Skip to main content
Log in

Organizing IT to promote agility

  • Published:
Information Technology and Management Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Agility at the individual business unit and organizational levels presents a challenge for many information system (IS) departments. Business unit agility demands the ability to sense and respond to changes in local competitive environments, whereas organizational agility demands the ability to sense broader market opportunities and respond with changes that are organization-wide. The former requires experimentation and customization of system designs, while the latter demands uniformity and standardization. Although flexible and customizable software might assist organizations in adapting systems to meet these challenges simultaneously, coordination across multiple business units also demands effective organization and governance of system design and development. This paper presents a longitudinal case study of an insurance company that was effective at sensing and responding to changes in the environment at the business unit level, but less effective at sensing and responding at the organizational level. Using the platform logic as a theoretical lens, we analyze this case and offer insights into how multi-unit organizations can manage system design at the organizational and business unit levels, thereby supporting agility through the development of effective organizing and governance mechanisms. Our analysis outlines relational and integration mechanisms and explains how these arrangements helped the organization to attain greater enterprise agility and support its overall strategy.

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

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. The name Delta Insurance was created to conceal the actual name at the request of the company.

References

  1. A. Borjesson, L. Mathiassen, Inform. Technol. People, 18(4), 359–382 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. O. Lee et al., Commun. ACM, 49(10), 49–54 (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  3. E. Overby, A. Bharadwaj, V. Sambamurthy, Eur. J. Inform. Syst. 15(2), 120–131 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. V. Sambamurthy, A. Bharadwaj, V. Grover, MIS Quarter. 27(2), 237–263 (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  5. P. Weill, M. Subramani, M. Broadbent, MIT Sloan Manage. Rev. 44(1), 57–65 (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  6. C.V. Brown, S.L. Magill, MIS Quarter. 18(4), 371 (1994)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. T. Byrd, D. Turner, J. Manage. Inform. Syst. 17(1), 167–208 (2000)

    Google Scholar 

  8. N. Duncan, J. Manage. Inform. Syst. 12(2), 37–57 (1995)

    Google Scholar 

  9. S. Brown, K. Eisenhardt, Admin. Sci. Quarter. 42(1), 1–34 (1997)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. V. Sambamurthy, R. Zmud, Inform. Syst. Res. 11(2), 105–114 (2000)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. A. Schwartz, R. Hirschheim, J. Strategic Inform. Syst. 12(2), 129–166 (2003)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. P. Lawrence, J. Lorsch, Organization and Environment: Managing Differentiation and Integration (Harvard Business School Press, Boston, 1986)

    Google Scholar 

  13. C. Gresov, Admin. Sci. Quarter. 34(3), 431–453 (1989)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. C. Brown, MIS Quarter. 23(3), 421–454 (1999)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. V. Sambamurthy, R.W. Zmud, MIS Quarter. 23(2), 261–291 (1999)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. E. von Simson, The ‘Centrally Decentralized’ IS Organization, Harvard Business Review, July-August 2–7 (1990)

  17. R. Boland, R. Tenkasi, Org. Sci. 6(4), 350–372 (1995)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. J.R. Galbraith, Competing with Flexible Lateral Organizations, 2nd edn. (Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, Reading, MA, 1994)

    Google Scholar 

  19. J. Thompson, Organizations in Action: Social Science Bases of Administrative Theory (McGraw-Hill, New York, 1967)

    Google Scholar 

  20. M. van Oosterhout, E. Waarts, J. van Hillegersberg, Eur. J. Inform. Syst. 15(2), 132–145 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. R. Dove, Response Ability - the Language, Structure, and Culture of the Agile Enterprise (Wiley, New York, NY, 2001)

    Google Scholar 

  22. L. Mathiassen, J. Pries-Heje, Eur. J. Inform. Syst. 15(2), 116–119 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. P. Ghemawat, P. del Sol, California Manage. Rev. 40(4), 26–42 (1998)

    Google Scholar 

  24. R. Agarwal, V. Sambamurthy, MIS Quarter. Execut. 1(1), 1–16 (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  25. O. El Sawy et al., MIS Quarter. 23(3), 305–335 (1999)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. C. Ciborra, Org. Sci. 7(2), 103–118 (1996)

    Google Scholar 

  27. R. Andreau, C. Ciborra, in Organizational Learning and Competitive Advantage, ed. by B. Moingeon, A. Edmonson (Sage Publications, New York, 1996)

    Google Scholar 

  28. M. Wade, J. Hulland, MIS Quarter. 28(1), 107–142 (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  29. R. Hirschheim, J. Porra, M. Parks, Database 34(4), 8–27 (2003)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. R.K. Yin, Case Study Research: Design and Methods 3 (Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA, 2003)

    Google Scholar 

  31. K. Eisenhardt, Acad. Manage. Rev. 14(4), 532–550 (1989)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. D. Leonard-Barton, Org. Sci. 1(3), 248–266 (1990)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kevin P. Gallagher.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Gallagher, K.P., Worrell, J.L. Organizing IT to promote agility. Inf Technol Manage 9, 71–88 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10799-007-0027-5

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10799-007-0027-5

Keywords

Navigation