Sample Cases Contextual Conditions Architecture: tightly coupled (0); loosely coupled (1) Control: centralized (0); decentralized (1) Mechanisms Adoption (A): unactualized (0); actualized (1) Innovation (I): unactualized (0); actualized (1) Scaling (S): unactualized (0); actualized (1) Outcome: unsuccessful (0); successful (1) Comb: combination of mechanisms No Case Contextual Conditions Mechanisms Outcome Comb Reference Arc Con A I S

Critical realism has attracted increasing attention as an alternative to positivist and interpretive research for explaining contemporary phenomena. There are now several sources for information systems' (IS) scholars providing guidance on conducting critical realist studies. However, the most challenging step of a critical realist data analysis, the identification of causal mechanisms, is still insufficiently described. Identifying mechanisms is challenging. Drawing on the concept of affordances as an analytical construct offers the researcher a tool to identify and analyse mechanisms. We present a stepwise framework for identifying structural components of a mechanism, how these components interact to produce an outcome and contextual influences on this outcome. We illustrate the application of the framework through an example of the identification of IS innovation mechanisms in a case study in the airline industry. In doing so, we argue that the approach offers a methodological tool for identifying generative mechanisms, helping the researcher in conducting a more precise data analysis in empirical research.

This paper proposes a simple terminology for understanding and dealing with two current phenomena; we suggest calling them heavyweight and lightweight IT. Heavyweight IT denotes the well-established knowledge regime of large systems, developing ever more sophisticated solutions through advanced integration. Lightweight IT is suggested as a term for the new knowledge regime of mobile apps, sensors and bring-your-own-device, also called consumerisation and Internet-of-Things. The key aspect of lightweight IT is not only the cheaper and more available technology compared with heavyweight IT, but the fact that its deployment is frequently done by users or vendors, bypassing the IT departments. Our theoretical lens is generativity, the idea that complex phenomena arise from interactions among basic elements. In the context of IT, generativity helps to explain the creative potential of flexible digital technology for knowledgeable professionals and users. The research questions are: how is generativity different in heavyweight and lightweight IT, and what is the generative relationship between heavyweight and lightweight IT? These questions were investigated through a study of four cases in the health sector. Our findings show that (i) generativity enfolds differently in heavyweight and lightweight IT and (ii) generativity in digital infrastructures is supported by the interaction of loosely coupled heavyweight and lightweight IT. The practical design implication is that heavyweight and lightweight IT should be only loosely integrated, both in terms of technology, standardisation and organisation.

Robotic Process Automation (RPA) is penetrating organizations at an accelerating rate. This trend is challenging the existing IT governance structures, because RPA usually is acquired and implemented by local business units, outside the control of the IT function. Consequently, how to organize and govern RPA initiatives is a topical issue. The recommendations from prior research are unclear, and there is a call for more research on this area. In this paper, we report from a study on RPA usage in three firms. In particular, we investigate the organizational consequences of having local business units manage the RPA initiatives. We make use of lightweight IT research as our analytical lens, contributing to research by unveiling the consequences and considerations of decentralized management of RPA.

No abstract

This paper investigates the relationship between software development methodologies and usability. The point of departure is the assumption that two important disciplines in software development, one of software development methods (SDMs) and one of usability work, are not integrated in industrial software projects.Building on previous research we investigate two questions; (1) Will software companies generally acknowledge the importance of usability, but not prioritise it in industrial projects? and (2) To what degree are software development methods and usability perceived by practitioners as being integrated? To this end a survey in the Norwegian IT industry was conducted. From a sample of 259 companies we received responses from 78 companies.In response to our first research question, our findings show that although there is a positive bias towards usability, the importance of usability testing is perceived to be much less than that of usability requirements. Given the strong time and cost pressures associated with the software industry, we believe that these results highlight that there is a gap between intention and reality. Regarding our second research question our survey revealed that companies perceive usability and software development methods to be integrated. This is in contrast to earlier research, which, somewhat pessimistically, has argued for the existence of two different cultures, one of software development and one of usability. The findings give hope for the future, in particular because the general use of system development methods are pragmatic and adaptable.

No abstract

Abstract