Making the case for “techno-change alignment”

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to develop “techno-change alignment” as an approach for evaluating the effectiveness of large-scale technology-enabled organisational change, commonly associated with the adoption of enterprise information systems (IS). Design/methodology/approach By developing a processual analysis of techno-change, useful insights are developed concerning techno-change alignment, within the confines of an enterprise resource planning (ERP) case study. Recent techno-change literature, emerging ideas on human agency, cultural and social relations are incorporated as part of the evaluation approach taken. The paper also discusses the implications of more recent work on techno-change and suggests directions for future research. Findings In terms of “structural” alignment, the ERP system was chosen because it reflected requirements of the case study in the university/education sector. As part of “strategic and intellectual” alignment, business processes were reviewed, as well as alignment with university aims and strategy goals. “Social and cultural” alignment between different groups of users is paramount for effective integration and re-embedding of relationships and activities once techno-change is introduced. Wider implications of processual alignment suggest that bringing users and stakeholders together as human agents for techno-change within a high priority communication environment is essential for developing effective social relationships. Originality/value Given the difficulty of developing usable evaluation mechanisms for techno-change and complex enterprise information systems, the contribution of this article is the demonstration of an effective interpretative (processual) IS evaluation approach, which the authors refer to as “techno-change alignment”.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 11 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.