Enterprise architecture operationalization and institutional pluralism: The case of the Norwegian Hospital sector

Enterprise architecture (EA) is a systematic way of designing, planning, and implementing process and technology changes to address the complexity of information system (IS) landscapes. EA is operationalized when architecture visions move towards realization through concrete projects. We report a case study on the dynamics of operationalizing EA in the Norwegian hospital sector by exploring different EA project trajectories. Our empirical context is an institutionally pluralistic setting where multiple logics coexist. We show that the distinct logic of EA is added to the institutional context and we find that tensions among existing medical, technical, and managerial logics and EA principles and assumptions emerge. We contribute to the under‐researched topic of EA operationalization by suggesting a model that demonstrates how the meeting of multiple institutional logics can lead to varying degrees of differentiation or even disassociation from EA visions during decision‐taking in projects. Furthermore, we advance extant research on IS projects' implementation in institutionally pluralistic settings by providing an empirical account of actors' interactions and project leadership arrangements that contribute to the persistence of coexisting logics in a dynamic equilibrium.

[1]  Nicholas Berente,et al.  Institutional Logics and Pluralistic Responses to Enterprise System Implementation: A Qualitative Meta-Analysis , 2019, MIS Q..

[2]  Kari Smolander,et al.  Understanding obstacles in Enterprise Architecture Development , 2016, ECIS.

[3]  Tiko Iyamu,et al.  Journal of Systems and Information Technology The impact of organisational structure on enterprise architecture deployment , 2016 .

[4]  Wendy K. Smith,et al.  Toward a Theory of Paradox: A Dynamic equilibrium Model of Organizing , 2011 .

[5]  R. Friedland Bringing Society Back In : Symbols, Practices, and Institutional Contradictions , 1991 .

[6]  Marlies van Steenbergen,et al.  A theory building study of enterprise architecture practices and benefits , 2015, Information Systems Frontiers.

[7]  G. Currie,et al.  Institutional Complexity and Individual Responses: Delineating the Boundaries of Partial Autonomy , 2017 .

[8]  Nicholas Berente,et al.  Institutional Contradictions and Loose Coupling: Postimplementation of NASA's Enterprise Information System , 2012, Inf. Syst. Res..

[9]  Marijn Janssen,et al.  Sociopolitical Aspects of Interoperability and Enterprise Architecture in E-Government , 2012 .

[10]  Tone Bratteteig,et al.  User Participation and Democracy: A Discussion of Scandinavian Research on System Development , 1995, Scand. J. Inf. Syst..

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

[12]  Roberta Bernardi,et al.  Clinical managers' identity at the crossroad of multiple institutional logics in it innovation: The case study of a health care organization in England , 2019, Inf. Syst. J..

[13]  Robert Winter,et al.  Institutionalization and the Effectiveness of Enterprise Architecture Management , 2013, ICIS.

[14]  Viswanath Venkatesh,et al.  Enterprise Architecture Maturity: the Story of the Veterans Health Administration Enterprise Architecture: a Strategic Weapon , 2022 .

[15]  Helana Scheepers,et al.  Enterprise architecture implementation as interpersonal connection: Building support and commitment , 2020, Inf. Syst. J..

[16]  Patricia H. Thornton,et al.  Institutional Logics and the Historical Contingency of Power in Organizations: Executive Succession in the Higher Education Publishing Industry, 1958– 19901 , 1999, American Journal of Sociology.

[17]  Michael D. Myers,et al.  A Set of Principles for Conducting and Evaluating Interpretive Field Studies in Information Systems , 1999, MIS Q..

[18]  Stephan Aier,et al.  The role of organizational culture for grounding, management, guidance and effectiveness of enterprise architecture principles , 2014, Inf. Syst. E Bus. Manag..

[19]  Anne-Claire Pache,et al.  When Worlds Collide: The Internal Dynamics of Organizational Responses to Conflicting Institutional Demands , 2010 .

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

[21]  Trish Reay,et al.  Qualitatively capturing institutional logics , 2016 .

[22]  Kari Smolander,et al.  Conflicts, Compromises and Political Decisions: Methodological Challenges of Enterprise-Wide E-Business Architecture , 2008, J. Database Manag..

[23]  Florian Matthes,et al.  A situated approach to enterprise architecture management , 2010, 2010 IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man and Cybernetics.

[24]  Farhad Arbab,et al.  Enterprise architecture: Management tool and blueprint for the organisation , 2006, Inf. Syst. Frontiers.

[25]  Marjolein van Offenbeek,et al.  Stakeholders’ enactment of competing logics in IT governance: polarization, compromise or synthesis? , 2018, Eur. J. Inf. Syst..

[26]  Samuli Pekkola,et al.  Looking for a five-legged sheep: identifying enterprise architects' skills and competencies , 2018, DG.O.

[27]  Pamela S. Tolbert,et al.  Institutionalization and Structuration: Studying the Links between Action and Institution , 1997 .

[28]  Svyatoslav Kotusev,et al.  TOGAF-based Enterprise Architecture Practice: An Exploratory Case Study , 2018, Commun. Assoc. Inf. Syst..

[29]  Geoff Walsham,et al.  Interpretive case studies in IS research: nature and method , 1995 .

[30]  Janita F. J. Vos,et al.  Tension Awareness of Stakeholders in Large Technology Projects: A Duality Perspective , 2017 .

[31]  Kari Smolander,et al.  Lack of Communication and Collaboration in Enterprise Architecture Development , 2017, Information Systems Frontiers.

[32]  Sjaak Brinkkemper,et al.  Foor-Compliance Assessments of Projects Adhering to Enterprise Architecture , 2012 .

[33]  Matthew B. Miles,et al.  Qualitative Data Analysis: An Expanded Sourcebook , 1994 .

[34]  Jeanne W. Ross,et al.  Enterprise Architecture As Strategy: Creating a Foundation for Business Execution , 2006 .

[35]  S. Kvale,et al.  InterViews: Learning the Craft of Qualitative Research Interviewing , 1996 .

[36]  J. Llewelyn Beyond Objectivism and Relativism: Science, Hermeneutics, and Praxis , 1985 .

[37]  Marc M. Lankhorst Introduction to Enterprise Architecture , 2017, Enterprise Architecture at Work, 4th ed..

[38]  Robert M. Davison Which journal characteristics best invite submissions? , 2020, Inf. Syst. J..

[39]  Michael Sauder,et al.  Logics in Action , 2013 .

[40]  Miria Grisot,et al.  The Work of Infrastructuring: A Study of a National eHealth Project , 2015, ECSCW.

[41]  Marie-Claude Boudreau,et al.  Enacting Integrated Information Technology: A Human Agency Perspective , 2005, Organ. Sci..

[42]  Patricia H. Thornton,et al.  The Institutional Logics Perspective: A New Approach to Culture, Structure and Process , 2012 .

[43]  Wendy L. Currie,et al.  Entangled Stakeholder Roles and Perceptions in Health Information Systems: A Longitudinal Study of the U.K. NHS N3 Network , 2016, J. Assoc. Inf. Syst..

[44]  Wanda J. Orlikowski,et al.  Studying Information Technology in Organizations: Research Approaches and Assumptions , 1991, Inf. Syst. Res..

[45]  Lars Mathiassen,et al.  A paradoxical perspective on technology renewal in digital transformation , 2020, Inf. Syst. J..

[46]  Bendik Bygstad,et al.  Nuanced Responses to Enterprise Architecture Management: Loyalty, Voice, and Exit , 2019, J. Manag. Inf. Syst..

[47]  T. Reay,et al.  A Tale of Two Countries: How Different Constellations of Logics Impact Action , 2013 .

[48]  Samuli Pekkola,et al.  Institutional Perspectives on the Process of Enterprise Architecture Adoption , 2019, Information Systems Frontiers.

[49]  F. J. Armour,et al.  A big-picture look at enterprise architectures , 1999 .

[50]  Michael D. Myers,et al.  The qualitative interview in IS research: Examining the craft , 2007, Inf. Organ..

[51]  Florian Matthes,et al.  Investigating the State-of-the-Art in Enterprise Architecture Management Methods in literature and Practice , 2010, MCIS.

[52]  Douglas D. Heckathorn,et al.  Respondent-driven sampling : A new approach to the study of hidden populations , 1997 .

[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]  Jan Pries-Heje,et al.  Enterprise Architecture in Government: Fad or Future? , 2009, 2009 42nd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.

[55]  D. Walton,et al.  Commitment in Dialogue: Basic Concepts of Interpersonal Reasoning , 1995 .

[56]  P. Jarzabkowski,et al.  Reinsurance Trading in Lloyd’s of London: Balancing Conflicting-yet-Complementary Logics in Practice , 2014 .

[57]  Annemette Kjærgaard,et al.  Using institutional theory with sensemaking theory: a case study of information system implementation in healthcare , 2009, J. Inf. Technol..

[58]  A. Huberman,et al.  Qualitative Data Analysis: A Methods Sourcebook , 1994 .

[59]  Kari Smolander,et al.  Conflicts, Compromises, and Political Decisions: Methodological Challenges of Enterprise-Wide E-Business Architecture Creation , 2009, Int. J. Enterp. Inf. Syst..

[60]  Samuli Pekkola,et al.  Enterprise Architecture Benefit Realization , 2016, Data Base.

[61]  Jan Muntermann,et al.  Paradoxes and the Nature of Ambidexterity in IT Transformation Programs , 2015, Inf. Syst. Res..

[62]  Dag H. Olsen,et al.  Enterprise Architecture Challenges : a Case Study of three Norwegian Public Sectors , 2018, ECIS.

[63]  Mohan Tanniru,et al.  Hospital Leadership in Support of Digital Transformation , 2018, Pac. Asia J. Assoc. Inf. Syst..

[64]  Wendy K. Smith,et al.  Multiple Institutional Logics in Organizations: Explaining Their Varied Nature and Implications , 2014 .

[65]  Matthew S. Kraatz,et al.  Organizational Implications of Institutional Pluralism , 2008 .

[66]  Bendik Bygstad,et al.  Exploring the role of informants in interpretive case study research in IS , 2011, J. Inf. Technol..

[67]  Leon A. Kappelman,et al.  Enterprise Architecture: Charting the Territory for Academic Research , 2008, AMCIS.

[68]  W. Scott Institutions and organizations : ideas, interests and identities , 2014 .

[69]  Matthias Lange,et al.  An empirical analysis of the factors and measures of Enterprise Architecture Management success , 2016, Eur. J. Inf. Syst..

[70]  Debra Howcroft,et al.  Interpreting Information Systems in Organisations , 1995, Inf. Syst. J..

[71]  Marijn Janssen,et al.  The value of and myths about enterprise architecture , 2019, Int. J. Inf. Manag..

[72]  Svyatoslav Kotusev,et al.  Enterprise Architecture: A Reconceptualization Is Needed , 2018, Pac. Asia J. Assoc. Inf. Syst..

[73]  T. Reay,et al.  Managing the Rivalry of Competing Institutional Logics , 2009 .

[74]  Richard Heeks,et al.  Health information systems: Failure, success and improvisation , 2006, Int. J. Medical Informatics.

[75]  D. Light Institutional change and healthcare organizations: from professional dominance to managed care , 2002, International Journal of Integrated Care.

[76]  Wendy L. Currie,et al.  Conflicting institutional logics: a national programme for IT in the organisational field of healthcare , 2007, J. Inf. Technol..

[77]  J. Gregory Scandinavian Approaches to Participatory Design , 2003 .

[78]  Bongsug Chae,et al.  The paradoxes of knowledge management: An eastern philosophical perspective , 2006, Inf. Organ..

[79]  Christina Soh,et al.  Digital Transformation: Of Paradoxical Tensions and Managerial Responses , 2019, ICIS.

[80]  Sherah Kurnia,et al.  The Problem of Engagement in Enterprise Architecture Practice: An Exploratory Case Study , 2019, ICIS.

[81]  Graeme G. Shanks,et al.  Achieving benefits with enterprise architecture , 2018, J. Strateg. Inf. Syst..

[82]  J. Coleman Relational Analysis: The Study of Social Organizations with Survey Methods , 1958 .

[83]  Sean W. Hansen,et al.  Electronic Health Records and the Logics of Care: Complementarity and Conflict in the U.S. Healthcare System , 2020, Inf. Syst. Res..

[84]  Johanna I. Westbrook,et al.  Technology meets tradition: The perceived impact of the introduction of information and communication technology on ward rounds in the intensive care unit , 2017, Int. J. Medical Informatics.

[85]  Eli Hustad,et al.  Implementing a Service-Oriented Architecture: A Technochange Approach , 2011, ISD.

[86]  Jaap Paauwe,et al.  Multiple Institutional Logics in Health Care: ‘Productive Ward: Releasing Time to Care’ , 2014 .

[87]  Pedro Manuel Antunes Sousa,et al.  A method to define an Enterprise Architecture using the Zachman Framework , 2004, SAC '04.

[88]  Randy V. Bradley,et al.  Enterprise architecture, IT effectiveness and the mediating role of IT alignment in US hospitals , 2012, Inf. Syst. J..

[89]  Catherine Cassell,et al.  Assessing ?good? qualitative research in the work psychology field: A narrative analysis , 2011 .

[90]  A. H. van de Ven,et al.  Integrating Dialectical and Paradox Perspectives on Managing Contradictions in Organizations , 2017 .

[91]  Patricia H. Thornton,et al.  Institutional Logics , 2008 .

[92]  Detmar W. Straub,et al.  Riding the Wave: Past Trends and Future Directions for Health IT Research , 2012 .

[93]  Gary W. Dickson,et al.  A Principles-Based Enterprise Architecture: Lessons from Texaco and Star Enterprise , 1990, MIS Q..