Public Listed Companies and Fund Managers - Academic ...

Aurilla Aurelie Bechina and Eli Hustad
Organizational dimensions Enterprise 1.0
Hierarchical
Enterprise 2.0
Heterarchic
Boundaries Clearly specified, persistent Fuzzy and permeable
Work process Routine work, standardized, rulebased
Improvised, flexible, participative
Direction Management commands Self-managing
Individual motivation Satisfy superiors Achieve team goals
Learning Specific skills Broader competencies
Composition Homogenous Heterogeneous
Performance criteria Established, singular Emergent, multiple
Watchword Stability, inertia Speed, adaptability
Scholars suggest that new organization forms such as the heterarchy which represents a postbureaucratic
organizational form are more prepared for adapting effectively to new conditions of
volatility and virtual spaces compared to traditional forms. Heterarchy is as well defined by David
Stark as ‘an emergent organizational form with distinctive network properties and multiple organizing
principles’ (Stark 2001).
To keep up with the dynamic environment, some firms are experimenting with dynamic strategy such
as the perpetual beta approach, and forms of organizing that are more open, interconnected and
adaptive (Ciborra, 1996; Neff & Stark, 2003).
4 Web 2.0 implications
It is recognized among the Practitioners that focusing only on technologies will not insure the success
of Web 2.0 deployment. E2.0 could have happen even without technologies due to the fact that it is a
socially-driven evolution that did not originate from a technology push nor from a demand pull (AAIM,
2008). Hence, adopting E2.0 is not about using others software tools but rather means that people
have to reconsider their business routine by incorporating the collaborative paradigm in their daily
work. Organizational dimension should be considered by fostering change management strategy
while trying to implement new technology. Understanding organizational challenges means
understanding the E2.0 adoption barriers, which identify the critical success factors.
The penetration of new technologies in the workplace has generated new type of issues and
challenges. For example, selection and adoption of technology is a complex process that is based on
a number of alternatives including technological choices, perceived benefits, cost based models and
organizational strategies. However technology itself needs adaptation to organizational goals and
strategies (Laulmann, Nadler, & O’Farrell, 1991).
Motivations for technology use are both intrinsic and extrinsic. Adaptability of technology to user
needs, user confidence, and motivation to its adoption are key factors to understand. Kanter’s has
identified five characteristics of successful technology adoption, the five Fs -: Focused, Fast, Flexible,
Friendly, and Fun (Kanter, 1990).
Dias (2002) identified three motivation factors for using technology, namely; perceived usefulness,
perceived ease of use, and perceived enjoyment. He argues that “information technology
implementation is an intervention we make in order to improve the effectiveness and efficiency of a
socio-technical system” (Dias, 2002).
The deployment of novel Web 2.0 tools requires understanding the factors that will facilitate or inhibit
the full adoption of their use in the workplace. It is important to examine some of the organizational
issues that E2.0 must face such as governance, culture, leadership, incentive schemes, and value
capture.
24