The dynamics of IT boundary objects, information infrastructures, and organisational identities: the introduction of 3D modelling technologies into the architecture, engineering, and construction industry

In recent years, more companies engage in collaborative cross-organisational practices to achieve their business objectives. To cooperate effectively across boundaries requires organisations to overcome the tension between their distinct backgrounds and the need to create shared understandings with their partners for collaboration. This requires the creation of shared artefacts such as boundary objects. Whereas the past work on boundary objects has highlighted their role as translation devices, we examine them in relation to the information infrastructures within which they are embedded, and the identities of the organisations that use them. We propose a model that outlines the relationships among the three concepts and illustrate its dynamics by presenting two case studies that describe the introduction of three-dimensional modelling technologies into the architecture, engineering, and construction industry. Based on the case studies we suggest that boundary objects, in addition to facilitating cross-organisational communication, also help to form organisational identities. We further suggest the occurrence of a process whereby changes in boundary objects enable changes in information infrastructures and identities in one organisation. These changes, in turn, create the conditions for change in bordering organisations through shared boundary objects and boundary practices.

[1]  Eswaran Subrahmanian,et al.  Boundary Objects and Prototypes at the Interfaces of Engineering Design , 2003, Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW).

[2]  Peter Weill,et al.  The Implications of Information Technology Infrastructure for Business Process Redesign , 1999, MIS Q..

[3]  Wai Fong Chua,et al.  The role of actor-networks and boundary objects in management accounting change: a field study of an implementation of activity-based costing , 2001 .

[4]  S. Morgan Communities of Practice and Social Learning in Associations of Organic Farmers in Wales , 2010 .

[5]  A. V. D. Ven,et al.  Explaining Development and Change in Organizations , 1995 .

[6]  Paul R. Carlile,et al.  Transferring, Translating, and Transforming: An Integrative Framework for Managing Knowledge Across Boundaries , 2004, Organ. Sci..

[7]  R CarlilePaul A Pragmatic View of Knowledge and Boundaries , 2002 .

[8]  Amany R. Elbanna,et al.  From Control to Drift: The Dynamics of Corporate Information Infrastructures , 2001 .

[9]  Kalle Lyytinen,et al.  Wakes of Innovation in Project Networks: The Case of Digital 3-D Representations in Architecture, Engineering, and Construction , 2007, Organ. Sci..

[10]  Beth A. Bechky Sharing Meaning Across Occupational Communities: The Transformation of Understanding on a Production Floor , 2003, Organ. Sci..

[11]  Emmanuelle Vaast,et al.  The Emergence of Boundary Spanning Competence in Practice: Implications for Implementation and Use of Information Systems , 2005, MIS Q..

[12]  E. Wenger Communities of Practice and Social Learning Systems , 2000 .

[13]  Kevin G. Corley,et al.  Organizational Identity, Image, and Adaptive Instability , 2000 .

[14]  B. Latour Science in action : how to follow scientists and engineers through society , 1989 .

[15]  Natalia Levina,et al.  Collaborating on Multi-Party Information Systems Development Projects: A Collective Reflection-in-Action View , 2005, Inf. Syst. Res..

[16]  Karen Ruhleder,et al.  Steps Toward an Ecology of Infrastructure: Design and Access for Large Information Spaces , 1996, Inf. Syst. Res..

[17]  Yasmin Merali,et al.  The role of boundaries in knowledge processes , 2002, Eur. J. Inf. Syst..

[18]  Marie-Claude Boudreau,et al.  Accounting for the Contradictory Organizational Consequences of Information Technology: Theoretical Directions and Methodological Implications , 1999, Inf. Syst. Res..

[19]  R. Yin Case Study Research: Design and Methods , 1984 .

[20]  Nancy Bogucki Duncan,et al.  Capturing Flexibility of Information Technology Infrastructure: A Study of Resource Characteristics and their Measure , 1995, J. Manag. Inf. Syst..

[21]  Suzanne D. Pawlowski,et al.  Bridging User Organizations: Knowledge Brokering and the Work of Information Technology Professionals , 2004, MIS Q..

[22]  Peter Beck The AEC Dilemma—Exploring the Barriers To Change , 2001 .

[23]  Roger Elvin,et al.  A new framework for managing IT‐enabled business change , 1999, Inf. Syst. J..

[24]  Les Gasser,et al.  Information Infrastructures for Distributed Collective Practices , 2006, Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW).

[25]  Sarita Albagli,et al.  Memory Practices in the Sciences , 2008 .

[26]  Susan Leigh Star,et al.  Institutional Ecology, `Translations' and Boundary Objects: Amateurs and Professionals in Berkeley's Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, 1907-39 , 1989 .

[27]  A. Salter,et al.  Postcards from the Edge: Local Communities, Global Programs and Boundary Objects , 2004 .

[28]  Susan Gasson,et al.  A genealogical study of boundary-spanning IS design , 2006, Eur. J. Inf. Syst..

[29]  P. Bourdieu,et al.  Language and Symbolic Power , 1991 .

[30]  Johannes M. Pennings,et al.  The Urban Quality of Life and Entrepreneurship , 1982 .

[31]  Trevor Wood-Harper,et al.  The shaping of I.T. trajectories: evidence from the U.K. public sector , 2006, Eur. J. Inf. Syst..

[32]  Daniel J. Brass,et al.  A Grounded Model of Organizational Schema Change During Empowerment , 2000 .

[33]  R. Badham,et al.  The Politics of Socio-technical Intervention: An Interactionist View , 2000 .

[34]  Richard J. Ormerod,et al.  A new perspective on the dynamics of information technology‐enabled strategic change , 1998, Inf. Syst. J..

[35]  Susan Leigh Star,et al.  Sorting Things Out: Classification and Its Consequences , 1999 .

[36]  David Bawden,et al.  Memory Practices in the Sciences , 2007 .

[37]  Kathleen M. Eisenhardt,et al.  Theory Building From Cases: Opportunities And Challenges , 2007 .

[38]  Roberta Lamb,et al.  Information and Communication Technology Challenges to Scientific Professional Identity , 2005, Inf. Soc..

[39]  Elaine K. Yakura,et al.  Charting Time: Timelines as Temporal Boundary Objects , 2002 .

[40]  M. Schultz,et al.  Responding to Organizational Identity Threats: Exploring the Role of Organizational Culture , 2006 .

[41]  P. Berger,et al.  The Social Construction of Reality , 1966 .

[42]  J. Overhage,et al.  Sorting Things Out: Classification and Its Consequences , 2001, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[43]  S. L. Star,et al.  The Ethnography of Infrastructure , 1999 .

[44]  Paul R. Carlile,et al.  A Pragmatic View of Knowledge and Boundaries: Boundary Objects in New Product Development , 2002, Organ. Sci..

[45]  O. Hanseth,et al.  From Control to Drift: The Dynamics of Corporate Information Infrastructures , 2000 .

[46]  Kathryn Henderson,et al.  Flexible Sketches and Inflexible Data Bases: Visual Communication, Conscription Devices, and Boundary Objects in Design Engineering , 1991 .

[47]  K. Eisenhardt Building theories from case study research , 1989, STUDI ORGANIZZATIVI.