Abstract
Using IT in ways that can trigger major organizational changes creates high-risk, potentially high-re ward, situations that I call technochange (for technology-driven organizational change). Technochange differs from typical IT projects and from typical organizational change programs and therefore requires a different approach. One major risk in technochange—that people will not use information technology and related work practices—is not thoroughly addressed by the discipline of IT project management, which focuses on project cost, project schedule, and solution functionality. Organizational change management approaches are also generally not effective on their own, because they take as a given the IT “solutions” developed by a technical team. Consequently, the potential for the IT “solution” to be misaligned with important organizational characteristics, such as culture or incentives, is great.
Merely combining IT project management and organizational change management approaches does not produce the best results, for two reasons. First, the additive approach does not effectively address the many failure-threatening problems that can arise over the lengthy sequential process of the typical technochange lifecycle. Second, the additive approach is not structured to produce the characteristics of a good technochange solution: a complete intervention consisting of IT and complementary organizational changes, an implementable solution with minimal misfits with the existing organization, and an organization primed to appropriate the potential benefits of the technochange solution. With hard work and care, the combined IT project management plus organizational change approach can be made to work. However, an iterative, incremental approach to implementing technochange can be a better strategy in many situations. The essential characteristic of the technochange prototyping approach is that each phase involves both new IT functionality and related organizational changes, such as redesigned business processes, new performance metrics, and training.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Notes
Markus, Axline, Petrie and Tanis, Learning From Adopters' Experiences with ERP – Successes and probems,' Journal of Information Technology 15(4) (December 2000), 245–265.
Markus and Tanis, The Enterprise Systems Experience – From adoption to success, in Zmud (ed.) Framing the Domains of IT Research: Glimpsing the Future Through the Past, Cincinnati, OH: Pinnaflex Educational Resources, 2000.
Majchrzak, Management of Technological and Organizational Change, in Salvendy (ed.) Handbook of Industrial Engineering, New York, NY: John Wiley and Sons, 1991, pp. 767–797.
Check out what the Project Management Institute has to say about the processes of project management. ‘Project communication’ hardly scratches the surface of what an organization change expert would think is needed.
Pick up a sample of organizational behavior and change textbooks and see for yourself.
Laartz, Monnoyer and Scherdin, Designing IT For Business, in McKinsey Quarterly, 2003, pp. 76–87.
Levinson, Cleared for Takeoff, in CIO Magazine, 2002, p. online http:www.cio.com.
Markus and I, The Magic Bullet Theory In IT-Enabled Transformation, Sloan Management Review (Winter) 1997, 55–68.
Brynjolfsson and Hitt, Beyond Computation: Information technology, organizational transformation and business performance, Journal of Economic Perspectives 14(4) (Fall 2000) 23–48.
IT projects, technochange efforts, and change management programs also differ in their basic methodologies, the roles of the organization's managers, IT specialists, and other specialists, and in key success factors (see Table 1.)
Bashein and Markus, Data Warehouses: More Than Just Mining, Morristown, NJ: Financial Executives Research Foundation, Inc., 2000.
Harrison, Conner and Horney, Project Change Management: Applying Change Management to Improvement Projects, New York: McGraw-Hill, 2000.
Mao and Markus, Revisiting User Participation – A new look at an old problem, Bentley College, Waltham, MA, working paper available from the author.
Stinchcombe, Information and Organizations, Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 1990.
See Note 2.
Markus, Majchrzak and Grasser, A Design Theory For Systems That Support Emergent Knowledge Processes, MIS Quarterly 26(3) (September 2002) 179–213.
See Note 2.
Bass, Cigna's Self-Inflicted Wounds, in CIO Magazine, 2003, online at www.cio.com.
Bulkeley, A Cautionary Network Tale: Fox–Meyer's high-tech gamble, in Wall Street Journal Interactive Edition, 1996.
Bashein, Markus and Finley, Safety Nets: Secrets of Effective Information Technology Controls, Morristown, NJ: Financial Executives Research Foundation, Inc., 1997.
Markus and Robey, Why Stuff Happens: Explaining the unintended consequences of using information technology, in Vendelo and Andersen (eds.) A Tribute to Niels Bjorn-Andersen, London: Butterworth-Heinemann, forthcoming.
Brynjolfsson and Hitt, Beyond Computation: Information technology, organizational transformation and business performance, Journal of Economic Perspectives 14(4) (Fall 2000) 23–48.
Markus and Keil, If We Build It They Will Come: Designing Information Systems That Users Want To Use, Sloan Management Review (Summer) 1994, pp 11–25.
This might be called the product theory of resistance. There are at least two other major theories of resistance to change: a theory that focuses on people and one that focuses on the change process. Although savvy change managers know and can apply all three, the other two theories are beyond the scope of this article.
See Note 23.
Applegate, Frito-Lay, Inc.: A Strategic Transition (Consolidated), Boston, MA: Harvard Business School.
By spreading out the payments over time, Frito-Lay avoided the shakedown trauma experienced by Cigna.
Corbett, Blackburn and Van Wassenhove, Case Study Parnterships To Improve Supply Chains, Sloan Management Review (Summer) 1999, pp 71–82.
See Note 16.
Kanter, Stein and Jick, The Challenge of Organizational Change: How companies experience it and leaders guide it, New York: The Free Press, 1992.
Schaffer, The Breakthrough Strategy: Using short-term successes to build the high performance organization, New York: Ballinger Publishing Co., 1988.
Orlikowski and Hofman, An Improvisational Model for Change Management: The case of groupware technologies, Sloan Management Review (Winter) 1997, pp 11–21.
Fichman and Moses, An Incremental Process for Software Implementation, Sloan Management Review (Winter) 1998, pp 39–52.
Ibid.
See Note 16.
See Note 33.
See Note 32.
See Note 33.
Acknowledgements
The author gratefully acknowledges the helpful comments of Ann Majchrzak, Chris Sauer, Peter Seddon, Mark Silver, and Alfred Waller on an earlier version of this paper.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Markus, M. Technochange management: using IT to drive organizational change. J Inf Technol 19, 4–20 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.jit.2000002
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.jit.2000002