Abstract:
Traditionally, organisations introducing enterprise level information systems have expected considerable change in behaviours like information sharing and process control. Despite these expectations, many organisations fail to realise significant benefits from these systems, or make only marginal improvements in their business processes. Many studies into the failure of systems initiatives have suggested that unsatisfactory outcomes were not the result of technical factors, but rather individual and social factors. This study sets out to expand on this literature by asking "Why do individuals and groups within organisations exhibit behaviours that attenuate the acceptance and usage of new information systems resulting in limited performance improvements?"
It is argued that the complex array of conflicting organisational, professional and personal objectives that define many organisations with large professional groupings creates conflicting priorities for the adoption of any new system. Within this perspective the thesis involves a longitudinal investigation into the development of a new enterprise level system within an Australian public sector organisation. The research utilises a power/political lens and applies Giddens' meta theory of structuration and Foucault's theories of power/knowledge to the analysis and interpretation of the data.
The study reveals a complex array of interrelated issues operating at the individual, group and structural level of the organisation that both creates user resistance and reduces the ability of the organisation to respond to this resistance. At the individual level, the development of a centralised system resulted in the disenfranchisement of scientists who had previously been empowered through the development of their own systems. Their perceived loss of autonomy and control created high levels of user resistance. At the organisational level, the issues of expertise and knowledge, central to scientists' perceptions of value, acted to constrain the ability of management support to encourage user adoption.
In the end the study highlights a paradox between the desire for increased information sharing embedded in the design of the new system and the levels of control enacted as part of its development. At its heart, the study suggests that information sharing, in environments where individual value is judged on the bash of knowledge creation (like research organisations or Universities), cannot be enacted through the enforced control of individual behaviours. Systems designed to support organisational activities like content or knowledge management must recognise the socio-cultural aspects of information sharing and strive to encourage rather than control individuals.
