ACM Home Page
Please provide us with feedback. Feedback
Technological frames: making sense of information technology in organizations
Full text PdfPdf (2.69 MB)
Source ACM Transactions on Information Systems (TOIS) archive
Volume 12 ,  Issue 2  (April 1994) table of contents
Special issue on social science perspectives on IS
Pages: 174 - 207  
Year of Publication: 1994
ISSN:1046-8188
Authors
Wanda J. Orlikowski  Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Debra C. Gash  Volpe National Transportation Systems Center
Publisher
ACM  New York, NY, USA
Bibliometrics
Downloads (6 Weeks): 85,   Downloads (12 Months): 780,   Citation Count: 72
Additional Information:

abstract   references   cited by   index terms   collaborative colleagues   peer to peer  

Tools and Actions: Request Permissions Request Permissions    Review this Article  
DOI Bookmark: Use this link to bookmark this Article: http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/196734.196745
What is a DOI?

ABSTRACT

In this article, we build on and extend research into the cognitions and values of users and designers by proposing a systematic approach for examining the underlying assumptions, expectations, and knowledge that people have about technology. Such interpretations of technology (which we call technological frames) are central to understanding technological development, use, and change in organizations. We suggest that where the technological frames of key groups in organizations—such as managers, technologists, and users— are significantly different, difficulties and conflict around the development, use, and change of technology may result. We use the findings of an empirical study to illustrate how the nature, value, and use of a groupware technology were interpreted by various organizational stakeholders, resulting in outcomes that deviated from those expected. We argue that technological frames offer an interesting and useful analytic perspective for explaining an anticipating actions and meanings that are not easily obtained with other theoretical lenses.


REFERENCES

Note: OCR errors may be found in this Reference List extracted from the full text article. ACM has opted to expose the complete List rather than only correct and linked references.

 
1
ABELSON, R. P 1981. Psychological status of the script concept. Am. Psychol. 36, 7, 715-729.
 
2
AGAR, M. H. 1980. The Professwnal Stranger: An In{brmal Introductzon to Ethnography. Academic Press, New York.
 
3
ARGYRIS, C. AND SCHON, D. 1978. Orgamzatwnal Learmng. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, N.J.
 
4
BARTLETT, F. 1932. Remembemng: A Study ~n Experimental and Soczal Psychology. Cambridge University Press, London.
 
5
BARTUNEK. J. 1984 Changing interpretive schemes and organizational restructuring: The example of a religious order. Adm. Scl. Q. 29, 3, 355-372.
 
6
BARTUNEK, J. AND MOCH, M. 1987. First order, second order, and third order change and organization development interventions: A cogmtive approach. J. Appl. Behav. Sc~. 23, 4, 483-500.
 
7
BERGER, P. L. AND LUCI~ANN, T. 1967. The Social Constructton of Reahty. Anchor Books, New York.
 
8
B~R, W 1987. The social construction of Bakelite: Toward a theory of invention. In The Social Construction of Technological Systems. MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass., 159-187.
 
9
BIJKER, W., HUCHES, T., AND P~NCH, T., EDS. 1987. The Soctal Construction of Technologzcal Systems. MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass.
10
 
11
BOLAND, R. J., JR. 1979. Control, causality and information systems requirements, Account. Org. Soc. 4, 4, 259-272.
 
12
BOLAND, R. J., JR. 1978. The process and product of system design. Manage. Sci. 24, 5, 887 898.
 
13
BOLMAN, L. G. AND DEAL, T. E 1991. Reframtng Orgamzatwns: Arttstry, Choice, and Leadership. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, Calif.
 
14
BOSTROM, R. P. AND HEINEN, J.S. 1977. MIS problems and failures: A socio-technical perspective, Part I--The causes. MIS Q. 1, 3, 17-32.
 
15
BOUGON, M., WEICK, K., AND BINKUORST, D. 1977. Cognition in organizations: An analysis of the Utrecht Jazz Orchestra. Admtn. Sci. Q. 22, 4, 606 639.
 
16
BURNS, T. AND STALKER, G.M. 1961. The Management of Innovation. Tavistock, London.
 
17
CALDER, B. AND SCHURR, P. 1981. Attitudinal processes in organizations. Res. Org. Behav. 3, 283-302.
 
18
CICOUREL, A. 1974. Cognitive Sociology. Free Press, New York.
 
19
 
20
DAFT, R. L. AND WEICK, K.E. 1984. Towards a model of organizations as interpretive systems. Acad. Manag. Rev. 9, 2, 284 295.
21
 
22
DEJE~, D. AND DBJE~, S.B. 1991. Lotus Notes at Work. Lotus Books, New York.
 
23
DIMAGG~O, P. J. ANn POWELL, W. W. 1991. Introduction. In The New Inst~tutional~sm in Organizatwnal Analysis. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago, Ill., 1-34.
 
24
DORNBUSCH, S. M. AND SCOTT, W.R. 1975. Evaluation and the Exercise of Authority. Jossey- Bass, San Francisco, Calif.
 
25
OUGHERTY, D. 1992. Interpretive barriers to successful product innovation in large firms. Org. Sci. 3, 2, 179-202.
 
26
DOUGLAS, M. 1987. How Institutions Think. Routledge and Kegan Paul, London.
 
27
DUTTON, J. E. AND JACKSON, S.E. 1987. Categorizing strategic issues: Links to organizational actions. Acad. Manag. Rev. 12, 1, 76-90.
 
28
EISENHARDT, K.M. 1989. Building theories from case study research. Acad. Manage. Rev. 14, 4, 532-550.
 
29
EDEN, C. 1992. On the nature of cognitive maps. J. Manage. Stud. 29, 3, 261-265.
 
30
FINNEY, M. AND MITROFF, I.I. 1986. Strategic plan failures: The organization as its own worst enemy. In The Thinking Organization. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, Calif., 317-335.
 
31
GASH, D.C. 1987. The effects of microcomputers on organizational roles and the distribution of power. Ph.D. dissertation, Cornell Univ., Ithaca, N.Y.
 
32
GASH, D. C. ~3~ ORLIKOWSKI, W. J. 1991. Changing frames: Towards an understanding of information technology and organizational change. In Academy of Management Best Papers Proceedings, 51st Annual Meeting. Academy of Management, 189-193.
 
33
GEERTZ, C. 1973. The Interpretation of Cultures, Basic Books, New York.
 
34
GIDDENS, A. 1984. The Constitution of Society: Outline of the Theory of Structure. University of California Press, Berkeley, Calif.
 
35
GIO~A, D.A. 1986. Symbols, scripts, and sensemaking: Creating meaning in the organizational experience. In The Th~nking Organization. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, Calif., 49 74.
 
36
GIoIA, D. A. AND SIMS, H. R., JR. 1986. Introduction: Social cognition in organizations. In The Thinking Organization. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, Calif., i 19.
 
37
GINZBERG, M.J. 1981. Early diagnosis of MIS implementation failure: Promising results and unanswered questions. Manage. Sci. 27, 4, 459-478.
 
38
GOFFMAN, I. 1974. Frame Analysis. Harper & Row, New York.
 
39
GOODMAN, P., GmFFITH, T. L. AND FENNER, B. 1990. Understanding technology and the individual in an organizational context. In Technology and Organizations. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, Calif., 45 86.
 
40
GRAY, B., BOUGON, M., AND DONNELLON, A. 1985. Organizations as constructions and destructions of meaning. J. Manage. 11, 1, 83-95.
 
41
GREENWOOD, R. AND HININGS, C.R. 1988. Organizational design types, tracks and the dynamics of strategic change. Org. Stud. 9, 3, 293-316.
 
42
GREGORY, K. L. 1983. Native-View Paradigms: Multiple cultures and culture conflicts in organizations. Adm~n. Sc~. Q. 28, 3, 359-376.
 
43
GRUDIN, J. 1988. Why gToupware applications fail: Problems in design and evaluation. Off. Tech. People 4, 3, 245-264.
 
44
HEDBERG, B., NYSTROM, P., AND STARRUCK, W. 1977. Designing organizations to match tomorrow. TIMS Stud. Manage. Sci. 5, 2, 171-181.
 
45
HEDBERG, B., NYSTROM, P., AND STARBUCK, W. 1976. Camping on seesaws: Prescriptions for a self-designing organization. Admin. Sci. Q. 21, 1, 41-65.
 
46
ENDERSON, K. 1991. Flexible sketches and inflexible data bases: Visual communication, conscription devices, and boundary objects in design engineering. Scz. Tech. Hum. Val. 16, 4, 448-473.
47
 
48
ISABELLA, L.A. 1990. Evolving interpretations as a change unfolds: How managers construe key organizational events. Acad. Manage J. 33, L 7 41.
 
49
KIESLER, S. AND ~PROULL, L. 1982. Managerial response to changing environments: Perspectives on problem sensing from social cognition. Admin. Sct. Q. 27, 4, 548-570.
 
50
KLING, R. AND GERSON, E. 1978 Patterns of segmentations and intersections in the computing world. Symb. Interaction 1, 1, 24 43.
 
51
KLING, R. AND IACONO, S. 1989. The institutional character of computerized information systems. Off. Tech. People 5, 1, 7-28.
 
52
KLING, R. AND IACONO, S. 1984. Computing as an occasion for social control J. Soc. Iss. 40, 77-96
 
53
KRUEGER, R.A. 1988. Focus Groups: A Practzcal Guide for Apphed Research. Sage Publications, Newbury Park, Calif.
 
54
KUHN, T. 1970. The Structure of Scientzflc Revolutions. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, Ill.
55
 
56
LAWRENCE, P. R. AND LORSCH, J.W. 1967. Organlzatlon and Envtronment. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Mass.
 
57
Lores, M. R. AND SUTTON, R.I. 1991. Switching cognitive gears: From habits of mind to active thinking Hum. Rel. 44, 1, 55-76.
 
58
MARCH, J. G. AND SIMON, H. 1958. Organizations. John Wiley and Sons, New York.
 
59
MARKUS, M.L. 1984. Systems m Organtzatlons: Bugs and Features. Pitman, Boston, Mass.
60
61
 
62
 
63
MARSHAK, D.S. 1990. Lotus Notes' A platform for developing workgroup applications. Patmcia Seybold's Of/: Comput. Rep. 13, 7.
 
64
MILES, M. B. AND HUBERMAN, A. M. 1984. Qual~tatwe Data Analys~s: A Sourcebook of New Methods, Sage Publications, Newbury Park, Calif.
 
65
MOTH, M. AND BARTUNEr:, J. 1990. Creating Alternatwe Reahtles at Work: The Quality of Work Lzfe Experiment at Food Corn. Harper Business, New York.
 
66
NEISSER, U. 1976. Cognztion and Reality: Prmmples and Irnphcatmns of Cognztzve Psychology W. H. Freeman and Co., San Francisco, Calif.
 
67
NOBLE, D. 1986. Forces of Production: A Soczal History of Industrial Automatmn. Oxford University Press, New York.
 
68
ODELL, L., Gosw^lm, D., AND HERRINC~TON, A. 1983. The discourse-based interview: A procedure for exploring tacit knowledge of writers in nonacademic settings. In Research on Writing: Princzples and Methods Longman, New York, 220 236.
 
69
ORLmOWSKh W.J. 1992a. The duality of technology: Rethinking the concept of technology, in organizations. O1w. Sci. 3, 3, 398-427.
70
 
71
ORLIKOWSKI, W.J. 1988. The data processing occupation: Professionalization or proletarianization. Res. Soc. Work 4, 95-124.
 
72
ORLIKOWSKL W. J. AND GASH, I). C. 1991. Changing frames: Understanding technological change in organizations. Working Paper 3368, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Mass.
 
73
PETTIGREW, A.M. 1979. On studying organizational cultures. Admin. Sct. Q. 24, 4, 570-581.
 
74
PETTIGREW, A.M. 1973. The Politics of Organizational Decision Making'. Tavistock, London.
 
75
 
76
PFEFFER, J. 1980. Power in Organizations. Pitman, Boston, Mass.
 
77
PINCH, T. AND BIJKER, W. 1987. The social construction of facts and artifacts. In The Social Constructzon of Technological Systems. MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass. 17-50.
 
78
PORAC, J. F. AND THOMAS, H. 1990. Taxonomic mental models in competitor definition. Acad. Manage. Rev. 15, 2, 224-240.
 
79
PORAC, J. F., THOMAS, H., AND BADEN-FULLER, C. 1989. Competitive groups as cognitive communities: The case of Scottish knitwear manufacturers. J. Manage. Stud. 26, 4, 397-416.
 
80
RILEY, P. 1983. A structurationist account of political culture. Admin. Sci. Q. 28, 3, 347-414.
 
81
S~CTNAN, A. R. 1991. Rigid politics and technological flexibility: The anatomy of a failed hospital innovation. Sci. Tech. Hum. Val. 16, 4, 419-447.
 
82
SALANCIK, G. R. AND PFEFFER, J. 1978. A social information processing approach to job attitudes and task design. Admin. Sci. Q. 23, 2,224 253.
 
83
SCHEIN, E. 1987. The Chnical Perspective in Fieldwork. Sage, Newbury Park, Calif.
 
84
SCHE~N, E. 1985. Organizational Culture and Leadership. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, Calif.
 
85
SCHUTZ, A. 1970. On Phenomenology and Social Relations. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, Ill.
 
86
SCHWARTZ, H. 1990. Narcissistw Process and Corporate Decay: The Theory of the Organization Ideal. New York University Press, New York.
 
87
SHELDON, A. 1980. Organization paradigms: A theory of organizational change. Org. Dynam. 8, 3 (Winter), 61-80.
 
88
SHIBUTANI, T. 1962. Reference groups and social control. In Human Behavior and Social Processes. Houghton Mifflin, Boston, Mass., 128-147.
 
89
SMIRCICH, L. AND STUBBART, C. 1985. Strategic management in an enacted world, Acad. Manage. Rev. 10, 4, 724 736.
 
90
STARBUCK, W.H. 1989. Why organizations run into crises.., and sometimes survive them. In Information Technology and Management Strategy. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, N.J., 11-33.
 
91
STRAUSS, A. 1978. A social world perspective. Stud. Symb. Interaction 4, 171-190.
 
92
TYRE, M. J. AND ORLIKOWSKI, W. J. 1994. Windows of opportunity: Temporal patterns of technological adaptation in organizations. Org. Sci. To be published.
 
93
VAN MAANEN, J. 1984. Doing new things in old ways: The chains of socialization. In College and University Organization. New York University Press, New York, 211-247.
 
94
VAN MAANEN, J. AND BARLEY, S. 1985. Organizational culture: Fragments of a theory. In Organizational Culture. Sage Publications, Beverly Hills, Calif., 31-53.
 
95
VAN MAANEN, J. AND SCHEIN, E. 1979. Toward a theory of organizational socialization. Res. Org. Behav. 1, 209-264.
 
96
WEICK, K.E. 1990. Technology as equivoque: Sensemaking in new technologies. In Technology and Organizations. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, Calif., 1-44.
 
97
WEICK, K.E. 1979a. The Social Psychology of Organizing. Addison-Wesley, Reading, Mass.
 
98
WE~CK, K.E. 1979b. Cognitive processes in organizations. Res. Org. Behav. 1, 1, 41-74.
 
99
WEICK, K. E. ANn BOUGON, M.G. 1986. Organizations as cognitive maps: Charting ways to success and failure. In The Thinking Organizatwn. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, Calif., 102-135.
 
100
WINNER, L. 1986. The Whale and the Reactor: A Search for Limits in an Age of High Technology. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, Ill.
 
101
WITTGENSTEIN, L. 1953. Philosophical Investigations. Macmillan Press, New York.
 
102
YIN, R.K. 1989. Case Study Research: Design and Methods. Rev. ed. Sage, Beverly Hills, Calif.
 
103

CITED BY  73
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Collaborative Colleagues:
Wanda J. Orlikowski: colleagues
Debra C. Gash: colleagues

Peer to Peer - Readers of this Article have also read: