Academia.eduAcademia.edu

Outline

The Inertia of ERP Projects - Diffusion or Drift?

2007

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-72804-9_17

Abstract

Models of the diffusion of innovation have received wide acceptance in IS research. Such diffusion models are typically based on the assumption that projects are either accepted or rejected by adopters, without recognizing or accounting for the negotiation, adaptation, and drift that take place during the implementation (Rogers 1995). This paper presents an alternative view, based on the actor network theory (ANT) concepts of translation, moving the token, and modality. This lens reveals that softM^are implementation projects, such as enterprise resource planning (ERP), have no inertia in themselves. Instead, a project's fate depends on each move it takes and each party involved in handling that move. Every handling of the project by different parties could present either a positive modality (that strengthens it and pushes it forward on its track) or a negative modality (that weaken its initial form and drags it in a different direction). The findings provide an explanation of drift and an alternative view of the diffusion of innovation in the ERP case. This could be extended to other technological projects. The findings also invite practitioners to monitor the various movements of their projects and encourage academics to revise their endorsement of the previously dominant diffusion model. They also contribute to the drift argument by identifying and discussing one of the sources of drift.

References (32)

  1. Alshawi, M., Themistocleous, M., and Almadani, R. "Integrating Diverse ERP Systems: A Case Study,'' Journal of Enterprise Information Management (17:6), 2004, pp. 454-460.
  2. Baskerville, R., and Pries-Heje, J. "A Multiple-Theory Analysis of a Diffusion of Information Technology Ca.SQ,'" Information Systems Journal (11), 2001, pp. 181-212.
  3. Bloomfield, B. P., Coombs, R., Knights, D., and Littler, D. (eds.). Information Technology and Organizations: Strategies, Networks, and Integration, OxfoTd,l]K: Oxford University Press, 1997.
  4. Bryman, A. Research Methods and Organization Studies, London: Unwin Hyman, 1989.
  5. Buscher, M., and Mogensen, P. "Mediating Change: Translation and Mediation in the Context of Bricolage," in T. McMaster, E. Mumford, E. B. Swanson, B. Warboys, and D. Wastell (eds.), Facilitating Technology Transfer Through Partnership: Learning from Practice and Research, London: Chapman & Hall, 1997, pp. 76-91.
  6. Callon, M. "Some Elements of a Sociology of Translation: Domestication of the Scallops and the Fishermen of St. Brieuc Bay," in J. Law (ed.), Power, Action and Belief A New Sociology of Knowledge, London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1986, pp. 196-233.
  7. Ciborra, C. U. "Drifting: From Control to Drift," in K. Braa, C. Sorensen, and B. Dahlbom (eds.). Planet Internet, Lund, Sweden: Studentlitteratur, 2000, pp. 185-195.
  8. Ciborra, C. U. "A Theory of Information Systems Based on Improvisation," in W. Currie and B. Galliers (eds.). Rethinking Management Information Systems: An Interdisciplinary Perspec- tive, Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, 1999, pp. 136-155.
  9. Elbanna, A. R. "The Construction of the Relationship Between ERP and the Organization Through Negotiation," in Proceedings of the 14'^ European Conference of Information Systems, Goteborg, Sweden, 2006.
  10. Elbanna, A. R. "Implementing an Integrated System in a Socially Dis-integrated Enterprise: A Critical View of ERP Enabled Integration," Information Technology & People (20:2), 2007 (forthcoming).
  11. Greimas,A. L The Social Science: ASemioticView,M\nnQ2i\io\\s,MH: University of Minnesota Press, 1990.
  12. Hanseth, O., Ciborra, C. U., and Braa, K. "The Control Devolution: ERP and the Side Effects of GlobaHzation," The Data Base for Advances in Information Systems (32:4), 2001, pp. 34-46.
  13. Holmstrom, J., and Stalder, F. "Drifting Technologies and Multi-Purpose Networks: The Case of the Swedish Cashcard," Information and Organization (11), 2001, pp. 187-206.
  14. James, G. "IT Fiascos and How to Avoid Them," Datamation (43:11), 1997, pp. 84-89.
  15. Klischewski, R. "Systems Development as Networking," in Proceedings of the Fourth Americas Conference on Information Systems, Long Beach, CA, 1998, pp. 1638-1644.
  16. Knights,D., and Noble, F. "Networks and Partnerships in the Evolution of Home Banking," in T. McMaster, E. Mumford, E. B. Swanson, B. Warboys, and D. Wastell (eds.). Facilitating Technology Transfer Through Partnership: Learning from Practice and Research, London: Chapman & Hall, 1997, pp. 92-107.
  17. Latour, B. "The Powers of Association," in J. Law (ed.). Power, Action and Belief: A New Sociology of Knowledge, London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1986, pp. 264-280.
  18. Latour, B. Science in Action: How to Follow Scientists and Engineers Through Society, Cam- bridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1987.
  19. Latour, B. "Technology Is Society Made Durable," in J. Law (ed.). Sociology of Monsters: Essays on Power, Technology and Domination London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1991, pp. 103-131.
  20. Law, L, and Hassard, J. (eds.). Actor Network Theory and After, Oxford, UK: Blackwell PubHshers, 1999.
  21. Lee, J. C , and Myers, M. D. "The Challenges of Enterprise Integration: Cycles of Integration and Disintegration Over Time," in R. Agarwal, L. Kirsch, J. I. DeGross (eds.), Proceedings of the 25'^' International Conference on Information Systems, Washington, DC, 2004, pp. 927-937.
  22. Lilley, S. "Regarding Screens for Surveillance of the System," Accounting, Management and Information Technology (8), 1998, pp. 63-105.
  23. Markus, M. L., Tanis, C , and Fenema, P. C. V. "Multisite ERP Implementations," Communi- cations of the ACM, (43:4), 2000, pp. 42-46.
  24. McMaster, T., Vidgen, T., and Wastell, D. "Technology Transfer: Diffusion or Translation," in T. McMaster, E. Mumford, E. B. Swanson, B. Warboys, and D. Wastell (eds.), Facilitating Technology Transfer Through Partnership: Learningfrom Practice and Research, London: Chapman & Hall, 1997, pp. 64-75.
  25. Montoya, S. "Foxmeyer Files Suit Against SAP Software Company," ^P Wire, August 27,1998. Nandhakumar, J., Rossi, M., and Talvinen, J. "Planning for 'Drift'?: Implementation Process of Enterprise Resource Planning Systems," in Proceedings of the 36'^' Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, Los Alamitos, CA: IEEE Computer Society Press, 2003.
  26. Orlikowski, W. J. "Learning from Notes: Organizational Issues in Groupware Implementation," MIT Sloan School Working Paper #3428-92, Center for Coordination Science Technical Report #134, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA, 1992.
  27. Rogers, E. M. Diffusion of Innovations {4^^ Qd.),]^Qw York: The Free Press, 1995.
  28. Ross, J. W., and Vitale, M. R. "The ERP Revolution, Surviving vs. Thriving," Information Systems Frontiers: Special Issue on the Future of Enterprise Resource Planning Systems (2:2), 2000, pp. 233-241.
  29. Rothwell, R. "Successful Industrial Innovation: Critical Factors for the 1990s," R&D Management (22), 1992, pp. 221-239.
  30. Truex, D., and Ngwenyama, O. K. "ERP Systems: Facilitating or Confounding Factors in Corporate Telecommunications Mergers?," in Proceedings of the 8'^' European Conference on n Information Systems, Vienna, Austria. 2000, pp. 645-651.
  31. Vidgen, R., and McMaster, T. "Black Boxes, Non-Human Stakeholders and the Translation of IT Through Mediation," in W. J. Orlikowski, G. Walsham, M. R. Jones, and J. I. DeGross (eds.). Information Technology and Change in Organizational Work, London: Chapman & Hall, 1996, pp. 250-271.
  32. Wagner, E. L., and Newell, S. "Making Software Work: Producing Social Order via Problem Solving in a Troubled ERP Implementation," in D. Avison, D. Galletta, and J. I. DeGross (eds.). Proceedings of the 2 &^' International Conference on Information Systems, Las Vegas, NV, 2005, pp. 447-458.