Change research: The search for a theoretical construct

Information Resources Management Journal

Volumn 18, Issue 3, 2005, Pages

  Paper, David ^a   Simon, Steve J ^b  

^a UTAH STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b MERCER UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

INDUSTRIAL ENGINEERING; INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY; INVESTMENTS; MANAGEMENT INFORMATION SYSTEMS; PROCESS ENGINEERING; REENGINEERING; SOCIETIES AND INSTITUTIONS; STANDARDS; STRATEGIC PLANNING;

BUSINESS PROCESS REENGINEERING (BPR); CHANGE MANAGEMENT; MANAGEMENT RESEARCH; SCIENTIFIC STANDARDS;

ENGINEERING RESEARCH;

EID: 20744455985     PISSN: 10401628     EISSN: None     Source Type: Trade Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Review

References (18)

1. Armenakis, A. A. & Bedeian, A. G. (1999). Organizational change: A review of theory and research in the 1990s. Journal of Management, 25(3), 293-315.
2. Bergey, J., Smith, D., Tiley, S., Weiderman, N., & Woods, S. (1999). Why reengineering projects fail. Carnegie Mellon Software Engineering Institute - Product Line Practice Initiative, 1-30.
3. Burke, W. & Litwin, G. (1992). A causal model of organizational performance and change. Journal of Management, 18(1), 523-545.
4. Davenport, T. H. (1993). Process innovation: Reengineering work through information technology. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
5. Glaser, B. G. & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. New York: Aldine De Gruyter.
6. Gummesson, E. (2000). Qualitative methods in management research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
7. Hammer, M. & Champy, J. (1993). Reengineering the corporation. New York: Harper Collins Books.
8. Harrington, H. J. (1991). Business process improvement: The breakthrough strategy for total quality, productivity, and competitiveness. New York: McGraw-Hill.
9. Isabella, L. A. (1990). Evolving interpretations as a change unfolds: How managers construe key organizational events. Academy of Management Research, 33, (1), 7-41.
10. Kotter, J.P. (1995). Leading change: Why transformation efforts fail. Harvard Business Review, March-April, 59-67.
11. Orlikowski, W. J. (1996). Improvising organizational transformation over time: A situated change perspective. Information Systems Research, 7(1), 63-92.
12. Paper, D. (1999). The enterprise transformation paradigm: The case of Honeywell's Industrial Automation and Control Unit. Journal of Information Technology Cases and Applications, 1(1), 4-23.
13. nd Annual GITM World Conference, June 10-12, Dallas, TX.
14. Paper, D. & Dickinson, S. (1997). A comprehensive process improvement methodology: Experiences at Caterpillar's Mossville Engine Center. In M. Khosrow-Pour & L. Liebowitz (Eds.), Cases on Information Technology Management in Modern Organizations (ch. 9). Hershey, PA: Idea Group Publishing.
15. Paper, D., Mok, W., & Rodger, J. A. (2004). Building automation into existing business processes. Annals of Cases on Information Technology, 6, 177-194.
16. Pettigrew, A. M., Woodman, R. W., & Cameron, K. S. (2001). Studying organizational change and development: Challenges for future research. Academy of Management Journal, 44(4), 697-713.
17. Sarker, S. & Lee, A. S. (2002). Using a positivist case research methodology to test three theories-in-use of business process redesign. Journal of the AIS, 2(7), 1-73.
18. Vollman, T. (1996). The transformation imperative. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.