Design Principles for Inter-Organizational Systems Development - Case Hansel

In this paper, we report new findings of an on-going action design research (ADR) study in a public organization, Hansel Ltd, the central procurement unit of the Finnish government. A procurement organization acts as a middleman in public sector procurement. In order to coordinate large-scale procurement supported by a third party, inter-organizational systems (IOS) are needed. However, it is challenging to develop these, as the stakeholders are scattered and not necessarily interested in supporting the development of systems. Our goal is to identify and formulate design principles for efficient and effective inter-organizational systems development in the procurement context. With the particular focus on power relations between the involved organizations as well as their separate interests in the IOS being built, we develop design principles for such systems. In addition to being useful for our case company, we illustrate how these design principles can be applied to a class of similar problems.

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

[2]  Virpi Kristiina Tuunainen,et al.  Redesigning the supplier reporting process and system in public procurement – case Hansel , 2011 .

[3]  Kuldeep Kumar,et al.  Sustainable Collaboration: Managing Conflict and Cooperation in Interorganizational Systems , 1996, MIS Q..

[4]  Albert Boonstra,et al.  Analyzing inter-organizational systems from a power and interest perspective , 2005, Int. J. Inf. Manag..

[5]  Hope Koch,et al.  Stuck in the Conflicted Middle: A Role-Theoretic Perspective on B2B E-Marketplaces , 2011, MIS Q..

[6]  Jing Zhang,et al.  Knowledge sharing in cross-boundary information system development in the public sector , 2006, Inf. Technol. Manag..

[7]  Alan Smart,et al.  Developing a decision‐making framework for implementing purchasing synergy: a case study , 2007 .

[8]  Richard Baskerville,et al.  Generalizing Generalizability in Information Systems Research , 2003, Inf. Syst. Res..

[9]  Paul Benjamin Lowry,et al.  Profiling the Research Productivity of Tenured Information Systems Faculty at U.S. Institutions , 2011, MIS Q..

[10]  James A. Wall,et al.  Managing conflict in B2B e-commerce , 2003 .

[11]  E. Raaij,et al.  Non-Compliant Work Behaviour in Purchasing: An Exploration of Reasons Behind Maverick Buying , 2009 .

[12]  Izak Benbasat,et al.  Predicting Intention to Adopt Interorganizational Linkages: An Institutional Perspective , 2003, MIS Q..

[13]  P. Matthyssens,et al.  The Pursuit of Global Purchasing Synergy , 2000 .

[14]  Robin Fincham,et al.  PERSPECTIVES ON POWER: PROCESSUAL, INSTITUTIONAL AND ‘INTERNAL’FORMS OF ORGANIZATIONAL POWER , 1992 .

[15]  Sandeep Purao,et al.  Action Design Research , 2011, MIS Q..