ICT and organizational change: A commentary

Journal of Applied Behavioral Science

Volumn 42, Issue 1, 2006, Pages 127-134

  Orlikowski, Wanda J ^a,b   Yates, Joanne ^a,b,c  

^a MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY   (United States)

^b MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY   (United States)

^c MIT's Sloan School of Management ^*

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 33744516234     PISSN: 00218863     EISSN: 15526879     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0021886305285130     Document Type: Article

References (22)

1. Barley, S. R. (1988). Technology, power, and the social organization of work. Research in the Sociology of Organizations, 6, 33-80.
2. Barley, S. R., & Kunda, G. (2001). Bringing work back in. Organization Science, 12, 76-95.
3. Berg, M. (1997). Of forms, containers, and the electronic medical record: Some tools for a sociology of the formal. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 22, 403-433.
4. Bridgman, T., & Willmott, H. (2006). Institutions and technology: Frameworks for understanding organizational change - The case of a major ICT outsourcing contract. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 42, 110-126.
5. Button, G. (1993). The curious case of the vanishing technology. In G. Button (Ed.), Technology in working order: Studies in work, interaction, and technology (pp. 10-28). London: Routledge.
6. Constantinides, P., & Barrett, B. (2006). Large-scale ICT innovation, power, and organizational change: The case of a regional health information network. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 42, 76-90.
7. Fuller, L. L. (1978). The forms and limits of adjudication. Harvard Law Review, 92, 394-404.
8. Gerson, E., & Star, S. L. (1986). Analyzing due process in theworkplace. ACMTransactions on Office Information Systems, 4, 257-270.
9. Hardy, C., & Phillips, N. (2004). Discourse and power. In D. Grant, C. Hardy, C. Oswick, N. Phillips, & L. Putnam (Eds.), Handbook of organizational discourse (pp. 299-316). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
10. Harley, B., Wright, C., Hall, R., & Dery, K. (2006). Management reactions to technological change: The example of enterprise resource planning. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 42, 58-75.
11. Hutchby, I. (2001). Technology, texts and affordances. Sociology, 35, 441-456.
12. Jones, M. (1999). Information systems and the double mangle. In T. J. Larsen, L. Levine, & J. DeGross (Eds.), Information systems: Current issues and future changes (pp. 287-302). New York: Omni Press.
13. Kellogg, K., Orlikowski, W. J., & Yates, J. (in press). Life in the trading zone: Structuring coordination across boundaries in post-bureaucratic organizations. Organization Science.
14. Laclau, E., & Mouffe, C. (1985). Hegemony and socialist strategy. London: Verso.
15. Orlikowski, W. J. (2000). Using technology and constituting structures: A practice lens for studying technology in organizations. Organization Science, 11, 404-428.
16. Orlikowski, W. J., & Iacono, C. S. (2001). Desperately seeking the "IT" in IT research: A call to theorizing the IT artifact. Information Systems Research, 12, 121-134.
17. Pickering, A. (1995). The mangle of practice: Time, agency and science. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
18. Piotti, B., Chilundo, B., & Sahay, S. (2006). An institutional perspective on health sector reforms and the process of reframing health information systems: Case study from Mozambique. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 42, 91-109.
19. Robey, D., & Boudreau, M.-C. (1999). Accounting for the contradictory organizational consequences of information technology: Theoretical directions and methodological implications. Information Systems Research, 10, 167-185.
20. Schatzki, T. R., Knorr-Cetina, K., & Savigny, E. (2001). The practice turn in contemporary theory. New York: Routledge.
21. Wagner, E. L., & Newell, Sue. (2006). Repairing ERP: Producing social order to create a working information system. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 42, 40-57.
22. Woolgar, S., & Grint, K. (1991). Computers and the transformation of social analysis. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 16, 368-381.