Transitions of power in multi-actor information system projects

Abstract Power and politics play an important role in multi-actor information systems where balancing change and stability can become a goal in itself. To investigate this, the paper looks at a project on the implementation of the electronic system of business registration in Albania, a developing country in transition. The study introduces the concept of Obligatory Passage Channels (OPCs), building on Actor-Network Theory (ANT) and the Circuits of Power Model (CPM). An OPC is defined as the mechanism that gives momentum to the flows of power in a multi-actor project network. Findings show that the social circuit of causal power is characterized by OPCs related to need and vision. The systemic circuit of facilitative power is shaped by OPCs related to coordination and capabilities. The episodic circuit of dispositional power is characterized by the interoperability OPC. This study contributes to a better understanding of network politics in multi-actor information system projects.

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

[2]  Roberto Franzosi,et al.  Quantitative narrative analysis software options compared: PC-ACE and CAQDAS (ATLAS.ti, MAXqda, and NVivo) , 2012, Quality & Quantity.

[3]  B. Latour.  Science in action : how to follow scientists and engineers through society , 1989 .

[4]  Derrick L. Cogburn.  Enabling effective multi-stakeholder participation in global internet governance through accessible cyber-infrastructure , 2008 .

[5]  James Backhouse,et al.  The Circuits-of-Power Framework for Studying Power in Institutionalization of Information Systems , 2003, J. Assoc. Inf. Syst..

[6]  Karin Axelsson,et al.  Developing public e-services for several stakeholders - A multifaceted view of the needs for an e-service , 2009, ECIS.

[7]  Zahir Irani,et al.  Managing e‐Government: value positions and relationships , 2015, Inf. Syst. J..

[8]  Julien Pollack,et al.  The changing paradigms of project management , 2007 .

[9]  B. Latour.  On Recalling Ant , 1999 .

[10]  L. Holmes.  Post-Communism: An Introduction , 1997 .

[11]  Tehmina N. Basit.  Manual or electronic? The role of coding in qualitative data analysis , 2003 .

[12]  John K. Christiansen,et al.  Understanding IS implementation by estimating power of subunits , 1996 .

[13]  S. Lukes.  Power: A Radical View , 1974 .

[14]  Geoff Walsham,et al.  GIS for District-Level Administration in India: Problems and Opportunities , 1999, MIS Q..

[15]  Helmut Krcmar,et al.  Towards a Research Method for Theory-driven Design Research , 2009, Wirtschaftsinformatik.

[16]  Carolyne Stanforth,et al.  Using Actor-Network Theory to Analyze E-Government Implementation in Developing Countries , 2007 .

[17]  Alexander Kock,et al.  Behavior of internal stakeholders in project portfolio management and its impact on success , 2013 .

[18]  Richard Heeks,et al.  Understanding e-Government project trajectories from an actor-network perspective , 2007, Eur. J. Inf. Syst..

[19]  Helen Margetts,et al.  Public management change and e-government: The emergence of digital-era governance , 2008 .

[20]  Brian S. Butler,et al.  Power and Information Technology Research: A Metatriangulation Review , 2002, MIS Q..

[21]  M. Lynne Markus,et al.  Power, politics, and MIS implementation , 1987, CACM.

[22]  G. Poggi.  Economy and Society: An Outline of Interpretive Sociology , 1969 .

[23]  A. Bruni,et al.  Reassembling the Social—An Introduction to Actor Network Theory , 2007 .

[24]  M. Sandelowski,et al.  Writing Usable Qualitative Health Research Findings , 2012, Qualitative health research.

[25]  M. Callon.  Society in the making: The study of technology as a tool for sociological analysis , 1987 .

[26]  Stig Nordheim,et al.  Stakeholders, Contradictions and Salience: An Empirical Study of a Norwegian G2G Effort , 2006, Proceedings of the 39th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS'06).

[27]  Eric G. Too,et al.  The management of project management: a conceptual framework for project governance , 2014 .

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

[29]  W. Duncan.  A GUIDE TO THE PROJECT MANAGEMENT BODY OF KNOWLEDGE , 1996 .

[30]  H. Turunen,et al.  Content analysis and thematic analysis: Implications for conducting a qualitative descriptive study. , 2013, Nursing & health sciences.

[31]  K. Weber,et al.  The 'fit' between forward-looking activities and the innovation policy governance sub-system: A framework to explore potential impacts , 2017 .

[32]  Terry Williams,et al.  Rethinking Project Management: Researching the actuality of projects , 2006 .

[33]  D. Loorbach,et al.  Governing Transitions in Cities: Fostering Alternative Ideas, Practices, and Social Relations Through Transition Management , 2016 .

[34]  José-Rodrigo Córdoba-Pachón,et al.  Discursive Institutionalism for reconciling change and stability in digital innovation public sector projects for development , 2017, Gov. Inf. Q..

[35]  S. Elo,et al.  Qualitative Content Analysis , 2014 .

[36]  Rob Kling,et al.  The control of information systems developments after implementation , 1984, CACM.

[37]  Svetlana. Cicmil,et al.  New Possibilities for Project Management Theory: A Critical Engagement , 2006 .

[38]  M. Foucault,et al.  Power/Knowledge: Selected Interviews and Other Writings 1972-1977 , 1980 .

[39]  Cathy Urquhart,et al.  Everyday power struggles: living in an IOIS project , 2013, Eur. J. Inf. Syst..

[40]  Patrick Dunleavy,et al.  New public management is dead. Long live digital-era governance , 2005 .

[41]  Geoff Walsham,et al.  Doing interpretive research , 2006, Eur. J. Inf. Syst..

[42]  Henry Mintzberg,et al.  Power in and Around Organizations , 1983 .

[43]  A. Spicer,et al.  Is Actor Network Theory Critique? , 2008 .

[44]  Yogesh Singh Chauhan,et al.  Actor-Network Theory , 2018, Encyclopedia of Social Network Analysis and Mining. 2nd Ed..

[45]  Siegfried P. Gudergan,et al.  Governing projects under complexity: theory and practice in project management , 2014 .

[46]  Stewart Clegg,et al.  Power and Politics in Construction Projects , 2013 .

[47]  M. Angela Sasse,et al.  Information security as organizational power: A framework for re-thinking security policies , 2011, 2011 1st Workshop on Socio-Technical Aspects in Security and Trust (STAST).

[48]  B. Latour.  On actor-network theory : A few clarifications , 1996 .

[49]  Vishanth Weerakkody,et al.  E-government implementation strategies in developed and transition economies: A comparative study , 2012, Int. J. Inf. Manag..

[50]  Deborah Bunker,et al.  Circuits of Power: A Study of Mandated Compliance to an Information Systems Security De Jure Standard in a Government Organization , 2010, MIS Q..

[51]  Julien Pollack,et al.  Applying Actor–Network Theory as a sensemaking framework for complex organisational change programs , 2013 .

[52]  Sabrina Ching Yuen Luk,et al.  The impact of leadership and stakeholders on the success/failure of e-government service: Using the case study of e-stamping service in Hong Kong , 2009, Gov. Inf. Q..

[53]  Bonnie Kaplan,et al.  Qualitative Research Methods for Evaluating Computer Information Systems , 2005 .

[54]  Yannis Charalabidis,et al.  An ontology for stakeholder collaboration and knowledge exploitation in e-government project management , 2009, ICEGOV '09.

[55]  Daniel J. Brass,et al.  Taking Stock of Networks and Organizations: A Multilevel Perspective , 2004 .

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

[57]  Anna Sidorova,et al.  Understanding Business Process Change Failure: An Actor-Network Perspective , 2006, J. Manag. Inf. Syst..

[58]  Tomas Müllern,et al.  A contextual understanding of projects--The importance of space and time , 2009 .

[59]  Thomas A. Schwandt.  Constructivist, interpretivist approaches to human inquiry. , 1994 .

[60]  Nihat Kasap,et al.  An Actor-Network Theory (ANT) Approach to Turkish E-Government Gateway Initiative , 2009 .

[61]  V. Braun,et al.  Using thematic analysis in psychology , 2006 .

[62]  M. Callon.  Some Elements of a Sociology of Translation: Domestication of the Scallops and the Fishermen of St Brieuc Bay , 1984 .

[63]  Vesa Torvinen,et al.  Stimulating power games as a part of systems development , 2000, Eur. J. Inf. Syst..

[64]  D. Hodgson,et al.  Making Projects Critical , 2006 .

[65]  W. Chigona,et al.  Investigating the Impact of Stakeholder Management on the Implementation of a Public Access Project: The Case of Smart Cape , 2010 .

[66]  James Backhouse,et al.  Circuits of Power in Creating de jure Standards: Shaping an International Information Systems Security Standard , 2006, MIS Q..

[67]  Alfons van Marrewijk,et al.  Managing project culture: The case of environment mega-project , 2007 .

[68]  C. Bauer.  The Circuits-of-Power Framework for Studying Power in Institutionalization of Information Systems , 2003 .

[69]  Wei Tong Chen,et al.  Earned value project management: Improving the predictive power of planned value , 2016 .

[70]  D. Robey,et al.  Foreword: special issue on information systems in developing countries , 2007 .

[71]  C. Pollitt,et al.  Public management reform : a comparative analysis - new public management, governance, and the Neo-Weberian State , 2011 .

[72]  Susanne Friese,et al.  Qualitative Data Analysis with ATLAS.ti , 2012 .

[73]  Kenneth H. Rose,et al.  Book Review: A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK® Guide), Fourth Edition , 2001 .

[74]  Johann Packendorff,et al.  INQUIRING INTO THE TEMPORARY ORGANIZATION: NEW DIRECTIONS FOR PROJECT MANAGEMENT RESEARCH , 1995 .

[75]  Marcus Lindahl,et al.  How do you do? On situating old project sites through practice‐based studies , 2012 .

[76]  Stewart Clegg,et al.  Frameworks of power , 1989 .