European Conference on Information Systems ( ECIS ) 5-15-2012 AN INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORK FOR ANALYZING ORGANIZATIONAL RESPONSES TO THE ESTABLISHMENT OF ARCHITECTUAL TRANSFORMATION

The need for constant transformation of enterprises is omnipresent. A discipline that has been proposed to support the coordination of enterprise transformation is Enterprise Architecture Management (EAM) which has grown to a mature discipline in academia and practice. However, it can be observed in practice that it still is a challenge to introduce such an architectural coordination approach for supporting enterprise transformation. This may be due to the reason that the institutional context of EAM is only little understood, that is, the interplay between the pressures EAM exerts on the organisation and the response strategies of this organisation. The paper reviews existing work on institutional theory and confirms by means of a case study that the institutional factors of cause, constituents, content, control, and context are not only relevant for EAM but may be consistently linked to response strategies of acquiesce, compromise, avoid, defy, and manipulate. Moreover the case study implies to add additional institutional factors for EAM, namely trust and participation.

[1]  Kenneth L. Kraemer,et al.  Institutional Factors in Information Technology Innovation , 1994, Inf. Syst. Res..

[2]  Wanda J. Orlikowski,et al.  Technology and Institutions: What Can Research on Information Technology and Research on Organizations Learn from Each Other? , 2001, MIS Q..

[3]  Remco M. Dijkman,et al.  A rigorous approach to relate enterprise and computational viewpoints , 2004, Proceedings. Eighth IEEE International Enterprise Distributed Object Computing Conference, 2004. EDOC 2004..

[4]  B. Loasby.  The External Control of Organizations. A Resource Dependence Perspective , 1979 .

[5]  C. Oliver.  SUSTAINABLE COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGE: COMBINING INSTITUTIONAL AND RESOURCE- BASED VIEWS , 1997 .

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

[7]  Shirley Gregor,et al.  The Anatomy of a Design Theory , 2007, J. Assoc. Inf. Syst..

[8]  W. Powell,et al.  The iron cage revisited institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields , 1983 .

[9]  Kristian Hjort-Madsen,et al.  Enterprise Architecture Implementation and Management: A Case Study on Interoperability , 2006, Proceedings of the 39th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS'06).

[10]  Henderik Alex Proper,et al.  Informed Governance of Enterprise Transformations , 2009, PRET.

[11]  Izak Benbasat,et al.  Predicting Intention to Adopt Interorganizational Linkages: An Institutional Perspective , 2003, MIS Q..

[12]  Philip Selznick.  Foundations of the Theory of Organization , 1948 .

[13]  Salvatore T. March,et al.  Design and natural science research on information technology , 1995, Decis. Support Syst..

[14]  Raul P. Lejano,et al.  Technology and Institutions , 2008 .

[15]  J. Whitney.  Case Study Research , 1999 .

[16]  1 What Is Game Theory Trying to Accomplish ? , 1985 .

[17]  M. Marcelli,et al.  Design and Methods , 2011 .

[18]  C. Oliver.  STRATEGIC RESPONSES TO INSTITUTIONAL PROCESSES , 1991 .

[19]  Colin Camerer,et al.  Coordination, Organizational Boundaries and Fads in Business Practices , 1996 .

[20]  Kristian Hjort-Madsen,et al.  Institutional patterns of enterprise architecture adoption in government , 2007 .

[21]  Jean Hartley,et al.  Case study research , 2004 .

[22]  Robert Winter,et al.  Towards a More Integrated EA Planning: Linking Transformation Planning with Evolutionary Change , 2011, EMISA.

[23]  Marie-Claude Boudreau,et al.  Coping with contradictions in business process re-engineering , 1996, Inf. Technol. People.

[24]  R. Yin.  Case Study Research: Design and Methods , 1984 .

[25]  Shirley Gregor,et al.  The Nature of Theory in Information Systems , 2006, MIS Q..

[26]  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..

[27]  Izak Benbasat,et al.  The Case Research Strategy in Studies of Information Systems , 1987, MIS Q..

[28]  João Baptista,et al.  Institutionalisation as a process of interplay between technology and its organisational context of use , 2009, J. Inf. Technol..

[29]  L. Zucker.  Institutional Theories of Organization , 1987 .

[30]  Sabine Buckl,et al.  On the State-of-the-Art in Enterprise Architecture Management Literature , 2011 .

[31]  Göran Goldkuhl,et al.  DESIGN THEORIES IN INFORMATION SYSTEMS - A NEED FOR MULTI-GROUNDING , 2004 .

[32]  D. North.  Institutions, Institutional Change and Economic Performance: Economic performance , 1990 .

[33]  Sten Jönsson.  Institutions and Organizations , 1997 .

[34]  Sabine Buckl,et al.  Charting the landscape of enterprise architecture management , 2011, Wirtschaftsinformatik.

[35]  Robert N. Stern,et al.  The External Control of Organizations: A Resource Dependence Perspective. , 1979 .

[36]  M. Markus,et al.  Information technology and organizational change: causal structure in theory and research , 1988 .

[37]  H. TeoH.,et al.  Predicting intention to adopt interorganizational linkages , 2003 .

[38]  Omar El Sawy,et al.  Building an Information System Design Theory for Vigilant EIS , 1992, Inf. Syst. Res..

[39]  S. Kimmel.  Architecture , 2013, Arsham-isms.

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