Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Theory and Practice of Electronic Governance 2018
DOI: 10.1145/3209415.3209423
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Towards an Integrative Theoretical Model For Examining IT Governance Audits

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
4
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
3

Relationship

1
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 3 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 17 publications
0
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…This model has been criticized for its lack of depth, and existing studies based on the model have also being criticized for their descriptive nature (Jewer & Mckay, 2012;Kude et al, 2018). To provide a clear understanding of IT Governance, Asmah and Kyobe (2018) developed an theoretical framework (Figure 1) that looks beyond the three mechanisms espoused in the three-tiered model. They integrated several theories because the concept of IT governance is broad and thus a single theory or framework may not fully explain the underlying constructs.…”
Section: Theoretical Frameworkmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…This model has been criticized for its lack of depth, and existing studies based on the model have also being criticized for their descriptive nature (Jewer & Mckay, 2012;Kude et al, 2018). To provide a clear understanding of IT Governance, Asmah and Kyobe (2018) developed an theoretical framework (Figure 1) that looks beyond the three mechanisms espoused in the three-tiered model. They integrated several theories because the concept of IT governance is broad and thus a single theory or framework may not fully explain the underlying constructs.…”
Section: Theoretical Frameworkmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Governance Mechanisms represent a set of controls, practices, processes and structures implemented within an organization to ensure decisions are in the interest of shareholders, monitor the progress and activities of the organization and take corrective actions where necessary. In this (Asmah & Kyobe, 2018) study, governance mechanisms are broadly classified as Structures, Processes, Leadership, Relational Mechanisms and Technologies. Leadership is clearly separated from structures to emphasize the fiduciary duty of the board to implement these mechanisms and drive change.…”
Section: Governance Mechanismsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The recognition that technology use is a social practice involving individual agency highlights how technological practices in the present have the capacity to produce a diverse range of different futures, both imaginatively and materially (Stein, 2008). Shove (2005) argues that to understand how practices emerge and, crucially, how they might change, we need to see how practices are combinations of three elements: Materials (objects, infrastructures, tools, technologies, or ‘stuff’), Meanings (underlying values and understandings, motivational knowledge or ‘image’) and Competences (background knowledge, multiple forms of understanding and practical knowledge, or ‘skills’). Practices evolve or change ‘naturally’, or can, in theory at least, be actively changed to fit a new vision of the future.…”
Section: Conceptualising the Digital Transformation Of Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Moreover, a study on the implementation of CO-BIT 2019 is still limited due to its novelty. COBIT framework, in general, is often seen as a product by practitioners and lacks theoretical claims [14]. COBIT 2019 is developed to address its predecessor's limitations: its complexities and difficulties in applying in practices and lack of guidance on 'how' rather than just 'what' [15,16].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%