From National to Supranational Government Inter-Organizational Systems: An Extended Typology
While inter-organizational systems (IOS) driven by supranational government (here referred to as supranational IOS or SN IOS) are increasingly being developed in practice, this phenomenon remains largely unexplored in the existing literature. What makes SN IOS specifically interesting is that their development and implementation is driven by supranational bodies (rather than businesses or national governments), implying that Member States have given up some of their decision-making power to higher level bodies and are bound to implement the decisions of these bodies. A key question then becomes: Are the processes for standards and system development and adoption of SN IOS distinct from IOS processes driven by businesses or national governments and, if so, what makes them different? Building on a novel typology and a case study of one SN IOS, our findings suggest that both industry and SN IOS exhibit similarities in terms of the role that intermediary organizations play as well as the processes through which standards are negotiated. These similarities can be used for transferability of knowledge between the two domains. We also demonstrate that there are inherent differences in terms of drivers, focus, approach, adoption incentives and the role of national governments. These differences require further attention and different considerations.
Keywordssupranational IOS typology standards eGovernment
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 1.Andersen, K.V., Henriksen, H.Z., Rasmussen, E.B.: Re-organizing government using IT: The Danish model. In: Nixon, P.G., Koutrakou, V.N. (eds.) E-government in Europe: Re-booting the state, pp. 103–118. Routledge, London (2007)Google Scholar
- 2.Bjørn-Andersen, N., Razmerita, L., Henriksen, H.Z.: The Streamlining of Cross-Border Taxation Using IT -The Danish eExport Solution. In: Makolm, J., Orthofer, G. (eds.) E-Taxation: State & Perspectives, pp. 195–206. Trauner Verlag, Linz (2007)Google Scholar
- 3.Bomberg, E.E., Peterson, J., Stubb, A.: The European Union: How does it work? Oxford University Press, USA (2008)Google Scholar
- 4.Cash, J.I., Konsynski, B.R.: IS redraws competitive boundaries. Harvard Business Review 63(2), 134–142 (1985)Google Scholar
- 6.European Commission: Electronic Customs Multi-Annual Strategic Plan (MASP), Rev. 8 (2007)Google Scholar
- 7.Gregor, S.: The nature of theory in information systems. MIS Quarterly 30(3), 611–642 (2006)Google Scholar
- 11.Kubicek, H.P., Cimander, R.: Three dimensions of organizational interoperability: Insights from recent studies for improving interoperability frame-works. European Journal of ePractice 6, 1–12 (2009)Google Scholar
- 12.Markus, M.L., Steinfield, C.W., Wigand, R.T., Minton, G.: Standards, Collective Action and IS Development-Vertical Information Systems Standards in the US Home Mortgage Industry. MIS Quarterly, Special Issue on Standards and Standardization 30, 439–465 (2006)Google Scholar
- 16.Teo, H.H., Tan, B.C.Y., Wei, K.K.: Organizational transformation using electronic data interchange: The case of TradeNet in Singapore. Journal of MIS 13(4), 139–165 (1997)Google Scholar
- 17.Walsham, G.: Interpreting information systems in organizations. John Wiley and Sons, Chichester (1993)Google Scholar
- 18.Wigand, R.T., Steinfield, C.W., Markus, M.L.: IT Standards Choices and Industry Structure Outcomes: The Case of the United States Home Mortgage Industry. Journal of MIS 22(2), 165–191 (2005)Google Scholar