Innovation in UK law enforcement: The emergence of mobile data

15th Americas Conference on Information Systems 2009, AMCIS 2009

Volumn 2, Issue , 2009, Pages 1165-1174

  Karanasios, Stan ^a   Allen, David ^a   Vardaxoglou, Georgios ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LEEDS   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Activity theory; Innovation; Mobile data; Public sector

Indexed keywords

ACTIVITY THEORY; INNOVATION ACTIVITY; INNOVATION PROCESS; MOBILE DATA; OPEN INNOVATION; PUBLIC SECTOR;

ACTIVITY COEFFICIENTS; INFORMATION SYSTEMS; INNOVATION;

LAW ENFORCEMENT;

EID: 84870193481     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (16)

1. Davis, F.D. (1989) Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology, MIS Quarterly 13, 3, pp 319-340.
2. Dawson, C. (2002) Practical research methods: a user-friendly guide to mastering research techniques and projects How To Books, Oxford, pp. x, 158.
3. Eisenhardt, K.M. (1989a) Building Theories From Case Study Research, Academy of Management. The Academy of Management Review 14, 4, pp 532-550.
4. Eisenhardt, K.M. (1989b) Building theories from case study research, The Academy of Management Review 14, 4, pp 532-550.
5. Ekeblad, E. (1998) Contact, Community and Multilogue. Electronic Communication in the Practice of Scholarship, Fourth Congress of the International Society for Cultural Research and Activity Theory, ISCRAT 1998, Aarhus University, Denmark.
6. Engeström, Y. (1987) Learning by Expanding: An Activity-Theoretical Approach to Developmental Research Orienta-Konsultit, Helsinki.
7. Engeström, Y. (1993) Developmental studies of work as a testbench of activity theory: the case primary care medical practice, in: Understanding practice: perspectives on activity and context, S. Chaiklin and J. Lave (eds.), Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 64-103.
8. Engeström, Y., Miettinen, R., and Punamäki-Gitai, R.-L. (1999) Perspectives on activity theory Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
9. Ezzy, D. (2002) Qualitative analysis: practice and innovation Allen & Unwin, Crows Nest, N.S.W., pp. xvii, 190.
10. Gallivan, M.J. (2001) Organizational adoption and assimilation of complex technological innovations: Development and application of a new framework, Database for Advances in Information Systems 32, 3, Summer, p 51.
11. Jarzabkowski, P. (2003) Strategic practices: An activity theory perspective on continuity and change, Journal of Management Studies 40, 1, pp 23-56.
12. MacKenzie, D.A., and Wajcman, J. (1999) The social shaping of technology, (2nd ed.) Open University Press, Buckingham.
13. Pinch, T.J., and Bijker, W.E. (1987) The Social Construction of Facts and Artefacts: Or How the Sociology of Science and the Sociology of Technology Might Benefit Each Other, in: The Social Construction of Technological Systems: New Directions in the Sociology and History of Technology, W.E. Bijker, T.P. Hughes and T.J. Pinch (eds.), MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass.; London, pp. 17-50.
14. Rogers, E.M. (2003) Diffusion of innovations, (Fifth ed.) Free Press, New York.
15. Wolfe, R.A. (1994) Organizational innovation: review, critique and suggested research suggestions, Journal of Management Studies 31, 3, pp 405-431.
16. Yin, R.K. (1994) Case study research: design and methods, (2nd ed.) Sage, CA, Thousand Oaks.