macro agency) include 53 percent
from assessments to System members for services provided by SAGO. For that macro agency
the satisfaction of users with FAMIS is an important outcome measure for one of its objectives.
27 Different respondents informed different understandings o f USAS implementation. For

instance, a number o f respondents believed that the original objective o f USAS was not to be
an information system for all agencies of state government. It must be noted that Uniform
Statewide Accounting Project (USAP) design project was completed in August 1988.
According to the state auditor’s report on USAS in 1996, the original report by the USAS
project team to the USAS Committee in December 1988 recommended a design for an
automated accounting system which could be used by all agencies of state government,
including institutions o f higher education like TAMUS. According to a member o f Gang of
Five, a similar kind o f information systems has been actually designed and implemented in the
state of Florida and used by all agencies o f state government, including universities.
235
When an information system like FAMIS becomes large in terms o f the complexity
and size, it tends to include diverse, even contradictory rules and resources and diverse, power-
asymmetric human actors, who are located at different hierarchical levels. This situation leads
to a dynamic interplay between those rules and resources and actors between and within levels.
It is clear that this dynamic interplay within large-scale IS tends to add more complexity and
difficulty to the design, implementation, and maintenance of these systems. This subsection
offered a more comprehensive picture o f this relatively new phenomenon with large-scale IS
using the multi-level model o f duality of technology.
9.3.3 Duality of Preexisting Information Systems
FAMIS has been built with preexisting information systems. The initial project idea to
develop a “fully integrated fiscal and administrative information system” for all parts of
TAMUS implied a major transformation and radical changes from existing information
systems at TAMU and other parts of TAMUS. However, it turned out that the actual
development o f FAMIS was less radical or transformative, but rather more conservative
through combining new development with preexisting information systems. This indicates that
FAMIS was not only constrained but also enabled by previous systems. There were several
information systems that preexisted and influenced the design of FAMIS. They include those
installed previously and being designed prior to FAMIS at TAMUS, other universities within
and outside the State and in the State, such as:
• The Budget/Payroll/Personnel (BPP) System and the Student Information Systems

(SIMS) at TAMU
• USAS in the State that was being designed in late 1980s
• Financial accounting management information systems installed at other

universities in the State
• Several large-scale financial accounting and management information systems at

other universities or university systems outside the State
236
The above information systems predated the FAMIS project. For example, BPP was
fully implemented at TAMU in 1979 by the CIS department and SIMS was put into operation
in 1986. While USAS began operation in 1993, the design of the system was going on around
the late 1980s and the MIS project team had to develop the interface between FAMIS and
USAS. In the mid 1980s several higher institutions in Texas, including the UT system and
Texas Tech had already developed large-scale financial information systems. Many institutions
outside the State also had large-scale information systems from two major vendors, American
Management Systems (AMS) and Information Associates (IA). Also a large set of rules and
resources (e.g., culture, organizational structure, hardware and software, programming
languages) were in place prior to the new IS project. The project team had to draw on those
informal and formal rules and resources when they designed the FAMIS system.
Thus, FAMIS was not developed “from scratch,” in the true sense o f the term. FAMIS
as a new institution had several information systems as its predecessors, and FAMIS, to
varying degrees, challenged, borrowed from, and displaced them.
9.3.3.1 Material Surface of Emergence
The FAMIS project could not develop independent o f material aspects of preexisting
IS. The developers had to combine and/or mobilize preexisting resources (or IT artifacts) in
design of the FAMIS system. It is recognized that several material structures emerged both
spatially and temporally.
The design of new ISs occurs through the replication o f old ones. The material surface
of emergence occurred temporally and the first material surface emerged from ISs existing
within TAMU. In designing FAMIS, the project team had to make technical commitments to
SIMS and the computing environments o f TAMU, particularly the IBM mainframe computer.
The SIMS project was initiated and implemented in line with TAMUS’ long range strategic
237
plan. The system used Software A G 's ADABAS as the main database system. The former
director o f the MIS project said:
We had one important technical commitment which was “ADABAS” This was the
database and could not be changed (4.9)
The SIMS project had cost TAMU almost $ 1.6 million already. Purchasing another database
was not an option for TAMU, TAMUS. and the MIS project team.
The existing human resources, system analysts and programmers and their technical
knowledge emerged as another powerful material surface o f emergence in the FAMIS system.
Initially four senior system analysts were hired in 1988, three from the SIMS project and one
from the CIS department at TAMU. Those system analysts had worked at TAMU since the late
1970s and had participated in the SIMS project. The main development language of SIMS was
NATURAL from Software AG. Therefore, they were more familiar with ADABAS and
NATURAL programming language rather than Oracle or other relational database management
systems and other fourth generation programming languages, which in late 1980s were
relatively new to universities.
The IBM 3090-200E system emerged as another material surface of emergence. The
mainframe computer was purchased and installed at TAMU in 1987. It cost $8.2 million at that
time. In fact the mainframe computer and SIMS were the major IT investments by TAMU until
that time. These material surfaces were so powerful that those resources could not be changed
but had to be combined with new resources in the development of FAMIS.
The design of FAMIS occurred through the replication o f spatially distant ISs. The
material surface o f emergence occurred spatially also. The important task for the MIS project
team was to discover “a good model” for the new, ambitious, large-scale, multi-site IT project.
The team traveled a lot and studied several information systems at universities in and outside
238
the State. Through this process, they identified several alternative models for the MIS project
and combined them with the team’s own visions for the new IS. This was the process of
“learning from others" or “learning from successful examples”. In fact, it is often the case that
this approach is not just an option to IS planners and designers, but rather the only viable
source of new ideas in the development of a new IS. It is a powerful device for IT innovation in
practice. However, as Offe (1996) notes, this approach may create an appearance o f clarity
about a solution without really testing its applicability to the present context.
First, the MIS project team investigated financial accounting MISs installed at several
universities in the State in order to identify one that might fit TAMUS’ needs. Three financial
information systems were identified among many as having less stringent restrictions from
software vendors and the team studied the three information systems in depth:
• The University o f Texas Departmental Financial Information Network (DEFINE)

System
• The University o f Texas Health Science Center’s Financial Information
Management System
• Texas Tech University’ Financial Information Management (TECHFIM) System
Even though these three systems did not meet TAMUS’ more complicated needs and they were
relatively small scale compared to the TAMUS’ planned enterprise software, they gave the
project team a solid understanding of what FAMIS would like and would not be.
Also, USAS became another material surface o f emergence. The MIS project team
studied the system in depth as an alternative for FAMIS. The early intention o f USAS was
“one system for all state agencies,” even though this was later changed and applied to small
state agencies only. However, one thing the MIS project team had to consider was interfacing
the new IS with USAS, because this was mandated by the State.
USAS as the material surface led the MIS project to consider and include the capability
to track detailed status information at the departmental level. In fact, this capability lacked with
239
USAS so TAMUS could say that USAS is not for large universities. However, as a top official
of TAMU pointed out, it later turned out that '‘FAMIS is geared at getting details, but not
reporting”.
A member o f “Gang o f Five” made a comment:
FAMIS promised too much and delivered too little and at the same time it delivered
too much and details which users don’t understand and don’t know how to utilize than
it promised. This is a contradiction but it is true (13.2)
The fact that FAMIS delivers "too much detail" was related to the characteristics o f fund
accounting, which emerged as the material surface o f emergence in the design process. All
parts of TAMUS as state agencies have had to follow this accounting practice, which is
different from that o f private organizations. A respondent explained:
Fund accounting and general private accounting are different in that basically you get
money from state, the state is interested in where money came from and how it is spent
Fund accounting requires detailed descriptions o f each account. It is not profit-oriented
accounting. When you look at private accounting and you will see two columns, profit
and expenses. However, fund accounting is a lot more complex than that (20.3)
This fund accounting was the powerful installed base the MIS team drew on in software
selection. Most commercial software that were designed for private organizations is not
suitable for state agencies whose accounting and fiscal management are based on fund
accounting rules. Several respondents pointed out this issue. A founder o f FAMIS said that
Kevin, do you know the differences between fund accounting and private accounting?
Fund accounting has many little pockets, multiple restrictions from state laws, donors,
grants, etc. and is very different from private sector. Thus popular commercial software
is not capable o f doing funding accounting (12.6)
In addition, another material surface occurred spatially within the sector o f higher
education. The information systems that were installed at universities outside the State were a
powerful material surface o f emergence. The MIS project team studied information systems
already installed at three large universities and a large university system: University o f
240
Arizona, University o f Kentucky at Lexington, Arizona State University, and West Virginia
Board o f Regents.
University o f Arizona’s Financial Records System (FRS) was purchased from
Information Associates, was running on IBM 3090-180 mainframe computer and IDMS-R
database, and built in COBOL. It was found that there were two reasons that led the decision to
purchase software from LA: one was the concurrent need for a student information system and
second was the decree from the University administration that both packages be bought from
the same vendor to support integration between the two systems. University of Kentucky’s
Financial Record System (FRS) was purchased from LA and running on an IBM 3084 Q and
VASM database. Arizona State University was running American Management System’s
College and University Financial System (AMS CUFS), which was running on an IBM 3081
KX and IDMS-R database. The University mentioned that, from an operational standpoint,
they preferred IA’s FRS because it takes less disk space (no ratio) and that IS had a new
version written in native IDMS; but the users preferred AMS CUFS West Virginia Board o f
Regents was running AMS CUFS for all universities in that state, running on an IMB 3081 KX
and VS AM database.
The material surface o f emergence from the four information systems was two
vendors, the vendors’ software and those systems’ hardware, database technology, and
programming languages. The two vendors. LA and AMS, limited the MIS team to their
software. FRS and CUF, the mainframe as the server operating system, and COBOL as the
application programming language. In particular the two popular software vendors and their
products were the powerful material surface of emergence. It can be further said that the
technology availability in 1980s became the material surface o f emergence. The team drew on
241
these material surfaces to develop the model for the new IS. The model was “imported” from
spatially distance ones rather than “invented”.
The MIS project team combined all the available resources that were within TAMU
and borrowed from other universities and IA. They challenged the imported model by changing
the old programming language (e.g., COBOL) and database (e.g., IDMS, VASM) to the
relatively advanced ones - NATURAL and ADABAS - available within TAMU. These
resources of the preexisting information systems within and outside TAMU had both
constrained and enabled the design of FAMIS. Those material resources limited the available
choices to the MIS project team but at the same time they provided a path as well as repertoire
for the development o f FAMIS. Without these preexisting resources, the FAMIS project itself
would not have been possible. The former director of the MIS project team explained this:
I was asked to work on this project for a reasonable time frame. It means one year.
With the one year goal systems analysts were selected. At the time no one wanted to
write system requirements. Everyone said “no time”. I was told from people “I don’t
care how you do it" ... “just go out and build it”. We had to make commitment to the
database, [considering the time pressure and emerging local politics] that wasn’t a bad
decision. No changes in both DB and basic server saved a lot o f time and efforts.
Otherwise the project could take at least 6 months or 1 year longer. Kevin, remember
FAMIS was supposed to be fully operation by August 1990 for fiscal year 1991 (4.3,
4.7, 4.9)
9.3.3.2 Virtual Surface of Emergence
System developers draw on the values and conventions of their organization,

occupation, and training to build information systems ... they are informed by systems
development methodologies and knowledge about their organization to build
information systems (Orlikowski and Robey 1991, p. 159)
The preexisting cultural infrastructure o f TAMUS and the IT group at TAMU as well as the
experiences and frames o f individuals in the MIS project team emerged as a powerful virtual
surface in the designing o f FAMIS.
As it was noted earlier, the former director o f the MIS project team was very
influential in the design o f FAMIS, particularly during the period o f 1988 to 1991. He had
242
previously served as vice president o f information systems with an airline company in private
industry and as a senior financial official with a number o f universities. Also he received his
college and graduate education from TAMU from 1965 to 1972. Therefore, he was quite
familiar with TAMU’s culture. He could be brought up to date on TAMUS’ administrative
culture and politics from diverse individuals, particularly a founder o f FAMIS who had known
him well and hired him for the project.
The former director drew on the “wisdom" gained from his previous experiences and
training. His technological frame is evident in the following comments
Users had little tolerance for changing (4.10)
Flexibility does not mean to users ... it is not something users w a n t... they want what
they are familiar with ... try as few changes possible ... so we [the project] team didn’t
want a lot o f changes ... tried to do as few changes as possible ... (4.10)
Large-scale information systems don't come to be alive on time (4.12) (the

development o f large-scale information systems is difficult and seldom meets the
original plan)
The technological frames in his experiences seemed to lead to a relatively conservative
approach to the MIS project through creating as few changes as possible in the preexisting IS at
TAMU. An IT manager of a research agency said:
... the MIS project team was in on the vendor selection ... they were less interested in
a brand new system but more with a system which is compatible with SIMS ... they
were considering two vendors AMS and IA ... did anyone mentioned about SCT in
the interview? No [the primary investigator said} ... actually SCT was under
consideration ... I supported that vendor and technology (SCT Banner financial
module) ... to me, SCT was the best ... it was based on advanced technologies not like
“Green Screen” [meaning non-GUI interface] ... They were looking at “Green
screens” and “ADABAS and Natural" ... They argued with me that SCT is not good
because it is risky and their approach was less risky ... (25.25, 25.26)
Most organizations like a large university system and the State have bureaucratic
organizational structure at the top level. The decision on the new project was made at the top
level: the Board delivered the directive and SAGO had to execute the directive. The decision
was “one system for everyone” and that adoption of FAMIS was mandatory for all parts of
243
TAMUS. Thus the MIS project team played a critical role as a proxy agent by going out and
saying to TAMUS’ parts “you got to be on FAMIS. This is not an option. No alternative is
allowed”. The value and discourse about “one system for everyone” emerged as the virtual
surface.
Thus, the MIS project team was forced to design an “average” system for everyone, no
matter whether they were large or small universities or research agencies, not an integrated
enterprise software for TAMUS. The former director pointed out, in fact “one system for
everyone” is “nothing for nobody” (4.21).
As was noted before, TAMUS' culture emphasized decentralization, and this served as
another powerful virtual surface. The MIS project team had to draw on this decentralized
culture. As a result, later on the MIS project team came to adopt the more “customer or user-
oriented” approach to FAMIS design. A system analyst and the FAMIS manager said
The system’s motto is “here to help”. Our team tried to accommodate individual
members’ needs into the FAMIS design as much as possible (23.7)
This is quite different from the initial approach the project team took, which followed the
hierarchical organizational structure and attempted top-down change. This led to strong
resistance from TAMUS’ decentralized organizational culture, which emphasized the
uniqueness o f each member and strong local autonomy. As the State audit report 1995 shows,
in its early days the design process for FAMIS was more top-down and steering committee-
dnven.
While the expertise of these individuals [different committees for IT project] is needed
in the system’s design, the user o f the system can also provide valuable input. Without
this input, the risks increase that a system will be designed and implemented that does
not meet the user’s needs. This has already been evidenced by the evolution o f the
University’s central financial system, FAMIS
Any IS department or group has conventions or “the way we do the work”. The senior
system analysts came from the CIS department at TAMU. They had worked for several years
244
together and developed different software applications for users at TAMU and other parts o f
TAMUS. Conventionally, IT projects at TAMU were managed “informally” rather than
following any “strict” or “formalized” IS development methodology, project management
techniques or quality assurance program. Like IT groups in most organizations, the department
used its own homegrown IS development methods and project management techniques. These
methods and techniques were rather “informal” in the sense that the IT professionals did not
keep much documentation, but instead relied heavily on their tacit knowledge and improvised
group work. The director o f the department said
In my view CMM [the standard for software quality assurance from DIR of the State]
is not a method, but a model. We have our own method and our method is “CMM like”
but not ‘CMM” [rather than using any formal IS development methodology like
SDLC] we can use a more informal one like “fit-gap analysis" to decide how much
will change though a new technology (24.10)
The MIS project team drew on the conventions and internal culture o f the TAMU’s IT
department in designing FAMIS. A system auditor commented, it is very difficult to find any
documents about FAMIS. The State auditors also found this, as noted earlier. A respondent in
the MIS project team also said:
We don’t keep much documentation. In practice it is not needed much. For example,
using project tracking software may be good but it may take more time to track than to
do “real work”. We tried to structure the team but always it crossed out. We are like a
matrix organization (2.26)
9.3.3.3 FAMIS design as transposition and patching up
The founders of FAMIS were initially in the HNM ("History No Matter”) tradition.
However, as discussed in the preceding subsections, their initial view drifted (and was
strategically shifted) to the PD (Path Dependency) perspective. As a result of institutional drift,
245
what actually has happened in FAMIS design was transposition and patching up28, rather than
the “pure” HNM or PD.
Transposition can refer to multiple terms including bricolage, improvisation and
backward looking. The founders and the MIS project team did not build FAMIS from scratch.
Actually they turned back to already existing information systems and tried to figure out where
they could use those systems to tackle the new situation - enterprise-wide integration -- at
hand. In fact, as noted earlier, they could not be free from the resources (e.g., IBM Mainframe,
ADABASE) and schemas (e.g., bureaucratic organizational structure, experiences o f the
members o f the MIS project team, culture o f the IT department at TAMU) from the preexisting
information systems inside and outside TAMU that emerged as powerful material and virtual
surfaces in the design of FAMIS. This strategy was observed in the early phase of FAMIS
development.
In addition to the strategy o f transposition, patching-up was an important strategy in
FAMIS design from the late 1980s through the present. This less conservative approach to IS
design refers to patching old information systems with new structures. The MIS project team
considered ten alternative options29 and chose the approach to “Install a college and university
financial system designed and written by an outside vendor but enhanced and modified to meet
the TAMUS, the USAS, and the State requirements”. They recognized the specific bottlenecks
and deficiencies o f the existing IS (e.g., the IT solutions o f Information Associates and
American Management Systems), and they attempted to patch the old systems up with new
structures such as NATURAL and an upgrade of the IBM mainframe.
28 These concepts were introduced in Chapter VI.

29 For details, readers are referred to the section 9.2.6 and Table 11.
246
This strategy was not a one-time use limited to the early days o f FAMIS development,
but actually used frequently in the history o f FAMIS development and became a common
approach in the maintenance and governance o f the system. For example, one major deficiency
o f (and complaint about) FAMIS was lack o f departmental user support. In order to relieve
these specific bottlenecks and deficiencies in 1995 software for departmental download
capability was purchased and combined with FAMIS rather than altering it. Also there was a
need to respond to the State auditor’s 1996 report that pointed out the lack o f the capability of
executive information systems to meet the information needs of System-level users. Rather
than altering FAMIS, the governance group in TAMUS purchased NCR’s Teradata database to
develop an executive information system that has a loose interconnection with FAMIS. Over
the years the macro and micro agency of FAMIS have attempted to handle some bottlenecks
and deficiencies of FAMIS through the strategy of patching-up. Most recently, the MIS project
team considers patching FAMIS up with the utilization o f middleware technologies such as the
EntireX Broker.30
Also the strategy o f patching-up has tended to proceed in a decentralized manner.
Different parts o f TAMUS have used the strategy to make up for the deficiencies o f FAMIS to
meet their specific, local needs. For example, as already noted, in its early days the FAMIS did
not provide the support for departmental level accounting. The ABBPBIS system was initially
developed for agricultural agencies in the TAMU system by Computing and Information
30 It should be noted that recently TAMU has developed a web-based information system that
allows thousands of students to register for classes through WWW. The project team also
determined that it would be best to use something it was comfortable with - in this case,
another tool from Software AG that would augment the university's existing investment in
ADABASE. The team ultimately settled on EntireX Broker, which would act as a gateway,
allowing developers to work with code from a variety o f sources, re-use existing code to speed
development time, and reduce errors - all in a Web-based framework. A similar pattern is
expected in the near future o f FAMIS. This is another case o f transposition and patching-up.
247
Services (CIS) at TAMU. The ABBPBIS system is built on the top o f FAMIS. The ABBPBIS
is a front-end system, while FAMIS is a back-end system. In addition, according to several
respondents, different parts o f TAMUS had initiatives to develop “shadow” information
systems that are combined and used with FAMIS. For example, according to the CIO of a
research agency. Research Foundation (RF) has its own system called Crystal Reports31 for the
reporting purposes. In the development of FAMIS there was no single design or designer.
Instead there were many localized attempts at partial design cutting across one another.
In contrast it is recognized that the strategy of “anticipated institution” was largely
missing in FAMIS design. The concept of anticipated institution is different from the idea of
“rationalistic, top-down IS design” or “strategic alignment o f IT and corporate strategy” which
is in the HNM tradition. The latter ignores the fact that “history matters in the design of a new
IS”. However, the former emphasizes the need of path-finding or path-creation in IS design
while recognizing the inevitability of path-dependency in IS design. The strategy refers to
“future-oriented collective process” of developing the expectations of the plausible institutional
change and FAMIS. In a similar vein, a former member of the steering committee and “Gang
o f Five” observed,
I would say the main problem with FAMIS design was the “incompetent
management”. What I mean is, for example, incompetent Chancellor and top
management. The management did not know what they were doing. In my opinion,
this caused the unsuccessful design o f FAMIS. Top people didn’t know what they
needed and what to ask to the MIS project team and other IT people. There was no
clear future plan for FAMIS. No blueprint ideas for FAMIS! There was no beginning
point and no ending point for the project. As you know, FAMIS was geared to know
“numbers”. Top people didn’t want to know things like purchasing, inventory and
property management, grant and contracts management and risk management. They
wanted to know “numbers”. That’s it!. That’s why it turned out that FAMIS has been
designed for executive reports rather than for departmental users. I would say no one
was truly understanding what’s going on with TAMU, FAMIS, etc. (8.2, 8.11, 8.15)
31 This software is produced by the company named Crystal Decisions that develop different
kinds of so-called business intelligence technologies.
248
It is our belief that even though institutional drift is a fact of the life for any
information system, the lack o f such strategy in FAMIS design had ever increased the
institutional drift o f FAMIS over the past 15 years.
9.3.3.4 FAMIS as a Preexisting Information System
FAMIS later became an important predecessor to systems at several other universities.
After the implementation in the TAMU system, several universities including Cornell
University Medical College. University of Houston, Brown University, University o f Hawaii,
and Charles County Community College have implemented Software AG’s FRS. It appears
that FAMIS has become a model for their new information systems. FAMIS both constrained
and enabled the development of these new ISs; FAMIS provided them a path as well as
repertoire for the development of such new systems.
An IS design rarely fully satisfies the intentions of those who initiate it. The founders
of FAMIS had a very ambitious goal to design "an enterprise-wide information system” that
seemed to require the utilization of more advanced technologies and radical organizational
changes. In the Request for Proposal was a list o f many new and advanced capabilities that
could not be found with any of those preexisting information systems at other universities. The
initial view of the founders o f FAMIS and the MIS project team was consistent with the
"History Does Not Matter" (HNM; discussed in Chapter VI) tradition that is often advocated
by senior management and IT project teams in industry.
However, the installed base of information systems had emerged as a powerful
influence in the design o f FAMIS. The MIS project team (particularly the former director) and
the founders of FAMIS had to face the dilemma o f "the long arm of the past.” They took a
more conservative approach in the development o f FAMIS. The FAMIS system turned out to
be an "average” IS, as several respondents pointed out, and an IT manager of a research agency
249
argued “what’s new?” Somewhat ironically, the initial HNM view eventuated in development
that was most consistent with the Path Dependency (PD) view as a result o f having to work
with the installed base and institutional drift.
9.3.4 The Evolution of FAMIS as a Dynamic Process of Institutionalization
The evolution o f large-scale IS like FAMIS appears to be much more complex and
dynamic than is suggested in previous approaches to technology adaptation and in descriptions
o f the process of institutionalization found in the literature on institutions.
9.3.4.1 Institutional Formation
Even though FAMIS was introduced to three parts of TAMUS in 1990 for the first
time, the institutional formation o f FAMIS, particularly its ideals and discourse, had started
much earlier. In the early 1980’s actors at the system level recognized the need for advanced
information systems to improve the efficiency and productivity in the area o f fiscal and
administrative management. This is evident in the long range plans submitted to the Automated
Information and Telecommunications Council (AITC) in these years.
The Automated Information and Telecommunications Systems (AITS) Plan submitted
in 1984 set the future direction of TAMUS with respect to administrative computing. It stated.
The application o f modem automated information systems technologies to the

solutions o f fiscal and administrative problems ... TAMUS will continue to take
advantage o f new technologies to increase efficiency and effectiveness in fiscal
operations, administration, programming, and communication
TAMUS recognized that efficiency and productivity in the area of fiscal and administrative
management allowed important resources to be applied to the enhancement o f the educational
and research functions.
In the subsequent 1986 AITS Plan, these goals were further delineated. By 1986, the
Student Information Systems (SIMS) project has been implemented and the focus o f long-
range planning was being redirected toward the financial information system. TAMUS noted
250
the initial consideration o f the goal o f the acquisition and/or development of an integrated
financial system. Concurrent with this goal was consideration of upgrading automated office
operations through the use o f microcomputers. The goal o f designing and implementing the
integrated financial system was to improve the productivity of the management process and to
reduce the amount of paper required by routine business. One member of the steering
committee said that:
I became a senior official at TAMU in 1983. Around this time PCs began to appear
(primarily among faculty members). The president [of TAMU] called and told me and
the director of Admission and Records that we are expecting an increasing enrollment
and need a new registration system. I remember it was fall 1983. However, we agreed
that doing registration is not enough but developed the Student Information Systems
(SIMS) ... later I became Deputy Chancellor o f Finance in SAGO. We realized the
need of a large-scale information system which can support different functionalities
including payroll, administrative tasks, decision support, management and executive
support and more ... the idea was having a uniform accounting and financial system in
TAMUS (12.2, 12.4)
Forms of
Social States
Objectification
Ideals Discourses Techniques of control
Oral language
Written language
IT artifacts
Time
1983 -1984 1984 - 1987 1987 • 1990
Figure 22. Institutional Formation in the Dynamic Process of FAMIS Adaptation
251
These ideals became formal discourse when the Board o f Regents directives were
formally established (Figure 22). Immediately after these directives the director of the MIS
project team was hired. The 1988 AITS Plan further specified the direction that administrative
computing should take.
Encouraging administrative users to move toward “integrated systems” has been made
feasible because o f such technological advances as relational databases. 4th generation
languages, networking, and distributed processing. FAMIS was believed to address
"the solutions of fiscal and administrative problems, explain the access to interactive
computing, and "introduce new modes of computing.” In the document containing the
system’s goals for the 1990’s, it is stated, “managing without a plan is analogous to
traveling without a map. With unlimited resources, unlimited time, and no mission, a
map may not be necessary. With limited resources, limited time, and a mission, a map
is imperative. A “fully implemented management information system” is a stated goal
o f TAMUS for 1993
Thus, while the IT artifact or “techniques o f control” (Hasselbladh and Kanllinikos 2000) of
FAMIS was introduced in and after 1990 to different parts o f TAMUS, the development and
implementation of FAMIS had started much earlier in the form o f ideals and discourses, which
later had significant impacts on the development o f the IT artifact of FAMIS and its
implementation and use. A small group o f top administrators o f SAGO, TAMU, and other
parts was in the formation o f the ideals and discourses. In the course o f formulating these
ideals and discourse many rules were already informally set such as the mandatory policy for
FAMIS implementation and use by all parts of TAMUS. Even prior to the introduction o f the
IT artifact of FAMIS. different individual and organizational users had already enacted the
FAMIS system and their technological frames had already been established. Those not
involved in the formation o f ideals and discourses tended to take very different views o f the
FAMIS system from those involved.
For example, among research agencies, those whose representatives were included in
the steering committee, such as the agricultural agencies or whose needs received the priority
reacted quite different than those who did not adopt the FAMIS system, such as the
252
engineering agencies. Engineering agencies were strongly against FAMIS based on a number
o f technical and managerial issues, as introduced previously. Several respondents noted
“Agricultural agencies were much more “accepting” than engineering agencies”.
From the course o f ideals to discourses to techniques o f control, the role o f organized
actors with sufficient resources was influential. It would be said that the development of
FAMIS was shaped by technical reasons rather than institutional ones. However, in the case we
observed that all instances o f FAMIS development later became highly political, since FAMIS
development necessarily included “heterogonous networks” (Callon 1992) of actors, their
diverse, conflicting interests and needs, and technical artifacts. These actors were competitive
by nature and thus the situation became more competitive; there were those self-interested
actors supporting its implementation and those against it; there were those whose needs and
interests were very different from each other;; and also there were those who supported
existing technologies and those against them.
For example, the concrete idea of FAMIS came out o f TAMU and the University
funded all costs related to the FAMIS package acquisition and the initial FAMIS development.
However, later TAMU was dissatisfied with FAMIS development since their needs, such as the
purchasing subsystem and grant and contract management system, were not placed among the
top priorities of the FAMIS development effort. As noted earlier, there was also a backlog o f a
large number of user requests from different parts o f the system, which also made TAMU
unhappy. In a memorandum, a senior vice president and provost o f TAMU wrote to several top
officials in TAMUS, SAGO and several other individuals on the TAMU FAMIS Advisory
Council
The purpose of the Texas A&M University Advisory Council is to list, in priority, the
efforts for development and implementation o f FAMIS as they relate to the needs of
Texas A&M University. This list of efforts should become the basic working list for
the FAMIS staff. While we continue to support the goal o f an integrated financial and
253
management information system for all parts o f the Texas A&M University System, it
is also recognized that the continued development o f FAMIS must address the critical
needs o f Texas A&M University and our end-users
Other agencies had different needs and interests. For instance, a research agency argued
through a memorandum that
The FAMIS solutions for handling indirect cost currently fall short o f providing the
flexibility that our agency needs to distribute indirect cost on inter-disciplinary
research projects. The Pre-Award/proposal tracking component o f FAMIS has not been
designed yet. Our needs are not on the top priority of FAMIS design
Among members o f the steering committee existed different opinions with respect to
the MIS project as a whole. A former member o f the committee noted.
Most members shared the vision o f the chair o f the committee. They wanted to develop
an information system for the Board since the Board wanted to look at numbers. I
personally believed that we should have developed a system for departmental users.
For example, there were 52 departments at TAMU. If you save SI from each
department, the total saving will be S52. On other hand, they developed FAMIS to
save SI from general ledger and executive report. I was very against about most
decisions made within the committee (8.11)
Thus, the institutional formation of FAMIS became very difficult. The “translation” (Callon
1992) of ideals to discourses to IT artifacts was not very successful as different individual and
collective actors attempted to contest their own translation. From this, it seems to be clear that
FAMIS adaptation actually began prior to the introduction o f “techniques of control” which
happened in 1990. FAMIS had already existed in the early and mid 1980s in the form o f oral
and written language and/or in the social state o f ideal and discourses. Subsequent discussion
will show that the phase o f institutional formation was very influential on the next phases in the
process of technology adaptation in the case o f FAMIS.
9.3.4.2 Institutional Development of FAMIS
The institutional development of FAMIS started in early 1990s when it went live with
the three parts. From the beginning, FAMIS has impacted as well as been impacted by different
254
actors including universities, research agencies, the MIS project team, the State and more. This
process can be partly understood as structuration where FAMIS as an institution both has
enabled and constrained the actions o f those actors by privileging some actors, some strategies,
and some actions over others: those actors have produced and been produced by FAMIS
depending their agentic power.
FAMIS has largely presented constraints to some actors while being an enabler for
others. For example, it seems evident that FAMIS was primarily an enabler for TAMU, SAGO,
the State’s Comptroller’s Office and some small universities and agencies. TAMU was the
most powerful agency in TAMUS and was one o f the main drivers of FAMIS development.
TAMU saw FAMIS as the solution for USAS compliance and other fiscal and administrative
problems. FAMIS enabled SAGO to exercise its authority and provided the office with the
means to have control over all parts o f TAMUS. This led to a significant role change of the
SAGO from the traditional role of a coordinator and service office for all parts o f TAMUS to
the new role o f regulatory agency. Prior to FAMIS, the State Comptroller’s Office had to
contact all parts o f TAMUS individually regarding any accounting and financial issue, and
individual universities and research agencies had to provide the office with accounting and
financial data and reports. However, the introduction o f FAMIS changed this in that SAGO
became the contact point for all parts o f TAMUS and the Comptrollers started to make requests
to all parts of TAMUS through the SAGO. FAMIS allowed the SAGO more efficient and
effective governance of TAMUS.
FAMIS also enabled small universities in a number of ways, both functional and
institutional. A CFO o f a small university that implemented FAMIS in 1996 noted:
255
There are many new mandates from the State. After FAMIS, for new State mandates,
we do not need to respond to them individually. A high level o f professionalization is
required for both IT and accounting. Thanks to the FAMIS we don’t need staffs for this
anymore. Also SAGO people represent us to the State. This is good for us (14.9)
The former director o f the MIS project team explained that:
Small universities don’t have much power to exercise over the State officials. They are
just small customers to the State. For example, there is a university whose budget is
about S4 million. For this university, the State Comptroller may say “you’ve got to fix
this and that”. The university has to fix them. In contrast, TAMU with S 1.2 billion
budgets is a big customer. The State officials may ask, “What can we do to help you”.
They are treated differently. Under the umbrella o f FAMIS. small universities are
treated better (4.27)
At the same time FAMIS served primarily as a constraint to others such as engineering
agencies and WTAMU. Many parts of TAMUS did not want to use FAMIS. One member o f
the steering committee and “Gang o f Five” noted that
In general all parts of TAMUS and particularly engineering agencies were scared that
the University system had come to know too much about their operations. They
thought that FAMIS could expose their own operations to the University system. They
didn’t like it. They wanted to be more independent as far as operations. There is a kind
o f institutional logic behind this kind o f resistance. The TAMUS system didn’t want
their operations to be overseen by the State through USAS and similarly, members o f
the System did not want their operations viewed and controlled by the System.
Everyone had “ego” and they felt losing control over their operation. They didn’t want
it (13.14, 4.26)
For example, one research agency clearly saw FAMIS as the constraint that would lead it to
abandon their own information systems and expose its operations to others. It was noted in
different memoranda from the research agency to the SAGO, the MIS project team, and
Chancellor:
The FAMIS solutions for handling indirect costs currently fall short of providing
flexibility that [our agency] needs to distribute indirect costs on inter-disciplinary
research projects ... Technically speaking, [our agency] does not have the database and
software constraints inherit at the System level
... In many State systems, centralization is well justified as the official accountability
to the State is at the system level. Funds are appropriated to the system offices from
which institutions within that system are allocated their respective monies. In these
256
types o f environments, the State holds the State system accountable for all funds
appropriated. This, o f course, is not the situation with TAMUS.
[Our agency’s information] system should be invisible to the System, Board and State
As an institution FAMIS tended to privilege certain actors, particularly the macro agencies
such as the State, TAMU and SAGO over others. Law and policy changes at the State level
have been very influential in the development and maintenance o f FAMIS over the years.
Thus, priority had to be given to processing requirement and maintenance requests from the
State. In fact, those changes were mandated for FAMIS. Also TAMU has been the most
important customer for FAMIS, and this gave TAMU leverage. As noted earlier, TAMU
established the TAMU FAMIS Advisory Council to list the efforts for FAMIS development as
they related to the needs o f TAMU. They contended that the needs of TAMU and their end-
users must be in priority. On the other hand, in 1992 and 1993 a research agency expressed that
FAMIS offers no support to the component [contract & grants and investment
management] as priorities are defined by the University [TAMU] and other parts o f the
System ... The FAMIS staff is small and changes would have to be prioritized with
[our agency] competing with the University. FAMIS initially designated research as
the last priority. There is probably little chance that this would change
[Our agency] should not be blamed for the lack o f progress on the FAMIS research
accounting development. And since 3.5 years have gone by with virtually no progress
From the discussion above, we can see that FAMIS has been mainly produced by certain actors
such as the State, the board, and TAMU (even though it is recognized that the action o f every
actor has contributed to the production and reproduction o f the FAMIS system) while it tended
to be a given influence to other actors including small universities and agencies.
Also we can see an increase in the extent o f institutionalization o f FAMIS over time
through a set of sequential processes- habituralization, objectification and sedimentation
(Figure 23). Despite various challenges from some parts o f TAMUS, the State, and other
institutional arrangements, in the 1990s FAMIS continued its development and
257
implementation. For fiscal year 1991-1992 five universities and agencies joined FAMIS. In late
1994 FAMIS reached its “critical mass” when it became larger with the implementation of a
new subsystem of purchasing at TAMUS departments and TAMU-Kingsville. For fiscal year
1996-1997 three new components (BCH, TAMUC, and TAMYT) that joined TAMUS in 1996
became users.
Habitualization Objectification Sedimentation
Early 1990s Mid 1990s Late 1990s
Figure 23. The Extent of Institutionalization of FAMIS
In early 1990s, FAMIS tended to be a regulative institution for parts of TAMUS. There
was no written policy for the mandatory implementation, which was mostly because of the
culture o f TAMUS. However, there was an understanding among many members, the Board,
SAGO, the MIS project team, and the State that FAMIS will be a fully integrated system for all
members o f TAMUS. As discussed above, there was administrative intent to require all
agencies and universities of TAMUS to utilize FAMIS as their financial and administrative
system. The former director o f the FAMIS team explained that:
Around 1988 Austin people [the State and specifically the State’s Comptroller’s
Office | pushed to develop one common and large IS for every State agency. This was a
huge institutional force. The idea was “one system for everyone” in the state. I met
258
Austin people and convinced them that I can develop a big system [FAMIS] which
support all parts o f TAMUS and provide the interface with the State systems. They just
liked it! Thus, the mandatory implementation by all parts was the official position at
the system level (25.24)
Similarly, an accountant in TAMUS who has greater experience o f accounting and IT recalled
that
FAMIS was not an option, but the mode was “had to” in the early 1990s. If you are
member o f TAMUS, you got to use FAMIS (19.8)
Even though the regulative institution was the dominant institution at that time, the
normative institution as a sub-institution was active also and actually supported the regulative
institution. For example, when TSU joined FAMIS in 1991, the FAMIS system seemed to be a
regulative institution as well as a normative institution. Prior to 1989 there were only three
universities - TAMUS, TSU and PVAMU - in the System. TSU, which was established in
1889, had been a system member since 1929. The long-time membership o f TSU seemed to
bring increased expectations and moral obligations. In this case the regulative and normative
aspects o f institutions are mutually reinforcing. The most common instance o f this involves the
use of authority. in which coercive power is legitimated by a normative framework that tends
to support it (Scott 2001). According to Scott (2001), Weber argued that power becomes
legitimated as authority to the extent that its exercise is supported by prevailing social norms.
Without the support o f the normative institution it is difficult to sustain the regulative
institution. This was the case for the three non-users o f FAMIS. According to a respondent,
WTAMU was directed by the State to join TAMUS in 1990 and the University did not develop
much of a feeling o f being part o f TAMUS. There were neither the binding expectations nor
moral obligation to use FAMIS. The situation was somewhat different for the two engineering
agencies. They both had been the System members since 1910s. However, both tried to
259
distance themselves from TAMUS by contending that they were different from other parts of
TAMUS. For example, one agency argued that
Our revenue comes from our own services, not from the State. 14% of our budget
comes from the State and 86% from grant, contract, seminars, training, and other
services. Therefore. FAMIS is not for agencies like us. FAMIS was geared to
academics like TAMU, not agencies like [our agency] (9.3)
They strategically denied binding expectations and moral obligations o f being a System
member. We can see the lack of normative aspects of institutions with these three parts. For
them the regulative institution could not be legitimated as authority.
K
Regulative Regulative Regulative
Normative Normative
Normative
Cognitive Cognitive Cognitive
- .v
Late 1980s - Early 1990s Early 1990s - Mid 1990s Mid 1990s - Present
Time
Figure 24. Transition oflnstitutional Modes for FAMIS
Also it was noticed that there was the transition of FAMIS among the three sub-institutions
(Figure 24). When the extent of institutionalization increased, the FAMIS system was
perceived by later adopters as a cognitive institution with support o f a normative framework
rather than the regulative institution. For fiscal year 1996-1997 three universities became
System members and joined FAMIS. At this time, FAMIS became taken-for-granted by these
new members of TAMUS. A CFO of the university that implemented FAMIS in 1996 noted:
260
The FAMIS implementation was not mandatory to us. I believe we were allowed to
choose something different but we did not. In fact there was no real selection process
for a new information system. It was not needed. FAMIS was our choice. It was
natural. At the time many State's higher institutions had implemented and been using
FAMIS so we thought that FAMIS would be the best for us (14.1)
At later stages o f FAMIS implementation, FAMIS became a cognitive institution
supported by moral obligations and binding expectations rather than a regulative institution. As
noted by the State auditor’s 1996 report, since 1994 there has been no administrative intent to
require all agencies and universities to utilize FAMIS as their fiscal and administrative system.
Since then FAMIS implementation became more easily accepted by new members because
FAMIS use became part o f the shared logics of action for new members: Using FAMIS
became culturally supported.
In the process of FAMIS design, implementation and use, decoupling was found more
frequently than is reported in the literature. In fact, the case study of FAMIS seems to suggest
that decoupling is an important part of institutionalization for two reasons. First, as the
literature (e.g., Westphal and Zajac 2001) suggests, decoupling is more likely to occur when
subjects have enough power to avoid institutional pressures for change and when social
structural or experiential factors enhance awareness among powerful actors of the potential for
organizational decoupling. As noted above, this seems to be the case for such members as
WTAMU and the two engineering research agencies. Secondly, the strategic uses of
decoupling that we termed “allowance” in Chapter V were found in the FAMIS case. Star
(1997) noted, “anomie32 may arise when the system is overly rigid, allowing for no tailoring or
32 This is Durkheim’s concept. Mary Douglas (1986) used the term to represent “nonfit” or
“lack of convergence”. She notes that there will always be [local] elements that do not fit the
classification system. Here Star (1997) uses the term “convergence” to represent a result o f the
consolidation o f social institutions. “Convergence is a process in which status, cultural and
community practices, resources, experience, and information infrastructure work together to
261
customizing to individual needs in a place o f practice”. Later by changing their early rigid
position on FAMIS development and implementation, the governance and production of
FAMIS had strategically “allowed” decoupling among users. There has also been much
tailoring and customization o f FAMIS to meet the needs of different parts o f the TAMUS.
While this increased the appeal of FAMIS to new users, an unintended consequence was
having several information systems running under the name of FAMIS, as a number of
respondents noted. One o f top IT persons in TAMUS explained this:
FAMIS is a confederated information system, where 6 or more information systems

are running under the name of FAMIS (13.6, 13.7)
A similar effect can be found in the case (Hepso et al. 2000) of the largest SAP ERP
project in Northern Europe. The authors studied a very ambitious ERP project implementation
on a large-scale across multiple-sites. The project team, abbreviated BRA (in Norwegian:
Better and Faster Administration) was launched in 1996. The project focused on high
centralization using a centrally defined, standardized set of administrative tools - ERP. A
manager o f BRA in 1997 made it clear that absolutely no decentralization or locally adopted
solution would be tolerated. However, this position had to be reversed and they had to open up
the strict standardization policy when meeting with local requirements and opposition from the
traditionally fairly autonomous and self-confident sites. Both too much rigidity and too few
standards seem to result in “anomie” or lack o f convergence (Star 1997). If decoupling and/or
allowance is an inevitable phenomenon due to the ever-present gap or mismatch between
individual circumstances and larger social rules or structures (Star 1997; Zucker 1988;
Sjostrand 1993), then those in the institutional realm o f the governance and production o f IT
need to have a balanced approach to IS development and implementation. Then while the
produce transparency within an information world”. Star uses the term “anomie” here to
262
institutional drift always occurs in IS design, implementation and use, the phenomenon may
become much more predictable and manageable.
9.3.4.3 Institutional Decay
Many IS studies or studies in SCOT (e.g., Pinch and Bijker 1987; Latour 1987;
Orlikowski 192; Hughes 1994; Hanseth and Braa 1998) seem to neglect the phase of
institutional decay in the process o f institutionalization. Rather they seem to assume a
relatively complete and uncontested institutionalization of technology or information systems.
They seem to suggest that at the end of institutionalization, the technology or information
system tends to reach “closure" or “ultrastabilization”. The case o f FAMIS seems to be
suggesting that (1) closure or stabilization is not a finished stage and (2) it contains opposing
forces for institutional entropy and inertia. Here, the institutional decay refers to the
phenomenon that the institutionalization o f FAMIS is an unfinished process. While FAMIS has
enjoyed the stability and longevity over the years, throughout the history it had experienced
three general types of pressures toward deinstitutionalization: functional, political and social
(Oliver 1992) in the process of structuration (Barley and Tolbert 1997). Deinstitutionalization
refers to “the erosion or discontinuity o f an institutionalized organizational activity or practice”
(Oliver 1992, p. 563) or represents an exit from institutionalization, toward social entropy or
nonreproductive patterns (Jepperson 1991). Studies of institutional theory in general and
deinstitutionalization in particular tend to assume that those pressures or antecedents of
deinstitutionalization appear at the last phase of institutionalization. These three pressures
together determine the probability o f either dissipation or rejection o f an institutionalized
organizational practice (Oliver 1992).
represent a failure to converge.
263
The findings o f the case study suggest that three pressures appear in the process of
institutionalization. However, unlike the extant understanding o f deinstitutionalization, they do
not necessarily appear during a later phase of technology adaptation. In fact they would appear
at any point o f the entire process o f institutionalization. Furthermore, they do not necessarily
lead to either dissipation or rejection. The inertia of technology tends to impede the process of
institutional decay. Political pressures for the institutional decay of FAMIS have been a
product of two types of factors: intra-organizational factors and environmental factors.
Specifically, the inter-organizational factors include the appointment o f new Chancellors
whose view o f FAMIS was not favorable and losing “sponsors” or “promoters” o f FAMIS such
as the former director o f the MIS project team. These factors led to changing power
distributions. Another intra-organizational factor was a growth in the criticality or
representation o f organizational members whose interests or beliefs conflict with the status quo
of FAMIS. The two engineering agencies would be an example of this. Environmental
pressures caused TAMUS to question the appropriateness of further developing and
maintaining FAMIS. For example, the State audit report o f 1996 recommended that:
System management [of TAMUS] should reevaluate the overall intent and purpose of
FAMIS and how best to meet the management reporting needs of the Board and
executive management ... Implementation o f FAMIS at other System components
should continue to be delayed until decisions are reached about the overall intent and
purpose o f FAMIS ...
A top IT person at TAMU noted:
In 1995 the State auditors came in and found several serious problems. The University
[TAMU] made a contract with Tenneco Gas Company to build an energy plant by not
following the formal procedures. Also they found that the University was falsifying the
purchase o f alcohol. The State law says you can use state money to buy alcohol. They
pretended to purchase “cups and ices” not alcohol. This was caught by the State
auditors. The Secretary of the Board was convicted for that. The State Chief Auditor
was known to dislike TAMU. They were going to get on us. They were trying to find
something. TAMU had to say “Yes” to every request by the office o f state audit at that
time. This is not common, but we were caught by it. The State auditors forced us to
move toward developing a user-oriented system [by replacing FAMIS]. However,
264
because o f the magnitude of the FAMIS project, there was no wav to replace FAMIS
... not much budget for developing a new tS (7.12)
Functional pressures that raised doubts about the instrumental value o f FAMIS came
from both inter-organizational and environmental level. At the inter-organizational level,
different user groups had pointed out functional deficiencies with FAMIS. Research agencies
had been concerned about technical deficiencies of FAMIS on research activities such as grants
and contract management. At more general levels, users complained that FAMIS was not user
friendly, not utilizing databases, and had slow response times for user requests. At the
environmental level, the emergence of new technologies such as GUI, 4th generation
programming languages, and client-server architecture led to functional pressures by different
user groups in the early days of FAMIS. More recently, there have been some functional
pressures from environments. For example, the industry has clearly moved to embrace SQL as
the standard query language. SQL databases like Oracle and Microsoft SQL Server are
becoming much more popular than ADABAS. Also it is very difficult to find programmers
familiar with ADABAS. Currently there is an ongoing effort to replace SIMS, the payroll
system, and the human resource system with an ERP, which is expected to cost approximately
S35 million. This project is becoming another source for technical or functional pressures for
the institutional decay o f FAMIS.
However, ADABAS/NATURAL is like to stay around for the next 5-7 years.
Furthermore, the BPP system has been converted to ADABAS/NATURAL, so opportunities
for improved information sharing between FAMIS, BPP, and other systems are improving.
Also, FAMIS has continued being upgraded to meet rules and policy changes mandated by the
State. These facts have counteracted the functional pressures just discussed and contributed to
the inertia of FAMIS.
265
Social pressures for the institutional decay of FAMIS come under different conditions
such as normative fragmentation, historical discontinuity and structural changes to the TAMUS
system and/or the FAMIS project team. For example, normative fragmentation includes strong
“detraction” from some agencies, dissent inside the steering committee, and differences in the
opinions on priority of FAMIS among member organizations, within FAMIS user groups and
TAMUS. There were a number o f disruptions to the FAMIS and TAMUS’ historical
continuity. The examples include leave o f “sponsors” or “promoters” o f the FAMIS project and
changes in state laws that prohibit or discourage the perpetuation of FAMIS (e.g., the State
auditor' report). These social pressures have existed with FAMIS from the early days o f the
FAMIS development to present. However, these pressures have not resulted in any kind of
action which is strongly against FAMIS. All the actions (e.g., resistance, pressures) have taken
place “under” FAMIS, not “about” the institution. It seems to appear that FAMIS has never
faced all the “logic of collective action” (Jepperson 1991) problems until the present.
9.3.4.4 Inertia of FAMIS
Those different types of pressures for the institutional decay o f FAMIS were much
stronger in early and mid 1990s than late 1990s and the present. Now it seems to appear that
FAMIS has gained its momentum after having a large number o f members as their members
and experienced the “convergence” (Star 1997). It is difficulty to achieve convergence or
transparency, but once achieved, FAMIS has acquired considerable inertia and even coercive,
normative, and mimetic power. Now, while there are relatively strong, particularly functional
and social, pressures for the institutional decay of FAMIS the equally strong inertial pressures
seem to exist and they seem to allow FAMIS “an institution-like longevity”.
Three very common and powerful sources of inertia can be discussed in this context:
costs, uncertainty, and political conflict (Genschel 1997). Institutions cause large initial set-up
266
costs. Actors have to leam new rules, codes, and conventions. They also have to develop
particular skills, competencies, and tools. All these take time, money and effort to build up. A
member of “Gang o f Five" explained:
There were proposals for replacing FAMIS even in 1994, 95, 96 ... but these ideas
were not materialized at that time. It was very difficult. The most difficult task to
change to a new IS would be training people. Online help may be available, but for
effective training people have to be together. You know training costs a lot of money.
In fact no one wants to do this. This is a too big and difficult task for anyone (13.12)
The capital investment for the new institution has to start from scratch. Fresh resources
have to be spent, and it takes some time and transitory confusion until the new institution is
fully operative (Genschel 1997, p. 47). Given this high cost to build a new IS it is often
rational to stick to old institutions or information systems even after new and potentially better
ones have become available. A member of the steering committee of the ERP project to replace
SIMS, BPP and human resource system said that:
While looking for replacing SIMS, payroll system, and human resources system, we
also looked at large-scale financial and administrative systems [ERP] since those
vendors are providing them. But we are not going to replace FAMIS in the short term.
It is not possible in the short term. It is so expensive (11.17)
Another member on the same steering committee explained this:
The replacement o f FAMIS will cost almost S50 million. The magnitude o f the project,
it is no way to replace FAMIS (6.10)
Uncertainty about a new information system or institution is a powerful source for the
inertia of FAMIS. “In a world o f bounded rationality and limited attention, the knowledge
about institutional choices is necessarily incomplete. Often it is difficult to even conceive of
alternatives to the institutional status quo. But even if models of alternative institutions are
available, their effects are much more difficult to predict than the effects of existing
institutions. It is unclear how they will perform, when they will be fully operative, and how
they will affect the relative position o f different actors. As a result, any changeover from an old
267
to a new institution involves an element o f uncertainty and risk. If the stakes are high and there
is some risk aversion, actors may stick to their old institutions even if they suspect that there
are better alternatives” (Genschel 1997). A respondent who was “Gang o f Five" noted that:
We considered the replacement o f FAMIS before. However people agree “FAMIS

plays a large role o f reporting to the State. People are saying “FAMIS is functioning
OK” and “FAMIS is serving OK”. FAMIS will be staying around more years (11.17)
Another respondent said
FAMIS is not OK from an end-user perspective, but this cannot be the reason to
replace FAMIS. This is not a “compelling reason”. “Inconvenient” use cannot be a
good compelling reason. There was nothing compelling force which could lead to
realize the idea of replacement. On the other hand there is a compelling force for
replacing SIMS. SCT [software vendor] drops to support financial module after 2002.
This is something compelling (7.12)
The uncertainty of outcomes for the new system is matched by the certainty of procedures,
rules, and parameters for the existing one. Rather than choosing a new IS with the uncertainty
of outcome, people have continued to support FAMIS which provides some certainty of
procedures, rules, and parameters: “FAMIS is OK”. This leads to an increase in the inertia o f
FAMIS. As long as institutions function properly and continue to generate tolerable levels o f
outcomes, there is no perceived need to think about, and even less to try to implement the
potentially costly process of innovating institutions or of introducing institutional alterations
(Offe 1996).
The third powerful source is the potential of political conflict from the development o f
a new information system. Institutions often have a distributive bias which systematically
makes it easier for some actors to achieve their goals than for others. This potential for
partiality makes a switch to new institutions prone to conflict. There is an issue of who will
initiate the replacement o f FAMIS and who is in charge of that initiative. It is very likely that
the replacement o f FAMIS will expect the same kind of political turmoil, which existed from
late 1980s to mid 1990s in the System. A respondent explained this indirectly:
268
The new [ERP] project for replacing the payroll system was initiated by TAMU, TEES
and TAES to replace the existing old system. But now the system [SAGO] came in and
asked to consider a larger one for every component of the System. If developing a
large system for everyone will take forever and we don’t want this. Recently TAES
wanted to pull out from the project. There must be some influences from the System
level. Again politics is playing here. A similar cycle of the FAMIS is going on here
again. Kevin, do you see? (15.22)
Another respondent said:
The system office [SAGO] seems not to like this project. This project is HR and SIMS
for a large university like TAMU. For all parts of TAMUS it takes a long time and it is
almost “impossible”. Small universities and large universities are different. SAGO is
not in charge o f the ERP project. They shouldn’t be ... (24.1)
In this situation, no matter who initiates the replacement of FAMIS, the founder(s) of the new
IS should expect the possibility o f a great deal of political conflict. This is a disincentive to be
the founder(s) and instead they may wait and see the emergence o f the founder(s) of the
successor.
Sunk costs, uncertainty, and potential conflict put a premium on the inertia of FAMIS.
They reduce the attractiveness o f alternatives and thus act as a barrier against a switchover to a
new IS. In fact, over time these barriers have grown so high as to make escape virtually
impossible. It appears or at least is perceived that FAMIS turns to what Hegel called “second
nature”. Despite their man-made origin they are perceived as something that is exogenously
given and resistant to willful change (Offe 1996; Genschel 1997). A top official of a research
agency commented that:
Some people have been talking about the replacement of FAMIS, but they don’t know
what they are talking about. In my opinion they have no idea o f the complexity and
scope of FAMIS. If they knew it they would never talk about the replacement of
FAMIS. You know what! FAMIS cannot be easily pulled back. It has its own life!”
(9.6)
The three types - functional, social and political —o f entropy pressures could have lead to the
failure o f institutionalization o f FAMIS at any point during its history o f FAMIS.
269
The planners and designers of a new large-scale IS should pay attention to those
entropy pressures and identify the sources o f those pressures. Thus, it is important to define
institutionalization o f an IS as both a process and a property variable. For institutionalization of
an IS as a process, extant process models o f ERP (e.g., Markus and Tanis 2000: Ross and
Vitale 2000: Koh et al 2000) and other types o f IS might be useful. However, as Robey et al
(2002) noted, these process models tend to conceive the implementation of large-scale IS as a
sequence of four stages (Markus and Tanis 2000; Koh et al. 2000), five stages (Ross and Vitale
2000: Ross 1999). or three major stages in the DIT model. These models should include not
only sequences o f events during the IS life cycle but also the interplay between the two
opposing pressures - three kinds o f entropy and inertial pressures - in the sequence. The
identification of the sources o f entropy pressures may allow the project team and “sponsors” to
strategically avoid them and possibly lead to the successful institutionalization o f IS. For this,
the DIT model needs to incorporate a dialectic theory (Van de Ven and Poole 1995) or “logic
of opposition” (Robey and Boudreau 1999). The case study suggests that there are always these
two opposing forces in the technology adaptation that lead to both stability and change over
time.
The replacement o f the legacy system is and will be a big issue by considering the
shortened system life cycie. Particularly studying the interplay between two opposing pressures
- three kinds of entropy and inertial pressures - and particularly the sources o f inertial
pressures at later stages o f system life cycle would effectively deal with many problems with
the replacement of legacy systems and change management.
The institutionalization o f FAMIS would not be correctly represented by the traditional
institutionalization curve like an S-shaped curve that characterizes most diffusion parts
involving both contagion and noncontagion processes. As Lawrence et al (2001) observe, the
270
institutionalization curves o f different ISs could be diverse. For example. Lawrence et al
(2001) provide two dimensions of power - its mode (episodic and systemic) and its
relationship to its target (target as subject and target as object) - as the basis for a typology o f
institutional mechanisms that forms the foundation o f the temporal dynamics of
institutionalization and propose six alternative institutionalization curves. There are different
typologies o f institutional mechanisms possible for IT institutionalization, such as using three
entropy and inertial pressures. I expect that FAMIS is less likely to experience the incremental
decay of its regime, which the traditional S shaped curve seems to suggest. Rather, I expect
that FAMIS will be replaced by a new generation o f ERP at a certain point o f time later this
decade as a result o f collective decisions which are influenced by numerous internal and
environmental forces or pressures.
9.4 Conclusion
This chapter introduced a case study with Financial Accounting Management
Information Systems (FAMIS) in The Texas A&M University System (TAMUS). FAMIS is
the case o f a large-scale information system that has been implemented at multiple-sites within
TAMUS.
The fist section presented the case overview and some general research findings from
the case. The goal o f the MIS project was to develop “a fully integrated large-scale fiscal and
administrative information system" for the large University system that includes almost twenty
universities and research agencies. The history o f FAMIS offers a simple but important lesson
for IS scholars that the development o f large-scale information systems is very complex and
that it is difficult to accomplish the original goal o f the founders. Large-scale ISs are rather
“social institution like".
271
The second section presented more specific findings from the case and offered a case
analysis using the four core categories introduced earlier in this dissertation: FAMIS as a social
institution; duality o f FAMIS; duality o f preexisting information systems; and FAMIS
development and implementation as a dynamic process of institutionalization. The history of
FAMIS offers an important lesson for IS scholars that the development o f large-scale
information systems includes much complexity and dynamic interactions among different
institutional arrangements within which such systems reside. To properly explain their design,
implementation and use, large-scale information systems need to be conceptualized as social
institutions and their development as the development o f social institutions rather than
software.
Ill
CHAPTER X
CONCLUSION
10.1 Introduction
The goal of this dissertation has been to build Dynamic Institutional Theory (DIT) as a
meta theory for understanding different aspects o f large-scale information systems such as
enterprise resource planning (ERP) systems, knowledge management systems (K.MS),
interorganizational information systems (IOIS), information infrastructure standards and e-
commerce solutions. It was noted that the deployment of large-scale information systems is a
major trend in corporate world, but in the IS field there is lack of understanding of exactly what
they involve and how they evolve over time. It was argued that there is a need for theory
building for large-scale information systems considering the size and the impacts of such
systems on individuals, organizations and society.
The study had two broad questions: how do large-scale information systems come to
be developed and how they do they come to be used. This study started with a review of the
literature on large-scale IS and we selected the case research strategy to build a theoretical
framework to answer those two general research questions. Initially two social theories -
Giddens' theory of structuration and actor network theory - were identified as theoretical
guides for the study. The study reviewed extant IS studies - the structurational model and the
socio-technical model -- drawn from these two theories and identified some limitations inwith
these studies. The main limitation of the two models and social theories was that they both
cannot properly deal with institutions and change.
While data collection from the FAMIS case and several secondary cases o f large-scale
information systems development and analysis were being conducted, the need for a different
theoretical framework to explain and understand the nature of large-scale ISs became apparent.
273
This led to the development o f a framework drawn from the tenets o f institutional theory. The
theory emerged in an iterative process o f retroduction. After making some progress on data
collection and analysis a number o f abstract categories from the tenets of institutional theory
emerged and were given greater prominence in the analysis. As presented in Chapters IV
through VII those abstract categories were the conceptualization of IS as social institutions, the
relationship between large-scale IS and organizations, the design o f large-scale IS and
technology adaptation in the case o f large-scale IS.
The purpose o f this chapter is five-fold. First, the chapter offers an overall statement
and the theoretical basis of Dynamic Institutional Theory and some o f the major propositions
o f the theory holds. Secondly, the chapter summarizes the theoretical frameworks o f DIT
introduced from Chapter IV through VII and assesses the meaning of the case for the
frameworks. Thirdly, the contributions o f this dissertation to the literature of large-scale
information systems, theory-building within the IS field and the tenets o f institutional theory
are presented. Fourthly, the chapter discusses the limitations with the research method and
design in the study. Finally, directions for future research are explored.
10.2 Propositions of DIT
DIT is an institutional theory developed in the IS field for understanding and studying
the design and implementation of large-scale information systems. This theory is adapted from
extant institutional theories in several academic disciplines such as political science (March
and Olsen 1989; Offe 1996), sociology (Berger and Luchmann 1967; DiMaggio and Powell
1991; Weber 1958; Zucker 1991) and economics (Hodgson 1988; Hodgson 1999) and the
theory o f critical realism (Archer 1995; Bhaskar 1979) and borrows several useful ideas and
concepts from Giddens’ structuration theory, actor network theory, social studies of
technology, and the work of others (Pickering 1995; Weber 1958).
274
A number o f characteristics about the theory are noted in this section. First, the theory
is epistemologically interpretive and to some extent critical. An “interpretive theory” assumes
that "people create and associate their own subjective and intersubjective meanings as they
interact with the world around them” (Orlikowski and Baroudi 1991, p. 5) and a “critical”
theory aims “to critique the status quo, through the exposure o f what are believed to be deep-
seated. structural contradictions within social systems ...” (p. 5-6). DIT offers an
understanding o f an information system as a social institution that is an “intersubjective” rather
than purely “subjective” or “objective” entity and also the theory opens a door to investigate
not only Giddens' structures o f significance and legitimation but also domination.
In this similar vein the theory is “realistic” in that it presupposes the pre-existence of
institutions or information systems in understanding agency and the theory tends to be
explanatory rather than descriptive. The ontological basis o f the theory is that agents are
hierarchically located and in line with this the theory emphasizes the variability of institutions
and agencies. Also the theory is “dual” in the sense that it assumes the duality o f (and with)
institutions and human actors using such concepts as “duality within institutions”, “duality
within agency”, and “duality o f preexisting institutions”.
Also, the theory would be considered “multi-level” in the sense that it assumes non-
separability o f local and global and aims specifically for multiple level analysis of social reality
and IS phenomenon. The theory itself is “retroductive” rather than either “grounded” or
“deductive” in that it can be used as an initial guide to design and data collection and further as
a meta-framework for data analysis. Finally, the theory is “institutional” in that it opposes
purely individualistic understandings and approaches to IS phenomenon and research
respectively: Organizations (and individuals) and information systems are situated in
275
institutional contexts and hence many topics in IS research such as IS design, implementation,
use, and technology innovation need to be studied and understood within institutional contexts.
Finally the theory advances four major propositions which can be derived from
Chapters IV through VII.
1. Information systems, like social institutions, should be understood in terms of both
material and virtual dimensions. Furthermore, because of this, information
technology should be conceived as part o f information systems. As an institution,
an information system is simultaneously stable and changing, simultaneously local
and global, and simultaneously pervasive and idiosyncratic. Thus, the paradoxical
findings from different cases of IT deployment are quite understandable. It is also
proposed that (1) the congruence of the schemas embedded on the IT and the
schemas (the virtual dimension) of the IS is important in the development of
information systems and (2) it relates to effectiveness and hence positively
contributes the outcome of the IT deployment (Chapter IV).
2. “The duality o f technology" that depicts as IT as macro structures and human
actors or organizations as micro agencies cannot provide an accurate picture o f the
relationship between IT and organizations. DIT proposes that there is the
variability in o f both IT and agencies in that: both IT and agencies can operate at
multiple levels. Then, the interplay between IT and agencies becomes much more
complex and dynamic than what extant structurational models suggest.
Conceptualizing IT as social institutions implies that it is agency-specific: IT may
both enable and constrain human action differently. Actors have different agentic
power to influence IT. Higher rules and resources are more stable and agencies at
higher levels are more influential on the overall picture o f IT. Finally, the theory
276
posits the existence of different types of agencies such as individual, collective and
proxy agency (Chapter V).
3. DIT posits that information systems are precursors o f human action. The theory
incorporates both the notion o f dualism and the notion of duality33. Information
systems and human action are conceived as two different entities and can be
understood separately for analytical purposes (analytic dualism). The development
of a new information system is enabled and constrained by preexisting information
systems: they are a path as well as providing a repertoire for the development of
new institutions (duality). The development o f a new information system occurs
through the replication of old and spatially distant ones. A new information system
emerges as well as is designed: no IT-related change rarely satisfies the prior
intentions of those who initiate and such change cannot be controlled precisely
(Chapter VI).
4. Technology adaptation of large-scale information systems can be understood as a
process of institutionalization which is nondeterministic in nature. Unlike extant
understandings o f institutionalization in the IS field (e.g., Orlikowski 1992; Kling
and lacono 1989; Hanseth and Monteiro 1998) DIT asserts that the process of
institutionalization (or technology adaptation) is rather unpredictable, problematic
and dynamic rather than pre-determined, linear and stable (Chapter VII).
33 This notion acknowledges a temporal division between structural preconditions and the
moment o f agency (Archer 1995). According to Stones (2001), the notion of analytic dualism
and the notion of duality (Giddens 1984) are comparable with one another, “although they do
have implications for each other that have not been fully drawn out (p. 179). A reader should
be noted that the notion o f dualism here differs from the traditional notion of dualism that
restrains from acknowledging the close, hermeneutically informed, interlinking of structure and
agency. This notion of dualism is rejected by both Giddens and others in institutional theory.
277
10.3 Summary of the Theory and the Case
In this study extant ways o f conceptualizing information systems were presented and
their limitations for understanding large-scale information systems were discussed. The study
has proposed an alternative conceptualization of large-scale information systems as social
institutions. The study developed two concepts, “duality within information systems” and
“duality of schemas and resources of information systems”. The concept of duality within
information systems refers to the fact that information systems have a dual character in that
they are composed simultaneously of schemas and IT artifacts. The concept of duality of
schemas and resources of information systems refers to the assertion that schemas are the
effects of the IT artifacts while at the same moment IT artifacts are the effects of schemas.
Another concept, “spirit,” has been proposed as an important tool for depicting the
philosoph/es and motives embedded in information systems. This new conceptualization of
information systems argues that previous conceptualizations of IS as either material artifacts or
social facts is as a false dichotomy. Following these new concepts, the study proposed six
axioms concerning information systems which can serve as tools for understanding the
dynamic phenomena in the development, implementation and use of large-scale information
systems. The FAMIS case was analyzed using this framework, particularly the three concepts
“duality within information systems,” "duality of schemas and resources,” and "spirit”. First of
all, case analysis suggested that FAMIS cannot be constructed solely as a technological
artifact, but should be understood and explained in both virtual and material dimensions as a
social institution. We found that much of what makes FAMIS an effective system is composed
o f formal rules and schemas rather than just hardware and software. In fact, case analysis
seemed to reveal that there are more complex interplays among the IT artifact, formal rules,
and the schemas o f FAMIS, possibly suggesting that there is a duality of involving the IT
278
artifact, formal rules and schemas rather than the simpler duality of schemas and resources
originally posited by in DIT. Thus. FAMIS may be better understood in terms o f a triadic
reciprocal interplay. In terms o f DIT. we initially understood FAMIS as illustrated in Figure
25.
S c h e m a s of R e s o u r c e s of
FAMIS F A M IS
Figure 25. Duality of schemas and resources o f FAMIS
However, the triadic reciprocal interplay may be represented as following (Figure 26):
IT Artifacts
Formal R ules S ch em as
Figure 26. Triadic reciprocal interplay o f FAMIS
279
In the same vein, case analysis suggested that the spirit o f FAMIS should be defined as
the philosophies and motive5 rather than the philosophy and motive of the information system.
The spirit o f FAMIS was found as to be multiple and possibly contradictory. Even though the
spirit of FAMIS might encompass (and/or function as) Giddens’s structures o f signification,
legitimation and domination (DeSanctis and Poole 1994) as instantiated in FAMIS, these
structures were considered only "potential” structures and in fact, different actors tended to
draw on different aspects o f structure based on their interpretation of FAMIS's spirit during
FAMIS adoption and implementation and their interpretation of the spirit. In its current
version, DIT has not dealt with this interesting aspect o f spirit.
Next, DIT was applied to the interplay between IT and organizations. It was argued
that the extant “IT enables/constrains action" position tends to overgeneralize IT and actors
respectively: It does not consider the variability o f IT (social structures) and actors (subjects).
A multi-level model o f duality o f IT was proposed. The variability of IT referred to three
institutional realms - governance, production and use — in an IT and the variability o f agency
distinguished three hierarchical levels - macro, meso and micro —of agency in terms o f actors’
roles, responsibility and practices in the relationship with the IT. This model emerged largely
during data collection and analysis o f the FAMIS case.
It is our belief that the multi-level model is much more complex and dynamic than the
extant structurational model and can provide a better account for the dynamic interplay
between IT and organizations. Consistent with our projection, FAMIS included nested rules
and resources that interacted with each other. Their interplay extended across a large number o f
actors who were hierarchically located in a power-asymmetric social world system that was
very dynamic and complex. This is partly because there was a dynamic process o f structuration
located in the interplay across and within levels (Figure 27). This is what the current
280
structurational model has been missing since they focus structuration on only one level: the
interplay between IT as macro structure and organizations as micro actors.
Case analysis suggested that the interplays o f rules and resources of IT between levels
were continuous and dynamic (Arrow a in Figure 28). Also the case suggested that there were
active interplays of agencies in different hierarchical levels were active (Arrow b in Figure 28).
These two aspects were not addressed at an adequate level in the multi-level model even
though in the model structuration is located in the interplay across and within levels.
Macro IT Macro agency
Meso IT Meso agency
Micro IT Micro agency
Figure 27. Structuration located in the interplay across and within levels
281
Macro IT Macro a g e n c y
a b
Meso IT Meso a g e n c y
Micro IT
▼ ▼
Micro a g e n c y
Figure 28. Structuration Located in the Interplay Between Levels of Both IT and Agency
It appears that the concept o f duality o f preexisting information systems in DIT
accurately explains what usually happens in designing a new information system. Case analysis
indicated that the installed base o f preexisting information systems had emerged as powerful
material and virtual surfaces in the design o f FAMIS. This became a powerful source of
institutional drift in FAMIS development and implementation. Because of this, the initial HNM
view by the founders of FAMIS and the MIS project team drifted to the PD view, which led
implementers to build an “average" system rather than an enterprise system. Case analysis
suggested that transposition and patching up were actually used as important tactics in FAMIS
development. The FAMIS case also illustrates the axiom o f DIT that “IS design rarely fully
satisfies the intentions of those who initiate it".
What was lacking in the design o f FAMIS was the strategy of “anticipated institutions”
which has teleological elements and focuses on path-finding or path creation in the design of
new ISs. Case analysis suggested that there was lack o f shared expectations o f the plausible
institutional change among planners and users. Anticipated institutions should be formed at the
early phase o f IS design. This was difficult in the FAMIS case due to for two reasons: the
282
HNM view initially advocated by the founders o f FAMIS and later the loss o f “sponsors” or
“promoters led to a shift in this view.” This result seems to suggest that any IS design should
consider the utilization of transposition and patching up. but also that it is important for planner
and designers to develop a sense o f “anticipated institutions” with users, considering the short
term and long-term consequences o f new ISs on individuals and organizations. The shared
expectations o f plausible institutional change are people’s shared belief in their collective
power to produce desired results and avoid disadvantages. This can enable double-loop
learning to occur at both individual and organizational level.
It was argued that technology adaptation in the case o f large-scale information systems
cannot be properly understood within extant approaches such as diffusion and infusion,
structuration, and actor network theory. Instead technology adaptation can be best explained
through DIT as a dynamic process o f institutionalization. The study proposed a complex three-
phase model o f DIT composed of institutional formation, institutional development and
institutional decay. It was argued that DIT makes some advances over extant approaches in a
number o f aspects. DIT explicitly takes the formation o f a new technology into account in
explaining technology adaptation in terms o f the institutional formation phase. This phase was
composed of three stages - ideals, discourses and techniques o f control —and focused on the
period prior to the actual implementation o f the technology in organization. The theory posited
that the phase of institutional formation was very influential on succeeding phases in the
process o f technology adaptation. We suggested that users and/or other non-planners and
designers should be included in the course o f formulating ideals and discourses and that this is
likely to result in desired results in technology adaptation. The theory views the phase of
institutional development as dynamic also and incorporates several aspects of
institutionalization (e.g.. temporal and spatial dimensions of institutions, decoupling,
283
transitions of three institutions over time, and three mechanisms o f institutional change) into
the process o f structuration. The third phase, institutional decay, suggests that the process o f
technology adaptation is always an unfinished one, and that the system must constantly work to
maintain its integrity. In this phase we consider three general types o f pressures - functional,
social and political - toward deinstitutionalization o f technology adaptation.
The FAMIS case demonstrated that a dynamic theory is required for understanding
technology adaptation in the case of large-scale information systems. The theory needs to be
useful for exploring the sources of both stability and change and focuses on both local,
contingent aspects o f sociotechnical change and broader environment or institutions in
technology adaptation. Case analysis suggested that the institutional formation of FAMIS
started in the early 1980s at the system level. In the mid 1980s ideals o f FAMIS using
vocabularies o f efficiency, automated office, productivity and effectiveness were formed at the
system level and these ideals o f FAMIS became formal discourse when the Board of Regents
directives were formally established in 1987. While the IT artifact or “techniques o f control” o f
FAMIS appeared in and after 1990, the ideals and particularly discourses had significant
impacts on the technology adaptation o f FAMIS in later stages. Many rules formulated for
FAMIS were already informally established and enforced. Case analysis suggested that
including diverse groups o f actors at these early stages is important since it potentially solves
the problem of the incongruence o f technological frames among different actors.
Case analysis suggested that the institutional development o f FAMIS was more
dynamic than what the extant approaches seem to suggest and actually illustrated several
aspects o f institutionalization which were mentioned previously. It should be noted that the
“transition o f institutions” from regulative to normative to cognitive was not as clear or clean-
cut as DIT initially suggested. However, a general pattern in the transition o f FAMIS from
284
regulative to normative to cognitive could be observed. DIT initially considered three general
pressures for deinstitutionalization o f technology adaptation. It turned out that this projection
needs some revision and requires the consideration of the other opposing forces for
institutional inertia of FAMIS. Also case analysis suggested that unlike the initial projection o f
DIT these three types of pressures for institutional decay had existed at all points during the
history o f FAMIS rather than only the third phase, and they could have lead to early
deinstitutionalization of FAMIS. In the case of large-scale information systems, these opposing
forces can come from diverse sources at the macro-societal innovation level including
government authorities, professional and industry associations, etc. (King et al. 1994) as well
as at the micro-local level. As suggested by the multi-level model in Chapter V, these pressures
can come from any level of agency. Thus DIT needs to incorporate the interplay between two
opposing forces - three kinds of entropy and inertial pressures - into all three phases of
technology adaptation. Dialectical theory (Van de Ven and Poole 1995) or logic of opposition
(Robey and Boudreau 1999) may be an avenue for this task.
10.4 Contributions
Through addressing the four specific areas in IS research, this dissertation attempts to
make three types o f contributions. First, the dissertation attempts to add to our knowledge of
large-scale information systems like ERP and KMS through providing critiques on extant
approaches and understandings o f such systems. Although organizations began to adopt
enterprise systems (ES) in the 1980s (Hayman 2000), academic interest in them has just gained
momentum and there is relatively little research on large-scale information systems or
enterprise systems (e.g., Robey et al. 2002; Markus 2000).
For example, Dong, Neufeld and Higgins’s (2002) literature review of forty four ES
articles in academic IS journals during the period of 1998-2002 indicates that most studies are
285
descriptive, and single-shot in design. No longitudinal studies were found. Moreover, most
current ES studies are positivist and descriptive; there is only one interpretive study and one
critical study so far. Dong et al (2002) claim that while previous ES studies have provided
interesting findings, only limited aspects o f enterprise systems have been explored, and our
understanding o f enterprise systems is till preliminary. Based on the literature review the
authors note, “what we have studied focuses primarily on the iceberg above the sea, ignoring
what is going on under the w ater’(p- 862).34 This becomes a serious issue today when the
deployment o f large-scale information systems such as ERP, KMS, CRM, and
interorganizational systems has become a major trend in almost every industry including
government, information technology, communications, financial services, utilities, healthcare,
manufacturing, higher education, sales, and travel. This dissertation has attempted to respond
to the immediate need for theoretical frameworks for large-scale information systems by
developing Dynamic Institutional Theory using an interpretive case study o f FAMIS and
investigating four important aspects of large-scale IS: conceptualization, design,
implementation, and use o f large-scale information systems.
Second, the dissertation attempts to contribute also to theory-building within the IS
field through developing a meta- theoretical framework which considers both local, contingent
aspects of sociotechnical change and the dynamics in broader social structures at the same
34 It should be noted that there are several other studies of large-scale information systems as
cited in the dissertation. As noted earlier in Chapter III and IV most o f these studies have used
Actor Network Theory as the framework for analyzing case data and they have tended to focus
on how large-scale information systems come to be developed by paying little attention to how
they come to be adapted and used. It appears that Dong et al (2002) focused on the articles on
ERP in their literature review. In fact, our understanding o f large-scale information systems
and that of the authors are different in that our definition o f large-scale information systems is
much broader. It is our belief that our broader definition including KMS, the Internet, Web-
based information systems, Interorganizational systems, CRM, ERP and other standardized
286
time. There seems to be consensus that little MIS research had been focused on the
development of theory native to IS. Rather the MIS field has borrowed heavily from the
theories of other disciplines (e.g., Alavi et al 1989; Banville and Landry 1989; Swanson and
Ramiller 1993; Pare and Elam 1997; Baskerville and Myers 2002). The conventional wisdom
amongst information systems (IS) researchers is that IS is an applied discipline drawing upon
other, more fundamental, reference disciplines (Baskerville and Myers 2002).
As pointed out by Baskerville and Myers (2002) a re-thinking is suggested of the idea
of reference disciplines for IS. This dissertation has been responding to the need for theories in
the IS field and joining the effort to make IS as a reference discipline in its own right.
Importantly, DIT posited that the perspectives of information technology and information
systems offer two different constructions o f social reality. Academic disciplines like computer
science are more related to information technology that is the resource o f information systems,
but to study information systems in the IS field is to study both the resources and the schemas
within which these technologies are designed, implemented, and used. This makes the IS field
different from other IT-related academic fields.
Finally, the dissertation attempts to contribute to the tenets o f institutional theory by
developing Dynamic Institutional Theory (DIT), a formulation that adds to our knowledge of
social institutions and the process o f institutionalization. As Scott (2001) noted, early theorists
tended to assume that institutional frameworks were monolithic and unified and that
institutional forces were external to the organizational systems affected and determined the
outcomes. Dynamic Institutional Theory is the result of synthesizing extant literatures in
institutional theory ranging from political science to sociology and organizational analysis and
technologies and classification systems is shared by many IS researchers who have studied the
phenomenon of large-scale information systems.
287
learning from the FAMIS case and other secondary case studies o f large-scale information
systems. The theory recognizes the existence of multifarious institutions and different kinds o f
agencies, and stresses the nondeterminant, interactive nature o f institutional processes by
taking into account newly recognized aspects of institutions and institutionalization such as
decoupling, institutional decay, and patching up.
10.5 Limitations
The main limitations o f this study may stem from the research method and design used
in the dissertation. First of all, it should be noted that no research strategy is superior to all
others (Benbasat et al 1987), and case study research is no exception. Case research was
considered the most appropriate research strategy for this dissertation, considering that theory-
building was the central project o f the dissertation. However, the research strategy itself has
some limitations that should be acknowledged (Yin 1994).
One limitation is with two generic weaknesses o f theory building from cases pointed
out by (Eisenhardt 1989). Eisenhardt noted, “a hallmark o f good theory is parsimony, but given
the typically staggering volume o f rich data, there is a temptation to build theory which tries to
capture everything. The result can be theory which is very rich in detail, but lacks the
simplicity o f overall perspective” (p. 547). Another weakness is that building theory from cases
may result in narrow and idiosyncratic theory. “Case study theory building is a bottom-up
approach such that the specifics of data produce the generalizations o f theory. The risks are that
the theory describes a very idiosyncratic phenomenon or that the theorist is unable to raise the
level of generality o f the theory” (p. 547).35 These weaknesses have been addressed in the
35 In our opinion these weaknesses come from “the process o f inducing theory using case
studies” (p. Eisenhardt 1989, p. 532). The author’s understanding o f “theory building” from
case studies follows a grounded theory (Strauss and Corbin) tradition which utilizes induction
(or “theory from data”).
288
dissertation by taking an iterative process from theory to data and vice versa and a balanced
approach between bottom-up and top-down. It is our belief that our retroductive approach can
handle the problem in large part.
Finally, “how can you generalize from a single case?” is a frequently heard question
(Yin 1994). Consider the following statements: “No theory concerning MIS would be
generalizable on the basis o f a single case study, since the single case study would have tested
the theory against the empirical circumstances o f just a single setting” (Lee 1989, p. 41).
Similarly Benbasat et al (1987) pointed out that a single case may also be used to test the
boundaries o f well-formed theory and multiple-case designs are desirable when the intent of
the research is description, theory building, or theory testing.36 However, it should be noted
that “case studies, like experiments, are generalizable to theoretical propositions and not to
populations or universes" (Yin 1994, p. 10). O f course, multiple cases yield more general
research results. The dissertation has addressed this concern to some extent by incorporating
observations from several secondary cases of large-scale information systems (e.g., Bloomfield
et al. 1992; Bloomfield et al. 1992; Bloomfield and Vurdubakis 1994; Jones 1994; Bloomfield
1995; Brown 1995; Bloomfield and Vurdubakis 1997; Bloomfield 1997; Doolin 1999a, 1999b,
1999c, 2001a, 2001b; Lowe and Doolin 1999; Hanseth and Braa 1998, 2000; Monteiro and
Hepso 2000; Cordelia and Simon 2000). When we compare our case data with these published
articles in academic journals and also reports published in the trade press, we find consistency
with our findings. We agree with Eisenhardt (1989) that “perhaps “grand” theory requires
multiple studies—an accumulation o f both theory-building and the theory-testing empirical
3t Dyer and Wilkins (1991) argue against the popular belief that “the more cases a researcher
studies, the better for generating theory”. (While not ignoring the value o f multiple case studies
for theory building) Instead they argue that the careful study of a single case can lead
289
studies” (p. 547). Future case studies o f large-scale information systems will be used to
strengthen and/or revise DIT by following a ‘replication” logic.
The weakness of a single case study is also complemented by certain strengths of the
study. Dong et al (2002) found that most studies o f large-scale information systems were
descriptive, single-snapshot in research design. In fact this is common in the IS field
(Orlikowski and Baroudi 1991 ).37 Many studies are based on data collection and analysis at the
early stage of system development or implementation or after the failure of system. These
studies tend to take a short time frame in explaining the phenomenon o f IS design,
implementation, and use. The consequence o f a new IS development needs to be studied both
in the short and long term since the effects could be often different. Then extant studies are less
capable of providing the accurate picture o f information systems. For example, what if Barley
(1986) went back to the case again two years after his study? Would he find the same results?
What if this researcher had studied FAMIS in 1990 or 1993? Could he see the same insights
and complexity of the information system described in this dissertation? This dissertation is
historical research on a mature enterprise system which has been in operation for more than a
decade. Thus, the study can inform not only the design o f enterprise systems but also sheds
some light on the adoption, implementation and use of such systems in multiple organizations.
researchers to see new theoretical relationships and question old ones (p. 614). They argue that
a “deep” case study may be better than multiple “surface” case studies.
J7 Orlikowski and Baroudi’s (1991) survey o f 155 IS research articles published from 1983 to
1988 illustrates that static, one-shot, cross-sectional studies are clearly the predominant from of
research in IS. These studies account for 90.3% of the articles in the sample.
290
10.6 Directions for Future Research
In Chapter III the study offered a general overview o f critiques on the structurational
model and the socio-technical model and proposed institutional theory as a way forward. The
development of Dynamic Institutional Theory illustrates one way how institutional theory can
serve as a way forward from the two approaches in ensemble view o f information systems.
However, in this dissertation the theory (DIT) has been applied to only four research areas -
conceptualization, the relationship between IS and organizations, design, and technology
adaptation -- in the IS field.
In future research, the theory needs to be applied to other areas of IS research. Among
others IT innovation and IT adoption are two promising areas on which Dynamic Institutional
Theory can offer new insights. As noted earlier in Chapter III, a growing number of studies
have adopted the tenets of institutional theory in the two areas particularly. Unfortunately,
these studies understand institutions and the process of institutionalization from the viewpoints
o f early institutional theorists, and thus tend to provide a static view of the process o f IT
innovation and IT adoption. We project that IT innovation and IT adoption are much more
dynamic than what they seem to suggest.
In Chapter IV the study coined two concepts -- duality within institutions and duality
of schemas and resources - and explained the stability and change of large-scale information
systems in terms of the two concepts. One aspect that should be investigated in future research
is “the relationship of duality o f schemas for duality within schemas”. Currently in DIT the two
concepts are rather explained in separation than in combination.
In future research Dynamic Institutional Theory should be applied to the development,
implementation and use o f other types o f large-scale information systems like KMS and web-
based information systems. These emerging information systems have tended to be understood
291
and discussed as information technologies. We believe that higher failure rate o f these types of
information systems is largely due to the prevailing “discrete-entity” view o f such information
systems. It has been already recognized that knowledge management systems have failed
mainly because o f technologists’ lack of understanding o f the situated work practices and
human elements o f the systems’ user communities (Schultze and Boland, 2000), KMS often
clash with corporate culture, pay insufficient attention to people management practice (Swan,
Newell and Robertson 2000), organizational politics and other organizational issues (Alavi and
Leidner, 2001). DIT posits that KMS should be understood as social institutions that have both
virtual (schemas) and material (resources) elements. Authors (e.g., Bowker 1997; Schultze and
Leidner 2002; Brown and Duguid, 2000; Boland and Tenkasi, 1995; Schultz and Boland, 2000;
Swan et al. 2000; Alavi and Leidner, 2001; Braa and Rolland, 2000; Gailers, Newell, Huang
and Pan 2002) in KM research have already recognized the virtual elements (schemas) o f KMS
as equally important as the actual elements (resources) o f such systems.
One interesting research direction for the future research is the topic of centralization
versus, decentralization. The debate between centralization vs. decentralization has been long
in the IS field (King 1983; Simon 1985; Bloomfield and Coombs 1992; von Simson 1990;
George and King 1991) as well as the field o f political science (e.g., Ostrom 1976). Dynamic
Institutional Theory views information systems as social institutions, and suggests that
dichotomous and deterministic approaches to this topic cannot provide any adequate level of
explanations about what is truly happening in terms o f structural changes after the deployment
o f new IS. The case o f FAMIS seems to offer a good deal o f data to revisit this debate using
DIT. The projection is that information systems as social institutions lead to both centralization
and decentralization at the same time. Centralization is the outcome of decentralization while
decentralization is the outcome o f centralization.
292
Throughout the dissertation, the study emphasized the dual nature of institution and
institutionalization. Unlike early theorists, Dynamic Institutional Theory offers a dynamic view
of institutions and institutionalization as both stability and change. It is our understanding that
the development and implementation o f any information systems contain two opposing forces.
For example, in Chapter VII, we discussed the interplay between two opposing pressures -
three kinds o f entropy and inertial pressures - in the technology adaptation. This aspect should
be further developed into a theoretical framework in future research. A potential source for this
theoretical framework is dialectical theory (Van de Ven and Poole 1995). However, unlike
extant understanding of dialectical theory as the a theory o f “change”, (as noted earlier in
Chapter IX) the dialectic of two opposing forces in the development and implementation o f IS
seem to be the source of stability also. This aspect of a dialectic process has not been the
subject o f much research that we are aware of.
In Chapters IV through IX, information systems were conceptualized as social
institutions which have dual dimensions: duality of institutions. This reconceptualization of
information systems can offers an alternative theoretical framework to analyze IS failure. There
have been two prevailing approaches to IS failure: one focuses on the material dimension of
information system and the other the virtual dimension of that. The fist tends to explain IS
failure as failure o f “system integration” (Lockwood 1964) or failure of performing their
function (Offe 1996) while the other as failure o f “social integration” or failure of socialization
and preference formation. Both approaches are dichotomous and do not provide an adequate
answer to IS failure. Instead, Dynamic Institutional Theory seems to suggest that both virtual
and material dimensions should be considered for the analysis o f IS failure. Then, IS failure
can be more accurately explained through both social and system integration. Consider the
following statement in the work of Bloomfield, Coombs, Cooper and Rea (1992).
293
A computerized information system that includes both hardware and software as well
as the personnel whose knowledge and skills are developed to maintain it in operation
... The implication is that for a RM [Resource Management] project [in UK National
Hospital Service] to get off the ground the be sustained requires a network to hold
together-including both the human and nonhuman elements-and if one or more
elements break away or fail to cooperate the whole may come under threat or even fall
apart. For example, if doctors decide to ignore RM. then a network can hardly be built.
Similarly, if a central database for RM, or the hardware on which it runs, fails to
produce consistent results then again the network o f which it is part-and-parcel may
being to dissolve as people become skeptical or lose faith in the system. In other
words, the balance in a network is dynamic and in the limit, always precarious (p. 202)
In Chapters V and IX different aspects of agency have been discussed in the interplay
between IT and organizations. One of them is the concept o f “collective agency”. Based on the
concept the study presented the concept of “collective efficacy” (Bandura 2001)— defined as
shared beliefs of collective agency. This concept needs to be further developed in future
research. In IS research authors (e.g., Compeau, Higgins and Huff 1999; Compeau and Higgins
1995) have used Bandura’ concept of self-efficacy—defined as beliefs about one’s ability to
perform a specific behavior—and demonstrated a strong link between self-efficacy and
individual reactions to computing technology, both in terms o f adoption and use of computers.
Unlike most current perspectives (Technology Acceptance Model, Diffusion of Innovations,
and Theory of Planned Behavior) that “view the causal relationships as essentially
unidirectional, with the environment influencing cognitive beliefs, which influence attitudes
and behaviors” (Compeau et al. 1999), Bandura's Social Cognitive Theory rejects dualisms
between environments (e.g., technology) and human cognitive perceptions (e.g., self-efficacy).
So far, extant studies focused on the relationship between personal self-efficacy and individual
adoption and use of IT.
These studies provide valuable insights of individual-level IT adoption and use, but
have some limitations to when applied to the adoption and use of large-scale information
systems. One interesting aspect of large-scale information systems is their scale: they are
.294
designed to support multiple communities of practice and thus are implemented at multiple
sites. To understand the adoption and use of large-scale IS like ERP and KMS, we should study
the relationship between collective efficacy and the adoption and use of technology. It is our
belief that the concept of collective efficacy can be used to study how shard beliefs of
collective agency shape and are shaped by IT adoption and use.
In the context o f IS design, DIT posited that the development of IS is actually the
development o f institutions rather than o f software or technologies. Our study suggested that it
is important ( I) to consider the design o f both virtual and material dimensions o f information
systems and (2) to utilize and balance between exploitation and exploration. As for the first
point, future research should discuss some details o f how two dimensions of information
systems can be designed together. As we know, there are several different IS development
methodologies and techniques found in academic journals. Traditionally, most IS development
methodologies focused on the material dimension o f information systems. For the last two
decades, there have been some advances in this area, observing the emergence of
sociotechnical approach and soft systems methodology. These relatively new methodologies
are valuable but tend to focus on the virtual dimension o f information systems. Future research
should focus on the development of an alternative IS development methodology which centers
on both dimensions and views IS development as “institutional development”. This alternative
methodology needs to be flexible and practical enough so it can be actually used by IS planners
and designers in practice. As for the second point, we discussed IS design as learning—
learning from the past (exploitation) and the future (exploration)-- and proposed three
alternative approaches (transposition, patching up and anticipated institution) to the designing
o f new information systems. As noted briefly in Chapter V there are two main polarized
perspectives on IS design: rationalistic and emergent or social constructionist. The framework
295
for “IS design as learning" as a middle-position needs to be developed in future research.
Those three alternative approaches should be further developed for the framework in future
research.
Finally, further data collection should be conducted to strengthen and/or revise the
institutional frameworks developed in the dissertation. As noted earlier, data collection from
FAMIS has no ending date and we will attempt to observe the FAMIS system for next three to
five years and document any significant events and changes. This will add a longitudinal case
study of a large-scale information system to the current historical study; this can provide
valuable insights to the role of preexisting information systems in the design o f a new IS, the
institutionalization o f IS, and other issues. Also we will observe a current ERP project going on
at TAMU and see whether a similar cycle o f FAMIS will actually occur in this project. It
would be interesting to see how this ERP project and the replacement o f SIMS will impact on
the FAMIS project. In addition it may be interesting to get some background on why the state
was so committed to computerization since early 1980s and how the current E-govemment
initiative in the state o f Texas shapes and is shaped by FAMIS and state agencies including
TAMUS.
296
REFERENCES
Agarwal, R., Ratan, A., and Ghosh, B. "Our Experience and Learning in ERP Implementation,"
Software Engineering Notes (25:2) 2000, pp 31-34.
Akrich, M. "The De-scription o f Technical Change," in Shaping Technology/Building Society,

W. Bijker and J. Law (eds.), MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1992, pp. 204-224.
Akrich, M., and Latour, B. "A Summary of a Convenient Vocabulary for the Semiotics of
Human and Nonhuman Assemblies," in Shaping Technology/Building Society, W. Bijker and J.
Law (eds.), MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1992, pp. 150-175.
Alam, M., Northcott, D., and Lowe, T. "Accountability Systems and Systems o f
Accountability: Accounting in New Zealand Health Sector Reform," Accounting, Auditing and
Accountability Journal (10:5) 1997, pp 665-683.
Alavi, M., Carlson. P., and Brooke, G. "The Ecology o f MIS Research: A 20 Year Status
Review," Tenth International Conference on Information Systems, Boston, MA, 1989, pp. 363-
376.
Allen, J.P. "The Selective Adoption o f Information Systems: Assessing Practicality,

Trustworthiness, and Fairness," in Facilitating Technology Transfer through Partnership:
Learning from Practice and Research, T. McMaster, E. Mumford, E.B. Swanson, B. Warboys
and D. Wastell (eds.), Chapman and Hall, London, 1997, pp. 145-160.
Alter, S., Ein-Dor, P., Markus, L., Scott, J.E., and Vessey, I. "Does the Trend Toward E-
Business Call for Changes in the Fundamental Concepts of Information Systems,"
Communciations o f the AIS (5) 2001, pp. 1-45.
Alvarez, R. ""It Was a Great System" Face-work and the Discursive Construction o f
Technology during Information Systems Development," Information Technology & People
(14:4) 2001, pp 385-405.
Alvarez, R. "The Myth o f Integration: A Case Study o f an ERP Implementation," in Enterprise

Resource Planning Global Opportunities and Challenges, L. Hossain, J.D. Patrick and M.A.
Rashid (eds.), Idea Group Publishing, London, UK, 2002, pp. 105-129.
Archer, M.S. "Human Agency and Social Structure: a Critique of Giddens'," in: Anthony
Giddens: Consensus and Controversy, J. Clark, M. C. and S. Modgil (eds.), Falmer Press,
Basingstoke, UK, 1990, pp. 49-67.
Archer, M.S. Realist Social Theory: The Morphogenetic Approach Cambridge University
Press, Cambridge, UK, 1995.
Argyris, C., and Schon, D.A. Organizational Learning II, Theory Method and Practice
Addision-Wesley Publishing Company, New York, 1996, p. 305.
297
Arslan, M. "The Work Ethic Values of Protestant British, Catholic Irish and Muslim Turkish
Managers," Journal o f Business Ethics (4:2) 2001, pp 321-339.
Aurthur, W.B. "Competing Technologies, Increasing Returns, and Lock-in by Historical

Events," The Economic Journal (99) 1989, pp 116-131.
Avgerou, C. "IT and Organizational Change: An Institutional Perspective," Information

Technology & People ( 13:4) 2000, pp 234-262.
Avgerou, C. Information Systems and Global Diversity, Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK,
2002 .
Avison, D.E., Wood-Harper, A.T., Vidgen, R., and Wood, J.R.G. "A Further Investigation into
Information Systems Development: The Evolution o f Multiview2," Information Technology &
People (11:2) 1998, pp 124-139.
Bancroft, N. Implementing SAP/R3: How to Introduce a Large System into A Large

Organization Prentice Hall, London, UK, 1996.
Bancroft, N.H., Seip, H., and Sprengel, A. Implementing SAP R/3: How to Introduce a Large
System into a Large Organization, Manning, Greenwich, UK, 1998.
Bandura, A. "Social Cognitive Theory: An Agentic Perspective," Annual Review o f Psychology

(52) 2001, pp 1-26.
Banville, C., and Landry, M. "Can the Field o f MIS Be Disciplined?," Communications o f the
ACM (32:1) 1989, pp 48-61.
Barley, S. "Technology as an Occasion for Structuring: Evidence from Observations of CT

Scanners and the Social Order o f Radiology Departments," Administrative Science Quarterly
(31) 1986, pp 78-108.
Barley, S. "Images o f Imaging: Notes on Doing Longitudinal Field Work," Organization

Science (1) 1990, pp 220-247.
Barley, S.R., and Tolbert, P.S. "Institutionalization and Structuration: Studying the Links
between Action and Institution," Organization Studies (18:1) 1997, pp 93-117.
Baskerville, R.L., and Myers, M.D. "Information Systems as a Reference Discipline," MIS
Quarterly (26:1) 2002.
Baskerville, R., Stage, J., and DeGross, J.I. Organizational and Social Perspectives on
Information Technology, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston, 2000.
Beckert, J. "Agency, Entrepreneurs, and Institutional Change. The Role o f Strategic Choice
and Institutionalized Practices in Organizations," Organization Studies (20:5) 1999, pp 777-
799.
298
Benbasat, I., Goldstein, D.K., and Mead, M. "The Case Research Strategy in Studies of
Information Systems," MIS Quarterly (11:3) 1987, pp 369-388.
Berg, M. "The Politics o f Technology: On Bringing Social Theory into Technological Design,"
Science, Technology & Human Values (23:4) 1998, pp 456-490.
Berger, P.L., and Luchmann, T. The Social Construction o f Reality, Doubleday & Company,
Inc., New York, NY, 1967.
Beynon-Davies, P. "Human Error and Information Systems Failure: The Case o f the London
Ambulance Service Computer-Aided Despatch System Project," Interacting with Computers
(11) 1999, pp 699-720.
Bhaskar, R. The Possibility o f Naturalism: A Philosophic Critique o f the Contemporary Human

Sciences, Harvester, Brighton, 1979.
Bijker, W. "Sustainable Policy? A Public Devate about Nature Development in the

Netherlands," New Paradigms and Environmental Sciences, 2001, pp. 1-15.
Bijker, W., Hughes, J., and Pinch, T. (eds.) The Social Construction o f Technological Systems.
The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1987.
Bijker, W.E. "The Social Construction o f Fluorescent Lighting, or How an Aircraft Was
Invented in Its Diffusion Stage," in Shaping Technology/Building Society: Studies in
Sociotechnical Change, W.E. Bijker and J. Law (eds.), MIT Press, Cambridge. MA, 1994, pp.
75-102.
Bijker, W., and Law, J. (eds.) Shaping Technology/Building Society: Studies in Sociotechnical
Change. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1992.
Bikson, T.K. "Groupware at the World Bank," in Groupware and Teamwork, C. Ciborra (ed.),
John Wiley & Sons Ltd., Oxford, UK, 1996, pp. 1-26.
Blackler, F. "Formative Contexts and Activity Systems: Postmodern Approaches to the

Management of Change," in Rethinking Organization: New Directions in Organization Theory
and Analysis, M. Reed and J. Hughes (eds.), Sage Publications, London, UK, 1992.
Bloomfield, B.P. "Power, Machines and Social Relations: Delegating to Information

Technology in the National Health Service," Organization (2:3/4) 1995, pp 489-518.
Bloomfield, B.P., and Best, A. "Management Consultants: Systems Development, Power and
the Translation of Problems," The Sociological Review, 1992, pp 533-560.
Bloomfield, B.P., Coombs, R., Cooper, D.J., and Rea, D. "Machines and Manoeuvers:
Responsibility Accounting and the Construction o f Hospital Information Systems,"
Accounting, Management & Information Technology (2:4) 1992, pp 197-219.
299
Bloomfield, B.P., Coombs, R., Knights, D., and Littler, D. "The Problematic of Information
Technology and Organization," in Information Technology and Organizations: Strategies,
Networks, and Integration, B.P. Bloomfield, R. Coombs, D. Knights and D. Littler (eds.),
Oxford University Press, 1997, pp. 115-138.
Bloomfield, B.P., and Vurdubakis, T. "Boundary Disputes: Negotiating the Boundary between
the Technical and the Social in the Development of IT Systems," Information Technology &
People (7:1) 1994, pp 9-24.
Bloomfield, B.P., and Vurdubakis, T. "Visions of Organization and Organizations o f Vision:

The Representational Practices o f Information Systems Development," Accounting,
Management & Information Technology (22:7) 1997, pp 639-668.
Boland, R. "The In-Formation o f Information Systems," in Wiley Series in Information

Systems, R. Boland and R. Hirschheim (eds.), John Wiley & Sons, Chester, UK, 1987, pp. 132-
142.
Boland, R., and Tenkasi, R.V. "Perspective Making and Perspective Taking in Communities of
Knowing," Organization Science (6:4) 1995, pp. 450-489.
Boland, R., Tenkasi, R. and Te eni, D. "Designing Information Technology to Support

Distributed Cognition," Organization Science (5:3) 1994, pp 456-475.
Boudreau, M. and Robey, D. "Organizational Transition to Enterprise Resource Planning

Systems: Theoretical Choices for Process Research," International Conference on Information
Systems (ICIS), 1999, pp. 291-299.
Bourdieu, P. Outline o f a Theory o f Practice Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK,

1977.
Bowker, G., and Star, S., L. "How Things (Actor-Net) Work: Classification, Magic and the
Ubiquity of Standards," Working Paper, University of California at San Diego, 1996.
Bowker, G.C. "Lest We Remember: Organizational Forgetting and the Production of

Knowledge," Accounting, Management & Information Technology (7:3) 1997, pp 113-138.
Braa, K., and Rolland, K.H. "Horizontal Information Systems: Emergent Trends and
Perspectives," in Organizational and Social Perspectives on Information Technology, R.
Baskerville, J. Stage and J. DeGross, I. (eds.), Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston, 2000, pp.
83-101.
Brehm, L., Heinzl, A., and Markus, M.L. "Tailoring ERP Systems: A Spectrum of Choices and
their Implications," Hawaii International Conference on Systems Sciences, 2001, pp. 1-9.
Brehm, L., and Markus, M.L. "The Divided Software Life Cycle of ERP Packages," 1st Global
Information Technology Management (GITM) World Conference, Memphis, Tennessee, 2000,
pp. 43-46.
300
Broadbent, M., and Weill, P. "Improving Business and Information Strategy Alignment:
Learning from the Banking Industry," IBM Systems Journal (32:1) 1993, pp 162-179.
Broadbent, M., and Weill, P. "Management by Maxim: How Business and IT Managers Can
Create IT Infrastructures," Sloan Management Review (Spring) 1997, pp 77-92.
Broadbent, M., Weill, P., St. Clair, D. "The Implications o f Information Technology
Infrastructure for Business Process Redesign," MIS Quarterly (23:2) 1999, pp 159-182.
Brown, A.D. "Managing Understandings: Politics, Symbolism, Niche Marketing and the Quest
for Legitimacy in IT Implementation," Organization Studies ( 16:6) 1995, pp 951-969.
Brown, A.D., and Jones, M. "Doomed to Failure: Narratives o f Inevitability and Conspiracy in
a Failed IS Project," Organization Studies (19:1) 1998, pp 73-88.
Brown, J.S., and Duguid, C.P. "Organizational Learning and Communities-of-practice: Toward
a Unified View o f Working, Learning, and Innovation," Organization Science (2) 1991, pp 40-
57.
Brown, J.S., and Duguid, P. The Social Life o f Information, Harvard Business School Press,
Boston, 2000, p. 320.
Bums, J., and Scapens, R.W. "Conceptualizing Management Accounting Change: An

Institutional Framework," Management Accounting Research (11) 2000, pp 3-25.
Caglio, A., and Newman, M. "Implementing Enterprise Resource Planning Systems:

Implications for Management Accounting," International Conference on Information Systems,
Brisbane, Australia, 1999, pp. 405-410.
Callon, M. "Some Elements of a Sociology o f Translation: Domestication of the Scallops and

Fishermen o f St. Brieuc Bay," in Power, Action and Belief: a New Sociology o f Knowledge?, J.
Law(ed.), Routledge, London, 1986, pp. 196-233.
Callon, M. "Techno-economic Networks and Irreversibility," in A Sociology o f Monsters:

Essays on Power, Technology and Domination, J. Law (ed.), Routledge, London, 1991, pp.
132-161.
Callon, M. "Variety and Irreversibility in Networks of Technique Conception and Adoption,"

in Technology and the Wealth o f Nations: The Dynamics o f Constructed Advantage, D. Foray
and C. Freeman (eds.), Pinter, London, 1993, pp. 232-268.
Campbell, J.L. "An Institutional Analysis o f Fiscal Reform in Postcommunist Europe," Theory
and Society (25) 1996, pp 45-84.
Campbell, J.L. "Mechanisms of Evolutionary Change in Economic Governance: Interaction,

Interpretation and Bricolage," in Evolutionary Economics and Path Dependence, L.
Magnusson and J. Ottosson (eds.), Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, 1997, pp. 10-32.
301
Carlino, J., and Kelly, J. "AMR Research Predicts ERP Market will Reach $66.6 Billion by
2003," AMR Research, Cambridge, MA, 1999.
Carlson, J., Carlson, D., and Wadswroth, L. "On the Relationship between DSS Design
Characteristics and Ethical Decision Making," Journal o f Management Issues (11:2) 1999, pp
180-197.
Cavaye, A. "User Participation in System Development Revisited," Information &

Management (28) 1995, pp 311-323.
Chrisman, N. "Topological Representations o f Geographical Inforamtion: Reversing the

Irreversible Arrow o f Progress," University o f Washington, Seatttle.
Christiaanse, E., and Huigen, J. "Institutional Dimensions in Information Technology

Implementation in Complex Network Settings," European Journal o f Information Systems (6)
1997, pp 77-85.
Christiansen, E. "Gardening: A Metaphor for Sustainability in Information Technology-

Technical Support," in An Ethical Global Information Society, J. Berleur and D. Whitehouse
(eds.). Chapman & Hall, London, 1997, pp. 15-32.
Chua, W.F. "Radical Developments in Accounting Thought," The Accounting Review (61)
1986, pp 601-632.
Churchman, C.W. The Design o f Inquiring Systems Basic Books, Inc., New York, 1971.
Ciborra, C. "Introduction: What Does Groupware Mean for the Organization Hosting It?," in
Groupware and Teamwork, C. Ciborra (ed.), John Wiley &Sons, New York, 1996, pp. 1-19.
Ciborra, C. The Labyrinths o f Information. Challenging the Wisdom o f Systems Oxford

University Press, Oxford, 2002.
Ciborra, C., and Failla, J. "Infrastructure as a Process: The Case of CRM in IBM," in From
Control To Drift, C. Ciborra and O. Hanseth (eds.), Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2000, pp.
45-59.
Ciborra, C., and Hanseth, O. "From Tool to Gestell," Information Technology & People (11:4)
1998, pp 305-327.
Ciborra, C., and Lanzara, G.F. "Formative Contexts and Information Technology:
Understanding the Dynamics of Innovation in Organizations," Accounting, Management &
Information Technology (4:2) 1994, pp 61-86.
Clegg, S.R. Frameworks o f Power Sage, London, 1989.
Clegg, S.R. Modern Organizations: Organization Studies in the Postmodern World Sage
Publications, London, 1990.
302
Clemens, E.S., and Cook, J.M. "Politics and Institutionalism: Explaining Durability and
Change," Annual Review o f Sociology (25) 1999, pp 441-466.
Compeau, D., and Higgins, C. "Computer Self-efficacy: Development o f a Measure and Initial
Test." MIS Quarterly { 19:2) 1995, pp 189-211.
Compeau, D., Higgins, C., and Huff, S. "Social Cognitive Theory and Individual Reactions to
Computing Technology: A Longitudinal Study," MIS Quarterly (23:2) 1999, pp 145-158.
Cook, S.D., and Brown, J.S. "Bridging Epistemologies: The Generative Dance Between
Organizational Knowledge and Organizational Knowing," Organization Science (10:4) 1999,
pp 381-400.
Coombs, R., Knights, D., and Willmott, H. "Culture, Control and Competition: Towards a
Conceptual Framework for the Study o f Information Technology in Organization,"
Organization Studies (13:1) 1992, pp 51 -72.
Cooper, R.B., and Zmud, R.W. "Information Technology Implementation Research: A

Technological Diffusion Approach," Management Science (36:2) 1990, pp 123-139.
Cordelia, A., and Simon, K. "Global and Local Dynamics in Infrastructure Deployment: The
Astra Hassle Experience," in From Control to Drift, C. Ciborra (ed.), Oxford University Press,
Oxford, 2000, pp. 151-165.
Covaleski, M.A., and Dirsmith, M.W. "An Institutional Perspective on the Rise, Social
Transformation, and Fall of a University Budget Category," Administrative Science Quarterly
(33) 1988, pp 562-587.
Covaleski, M.A., Dirsmith, M.W., and Michelman, J.E. "An Institutional Theory Perspective
on the DRG Framwork, Case-mix Accounting Systems and Health-care Organizations,"
Accounting, Organizations and Society (18:1) 1993, pp 65-85.
Crowston, K., Sawyer, S., and Wigand, R.T. "Investigating the Interplay between Structure and
Information and Communications Technology in the Real Estate Industry," Information
Technology & People (15:2) 2001, pp 1-18.
Dahlbom, B., Hanseth, O., and Ljungberg, J. "Conservative Success: Organization and
Infrastructure Evolution," in From Control to Drift, C. Ciborra and O. Hanseth (eds.), Oxford
University Press, Oxford, 2000, pp. 89-101.
Damsgaard, J., and Lyytinen, K. "Hong Kong’s EDI Bandwagon: Derailed or on the Right
Track?," in Facilitating Technology Transfer through Partnership: Learning front Practice and
Research, T. McMaster, E. Mumford, E.B. Swanson, B. Warboys and D. Wastell (eds.),
Chapman and Hall, London, 1997, pp. 39-63.
Damsgaard, J., and Lyytinen, K. "The Role o f Intermediating Institutions in the Diffusion of
Electronic Data Interchange (EDI): How Industry Associations Intervened in Denmark,
Finland, and Hong Kong," The Information Society (17) 2001, pp 195-210.
303
Damsgaard, J., Rogaczewski, A., and Lyytinen, K. "How Information Technologies Penetrate
Organizations: An Analysis of Four Alternative Models," in Diffusion, Transfer and
Implementation o f Information Technology, L. Levine (ed.), Elsevier Science BV, Amsterdam,
1994, pp. 1-21.
Davenport, T.H. "Putting the Enterprise into the Enterprise System." Harvard Business Review
(July/ August) 1998, pp 121-131.
Davenport, T.H. Mission Critical: Realizing the Promise o f Enterprise Systems Harvard
Business School Press, Boston, MA, 2000.
David, P.A. "Understanding the Economics of QWERTY," in Economic History’ and the
Modern Economist, W.N. Parker (ed.), Basil Blackewell, London, 1986, pp. 1-45.
Davis, G.B., Lee. A.S., Nickles, K.R., Chatteijee, S., Hartung, R., and Wu, Y. "Diagnosis of an
Information System Failure: A Framework and Interpretive Precess," Information &
Management (23) 1992, pp 293-318.
Denzin, N.K., and Lincoln, Y.S. "Introduction: Entering the Field o f Qualitative Research," in
Handbook o f Qualitative Research, N.K. Denzin and Y.S. Lincoln (eds.), Sage Publications,
New York, 2000, pp 1-21.
DeSanctis, G., and Poole, M.S. "Capturing the Complexity in Advanced Technology Use:
Adaptive Structuration Theory," Organization Science (5:2) 1994, pp 121-147.
Diesing, P. How Does Social Science Work: Reflections on Practice, University of Pittsburgh
Press, Pittsburgh, 1991.
DiMaggio, P.J. "Interest and Agency in Institutional Theory," in Institutional Patterns and
Organizations, L.G. Zucher(ed.), Ballinger, Cambridge, MA. 1988, pp 59-78.
DiMaggio, P.J. "The New Institutional isms: Avenues o f Collaboration," Journal o f

Institutional and Theoretical Economics (154) 1998, pp 696-705.
DiMaggio, P.J., and Powell, W.W. "The Iron Cage Revisited: Institutional Isomorphism and
Collective Rationality in Organization Fields," in The New Institutionalism in Organizational
Analysis, W.W. Powell and P.J. DiMaggio (eds.), The University o f Chicago Press, Chicago,
1991, pp 75-91.
DiMaggio, P.J., and Powell, W.W. (eds.) The New Institutionalism in Organizational Analysis.
The University o f Chicago Press, Chicago, 1991.
Dong, L., Neufeld, D., and Higgins, C. "The Iceberg on the Sea: What Do You See?," Eighth
Americas Conference on Information Systems, Dallas, TX, 2002, pp 611-620.
Doolin, B. "Information Technology as Disciplinary Technology: Being Critical in Interpretive

Research on Information Systems," Journal o f Information Technology (13) 1998, pp 301 -311.
304
Doolin, B. "Casemix Management in a New Zealand Hospital: Rationalisation and Resistance,"

Financial Accountability and Management (15:3) 1999a, pp 397-417.
Doolin, B. "Sociotechnical Networks and Information Management in Health Care,"

Accounting. Management & Information Technology (9) 1999b, pp 95-114.
Doolin, B. "Understanding Organizational Change: Discourse, Technology and Social

Relations," Critical Management Studies Conference, Manchester, UK, 2001, 101-125.
Doolin, B., and Lawrence, S. "Managerialism, Information Technology and Health Reform in
New Zealand," International Journal o f Public (10:1/2) 1997, pp 108-122.
Douglas, M. How Institutions Think, Routledge and Kegan Paul, London, 1987.
Downward, P., Finch, J., and Ramsay, J. "Critical Realism, Empirical Methods and Inference:
A Critical Discussion," Cambridge Journal o f Economics (26) 2002, pp 481-500.
Dryzek, J.S. "The Informal Logic o f Institutional Design," in The Theory o f Institutional
Design, R.E. Goodin (ed.), Cambrige University Press, Cambrige, 1996, pp 89-102.
Dyer, W.G., and Wilkins, A.L. "Better Stories, Not Better Constructs, To Generate Better
Theory: A Rejoinder to Eisenhardt," Academy o f Management Review (16:3) 1991, pp 613-
619.
Eisenhardt, K.M. "Building Theories from Case Study Research," Academy o f Management
Review (14:4) 1989, pp 532-550.
Eisenstadt, S.N. "Institutionalization and Change," American Sociological Review (29:2) 1964,
pp 235-247.
Elgar, E. Strategic Choice and Path-Dependency in Post-Socialism: Institutional Dynamics in

the Transformaiton Process Edward Elgar Publishing Company, Berlin, 1995.
Emirbayer, M., and Mische, A. "What Is Agency?," American Journal o f Sociology (103:4)
2001, pp 962-1023.
Engestrom, Y. Learning Working and Imagining, Orienta-Konsultit Oy, Helsinki, Finland,

1990.
Engestrom, Y. "Innovative Learning in Work Teams: Analyzing Cycles o f Knowledge

Creation in Practice," in Perspectives on Activity Theory, Y. Engestrom, R. Miettinen and R.
Punamaki (eds.), Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1999, pp 50-68.
Fararo, T.J., and Skvoretz, J. "Action and Institution, Network and Function: The Cybernetic
Concept o f Social Structure," The Eastern Sociological Society {1:2) 1986, pp 219-250.
305
Federowicz, M. "Anticipated Institutions: The Power o f Path-Finding Expectations," in

Democratic and Capitalist Transitions in Eastern Europe, M. Dobry (ed.), Kluwer Academic
Publishers, London, 2000, pp 45-66.
Firth, D. "The Organizing Vision for Customer Relationship Management," The Americas
Conference in Information Systems, Boston, 2001, pp 450-461.
Flowers, S. Software Failure: Management Failure Amazing Stories and Cautionary Tales
John Wiley & Sons, Chicago, 1996.
Friedland, R., and Alford, R.R. "Bringing Society Back in Symbols, Practices, and Institutional
Contradictions," in The New Institutionalism in Organizational Analysis, W.W. Powell and P.J.
DiMaggio (eds.), University Chicago Press, Chicago, IL, 1991, pp. 232-263.
Gailers, R.D., Newell, S., Huang, J.C., and Pan, S.L. "Implementing Enterprise Resource
Planning and Knowledge Management Systems in Tandem: Fostering Efficiency and
Innovation Complementarity," Information & Organization, (12), 2002, pp 1-28.
Galli, R., and Teubal, M. "Paradigmatic Shifts in National Innovation Systems," in Systems o f
Innovation: Technologies, Institutions and Organizations, E. Charles (ed.), Pinter Publishers,
London, 1997, pp 135-165.
Garud, R., and Kamoe, P. "Path Creation as a Process o f Mindful Deviation," in Path
Dependence and Creation, R. Garud and P. Kamoe (eds.), Lawrence Erlbaum Associations,
London, 2001, pp 1-25.
Gasson, S. "The Reality o f User-Centered Design," Journal o f End User Computing (11:3)
1999, pp 5-15.
Genschel "The Dynamics of Inertia: Institutional Persistence and Change in

Telecommunications and Healthcare," Governance(10:1) 1997, pp43-66.
George, J.F., and King, J. "Examining the Computing and Centralization Debate,"
Communiations o f the ACM (34:7) 1991, pp 63-72.
Giddens, A. Central Problems in Social Theory: Action, Structure and Contradiction in Social
Analysis, University o f California Press, Berkeley, 1979.
Giddens, A. The Constitution o f Society University o f California Press, Berkeley, 1984.
Glaser, B., and Strauss, L. The Discovery o f Grounded Theory: Strategies fo r Qualitative
Research, Aldine Publication Co., Chicago, 1967.
Glass, R.L. "Enterprise Resource Planning - Breakthrough and/or Term Problem?" Data Base
(29:2) 1998, pp 14-15.
306
Goodin, R.E. "Institutions and Their Design," in The Theory o f Institutional Design. R.E.
Goodin (ed.), Cambrige Univeristy Press, Cambridge, UK, 1996, pp 1-30.
Goodin, R.E., and Klingemann, H. "Political Science: The Discipline," in A New Handbook o f
Political Science, R.E. Goodin and H. Klingemann (eds.), Oxford University Press, Oxford,
1996, pp 3-49.
Goodrick, E., and Salancik, G.R. "Organization Discretion in Responding to Institutional

Practice: Hospitals and Cesarean Births," Administrative Science Quarterly (41) 1996, pp 1-28.
Goodstein, J. "Institutional Pressures and Strategic Responsiveness: Employer Involvement in

Work," Academy o f Management Journal (37) 1994, pp 350-382.
Goulding, C. "Grounded Theory; the Missing Methodology on the Interpretivist Agenda,"

Qualitative Market Research: An International Journal (1:1) 1998, pp 50-57.
Granlund, M. "Towards Explaining Stability in and Around Management Accounting

Systems," Management Accounting Research (12) 2001, pp 141-166.
Granovetter, M. "Economic Action and Social Structure: The Problem o f Embeddedness,"

American Journal o f Sociology (91:3) 1985, pp 481 -510.
Greenberg, R., and Hinings, C.R. "Understanding Strategic Change: The Contrubution of
Archetypes," Academy o f Management Journal (36:5) 1993, pp 1052-1081.
Greenwood, R. "Understanding Radical Organizational Change: Bringing Together the Old and
the New Institutionalism," Academy o f Management Review (21:4) 1996, pp 1022-1054.
Griffith, T. "Technology Features as Triggers for Sensemaking," Academy o f Management

Review (24:3) 1999, pp 472-488.
Grindley, P. Standards, Strategy, and Politics, Cases and Stories Oxford Unversity Press, New
York, 1995.
Grint, K., and Woolgar, S. The Machine at Work: Technology, Work and Organization, Polity
Press, Cambridge, 1997.
Grover, V., Tang, J., and Fiedler, K. "IS Investment Priorities in Comtemporary
Organizations," Communications o f the ACM (41:2) 1998, pp 40-48.
Hakansson, H., and Lundgren, A. "Paths in Time and Space-Path Dependence in Industrial
Networks," in Evolutionary>Economics and Path Dependence, L. Magnusson and J. Ottosson
(eds.), Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, 1997, pp 99-121.
Hall, P.A., and Taylor, R.C.R. "Political Science and the Three New Institutional isms,"
Political Studies (44) 1996, pp 936-957.
307
Hammer, M., and Champy, J. Reengineering the Corporation, Harper Business, New York,
1993.
Hannan, M.T., and Freeman, J. "Structural Inertia and Organizational Change," American
Sociological Review (49) 1984, pp 149-164.
Hanseth, O. "Information Technology as Infrastructure," in Gothenburg Studies in Informatics,

Goteborg University, Goteborg, 1996, pp 1-325.
Hanseth, O. "Changing Irreversible Networks: Institutionalization and Infrastructure," ECIS,

Aix-en-Provence, 1998, pp 1-150.
Hanseth, O., and Braa, K. "Globalization and Risk Society," in From Control to Drift, C.
Ciborra and O. Hanseth (eds.), Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2000, 32-45.
Hanseth, O., and Braa, K. "Hunting for the Treasure at the End o f the Rainbow. Standardizing
Corporate IT Infrastructure Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW)." The Journal o f
Collaborative Computing (10:3/4) 2001, pp 261-292.
Hanseth, O., Ciborra, C., and Braa, K. "The Control Devolution: ERP and the Side Effects of
Globalization," The Data Base for Advances in Information Systems (32:4) 2001, pp 55-74.
Hard, M., and Jamison, A. "Alternative Cars: The Contrasting Stories of Steam and Diesel
Automotive Engines," Technology in Society (19:2) 1997, pp 145-160.
Hasselbladh, H., and Kallinikos, J. "The Project o f Rationalization: A Critique and Reappraisal
o f Neo-Institutionalism in Organization Studies," Organization Studies (21:4) 2000, pp 697-
720.
Hausner, J., essop, R.D., and Nielsen, K. Strategic Choice and Path-dependency in Post-
Socialism: Institutional Dynamics in the Transformation Process Edward Elgar, Aldershot,
1995.
Hayman, L. "ERP in the Internet Economy," Information Systems Frontiers; Special Issue o f
on the Future o f Enterprise Resource Planning Systems Frontiers (2:2) 2000, pp 137-139.
Hepso, V., Monteiro, E., and Schiefloe, P. "Implementing Multi-Site ERP Projects:
Centralization and Decentralization Revisited," Norway and the Annual Sociology Conference,
Utrecht, Norway, 2000, pp 211-220.
Hirsch, P.M. "Sociology without Social Structure: Neoinstitutional Theory Meets Brave New
World," American Journal o f Sociology (102:6) 1997, pp 1702-1723.
Hirsch, P.M., and Lounsbury, M. "Ending the Family Quarrel," American Behavioral Scientist
(40:4) 1997, pp 406-418.
Hirschheim, R. Office Automation: A Social and Organizational Perspective Wiley,

Chichester, 1985.
308
Hirschheim, R. "Realizing Emancipatory Principles in Information Systems Development: The

Case for ETHICS," MIS Quarterly (March) 1994, pp 83-109.
Hirschheim, R., and Klein, H.K. "Four Paradigms o f Information Systems Development,"
Communications o f the ACM (32:10) 1989, pp 1199-1216.
Hirschheim, R., Klein, H., and Lyytinen, K. "Exploring the Intellectual Structures of
Information Systems Development: A Social Action Theoretic Analysis," Accounting,
Management and Information technology ( 6 :1/2) 1996, pp 1-64.
Hirt, G., and Swanson, E.B. "Maintaining ERP: Rethinking Relational Foundations," UCLA,
Working Paper, 1999.
Hodgson, G.M. Economics and Institutions: A Manifesto fo r a Modern Institutional Economics

University of Pennsylvania Press, Worchester, 1988.
Hodgson, G.M. Economics and Utopia: Why the Learning Economy Is Not the End o f History
Routledge, London, 1999.
Hodgson, G.M. "From Micro to Macro: The Concept of Emergence and the Role of
Institutions," in Institutions and the Role o f the State, L. Burlamaqui, A. Castro and H. Chang
(eds.), Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, 2000, pp. 103-126.
Hoffman, A.J. "Institutional Evolution and Change: Environmentalism and the U.S. Chemical
Industry," Academy o f Management Journal (42:4) 1999, pp 351-371.
Hoffman, A.J., and Ventresca, M.J. "The Institutional Framing o f Policy Debates," American
Behavioral Scientist (42:8) 1999, pp 1368-1392.
Holland, C.P., and Light, B. "A Critical Success Factors Model for ERP Implementation,"
IEEE Software (May/ June) 1999, pp 30-36.
Holm, P. "The Dynamics of Institutionalization: Transformation Processes in Norwegian

Fisheries," Administrative Science Quarterly (40) 1995, pp 398-422.
Howcroft, D., and Truex, D. "Special Issue on Critical Analysis of ERP Systems," The Data
Base fo r Advances in Information Systems (32:4) 2001.
Hughes, J., Kristoffersen, S., O'Brien, J., and Rouncefield, M. "The Organisational Politics of
Meetings and Their Technology - Two Case Studies of Video Supported Communication," in
Diffusion and Adoption o f Information Technology, K. Kautz and J. Pries-Heje (eds.),
Chapman and Hall, London, 1996, pp. 52-64.
Hughes, T.P. "The Evolution of Large Technological Systems," in The Social Construction o f
Technological Systems, W. Bijker, T.P. Hughes and T.J. Pinch (eds.), MIT Press, Cambridge,
MA, 1987, pp. 51-82.
309
Hughes, T.P. "Technological Momentum," in Does Technology Drive History? The Dilemma
o f Technological Determinism, M.R. Smith and L. Marx (eds.), MIT Press, Cambridge, MA,
1994.
Hutchins, E. "The Technology o f Team Navigation," in Intellectual Teamwork: Social and

Technological Foundations o f Co-Operative Work, J. Galegher, R.E. Kraut and L. Egido (eds.),
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, London, 1990, pp 115-134.
Hutchins, E. Cognition in the Wild, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1995.
Ives, B., and Jarvenpaa, S. "Applications o f Global Information Technology: Key Issues for
Management," MIS Quarterly, (15:4), 1991, pp 32-49.
Ives, B., Jarvenpaa, S., and Mason, R.O. "Global Business Drivers: Aligning Infomation
Technology to Global Business Strategy," IBM Systems Journal (32:1) 1993, pp 143-161.
Jepperson, R.L. "Institutions, Institutional Effects, and Institutionalism," in The New

Institutionalism in Organizational Analysis, W.W. Powell and P.J. DiMaggio (eds.), The
University o f Chicago Press, Chicago, 1991, 59-67.
Jessop, B. "Interpretive Sociology and the Dialectic of Structure and Agency," Theory, Culture
& Society ( 13:1) 1996, pp 119-128.
Jessop, B. "Institutional Re(tums) and the Strategic-Relational Approach," Environment and

Planning (33) 2001, pp 1213-1235.
Johnson, B. "Institutional Learning," in National Systems o f Innovation, Pinter, London, 1992,

pp 1-25.
Johnson, B., and Rice, R. "Reinvention in the Innovation Process: The Case o f Work
Processing," in The New Media, R.E. Rice (ed.), Sage Publications, Beverly Hills, CA, 1984,
pp 115-124.
Jones, M. "Information Systems and the Double Mangle: Steering a Course between the Scylla
o f Embedded Structure and the Charybdis o f Strong Symmetry," IFIP WG8.2 & WG 8 . 6 Joint
Working Conference on Information Systems: Current Issues and Future Changes, Helsinki,
Finland, 1998, pp 76-84.
Jones, M. "Structuration Theory," in Rethinking Management Information Systems, W. Currie

and B. Gathers (eds.), Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1999, 86-99.
Jones, M.R. "Learning the Language o f the Market: Information Systems Strategy Formation
in a UK District Health Authority," Accounting, Management & Information Technology (4:3)
1994, pp 119-147.
Kappelman, L., and McLean, E. "Promoting Information System Success: The Respective
Roles o f User Participation and User Involvement," Journal o f Information Technology
Management (3:1) 1992, pp 1-12.
310
Karsten, H. "Converging Paths to Notes: In Search o f Computer-based Information Systems in

a Networked Company," Information Technology & People (8:1) 1995, pp 7-34.
Karsten, H. "Collaboration and Collaborative Information Technologies: A Review o f the

Evidence," The Data Base fo r Advances in Information System (30:2) 1999, pp 44-65.
King, J. "Centralized vs Decentralized Computing: Organizational Considerations and

Management Options," Computing Surveys (15:4) 1983, pp 319-349.
King, J.L., Gurbaxani, V., Kraemer, K.L., McFarlan, F.W., Raman, K.S., and Yap, C.S.
"Institutional Factors in Information Technology Innovation,” Information Systems Research
(5:2) 1994, pp 139-169.
King, W.R., and Lee, T. "The Effects of User Participation on System Success: Toward a
Contingency Theory o f User Satisfaction," International Conference on Information Systems,
Denver, CO, 1991, p. 245-260.
Klaus, H., Roseman, M., and Gable, G.G. "What Is Enterprise Resource Planning?,"
Information Systems Frontiers; Special Issue o f on The Future o f Enterprise Resource
Planning Systems (2:2) 2000, pp 141-162.
Klein, H., and Kleinman, D.L. "The Social Construction of Technology: Structural
Considerations," Science, Technology & Human Values (27:1) 2002, pp 28-52.
Klein, H.K., and Myers, M.D. "A Set of Principles for Conducting and Evaluating Interpretive
Field Studies in Information Systems," MIS Quarterly (23:1) 1999, pp 67-93.
Kleinman, D.L. "Untangling Context: Understanding a University Laboratory in the

Commercial World," Science, Technology & Human Values (23:3) 1998, pp 285-314.
Kling, R. "Social Analyses of Computing: Theoretical Orientations in Recent Empirical

Research," Computing Surveys (12:1) 1980, pp 61-110.
Kling, R. "Defining the Boundaries of Computing Across Complex Organizations," in Critical

Issues in Information Systems Reserach, R. Boland and R.A. Hirschheim (eds.), John Wiley,
London, 1987, pp 79-94.
Kling, R. "Computerization and Social Transformations," Science, Technology & Human

Values (16:3) 1991, pp 342-367.
Kling, R. "When Gunfire Shatters Bone: Reducing Sociotechnical Systems to Social

Relationships," Science. Technology & Human Values ( 17:3) 1992, pp 381-385.
Kling, R. "Reading " All About" Computerization: How Genre Conventions Shape Nonfiction
Social Analysis," The Information Society (10) 1994, pp 147-172.
311
Kling, R., and Iacono, S. "The Institutional Character o f Computerized Information Systems,"
Office: Technology and People (5:1) 1989, pp 7-28.
Kling, R., and Scacchi, W. "The Web o f Computing: Computer Technology as Social
Organization," Advances in Computers (21) 1982, pp 1-90.
Knights, D., and Noble, F. "Networks and Partnerships in the Evolution of Home Banking," in
Facilitating Technology Transfer Through Partnership: Learning from Practice and Research,
T. McMaster, E. Mumford, E.B. Swanson, B. Warboys and D. Wastell (eds.), Chapman and
Hall, London, 1997, pp. 92-107.
Knights, D., Noble, F., and Willmott, H. '"We Should Be Total Slaves to the Business':
Aligning Information Technology and Strategy-Issues and Evidence," in Information
Technology and Organizations: Strategies, Networks, and Integration, B.P. Bloomfield, R.
Coombs, D. Knights and D. Littler (eds.), Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1997, pp 45-59.
Koh, C., Soh, C., and Markus, M.L. "A Process Theory Approach to ERP Implementation and
Impacts: The Case o f Revel Asia," Journal o f Information Technology Cases and Application
(2:1)2000, pp 4-23.
Kondra, A.Z. "Organizational Diversity and Change in Institutional Theory," Organization

Studies (19:5) 1998, pp 743-767.
Korpela, M., Mursu, A., and Soriyan, H.A. "Two Times Four Integrative Levels of Analysis: A
Framework," in Realigning Research and Practice in Information Systems Development: The
Social and Organizational Perspective, N.L. Russo, B. Fitzgerald and J.I. DEGross (eds.),
Kluwer Academic Publishers, London, 2001, pp 199-215.
Kraatz, M.S., and Zajac, E. "Exploring the Limits of the New Institutionalism: The Causes and
Consequences o f Illegitimate Organizational Change," American Sociological Review (61),
1996, pp 812-836.
Kwon, T.H., and Zmud, R.W. "Unifying the Fragmented Models of Information Systems
Implementation," in Critical Issues in Information Systems Research, R.J. Boland and R.A.
Hirschheim (eds.), John Wiley & Sons, Chichester, 1987, pp 101-114.
Lamb, R., Sawyer, S., and Kling, R. "A Social Informatics Perspective on Socio-Technical
Networks," Americas Conference on Information Systems, Long Beach, CA, 2000.
Land, F.F., and Hirschheim, R.A. "Participative Systems Design: Rationale, Tools and
Techniques," Journal o f Applied Systems Analysis (10) 1983, pp 91-107.
Langley, A. "Strategies for Theorizing from Process Data," Academy o f Management Review
(24:4) 1999, p p 6 9 1 -7 1 0 .
Lanzara, G.F. "Self-destructive Processes in Institution Building and Some Modest

Countervailing Mechanisms," European Journal o f Political Research (33) 1998, pp 1-33.
312
Lanzara, G.F. "Between Transient Constructs and Persistent Structures: Designing Systems in
Action," Journal o f Strategic Information Systems ( 8 ) 1999, pp 331-349.
Lanzara, G.F. "Institutional Bricolage: Notes on the Evolutionary Dynamics o f the Italian Code
of Parliamentary Procedure," The European Consortium for Political Research, Athens, 1999,
PP 5-15.
Latour, B. Science in Action: How to Follow Scientists and Engineers through Society, Harvard
University Press, Cambridge, MA, 1987.
Laudon, K.C. "Environmental and Institutional Models of System Development: A National

Criminal History System," Communications o f the ACM (28:7) 1985, pp 728-740.
Lave, J. Cognition in Practice: Mind, Mathematics and Culture in Everyday Life, Cambridge
University Press, Cambridge, 1988.
Law, J. "Power, Discretion and Strategy," in A Sociology o f Monsters: Essays on Power,

Technology and Domination, J. Law (ed.), Routledge, New York, 1991, pp 45-56.
Lave, J., and Wenger, E. Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation, Cambridge
University Press, Cambridge, 1991.
Law, J., and Bijker, W. "Postscript: Technology, Stability, and Social Theory," in Shaping
Technology / Building Society: Studies in Sociotechnical Change, W.E. Bijker and J. Law
(eds.), MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1994, pp. 290-308.
Lawrence, T.B., and Winn, M.I. "The Temporal Dynamics o f Institutionalization," Academy o f
Management Review (26:4) 2001, pp 624-644.
Leblebici, H., Salancik, G.R., Copay, A., and King, T. "Institutional Change and the
Transformation o f Interorganizational Fields: An Organizational History o f the U.S. Radio
Broadcasting Industry," Administrative Science Quarterly (36) 1991, pp 333-363.
Lee, A.S. "A Scientific Methodology for MIS Case Studies," M IS Quarterly (14:1) 1989, pp
33-50.
Lee, A.S. "Researching MIS," in Rethinking Management Information Systems, W. Currie and
B. Galliers (eds.), Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1999, pp 69-78.
Lee, A.S., Liebenau, J., and DEGross, J.I. (eds.) Information Systems and Qualitative
Research, Chapman & Hall, London, 1997.
Lee, Z., and Lee, J. "An ERP Implementation Case Study from a Knowledge Transfer
Perspective," Journal o f Information Technology (15:4) 2000, p 281.
Leidner, M.A.a.D.E. "Review: Knowledge Management and Knowledge Management

Systems: Conceptual Foundations and Research Issues," MIS Quarterly (25:1) 2001, pp 1-25.
313
Leonard-Barton, D. "Implementation as Mutual Adaptation o f Technology and Organization,"

Research Policy (17:5) 1988, pp 251-267.
Levinthal, D.A., and March, J.G. "The Myopia of Learning," Strategic Management Journal
(14) 1993, pp 95-112.
Lockwood, D. "Social Integration and System Integration," in Explorations in Social Change,

G.K.. Zollschan and W. Hirsch (eds.), Houghton Mifflin Company, London, 1964, 56-89.
Louridas, P. "Design as Bricolage: Anthropology Meets Design Thinking," Design Studies (20)
1999, pp 517-535.
Lowe, A., and Doolin, B. "Casemix Accounting Systems: New Spaces for Action,"
Management Accounting Research (10) 1999, pp 181 -201.
Lyytinen, K. "Different Perspectives on Information Systems: Problems and Solutions," ACM

Computing Surveys (19:1) 1987, pp 5-43.
Macintosh, N.B., and Scapens, R.W. "Structuration Theory in Management Accounting,"

Accounting, Organizations and Society ( 15:5) 1990, pp 455-477.
Majchrzak, A., Rice, R., Malhotra, A., King, N., and Ba, S. "Technology Adaptation: The Case
of A Computer Supported Interorganizational Virtual Team," M IS Quarterly (24:4) 2000, pp
569-600.
March, J.G. "Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning," Organization Science

(2:1) 1989, pp 71-87.
March, J.G., and Olsen, J.P. Rediscovering Institutions: The Organizational Basis o f Politics
The Free Press, London, 1989.
Markus, L. "Toward a Critical Mass Theory o f Interactive Research," in Organizations and

Communication Technology, J. Fulk and C. Steinfield (eds.). Sage Publications, Newbury Park,
CA, 1990, pp 111-132.
Markus, M. "Conceptual Challenges in Comtemporary IS Research," Communications o f the

A I S O ) 2 0 0 0 b, pp 1-45.
Markus, M., and Robey, D. "Information Technology and Organizational Change: Causal
Structure in Theory and Research," Management Science (34:5) 1988, pp 583-598.
Markus, M.L. "Power, Politics, and MIS Implementation," Communications o f the ACM (26)
1983, pp 430-444.
Markus, M.L. "The Qualitative Difference in Information Systems Research and Practice," in
Information Systems and Qualitative Research, A.S. Lee, J. Liebenau and J.I. Degross (eds.),
Chapman & Hall, London, 1997, pp. 11-27.
314
Markus, M.L. "Paradigm Shifts - E-Business and Business/Systems Integration."

Communications o f the AIS (4:10) 2000a, pp 1-45.
Markus, M.L. "Reflections on the Systems Integration Enterprise," Business Process

Management Journal, (14:1) 2001, pp 1-9.
Markus, M.L., and Tanis, C. "The Enterprise Systems Experience-From Adoption to Success,"
in Framing the Domains o f IT Research: Glimpsing the Future Through the Past, R.W. Zmud
(ed.), Pinnaflex Educational Resources, Inc, Cincinnati, OH, 2000, pp. 173-207.
Mason, R.O. "Ethics to Information Technology Issues," Communications o f the ACM (38:12)
1995, pp 55-57.
Meyer, J.W., Boli, J., Thomas, G.M., and Ramirez, F.O. "World Society and the Nation-State,"
American Journal o f Sociology (103:1) 1997, pp 144-181.
Meyer, J.W., and Rowan, B. "Institutionalized Organizations: Formal Structure as Myth and
Ceremony," American Journal o f Sociology (S3) 1977, pp 340-363.
Meyer, J.W., and Rowen, B. "Institutionalized Organizations: Formal Structure as Myth and
Ceremony," in The Afew Institutionalism in Organizational Analysis, W.W. Powell and P.J.
DiMaggio (eds.), The University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1991, pp 178-191.
Miles, M.B., and Huberman, A.M. Qualitative Data Analysis: An Expanded Sourcebook Sage
Publications, Inc., Thousand Oaks, CA, 1994.
Milford, M., and Stewart, G. "Are ERP Implementations Qualitatively Different from Other
Large Systems Implementations?," Proceedings o f the Sixth Americas Conference on
Information Systems, Long Beach, CA, 2000, pp 423-430.
Misa, T.J. "Controversy and Closure in Technological Change: Constructing "Steel"," in

Shaping Technology / Building Society: Studies in Sociotechnical Change, W.E. Bijker and J.
Law (eds.), MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1994, pp. 109-139.
Misa, T.J. "Retrieving Sociotechnical Change from Technological Determinism," in Does

Technology Drive History? The Dilemma o f Technological Determinism, M.R. Smith and L.
Marx (eds.), MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1994, pp 24-35.
Mitev, N. "Toward Social Constructivist Understandings o f IS Success and Failure:

Introducing a New Computerized Reservation System," International Conference on
Information Systems, Sydney, 2000, pp 244-260.
Montealegre, R. "The Interplay of Information Technology and the Social Milieu," Information
Technology <£ People (10:2) 1997, pp 106-131.
Montealegre, R., and Applegate, L.M. "Information Technology and Organizational Change:
Lessons from a Less-developed Country," in Diffusion, Transfer and Implementation o f
Information Technology, L. Levine (ed.), Elsevier Science BV, Amsterdam, 1994, pp. 99-131.
315
Monteiro, E. "Scaling Information Infrastructure," The Information Society (14:3) 1998, pp 12-
30.
Monteiro, E. "Actor Network Theory and Information Infrastructure," in From Control to

Drift, C. Ciborra (ed.), Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2000, pp 85-92.
Monteiro, E., and Hanseth, O. "Social Shaping o f Information Infrastructure: On Being

Specific About the Technology," in Information Technology and Changes in Organization
Work, W.J. Orlikowski, G. Walsham, M.R. Jones and J.I. DEGross (eds.), Chapman & Hall,
London, 1995, pp. 325-343.
Monteiro, E., and Hepso, V. "Diffusion o f Infrastructure: Mobilization and Improvisation," in

Information Systems: Current Issues and Future Changes, T.J. Larsen, L. Levine and J.I.
DeGross (eds.), IFIP, Laxenburg, Austria, 1999, pp. 255-274.
Monteiro, E., and Hepso, V. "Infrastructure Strategy Formation: Seize the Day at Statoil," in
From Control to Drift, C. Ciborra and O. Hanseth (eds.), Oxford University Press, Oxford,
2000, pp 124-132.
Monteiro, E., and Hepso, V. "Purity Danger o f Information Infrastructure,” Systemic Practice
and Action Research (15:2) 2002, pp 68-78.
Mouzelis, N. Sociological Theory: What Went Wrong? Routledge, London, 1995.
Myers, M., and Young, L. "Hidden Agendas, Power, and Managerial Assumptions in
Information Systems Development: An Ethnographic Study," Information Technology &
People (10:3) 1997, pp 224-240.
Myers, M.D. "A Disaster for Everyone to See: An Interpretive Analysis o f a Failed IS Project,"
Accounting, Management & Information Technology (AA) 1994, pp 185-201.
Myers, M.D. "Qualitative Research in Information Systems," M IS Quarterly (June) 1997, pp

241-242.
Nandhakumar, J., and Avison, D.E. "The Fiction of Methodologica Development: A Field
Study o f Information Systems Development," Information Technology & People (12:2) 1999,
pp 176-191.
Nelson, K.M., and Cooprider, J.G. "The Contribution of Shared Knowledge to IS Group
Performance," MIS Quarterly (20:4) 1996, pp 409-432.
Newman, M., and Robey, D. "A Social Process Model of User-Analyst Relationships," MIS
Quarterly (16:1) 1992, pp 249-266.
Ngwenyama, O. "Groupware, Social Action and Organizational Emergence: On the Process

Dynamics o f Computer Mediated Distributed Work," Accounting, Management & Information
Technology ( 8 ) 1998, pp 127-146.
316
Nicoalou, A.I. "Social Control in Information Systems Development," Information Technology

& People (12:2) 1999, pp 130-147.
Nielsen, K., Jessop, B., and Hausner, J. "Institutional Change in Post-Socialism," in Strategic
Choice and Path-Dependency in Post-Socialism: Institutional Dynamics in the Transformation
Process, K. Nielsen, B. Jessop and J. Hausner (eds.), Edward Elgar, London, 1995, pp 3-25.
Nissen, H.-E., Klein, H.K., and Hirschheim, R.A. (eds.) Information Systems Research:
Contemporary Approaches and Emergent Traditions, NorthHolland, Amsterdam,, 1991.
North, D.C. Institutions, Institutional Change and Economic Performance Cambridge

University Press, London, 1990.
Offe, C. "Designing Institutions in East European Transitions," in The Theory o f Institutional

Design, R.E. Goodin (ed.), Cambridge University Press, London, 1996, pp 79-91.
Oliver, C. "Strategic Responses to Institutional Processes," Academy o f Management Review

(16:1) 1991, pp 145-179.
Oliver, C. "The Antecedents o f Deinstitutionalization," Organization Studies (13:4) 1992, pp

563-588.
Olsen, J.P. "How, Then, Does One Get There?: An Institutionalist Response to Herr Fischer's
Vision o f a European Federation," University o f Oslo, Oslo, Norway, 2001.
Orlikowski, W. "The Duality o f Technology: Rethinking the Concept of Technology in

Organization," Organization Science (3:2) 1992, pp 398-427.
Orlikowski, VV. "Improving Organizational Transformation Over Time: A Situated Change

Perspective," Information Systems Research (7:1) 1996, pp 63-92.
Orlikowski, W. "Using Technology and Constituting Structures: A Practice Lens for Studying
Technology in Organizations," Organization Science (25:1) 2000, pp 1-18.
Orlikowski, W. "Research Commentary: Desperately Seeking the "IT" in IT Research - A Call

to Theorizing the IT Artifact," Information Systems Research (12:2) 2001, pp 121-134.
Orlikowski, W., and Barley, S. "Technology and Institutions: What Can Research on
Information Technology and Research on Organizations Learn from Each Other?," MIS
Quarterly (25:2) 2001, pp 145-165.
Orlikowski, W.J. "CASE Tools as Organizational Change: Investigating Incremental and

Radical Changes in Systems Development," MIS Quarterly (17) 1993, pp 309-340.
Orlikowski, W.J., and Gash, D.C. "Technological Frames: Making Sense of Information
Technology in Organizations," ACM Transactions on Information Systems (12:2), April 1994,
pp 669-702.
317
Orlikowski, W.J., and Robey, D. "Information Technology and the Structuring of

Organizations," Information Systems Research (2) 1991, pp 143-169.
Ostrom, V. "The Contemporary Debate over Centralization and Decentralization," The Journal
o f Federalism (Fall) 1976, pp 21 -32.
Pare, G., and Elam, J.J. "Using Case Study Research to Build Theories of IT Implementation,"
Information Systems and Qualitative Research (1:2) 1997, pp. 542-568.
Parker, J. Structuration, Open University Press, Berlin, 2000.
Parr. A., and Shanks, G. "A Model of ERP Project Implementation," Journal o f Information
Technology (15:4) 2000, pp 289-303.
Parr, A., Shanks, G., and Darke, P. "The Identification o f Necessary Factors for Successful
Implementation of ERP Systems," IFIP Working Group 8.2 Conference on New Information
Technologies in Organisational Process: Field Studies and Theoretical Reflections on the
Future of Work, London, 1999, pp. 99-120.
Peirce, C. Philosophical Writings, Dover Publications, New York, 1955.
Perkmann, M. "Social Integration and System Integration: Reconsidering the Classical

Distinction," Sociology (32:3) 1998, pp 491-507.
Perrow, C. Complex Organizations, (3 ed.) Random House, New York, 1986.
Perrow, C. Normal Accidents: Living with High-Risk Technologies, Princeton University Press,
Princeton, NJ, 1999.
Peters, B.G. "Institutional Theory and Administrative Reform," in Organizing Political

Institutions, M. Egeberg and P. Laegreid (eds.), Scandinavian University Press, Norway,
1999a.
Peters, B.G. Institutional Theory in Political Science: The New Institutionalism Pinter, New
York, 1999b.
Pickering, A. The Mangle o f Practice, The University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1995.
Pinch, T., Ashmore, M., and Mulkay, M. "Technology, Testing, Text: Clinical Budgeting in the
U.K. National Health Service," in Shaping Technology / Building Society: Studies in
Sociotechnical Change, W.E. Bijker and J. Law (eds.), MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1994, pp.
265-289.
Pinch, T., and Bijker, W. "The Social Construction o f Facts and Artifacts," in The Social
Construction o f Technological Systems, W. Bijker, T. Hughes and T. Pinch (eds.), MIT Press,
Cambridge, MA, 1987, pp 45-65.
318
Poole, M.S. "Structural Paradigms and the Study of Group Communication," in

Communication in Transition: Issues and Debates in Current Research, M. Mander (ed.),
Praeger, New York, 1983, pp. 45-59.
Poole, M.S. "Organizational Challenges for the New Forms," in Shaping Organization Form:
Communication, Connection, and Community, G. DeSanctis and J. Fulk (eds.), Sage
Publication, Thousand Oak, CA, 1999, pp 98-109.
Poole, M.S.. and DeSanctis, G. "Understanding the Use o f Group Decision Support Systems,"
in Organizations and Communication Technology, J. Fulk and C. Steinfield (eds.), Sage
Publication, Beverly Hills, CA, 1990, pp. 173-193.
Poole, M.S., and DeSanctis, G. "Microlevel Structuration in Computer-supported Group

Decision-making," Human Communication Research (91:1) 1992, pp 5-49.
Poole, M.S., Van de Ven, A., Dooley, K., and Holmes, M.E. (eds.) Organizational Change and
Innovation Processes. Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2000.
Pozzebon, M. "Combining a Structuration Approach with a Behavioral-Based Model to

Investigate ERP Usage," Proceedings o f the Sixth Americas Conference on Information
Systems, Long Beach, CA, 2000, pp 25-40.
Purvis, R.L., Sambamurthy, V., and Zmud, R.W. "The Assimilation of Knowledge Platforms
in Organizations: An Empirical Investigation," Organization Science (12:2) 2001, pp 117-135.
Quattrone, P., and Hopper, T. "What Does Organizational Change Mean? Speculations on a
Taken for Granted Category," Management Accounting Research (12) 2001, pp 403-435.
Ragin, C.C. Constructing Social Resarch Pine Forge Press, London, 1994.
Rajagopal, P. "An Innovation: Diffusion View of Implementation of Enterprise Resource

Planning (ERP) Systems and Development o f a Research Model," Information & Management
(40) 2002, pp 87-114.
Ranson, S., Hinings, B., and Greenwood, R. "The Structuring o f Organizational Structures,"
Administrative Science Quarterly (25) 1980, pp 45-68.
Rao, H„ and Singh, J.V. "Types of Variation in Organizational Populations: The Speciation of
New Organizational Forms," in Variations in Organization Science, J. Baum and B. McKelvey
(eds.), Sage Publications, London, 1999, pp 15-38.
Ratner, C. "Agency and Culture," Journal o f the Theory o f Social Behavior (30) 2000, pp 413-
434.
Reed, M. "In Praise of Duality and Dualism: Rethinking Agnecy and Structure in
Organizaitonal Anaysis," Organization Studies (18:1) 1997, pp 21-42.
319
Rice, R., and Gattiker, U. "New Media and Organizational Structuring o f Meanings and
Relations," in New Handbook o f Organizational Communication, F. Jablin and L. Putnam
(eds.), Sage, Newbury Park, CA, 1999, pp 45-62.
Riker, W.H. "The Experience o f Creating Institution: The Framing o f the United States
Constitution," in Explaining Social Institutions, J. Knight and I. Sened (eds.), The University of
Michigan Press, Ann Arbor MI, 1995, pp 89-110.
Riley, P. "A Structurationist Account o f Political Culture," Administrative Science Quarterly

(28) 1983, pp 414-437.
Roberts, J., and Scapens, R.W. "Accounting Systems and Systems o f Accountability -
Understandng Accounting Practices in Their Organizational Contexts," Accounting,
Organizations and Society (10:4) 1985, pp 443-456.
Roberts, L.H., and Grabowski, M. "Organizations, Technology and Structuring," in Handbook

o f Organization Studies, S.R. Clegg, C. Hardy and W.R. Nord (eds.), Sage Publications,
London, 1996, pp 321-340.
Roberts, P.W., and Greenwood, R. "Integrating Transaction Cost and Institutional Theories:
Toward a Constrained-Efficiency Framework for Understanding Organizational Design
Adoption," in Academy o f Management Review, (40:2) 1997, pp. 346-373.
Robey, D., and Boudreau, M. "Accounting for the Contradictory Organizational Consequences
o f Information Technology: Theoretical Directions and Methodologies Implications,"
Information Systems Research (10:2) 1999, pp 167-185.
Robey, D., Ross, J.W., and Boudreau, M. "Learning to Implement Enterprise Systems: An
Exploratory Study o f the Dialectics of Change," Journal o f Management Information Systems
(24:3)2002, pp 45-61.
Rogers, E.M. Diffusion o f Innovations, (4th ed.) The Free Press, New York, 1995.
Rolland, K. "Challenging the Installed Base: Deploying a Large-Scale IS in a Global

Organization," The European Conference on Information Systems, Vienna, Austria, 2000, pp
211-216.
Rose, J., and Truex, D. "Machine Agency as Perceived Autonomy: An Action Perspective," in
IS 2000 The Social and Organizational Perspective on Research and Practice in Information
Technology, R. Baskerville, J. Stage and J. DeGross, I. (eds.), Kluwer Academic Publishers,
Aakbjorg, Denmark, 2000, pp. 371-390.
Ross, J. "Surprising Facts about Implementing ERP," in IT Professional, (10:1) 1999, pp. 65 -
68 .
Ross, J.W., and Vitale, M.R. "The ERP Revolution, Surviving vs. Thriving," Information
Systems Frontiers; Special Issue on the Future o f Enterprise Resource Planning Systems (2:2)
2000, pp 233-241.
320
Rossman, G.B., and Rallis, S.F. Learning in the Field: An Introduction to Qualitative Research
Sage Publications, London, 1998.
Rousseau, D. "Technology in Organization: A Constructive Review an Analytic Framework,"

in A Field Guide to Organizational Assessment, S.E. Seashore, E.E. Lawler, P.H. Miruis and C.
Cammann (eds.), Wiley Intersciences, New York, 1983, pp. 32-50.
Rousseau, D. "Issues of Level in Organizational Research: Muti-level and Cross-level

Perspectives," Research in Organizational Behavior {1) 1985, pp 1-37.
Russell, S. "The Social Construction of Artifacts: A Response to Pinch and Bijker," Social
Studies o f Science (16) 1986, pp 331 -346.
Russo, N.L., Fitzgerald, B., and DeGross, J.I. (eds.) Realigning Reserach and Practice in
Information Systems Development: The Social and Organizational Perspective. Kluwer
Academic Publishers, London, 2001.
Sabel, C., and Zeitlin, J. "Stories, Strategies, Structures: Rethinking Historical Alternatives to
Mass Production," in Worlds o f Possibilities: Flexibility and Mass Production in Western
Industrialization, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1997, pp 114-129.
Sarker, S., and Lee, A.S. "Using a Positivist Case Research Methodology to Test Three
Competing Theories-in-use of Business Process Redesign," Journal o f Association for
Information Systems (2:7) 2002, pp 1-72.
Sawyer, S. "Packaged Software: Implications o f the Differences from Custom Approaches to

Software Development," European Journal o f Information Systems (9:1) 2000, pp 47-58.
Scapens, R.W., and Macintosh, N.B. "Structure and Agency in Management Accounting
Reseach: A Response to Boland's Interpretive Act," Accounting, Organizations and Society
(21:7) 1996, pp 675-690.
Scapens, R.W., and Roberts, J. "Accounting and Control: A Case Study o f Resistance to
Accounting Change," Management Accounting Research (4) 1993, pp 1-32.
Scarbrough, H. "Problem-solutions in the Management o f Information Systems Expertise,"

Journal o f Management Studies (30) 1993, pp 939-955.
Scheepers, R., and Rose, J. "Understanding Ubiquitous IT in Organisations; The Case of

Intranet Introduction," The Information Research in Scandinavia (IRIS) Conference, 2000, pp.
21-30.
Schultze, U. "A Confessional Account o f an Ethnography about Knowledge Work," MIS

Quarterly (24:1) 2000, pp 3-41.
Schultze, U., and Leidner, D. "Studying Knowledge Management in Information Systems

Resarch: Discourses and Theoretical Assumptions," MIS Quarterly (26:3) 2002, pp 1-20.
321
Schultze, U., and Roland, R.J.J. "Place, Space and Knowledge Work: A Study o f Outsourced
Computer Systems Administrators,” Accounting, Management, and Information Technologies
(10) 2000, pp 187-219.
Schumpeter, J.A. The Theory o f Economic Development, Harvard University Press,

Cambridge, MA, 1934.
Scott, J.E., and Kaindl, L. "Enhancing Functionality in an Enterprise Software Package,"

Information and Management (37) 2 0 0 0 , pp 111-112.
Scott, W.R. "The Adolescence of Institutional Theory," Administrative Science Quarterly (32)
1987, pp 493-511.
Scott, W.R. " Institutional Theory and Organizations," in The Institutional Construction o f
Organizations, W.R. Scott and S. Christensen (eds.), Sage Publications, London, 1995.
Scott, W.R. Institutions and Organizations, Foundations for Organizational Science, London,
1995.
Scott, W.R. Institutions and Organizations, (2nd ed.) Foundations for Organizational Science,
London, 2001.
Scott, W.R., and Meyer, J.W. Institutional Environments and Organizations: Structural
Complexity and Individualism Sage Publications, London, 1994.
Selznick, P. Leadership in Administraion, Harper & Row, New York, 1957.
Selznick, P. The Moral Commonwealth: Social Theory and the Promise o f Community,
University o f California Press, Berkeley, 1992.
Sewell, G., and Wilkinson, B. "Someone to Watch Over Me: Surveillance, Discipline and the
Just-In-Time Labour Process," Sociology (26:2) 1992, pp 271-289.
Sewell, W.H. "A Theory of Structure: Duality, Agency and Trasformation," American Journal
o f Sociology {98:1) 1992, pp 1-29.
Silva, L., and Figueroa, E. "Institutional Intervention and the Expansion of ICTs in Latin
America: The Case of Chile," Information Technology & People (15:1) 2002, pp 8-25.
Simon, H. "The Consequences of Computers for Centralization and Decentralization," in The

Computer Age: A Twenty-Year View, M.L. Dertouzos and J. Moses (eds.), MIT Press,
Cambridge, MA, 1979, pp. 212-228.
Simon, H. "Bounded Rationality an Organizational Learning," Organization Science (2:1)

1991, pp. 61-75.
322
Simson, E.M. "The Centrally Decentralized is Organization," Harvard Business Review (July-
August) 1990, pp 158-162.
Sjostrand, S. "The Socioeconomic Institutions o f Organizing: Origin, Emergence, and

Reproduction," The Journal o f Socio-Economics (22:4) 1993, pp 323-352.
Soh, C., Kien, S.S., and Tay-Yap, J. "Cultural Fits and Misfits: Is ERP a Universal Solution?,"
Communications o f the ACM (43:4) 2000, pp 47-51.
Star, S., and Ruhlender, K. "Steps Towards an Ecology o f Infrastructure: Designing Large
Scale Information Spaces," Information Systems Research (7:1) 1996, pp 111-134.
Star, S.L. "Transparency at Different Levels of Scale: Convergence between Information

Artifacts and Social Worlds," University o f Illinois, Champaign, IL, 1997, pp. 1-30.
Stark, D. "Not by Design: The Myth o f Designer Capitalism in Eastern Europe," in Strategic
Choice and Path-Dependency in Post-Socialism: Institutional Dynamics in the Trasformation
Process, K. Nielsen, B. Jessop and J. Hausner (eds.), Edward Elgar, London, 1995, pp 111-
145.
Stein, E.W., and Vandenbosch, B. "Organizational Learning During Advanced System

Development: Opportunities and Obstacles," Journal o f Management Information Systems
(13:2) 1996, pp 115-136.
Stones, R. "Refusing the Realism-Structuration Divide," European Journal o f Social Theory

(4:2) 2001, pp 177-197.
Strang, D., and Tuma, N.B. "Spatial and Temporal Heterogeneity in Diffusion," American
Journal o f Sociology (99) 1993, pp 614-639.
Strategic Planning Committee "Strategic Planning Committee Vision 2020 Imperative:

Information Technologies," Lowry Mays College and Graduate School of Business, Texas
A&M University, College Station, pp. 23-24.
Strauss, A., and Corbin, J. Basics o f Qualitative Research: Techniques and Procedures fo r
Developing Grounded Theory, (Second ed.) Sage Publications, Inc., Thousand Oaks, CA,
1998, p. 312.
Suchman, L. "Constituting Shared Workplaces," in Cognition and Communication at Work, Y.

Engestrom and D. Middleton (eds.), Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1996, pp. 35-60.
Swan, J., Newell, S., and Robertson, M. "Limits of IT-Driven Knowledge Management
Initiatives for Interactive Innovation Processes: Towards a Community-Based Approach,"
Proceedings o f the 33rd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS-33),
Maui, HI, 2000, pp 211-220.
Swanson, E.B., and Ramiller, N.C. "Information Systems Research Thematics: Submissions to
a New Journal, 1987-1992," Information Systems Research (4:4) 1993, pp 30-42.
323
Swanson, E.B., and Ramiller, N.C. "The Organizing Vision in Information Systems
Innovation," Organization Science (8:5) 1997, pp 458-474.
Taylor, J.r., Groleau, C., Heaton, L., and Every, E.V. The Computerization o f Work:
Communication Perspective, Sage Publications, London, 2001.
Thompson, J.B. "The Theory o f Structuration," in Social Theory o f Modern Societies: Anthony
Giddens and His Critics., D. Held and J.B. Thompson (eds.), Cambridge University Press,
Cambridge, 1989, pp 36-45.
Tolbert. P.S. "Resource Depence and Institutional Environments: Sources o f Administrative

Structure in Institutions o f Higher Education," Administrative Science Quarterly (30) 1985, pp
1-3.
Tolbert, P.S., and Zucher, L.G. "The Institutionalization o f Institutional Theory," in Handbook
o f Organization Studies, S.R. Clegg, C. Hardy and W.R. Nord (eds.), Sage Publications,
London, 1996, pp 321-340.
Tolbert, P.S., and Zucker, L.G. "Institutional Sources o f Change in the Formal Structure of
Organizations: The Diffusion o f Civil Service Reform, 1880-1935," Administrative Science
Quarterly (28) 1983, pp 22-39.
Trauth, E.M. Qualitative Research in IS: Issues and Trends Idea Group Publishing, London,
2001 .
Tyre, M., and Orlikowski, W. "Windows of Opportunities: Temporal Patterns o f Technological

Adaptation in Organizations," Organization Science (5:1) 1994, pp 98-118.
Usher, A. A Histon' o f Mechanical Inventions Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA,

1954.
Van de Ven, A., and Poole, M.S. "Explaining Development and Change in Organizations,"
Academy o f Management Review (20:3) 1995, pp 510-540.
Venkatraman, N., Lawrence, N., and Koh, J. "The Adoption of Corporate Governance
Mechanisms: A Test o f Competing Diffusion Models," Management Science (40:4) 1994, pp
496-507.
Volkoff, O. "Using the Structurational Model o f Technology to Analyze an ERP

Implemetation," The Fifth Americas Conference on Information Systems, Milwaukee, WI,
1999, pp. 466-475.
Von Hippel, E. The Sources o f Innovation, Oxford University Press, New York, 1988.
Wallace, L.W. Sociological Theory, Heinemann Educational Books, London, 1969.
324
Walsham, G. "Organizational Metaphors and Information Systems Research," European

Journal o f Information Systems (2:2) 1991, pp 83-94.
Walsham, G. Interpreting Information Systems in Organizations Wiley & Sons, Chichester,

1993.
Walsham. G. "The Emergence o f Interpretivism in IS Research," Information Systems

Research (6:4) 1995a, pp 376-394.
Walsham, G. "Interpretive Case Studies in IS Research: Nature and Method," European

Journal o f Information Systems (4) 1995b, pp 74-81.
Walsham, G. "Actor-Network Theory and IS Research: Current Status and Future Prospects,"
in Information Systems and Qualitative Research, A.S. Lee, J. Liebenau and J.I. DeGross
(eds.). Chapman and Hall, London, 1997, pp. 466-480.
Walsham. G., and Sahay, S. "GIS for District-Level Administration in India: Problems and
Opportunities," MIS Quarterly (23:1) 1999, pp 39-65.
Walsham, G„ Symons, V., and Waema, T. "Information Systems as Social Systems:

Implications for Developing Countries," Information Technology fo r Development (3:3) 1988,
pp 189-205.
Wang, P. "What Drives Waves in Information Systems: The Organizing Vision Perspective,"
Twenty-Second International Conference on Information Systems, New Orleans, 2001, pp 234-
250.
Wastell, D.G., and Newman, M. "Information System Design, Stress and Organisational
Change in the Ambulance Services: A Tale o f Two Cities," Accounting, Management &
Information Technology (6:4) 1996, pp 283-300.
Weber, M. The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit o f Capitalism, Hil Yayin, Istanbul, 1958.
Weick, K. The Social Psychology o f Organizing, Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, Inc.,

New York, 1979.
Weick, K. Making Sense o f the Organization, Blackwell Business, New York, 2001.
Weick, K.E., and Roberts, K..H. "Collective Mind in Organizations: Heedful Interrelating on
Flight desks," Adminitrative Science Quarterly (38) 1993, pp 357-381.
Wenger, E. Communities o f Practice: Learning, Meaning, and Identity, Oxford University

Press, New York, 1998.
Westphal, J.D., and Zajac, E. "Decoupling Policy from Practice: The Case of Stock
Repurchases Programs," Administrative Science Quarterly (46) 2001, pp 202-208.
325
Whittington, R. "Sociological Pluralism, Institutions and Managerial Agency," in Towards a

New TJteory o f Organizations, Routledge, London & New York, 1994.
Williams, R., and Edge, D. "The Social Shaping of Technology," Research Policy (25) 1996,
pp 865-899.
Winner, L. "Upon Opening the Blank Box and Finding It Empty: Social Constructivism and
the Philosophy o f Technology," Science, Technology & Human Values (18) 1993, pp 362-378.
Woolgar, S. "Configuring the User: The Case of Usability Trials," in A Sociology o f Monsters:
Essays on Power, Technology and Domination, J. Law (ed.), Routledge, London, 1991, pp 23-
45. '
Yates, J.. and Orlikowski, W. "Genres of Organizational Communication: A Structurational

Approach to Studying Communication and Media," Academy o f Management Review (17:2)
1992, pp 299-326.
Yin, R.K. Case Study Research: Design and Methods, (Second ed.) Sage Publications, Inc.,
Thousand Oaks, CA, 1994.
Yoneyama, J. "Computer Systems as Text and Space: Toward a Phenomenological

Hermeneutics of development and Use," in Social Science, Technical Systems, and
Cooperative Work, G.C. Bowker, S.L. Star, W. Turner and L. Gasser (eds.), Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates, Publishers. New York, 1997, pp 114-125.
Zhou, X. "The Dynamics of Organizational Rules," American Journal o f Sociology (98:5)

1993, pp 1134-1166.
Zmud, R.W. "Diffusion of Modem Software Practices: Influence of Centralization and

Formalization," Management Science (28:12) 1982, pp 1421-1431.
Zmud, R.W. "An Examination of 'Push-pull’ Theory Applied to Process Innovation in

Knowledge Work," Management Science (30:6) 1984, pp 727-738.
Zmud, R.W., and Apple, L.E. "Measuring Technology Incorporation / Infusion," Journal o f
Product Innovation Management (9) 1992, pp 148-155.
Zucher, L.G. "Institutional Theories of Organization," Annual Review o f Sociology (13) 1987,
pp 443-464.
Zucker, L.G. "The Role of Institutionalization in Cultural Persistence," American Sociological

Review (42) 1977, pp 726-743.
Zucker, L.G. "The Role of Institutionalization in Cultural Persistence," in The New

Institutionalism in Organizational Analysis, W.W. Powell and P.J. DiMaggio (eds.), The
University o f Chicago Press, Chicago, 1991, pp 78-95.
326
APPENDIX A
EXAMPLES OF MATRIX DISPLAY
Event Listings
TI ME P E R I O DS
LEVEL ?? - 87 87-89 90-91 91-92 92-93 94-95 95-96 96-97 99-2000 2 0 0 1 -present
State/Macro
TAMUS
Local
Universities/Age
ncies
Users
327
Changes o f Institutions
Phase 5 (99-
Phase 1 (89-90) Phase 2 (9 -93) Phase 3(93-94) Phase 4 (94-99) Present)
Reg Nor Cog Reg Nor Cog Reg Nor Cog Reg Nor Cog Reg Nor Cog
SAGO
TAMU
TVMDL
TSU
PVAMU
TAES
TAMU
G
TAIU
TFS
CCSU
TADCS
TAEX
TTI
RF
BCD
ITAMUC
TAMUT
WTAM
U
TEEX
TEES
• Members bolded are using FAMIS
• Each phase indicates TAMUS under new chancellors
Leadership and the Changes of FAMIS

Leadership Changes
Phase 1 (89- Phase 2 (91- Phase 3(93- Phase 4 (94- Phase 5 (99-
90) 93) 94) 99) Present)
Mode of
FAMIS
328
Institutionalization Matrix
Time P e r ads
7 ? -8 7 87-89 90-91
Institutional Forges Institutional Farces Institutional Forces
Modality Reaction Mxlality
D ie d | Indirect D rect | Indirect D rect | Indirect
SAGO
TAMJ
TVMX
TSU
PVAMU
TAES
TAMUG
TAIU
TPS____
CCSU
TADCS
TAEX
TT1_____
RF_____
BCO
TAMJC
TAMLfT
WTAMJ
TEEX
| TEES
329
APPENDIX B
SUMMARY OF DIFFERENT MODELS FOR IS RESEARCH
D iscrete- S tru cturation Socio-technical Institutional DIT

en tity al models models approaches
m odels
T heoret Neoclassical Giddens’ Actor network Early Institutional
ical economics; Structuration theory; Social neointsitutiona theory in
basis Rational theory (cf. Shaping of I studies (e.g.. economics.
choice DeSanctis and Technology Meyer and political
theory; Poole 1994); (SST) (cf. Rowan 1977; science and
Cartesian Social Williams and DiMaggio and sociology;
philosophy; Construction Edge 1995; Powell 1983; Critical
Information o f Technology Lamb, Sawyer Selznick 1957) realism;
processing (SCOT) and Kling with an Post-
theory; (Bijker and 2000); exception of structuration
Classical Pinch 1987) Evolutionary King et al's theory:
organization economics (cf. study (1994) Concepts
al theories Hanseth 1998) borrowed
from
Structuratio
n theory;
Actor
network
theory.
Social
Shaping of
Technology
and Weber
Epistem Tends to be Tends to be Interpretive and Interpretive Interpretive
ology positivistic interpretive to some extent and to some
critical extent
critical
Ontolog Flat social Tends to hold With few Tend to hold Non-flat
y reality flat ontology exceptions, tend flat ontology ontology
to hold flat
ontology
Actors Given, Human actors Both human Actors Actors
rational are the and non-human constrained by constrained
individuals; producer and (e.g., institutional and enabled
Rational- product of technology) mechanisms in
actor structures; actors institutional
models; Rather non contexts;
Individualis hierarchy Diverse
m; Freewill; among actors; agencies
rational; (individual,
strategic collective
choice and proxy
agency);
Variation of
330
agency
Instituti Institutions Structures are Little Institutions Duality with
ons (or are the product consideration and institutions;
social supposed to and means of on social institutionaliza Nested
stru c tu r be rational human action; structures; tion viewed as institutions;
c) and efficient little dealing Social stability. Variation of
with structures are uniformity, institutions;
institutional relatively stable and order; Multiplicity
arrangements Monolithic of
and unified institutions;
institutional
frameworks
Relatio Emphasis on Duality of Little Emphasis on Dynamic
nship agency; structure; consideration institutions interactions
between little Little on the interplay and among and
actors consideratio consideration between actors institutional between
& n of the o f the and social forces in IS actors and
instituti relationship interplays structures; more development. institutions
ons among actors interested in the adoption. at different
and structures game play diffusion, and levels;
among human use; Little Duality of
and non-human about the institutions;
actors within an interplay Duality of
actor network between actors preexisting
and institutions
institutions;
C h aract Focusing on Focusing on Interested in the Focusing on Balancing
eristics computation individual formation o f an the stability o f stability and
al capability agency; actor network institutions change;
o f IS, Viewing the (or IS) and and Institutions
technology interplay opening the institutionaliza and
engineering, between IT black-box; tion. institutionali
economics and actors as political Institutional zation as
o f IS; structuration; interpretations forces (e.g.. unfinished
Rationalistic focusing on of IS isomorphism. processes;
approach to the phenomenon; myth) in the Emphasize
IS design. implementatio Local innovation, both local.
implementat n and use of contingencies diffusion, contingent
ion and use; IT; early and later adoption, and aspects of
Determinacy structuration irreversibility of use o f IT; sociotechnic
o f IS impact described as large-scale IS; Relatively al change
the process of Path- determinant o f and broader
reproduction dependency institutional environment
forces in IS s
adoption and
development
Level of Micro Micro Micro Macro Multiple-
analysis (Market) level;
Interaction
between
levels
C oncept A relatively IS as IS as No IS as social
331
ualizati independent. information information conceptualizati institutions

on of IS universal. technology. infrastructure. on o f IS (in with nested
value-free and/or a socio-technical many studies); rules and
technical collection of network, or IS as resources
artifact or no hardware and actor network institutions
conceptualiz software (and (Kling and
ation features) Iacono 1989)
Role of History does With few History matters With few Duality of
history not matter exceptions and is a path exceptions history
(e.g. DeSanctis (e.g., Kling
and Poole and Iacono
1994), no 1989), no
consideration explicit view
Technol Diffusion: a Not applied Translation: a Institutionaliza A dynamic,
og> non political process tion based on nondetermin
innovati problematic. isomorphism istic process
on physical of
process institutionali
zation
Exampl George et al. Orlikowski Hanseth and Kling and
es o f IS (1990); (1992); Monteiro Iacono (1989);
studies Moore and DeSanctis and (1997) Laudon
Benbasat Poole (1994) (1985);
(1991) Nicolaou
(1999);
Christiaanse
and Huigen
(1997); King
et al. (1994);
Silva and
Figuerosa
(2002);
Avgerou
(2000)
U nderst Too simple Lacking to Lacking to deal Little clear Offering
anding and narrow deal with with diverse guidelines and design
based to explain diverse institutional directions to guidelines
on the institutional arrangements, understand the and guiding
FAM IS phenomenon arrangements openness o f an design. principles
case o f large- where large- information implementatio for the
findings scale IS; scale IS are infrastructure; n, and use of developmen
Little help designed. Little help to large-scale IS; t,
for implemented understand the Little help to implementat
understands and used; interaction explain ion, and use
g the Suggesting between actors institutional o f large-
development little methods and structures drift. scale IS; No
. diffusion. or guidelines decoupling clear
adoption. for IS and methods or
and use o f development; institutional methodologi
large-scale Less sensitive change in IS es for IS
IS to IS changes research developmen
t
332
VITA
Bongsug Chae
2275 Buckingham Street, #7
Manhattan, Kansas, 66503
Education
BA in Economics, City University o f New York, May 1995
MBA, St. John’s University, Jan 1997
PhD in Management Information Systems, Texas A&M University, Dec 2002
Selected Publications
With Vo Van Huy and David Olson “Dynamic MCDM: The Case o f Urban Infrastructure
Decision Making,” International Journal o f Information Technology & Decision Making
(IT&DM) (In press)
With Hope Koch, David Paradice, and Yi Guo "An Investigation o f Knowledge Management
within a University IT Group," Information Resource Management Journal, Vol. 15 No. 1,
2 0 0 2 , pp. 1-16.
With James F. Courtney and Dianne Hall "Developing Inquiring Organizations," Journal o f
KMCI, Vol. 1( 1 ), 2001, pp. 70-85.
With Koch, Hope, David Paradice, and Yi Guo. "Knowledge Management Facilitators within
Operational and Visionary IT Groups," In Advanced Topics o f Information Resources
Management, Second Edition, M. Khosrowpour (Ed.), Information Resources Management
Association, Hershey, PA, 2003.
With James F. Courtney and David Paradice “Incorporating An Ethical Perspective into
Decision Support Systems Design," The International Conference on Decision Making and
Decision Support in the Internet Age (DSI-Age 2002), Cork, Ireland, July 2002.
Bongsug Chae, “Technology Adaptation: The Case of Large-scale Information Systems,”

International Conference on Information Systems (ICIS) 2001 in New Orleans, 2001.
Bongsug Chae “Information Systems as Social Institutions” The IFIP 8.2 Working Group on
Information Systems in Organizations, Organizations and Society in Information Systems
(OASIS) 2001 Workshop.
With James F. Courtney “Hegelian Inquiring Organizations: Design Guidelines, Guiding

Principles and IT Support,” in the Proceedings o f the 2000 Americas Conference on
Information Systems (AMCIS), Long Beach, CA, August 10-13, 2000.

Understanding Information Syst PDF

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Understanding Information Syst PDF

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

INFORMATION TO USERS

The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of th e

Oversize materials (e.g., maps, drawings, charts) are reproduced by

ProQuest Information and Learning

DYNAMIC INSTITUTIONAL THEORY

Submitted to the Office o f Graduate Studies of

Major Subject: Information and Operations Management

ProQuest Information and Learning Company

DYNAMIC INSTITUTIONAL THEORY

Submitted to the Office of Graduate Studies of

Approved as to style and content by:

Major Subject: Information and Operations Management

Understanding Information Systems as Social Institutions:

Dynamic Institutional Theory. (December 2002)

Bongsug Chae, B.A., City University o f New York;

M.B.A., St. John’s University

Co-Chairs of Advisory Committee: Dr. Marshall Scott Poole

The deployment of large-scale information systems such as enterprise resource

planning systems, knowledge management systems, customer relationship management

dynamic process of institutionalization.

develop and refine the Dynamic Institutional Theory.

to our knowledge of large-scale information systems through providing critiques of extant

to theory-building within the IS field through developing a meta-theoretical framework that

theory by developing a dynamic institutional theory that reconceptualizes the process of

me access to documentation and answered countless questions.

many ways during my stay in INFO.

I am deeply indebted to my dissertation committee: Dr. Antonio Arreola-Risa, Dr.

trusted and supported me sufficiently to pursue my research interests in different areas. He

sacrifice, and prayers none of this would have been possible.

TABLE OF CONTENTS............................................................................................................... vii

1.1 Opening Statement....................................................................... 1

II OVERVIEW OF LARGE-SCALE INFORMATION SYSTEMS.................... 12

III DYNAMIC INSTITUTIONAL THEORY AS

3.1 Critique of the Socio-Technical Approach and the

IV RECONCEPTUALIZING LARGE-SCALE INFORMATION SYSTEMS AS

4.1 Prior Understandings o f Information Systems.......................38

4.3 Premises o f a Dynamic Institutional Theory for Information

V RETHINKING THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN IT AND

VI REFRAMING THE INTERPLAY BETWEEN EXISTING INSTITUTIONS

6.1 Prior Conceptualizations of History (or Preexisting

VII TECHNOLOGY ADAPTATION AS DYNAMIC

7.1 Introduction............................................................................ 122

7.6 Conclusion............................................................................... 150

VIII RESEARCH METHOD AND DESIGN........................................................... 152

8.1 Introduction.............................................................................. 152

DC CASE STUDY..................................................................................................... 177

9.1 Introduction............................................................................. 177

APPENDIX A ............................................................................................................................. 326

APPENDIX B ............................................................................................................................. 329

1. The Contribution o f Chapters IV through VII to the Development of DIT

3. Giddens’s Duality of Structure (1984)........................................................................... 23

4. Duality of Schemas and IT A rtifacts...............................................................................56

5. Duality of Technology (Adapted from Orlikowski 1992).............................................. 84

6. A Multi-level Model of the Duality o f Technology.......................................................85

7. Two Poles of IS and Institutional Innovation............................................................... 102

8. The Morphogenetic Sequence (Adapted from Archer 1995)...................................... 105

9. Three Alternative Strategies in the Middle Position.....................................................116

10. A Sequential Model of Institutionalization (Barley and Tolbert 1997).......................131

11. Component Processes of Institutionalization

12. Pressures for Deinstitutionalization (Adapted from Oliver 1992).............................. 138

13. Mechanisms o f Institutionalization (Adapted from Lawrence et al.2 001)..................144

14. A Dynamic Process of Technology Adaptation........................................................... 145

15. Institutional Formation in the Dynamic Process of Technology Adaptation............. 146