A ‘sweet spot’ change strategy for a least developed country: leveraging e-Government in Bangladesh

Abstract

Information systems have the potential to improve societal conditions in developing countries, and yet design theory to inform interventions to encourage uptake and use of these systems is sparse. This paper reports on an action design research project that addressed the problem of limited adoption of e-Government in Bangladesh. Inadequate knowledge of the nature of e-Government systems had been identified as an underlying cause of many other problems in this 'wicked' problem context. The project aimed to reduce knowledge deficiencies among key decision makers through activities that included the delivery of a custom-made training program and a handbook targeted at senior government officers. The project had modest resources and yet yielded significant outcomes. Critical reflection established a number of design principles for a 'sweet spot change strategy' for interventions of this type, with the most important principle being to first identify a 'sweet spot', a point of maximum leverage, and then to act on it.

Project Half Double: Addendum: Current Results for Phase 1, January 2017

“…(2) building, intervention, and evaluation; (3) reflection and learning; and (4) formalization of learning. ADR also involves seven principles shown together with the four stages in Table 18 below, which outlines the action design research process (inspired by Gregor, Imran et al 2014). It is an iterative process moving back and forth between the different stages as stipulated in the ADR method (Sein, Henfridsson et al 2011).…”

An Evaluation View of an Ensemble Artefact for Decision Support using Action Design Research

“…A number of design principles are emerging from the case study that apply generally. Some examples include the use of open source software and cloud warehousing, project development with WIL students supported by community experts and facilitated by academic researchers, CCP evaluations for qualitative stakeholder appraisals, and the concept of small wins, akin to Gregor et al's 'sweet spot' (Gregor et al 2010).…”

“…This argument is consistent with Gregor's theory for design and action which says "how to do something" giving prescriptions of "methods, techniques, principles of form and function" (Gregor 2006, p. 620). Gregor et al (2010) note that DSR draws on theory we already know, otherwise known as kernel theory or justificatory theory. In this case, it is sense-making theory and 'small wins' theory.…”

“…From this project, a CCP evaluation model, integrated with ADR as an evaluation view, extends the conceptual work of Sein et al (2011). This could be described as 'partial theory' according to the classification by Gregor, Imran and Turner (2010) with attention on the socio-technical artefact in its setting, design principles of form and function, and associated theories. The integrated and extended framework is modelled and explained in the discussion section while future research is proposed in the concluding section.…”

The Knowledge Innovation Matrix (KIM): A Clarifying Lens for Innovation

“…We also have clear interests in promoting innovation in industry as evidenced by our work on projects such as those found in Berndt, Hevner, and Studnicki (2003) and Gregor, Imran, and Turner (2013). However, it became obvious to us that in shifting across disciplinary boundaries we encountered areas in which understandings of innovation and applied research were quite different, having dissimilar and sometimes incompatible meanings and measurements of success.…”