Infrastructural Tuning in Public-Private Partnerships

In this paper, we study a public-private digital infrastructure to understand the dynamics of its emergence. We explore the interrelation of architectural and governance aspects of the infrastructure, through a longitudinal, embedded case study of the Norwegian Welfare Technology project. We introduce the concept of infrastructural tuning to conceptualize a dynamic of resistance and accommodation over time between the infrastructure’s architecture and implementation and multiple actors’ interests, policy goals and emerging opportunities and challenges. Our study makes three contributions: first, based on the analysis of our case study we provide an understanding of how the architecture of a digital infrastructure can accommodate divergent perspectives and strategies in public-private partnerships; second, we provide a process perspective on digital transformation of the public sector by analyzing the tuning process of the architecture-governance interplay; third, we develop the concept of infrastructural tuning. organized into three phases according to the three ar-chitecture-governance configurations of the infrastructure project. For each phase, we describe the core policy problem, envisioned architecture, and implementation, and we analyse it as tuning by foregrounding the resistance and accommodation dynamics.

[1]  Jerry Fishenden,et al.  Appraising the impact and role of platform models and Government as a Platform (GaaP) in UK Government public service reform: Towards a Platform Assessment Framework (PAF) , 2017, Gov. Inf. Q..

[2]  Rony Medaglia,et al.  Public-Private Collaboration in the Emergence of a National Electronic Identification Policy: The Case of NemID in Denmark , 2017, HICSS.

[3]  Rony Medaglia,et al.  It Takes Two to Tango: Power Dependence in the Governance of Public-Private e-Government Infrastructures , 2017, ICIS.

[4]  Ole Hanseth,et al.  Information Infrastructures within European Health Care: Working with the Installed Base , 2017 .

[5]  Tina Blegind Jensen,et al.  Building National eHealth Platforms: the Challenge of Inclusiveness , 2017, ICIS.

[6]  Gregory S. Dawson,et al.  Governing innovation in U.S. state government: An ecosystem perspective , 2016, J. Strateg. Inf. Syst..

[7]  Wanda J. Orlikowski,et al.  Creating Value in Online Communities: The Sociomaterial Configuring of Strategy, Platform, and Stakeholder Engagement , 2016, Inf. Syst. Res..

[8]  Tomasz Janowski,et al.  Universal and contextualized public services: Digital public service innovation framework , 2016, Gov. Inf. Q..

[9]  Antonello Zanfei,et al.  Governance and innovation in public sector services: The case of the digital library , 2015, Gov. Inf. Q..

[10]  Nitesh Bharosa,et al.  The collaborative realization of public values and business goals: Governance and infrastructure of public-private information platforms , 2016, Gov. Inf. Q..

[11]  Christine Nadel,et al.  Case Study Research Design And Methods , 2016 .

[12]  Erik-Hans Klijn,et al.  Governance Networks in the Public Sector , 2015 .

[13]  Youngjin Yoo,et al.  Distributed Tuning of Boundary Resources: The Case of Apple's iOS Service System , 2015, MIS Q..

[14]  J. Rodon,et al.  1 Stabilization and Destabilization Processes at Work in Digital Infrastructures : The Co-Functioning of Architecture and Governance , 2015 .

[15]  M. Lynne Markus,et al.  Maybe not the king, but an invaluable subordinate: a commentary on Avison and Malaurent’s advocacy of ‘theory light’ IS research , 2014, J. Inf. Technol..

[16]  Bram Klievink,et al.  Developing Multi-Layer Information Infrastructures: Advancing Social Innovation through Public–Private Governance , 2014, Inf. Syst. Manag..

[17]  Evelyn Baca,et al.  Methods for policy research: taking socially responsible action , 2014 .

[18]  David Ribes,et al.  Ethnography of scaling, or, how to a fit a national research infrastructure in the room , 2014, CSCW.

[19]  Amrit Tiwana,et al.  Platform Ecosystems: Aligning Architecture, Governance, and Strategy , 2013 .

[20]  Jerry Fishenden,et al.  Digital Government, Open Architecture, and Innovation: Why Public Sector IT Will Never Be the Same Again , 2013 .

[21]  Bendik Bygstad,et al.  The Generative Mechanisms of Digital Infrastructure Evolution , 2013, MIS Q..

[22]  Ola Henfridsson,et al.  Balancing platform control and external contribution in third‐party development: the boundary resources model , 2013, Inf. Syst. J..

[23]  JoAnne Yates,et al.  Reconfiguring Boundary Relations: Robotic Innovations in Pharmacy Work , 2012, Organ. Sci..

[24]  Ashley A. Bush,et al.  Platform Evolution: Coevolution of Platform Architecture, Governance, and Environmental Dynamics , 2010 .

[25]  Yvonne Benschop,et al.  Reflexive Methodology, New Vistas for Qualitative Research (Book) , 2002 .

[26]  A. Langley Strategies for Theorizing from Process Data , 1999 .

[27]  James L. McKenney,et al.  An Historical Method for MIS Research: Steps and Assumptions , 1997, MIS Q..

[28]  Andrew Pickering,et al.  The mangle of practice : time, agency, and science , 1997 .

[29]  A. Pickering The Mangle of Practice: Agency and Emergence in the Sociology of Science , 1993, American Journal of Sociology.