Implementing IT in Production Settings

Organisational Sense-Making and Psychological Stress
  • Steven Verjans
Part of the Information and Organization Design Series book series (INOD, volume 2)


In 1996 a large Danish manufacturing company — Omikron25 — started a European-Commission financed information technology (IT) research project — BlueTech1 — in order to develop and test new software that would allow shop floor workers to have more influence and control over their daily work in production. This new software was expected to raise the workers’ motivation and commitment and — in the long run — their productivity. The whole idea was to use BlueTech as an experiment that should show that IT can act as a catalyst for organisational change. Omikron had a very traditional top-down hierarchical functional organisation, with foremen and supervisors telling their colleagues what to do when and how. Most workers had a career of more than 20 years with the company, some even more than 40 years, a period in which a lot had changed technologically, but not organisationally or culturally. BlueTech, on the other hand, was implemented by a very young research department specialised in developing advanced robot systems and robot software, a department which was something of an ‘outsider’ within a company focussed on hands-on production.


Organisational Level Middle Manager Production Setting Management Style Case Study Research 
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. Arnold, J., Robertson, I. T., & Cooper, C. L. (1995). Work Psychology: Understanding human behaviour in the workplace (2nd ed.). London: Pitman.Google Scholar
  2. Barley, S. R. (1986). Technology as an occasion for structuring: evidence from observations of CT scanners and the social order of radiology departments. Administrative Science Quarterly, 31(1), 78–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Burton, R. M., Lauridsen, J., & Obel, B. (2000). Fit and misfits in the multi-dimensional contingency model: An organizational change perspective (LOK report No. 1-2000). Odense: University of Southern Denmark.Google Scholar
  4. Burton, R. M., Lauridsen, J., & Obel, B. (Forthcoming). The opportunity cost of extreme situational and contingency misfits.Google Scholar
  5. Burton, R. M., & Obel, B. (1998). Strategic organisational diagnosis and design: Developing theory for application (2nd ed.). Boston/Dordrecht/London: Kluwer Acadmic Publishers.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Caplan, R. D. (1998). Person-Environment Fit. In J. M. Stellman (Ed.), Encyclopaedia of Occupational Health and Safety (Vol. 1, pp. 34.15–34.17). Geneva: International Labour Office.Google Scholar
  7. Cooper, C. L., Sloan, S., & Williams, S. (1987). Occupational Stress Indicator. Windsor: NFER/Nelson.Google Scholar
  8. DeSanctis, G., & Poole, M. S. (1994). Capturing the complexity in advanced technology use: adaptive structuration theory. Organization Science, 5(2), 121–147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Døjbak, D., Nissen, T., & Obel, B. (2000). OrgCon: Vejen til at lære din virksomhed bedre at kende. Ledelse i dag, Forthcoming.Google Scholar
  10. Edwards, J. R., Caplan, R. D., & Harrison, R. V. (1998). Person-environment fit theory: conceptual foundations, empirical evidence and directions for future research. In C. L. Cooper (Ed.), Theories of Organizational Stress (pp. 28–67). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  11. Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989). Building theories from case study research. Academy of Management Review, 14(4), 532–550.Google Scholar
  12. Feldman, M. S. (1989). Order Without Design. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  13. Franz, C. R., & Robey, D. (1987). Strategies for research on information systems in organizations: a critical analysis of research purpose and time frame. In R. J. Boland, Jr. & R. A. Hirschheim (Eds.), Critical Issues in Information Systems Research (pp. 205–225). Chichester: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
  14. Fulk, J. (1993). Social construction of communication technology. Academy of Management Journal, 36(5), 921–950.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Giddens, A. (1979). Central Problems in Social Theory. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  16. Giddens, A. (1984). The Constitution of Society. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  17. Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research. New York, NY: Aldine Publishing.Google Scholar
  18. Hackman, J. R., & Oldham, G. R. (1975). Development of the Job Diagnostic Survey. Journal of Applied Psychology, 60(2), 159–170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Hackman, J. R., & Oldham, G. R. (1980). Work redesign. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
  20. Harrison, R. V. (1978). Person-environment fit and job stress. In C. L. Cooper & R. Payne (Eds.), Stress At Work (pp. 175–205). New York: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
  21. Harrison, R. V. (1985). The person-environment fit model and the study of job stress. In T. A. Beehr & R. S. Bhagat (Eds.), Human Stress and Cognition in Organizations (pp. 23–55). New York: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
  22. Hofstede, G. (1980). Culture’s Consequence: International Differences in Work-related Values. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  23. James, L. R., James, L. A., & Ashe, D. K. (1990). The meaning of organizations: The role of cognition and values. In B. Schneider (Ed.), Organizational Climate and Culture (pp. 40–84). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers.Google Scholar
  24. Kanfer, R. (1990). Motivation theory and industrial and organizational psychology. In M. D. Dunnette & L. M. Hough (Eds.), Handbook of Industrial and Organizational Psychology (Vol. 1, pp. 75–170). Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.Google Scholar
  25. Karasek, R. (1998). Demand/control model: A social, emotional, and physiological approach to stress risk and active behaviour development. In J. M. Stellman (Ed.), Encyclopaedia of Occupational Health and Safety (Vol. 1, pp. 34.36–34.15). Geneva: International Labour Office.Google Scholar
  26. Kristensen, T. S. (1999). Spørgeskema om psykisk arbejdsmiljø. København: Arbejdsmiljøinstituttet (National Institute of Occupational Health).Google Scholar
  27. Locke, E. A. (1996). Motivation through conscious goal setting. Appplied and Preventive Psychology, 5, 117–124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1984). Qualitative Data Analysis: A Sourcebook of New Methods. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  29. Morgan, G. (1986). Images of Organization. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  30. Mottaz, C. J. (1988). Determinants of organizational commitment. Human Relations, 41, 467–482.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Orlikowski, W. J., & Gash, D. C. (1994). Technological frames: making sense of information technology in organizations. ACM Transactions on Information Systems, 12(2), 174–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Orlikowski, W. J., & Robey, D. (1991). Information technology and the structuring of organizations. Information Systems Research, 2(2), 143–169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Pinder, C. C. (1998). Work Motivation in Organizational Behavior. London: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  34. Prasad, P. (1993). Symbolic processes in the implementation of technological change: a symbolic interactionist study of work computerization. Academy of Management Journal, 36, 1400–1429.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Schabracq, M. J. (1991). De inrichting van de werkelijkheid (The design of Reality). Meppel/Amsterdam: Boom.Google Scholar
  36. Schabracq, M. J., & Cooper, C. L. (1998). Toward a phenomenological framework for the study of work and organizational stress. Human Relations, 51(5), 625–648.Google Scholar
  37. Starbuck, W. H., & Milliken, F. J. (1988). Executives’ perceptual filters: What they notice and how they make sense. In D. C. Hambrick (Ed.), The Executive Effect: Concepts and Methods for Studying Top Managers (pp. 35–65). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.Google Scholar
  38. Staw, B. M. (1991). Dressing up like an organization: when psychological theories can explain organizational action. Journal of Management, 64, 273–290.Google Scholar
  39. Verjans, S. (Forthcoming). Harmony and Stress in Information Systems Development and Implementation. A Multilevel Theory and Some Empirical Work on the Crossroads of Work Psychology, Organisational Theory and Information Systems Research — PhD Dissertation. Odense: University of Southern Denmark Press.Google Scholar
  40. Verjans, S., Mogensen, L. K., & Lynggaard, H.-J. B. (1998). Interactive collaborative production scheduling. Proceedings of the 24th Annual Conference of the IEEE Industrial Electronics Society — IECON′98, 1926–1931.Google Scholar
  41. Weick, K. E. (1990). Technology as an equivoque: sensemaking in new technologies. In P. S. Goodman & L. Sproull (Eds.), Technology and Organisations (pp. 1–44). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers.Google Scholar
  42. Weick, K. E. (1995). Sensemaking in Organizations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  43. Whyte, W. F. (Ed.). (1991). Participatory Action Research (Vol. 123). Newbury Park: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  44. Yin, R. K. (1984). Case Study Research. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  • Steven Verjans

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations