Same technology, different outcome? Reinterpreting Barley's Technology as an Occasion for Structuring

In the last few decades, several studies have found the same technology implemented in highly similar organizational settings to be associated with very different consequences for structure and process. The seminal study in this stream of research is Barley's (1986) Technology as an Occasion for Structuring, which reported that two similarly composed radiology departments implemented the same technology (computerized tomography scanners), yet experienced very different structural outcomes. In this paper I re-analyze the original study's data under three different statistical assumptions. First, I performed an arcsine transformation on the dependent variable where the original study used the raw probabilities. Second, I specified a power regression model in which the original study employed a linear regression. Finally, I user fewer dummy variables in the ‘combined’ regression models to determine the distinct phases through which the two hospitals evolved. Taken together, these assumptions produce very different results from the original study. Specifically they indicate that the radiology departments did not decentralize at different rates and did not do so over a different number of distinct phases. From my analysis come three specific recommendations for research investigating the consequences of information technology in similarly constituted organizations: (1) exchange the default assumption of homogeneity of outcomes with one of heterogeneity; (2) explicitly account for both the observable properties of technology and the context of its use; and (3) state clearly and a priori the standard used to classify structural and organizational outcomes as ‘different’.

[1]  P. Blau,et al.  Technology and Organization in Manufacturing , 1976 .

[2]  G. Casella,et al.  Statistical Inference , 2003, Encyclopedia of Social Network Analysis and Mining.

[3]  C. Morrill,et al.  Ethnographic Contributions to Organizational Sociology , 1997 .

[4]  Lorin M. Hitt,et al.  Information Technology and Internal Firm Organization: An Exploratory Analysis , 1997, J. Manag. Inf. Syst..

[5]  Wanda J. Orlikowski,et al.  Technology and Institutions: What Can Research on Information Technology and Research on Organizations Learn from Each Other? , 2001, MIS Q..

[6]  George P. Huber,et al.  A theory of the effects of advanced information technologies on organizational design, intelligence , 1990 .

[7]  J. Heckman Heterogeneity and State Dependence , 1981 .

[8]  Bartlett Ms The use of transformations. , 1947 .

[9]  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.

[10]  M. Markus,et al.  Information technology and organizational change: causal structure in theory and research , 1988 .

[11]  N. Carter Computerization as a Predominate Technology: Its Influence on the Structure of Newspaper Organizations , 1984 .

[12]  M. Bartlett,et al.  The use of transformations. , 1947, Biometrics.

[13]  Michael H. Kutner Applied Linear Statistical Models , 1974 .

[14]  Rachid Zeffane,et al.  Computer Use And Structural Control: A Study Of Australian Enterprises , 1989 .

[15]  Erik Brynjolfsson,et al.  Does Information Technology Lead to Smaller Firms , 2011 .

[16]  Tim Barnett,et al.  Research Productivity of Graduates in Management: Effects of Academic Origin and Academic Affiliation , 1998 .

[17]  D. Leidner,et al.  The Impact of Executive Information Systems on Organizational Design, Intelligence, and Decision Making , 1995 .

[18]  A. W. Swan Handbook of Statistical Tables , 1964 .

[19]  Joey F. George,et al.  Examining the computing and centralization debate , 1991, CACM.

[20]  Robert L. Mason,et al.  Statistical Principles in Experimental Design , 2003 .

[21]  John Fox Multiple and Generalized Nonparametric Regression , 2000 .

[22]  S. Klatzky,et al.  Automation, Size, and the Locus of Decision Making: The Cascade Effect , 1970 .

[23]  Cheng Hsiao,et al.  Analysis of Panel Data , 1987 .

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

[25]  James J. Heckman,et al.  New Evidence on the Timing and Spacing of Births , 1985 .

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

[27]  Alexander von Eye,et al.  Regression Analysis for Social Sciences , 1998 .

[28]  Daniel Robey,et al.  Computer information systems and organization structure , 1981, CACM.

[29]  L. Tippett Statistical Tables: For Biological, Agricultural and Medical Research , 1954 .

[30]  T. L. Whisler,et al.  Information technology and organizational change , 1972 .

[31]  Daniel Robey,et al.  The organizational and cultural context of systems implementation: Case experience from Latin America , 1989, Inf. Manag..

[32]  Matthew R. Jones,et al.  Giddens's Structuration Theory and Information Systems Research , 2008, MIS Q..

[33]  Rachel A. Gordon,et al.  Regression Analysis for the Social Sciences , 2010 .

[34]  J G Anderson,et al.  Evaluating the Impact of Health Care Information Systems , 1997, International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care.

[35]  Jacob Cohen,et al.  Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences , 1979 .

[36]  Sundeep Sahay Implementation of Information Technology: A Time-Space Perspective , 1997 .

[37]  R. A. Fisher,et al.  Statistical Tables for Biological, Agricultural and Medical Research , 1956 .

[38]  Rachid M. Zeffane,et al.  Patterns of structural control in high and low computer user organizations , 1992, Inf. Manag..

[39]  Paul R. Carlile,et al.  A Dynamic Theory of Expertise and Occupational Boundaries in New Technology Implementation: Building on Barley's Study of CT Scanning , 2004 .

[40]  Brian T. Pentland,et al.  Grammatical Models of Organizational Processes , 1995 .

[41]  V. Barnett,et al.  Applied Linear Statistical Models , 1975 .

[42]  Ken Kelley’s,et al.  Multiple Regression , 2002, Deutsche medizinische Wochenschrift.

[43]  D. A. Kenny,et al.  The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. , 1986, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[44]  G. W. Snedecor Statistical Methods , 1964 .

[45]  Morten Thanning Vendelø Recycling software - on the road to high performance in software companies , 1998 .

[46]  Patricia Carlson,et al.  Information Technology and Organizational Change , 1999, SIGDOC '99.

[47]  D. G. Beech,et al.  Handbook of Statistical Tables. , 1962 .

[48]  M. Bartlett Sub‐Sampling for Attributes , 1937 .

[49]  H. Müller,et al.  Local Polynomial Modeling and Its Applications , 1998 .

[50]  R. Mayntz [Rezension] Strauss, Anselm: Negotiations - Varieties, Contexts, Processes, and Social Order (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1978) , 1980 .

[51]  Charles A. Myers,et al.  The Impact of Computers on Management , 1968 .

[52]  Alain Pinsonneault,et al.  Information Technology and the Nature of Managerial Work: From the Productivity Paradox to the Icarus Paradox? , 1998, MIS Q..

[53]  J. Pfeffer,et al.  Information Technology and Organizational Structure , 1977 .

[54]  D. Leonard-Barton,et al.  Implementation as mutual adaptation of technology and organization , 1988 .

[55]  Wanda J. Orlikowski,et al.  CASE Tools as Organizational Change: Investigating Incremental and Radical Changes in Systems Development , 1993, MIS Q..

[56]  Xianggui Qu,et al.  Multivariate Data Analysis , 2007, Technometrics.

[57]  B. J. Winer Statistical Principles in Experimental Design , 1992 .

[58]  A. Giddens Central Problems In Social Theory , 1979 .

[59]  Marshall Scott Poole,et al.  Response to Jones and Karsten, Giddens's structuration theory and information systems research , 2009 .

[60]  Marshall W. Meyer Automation and Bureaucratic Structure , 1968, American Journal of Sociology.