Advertisement

Bootstrapping Revisited: Opening the Black Box of Organizational Implementation

  • Espen Skorve
  • Margunn Aanestad
Part of the Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing book series (LNBIP, volume 60)

Abstract

This paper contributes to the literature on implementation strategies for enterprise information systems. Based on a study of the implementation of a hospital wide clinical information system in a major Norwegian hospital, we discuss various dimensions along which implementation strategies can be adapted. We utilize the concept of bootstrapping which was introduced to the IS field in the context of design and implementation of information infrastructures. Applied to the context of enterprise information system implementation, it addresses the challenges in dealing with organizational diversity.

Keywords

Implementation Strategy Medical Chart Enterprise System Linear Strategy Paper Chart 
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.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Keen, P.G.W.: Information Systems and Organizational Change. Communications of the ACM 24(1), 24–33 (1981)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Markus, M.L.: Power, Politics, and MIS Implementation. Communications of the ACM 26(6) (1983)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Leonard-Barton, D.: Implementation as mutual adaptation of technology and organization. Research Policy 17, 251–267 (1988)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Tyre, M.J., Orlokowski, W.J.: Windows of Opportunity: Temporal Patterns of Technological Adaptation in Organizations. Org. Science 5(1), 98–118 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Majchrzak, A., Rice, R.E., Malhotra, A., King, N., Ba, S.: Technology Adaptation: The Case of a Computer-Supported Inter-Organizational Team. MISQ 24(4), 569–600 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Orlikowki, W.J., Hofman, J.D.: An Improvisational Model for Change Management: The Case of Groupware Technologies. Sloan Management Review, 11–21 (1997)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Orlikowski, W.J.: Using technology and constituting structures: A practice lens for studying technology in organizations. Organization Science 11(4), 404–428 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ciborra, C.U.: De profundis? Deconstructing the concept of strategic alignment. Scandinavian J. of IS 9(1), 67–82 (1997)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Elingsen, G., Monteiro, E.: Big is beautiful: electronic patient records in large Norwegian hospitals 1980–2001. Methods Inf. Med. 42, 366–370 (2003)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ellingsen, G.: Coordinating work in hospitals through a global tool. Scandinavian J. of IS 15, 39–54 (2003)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Vikkelsø, S.: Subtle Redistribution of Work, Attention and Risks: Electronic Patient Records and Organisational Consequences. Scandinavian J. of IS 17(1), 3–30 (2005)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Jones, M.: Learning the lessons of history? Electronic records in the United Kingdom acute hospitals. 1988–2002. Health Inf. J. 10(4), 253–263 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Keen, P.G.W., Bronsema, G.S., Zuboff, S.: Implementing Common Systems: One Organization’s Experience. Sloan Working Papers, pp. 1265–1281 (1981)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Markus, M.L., Tanis, C., van Fenema, P.C.: Multisite ERP implementations. Communications of the ACM 43(4) (2000)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Hertzum, M.: Organisational Implementation: A Complex but Underrecognised Aspect of Information-System Design. In: Proc. of the second Nordic conf. on HCI. ACM Int. Conf. Proc. Series, vol. 31, pp. 201–204 (2002)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Robey, D., Ross, J.W., Boudreau, M.C.: Learning to Implement Enterprise Systems: An Exploratory Study of the Dialectics of Change. J. of MIS 19(1), 17–46 (2002)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Nordheim, S., Päivärinta, T.: Implementing enterprise content management: from evolution through strategy to contradictions out-of-the-box. European J. of IS 15(6), 648–662 (2008)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Scheepers, R.: A conceptual framework for the implementation of enterprise information portals in large organizations. European J. of IS 15(6), 635–647 (2006)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Grudin, J.: Why CSCW Applications Fail: Problems in the Design and Evaluation of Organizational Interfaces. In: Proc. of the Conf. on CSCW, Portland, Oregon, pp. 85–93 (1988)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Markus, M.L., Connolly, T.: Why CSCW Applications Fail: Problems in the Adoption of Independent Work Tools. In: Proc. of the Conf. on CSCW, ACM CSCW’90, pp. 371–380 (1990)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Grudin, J., Palen, L.: Why Groupware Succeeds: Discretion or Mandate? In: Marmolin, Sundblad, Schmidt (eds.) Proc. from the Fourth European Conf. on CSCW, pp. 263–378. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht (1995)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Hanseth, O., Aanestad, M.: Bootstrapping networks, communities and infrastructures. On the evolution of ICT solutions in health care. Presented at ITHC: Erasmus University, Rotterdam, The Netherlands (September 6-7, 2001)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Hanseth, O., Aanestad, M.: Design as bootstrapping. On the evolution of ICT networks in Health Care. Methods Inf. Med. 4 (2003)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
  25. 25.
  26. 26.
    Walsham, G.: Interpreting Information Systems in Organizations. John Wiley, Chichester (1993)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Klein, H., Myers, M.: A Set of Principles for Conducting and Evaluating Interpretive Field Studies in Information Systems. MISQ 23(1), 67–94 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Chaffee, E.E.: Three models of strategy. Academy of management review 10(1), 89–98 (1985)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Espen Skorve
    • 1
  • Margunn Aanestad
    • 1
  1. 1.Dep. of Informatics.University of OsloBlindernNorway

Personalised recommendations