1,720,985 research outputs found
Social power and information technology implementation: a contentious framing lens
No full textResearch on the organizational implementation of information technology (IT) and social power has favoured explanations based on issues of resource power and process power at the expense of matters of meaning power. As a result, although the existence and importance of meaning power is acknowledged, its distinctive practices and enacted outcomes remain relatively under-theorized and under-explored by IT researchers. This paper focused on unpacking the practices and outcomes associated with the exercise of meaning power within the IT implementation process. Our aim was to analyze the practices employed to construct meaning and enact a collective 'definition of the situation'. We focused on framing and utilizing the signature matrix technique to represent and analyze the exercise of meaning power in practice. The paper developed and illustrated this conceptual framework using a case study of a conflictual IT implementation in a challenging public sector environment. We concluded by pointing out the situated nature of meaning power practices and the enacted outcomes. Our research extends the literature on IT and social power by offering an analytical framework distinctly suited to the analysis and deeper understanding of the meaning power properties. © 2010 Blackwell Publishing Ltd.Avgerou C, 2007, MIS QUART, V31, P295; Azad B, 2009, GOV INFORM Q, V26, P5, DOI 10.1016-j.giq.2008.08.005; Barrett M., 2006, J APPL BEHAV SCI, V42, P6, DOI 10.1177-0021886305285299; Bateson G., 1972, STEPS ECOLOGY MIND; Berger P. L., 1966, SOCIAL CONSTRUCTION; Bijker W. E., 1997, BICYCLES BAKELITES B; Boudreau MC, 2005, ORGAN SCI, V16, P3, DOI 10.1287-orsc.1040.0103; Bourdieu P., 1970, REPROD ED SOC CULTUR; Bradshaw-Camball P, 1991, ORGAN SCI, V2, P379, DOI 10.1287-orsc.2.4.379; Creed D, 2002, ORGAN SCI, V13, P475; Creed D. W. E., 2002, ORGAN RES METHODS, V5, P34; Davidson E., 2006, J APPL BEHAV SCI, V42, P23, DOI DOI 10.1177-0021886305285126; Davidson EJ, 2002, MIS QUART, V26, P329, DOI 10.2307-4132312; Dougherty D, 1996, ACAD MANAGE J, V39, P1120, DOI 10.2307-256994; Dowell G, 2002, ADV STRAT M, V19, P97; EISENHARDT KM, 1989, ACAD MANAGE REV, V14, P532, DOI 10.2307-258557; ENTMAN RM, 1993, J COMMUN, V43, P51, DOI 10.1111-j.1460-2466.1993.tb01304.x; Evered R., 1981, ACAD MANAGE REV, V6, P385, DOI DOI 10.2307-257374; Faraj S, 2004, INFORM TECHNOLOGY PE, V17, P186, DOI 10.1108-09593840410542501; Gamson W., 1983, EVALUATING WELFARE S, P397; GAMSON WA, 1989, AM J SOCIOL, V95, P1, DOI 10.1086-229213; Gitlin Todd, 1980, WHOLE WORLD IS WATCH; Goffman E., 1974, FRAME ANAL ESSAY ORG; HARDY C, 1985, J MANAGE STUD, V22, P384, DOI 10.1111-j.1467-6486.1985.tb00004.x; Hardy C., 1996, BRIT J MANAGE, V7, P3; Hargrave TJ, 2006, ACAD MANAGE REV, V31, P864; Howcroft D, 2006, INFORM SYST J, V16, P215, DOI 10.1111-j.1365-2575.2006.00216.x; Jasperson J, 2002, MIS QUART, V26, P397, DOI 10.2307-4132315; Lin A, 2005, EUR J INFORM SYST, V14, P49, DOI 10.1057-palgrave.ejis.3000521; MARKUS ML, 1987, COMMUN ACM, V30, P498, DOI 10.1145-214762.214764; MARKUS ML, 1983, COMMUN ACM, V26, P430, DOI 10.1145-358141.358148; Markuss M. L., 2004, J INF TECHNOL, V19, P3; Nidumolu SR, 1996, MIS QUART, V20, P197, DOI 10.2307-249478; ORLIKOWSKI WJ, 1994, ACM T INFORM SYST, V12, P174, DOI 10.1145-196734.196745; Pettigrew A.M., 1973, POLITICS ORG DECISIO; Pfeffer J., 1981, POWER ORG; Sillince JAA, 1997, INFORM SYST RES, V8, P368, DOI 10.1287-isre.8.4.368; Silva L., 2003, J ASSOC INF SYST, V4, P294; Benford RD, 2000, ANNU REV SOCIOL, V26, P611, DOI 10.1146-annurev.soc.26.1.611; Swan J, 2005, HUM RELAT, V58, P913, DOI 10.1177-0018726705057811; Thomas W. I., 1928, SOCIAL PSYCHOL SYMBO, P154; *UN DEV PROGR, 2005, RBAS MIC BEST PRACT; WILLCOCKS L, 2003, SOCIAL THEORY PHILOS, P238; *WORLD BANK, 1994, MEM PRES REV ENH TEC; *WORLD BANK, 2003, MEM REC PRES SUPPL L; Yin R. K., 2003, CASE STUDY RES DESIG86
What shapes Global diffusion of e-government: Comparing the infuence of national governance institutions
No full textPrior research has established the existence of a differential between industrialized and other countries for e-Government diffusion. It attempts to explain this divide by identifying economic and technical variables. At the same time, the role of national governance institutions in e-Government diffusion has been relatively under-theorized and under-studied. The authors posit that, the existing national governance institutions shape the diffusion and assimilation of e-Government in any country via associated institutions in three key sectors: government, private sector and non-governmental organizations. This paper develops and tests a preliminary model of e-Government diffusion using the governance institutional climate as represented via democratic practices, transparency of private sector corporate governance, corruption perception, and the free press. The results indicate that the level of development of national governance institutions can explain the level of e-Government diffusion over and above economic and technical variables. The authors' research contributes to the literature by providing initial evidence that the existing national governance institutions infuence and shape e-Gov diffusion and assimilation beyond the adoption stage. © 2010, IGI Global.AHRENS J, 2002, DEV TRANSITION, V6, P35; AHRENS J, 2006, PRIVATE U APPL SCI G; Andersen KV, 2006, GOV INFORM Q, V23, P236, DOI 10.1016-j.giq.2005.11.008; Azad B, 2009, GOV INFORM Q, V26, P5, DOI 10.1016-j.giq.2008.08.005; Besley T., 2002, RIGHT TELL ROLE MASS, P45; Boyer-Wright K. M., 2008, P 41 ANN HAW INT C S; Campos NF, 1999, WORLD DEV, V27, P439, DOI 10.1016-S0305-750X(98)00149-1; Chen YN, 2006, J GLOB INF MANAG, V14, P23, DOI 10.4018-jgim.2006010102; Ciborra C., 2005, INFORM TECHNOLOGY PE, V18, P260, DOI DOI 10.1108-09593840510615879; Coursey D, 2008, PUBLIC ADMIN REV, V68, P523, DOI 10.1111-j.1540-6210.2008.00888.x; De Soto H., 2000, MYSTERY CAPITAL WHY; DIMAGGIO PJ, 1983, AM SOCIOL REV, V48, P147, DOI 10.2307-2095101; Djankov S, 2003, J LAW ECON, V46, P341, DOI 10.1086-377116; Dobbin F, 2007, ANNU REV SOCIOL, V33, P449, DOI 10.1146-annurev.soc.33.090106.142507; Dunleavy P., 2007, OXFORD HDB INFORM CO, P440; Dunleavy P., 2006, DIGITAL ERA GOVERNAN; Dwivedi YK, 2009, GOV INFORM Q, V26, P3, DOI 10.1016-j.giq.2008.09.001; Evans P, 1999, AM SOCIOL REV, V64, P748, DOI 10.2307-2657374; Fountain J. E., 2001, BUILDING VIRTUAL STA; Fountain J. E., 2007, GOVERNANCE INFORM TE; Gronlund A., 2004, COMMUNICATIONS ASS I, V15; Helbig N, 2009, GOV INFORM Q, V26, P89, DOI 10.1016-j.giq.2008.05.004; Islam R., 2008, INFORM PUBLIC CHOICE; Islam R., 2006, ECON POLIT-OXFORD, V18, P121, DOI 10.1111-j.1468-0343.2006.00166.x; Jones MR, 2008, MIS QUART, V32, P127; Kamarck E. C., 2002, GOVERNANCE COM DEMOC; KATCHANOVSKI I, 2005, INT J PUBLIC ADMIN, V28, P665, DOI DOI 10.1081-PAD-20064228; KATCHANOVSKI I, 2009, J COMP POLICY ANAL R; Kaufmann D., 1999, 2196 WORLD BANK; Ke WL, 2004, COMMUN ACM, V47, P95, DOI 10.1145-990680.990687; KEOHANC RO, 2000, GOVERNANCE GLOBALIZI; Kim S, 2009, GOV INFORM Q, V26, P42, DOI 10.1016-j.giq.2008.09.002; KING JL, 1994, INFORM SYST RES, V5, P139, DOI 10.1287-isre.5.2.139; Layne K, 2001, GOV INFORM Q, V18, P122, DOI 10.1016-S0740-624X(01)00066-1; Lee CK, 2006, INT ORGAN, V60, P883, DOI 10.1017-S002081830606292; LI S, 2005, BUSINESS HORIZONS, V0048; Maddala G. S., 1992, INTRO ECONOMETRICS; March J. G., 1989, REDISCOVERING I ORG; MARSHALL MG, 2007, POLITY IV PROJECT PO; MARTIN R, 1998, TI WORKING PAPER ACC; Mayer-Schonberger V., 2007, GOVERNANCE INFORM TE; MEYER JW, 1977, AM J SOCIOL, V83, P340, DOI 10.1086-226550; Meyer JW, 1997, AM J SOCIOL, V103, P144; Moon M. J., 2005, P 38 ANN HAW INT C S; NECKS R, 2007, GOVT INFORM Q, V24, P243; Norris P., 2001, DIGITAL DIVIDE CIVIC; NORTH DC, 1994, AM ECON REV, V84, P359; North D. C., 1990, I I CHANGE EC PERFOR; *REP BORD, 2006, PRESS FREED IND 2006; Rodrik Dani, 2003, SEARCH PROSPERITY AN; Rogers E. M., 1995, DIFFUSION INNOVATION; Siau K, 2006, J GLOB INF MANAG, V14, P47, DOI 10.4018-jgim.2006010103; Singh H., 2007, COMMUNICATIONS ASS I, V20, P632; SRIVASTAVA SC, 2008, COMMUNICATIONS ASS I, V23; Stiglitz J. E, 2008, INFORM PUBLIC CHOICE, P139; Stinchcombe AL, 1997, ANNU REV SOCIOL, V23, P1, DOI 10.1146-annurev.soc.23.1.1; STRANG D, 1993, THEOR SOC, V22, P487, DOI 10.1007-BF00993595; Tolbert CJ, 2008, PUBLIC ADMIN REV, V68, P549, DOI 10.1111-j.1540-6210.2008.00890.x; Treier S, 2008, AM J POLIT SCI, V52, P201; *UN, 2005, DIG DIV REP ICT DIFF; UN, 2005, UN GLOB E GOV READ R; West D. M., 2005, DIGITAL GOVT TECHNOL; WEST DM, 2007, GOVERNANCE INFORM TE, P17; Williamson OE, 1999, J LAW ECON ORGAN, V15, P306, DOI 10.1093-jleo-15.1.306; WILSON EJ, 2003, INFORM REVOLUTION DE; WILSON JAMES Q., 1989, BUREAUCRACY WHAT GOV; World Bank, 2002, BUILD I MARK WORLD D; *WORLD BANK, 2004, WORLD BANK CORP CORR; *WORLD EC FOR, 2005, GLOB INF TECH REP 20; Yoon J, 2009, GOV INFORM Q, V26, P25, DOI 10.1016-j.giq.2008.08.00647
Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis
Full text linkThe present study examines one of the fundamental aspects of author co-citation analysis (ACA) - the way co-citation
counts are defined. Co-citation counting provides the data on which all subsequent statistical analyses and mappings
are based, and we compare ACA results based on two different types of co-citation counting - the traditional type that
only counts the first one among a cited work's authors on the one hand and a non-traditional type that takes into
account the first 5 authors of a cited work on the other hand. Results indicate that the picture produced through this non-traditional author co-citation counting contains more coherent author groups and is therefore considerably clearer. However, this picture represents fewer specialties in the research field being studied than that produced through the traditional first-author co-citation counting when the same number of top-ranked authors is selected and analyzed. Reasons for these effects are discussed
Using signature matrix to analyze conflicting frames during the IS implementation process
No full textAnalyzing and theoretically accommodating the presence of diverse perspectives or frames during the implementation process has proved conceptually complex and empirically elusive within the extant IS research. The purpose of this manuscript is to introduce a research methodology to rectify these challenges in analyzing frames, i.e., signature matrix. We posit that this approach can help scholars to research perspectives or frames in a more transparent and straightforward manner which has been rare so far and as a result contribute to frame analysis in IS research. © 2013 Elsevier Inc.Azad B, 2011, INFORM SYST J, V21, P33, DOI 10.1111-J.1365-2575.2010.00349.x; Azad B, 2008, J STRATEGIC INF SYST, V17, P75, DOI 10.1016-j.jsis.2007.12.001; Baxter J, 2003, ACCOUNT ORG SOC, V28, P97, DOI 10.1016-S0361-3682(02)00022-3; Berger P. L., 1966, SOCIAL CONSTRUCTION; Creed D. W. E., 2002, ORGAN RES METHODS, V5, P34; Davidson E., 2006, J APPL BEHAV SCI, V42, P23, DOI DOI 10.1177-0021886305285126; ENTMAN RM, 1993, J COMMUN, V43, P51, DOI 10.1111-j.1460-2466.1993.tb01304.x; Gamson W., 1983, EVALUATING WELFARE S, P397; Glass RL, 2006, COMMUN ACM, V49, P15, DOI 10.1145-1145287.1145301; Goffman E., 1974, FRAME ANAL ESSAY ORG; He J, 2008, J MANAGE INFORM SYST, V25, P301, DOI 10.2753-MIS0742-1222250111; Howcroft D, 2006, INFORM SYST J, V16, P215, DOI 10.1111-j.1365-2575.2006.00216.x; Hutchison AJ, 2010, INT J SOC RES METHOD, V13, P283, DOI 10.1080-13645570902996301; IVES B, 1984, MANAGE SCI, V30, P586, DOI 10.1287-mnsc.30.5.586; MARKUS ML, 1983, COMMUN ACM, V26, P430, DOI 10.1145-358141.358148; Neisser U., 1976, COGNITION REALITY PR; Nicolaou AI, 2008, INT J ACCOUNT INF SY, V9, P131, DOI 10.1016-j.accinf.2008.07.001; ORLIKOWSKI WJ, 1994, ACM T INFORM SYST, V12, P174, DOI 10.1145-196734.196745; Orlikowski WJ, 2006, J APPL BEHAV SCI, V42, P127, DOI 10.1177-0021886305285130; Reese S. D., 2003, FRAMING PUBLIC LIFE, P7; Rose J, 2006, INT J ACCOUNTING INF, V7, P217, DOI DOI 10.1016-J.ACCINF.2006.06.003; Benford RD, 2000, ANNU REV SOCIOL, V26, P611, DOI 10.1146-annurev.soc.26.1.611; Wagners E. L., 2006, J APPL BEHAV SCI, V42, P40, DOI 10.1177-0021886305284290; Walsh J.P., 1995, ORGAN SCI, V6, P280; Walsham G, 1995, INFORM SYST RES, V6, P376, DOI 10.1287-isre.6.4.37610
Variations on the Author
Full text link“Variations on the Author” discusses two of Eduardo Coutinho’s recent films (Um Dia na Vida, from 2010, and Últimas Conversas, posthumously released in 2015) and their contribution to the general question of documentary authorship. The director’s filmography is characterized by a consistent yet self-effacing form of authorial self-inscription: Coutinho often features as an interviewer that rather than express opinions propels discourses; an interviewer that is good at listening. This mode of self-inscription characterizes him as an author who is not expressive but who is nonetheless markedly present on the screen. In Um Dia na Vida, however, Coutinho is completely absent form the image, while Últimas Conversas, on the contrary, includes a confessional prologue that moves the director from the margins to the center of his films. This article examines the ways in which these works stand out in the filmography of a director who offers new insights into the notion of cinematic authorship
Appropriate Similarity Measures for Author Cocitation Analysis
Full text linkWe provide a number of new insights into the methodological discussion about author cocitation analysis. We first argue that the use of the Pearson correlation for measuring the similarity between authors’ cocitation profiles is not very satisfactory. We then discuss what kind of similarity measures may be used as an alternative to the Pearson correlation. We consider three similarity measures in particular. One is the well-known cosine. The other two similarity measures have not been used before in the bibliometric literature. Finally, we show by means of an example that our findings have a high practical relevance.information science;Pearson correlation;cosine;similarity measure;author cocitation analysis
Dispelling the Myths Behind First-author Citation Counts
Full text linkWe conducted a full-scale evaluative citation analysis study of scholars in the XML research field to explore just how different from each other author rankings resulting from different citation counting methods actually are, and to demonstrate the capability of emerging data and tools on the Web in supporting more realistic citation counting methods. Our results contest some common arguments for the continued
use of first-author citation counts in the evaluation of scholars, such as high correlations between author rankings by first-author citation counts and other citation
counting methods, and high costs of using more realistic citation counting methods that are not well-supported by the ISI databases. It is argued that increasingly available digital full text research papers make it possible for citation analysis studies to go beyond what the ISI databases have directly supported and to employ more
sophisticated methods
Situated practices of computer workarounds in a hospital medication system: A Case study
No full textAre computer workarounds temporary or routine, sign of resistance or acceptance, harmful or benign? The extant literature says they can be any of these. We surmise that this ambiguity reflects the modus operandi that content and processes of computer workarounds are under-theorized as post IT implementation phenomena. Recent research, though insightful, still casts computer workarounds as nominal and aggregate phenomena analyzing their antecedent conditions and their impact. This paper is an attempt to disentangle the black-box of computer workarounds focusing on their contents and processes as situated work practices using negotiated order as a conceptual framework. By making the workaround practices as well as their immediate upstream and downstream activities the focal unit of analysis, we disentangle the enactment of a computer workaround. Specifically we propose that some workarounds are based on an alternate negotiated order and may entail coordinated action. Thus, we extend the literature by positing that computer workarounds are social practices going beyond prior formulations of workarounds as hacks or tweaks by individual computer users. Our findings are based on a non-participant observer case study of a medication dispensing system in a teaching hospital
- …
