Technology Introduction as a Time-Extended, Social Process: Key Articulations in the Literature

What happens after new technologies have been rolled out in organisations? This question has motivated a wide range of academic works in diverse intellectual communities, such as HCI (Bannon and Bødker, 1989), STS (Mackay and Gillespie, 1992), Organisational Studies (Lewis and Seibold, 1993) and IS (Lamb and Kling, 2003). This issue has assumed increasing importance in light of recent proliferation of new malleable technologies. Different notions such as ‘postimplementation participation’ (Wagner and Newell, 2007), ‘post-adoptive behaviours’ (Jasperson, Carter and Zmud, 2005), ‘ICT appropriation’ (Hussenot, 2008) and ‘mutual adaptation’ (Bansler and Havn, 2006) have been put forward to answer this question. What these notions have in common is an acknowledgement of the limitations of dominant decision-oriented approaches to IT implementation (Swanson, 1974), technology acceptance (Davis, 1985), and task-technology fit (Goodhue and Thompson, 1995).

[1]  Beth A. Bechky,et al.  The Changing Nature of Work: Careers, Identities, and Work Lives in the 21st Century , 2017 .

[2]  Alexander Richter,et al.  Malleable End-User Software , 2013, Bus. Inf. Syst. Eng..

[3]  A. V. D. Ven,et al.  Process studies of change in organization and management : unveiling temporality, activity, and flow , 2013 .

[4]  Elfi Furtmueller,et al.  Using grounded theory as a method for rigorously reviewing literature , 2013, Eur. J. Inf. Syst..

[5]  Anthony Hussenot,et al.  Between structuration and translation : an approach of ICT appropriation , 2008 .

[6]  Sue Newell,et al.  Exploring the Importance of Participation in the Post-Implementation Period of an ES Project: A Neglected Area , 2007, J. Assoc. Inf. Syst..

[7]  Jorgen P. Bansler,et al.  Sensemaking in Technology-Use Mediation: Adapting Groupware Technology in Organizations , 2006, Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW).

[8]  Robert W. Zmud,et al.  A Comprehensive Conceptualization of Post-Adoptive Behaviors Associated with Information Technology Enabled Work Systems , 2005, MIS Q..

[9]  Rob Kling,et al.  Reconceptualizing Users as Social Actors in Information Systems Research , 2003, MIS Q..

[10]  Robert Chia,et al.  On Organizational Becoming: Rethinking Organizational Change , 2002, Organ. Sci..

[11]  R. Barry Johnston,et al.  Planning or organizing: The implications of theories of activity for management of operations , 1996 .

[12]  Dale Goodhue,et al.  Task-Technology Fit and Individual Performance , 1995, MIS Q..

[13]  Wanda J. Orlikowski,et al.  Technological frames: making sense of information technology in organizations , 1994, TOIS.

[14]  David R. Seibold,et al.  Innovation Modification During Intraorganizational Adoption , 1993 .

[15]  H. Mackay,et al.  Extending the Social Shaping of Technology Approach: Ideology and Appropriation , 1992 .

[16]  Liam J. Bannon,et al.  Beyond the Interface: Encountering Artifacts in Use , 1989 .

[17]  E. B. Swanson,et al.  Management Information Systems: Appreciation and Involvement , 1974 .

[18]  James Stewart,et al.  Social Learning in Technological Innovation: Experimenting with Information and Communication Technologies , 2005 .

[19]  Claudio U. Ciborra,et al.  The labyrinths of Information , 2002 .

[20]  Fred D. Davis.  A technology acceptance model for empirically testing new end-user information systems : theory and results , 1985 .

[21]  D. Cecez-Kecmanovic,et al.  Communications of the Association for Information Systems a Hermeneutic Approach for Conducting Literature Reviews and Literature Searches a Hermeneutic Approach for Conducting Literature Reviews and Literature Searches a Hermeneutic Approach for Conducting Literature Reviews and Literature Searches , 2022 .