In order to ascertain and measure dedicated aspects of social and technical systems 'maturity', a wide range of maturity assessment models have been developed by both, practitioners and academics over the past years. In spite of its broad proliferation, the concept has not been untroubled by criticism. Unnecessary bureaucracy, poor theoretical foundation, and the impression of a falsified certainty to achieve success are just a few examples for that. As there is still a significant lack of knowledge on how to design theoretically sound and widely accepted maturity assessment models, it is the aim of this paper to discuss the typical phases of maturity model development and application by taking a design science research perspective. Given that both, development and application are intimately connected, different decision parameters are identified that are relevant in respect to rigour and relevance of the maturity assessment model.

In order to identify and explore the strength and weaknesses of particular organizational designs, a wide range of maturity models have been developed by both, practitioners and academics over the past years. However, a systematization and generalization of the procedure on how to design maturity models as well as a synthesis of design science research with the rather behavioural field of organization theory is still lacking. Trying to combine the best of both fields, a first design proposition of a situational maturity model is presented in this paper. The proposed maturity model design is illustrated with the help of an instantiation for the healthcare domain.

Wearables paired with data analytics and machine learning algorithms that measure physiological (and other) parameters are slowly finding their way into our workplace. Several studies have reported positive effects from using such “physiolytics” devices and purported the notion that it may lead to significant workplace safety improvements or to increased awareness among employees concerning unhealthy work practices and other job‐related health and well‐being issues. At the same time, physiolytics may cause an overdependency on technology and create new constraints on privacy, individuality, and personal freedom. While it is easy to understand why organizations are implementing physiolytics, it remains unclear what employees think about using wearables at their workplace. Using an affordance theory lens, we, therefore, explore the mental models of employees who are faced with the introduction of physiolytics as part of corporate wellness or security programs. We identify five distinct user types each of which characterizes a specific viewpoint on physiolytics at the workplace: the freedom loving, the individualist, the cynical, the tech independent, and the balancer. Our findings allow for better understanding the wider implications and possible user responses to the introduction of wearable technologies in occupational settings and address the need for opening up the “user black box” in IS use research.

No abstract