A Framework for Selecting Change Strategies in IT Organizations

  • Jan Pries-Heje
  • Otto Vinter
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 4034)


In this paper we describe a framework which combines several models for organizational change. The framework enables an organization to decide which strategies will be most successful when implementing a specific change in its particular setting. The conditions for change is assessed in relation to each of the strategies for organizational change and a list-of-fit is produced, which reveals the degree to which each of the strategies fits the specific setting. The framework was developed and evaluated within a field study involving four companies in the financial sector. The IT organizations in two of these collaborated with the researchers in providing promising evaluations of the framework.


Organizational Change Ideal Type Organizational Setting Change Strategy Participatory Design 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Andersen, C.V., Krath, F., Krukow, L., Mathiasssen, L., Pries-Heje, J.: The Grass Root Effort. In: Mathiassen, et al. (eds.) Improving Software Organizations - From Principles to Practice. Addison-Wesley, Reading (2001)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bashein, B.J., Markus, M.L., Riley, P.: Preconditions for BPR Success: And How to Prevent Failures. Information Systems Management 11(2), 7–13 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Benner, M., Tushman, M.: Exploitation, exploration, and process management: The productivity dilemma revisited. Academy of Management Review 28(2), 238–256 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Borum, F.: Strategier for organisationsændring (Strategies for organizational change), Handelshøjskolens Forlag, Copenhagen (1995)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Boudreau, M.-C., Robey, D.: Coping with contradictions in business process re-engineering. Information Technology & People 9(4), 40–57 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Burnes, B.: Managing Change, 2nd edn. Financial Times. Pitman Publishing (1996)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Ciborra, C.U.: Associates: From Control to Drift. The dynamics of cooporate information infrastructures. Oxford University Press, Oxford (2000)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Davenport, T.H.: Process Innovation: Re-engineering Work through Information Technology. Harvard Business School Press (1993)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Hammer, M.: Reengineering Work: Don’t Automate, Obliterate. Harvard Business Review, 104–112 (July-August 1990)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hammer, M., Champy, J.: Reengineering the Corporation; A Manifesto For Business Revolution. Harper Business (1993)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Handy, C.: Understanding Organizations, 4th edn. Penguin Global (2005)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Huy, Q.N.: Time, temporal capability, and planned change. Academy of management Review 26(4), 601–623 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kensing, F.: Methods and Practices in Participatory Design. ITU Press, Copenhagen (2003)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kensing, F., Blomberg, J.: Participatory Design: Issues and Concerns. Computer Supported Cooperative Work 7(3-4), 167–185 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    King, W.R.: Process Reengineering: The Strategic Dimensions. Information Systems Management 11(2), 71–73 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Malhotra, Y.: Business Process Redesign: An Overview. IEEE Engineering Management Review 26(3) (1998)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Mintzberg, H.: Structure in Fives - designing effective organizations. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs (1983)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Oakland, J.S.: TQM – Text with Cases, 3rd edn. Butterworth-Heinemann (2003)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Pande, P.S., Holpp, L.: What is Six Sigma? McGraw Hill, New York (2000)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Pries-Heje, J., Johansen, J.: AIM – Ability Improvement Model. In: Richardson, I., Abrahamsson, P., Messnarz, R. (eds.) EuroSPI 2005. LNCS, vol. 3792, pp. 71–82. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Rogers, E.M.: Diffusion of Innovations, 5th edn. Free Press (2003)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Simon, H.A.: The Structure of Ill Structured Problems. Artificial Intel. 4, 181–201 (1973)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Simon, H.A.: Search and Reasoning in Problem Solving. Artificial Intel. 21, 7–29 (1983)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Tingey, M.O.: Comparing ISO 9000, Malcolm Baldrige, and the SEI CMM for Software: A Reference and Selection Guide. Prentice-Hall PTR, Upper Saddle River (1997)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Vinter, O.: A Framework for Classification of Change Approaches Based on a Comparison of Process Improvement Models. In: Bomarius, F., Komi-Sirviö, S. (eds.) PROFES 2005. LNCS, vol. 3547, pp. 29–38. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Vinter, O., Pries-Heje, J. (eds.): Påvej mod at blive bedre til at blive bedre (On how to improve the ability to improve). DELTA Report D-266, Hørsholm, Denmark (2004)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Willcocks, L., Feeny, D., Islei, G.: Managing IT as a Strategic Resource, ch. 10, pp. 238–273. McGraw-Hill, New York (1997)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jan Pries-Heje
    • 1
  • Otto Vinter
    • 2
  1. 1.The IT University of CopenhagenDenmark
  2. 2.DELTA IT ProcessesDenmark

Personalised recommendations