Download Full Paper - EGOS

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Research on standards has many facets. Following Orlikowski (1992) and her research on technologies, one potential approach to distinguish research on standards is the differentiation between the design mode and the use mode of standards. This distinction emphasizes that social construction occurs both before and after a standard is enacted in an organization and refers to processes of setting and following standards. The design mode describes the process of standardization on the standard setting bodies’ and/ or the related stakeholders side. Hereby, researchers ask about how standards come into being, how standard setting bodies are organized and how do these bodies determine the content of standards as well as how they convince potential stakeholders to certify their organizations (e.g. Furusten 2000; Marimon et al. 2009). For our paper, the use mode of standards is of special interest. The use mode literature on process standards is chiefly shaped by the research on the ISO 9000s and ISO 14000s process quality norms that culminates in the early 2000s mainly in the following two topics. Firstly, there is an extensive amount of literature about the motivation and barriers of the implementation of standards (e.g. Boiral 2003; Niazi et al. 2005; Zeng et al. 2007). This literature focuses on the influence of the implementation of process standards on product quality, on the organizational performance and the obstacles and limitations while putting a standard into effect. Secondly, there is a meta-discussion around process standards that reflects on the assumptions what a ‘good’ organization constitutes. Authors who ask about these assumptions found answers like customer satisfaction, defined responsibilities, the reduction of production and management mistakes, quality assurance, documentation of all processes and decisions and related audits (e.g. Lawrence and Phillips 1998). That standards are socially constructed plays a minor role in research about process standards. However, some research has been done on standards as a form of regulation or as a code of corporate governance and on the functioning of these code regimes (e.g. Power 2007; Seidl 2007; Wieland 2005). In view of our empirical investigations we will contribute to the socially constructed perspective on standards in a software development organization and direct the reader’s Full paper GEY & FRIED EGOS conference 2012, Sub-theme 15 2
attention to the phenomenon of standard-use mediators and their metastructuring activities in mastering the multiplicity and plurality of standards. The following section will deliver the theoretical background on standard-use mediation. Section 3 describes the research design. The findings of our case study “A-Suppliers” are presented in section 4. The paper will be completed by the discussion and conclusion and will deliver insights about the process of metastructuring as a powerful mechanism in dealing with multiple and plural standard requirements in organizations. 2. Theory With this paper we report on a specific type of structuring activities around standards within organizations. We do not describe the influences standards can have, for instance, on learning or innovating (Fried 2010, Fried et al. 2011, Gey 2011) or other activities where standards can have an important influence. Rather, we focus on a process Orlikowski et al. (1995) called metastructuring. Metastructuring was primarily used in the context of technology research. Yates et al. (1999) found out that “a few members of the project group explicitly engaged in activities that facilitated both early and ongoing use of the new technology by the rest of the project group” (Yates et al. 1999, p.84f.; see also Okamura et al. 1994, Orlikowski et al. 1995). These activities included guidelines for the use of the new (conference) technology, providing qualification and follow-ups in using the technology as well as modifying it according to contextual, project-specific requirements. Orlikowski et al. (1995) summarized metastructuring “as an organizational mechanism for facilitating the ongoing adaptation of technologies, their use, and organizational contexts to each other and to changing conditions”. Further, Orlikowski et al. (1995) classified four types of metastructuring activities: establishment, reinforcement, adjustment and episodic change. During establishment the mediators establish their roles in the organization, they set up the infrastructure and implement the new technology. They also need to promote and support the new technology, Full paper GEY & FRIED EGOS conference 2012, Sub-theme 15 3
Page 1: EGOS Conference 2012 Submission to
Page 5 and 6: 3. Research design We use a qualita
Page 7 and 8: well as emotional conditions of our
Page 9 and 10: “There have been some people assi
Page 11 and 12: “[...] this is a documentation of
Page 13 and 14: As a matter of fact, this continuou
Page 15 and 16: influences the design of the standa
Page 17 and 18: The case organization A-Suppliers d
Page 19 and 20: While looking at the standard media
Page 21 and 22: understanding of metastructuring. E
Page 23: Orlikowski, W. (1996). Improvising

Download Full Paper - EGOS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?