Christina Ling-hsing Chang

1. The Political Behavior in Information System Implementation: Interpretation From Multi-Perspectives Christina Ling-hsing Chang Assistant Professor, Department of Information Technology of National Pintung Institute of Commerce

2. Research Motivation • Organizational politics is the critical success/failure factor in the IS implementation process. • This study will explain political behavior in IS implementation processes using different interpretations and perspectives. • This study relies on qualitative data collected over thirteen months from --manufacturer Theta. • The data are interpreted through three internally coherent theoretical perspectives: strategic contingency theory, social exchange theory, and structuration theory. • IS implementation is a trend and an inevitability in the 21st century. To develop competitiveness, reducing political behaviors and their negative impact on the organization and promoting IS efficiency and effectiveness will be important issues.

3. Theory • Strategy contingency theory perspective • Organizational politics is related to power. But what events decide the power of the subunits? What kind of power do subunits want to keep? What is the role of IS in these scrambles? For the answers, we use the strategy contingency theory perspective to analyze political behavior in ISD. • The typical theory of subunit power is the strategy contingency theory of Hickson et al. (1971). They found that subunits seek power to cope with uncertainty, substitutability, and high workflow pervasiveness and immediacy (e.g. subunits as interdependent parts of organizational systems).

4. Theory (Cont.) • Social exchange theory perspective • Organizational politics always occur when individuals/subunits scramble to obtain power or secure their self-interests. The relative power and dependence among individuals/subunits are the dominant factors affected by their benefit exchange in these actions. • Homans (1958) found that people like to perform actions that produce a reward, and exchange behavior continues when both parties enjoy mutual benefits from the relationship. Homans (1974) asserted that people will perform actions they feel to be valuable, and if those behaviors result in the expected reward with no punishment, they will repeat those behaviors frequently. • Emerson (1962) found that the relative power between parties determines their relative dependence.

5. Theory (Cont.) • Structuration theory perspective • Political behavior is a complex interactive process; organization factors and culture affect people’s political behavior, and vice versa. We use the interactive perspective to interpret how IS affects the political behaviors of people, and how these political behaviors affect the IS implementation process. • Giddens (1984) believed “resources” are the means through which intentions are realized, goals are accomplished, and power is exercised. “Resources” are structural elements that constitute organizational structures of domination. “Norms” are organizational rules or conventions governing legitimate or appropriate conduct. “Interpretive schemes” are standardized and shared knowledge that humans draw upon to interpret behavior and events, thereby achieving meaningful interaction. These three modalities determine how the institutional properties of social systems mediate deliberate human action and how human action constitutes social structure.

6. Research Method • Contextualism: we need contextualism (Pettigrew, 1985) to analyze these processes, understand the phenomena at vertical (organizational context, interest group behavior, socio-economic context) and horizontal (historical, present, future) levels, and discover the interconnections between those levels through time. • Case: Theta Company • Collect data: 2001/10~2002/10, totally 13 months

7. Component Description Context Horizontal level: time (historical, present, and future) Vertical level: organizational context, interest group behavior, and socio-economic context Interconnection between those levels through time IS: content of hardware and software Content Kind of political behavior Process Political behavior of IS implementation process: The interaction of events and behavior through time The process of evolution of political behaviors in different contexts and contents The effect and outcome (to IS and organization) of these processes Table 1: three components of Contextualism

8. Theta Selected subjects Theta Selected subjects MIS dept. 8 Sales (TS) dept 1 Finance (TF-A) dept 4 Subsidiary company TK 2 Accounting (TF-B) dept. 3 Subsidiary company TC 1 Administration (TH) dept. 1 Subsidiary company TH 1 Purchase (TP) dept. 2 Subsidiary company TG 1 Audit (TA) dept. 1 Total 25 Table 2: Selected subjects of case

9. Boss TA Dept. CEO Robby Tim Investment Dept. TK TS Dept. TM部門 Meg David TS-B SU. TG TH TC TF部門 TH Dept. MIS Dept. TP Dept. Ted John TF-A SU. TF-B SU. Don 3rd. SU. 2nd. SU. 1st. SU. Ava TF-1 SU. Sam Kenny ∣ Kevin Alice Amy Figure 1: Organizational, employees relationship Chart of Manufacturer Theta

10. Context Content Process Time Background Why Political behavior How Effect 1990- David is the leader of the MIS department To consolidate David’s position in the MIS department Looking out for number one If David did not approve, the designer cannot modify or insert functions for users. Filtered out many useful functions 1994- Boss-5 had a strict control style Users didn’t know how to use computers David controls IS and data Backing out in the face of difficulty Users always limited by David and they stop making requests to modify IS. IS could not be ameliorated 1994- Tim didn’t have computer knowledge, David can have absolute control Employees was punished at any time for their mistakes Protecting one’s territory David handled critical data and retains his position, emphasizing his importance. Decision-making efficiency is affected 1994-1997 Tim didn’t have computer knowledge, the MIS department had authority and expert knowledge, trying to grasp resources David keeps tight control over his subordinates in their data maintenance jobs so that his image will not be harmed Overplaying the order of the superior David claimed that the changes in workflow, IS direction, and goals are due to Tim’s orders and company regulations. The change in workflow is unreasonable 1994-1997 The MIS department had authority and expert knowledge, trying to grasp resources Users made suggestions based on past experience with good IS Stalling David rejected users’ suggestions by giving them the runaround and justifies the limitations of hardware, IS structure. New ideas are no longer suggested 1994-1997 Boss-5 did not appreciate MIS professionals’ effort, ability, and value Since there was no rewards, MIS professionals don’t want to ameliorate IS Leading an easy life MIS professionals dismiss users’ requests. They maintain the status quo and preserve IS stability until migration time. IS development is affected Table 3: Political behaviors before migration

11. Time Background Why Political behavior How Effect 1994-1997 Boss-5 and Tim had strict control over subordinates, they don’t have computer knowledge, and always have unreasonable demands MIS professionals didn’t want migration Playing it safe If MIS professionals made a change and something went wrong, they would have to take responsibility for the errors. IS development is deterred 1997 The computers was obsolete, not user-friendly, overloaded with data, and the hardware supplier goes bankrupt Migration was the only option, and they must be successful Winning popularity under false pretenses Although David left the choice to MIS professionals, he had the final say. MIS professionals obey David’s command and succeed in migration 1994-2000 The MIS department had authority but poor interaction with other departments, users need to depend on David Tim order that all reports need to be printed by the MIS department Leaving others in the lurch David follow Tim’s orders, but he did not check and print these reports quickly. The MIS department is the core of business processes 1997-1999 Boss-5 did not appreciate MIS professionals’ effort, ability, and value Superiors shorten migration schedule Playing it safe MIS professionals follow the old IS structure, only inserting, updating, and integrating parts of function. New IS direction is affected 1998- David did not design IS automation, executing it with many steps Employees have high turnover rate David consolidated his position in the MIS department Playing the cards close to one’s chest David’s runaround is that the process is complicated and cannot be done by his subordinates. David’s importance is emphasized 2001- Tim hope they have state of the art IS David wanted to consolidate his most important position in the MIS department Hiding the facts David told Tim that the IS has ERP function and it was state of the art. IS development is deterred Table 3: Political behaviors before migration (Cont.)

12. Context Content Process Time Background Why Political behavior How Effect 1999- Meg believes a dominant department can control everything Megorganizes councils to settle ambiguity among departments Over-icing the cake Reports of TF department’s design are better than those of MIS department Meg is empowered 2000- Meg becomes an apple of the eye of Boss-5 Meg has no accountability for data error Passing the buck MIS professionals have no choice but to do the job of TF department David concedes Table 4: political behaviors between TF and MIS department

13. Context Content Process Time Background Why Political behavior How Effect 1994-1997 Boss-5 did not appreciate MIS professionals’ effort, ability, and value Even if MIS professionals work overtime, they cannot finish accommodating all user requests, and they would not get extra pay for it Leading an easy life MIS professionals reject users’ requests, giving excuses of being too busy or having a negative impact on the system structure. IS cannot be modified 2000- MIS professionals had different opinions Users propose some ideas for new IS Burning the bridge that brought one over To get approval from Boss-5 in the migration stage, MIS professionals appealed to users to support the new IS. Once the new IS was stable, MIS professionals rejected users’ requests with visible contempt. Users do not suggest new ideas 2000- Employees were always punished and demoted Users made requests in a very haphazard way, so MIS professionals could not design for them Keeping others on the trot Users made a very unreasonable requests for an overall check on data to avoid responsibility. IS is of poor quality 2000- Employees were always punished and demoted Some users were suspicious of MIS professionals because data is modified Finding a scapegoat Some users were suspicious of MIS professionals and blame all IS errors on them. They also thought the MIS professionals had taken bribes from other workers. These users report to the manager and claimed they had nothing to do with it. MIS professionals are not committed enough 2001- There were too many IS control mechanisms in Theta TG company had no choice, they must use Theta’s IS Being hypocritical Ted reconciles and uses Theta IS. He does not want to create conflicts with David. The amelioration of IS in Theta is affected Table 5: Political behaviors of user complaints

14. Contribution

15. Strategy contingency theory perspective Effects Insight MIS department: operates political behavior to become the core of business processes, copes with substitutability, high workflow pervasiveness, and immediacy position. TF department: uses Boss-5’s trust, organizes councils to settle ambiguities among departments, has the ability to cope with uncertainty. Small decisions from superiors can transform the MIS department into the core of business processes, where political behavior can be operated more easily. This is why the TF department exhibited arbitrary political behavior in the IS implementation process after they obtained the most important position, and defeated the MIS department. Table 6: The effects and insights of interpretation and analysis from different perspectives

16. Effects Insight Social exchange theory perspectives Interaction between MIS Professionals and Users 1. Played by MIS Professionals: use their expert knowledge, evaluate their benefits, and decide whether to modify IS for users or not. 2. Played by Users: for their self-interest, keep others on the trot. Interaction between David and MIS Professionals To make sure migration is successful, David does everything possible to win cooperation from his subordinates so that he can consolidate his position in Theta. Interaction between David and Meg In the past, Meg was not valued by Boss-5, and she could not demand IS modification. After she becomes the boss’ favorite, David accepts every one of her demands about IS. 1. From the user aspect, if the organization cannot consider and assure users of their interests, power, and positions, and dispel their anxiety in the IS implementation process, then they will operate political behavior for these reasons, impacting IS development. 2. From the MIS professional viewpoint, if the organization cannot give a definite direction, sufficient time, a training environment, respect their demands, understand their efforts, and fully support them, they will take advantage of their expert knowledge and operate political behavior in the IS implementation process. 3. If superiors supervise staff with tight control, it will induce a distrust culture. Employees will take every opportunity to operate political behaviors and gain their self-interests. The IS implementation process will become a tool when scrambling for power, and nobody will execute IS for the benefit of the organization. Table 6: The effects and insights of interpretation and analysis from different perspectives (Cont.)

17. Effects Insight Structuration theory perspective Feedback among Actor, IS, and Organizational Factors Structures of signification: MIS professionals and users have different structures of signification for IS,andenhance the negative image of IS in the eyes of users; this makes it more difficult to ameliorate IS. Structures of domination: MIS department is the core of business processes, which enhances the MIS department’s position, and changes the allocation of resources in Theta. Structure of legitimation: the distrust culture of Theta ensures the IS controllability, and enhances the norm of Theta. If superiors maintain their management attitude and style, not only IS but also Theta’s advantage will be influenced by their culture. They fuse distrust culture into IS, operate business with tight control, limit the behavior of employees, and restrict IS development. In this situation, employees will operate many aggressive political behaviors in the IS implementation process to protect themselves. Table 6: The effects and insights of interpretation and analysis from different perspectives (Cont.)

18. The End