Technology Introduction as Social Interpretation by End-Users: Key Articulations in the Literature

What happens after new technologies have been rolled out in organisations? Current literature studying technology introduction often explicitly or implicitly focusses more on the adaptation of technologies than on the role of social interpretation of technology by end-users. Focusing specifically on how endusers, collectively and over time, respond to new technologies in organisational settings, we performed an extensive review of literature employing elements of structured and hermeneutical approaches. We identify 5 key dimensions employed by authors to conceptualise technology introduction and distinguish 3 major streams of literature using the particular positions that each paper takes along these dimensions. The streams are mainly distinguished by how they conceive the social aspects of the process and how they understand the effects of technology. This finding has implications for appropriate management of the process under each conception.

[1]  Beth A. Bechky,et al.  The Changing Nature of Work: Careers, Identities, and Work Lives in the 21st Century , 2017 .

[2]  Tina Blegind Jensen,et al.  Collective mindfulness in post-implementation IS adaptation processes , 2016, Inf. Organ..

[3]  Samer Faraj,et al.  Technology and Sociomaterial Performation , 2014, IS&O.

[4]  Matthew R. Jones A Matter of Life and Death: Exploring Conceptualizations of Sociomateriality in the Context of Critical Care , 2014, MIS Q..

[5]  Alexander Richter,et al.  Malleable End-User Software , 2013, Bus. Inf. Syst. Eng..

[6]  Elfi Furtmueller,et al.  Using grounded theory as a method for rigorously reviewing literature , 2013, Eur. J. Inf. Syst..

[7]  Ellen Christiaanse,et al.  Exploring users' appropriation and post‐implementation managerial intervention in the context of industry IOIS , 2011, Inf. Syst. J..

[8]  Sue Newell,et al.  Understanding Project Survival in an ES Environment: A Sociomaterial Practice Perspective , 2010, J. Assoc. Inf. Syst..

[9]  P. Leonardi,et al.  What’s Under Construction Here? Social Action, Materiality, and Power in Constructivist Studies of Technology and Organizing , 2010 .

[10]  Anthony Hussenot,et al.  Between structuration and translation : an approach of ICT appropriation , 2008 .

[11]  Robert Schroeder,et al.  Pointing Users Toward Citation Searching: Using Google Scholar and Web of Science , 2007 .

[12]  Nicolau Reinhard,et al.  The Hospitality Metaphor as a theoretical lens for understanding the ICT adoption process , 2006, J. Inf. Technol..

[13]  Tanya V. Bondarouk,et al.  Action-oriented group learning in the implementation of information technologies: results from three case studies , 2006, Eur. J. Inf. Syst..

[14]  Michael C. Wendl,et al.  Argonaute—a database for gene regulation by mammalian microRNAs , 2005, BMC Bioinformatics.

[15]  Robert W. Zmud,et al.  A Comprehensive Conceptualization of Post-Adoptive Behaviors Associated with Information Technology Enabled Work Systems , 2005, MIS Q..

[16]  E. Burton Swanson,et al.  Innovating Mindfully with Information Technology , 2004, MIS Q..

[17]  Jeanne W. Ross,et al.  Learning to Implement Enterprise Systems: An Exploratory Study of the Dialectics of Change , 2002, J. Manag. Inf. Syst..

[18]  WebsterJane,et al.  Analyzing the past to prepare for the future , 2002 .

[19]  G. Pisano,et al.  Disrupted Routines: Team Learning and New Technology Implementation in Hospitals , 2001 .

[20]  Trevor Hopper,et al.  What does organizational change mean?: Speculations on a taken for granted category , 2001 .

[21]  Sundeep Sahay,et al.  Transforming Work Through Information Technology: A Comparative Case Study of Geographic Information Systems in County Government , 1996, Inf. Syst. Res..

[22]  Wanda J. Orlikowski,et al.  Improvising Organizational Transformation Over Time: A Situated Change Perspective , 1996, Inf. Syst. Res..

[23]  Dale Goodhue,et al.  Task-Technology Fit and Individual Performance , 1995, MIS Q..

[24]  Gerardine DeSanctis,et al.  Capturing the Complexity in Advanced Technology Use: Adaptive Structuration Theory , 1994 .

[25]  Wanda J. Orlikowski,et al.  Technological frames: making sense of information technology in organizations , 1994, TOIS.

[26]  Les Gasser,et al.  The integration of computing and routine work , 1986, TOIS.

[27]  S. Barley Technology as an occasion for structuring: evidence from observations of CT scanners and the social order of radiology departments. , 1986, Administrative science quarterly.

[28]  Robert Wayne Gregory,et al.  IT Consumerization and the Transformation of IT Governance , 2018, MIS Q..

[29]  Kai Riemer,et al.  Place-making: A Phenomenological Theory of Technology Appropriation , 2012, ICIS.

[30]  J Fidock,et al.  Theorising about the lifecycle of IT use: An appropriation perspective , 2010 .

[31]  M. Lynne Markus,et al.  A Foundation for the Study of IT Effects: A New Look at DeSanctis and Poole's Concepts of Structural Features and Spirit , 2008, J. Assoc. Inf. Syst..

[32]  Marie-Claude Boudreau,et al.  Enacting Integrated Information Technology: A Human Agency Perspective , 2005, Organ. Sci..

[33]  Geoff Walsham,et al.  Representations and actions: the transformation of work practices with IT use , 2005, Inf. Organ..

[34]  Ronald E. Rice,et al.  Technology Adaptation: The Case of a Computer-Supported Inter-Organizational Virtual Team , 2000, MIS Q..

[35]  K. Weick Technology as equivoque: sensemaking in new technologies , 1990 .

[36]  Fred D. Davis A technology acceptance model for empirically testing new end-user information systems : theory and results , 1985 .

[37]  D. Cecez-Kecmanovic,et al.  Communications of the Association for Information Systems a Hermeneutic Approach for Conducting Literature Reviews and Literature Searches a Hermeneutic Approach for Conducting Literature Reviews and Literature Searches a Hermeneutic Approach for Conducting Literature Reviews and Literature Searches , 2022 .