Skip to main content
Springer Nature Link
Log in

Understanding Contradictions in Enterprise System Implementations: A Case for Stakeholder Theory

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Information System Development

  • 1871 Accesses

Abstract

Enterprise Systems (ES) implementation is challenging, and handling conflicting interests may be vital for success. Previous research has established how ES implementation involves dialectics, often related to multiple stakeholders. Involved stakeholders have in previous studies been analyzed in a power perspective, through the lens of organizational influence processes. Stakeholder theory (ST) takes a wider perspective, by including legitimacy and urgency in addition to power. An interesting perspective is therefore a suggested combination of ST and dialectics. This paper presents an ES implementation case where the explicit combination of ST and dialectics was tried out in the data analysis. In this case, two types of contradictions surfaced in implementation process. The case demonstrates that stakeholder theory contributes to a richer understanding of these contradictions than a focus on power only. Based on previous research, power would be expected to be decisive for the outcome of contradictions. However, in this case urgency and legitimacy compensated for lack of power. This suggests that the combination of ST and dialectics is a useful theoretical perspective on ES implementation processes, to better understand contradictions.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Seddon PB (2005) Are ERP systems a source of competitive advantage? Strat Change 14:283–293

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Allen JP (2005) Value conflicts in enterprise systems. Inform Tech People 18(1):33–49

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Sia SK, Soh C (2007) An assessment of package–organisation misalignment: institutional and ontological structures. Eur J Inform Syst 16(568–5):83

    Google Scholar 

  4. Boonstra A (2006) Interpreting an ERP-implementation project from a stakeholder perspective. Int J Proj Manag 24(3):8–52

    Google Scholar 

  5. Sarker S, Lee AS (2003) Using a case study to test the role of three key social enablers in ERP implementation. Inform Manag 40(8):13–829

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Freeman RE (1984) Strategic management: a stakeholder approach. Pitman, Boston

    Google Scholar 

  7. Donaldson T, Preston LE (1995) The stakeholder theory of the corporation—concepts, evidence, and implications. Acad Manage Rev 20(1):65–91

    Google Scholar 

  8. Mitchell RK, Agle BR, Wood DJ (1997) Toward a theory of stakeholder identification and salience: defining the principle of who and what really counts. Acad Manage Rev 22(4):853–886

    Google Scholar 

  9. Sedera D, Gable GG, Chan T (2004) Measuring enterprise systems success: the importance of a multiple stakeholder perspective. In: Proceedings of the 13th European conference on information systems, Turku, Finland

    Google Scholar 

  10. Nordheim S, Päivärinta T (2006) Implementing enterprise content management: from evolution through strategy to contradictions out-of-the-box. Eur J Inform Syst 15(6):648–662

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Nordheim S, Nielsen PA (2008) Enterprise system implementations: organizational influence processes for corporate user representatives. In: Golden W, et al. (eds) Proceedings of the 16th European conference on information systems, Galway, Ireland, Paper 187

    Google Scholar 

  12. Flak LS, Nordheim S, Munkvold BE (2008) Analyzing stakeholder diversity in G2G efforts: combining descriptive stakeholder theory and dialectic process theory. e-Serv J 6(2):3–23

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Esteves J, Bohorquez V (2007) An updated ERP systems annotated bibliography: 2001–2005. Instituto de Empresa Business School Working Paper No. WP 07-04

    Google Scholar 

  14. Van De Ven AH, Poole MS (1995) Explaining development and change in organizations. Acad Manage Rev 20(3):510–540

    Google Scholar 

  15. Besson P, Rowe F (2001) ERP project dynamics and enacted dialogue: perceived understanding, perceived leeway, and the nature of task-related conflicts. SIGMIS Database 32(4):47–66

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Robey D, Ross JW, Boudreau M-C (2002) Learning to implement enterprise systems: an exploratory study of the dialectics of change. J Manag Inform Syst 19(1):17–46

    Google Scholar 

  17. Soh C, Sia SK (2005) The challenges of implementing vanilla versions of enterprise systems. MIS Quart Exec 4(3):373–384

    Google Scholar 

  18. Nordheim S (2011) Towards understanding contradictions in enterprise system implementations—insights from a case study. In: Pkorny J et al (eds) Information systems development. Business systems and services: modelling and development. Springer, New York, pp 563–574

    Google Scholar 

  19. Pouloudi A, Whitley EA (1997) Stakeholder identification in inter-organizational systems: gaining insights for drug use management systems. Eur J Inform Syst 6(1):1–14

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Vidgen R (1997) Stakeholders, soft systems and technology: separation and mediation in the analysis of information system requirements. Inform Syst J 7(1):21–46

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Sathish S, Pan S, Raman K (2004) Using stakeholder theory to analyze knowledge sharing during enterprise systems implementations. In: PACIS 2004 proceedings, Paper 26. http://aisel.aisnet.org/pacis2004/26

  22. Friedman AL, Miles S (2002) Developing stakeholder theory. J Manag Stud 39:1–21

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Braa K, Vidgen R (1999) Interpretation, intervention, and reduction in the organizational laboratory: a framework for in-context information system research. Account Manag Inform Tech 9(1):25–47

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Miles MB, Huberman AM (1994) Qualitative data analysis: an expanded sourcebook, 2nd edn. SAGE Publications, Thousand Oaks

    Google Scholar 

  25. Creswell JW (2009) Research design: qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches, 3rd edn. SAGE Publications, Thousand Oaks

    Google Scholar 

  26. Walsham G (2006) Doing interpretive research. Eur J Inform Syst 15:320–330

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Klein HK, Myers MD (1999) A set of principles for conducting and evaluating interpretive field studies in information systems. MIS Quart 23(1):67–93

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Henfridsson O, Yoo Y, Svahn F (2009) Path creation in digital innovation: a multi-layered dialectics perspective. Sprouts: working papers on information systems, vol 9, article 20. http://sprouts.aisnet.org/9-20

  29. Vlaar PWL, Van Den Bosch FAJ, Volberda HW (2007) Towards a dialectic perspective on formalization in interorganizational relationships: how alliance managers capitalize on the duality inherent in contracts, rules and procedures. Organ Stud 28(4):437–466

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Agder, Kristiansand, Norway

    Stig Nordheim

  2. Norwegian Tax Administration, Oslo, Norway

    Kai R. Moseid-Vårhus & Arnfinn Min Bærø

Authors
  1. Stig Nordheim
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Kai R. Moseid-Vårhus
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Arnfinn Min Bærø
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Stig Nordheim .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Dept of Computer Languages and Systems, University of Seville, Seville, Spain

    María José Escalona

  2. IWT2 Research Group FIDETIA, University of Seville, Seville, Spain

    Gustavo Aragón

  3. Monash University, Caaulfield East, Victoria, Australia

    Henry Linger

  4. National University of Ireland, Galway, Ireland

    Michael Lang

  5. National University of Ireland, Galway, Ireland

    Chris Barry

  6. City University of Hong Kong, Kowloon, Hong Kong SAR

    Christoph Schneider

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2014 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this paper

Cite this paper

Nordheim, S., Moseid-Vårhus, K.R., Bærø, A.M. (2014). Understanding Contradictions in Enterprise System Implementations: A Case for Stakeholder Theory. In: José Escalona, M., Aragón, G., Linger, H., Lang, M., Barry, C., Schneider, C. (eds) Information System Development. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-07215-9_17

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-07215-9_17

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-07214-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-07215-9

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics