Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A Holistic and Universal Approach for Managing Technology and Organizational Change

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Proceedings of the Future Technologies Conference (FTC) 2022, Volume 2 (FTC 2022 2022)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Networks and Systems ((LNNS,volume 560))

Included in the following conference series:

  • 512 Accesses

Abstract

The study addressed the high failure rate problem of major planned technology and organizational change that had not been ameliorated by the many existing theories, approaches and management models for managing and explaining change. A conceptual research design was followed as the means to coherently relate and extend existing theories and fields, develop key insights into problem phenomena, expand the ambit of knowledge and develop new theory, through reason, discourse, argumentation and the scientific literature. The study presented the change and constancy management approach with a practical mechanism for implementation, namely pertinent aspect tables (PATs). For organizational management, the approach using PATs facilitates vital insight for managing, controlling, planning, leading and organizing those aspects that are allocated for change and those allocated for constancy, supporting management decision making relating to the allocation of limited organizational resources for organizational agility and stability. The approach offers a unique theoretical device for advancing knowledge acquisition in the research domain.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Bradley, R.V., Byrd, T.A.: Information technology architecture as a competitive advantage-yielding resource: a theoretical perspective. Int. J. Netw. Virtual Organ. 4, 1–19 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1504/IJNVO.2007.012079

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Aoki, M., Jackson, G.: Understanding an emergent diversity of corporate governance and organizational architecture: an essentiality-based analysis. Ind. Corp. Change 17, 1–27 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1093/icc/dtm037

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. McDonagh, J.: Why change programmes don’t produce change: The case of IT-enabled change in public service organisations. In: Information Resources Management Association (ed.) Project Management: Concepts, Methodologies, Tools, and Applications, pp. 2095–2116. IGI Global, PA (2016). https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-5225-0196-1.ch105

  4. Gupta, S.K., Gunasekaran, A., Antony, J., Gupta, S., Bag, S., Roubaud, D.: Systematic literature review of project failures: current trends and scope for future research. Comput. Ind. Eng. 127, 274–285 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cie.2018.12.002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Coombs, C.R.: When planned IS/IT project benefits are not realized: a study of inhibitors and facilitators to benefits realization. Int. J. Proj. Manag. 33, 363–379 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2014.06.012

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Decker, P., Durand, R., Mayfield, C.O., McCormack, C., Skinner, D., Perdue, G.: Predicting implementation failure in organization change. J. Organ. Cult. Commun. Confl. 16, 29–49 (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Heracleous, L., Bartunek, J.: Organization change failure, deep structures and temporality: appreciating wonderland. Hum. Relat. 74, 208–233 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726720905361

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Bharadwaj, A., Keil, M., Mähring, M.: Effects of information technology failures on the market value of firms. J. Strateg. Inf. Syst. 18, 66–79 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsis.2009.04.001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Burnes, B.: Introduction: why does change fail, and what can we do about it? J. Change Manag. 11, 445–450 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1080/14697017.2011.630507

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Hay, G.J., Parker, S.K., Luksyte, A.: Making sense of organisational change failure: an identity lens. Hum. Relat. 74, 180–207 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726720906211

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Reavis, M.R., Orr, D.W.: The journey of American capitalism: From stockholders to stakeholders. Am. J. Manag. 21, 1–15 (2021). https://doi.org/10.33423/ajm.v21i4.4553

  12. Manyika, J., Birshan, M., Smit, S., Woetzel, J., Russell, K., Purcell, L.: A new look at how corporations impact the economy and households (2021)

    Google Scholar 

  13. PWC: The road ahead for public service delivery: delivering on the customer promise (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Lewis, L.: Organizational change. In: Nicotera, A.M. (ed.) Origins and Traditions of Organizational Communication: A comprehensive Introduction to the Field, pp. 406–423. Routledge, New York (2020)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Ovadje, F., Aryee, S.: Introduction. In: Ovadje, F., Aryee, S. (eds.) Routledge Handbook of Organizational Change in Africa, pp. 1–7. Routledge, Oxfordshire (2018). https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315630113

  16. Malopinsky, L., Osman, G.: Dimensions of organizational change. In: Pershing, J.A. (ed.) Handbook of Human Performance Technology: Principles, Practices, and Potential, pp. 262–286. Pfeiffer, San Francisco (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Rosenbaum, D., More, E., Steane, P.: Planned organisational change management: forward to the past? An exploratory literature review. J. Organ. Change Manag. 31, 286–303 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1108/JOCM-06-2015-0089

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Arazmjoo, H., Rahmanseresht, H.: A multi-dimensional meta-heuristic model for managing organizational change. Manag. Decis. 58, 526–543 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1108/MD-07-2018-0795

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Al-Haddad, S., Kotnour, T.: Integrating the organizational change literature: a model for successful change. J. Organ. Change Manag. 28, 234–262 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1108/JOCM-11-2013-0215

  20. Golembiewski, R.T., Billingsley, K., Yeager, S.: Measuring change and persistence in human affairs: types of change generated by OD designs. J. Appl. Behav. Sci. 12, 133–157 (1976). https://doi.org/10.1177/002188637601200201

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Bartunek, J.M., Moch, M.K.: First-order, second-order, and third-order change and organization development interventions: a cognitive approach. J. Appl. Behav. Sci. 23, 483–500 (1987). https://doi.org/10.1177/002188638702300404

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. WEF: Global Technology Governance Report 2021: Harnessing Fourth Industrial Revolution technologies in a COVID-19 world, Geneva, Switzerland (2020)

    Google Scholar 

  23. Hazlehurst, C., Brouthers, K.D.: IB and strategy research on “new” information and communication technologies: guidance for future research. In: van Tulder, R., Verbeke, A., Piscitello, L. (eds.) International Business in the Information and Digital Age (Progress in International Business Research), pp. 65–89. Emerald Publishing Limited, Bingley, UK (2018). https://doi.org/10.1108/S1745-886220180000013004

  24. Gupta, G., Tan, K.T.L., Ee, Y.S., Phang, C.S.C.: Resource-based view of information systems: sustainable and transient competitive advantage perspectives. Australas. J. Inf. Syst. 22, 1 (2018). https://doi.org/10.3127/ajis.v22i0.1657

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Howard, G.R.: A Change and constancy management approach for managing the unintended negative consequences of organizational and IT change. In: Themistocleous, M., Papadaki, M., Kamal, M.M. (eds.) EMCIS 2020. LNBIP, vol. 402, pp. 683–697. Springer, Cham (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-63396-7_46

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  26. Markus, M.L., Robey, D.: Information Technology and organizational change: causal structure in theory and research. Manag. Sci. 34, 583–598 (1988). https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.34.5.583

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Fiedler, K.D., Grover, V., Teng, J.T.C.: An empirically derived taxonomy of Information technology structure and its relationship to organizational structure. J. Manag. Inf. Syst. 13, 9–34 (1996). https://doi.org/10.1080/07421222.1996.11518110

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Attaran, M., Attaran, S., Kirkland, D.: Technology and organizational change: harnessing the power of digital workplace. In: Idemudia, E.C. (ed.) Handbook of Research on Social and Organizational Dynamics in the Digital Era, pp. 383–408. IGI Global, PA (2020). https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-5225-8933-4.ch018

  29. Baygi, R.M., Introna, L.D., Hultin, L.: Everything flows: studying continuous socio-technological transformation in a fluid and dynamic digital world. MIS Q. 45, 423–452 (2021). https://doi.org/10.25300/MISQ/2021/15887

  30. Vial, G.: Understanding digital transformation: a review and a research agenda. J. Strateg. Inf. Syst. 28, 118–144 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsis.2019.01.003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Hanelt, A., Bohnsack, R., Marz, D., Marante, C.A.: A systematic review of the literature on digital transformation: insights and implications for strategy and organizational change. J. Manag. Stud. 58, 1159–1197 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1111/joms.12639

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Jaakkola, E.: Designing conceptual articles: four approaches. AMS Rev. 10(1–2), 18–26 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13162-020-00161-0

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Mora, M., Gelman, O., Paradice, D., Cervantes, F.: The case for conceptual research in information systems. In: International Conference on Information Resources Management (Conf-IRM), pp. 1–10. Association for Information Systems, Ontario, Canada (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  34. Andersen, T.K.: Understanding the success or failure of organizational ICT integration: the criticality of managerial involvement. J. Change Manag. 18, 327–343 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1080/14697017.2018.1491482

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Hagebakken, G., Olsen, T.H., Solstad, E.: Success or failure? Making sense of outcomes in a public sector change project. J. Manag. Organ., 1–17 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1017/jmo.2020.19

  36. Albert, M., Balve, P., Spang, K.: Evaluation of project success: a structured literature review. Int. J. Manag. Proj. Bus. 10, 796–821 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1108/IJMPB-01-2017-0004

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Salmimaa, T., Hekkala, R., Pekkola, S.: Dynamic activities for managing an is-enabled organizational change. Bus. Inf. Syst. Eng. 60(2), 133–149 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12599-018-0524-6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Jones, J., Firth, J., Hannibal, C., Ogunseyin, M.: Factors contributing to organizational change success or failure: a qualitative meta-analysis of 200 reflective case studies. In: Hamlin, R.G., Ellinger, A.D., Jones, J. (eds.) Evidence-Based Initiatives for Organizational Change and Development, pp. 155–178. IGI Global, Hershey, PA (2019). https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-5225-6155-2.ch008

  39. Hughes, M.: Do 70 per cent of all organizational change initiatives really fail? J. Change Manag. 11, 451–464 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1080/14697017.2011.630506

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Baghizadeh, Z., Cecez-Kecmanovic, D., Schlagwein, D.: Review and critique of the information systems development project failure literature: an argument for exploring information systems development project distress. J. Inf. Technol. 35, 123–142 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1177/0268396219832010

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Talavera, I.: The fallacy of misplaced temporality in western philosophy, natural science, and theistic religion. In: Forum on Public Policy: A Journal of the Oxford Round Table, pp. 1–46 (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  42. Norton, B.: Change, constancy, and creativity: the new ecology and some old problems. Duke Environ. Law Policy Forum 7, 49–70 (1996)

    Google Scholar 

  43. Loubser, A.: An ontological exploration of change and constancy. Koers Bull. Christ. Scholarsh. 78, 1–8 (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  44. Collver, A., Semyonov, M.: Suburban change and persistence. Am. Sociol. Rev. 44, 480–486 (1979). https://doi.org/10.2307/2094888

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Josefy, M.A., Harrison, J.S., Sirmon, D.G., Carnes, C.: Living and dying: synthesizing the literature on firm survival and failure across stages of development. Acad. Manag. Ann. 11, 770–799 (2017). https://doi.org/10.5465/annals.2015.0148

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Dwivedi, Y.K., et al.: Research on information systems failures and successes: status update and future directions. Inf. Syst. Front., 1–15 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10796-014-9500-y

  47. Dönmez, D., Grote, G., Brusoni, S.: Routine interdependencies as a source of stability and flexibility. A study of agile software development teams. Inf. Organ. 26, 63–83 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infoandorg.2016.07.001

  48. Goldkuhl, G.: Patterns of change and action: a socio-pragmatic perspective on organisational change. In: Sundgren, B., Mårtensson, P., Mähring, M., Nilsson, K. (eds.) Exploring Patterns in Information Management: Concepts and Perspectives for Understanding IT-Related Change, pp. 1–13. Economic Research Institute, Stockholm School of Economics, Stockholm (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  49. Lucas Jr., H.C., Goh, J.M.: Disruptive technology: how Kodak missed the digital photography revolution. J. Strateg. Inf. Syst. 18, 46–55 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsis.2009.01.002

  50. Nasim, S., Sushil: Revisiting organizational change: exploring the paradox of managing continuity and change. J. Change Manag. 11, 185–206 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1080/14697017.2010.538854

  51. Schein, E.H.: Models and tools for stability and change in human systems. Reflect. SoL J. Knowl. Learn. Change 4, 34–46 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1162/152417302762251327

  52. Siti-Nabiha, A.K., Scapens, R.W.: Stability and change: an institutionalist study of management accounting change. Account. Audit. Account. J. 18, 44–73 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1108/09513570510584656

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Fischer, L.H., Baskerville, R.: Socio-technical change: the equilibrium paradox. In: Bednar, P.M., Frank, U., Kautz, K. (eds.) 26th European Conference on Information Systems (ECIS 2018), pp. 1–16. Association for Information Systems (AIS) e-Library, Portsmouth, UK (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  54. Rosales, V., Gaim, M., Berti, M., Pina e Cunha, M.: The rubber band effect: managing the stability-change paradox in routines. Scand. J. Manag. 38, 101194 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scaman.2022.101194

  55. Sutherland, F., Smith, A.C.: Duality theory and the management of the change–stability paradox. J. Manag. Organ. 17, 534–547 (2011). https://doi.org/10.5172/jmo.2011.17.4.534

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Burnes, B., Cooke, B.: The past, present and future of organization development: taking the long view. Hum. Relat. 65, 1395–1429 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726712450058

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Morrison, K., van der Werf, G.: Editorial. Educ. Res. Eval. 18, 399–401 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1080/13803611.2012.695513

    Article  Google Scholar 

  58. Lewin, K.: Frontiers in group dynamics: concept, method and reality in social science; social equilibria and social change. Hum. Relat. 1, 5–41 (1947). https://doi.org/10.1177/001872674700100103

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. Young, M.: A meta model of change. J. Organ. Change Manag. 22, 524–548 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1108/09534810910983488

    Article  Google Scholar 

  60. Galli, B.J.: Change management models: a comparative analysis and concerns. IEEE Eng. Manag. Rev. 46, 124–132 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1109/EMR.2018.2866860

    Article  Google Scholar 

  61. Maes, G., van Hootegem, G.: A systems model of organizational change. J. Organ. Change Manag. 32, 725–738 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1108/JOCM-07-2017-0268

    Article  Google Scholar 

  62. Stouten, J., Rousseau, D.M., de Cremer, D.: Successful organizational change: integrating the management practice and scholarly literatures. Acad. Manag. Ann. 12, 752–788 (2018). https://doi.org/10.5465/annals.2016.0095

    Article  Google Scholar 

  63. Bartunek, J.M., Jones, E.B.: How organizational transformation has been continuously changing and not changing. In: Research in Organizational Change and Development, vol. 25. pp. 143–169. Emerald Publishing Limited, Bingley (2017). https://doi.org/10.1108/S0897-301620170000025004

  64. Cameron, E., Green, M.: Organizational change. In: Making Sense of Change Management: A Complete Guide to the Models, Tools & Techniques of Organizational Change, pp. 97–137. Kogan Page Limited, London (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  65. Jacobs, G., van Witteloostuijn, A., Christe-Zeyse, J.: A theoretical framework of organizational change. J. Organ. Change Manag. 26, 772–792 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1108/JOCM-09-2012-0137

    Article  Google Scholar 

  66. Fisher, J.M.: A time for change? Hum. Resour. Dev. Int. 8, 257–263 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1080/13678860500100665

    Article  Google Scholar 

  67. Wolpert, C.: The success of caterpillar’s global approach to change management. Glob. Bus. Organ. Excell. 29, 17–24 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1002/joe.20345

    Article  Google Scholar 

  68. Sambamurthy, V., Bharadwaj, A., Grover, V.: Shaping agility through digital options: reconceptualizing the role of information technology in contemporary firms. MIS Q. 27, 237–263 (2003). https://doi.org/10.2307/30036530

    Article  Google Scholar 

  69. Arnott, D.: Decision support systems evolution: framework, case study and research agenda. Eur. J. Inf. Syst. 13, 247–259 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.ejis.3000509

    Article  Google Scholar 

  70. Orlikowski, W.J.: The sociomateriality of organisational life: considering technology in management research. Camb. J. Econ. 34, 125–141 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1093/cje/bep058

    Article  Google Scholar 

  71. Alter, S.: Work system theory: overview of core concepts, extensions, and challenges for the future. J. Assoc. Inf. Syst. 14, 72–121 (2013). https://doi.org/10.17705/1jais.00323

  72. DeSanctis, G., Poole, M.S.: Capturing the complexity in advanced technology use: adaptive structuration theory. Organ. Sci. 5, 121–147 (1994). https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.5.2.121

    Article  Google Scholar 

  73. Burkhardt, M.E., Brass, D.J.: Changing patterns or patterns of change: the effects of a change in technology on social network structure and power. Adm. Sci. Q. 35, 104–127 (1990). https://doi.org/10.2307/2393552

    Article  Google Scholar 

  74. Lyytinen, K., Newman, M.: Explaining information systems change: a punctuated sociotechnical change model. Eur. J. Inf. Syst. 17, 589–613 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1057/ejis.2008.50

    Article  Google Scholar 

  75. Avgerou, C.: IT and organizational change: an institutionalist perspective. Inf. Technol. People 13, 234–262 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1108/09593840010359464

    Article  Google Scholar 

  76. Sawyer, S., Jarrahi, M.H.: Sociotechnical approaches to the study of Information Systems. In: Tucker, A., Topi, H. (eds.) Computing Handbook: Information Systems and Information Technology, pp. 5.1–5.27. CRC Press, Boca Raton (2014). https://doi.org/10.1201/b16768

  77. Phang, C., Kankanhalli, A.: Interplay of culture, learning, politics, and institutions: a structurational framework of information technology-induced organizational change. In: 26th International Conference on Information Systems (ICIS), Las Vegas, Nevada, USA, pp. 535–545 (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  78. Sveiby, K.-E.: Unattended consequences of innovation. In: Godin, B., Vinck, D. (eds.) Critical Studies of Innovation: Alternative Approaches to the Pro-Innovation Bias, pp. 137–155. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham (2017). https://doi.org/10.4337/9781785367229.00016

  79. Ritter, S.M., Mostert, N.M.: How to facilitate a brainstorming session: the effect of idea generation techniques and of group brainstorm after individual brainstorm. Creat. Ind. J. 11, 263–277 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1080/17510694.2018.1523662

    Article  Google Scholar 

  80. Kalargiros, E.M., Manning, M.R.: Divergent thinking and brainstorming in perspective: implications for organization change and innovation. In: Shani, A.B.(R.), Noumair, D.A. (eds.) Research in Organizational Change and Development, pp. 293–327. Emerald Group Publishing Limited, UK (2015). https://doi.org/10.1108/S0897-301620150000023007

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of South Africa (Unisa), 28 Pioneer Avenue, Florida, Roodepoort, 1709, South Africa

    Grant Royd Howard

Authors
  1. Grant Royd Howard
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Grant Royd Howard .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Science and Engineering, Saga University, Saga, Japan

    Kohei Arai

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2023 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Howard, G.R. (2023). A Holistic and Universal Approach for Managing Technology and Organizational Change. In: Arai, K. (eds) Proceedings of the Future Technologies Conference (FTC) 2022, Volume 2. FTC 2022 2022. Lecture Notes in Networks and Systems, vol 560. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-18458-1_47

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation