CASE Tools as Organizational Change: Investigating Incremental and Radical Changes in Systems Development

Abstract

This paper presents the findings of an empirical study into two organizations' experiences with the adoption and use of CASE tools over time. Using a grounded theory research approach, the study characterizes the organizations' experiences in terms of processes of incremental or radical organizational change. These findings are used to develop a theoretical framework for conceptualizing the organizational issues around the adoption and use of these tools--issues that have been largely missing from contemporary discussions of CASE tools. The paper thus has important implications for research and practice. Specifically, the framework and findings suggest that in order to account for the experiences and outcomes associated with CASE tools, researchers should consider the social context of systems development, the intentions and actions of key players, and the implementation process followed by the organization. Similarly, the paper suggests that practitioners will be better able to manage their organizations' experiences with CASE tools, if they understand that such implementations involve a process of organizational change over time, and not merely the installation of a new technology.ii

Learning How and Learning What: Effects of Tacit and Codified Knowledge on Performance Improvement Following Technology Adoption

“…For example, when new technology requires a new way to coordinate actions across individuals, it is difficult to describe the knowledge needed for improvement. This know-how is rooted in action, and is improvisational (Orlikowski, 1993). Researchers thus emphasize the contextually embedded nature of knowledge about technology use in organizations (Orlikowski, 2000;Von Hippel & Tyre, 1995).…”

“…Research on team and organizational learning has demonstrated substantial variance in experimentation or trial-and-error learning processes across groups (Edmondson, 1999(Edmondson, , 2002 and organizations. The collective learning processes through which new know-how and tacit knowledge are developed in organizations are fraught with uncertainty and difficult to reproduce (Orlikowski, 1993). Stable membership thus promotes rapid performance improvement when learning a new group task (Moreland, 1999).…”

“…Yet, some studies show homogeneous learning curves across sites (e.g., Baloff, 1970;Wright, 1936) and others show heterogeneity across sites (e.g., Argote, Beckman, & Epple, 1990;Dutton & Thomas, 1984;Hayes & Clark, 1985). These different results may be due to differences in the extent of social and organizational changes provoked by a new technology or practice, which give rise to differences in user acceptance and behavior (Barley, 1986;Orlikowski, 1993).…”

Cloud Computing: Adoption Issues for Sub‐Saharan African SMEs

“…It is a qualitative approach that has been has been variously described as positivist, interpretive or critical (Urquhart et al, 2010). Grounded theory has been used in the IS field; Orlikowski (1993), for example in investigating the use of Computer Aided Software Engineering tools in organizations. Matavire and Brown (2008) have identified four main grounded theory approaches in IS research.…”

Transforming information systems development through computer‐aided systems engineering (CASE): lessons from practice

“…Certainly, the mixed findings of extant research on CASE adoption and use support this argument. Much of this research has been survey based and falls prey to criticisms such as those levelled at similar research conducted on other aspects of systems development (for examples, see Markus & Robey, 1988;Orlikowski, 1993;Cavaye, 1995). Qualitative interpretive research approaches are therefore indicated as appropriate to capture the 'rich picture' of systems development in organizations (Cavaye, 1995;Myers, 1995;cf.…”