Institutional patterns of enterprise architecture adoption in government

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to understand why, and under which circumstances, enterprise architecture (EA) planning adoption improves information systems (IS) planning and supports administrative transformation in government.Design/methodology/approach – About 12 cases in the USA were approached with a preliminary theoretical framework derived from the extant literature. Theory building had affinities with grounded‐theory approaches and came out of numerous iterations between the “deep cases” and the extant theory.Findings – Three adoption patterns illustrate that the adoption of a new IS planning innovation does not create administrative or political transformation in itself. Compliance and imitation primarily drives the adoption process, while fundamental transformation to the tasks performed in government is only achieved if the institutional force at the micro‐and macro‐level promotes transformation.Research limitations/implications – The neoinstitutional perspective proposed can be of valu...

[1]  W. Powell,et al.  The iron cage revisited institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields , 1983 .

[2]  Steven C. Hill,et al.  Enterprise Architecture Planning: Developing a Blueprint for Data, Applications and Technology , 1993 .

[3]  U. Yeliz Eseryel,et al.  Enterprise architecture as a context for ERP implementation , 2005 .

[4]  W. Scott,et al.  INSTITUTIONAL THEORY AND INSTITUTIONAL CHANGE: INTRODUCTION TO THE SPECIAL RESEARCH FORUM , 2002 .

[5]  Sanjay Gosain,et al.  Enterprise Information Systems as Objects and Carriers of Institutional Forces: The New Iron Cage? , 2004, J. Assoc. Inf. Syst..

[6]  Frank Dobbin,et al.  Cultural Models of Organization: The Social Construction of Rational Organizing Principles , 1994 .

[7]  M. Gascó.  New Technologies and Institutional Change in Public Administration , 2003 .

[8]  G. Garson,et al.  The promise of digital government , 2004 .

[9]  Kenneth L. Kraemer,et al.  Institutional Factors in Information Technology Innovation , 1994, Inf. Syst. Res..

[10]  Kalle Lyytinen,et al.  What's Wrong with the Diffusion of Innovation Theory , 2001, Diffusing Software Products and Process Innovations.

[11]  Hans Jochen Scholl.  E-Government-Induced Business Process Change (BPC): An Empirical Study of Current Practices , 2005, Int. J. Electron. Gov. Res..

[12]  M. J. Moon,et al.  Advancing E‐Government at the Grassroots: Tortoise or Hare? , 2005 .

[13]  T. Skocpol,et al.  Bringing the State Back In , 1985 .

[14]  Kevin Crowston,et al.  Information technology and the transformation of industries: three research perspectives , 2004, J. Strateg. Inf. Syst..

[15]  Johan P. Olsen,et al.  Rediscovering institutions: The organizational basis of politics , 1989 .

[16]  Kenneth L. Kraemer,et al.  Information Technology and Administrative Reform: Will E-Government Be Different? , 2006, Int. J. Electron. Gov. Res..

[17]  Anselm L. Strauss,et al.  Basics of qualitative research : techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory , 1998 .

[18]  P. Weill,et al.  IT Governance , 2017 .

[19]  L. G. Tornatzky,et al.  Innovation characteristics and innovation adoption-implementation: A meta-analysis of findings , 1982, IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management.

[20]  Zahir Irani,et al.  Creating social entrepreneurship in local government , 2008, Eur. J. Inf. Syst..

[21]  Institutions and Organizations. , 1997 .

[22]  Gary W. Dickson,et al.  A Principles-Based Enterprise Architecture: Lessons from Texaco and Star Enterprise , 1990, MIS Q..

[23]  W. Gibb Dyer,et al.  Better Stories, Not Better Constructs, To Generate Better Theory: A Rejoinder to Eisenhardt , 1991 .

[24]  Vassilios Peristeras,et al.  Towards an enterprise architecture for public administration using a top-down approach , 2000, ECIS.

[25]  M. Lounsbury,et al.  Ending the Family Quarrel , 1997 .

[26]  Sree Nilakanta,et al.  Implementation of Electronic Data Interchange: An Innovation Diffusion Perspective , 1994, J. Manag. Inf. Syst..

[27]  Jeanne W. Ross,et al.  Creating a Strategic IT Architecture Competency: Learning in Stages , 2003, MIS Q. Executive.

[28]  Rob Kling,et al.  The Institutional Character of Computerized Information Systems , 1989 .

[29]  Frank Dobbin,et al.  In Search of Identity and Legitimation , 2006 .

[30]  W. Scott,et al.  Institutions and Organizations. , 1995 .

[31]  James N. Danziger,et al.  THE IMPACTS OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY ON PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION: AN ANALYSIS OF EMPIRICAL RESEARCH FROM THE “GOLDEN AGE” OF TRANSFORMATION[1] , 2002 .

[32]  O. Williamson,et al.  Markets and Hierarchies: Analysis and Antitrust Implications. , 1977 .

[33]  Albert H. Segars,et al.  Strategic Information Systems Planning Success: An Investigation of the Construct and Its Measurement , 1998, MIS Q..

[34]  Philip Selznick.  Leadership in administration , 1957 .

[35]  Geoff Walsham,et al.  Electronic Trading and Work Transformation in the London Insurance Market , 1999, Inf. Syst. Res..

[36]  Carmelo Mazza,et al.  From Press to E-Media? The Transformation of an Organizational Field , 2004 .

[37]  Åke Grönlund,et al.  State of the Art in E-Gov Research: Surveying Conference Publications , 2005, Int. J. Electron. Gov. Res..

[38]  K. Eisenhardt,et al.  Competing on the Edge: Strategy as Structured Chaos , 1998 .

[39]  John W. Meyer,et al.  Institutional Environments and Organizations: Structural Complexity and Individualism , 1994 .

[40]  J. Fountain.  Building the Virtual State: Information Technology and Institutional Change , 2001 .

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

[42]  S. Gopalakrishnan,et al.  The Dynamics of the Adoption of Product and Process Innovations in Organizations , 2001 .

[43]  M. Douglas.  How Institutions Think , 1986 .

[44]  John W. Meyer,et al.  Institutionalized Organizations: Formal Structure as Myth and Ceremony , 1977, American Journal of Sociology.

[45]  Robert N. Stern,et al.  The External Control of Organizations: A Resource Dependence Perspective. , 1979 .

[46]  Aaron Wildavsky,et al.  Choosing Preferences by Constructing Institutions: A Cultural Theory of Preference Formation , 1987, American Political Science Review.

[47]  W. Powell.  Expanding the Scope of Institutional Analysis , 1991 .

[48]  Jean Hartley,et al.  Case study research , 2004 .

[49]  E. Rogers.  Diffusion of Innovations , 1962 .

[50]  Scott A. Bernard.  An Introduction to Enterprise Architecture , 2004 .

[51]  Johan Magnusson,et al.  Infusing an Architectural Framework with Neo-Institutional Theory: Reports from Recent Change Management Initiatives within the Swedish Public Administration , 2006, Proceedings of the 39th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS'06).

[52]  W. Powell,et al.  The New Institutionalism in Organizational Analysis , 1993 .

[53]  Suhas Gangadhar Deshpande.  Review of: Pavlichev, Alexi and Garson, David G. (Eds). Digital government: principles and best practices. London: Idea Group Inc., 2004 , 2005, Inf. Res..

[54]  Bala Iyer,et al.  The Four-Domain Architecture: An approach to support enterprise architecture design , 2004, IBM Syst. J..

[55]  W. Richard Scott,et al.  Institutional Change and Healthcare Organizations: From Professional Dominance to Managed Care , 2000 .