ACM Home Page
Please provide us with feedback. Feedback
Digital Library logoTake a look at the new version of this page: [ beta version ]. Tell us what you think.
Evolution and organizational information systems: an assessment of Nolan's stage model
Full text PdfPdf (1.05 MB)
Source
Communications of the ACM archive
Volume 27 ,  Issue 5  (May 1984) table of contents
Pages: 466 - 475  
Year of Publication: 1984
ISSN:0001-0782
Authors
John Leslie King  Univ. of California, Irvine
Kenneth L. Kraemer  Univ. of California, Irvine
Publisher
ACM  New York, NY, USA
Bibliometrics
Downloads (6 Weeks): 25,   Downloads (12 Months): 237,   Citation Count: 19
Additional Information:

abstract   references   cited by   index terms   collaborative colleagues  

Tools and Actions: Request Permissions Request Permissions    Review this Article  
DOI Bookmark: Use this link to bookmark this Article: http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/358189.358074
What is a DOI?

ABSTRACT

Richard Nolan's stage model is the best known and most widely cited model of computing evolution in organizations. The model's development over a decade demonstrates its own evolution from a simple theory, based on the factoring of change states indicated by changes in computing budgets, to an elaborate account of the characteristics of six stages of computing growth. An analysis of the model's logical and empirical structure reveals a number of problems in its formulation that help to account for the fact that its principal tenets have not been independently validated. The model is shown to be an “evolutionistic” theory within the theories of evolution in the social sciences, focusing on assumed directions of growth and an implied end state toward which growth proceeds, and suffering from problems inherent in such theories. Further research based on an “evolutionary” view of computing growth is suggested as a means of improving theories of computing in organizations.


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
 
2
Alter, S. Decision Support Systems: Current Practices and Continuing Challenges. Addison-Wesley, Reading, Mass., 1980.
 
3
Benbasat, I., Dexter, A.S., Drury, D.H. and Goldstein, R,C. A critique of the stage hypothesis: Theory and empirical evidence. Working paper 194, Faculty of Commerce and Business Administration, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, B.C., Canada, 1983.
 
4
Cyert, R.M. and March, J.G. Organizational factors in the theory of oligopoly. Quart. J. Economics (Feb. 1956), 44.
 
5
Danziger, J.N., Dutton, W.H., Kling, R. and Kraemer, K.L. Computers and Politics. Columbia Univ. Press, New York, 1982.
 
6
Drury D.H. An empirical assessment of the stages of DP growth. MIS Quart. (June, 1983), 59-70.
 
7
Ein-Dor, P. and Segev, E. Managing Management Information Systems. Lexington Books, Lexington, Mass., 1978.
 
8
Estes, W.E. Toward a statistical theory of learning. Psych. Rev. 57 (1950), 94-107.
 
9
Gibson, C.F. and Nolan, R.L. Managing the four stages of EDP growth. Harvard Business Rev. CJan./Feb. (1974), 76-88.
 
10
Glaser, B, and Strauss, A. The Discovery of Grounded Theory. Aldine, Chicago, Ill., 1967.
 
11
Goldstein, R. and McCririk, I. The stage hypothesis and data administration. In C. Ross (Ed), Proc. 2nd Int. Conf, Information Systems, Society for Management Information Systems, Cambridge, Mass., pp. 309-324.
 
12
Jordan, R. How to Use the Learning Curve. Materials Management Institute, Boston, Mass., 1965.
 
13
Keen, P.W.G. and Scott Morton, M.S. Decision Support Systems: An Organizational Pperspetive. Addison-Wesley, Reading, Mass., 1978.
 
14
King, J.L. Centralization versus decentralization of computing: Organizational considerations and management options. Dept. Information and Computer Science, Univ. California, Irvine, 1983.
15
 
16
Kling, R. and Scacchi, W. The Web of Computing. In Advances in Computers, vol. 20. Academic Press, New York, 1982.
 
17
Kraemer, K.L. Computers, information and power in local governments: A stage theory. In A. Mowshowitz (Ed), Human Choice and Computers, No. 2. North Holland, New York, 1980.
 
18
Kraemer, K.L. and King, J.L. Computing policies and problems: A stage theory approach. Telecommun. Policy 5, 3, (1981), 198-215.
 
19
Kuznets, S., Economic Growth and Structure: Selected Essays. W.W. Norton, New York, 1965.
20
 
21
Markus, M.L. Implementation politics: top management support and user involvement. Systems, Objectives, Solutions 1, 4, (1981), 203-215.
 
22
McKenney, J.L. and McFarlan, W. Merging the islands of information service. In C. Ross (Ed), Prec. and Int. Conf. Information Systems. Society for Management Information Systems, Cambridge, Mass., pp. 331-350.
 
23
Moore, W.E. Order and Change: Essays in Contemporary Sociology. Wiley, New York, 1967.
 
24
Nisbet, R. Social Change and History. Oxford Univ. Press, New York, 1969.
 
25
Nolan, R.L. Management Accounting and Control of Data Processing. National Association of Accountants, New York, 1977.
26
 
27
Nolan, R.L. Managing the crisis in data processing. Harvard Business Rev. (March/April 1979), 115-26.
 
28
Pfeffer, J. Power in Organizations. Pitman, Boston, Mass., 1978.
 
29
Rockhart, I.F. and Flannery, L.S. The management of end user computing. In C. Ross (Ed), Prec. 2nd Int. Conf. Information Systems. Society for Management Information Systems, Cambridge, Mass., pp. 351-364.
 
30
Roessner, J.D. Federal technology policy: Innovation and problem solving in state and local governments. Policy Analysis 5, (1979), 181- 200.
 
31
 
32
Swanson, E.B. A view of information systems evolution. In J. Hawgood (EdJ, Evolutionary Information Systems. North Holland, New York, pp. 55-62.
 
33
Tornatzky, L.G., Roitman, D., Boylan, M., Carpenter, J., Eveland, J.D., Hetzner, W.A., Lucas, B.G. and Schneider, J. Innovation processes and their management: A conceptual, empirical and policy review of innovation process research. National Science Foundation, Washington, D.C., 1980.
 
34
van Parijs, P. Evolutionary Explanations in the Social Sciences, Rowman and Littlefield, Totowa, N.J., 1081.

CITED BY  19

Collaborative Colleagues:
John Leslie King: colleagues
Kenneth L. Kraemer: colleagues