A recurrent problem in information-systems development (ISD) is that many design shortcomings are not detected during development, but first after the system has been delivered and implemented in its intended environment. Pilot implementations appear to promise a way to extend prototyping from the laboratory to the field, thereby allowing users to experience a system design under realistic conditions and developers to get feedback from realistic use while the design is still malleable. We characterize pilot implementation, contrast it with prototyping, propose a fiveelement model of pilot implementation and provide three empirical illustrations of our model. We conclude that pilot implementation has much merit as an ISD technique when system performance is contingent on context. But we also warn developers that, despite their seductive conceptual simplicity, pilot implementations can be difficult to plan and conduct. It is sometimes assumed that pilot implementations are less complicated and risky than ordinary implementations. Pilot implementations are, however, neither prototyping nor small-scale versions of full-scale implementations; they are fundamentally different and have their own challenges, which will be enumerated and discussed in this article.
Understanding how people in organizations appropriate and adapt groupware technologies to local contexts of use is a key issue for CSCW research, since it is critical to the success of these technologies. In this paper, we argue that the appropriation and adaptation of groupware and other types of advanced CSCW technologies is basically a problem of sensemaking. We analyze how a group of ''technology-use mediators'' (Orlikowski et al. Org. Sci. (1995) 6(4), 423) in a large, multinational company adapted a groupware technology (a ''virtual workspace'') to the local organizational context (and vice versa) by modifying features of the technology, providing ongoing support for users, and promoting appropriate conventions of use. Our findings corroborate earlier research on technology-use mediation, which suggests that such mediators can exert considerable influence on how a particular technology will be established and used in an organization. However, we also find that the process of technology-use mediation is much more complex and indeterminate than prior research suggests. The reason being, we argue, that new, advanced CSCW technologies, such as ''virtual workspaces'' and other groupware applications, challenge the mediators' and users' sensemaking, because the technologies are equivocal and, therefore, open to many possible and plausible interpretations.
Pilot implementation is a powerful and widely used approach in identifying design flaws and implementation issues before the full-scale deployment of new health information systems. However, pilot implementations often fail in the sense that they say little about the usability and usefulness of the proposed system designs. This calls for studies that seek to uncover and analyze the reasons for failure, so that guidelines for conducting such pilots can be developed. In this paper, we present a qualitative field study of an ambitious, but unsuccessful pilot implementation of a Danish healthcare information system. Based on the findings from this study, we identify three main challenges: (1) defining an appropriate scope for pilot implementation, (2) managing the implementation process, and (3) ensuring commitment to the pilot. Finally, recommendations for future research and implications for practice are provided.
If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information. About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.comEmerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company manages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as providing an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and services.Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive preservation.Abstract This paper seeks to analyze the role of network effects in relation to the adoption and use of systems for knowledge sharing in organizations and draws on recent developments within network economics to outline a theoretical perspective on the implementation of knowledge repositories in organizations. Findings from a longitudinal field study are presented to explore the concept of network effects in more detail. Commonly associated with economics, the concept of network effects can also be used in an organizational context to study adoption dynamics and use patterns when new information and communication technologies are introduced. The analysis of the field study data shows that knowledge repositories exhibit strong network effects, which can complicate the implementation process in multiple ways. The research is based on a single, in-depth case study. Future research should study the role of network effects in relation to other technologies and organizational contexts. It underscores the need to be aware of -and try to managenetwork effects when implementing knowledge repositories and other "networked" technologies. By and large, IS researchers have overlooked the role of network effects in relation to information and communication technologies in organizations. This paper begins to address this gap by focusing on the role of network effects in the adoption and use of knowledge repositories. It is suggested that the concept of network effects provides a useful theoretical lens in a number of other cases.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.