What Goes Online Comes Offline: Knowledge Management System Use in a Soft Bureaucracy

This paper investigates when and how online practices (i.e. practices of management and use of web-based Information Technology) impact offline practices (i.e. regular work practices and communication patterns) within a bureaucratic environment. A case study of implementation and use of a Knowledge Management System by members of a network of practice within the bureaucratic environment of a public administration is interpreted through a situated learning perspective. This lens helps us to understand the process of emergence of continuity between online and offline practices. Findings indicate that the constructed continuity within the network of practice emerged from a combination of structural changes in the environment and of the involvement of key actors who actively encouraged others to integrate their online practices into their regular activities. The paper helps us to understand the processes of construction of continuity of online and offline practices and the bounded impacts of this continuity within bureaucracies. Such continuity may contribute to the circumscribed emergence of a soft bureaucracy in which professional competences and exchanges are recognized and encouraged, while the structural features of decision making, control, and resource allocation remain unchanged.

[1]  Keith N. Hampton,et al.  Living Networked On and Offline , 1999 .

[2]  Shan Ling Pan,et al.  Bridging communities of practice with information technology in pursuit of global knowledge sharing , 2003, J. Strateg. Inf. Syst..

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

[4]  E. J. Walton.  The Persistence of Bureaucracy: A Meta-analysis of Weber’s Model of Bureaucratic Control , 2005 .

[5]  David Courpasson,et al.  Managerial Strategies of Domination. Power in Soft Bureaucracies , 2000 .

[6]  J. Lave.  Cognition in Practice: Outdoors: a social anthropology of cognition in practice , 1988 .

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

[8]  S. Newell,et al.  From global knowledge management to internal electronic fences: contradictory outcomes of intranet development , 2001 .

[9]  C. Hales.  ‘Bureaucracy-lite’ and Continuities in Managerial Work† , 2002 .

[10]  Herbert Snyder,et al.  The Network Nation: Human Communication Via Computer , 1995 .

[11]  Thomas B. Lawrence,et al.  The Iron Cage in the Information Age: The Legacy and Relevance of Max Weber for Organization Studies. Editorial , 2005 .

[12]  R. Coombs,et al.  Culture, Control and Competition; Towards a Conceptual Framework for the Study of Information Technology in Organizations , 1992 .

[13]  Paul S. Goodman,et al.  Computer-Aided Systems and Communities: Mechanisms for Organizational Learning in Distributed Environments , 1998, MIS Q..

[14]  David Courpasson,et al.  Introduction: Bureaucracy in the Age of Enterprise , 2004 .

[15]  B. C. Reimann.  On the Dimensions of Bureaucratic Structure: An Empirical Reappraisal , 1973 .

[16]  Mani R. Subramani,et al.  Situated Learning and the Situated Knowledge Web: Exploring the Ground Beneath Knowledge Management , 2001, J. Manag. Inf. Syst..

[17]  Samer Faraj,et al.  Why Should I Share? Examining Social Capital and Knowledge Contribution in Electronic Networks of Practice , 2005, MIS Q..

[18]  M. Waters.  Collegiality, Bureaucratization, and Professionalization: A Weberian Analysis , 1989, American Journal of Sociology.

[19]  Karen A. Cerulo.  IDENTITY CONSTRUCTION: New Issues, New Directions , 1997 .

[20]  M. Lounsbury,et al.  From King to Court Jester? Weber’s Fall from Grace in Organizational Theory , 2005 .

[21]  Starr Roxanne Hiltz,et al.  Network Nation: Human Communication Via Computer , 1979 .

[22]  Constance Perin,et al.  Electronic social fields in bureaucracies , 1991, CACM.

[23]  M. Crozier,et al.  L' acteur et le systeme , 1978 .

[24]  Ann Taket,et al.  Doing Critical Management Research , 2001, J. Oper. Res. Soc..

[25]  M. Crozier,et al.  Le phenomene bureaucratique , 1965 .

[26]  Daniel G. Bobrow,et al.  Community Knowledge Sharing in Practice: The Eureka Story , 2002 .

[27]  S. Kiesler,et al.  Legitimacy, Authority, and Community in Electronic Support Groups , 1998 .

[28]  Michael Ivor Reed,et al.  Organization, Trust and Control: A Realist Analysis , 2001 .

[29]  Jan Weglarz,et al.  Interpreting Information Systems in Organizations , 1993 .

[30]  J. Fitzmaurice.  Economy and Society , 1998 .

[31]  S. Kiesler,et al.  The kindness of strangers: on the usefulness of electronic weak ties for technical advice , 1996 .

[32]  E. Ferlie,et al.  Process Transformation: Limitations to Radical Organizational Change within Public Service Organizations , 2004 .

[33]  D. Hindman.  The Virtual Community: Homesteading on the Electronic Frontier , 1996 .

[34]  B. Wellman.  An electronic group is virtually a social network. , 1997 .

[35]  Maureen S. Battistella,et al.  Connections: New Ways of Working in the Networked Organization , 1991 .

[36]  Michael Brocklehurst,et al.  Power, Identity and New Technology Homework: Implications for `New Forms' of Organizing , 2001 .

[37]  Hugh Willmott,et al.  Comment on Wenger and Yanow. Knowing in Practice: A `Delicate Flower' in the Organizational Learning Field , 2000 .

[38]  J. Brown,et al.  Knowledge and Organization: A Social-Practice Perspective , 2001 .

[39]  Michael W. Macy,et al.  Learning Theory and the Logic of Critical Mass , 1990 .

[40]  Paul Duguid,et al.  “The Art of Knowing”: Social and Tacit Dimensions of Knowledge and the Limits of the Community of Practice , 2005, Inf. Soc..

[41]  Jenny Preece,et al.  History and emergence of online communities , 2003 .

[42]  R. Ruggles.  The State of the Notion: Knowledge Management in Practice , 1998 .

[43]  Maxine Robertson,et al.  Going Public: The Emergence and Effects of Soft Bureaucracy Within a Knowledge-Intensive Firm , 2004 .

[44]  Stephen Fox.  Communities Of Practice, Foucault And Actor‐Network Therory , 2000 .

[45]  A. Gouldner.  Patterns Of Industrial Bureaucracy , 1954 .

[46]  Jenny Preece,et al.  Online Communities: Designing Usability and Supporting Sociability , 2000 .

[47]  S. Turkle.  Life on the Screen: Identity in the Age of the Internet , 1997 .

[48]  Pierre Bourdieu,et al.  Esquisse d ' une théorie de la pratique.(précédé de) trois études d ' éthnologie kabyle , 2000 .

[49]  Richard Baskerville,et al.  Generalizing Generalizability in Information Systems Research , 2003, Inf. Syst. Res..

[50]  Ernest S. Wolf,et al.  Treating the Self: Elements of Clinical Self Psychology , 1988 .

[51]  J. Brown,et al.  Organizational Learning and Communities-of-Practice: Toward a Unified View of Working, Learning, and Innovation , 1991 .

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

[53]  Henry Mintzberg,et al.  The structuring of organizations : a synthesis of the research , 1980 .

[54]  Jonathon N. Cummings,et al.  Beyond hearing: Where the real-world and online support meet. , 2002 .

[55]  Etienne Wenger,et al.  Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation , 1991 .

[56]  Pierre Bourdieu,et al.  Outline of a Theory of Practice , 2020, On Violence.

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

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

[59]  Dimitrina S. Dimitrova,et al.  Computer Networks as Social Networks: Collaborative Work, Telework, and Virtual Community , 1996 .

[60]  Wanda J. Orlikowski,et al.  Using Technology and Constituting Structures: A Practice Lens for Studying Technology in Organizations , 2000, Theory in CSCW.

[61]  P. Adler,et al.  Two Types of Bureaucracy: Enabling and Coercive , 1996 .

[62]  S. Barley.  Technicians in the Workplace: Ethnographic Evidence for Bringing Work into Organizational Studies , 1996 .

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

[64]  Dorothy E. Leidner,et al.  Review: Knowledge Management and Knowledge Management Systems: Conceptual Foundations and Research Issues , 2001, MIS Q..

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

[66]  Wanda J. Orlikowski,et al.  Improvising Organizational Transformation Over Time: A Situated Change Perspective , 1996, Inf. Syst. Res..

[67]  J. Brown,et al.  Bridging epistemologies: The generative dance between organizational knowledge and organizational knowing , 1999 .

[68]  Eleanor Wynn,et al.  Hyperbole over Cyberspace: Self-Presentation and Social Boundaries in Internet Home Pages and Discourse , 1997, Inf. Soc..

[69]  J. Lave,et al.  Understanding Practice: Perspectives on Activity and Context , 1996 .

[70]  Lucy Suchman.  Plans and situated actions: the problem of human-machine communication , 1987 .

[71]  D. Hodgson.  Project Work: The Legacy of Bureaucratic Control in the Post-Bureaucratic Organization , 2004 .

[72]  Jonathon N. Cummings,et al.  Beyond Hearing : Where Real-World and Online Support Meet , 2002 .

[73]  Mats Alvesson,et al.  Cages in Tandem: Management Control, Social Identity, and Identification in a Knowledge-Intensive Firm , 2004 .

[74]  Marie-Claude Boudreau,et al.  Accounting for the Contradictory Organizational Consequences of Information Technology: Theoretical Directions and Methodological Implications , 1999, Inf. Syst. Res..

[75]  Pierre Bourdieu,et al.  Esquisse d'une théorie de la pratique , 1972 .

[76]  Christopher Grey,et al.  Trust, Control and Post-Bureaucracy , 2001 .

[77]  Richard J. Boland,et al.  Knowledge management technology and the reproduction of knowledge work practices , 2000, J. Strateg. Inf. Syst..