Crossing the Line: Overcoming Knowledge Boundaries in Enterprise Transformation

Enterprise transformations are fundamental changes in an organization. Such changes typically affect different stakeholder groups (e.g., program managers, business managers) that exhibit a significant diversity regarding their members’ knowledge, goals, and underlying assumptions. Yet, creating shared understanding among diverse stakeholder groups in transformations is a main antecedent for success. The paper analyzes which properties of enterprise architecture models contribute to syntactic, semantic, and pragmatic capacities which helps to create shared understanding among stakeholder groups involved in enterprise transformation. The differences among stakeholder groups are assessed through the lens of knowledge boundaries, and enterprise architecture models are assessed through the lens of boundary objects. A research model is developed and empirically tested that describes which boundary object properties are required to overcome three progressively complex knowledge boundaries – syntactic, semantic, and pragmatic. The findings show which boundary object properties contribute to a respective capacity needed to overcome each of the three knowledge boundaries. Specifically, the results show that for (1) a syntactic capacity, concrete and modular enterprise architecture (EA) models are helpful; (2) a semantic capacity, visual EA model properties are relevant, and (3) a pragmatic capacity, broad stakeholder participation is conductive.

[1]  Brian S. Butler,et al.  Creating bigger problems: grand challenges as boundary objects and the legitimacy of the information systems field , 2011, J. Inf. Technol..

[2]  Lars Pareto,et al.  Architectural descriptions as boundary objects in system and design work , 2010, MODELS'10.

[3]  Susan Leigh Star,et al.  Institutional Ecology, `Translations' and Boundary Objects: Amateurs and Professionals in Berkeley's Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, 1907-39 , 1989 .

[4]  Kalle Lyytinen,et al.  Boundary Objects in Design: An Ecological View of Design Artifacts , 2007, J. Assoc. Inf. Syst..

[5]  Marijn Janssen,et al.  Management and Failure of Large Transformation Projects: Factors Affecting User Adoption , 2013, TDIT.

[6]  Ryan S. Bisel,et al.  Discursive positioning and planned change in organizations , 2011 .

[7]  Graeme G. Shanks,et al.  How Does Enterprise Architecture Add Value to Organisations? , 2011, Commun. Assoc. Inf. Syst..

[8]  JoAnne Yates,et al.  Life in the Trading Zone: Structuring Coordination Across Boundaries in Postbureaucratic Organizations , 2006, Organ. Sci..

[9]  Hans van Vliet,et al.  The relation between EA effectiveness and stakeholder satisfaction , 2010, J. Syst. Softw..

[10]  William B. Rouse,et al.  A theory of enterprise transformation , 2005, 2005 IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man and Cybernetics.

[11]  Susan V. Scott,et al.  10 Sociomateriality: Challenging the Separation of Technology, Work and Organization , 2008 .

[12]  Eivor Oborn,et al.  Boundary object use in cross-cultural software development teams , 2010 .

[13]  Nils Urbach,et al.  Structural Equation Modeling in Information Systems Research Using Partial Least Squares , 2010 .

[14]  Beth A. Bechky Sharing Meaning Across Occupational Communities: The Transformation of Understanding on a Production Floor , 2003, Organ. Sci..

[15]  Elaine K. Yakura,et al.  Charting Time: Timelines as Temporal Boundary Objects , 2002 .

[16]  Daniel L. Sherrell,et al.  Communications of the Association for Information Systems , 1999 .

[17]  Kerstin Liehr-Gobbers,et al.  Evaluation of Structural Equation Models Using the Partial Least Squares (PLS) Approach , 2010 .

[18]  Mikko Valorinta,et al.  IT alignment and the boundaries of the IT function , 2011, J. Inf. Technol..

[19]  Suzanne D. Pawlowski,et al.  Bridging User Organizations: Knowledge Brokering and the Work of Information Technology Professionals , 2004, MIS Q..

[20]  C. Fornell,et al.  Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. , 1981 .

[21]  Ricardo Valerdi,et al.  Enterprise Transformation: Why Are We Interested, What Is It, and What Are the Challenges? , 2011 .

[22]  Sandeep Purao,et al.  Software architectures: Blueprint, Literature, Language or Decision? , 2008, Eur. J. Inf. Syst..

[23]  George A. Marcoulides,et al.  Modern methods for business research , 1998 .

[24]  Elena Karahanna,et al.  Antecedents of IS Strategic Alignment: A Nomological Network , 2009, Inf. Syst. Res..

[25]  Paul R. Carlile,et al.  Transferring, Translating, and Transforming: An Integrative Framework for Managing Knowledge Across Boundaries , 2004, Organ. Sci..

[26]  Kalle Lyytinen,et al.  Crossing boundaries and conscripting participation: representing and integrating knowledge in a paper machinery project , 2001, Eur. J. Inf. Syst..

[27]  Christoph Rosenkranz,et al.  Boundary Interactions and Motors of Change in Requirements Elicitation: A Dynamic Perspective on Knowledge Sharing , 2014, J. Assoc. Inf. Syst..

[28]  Carsten S. Østerlund The Materiality of Communicative Practices , 2008, Scand. J. Inf. Syst..

[29]  Marko Sarstedt,et al.  PLS-SEM: Indeed a Silver Bullet , 2011 .

[30]  Robert Winter,et al.  Critical Success Factors of Service Orientation in Information Systems Engineering , 2011, Bus. Inf. Syst. Eng..

[31]  Detlef Schoder,et al.  An Exploration of Enterprise Architecture Research , 2013, Commun. Assoc. Inf. Syst..

[32]  S. L. Star,et al.  This is Not a Boundary Object: Reflections on the Origin of a Concept , 2010 .

[33]  Peter Mertens,et al.  Memorandum on design-oriented information systems research , 2011, Eur. J. Inf. Syst..

[34]  C. Gibson,et al.  Virtual teams that work : creating conditions for virtual team effectiveness , 2003 .

[35]  Paul R. Carlile,et al.  A Pragmatic View of Knowledge and Boundaries: Boundary Objects in New Product Development , 2002, Organ. Sci..

[36]  Kathryn Henderson,et al.  Flexible Sketches and Inflexible Data Bases: Visual Communication, Conscription Devices, and Boundary Objects in Design Engineering , 1991 .

[37]  Ulrich Frank,et al.  Multi-perspective enterprise modeling: foundational concepts, prospects and future research challenges , 2014, Software & Systems Modeling.

[38]  Jeffrey Parsons,et al.  Effects of Local Versus Global Schema Diagrams on Verification and Communication in Conceptual Data Modeling , 2002, J. Manag. Inf. Syst..

[39]  Susan Gasson,et al.  A genealogical study of boundary-spanning IS design , 2006, Eur. J. Inf. Syst..

[40]  J. Blaivas,et al.  Crossing the line , 2002, Neurourology and urodynamics.

[41]  Natalia Levina,et al.  Collaborating on Multi-Party Information Systems Development Projects: A Collective Reflection-in-Action View , 2005, Inf. Syst. Res..

[42]  Jörg Henseler,et al.  Handbook of Partial Least Squares: Concepts, Methods and Applications , 2010 .

[43]  Wynne W. Chin The partial least squares approach for structural equation modeling. , 1998 .

[44]  Daniel L. Moody,et al.  Theoretical and practical issues in evaluating the quality of conceptual models: current state and future directions , 2005, Data Knowl. Eng..

[45]  David M. Gann,et al.  "In Case of Fire, Please Use the Elevator": Simulation Technology and Organization in Fire Engineering , 2007, Organ. Sci..

[46]  Robert Winter,et al.  Understanding Enterprise Architecture Management Design - An Empirical Analysis , 2011, Wirtschaftsinformatik.

[47]  Wynne W. Chin,et al.  A Partial Least Squares Latent Variable Modeling Approach for Measuring Interaction Effects: Results from a Monte Carlo Simulation Study and an Electronic - Mail Emotion/Adoption Study , 2003, Inf. Syst. Res..

[48]  Sybren de Kinderen,et al.  Integrating Value Modelling into ArchiMate , 2012, IESS.

[49]  Ralf Abraham,et al.  Enterprise Architecture Artifacts As Boundary Objects - A Framework Of Properties , 2013, ECIS.

[50]  语言学和文学 European Journal of Information Systems , 2010 .

[51]  Elmar J. Sinz,et al.  The Research Field “Modeling Business Information Systems” , 2014, Business & Information Systems Engineering.

[52]  C. Kowalski,et al.  Crossing the Line , 2009, Research quarterly for exercise and sport.

[53]  Peter Buxmann,et al.  Outcomes and success factors of enterprise IT architecture management: empirical insight from the international financial services industry , 2011, Eur. J. Inf. Syst..

[54]  Robert Winter,et al.  Towards A Conceptualization Of Architectural Support For Enterprise Transformation , 2013, ECIS.

[55]  Bart van den Hooff,et al.  Are We on the Same Page? Knowledge Boundaries and Transactive Memory System Development in Cross-Functional Teams , 2015, Commun. Res..

[56]  Steven J. Landry,et al.  Enabling Collaborative Work Across Different Communities of Practice Through Boundary Objects: Field Studies in Air Traffic Management , 2010, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Interact..

[57]  Bill Doolin,et al.  Sociomateriality and boundary objects in information systems development , 2012, Eur. J. Inf. Syst..

[58]  William B. Rouse Enterprises as systems: Essential challenges and approaches to transformation , 2005, Syst. Eng..

[59]  Jacky Swan,et al.  Understanding the Role of Objects in Cross-Disciplinary Collaboration , 2012, Organ. Sci..

[60]  Detlef Schoder,et al.  Enterprise architecture management and its role in corporate strategic management , 2013, Information Systems and e-Business Management.

[61]  Wynne W. Chin How to Write Up and Report PLS Analyses , 2010 .

[62]  Yogesh Kumar Dwivedi,et al.  Grand Successes and Failures in IT. Public and Private Sectors , 2013, IFIP Advances in Information and Communication Technology.

[63]  Jan L. G. Dietz,et al.  Enterprise ontology in enterprise engineering , 2008, SAC '08.

[64]  Daniel L. Moody,et al.  The “Physics” of Notations: Toward a Scientific Basis for Constructing Visual Notations in Software Engineering , 2009, IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering.

[65]  E. Wenger Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning, and Identity , 1998 .

[66]  Sven-Volker Rehm,et al.  Composite Boundary Objects In Inter-Organizational Innovation Activities , 2013, ECIS.

[67]  Sybren de Kinderen,et al.  Can boundary objects mitigate communication defects in enterprise transformation? Findings from expert interviews , 2013, EMISA.

[68]  Ramkrishnan V. Tenkasi,et al.  P ERSPECTIVE M AKING AND P ERSPECTIVE T AKING IN C OMMUNITIES OF K NOWING , 2000 .

[69]  Matthew Hawkins,et al.  Management Decision Emerald Article : Knowledge boundary spanning process : synthesizing four spanning mechanisms , 2012 .

[70]  Van Haren,et al.  TOGAF Version 9.1 , 2011 .

[71]  Etienne Wenger,et al.  Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning, and Identity , 1998 .

[72]  Emmanuelle Vaast,et al.  The Emergence of Boundary Spanning Competence in Practice: Implications for Implementation and Use of Information Systems , 2005, MIS Q..

[73]  E. Wenger Communities of Practice and Social Learning Systems , 2000 .

[74]  A. Kellerman,et al.  The Constitution of Society : Outline of the Theory of Structuration , 2015 .

[75]  Paul M. Leonardi,et al.  ENGINEERING OBJECTS FOR COLLABORATION: STRATEGIES OF AMBIGUITY AND CLARITY AT KNOWLEDGE BOUNDARIES , 2011 .

[76]  Scott B. MacKenzie,et al.  Construct Measurement and Validation Procedures in MIS and Behavioral Research: Integrating New and Existing Techniques , 2011, MIS Q..

[77]  Inger G. Stensaker,et al.  Implementation Activities and Organizational Sensemaking , 2008 .

[78]  Bart van den Hooff,et al.  Bridging Knowledge Boundaries in Cross-Functional Groups: The Role of a Transactive Memory System , 2009, ICIS.

[79]  Mario Piattini,et al.  A conceptual modeling quality framework , 2011, Software Quality Journal.

[80]  Kevin Lano,et al.  Slicing of UML models using model transformations , 2010, MODELS'10.

[81]  Wynne W. Chin Issues and Opinion on Structural Equation Modeling by , 2009 .

[82]  John Krogstie,et al.  Process models representing knowledge for action: a revised quality framework , 2006, Eur. J. Inf. Syst..

[83]  Dusya Vera,et al.  Improvisation and Innovative Performance in Teams , 2005, Organ. Sci..

[84]  J. Ford,et al.  The Role Of Conversations in Producing Intentional Change in Organizations , 1995 .