Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Affording and Constraining Digital Transformation:

The Enactment of Structural Change in Three Swedish Government Agencies

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Electronic Government (EGOV 2023)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNCS,volume 14130))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

Public sector organizations need to adapt to the ongoing societal changes and new technologies emerging, and as public sector organizations engage in digital transformation, they are confronted with the need to re-arrange and change themselves to be successful. Previous research has identified factors for digital transformation in both public and private sector settings, yet there is still an absence of research into how public sector organizations deal with this transformation. In this study, we explore how government agencies enact structural changes related to digital transformation. We do so through a multi-case study of three government agencies in Sweden, interviewing key actors to explore the organizations’ enactments. Our findings show that public sector organizations display a high level of variance in how they enact structural changes to succeed with digital transformation. This is discussed in relation to previous research on management commitment to digital transformation, as well as dialogue and tensions when changing, with the intent to contribute to research and practice in relation to digital transformation.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 79.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 99.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Hanelt, A., Bohnsack, R., Marz, D., Marante, C.A.: A systematic review of the literature on digital transformation: insights and implications for strategy and organizational change. J. Manag. Stud. 58, 1159–1197 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1111/joms.12639

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Jackson, N.C.: Managing for competency with innovation change in higher education: examining the pitfalls and pivots of digital transformation. Bus. Horizons 62, 761–772 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bushor.2019.08.002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Magnusson, J., Elliot, V., Hagberg, J.: Digital transformation: why companies resist what they need for sustained performance. J. Bus. Strategy 43, 316–322 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1108/jbs-02-2021-0018

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Brunetti, F., Matt, D.T., Bonfanti, A., Longhi, A.D., Pedrini, G., Orzes, G.: Digital transformation challenges: strategies emerging from a multi-stakeholder approach. TQM J. 32, 697–724 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1108/tqm-12-2019-0309

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Pittaway, J.J., Montazemi, A.R.: Know-how to lead digital transformation: the case of local governments. Gov. Inform. Q. 37, 101474 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2020.101474

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Hafseld, K.H.J., Hussein, B., Rauzy, A.B.: An attempt to understand complexity in a government digital transformation project. Int. J. Inf. Syst. Proj. Manag. 9, 70–91 (2021). https://doi.org/10.12821/ijispm090304

  7. Gong, Y., Yang, J., Shi, X.: Towards a comprehensive understanding of digital transformation in government: analysis of flexibility and enterprise architecture. Gov. Inform. Q. 37, 101487 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2020.101487

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Gil-Garcia, J.R., Flores-Zúñiga, M.Á.: Towards a comprehensive understanding of digital government success: integrating implementation and adoption factors. Gov. Inform. Q. 37, 101518 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2020.101518

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Vogelsang, K., Liere-Netheler, K., Packmohr, S., Hoppe, U.: A taxonomy of barriers to digital transformation. In: Presented at the 14th International Conference on Wirtschaftsinformatik, 24 February (2019)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Bjerke-Busch, L.S., Aspelund, A.: Identifying barriers for digital transformation in the public sector. In: Schallmo, D.R.A., Tidd, J. (eds.) Digitalization. MP, pp. 277–290. Springer, Cham (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-69380-0_15

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  11. Mergel, I., Edelmann, N., Haug, N.: Defining digital transformation: results from expert interviews. Gov. Inform. Q. 36, 101385 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2019.06.002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Vial, G.: Understanding digital transformation: a review and a research agenda. J. Strateg. Inf. Syst. 28, 118–144 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsis.2019.01.003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Janowski, T.: Digital government evolution: from transformation to contextualization. Gov. Inform. Q. 32, 221–236 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2015.07.001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Janssen, M., van der Voort, H.: Adaptive governance: towards a stable, accountable and responsive government. Gov. Inform. Q. 33, 1–5 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2016.02.003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Weerakkody, V., Omar, A., El-Haddadeh, R., Al-Busaidy, M.: Digitally-enabled service transformation in the public sector: the lure of institutional pressure and strategic response towards change. Gov. Inform. Q. 33, 658–668 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2016.06.006

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Meijer, A., Bekkers, V.: A metatheory of e-government: creating some order in a fragmented research field. Gov. Inform. Q. 32, 237–245 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2015.04.006

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Nograšek, J., Vintar, M.: E-government and organisational transformation of government: black box revisited? Gov. Inform. Q. 31, 108–118 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2013.07.006

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Omar, A., Weerakkody, V., Daowd, A.: Studying Transformational Government: a review of the existing methodological approaches and future outlook. Gov. Inform. Q. 37, 101458 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2020.101458

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Wessel, L.: Unpacking the difference between digital transformation and IT-enabled organizational transformation. J. Assoc. Inf. Syst. 22, 102–129 (2021). https://doi.org/10.17705/1jais.00655

  20. Jarvenpaa, S.L., Selander, L.: Between scale and impact: member prototype ambiguity in digital transformation. Eur. J. Inform. Syst. 1–19 (2023, ahead-of-print). https://doi.org/10.1080/0960085x.2023.2175474

  21. Wilson, C., Mergel, I.: Overcoming barriers to digital government: mapping the strategies of digital champions. Gov. Inform. Q. 39, 101681 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2022.101681

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Tangi, L., Janssen, M., Benedetti, M., Noci, G.: Digital government transformation: a structural equation modelling analysis of driving and impeding factors. Int. J. Inform. Manag. 60, 102356 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2021.102356

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Magnusson, J., Khisro, J., Melin, U.: A pathology of public sector IT governance: how IT governance configuration counteracts ambidexterity. In: Viale Pereira, G., et al. (eds.) EGOV 2020. LNCS, vol. 12219, pp. 29–41. Springer, Cham (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-57599-1_3

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  24. Osmundsen, K., Iden, J., Bygstad, B.: Digital transformation: drivers, success factors, and implications. In: Presented at the MCIS 2018 (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  25. Escobar, F., Almeida, W.H.C., Varajão, J.: Digital transformation success in the public sector: a systematic literature review of cases, processes, and success factors. Inf. Polity 28, 1–21 (2022). https://doi.org/10.3233/ip-211518

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Boyne, G.A.: Public and private management: what’s the difference? J. Manag. Stud. 39, 97–122 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-6486.00284

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Pang, M.-S., Lee, G., DeLone, W.H.: IT resources, organizational capabilities, and value creation in public-sector organizations: a public-value management perspective. J. Inform. Technol. 29, 187–205 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1057/jit.2014.2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Yin, R.K.: Qualitative Research from Start to Finish. The Guilford Press, New York, London (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  29. Stebbins, R.A.: Exploratory Research in the Social Sciences. SAGE Publications, Thousand Oaks (2001). https://doi.org/10.4135/9781412984249

  30. Eisenhardt, K.M.: Better stories and better constructs: the case for rigor and comparative logic. Acad. Manag. Rev. 16, 620 (1991). https://doi.org/10.2307/258921

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Anckar, C.: On the applicability of the most similar systems design and the most different systems design in comparative research. Int. J. Soc. Res. Method 11, 389–401 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1080/13645570701401552

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Bowen, G.A.: Naturalistic inquiry and the saturation concept: a research note. Qual. Res. 8, 137–152 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794107085301

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Bogner, A., Littig, B., Menz, W.: Interviewing Experts, pp. 1–13 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230244276_1

  34. Braun, V., Clarke, V.: To saturate or not to saturate? Questioning data saturation as a useful concept for thematic analysis and sample-size rationales. Qual. Res. Sport Exerc. Heal. 13, 201–216 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1080/2159676x.2019.1704846

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Sandelowski, M.: Sample size in qualitative research. Res. Nurs. Health 18, 179–183 (1995). https://doi.org/10.1002/nur.4770180211

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Creswell, J.W., Miller, D.L.: Determining validity in qualitative inquiry. Theor. Pract. 39, 124–130 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip3903_2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Vaughn, P., Turner, C.: Decoding via coding: analyzing qualitative text data through thematic coding and survey methodologies. J. Libr. Adm. 56, 41–51 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1080/01930826.2015.1105035

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Goodman, L.A.: Snowball sampling. Ann. Math. Stat. 32, 148–170 (1961)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  39. Braun, V., Clarke, V.: Thematic analysis. In: Cooper, H., Camic, P.M., Long, D.L., Panter, A.T., Rindskopf, D., Sher, K.J. (eds.) APA Handbook of Research Methods in Psychology: Research Designs: Quantitative, Qualitative, Neuropsychological, and Biological, vol. 2, pp. 57–71 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1037/13620-004

  40. Earley, S.: The digital transformation: staying competitive. IT Prof. 16, 58–60 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1109/mitp.2014.24

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Duerr, S., Holotiuk, F., Wagner, H.-T., Beimborn, D., Weitzel, T.: What is digital organizational culture? Insights from exploratory case studies. In: Proceedings of the 51st Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (2018). https://doi.org/10.24251/hicss.2018.640

  42. Hartl, E., Hess, T.: The role of cultural values for digital transformation: insights from a Delphi study. In: Presented at the Twenty-Third Americas Conference on Information Systems, Boston (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  43. Li, W., Liu, K., Belitski, M., Ghobadian, A., O’Regan, N.: E-leadership through strategic alignment: an empirical study of small- and medium-sized enterprises in the digital age. J. Inform. Technol. 31, 185–206 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1057/jit.2016.10

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Ehlers, U.-D.: Digital leadership in higher education. J. High. Educ. Policy Leadersh. Stud. 1, 6–14 (2020). https://doi.org/10.29252/johepal.1.3.6

  45. Volberda, H.W., Khanagha, S., Baden-Fuller, C., Mihalache, O.R., Birkinshaw, J.: Strategizing in a digital world: overcoming cognitive barriers, reconfiguring routines and introducing new organizational forms. Long Range Plann. 54, 102110 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lrp.2021.102110

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Caputo, F., Cillo, V., Fiano, F., Pironti, M., Romano, M.: Building T-shaped professionals for mastering digital transformation. J. Bus. Res. 154, 113309 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2022.113309

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Thomas, R., Sargent, L.D., Hardy, C.: Managing organizational change: negotiating meaning and power-resistance relations. Org. Sci. 22, 22–41 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1090.0520

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Aditya, B.R., Ferdiana, R., Kusumawardani, S.S.: A barrier diagnostic framework in process of digital transformation in higher education institutions. J. Appl. Res. High. Educ. 14, 749–761 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1108/jarhe-12-2020-0454

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Ashaye, O.R., Irani, Z.: The role of stakeholders in the effective use of e-government resources in public services. Int. J. Inform. Manag. 49, 253–270 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2019.05.016

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Syed, R., Bandara, W., Eden, R.: Public sector digital transformation barriers: a developing country experience. Inf. Polity 28, 5–27 (2023). https://doi.org/10.3233/ip-220017

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Pollitt, C.: Structural change and public service performance: international lessons? Public Money Manag. 29, 285–291 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1080/09540960903205907

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Sutherland, F., Smith, A.C.: Duality theory and the management of the change–stability paradox. J. Manag. Org. 17, 534–547 (2011). https://doi.org/10.5172/jmo.2011.17.4.534

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Clegg, S., Cunha, M.P.E.: Organizational dialectics. In: Smith, W.K., Lewis, M.W., Jarzabkowski, P., Langley, A. (eds.) The Oxford Handbook of Orgaizational Paradox. Oxford University Press (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  54. Svahn, F., Mathiassen, L., Lindgren, R.: Embracing digital innovation in incumbent firms: how Volvo cars managed competing concerns. MIS Q. 41, 239–253 (2017). https://doi.org/10.25300/misq/2017/41.1.12

  55. Andriopoulos, C., Gotsi, M.: Methods of paradox. In: Smith, W.K., Lewis, M.W., Jarzabkowski, P., Langley, A. (eds.) The Oxford Handbook of Organizational Paradox, pp. 513–528. Oxford Academic (2017, Online)

    Google Scholar 

  56. Smith, W.K., Erez, M., Jarvenpaa, S., Lewis, M.W., Tracey, P.: Adding complexity to theories of paradox, tensions, and dualities of innovation and change: introduction to organization studies special issue on paradox, tensions, and dualities of innovation and change. Org. Stud. 38, 303–317 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840617693560

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Pettigrew, A.M.: Longitudinal field research on change: theory and practice. Org. Sci. 1, 267–292 (1990). https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1.3.267

    Article  Google Scholar 

  58. Soh, C., Yeow, A., Goh, Q., Hansen, R.: Digital transformation: of paradoxical tensions and managerial responses. In: Fortieth International Conference on Information Systems, Munich (2019)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Gothenburg, Forskningsgången 6, 417 56, Gothenburg, Sweden

    Malin Tinjan, Robert Åhlén, Susanna Hammelev Jörgensen & Johan Magnusson

Authors
  1. Malin Tinjan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Robert Åhlén
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Susanna Hammelev Jörgensen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Johan Magnusson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Malin Tinjan .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden

    Ida Lindgren

  2. Corvinus University of Budapest, Budapest, Hungary

    Csaba Csáki

  3. University of Macedonia, Thessaloniki, Greece

    Evangelos Kalampokis

  4. Delft University of Technology, Delft, The Netherlands

    Marijn Janssen

  5. University for Continuing Education Krems, Krems an der Donau, Austria

    Gabriela Viale Pereira

  6. Vienna University of Economics and Business, Vienna, Austria

    Shefali Virkar

  7. University of Macedonia, Thessaloniki, Greece

    Efthimios Tambouris

  8. Delft University of Technology, Delft, The Netherlands

    Anneke Zuiderwijk

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2023 IFIP International Federation for Information Processing

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Tinjan, M., Åhlén, R., Hammelev Jörgensen, S., Magnusson, J. (2023). Affording and Constraining Digital Transformation:. In: Lindgren, I., et al. Electronic Government. EGOV 2023. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 14130. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-41138-0_26

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-41138-0_26

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-031-41137-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-031-41138-0

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Societies and partnerships

Search

Navigation