11. Solutions for innovation the design dilemma
11.2 Organisational construction model for the planning and
According to the innovation design dilemma, the most important factors from the point of view of the success of the results of the implementation process of infor- mation systems are the following elements: (1) viewpoint of the nature of change;
(2) design concept; (3) planning approach; and (4) change concept (see Table 2).
The most important intervening factors are organisational patterns (cf.
Hyötyläinen, 1998; Doherty and King, 1998; Bai and Lee, 2003). The relations of these elements are described by the organisational construction model of the planning and implementation process of information systems. The model is pre- sented in Figure 20.
Figure 20. Organisational construction model of planning and implementation process of information systems.
According to the model of the planning and implementation process, the viewpoint of the nature of change defines mainly the design concept, and also partly the
Viewpoint to the nature of change
- organisational construction process
Design concept
- organisational activity system
- changing and developing system
Planning approach
- participation of different organisational functions and levels - contribution of
users
- systematic planning methods
Change concept
- phased change steps
- problem-oriented approach - systemic way of
learning - development
methods
Results
- implemen- tation process - use activity - development
measures
planning approach and change concept. The viewpoint to the nature of change is the organisational construction process. The design concept determines corre- spondingly the planning approarch and its organisation. The change concept is closely connected the planning approach, as well as to the viewpoint to change.
All of this influences the results of the change. The results concern the success of the implementation process, use activity, and development measures. As is seen in the figure, organisational learning and change activity are in a central role in the organisational construction model for the achievement of the goals of the planning and implementation process (Davis and Hikmet, 2008; Doherty et al., 2010; Lo- renzo et al., 2012). The most important factor for all the following phases is the viewpoint to the nature of change. This has to seen as a great organisational con- struction process, which helps to direct the later phases of the planning and change successfully (cf. Lewis et al., 2005; Lin et al. 2012).
In the following, the features of the organisational construction model are con- sidered. The next analysis specifies further the model of the implementation pro- cess of information systems:
(1) The realism of the viewpoint of the nature of change is one of the most im- portant factors influencing the whole planning and implementation process of information systems. It is realistic to consider the change as an organisa- tional construction process (cf. Ramdani et al., 2009; Doherty et al., 2010).
(2) Another important factor is the design concept, which had a crucial role for the formation of the planning organisation and practice, and for the tech- nical solutions made in the planning phase. Thus, the design concept is an important means for the designers and planners in directing their work (Wang and Tai, 2003). The design concept has two dimensions. First, the object of design has to cover the organisational activity system, not only the technical system and process design (cf. Hyötyläinen, 1998). Second, the object of the design has to be seen as the constantly changing and de- veloping organisational activity system. Furthermore, when the changing and developing organisational activity system is an object of design, it has profound implications for the technical and organisational practices to be chosen (cf. Corbett et al., 1991; Dittrich and Lindeberg, 2004; Doherty et al., 2010; Bhatt et al., 2010).
(3) The third factor of the organisational construction model is connected to the planning approach, culminating in the division between “top-down” and
“bottom-up” planning, which is the central line in overcoming the border be- tween planning and use (cf. Currie, 2009; Blount, 2011). There are espe- cially two basic elements for solving this dilemma: the planning organisa- tion and the systematic planning methods.
The first one is the planning organisation. The change in the planning or- ganisation means that the different organisational functions and levels par- ticipate in planning activities and contribute the solutions formed in the planning phase (Gosain et al, 2005). Especially, the role of the users in the planning has to be emphasised. The users can become involved in the
11. Solutions for innovation the design dilemma
planning process earlier and more deeply than usual (Kanter 1988, 241–
277; Jones, 1989; Hyötyläinen et al., 1991; Boedker and Gronbaek 1996;
Feeney and Willcocks, 1999). The participation of the users in the planning has a double effect (Sohn and Doane, 2002; Santosa et al., 2005; Hsu et al., 2008):
– by being involved in the planning process, the future operators of the system can adopt and transfer the planning knowledge to the operation, which may also shorten the implementation period of the system – the users of the system can participate in the processing and solving of
the planning problems and, thus, bring operational knowledge into the plans, which may reduce problems and disturbances in the realisation of the plans in the implementation and use phase.
However, at best, these changes only lead to so-called "participative" plan- ning, in accordance with the “user-centred” model (Mumford, 1999; Gul- liksen et al., 2003 Dix et al., 2004). The integration of the planning and use activities depends crucially on the constructive approach (Lukka, 2003, Hyötyläinen, 2005), as well as on the use of the systematic planning meth- ods and tools (Ehn, 1998; Boedker and Gronbaek 1996; Dittrich and Lindeberg, 2004; Kautz, 2011). Models and methods are needed, by which the planners, users, and user organisation as a whole can manage the techno-organisational system under design, in co-operation through the principles of simultaneous working.
(4) The change concept is a crucial factor for the implementation, use, and de- velopment of an information system in the organisational construction model (Leem and Kim, 2004). It could be assumed that the change is suit- able to carry out by step by step, according to a phased steps model (Fichman Moses, 1999; Avison and Fitzgerald, 1999; Benediktsson and Dalcher, 2003; Greer and Ruhe, 2004; Ruhe, 2004). The problem-oriented approach emphasises organisational problem-solving activity, which has a central role in the implementation process. At best, this can result in a sys- tematic way of learning activity (Chen, 2009). This requires the use of the suitable development methods, in order to advance organisational learning and innovation activities in the implementation process of an information system.
As a summary of the above treatment, one can state that the planning and imple- mentation process progresses as an organisational constructional process. The planning and implementation process can be seen to form an “experimental field”, where the experienced difficulties, set-backs, and good results may act as a basis for learning and seeking new planning practices, implementation models, and management approaches (cf. Edmondson and Moingeon, 1999; Bhatt et al., 2010;
Doherty et al., 2010; Choi et al., 2011). As March and Simon (1958, 117–131) already argued, when an organisation meets a new and complex situation of deci- sion–making, the past experience gathered in the organisation is not necessarily
valid for choosing the "right" actions. Especially in the conditions of developing new “performance programmes”, the search for new organisational patterns oc- curs rather according to a step-by-step principle than by the “rational” planning of ready solutions, due to “limited aspirations” and “bounded rationality” (March and Simon, 1958, 172–210; Cyert and March, 1992, 214–215; cf. Child, 1997).