European Journal of Information Systems

, Volume 17, Issue 6, pp 614–630 | Cite as

Contextual dynamics during health information systems implementation: an event-based actor-network approach

Original Article

Abstract

Despite its information-intensive nature and considerable investments, healthcare continues to lag behind other industries in effectively exploiting information technology (IT). This paradox suggests that the healthcare industry presents particular challenges for successful implementation of information systems. As a result, there is an increasing interest in research into how information systems implementation efforts are shaped in interaction with the healthcare context. This paper contributes to this emerging body of knowledge by applying Actor-Network Theory (ANT) to explore the implementation of a radiology network system in a Swedish hospital. The analysis of the process reveals how complex contextual dynamics had disruptive effects. First, we identified important dynamics related to implementation content; these were mainly expressed as tensions between the radiology network system and medical work practices. Second, we found important dynamics related to implementation context; these were mainly expressed as tensions between shifting networks of actors within the implementation project and the broader institutional setting. Seeking to understand contextual dynamics during healthcare information systems implementation, we use events to focus, structure, and present the ANT analysis. This event-based approach furthers our understanding of how researchers can apply ANT to study IT-based change in general.

Keywords

healthcare information systems Actor-Network Theory event-based analysis IT-based change 

References

  1. Aarts J, Peel V and Wright G (1998) Organizational issues in health informatics: a model approach. International Journal of Medical Informatics 52 (3), 235–242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Adams S and Berg M (2004) The nature of the net: constructing reliability of health information on the web. Information Technology & People 17 (2), 150–170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Akrich M (1992) The de-scription of technical objects. In Shaping Technology/Building Society: Studies in Sociotechnical Change (BIJKER WE and LAW J, Eds), pp 205–224, The MIT Press, Cambridge MA.Google Scholar
  4. Allen JP (2004) Redefining the network: enrolment strategies in the PDA industry. Information Technology & People 17 (2), 171–185.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Anderson JG (1997) Clearing the way for physicians' use of clinical information systems. Communications of the ACM 40 (8), 83–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Atkinson CJ (2000) The ‘soft information systems and technologies methodology’ (SISTeM): an actor network contingency approach to integrated development. European Journal of Information Systems 9 (2), 104–123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Avgerou C (2001) The significance of context in information systems and organizational change. Information Systems Journal 11 (1), 43–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Avgerou C and Madon S (2004) Framing IS studies: understanding the social context of IS innovation. In The Social Study of Information and Communication Technology (AVGEROU C, CIBORRA C and LAND F, Eds), Oxford University Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
  9. Bangert D and Doktor R (2003) The role of organizational culture in the management of clinical e-health systems. In Hawaii International Conference System Sciences pp 163–171, Computer Society Press, Big Island, Hawaii.Google Scholar
  10. Berg M (2001) Implementing information systems in health care organizations: myths and challenges. International Journal of Medical Informatics 64 (2–3), 143–156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Beynon-Davies P (1995) Information systems ‘Failure’: the case of the London ambulance service's computer aided despatch project. European Journal of Information Systems 4 (3), 171–184.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Bloomfield BP, Coombs R, Cooper DJ and Rea D (1992) Machines and maneuvers: responsibility accounting and the construction of hospital information systems. Accounting, Management and Information Technologies 2 (4), 197–219.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Bloomfield BP and Vurdubakis T (1994) Boundary disputes: negotiating the boundary between the technical and the social in the development of IT systems. Information Technology & People 7 (1), 9–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Boland RJ and Schultze U (1996) From work to activity: technology and the narrative of progress. In Information Technology and Changes in Organizational Work (ORLIKOWSKI W, WALSHAM G, JONES MR and DEGROSS JI, Eds), Chapman & Hall, London.Google Scholar
  15. Bowker G, Timmermans S and Star SL (1996) Infrastructure and organizational transformations: classifying nurses' work. In Information Technology and Changes in Organizational Work (ORLIKOWSKI WJ, WALSHAM G, JONES MR and DEGROSS JI, Eds), Chapman & Hall, London.Google Scholar
  16. Braa J, Monteiro E and Sahay S (2004) Networks of action: sustainable health information systems across developing countries. MIS Quarterly 28 (3), 337–362.Google Scholar
  17. Callon M (1986) Some elements of a sociology of translation: domestication of the scallops and eth fishermen of St Brieuc bay. In Power, Action and Belief: A New Sociology of Knowledge (LAW J, Ed), pp 196–233, Routledge & Kegan Paul, London.Google Scholar
  18. Callon M (1987) Society in the making. In The Social Construction of Technological Systems: New Directions in the Sociology and History of Technology (BIJKER WE, HUGHES TP and PINCH T, Eds), MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
  19. Callon M (1991) Techno-economic networks and irreversibility. In A Sociology of Monsters? Essays on Power, Technology and Domination (LAW J, Ed), pp 132–161, Routledge, London.Google Scholar
  20. Callon M and Law J (1989) On the construction of socio-technical networks: content and context revisited. Knowledge and Society 9, 57–83.Google Scholar
  21. Chiasson MW and Davidson E (2004) Pushing the contextual envelope: developing and diffusing IS theory for health information systems research. Information and Organization 14 (3), 155–188.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Chiasson MW and Davidson E (2005) Taking industry seriously in information systems research. MIS Quarterly 29 (4), 591–605.Google Scholar
  23. Cho S, Mathiassen L and Robey D (2007) Dialectics of resilience: a multi-level analysis of a telehealth innovation. Journal of Information Technology 16 (1), 24–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Constantinides P and Barrett M (2006) Negotiating ICT development and use: the case of a telemedicine system in the healthcare region of Crete. Information and Organization 16 (1), 27–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Coombs R, Knights D and Willmott HC (1992) Culture, control and competition; towards a conceptual framework for the study of information. Organization Studies 13 (1), 51–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Crowston K and Myers MD (2004) Information technology and the transformation of industries: three research perspectives. Journal of Strategic Information Systems 13 (1), 5–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Davidson E and Chiasson M (2005) Contextual influences on technology use mediation: a comparative analysis of electronic medical record systems. European Journal of Information Systems 14 (1), 6–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Davidson EJ (2000) Analyzing genre of organizational communication in clinical information systems. Information Technology & People 13 (3), 196–209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Doolin B (1999) Socio-technical networks and information management in health care. Accounting, Management and Information Technologies 9 (2), 95–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Dwivedi A, Bali RK, James AE and Naguib RNG (2001) Telehealth systems: considering knowledge management and ICT issues. In The 23rd Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society pp 25–28, Computer Society Press, Istanbul, Turkey.Google Scholar
  31. Faraj S, Kwon D and Watts S (2004) Contested artifact: technology sensemaking, actor networks, and the shaping of the web browser. Information Technology & People 17 (2), 186–209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Fitzgerald G and Russo NL (2005) The turnaround of the London ambulance service computer-aided despatch system (LASCAD). European Journal of Information Systems 14 (3), 244–257.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Geertz C (1988) Works and Lives: The Anthropologist as Author. Standford University Press, Palo Alto, CA.Google Scholar
  34. Gersick C (1991) Revolutionary change theories: a multilevel exploration of the punctuated equilibrium paradigm. Academy of Management Review 16 (1), 10–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Hanseth O, Jacucci E, Grisot M and Aanestad M (2006) Reflexive standardization: side effects and complexity in standard making. MIS Quarterly 30 (Special Issue), 563–581.Google Scholar
  36. Hanseth O and Monteiro E (1997) Inscribing behavior in information infrastructure standards. Accounting, Management and Information Technologies 7 (4), 183–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Hepworth JB, Vidgen GA, Griffin E and Woodward AM (1992) The enhancement of information systems through user involvement in system design. International Journal of Information Management 12 (2), 120–129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Hine C (1995) Representations of information technology in disciplinary development: disappearing plants and invisible networks. Science, Technology and Human Values 20 (1), 65–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Holmström J and Stalder F (2001) Drifting technologies and multi-purpose networks: the case of the Swedish cashcard. Information and Organization 11 (3), 187–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Isabella LA (1990) Evolving interpretations as a change unfolds: how managers construe key organizational events. Academy of Management Journal 33 (1), 7–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Jayasuriya R (1999) Managing information systems for health services in a developing country: a case study using a contextualist framework. International Journal of Information Management 19 (5), 335–349.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Kavanagh D and Araujo L (1995) Chronigami: folding and unfolding time. Accounting, Management and Information Technologies 5 (2), 103–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Klein HK and Myers MD (1999) A set of principles for conducting and evaluating interpretive field studies in information systems. MIS Quarterly 23 (1), 67–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Langley A (1999) Strategies for theorizing from process data. Academy of Management Review 24 (4), 691–710.Google Scholar
  45. Lapointe L and Rivard S (2005) A multilevel model of resistance to information technology implementation. MIS Quarterly 29 (3), 461–491.Google Scholar
  46. Latour B (1987) Science in Action: How to Follow Scientists and Engineers Through Society. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
  47. Latour B (2005) Reassembling the Social: An Introduction to Actor-Network Theory. Oxford University Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
  48. Lau F, Doze S, Vincent D, Wilson D, Noseworthy T, Hayward R and Penn A (1999) Patterns of improvisation for evidence-based practice in clinical settings. Information Technology & People 12 (3), 287–303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Law J (1991) Introduction: monsters, machines and socio-technical relations. In A Sociology of Monsters: Essays on Power, Technology and Domination (LAW J, Ed), Routledge, London.Google Scholar
  50. Law J (1992) Notes on the theory of the actor-network: ordering, strategy, and heterogeneity. Systemic Practice and Action Research 5 (4), 379–393.Google Scholar
  51. Leonard-Barton D (1990) A dual methodology for case studies: synergistic use of a longitudinal single site with replicated multiple sites. Organization Science 1 (3), 248–266.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Lorenzi NM and Riley RT (2003) Organizational issues=change. International Journal of Medical Informatics 69 (2–3), 197–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Lorenzi NM, Riley RT, Blyth AJC, Southon G and Dixon BJ (1997) Antecedents of the people and organizational aspects of medical informatics: review of the literature. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association 4 (2), 79–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Mähring M, Holmström J, Keil M and Montealegre R (2004) Trojan actor-networks and swift translations – bringing actor-network theory to IT project escalation studies. Information Technology & People 17 (2), 210–238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Menon NM, Lee B and Eldenburg L (2000) Productivity of information systems in the healthcare industry. Information Systems Research 11 (1), 83–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Monteiro E and Hanseth O (1996) Social shaping of information infrastructure: on being specific about technology. In Information Technology and Changes in Organizational Work (ORLIKOWSKI WJ, WALSHAM G, JONES MR and DEGROSS JI, Eds), Chapman & Hall, London.Google Scholar
  57. NEWMAN M and ROBEY D (1992) A social process model of user-analyst relationships. MIS Quarterly 16 (2), 249–266.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Ngwenyama OK and Klein HK (1994) An exploration of expertise of knowledge workers: towards a definition of the universe of discourse for knowledge acquisition. Information Systems Journal 4 (2), 129–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Orlikowski WJ and Hofman JD (1997) An improvisational model of change management: the case of groupware technologies. Sloan Management Review 38 (2), 11–21.Google Scholar
  60. Orlikowski WJ, Yates J, Okamura K and Fujimoto M (1995) Shaping electronic communication: the meta-structuring of technology in the context of use. Organization Science 6 (4), 423–444.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Paul DL and McDaniel Jr. RR (2004) A field study of the effect of interpersonal trust on virtual collaborative relationship performance. MIS Quarterly 26 (2), 183–227.Google Scholar
  62. Paul RJ (2005) Editor's view: an opportunity for editors of IS journals to relate their experiences and offer advice. European Journal of Information Systems 14 (3), 207–212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Peterson MF (1998) Embedded organizational events: the units of process in organization science. Organization Science 9 (1), 16–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Pettigrew AM (1985) Contextualist research: a natural way to link theory and practice. In Doing Research that is Useful for Theory and Practice (Lawler E, Ed), Jossey-Bass Publishers, San Fransisco, Washington, London.Google Scholar
  65. Pettigrew AM (1987) Context and action in the transformation of the firm. Journal of Management Studies 24 (6), 649–670.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Pettigrew AM (1990) Longitudinal field research on change: theory and practice. Organization Science 1 (3), 267–292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Pettigrew AM, Woodman RW and Cameron KS (2001) Studying organizational change and development: challenges for future research. Academy of Management Journal 44 (4), 697–713.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Pichault F (1995) The management of politics in technically related organizational change. Organization Studies 16 (3), 449–476.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Pouloudi A (1999) Information technology for collaborative advantage in healthcare revisited. Information & Management 35 (6), 345–356.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Raghupathi W (1997) Health care information systems. Communications of the ACM 40 (8), 80–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Robey D, Ross JW and Boudreau MC (2002) Learning to implement enterprise systems: an exploratory study of the dialectics of change. Journal of Management Information Systems 19 (1), 17–46.Google Scholar
  72. Schultze U (2000) A confessional account of an ethnography about knowledge work. MIS Quarterly 24 (1), 3–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Scott SV and Wagner EL (2003) Networks, negotiations, and new times: the implementation of enterprise resource planning into an academic administration. Information and Organization 13 (4), 285–313.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Sheldon I. Dorenfest Associates, Ltd (2004) Healthcare Information Technology Spending is Growing Rapidly. Sheldon I. Dorenfest & Associates, Ltd., http://dorensfest.com/doc/pressrelease-Feb2004.pdf.
  75. Sillince J and Harindranath G (1998) Integration of requirements determination and business process re-engineering: a case study of an ambulatory care and diagnostic (ACAD) centre. European Journal of Information Systems 7 (2), 115–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Star SL and Griesemer JR (1989) Institutional ecology, ‘translations’ and boundary objects: amateurs and professionals in Berkeley's museum of vertebrate zoology. Social Studies of Science 19 (3), 387–420.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Star SL and Ruhleder K (1996) Steps toward an ecology of infrastructure: design and access for large information spaces. Information Systems Research 7 (1), 111–134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Tanriverdi H and Iacono CS (1998) Knowledge barriers to diffusion of telemedicine. In International Conference on Information Systems (DeGross J, Hirschheim R and Newman M, Eds), pp 39–50, Helsinki, Finland.Google Scholar
  79. Van De Ven AH and Poole MS (1995) Explaining development and change in organizations. Academy of Management Review 20 (3), 510–540.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Vidgen R and McMaster T (1996) Black Boxes, non-human stakeholders and the translation of IT. In Information Technology and Changes in Organizational Work (ORLIKOWSKI WJ, WALSHAM G, JONES MR and DEGROSS JI, Eds), Chapman & Hall, London.Google Scholar
  81. Walsham G (1995) Interpretive case study in IS research: nature and method. European Journal of Information Systems 4 (2), 74–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Walsham G (1997) Actor-network theory and is research: current status and future prospects. In Information Systems and Qualitative Research (LEE S, LIEBENAU J and DEGROSS JI, Eds), pp 466–480, Chapman and Hall, London.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Walsham G (2006) Doing interpretive research. European Journal of Information Systems 15 (3), 320–330.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Walsham G and Sahay S (1999) GIS for district-level administration in India: problems and opportunities. MIS Quarterly 23 (1), 39–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. Yin RK (2003) Case Study Research Design and Methods. Sage Publications, Inc., Thousand Oaks, CA.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Palgrave Macmillan 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Computer Information SystemsVirginia State UniversityU.S.A.
  2. 2.Center for Process Innovation, J. Mack Robinson College of Business, Georgia State UniversityU.S.A.
  3. 3.IT University of GöteborgSweden

Personalised recommendations