Association for Information Systems

AIS Electronic Library (AISeL)

European Conference on Information Systems
ECIS 2000 Proceedings
(ECIS)

1-1-2000

Interpretation of Groupware Effect in an

Organization using Structuration Theory
John Hassall
University of Wolverhampton

Follow this and additional works at: http://aisel.aisnet.org/ecis2000

Recommended Citation
Hassall, John, "Interpretation of Groupware Effect in an Organization using Structuration Theory" (2000). ECIS 2000 Proceedings.
Paper 33.
http://aisel.aisnet.org/ecis2000/33

This material is brought to you by the European Conference on Information Systems (ECIS) at AIS Electronic Library (AISeL). It has been accepted
for inclusion in ECIS 2000 Proceedings by an authorized administrator of AIS Electronic Library (AISeL). For more information, please contact
[email protected].
 search

Interpretation of Groupware Effect in an Organization using Structuration Theory

John Hassall
University of Wolverhampton
Shropshire Campus, Shimal Road, Priorlsee
TELFORD, Shropshire, TF2 9NT, U.K.

Abstract The need for appropriate interpretative and Complementary to theseperspectives,a holistic or systems
evaluative frameworks for understanding groupware and approach offers a view in relation to the effect of new
related technologies is discussed. Structuration is employed to information systems and technology since it might be
examine some aspects of an implementation of groupware
expected to include both technological and social potentials.
within one organization and various interpretative outcomes
developed. The work reported in this paper employs the theory of
structuration, Giddens [ 121, to frame and discussthe effect
I. INTRODUCTION created by new information technologies within an
organization in terms of the capabilities and potentials
Increasingly, organizations take for granted the benefits of introduced to the existing system(s)and social structures.
information technologies introduced to provide electronic
forms of communication and co-ordination between groups II. THE PERSPECTIVE OF STRUCTURATION
of staff. The assumedbenefits of these technologies include
more flexible working, the potential to build what are called Systems perspectives, methods and systemic analyses are
‘virtual teams’ and to improve knowledge management typically based upon an abstracted view of the system of
within the organization, Bannon [2], Ciborra and Patriotta interest. Soft Systems Methodology (SSM) emerges from
[8], Orlikowski [20],[21]. At the sametime researchersare the ‘process’world view of hard systems analysis in that
addressingthe need to improve methods of evaluation for conceptual models, developed from root definitions, parallel
information systemsand technologies, Hares and Royle [ 131, the abstraction processesin engineering design, Checkland
Remenyi, Sherwood-Smith and White [23], with the implicit [6], Checkland and Scholes [7]. SSM differs from hard
rationale that such technologies do not always deliver easily systemsanalysis by the possibility of developing alternative
identified benefits. perspectives through alternative root definitions. Learning
The approach taken to evaluating the effect of groupware is also incorporated as an important part of SSM, but, in the
and network technologies, including internet technologies, end, a choice of feasibleaction needsto be taken.
reflects an underlying rationale adopted by the worker It is possibleto consider groupware implementation using
concerned. So, for example, there is a significant body of SSM amongst many systems approaches. Thus, in
research which adopts a socio-technical approach, with the considering the introduction of new technology, a variety of
implicit assumption that design of the system can be systemic identities could be explored, the potentials
optimized in conjunction with the human activity introduced by the technology would be incorporated into
components to ensure the organization’s objectives are conceptual models which could lead to the adoption of
achieved. This is the approach adopted by and describedin, appropriate technical solutions and practices aimed at
for example, Avison and Wood Harper [ 11, Mumford [ 191, bringing about the desired effect. This implicitly iterative
Kunda and Brooks [ 181. In contrast to this are approaches processcould be aimed at growth in use of the technology
that stressan interpretative analysis of information systems, towards agreed beneficial outcomes. An alternative might
setting them in the context of organizational change and be to adopt a model such as the Viable System Model,
treating them as affecters (potentially generators) of employing it as a diagnostic tool to identify areas where
organizational and social potential Walsham [26]. To an technology could facilitate improved variety management
extent it is felt these workers are interested in describing and and conformation towards improved viable system design
interpreting phenomenaas a prelude to achieving beneficial Beer [3], [4].
action in relation to organizational information systems. A further approach, still seeking an holistic (systemic)
Whilst this is a useful activity in and of itself, it cannot affect understanding, is to considerthe perspective of an individual
the actual process of information systems implementation working within an organization. This individual is an actor
and benefits realisation directly. Other workers agendas, involved in bringing about many transformations in SSM
e.g. Orlikowski [21], Bannon [2], Ciborra and Patriotta [S]), terms, thus forming a part in many systems (holons),
present as an active attempt to understand how emerging Checkland and Scholes [7]. In any organization the actor
information technologiesmay be employed effectively. has a choice of what to do but the choice is a constrained one
by virtue of the actors participation within the organization.
 search

However, the organization does not have total power to contributor to the identification of overall organizational
determine what the choice(s) of an actor will be in a goals and exploitation of strategic opportunities. We must
particular circumstance; and many commentators consider guard against forms of words and institutionalisation of
that the actor and the systems or organizations with which procedures which, however subtly, limit our thinking to the
she or he interact should be considered holistically. Notably former viewpoint ” (Sutton, 1998).
Giddens, in the development of structuration theory, insists The two way process by which technological capability
upon an action/structure duality; the actor by virtue of affects individuals and organizational choices, actions and
interaction with the organization being both constrained by their interpretations has been noted by many commentators.
and, in a sense, creating the structure(s) of the organization For example Dudley and Hassall [9] have developed this
Giddens [ 121. For Giddens this is bought about by theme towards application in terms of understanding the
modalities which link particular types of interaction with various tensions around the implementation of a client
particular structural elements. The three key types of database within a large organization [lo]. Structuration
modality are interpretative schemes, facilities and norms. itself has been employed as a framework for considering
This is shown diagrammatically in Figure 1. media choice, where technology is manipulated to perform
work and has the result of reproducing or changing social
Structure signification legitimation context, Poole and DeSanctis [22], Yates and Orlikowski
[27], (Most commonly noticeable in the way in which
f
persons who might not normally interact at a social level
i within work may find themselves engaged in genial
Interpretative norm
(Modality)
scheme communication via EMail).
:
4

III. EXPERIENCES WITH GROUPWARE

Interaction comnunication sanction
When new technology is introduced to the organization
Figure 1, Adapted from (Giddens, 1984, page 29).
we might expect adjustments to occur to the modalities
experienced by the users; and in turn for the organization to
To expand upon this scheme, the structure element be affected by adjustmentsin the nature of interactions of the
relating to interpretation is signification. Signification has users. So, a way of seeking insights into the process of
the ability through the modality of an interpretative scheme adoption of and adaptation to new technology is to look for
to affect the way in which communication interactions are evidence of adjustmentsin thesemodalities.
performed. But also, communicative actions can through Considering this approach in more detail it seemsclear
interpretative schemes, change the form of signification. A that new technology is most easily associated with the
simple example of this might be the way in which an Email facilities modality. Facilities, as has been seen, are
message is interpreted by the receiver and sender, leading, processes,procedures and physical capabilities available to
over time, to development of a protocol for use. actors that are concerned with domination on the part of the
The value of structuration theory in considering organization and the exercise of power on the part of the
information systems in organizations has been discussed, by user/actor. Indeed, we could say that power is exercised
Walsham [26]. Noting firstly the contextualist approach, most often by actors within organizations through physical
which emphasizes the linkage between context and process; means to produce effects. In information systems for
“This linkage is of key importance for understanding the example, a facility may represent the way in which, on the
impact of computer-based information systems in one hand, individual users of a system are able to perform
organizations, which are both constrained by the context in particular tasks (for example create an order for a product or
which they are developed and, in turn, are a factor in service) and, on the other hand, the organization is enabled
maintaining or altering that context. ” to constrain the capabilities of individual users to create
Walsham goes on to discuss the application of more than a certain size of order without the intervention of
structuration theory to the field of information systems another more privileged user. Most organizations explicitly
within organizations. Walsham’s approach is largely split responsibilities for the commitment of physical
interpretivist, but commentators with a more socio-technical resourcesand money between many different people; and the
or systems based approach also accept the validity of this technological facilities which enable this are the specific
agenda. For example Sutton [25] provides the following information systems employed. The technology provides,
conclusion. and increasingly is, the physical manifestation of facilities
“The classical. view of IT/IS as a supporter and follower which enable the balance between power for the individual
of organizational objectives and needs is shown to be unduly and domination (regulation) by the organization. But what
conservative. Rather, at its most effective, IT/IS is an equal of the other modalities, interpretative schemesand norms?
Can we show how information technology affects these?
 search

During the period 1996 to 1998 a longitudinal study was 1 Task description ! Staff ! Managers
I I
No. % No. %
conducted covering the introduction of Novell GroupWise 44 66% 11 52%
To inspect others
(Rogers and McTague [24]), within an English County diaries/own diary
Council. A number of surveys were conducted during the management
process of data gathering, including data from a variety of Message management 7 10% 1 5%
Sending documents as 9 13% 6 29%
departments across the Council. The main objective of the attachments
longitudinal study was to evaluate the effectiveness of the Accessing or sending 3 4% 1 5%
technology in changing the patterns of working and methods broadcast information.
Scheduling meetings 34 51% 13 62%
of performing particular business linked tasks.
Informal 39 58% 6 29%
The outcome of this work, including the development of communications
several ways of evaluating groupware effect upon the Task List Management 20 30% 5 24%
organization based upon user judgements, is reported in
Hassall (1999) [ 141. Among the key findings of this Table 1, Business Tasks for which Groupware Most Useful (Adapted from
Hassall, 1999, page 167.)
research were the that patterns of use of the groupware
technology were established early in implementation and did V. INTERPRETATIVE SCHEMES
not show significant progressive development over time.
This finding suggests that implementation of new An example from the study in which the interpretative
technology on its own cannot easily bring about new ways of schemesmay be discerned is the way in which the use of
working, leading in turn to the need for further research into Email is viewed as a complement to, or in place of, other
the socio-cultural context and the use of interpretative methods of communication. Part of the research study
methods and schemes such as structuration. The current involved interviews with a total of 22 subjects covering a
paper is a development based upon selected data from the variety of areas in relation to the implemented groupware
study in which structuration is used to examine how technology. Several people in the interviews expressedthe
adjustments to modalities may be taking place. opinion that Email offered a meansof communication which
was, (to paraphrase), “. ..more formal than a conversation
IV. FACILITIES but less formal than a paper memo . .. I: Several more,
particularly managers,cited the ability to have a record that
As already suggested, it is fairly easy to find evidence information had been communicated.
within the case data of changes to facilities introduced by the If a novel form of communication is introduced and made
new groupware system. We have only to look at the business available to people within an organization, they must, in the
tasks for which the system was judged most useful by various absence of explicit instructions for use, determine for
respondents within the Social Services and Health themselves when and for what to employ the
department. (A single department has been selected based communications medium. In the absence of prior
upon its high proportion of respondents, over 50%. experience, such a determination will be governed, partly at
However, conclusions from the surveys across all least, by the anticipated effect upon the receiver. So, the
departments mirror those which are being drawn here.) senderof email must make judgementswhich inevitably lead
The impact of the groupware system in terms of providing to a evolving interpretative schemewhich, in time, is shared
access to others diaries together with the ability to schedule by other users within the organization. Wider experiences
meetings is seen as important by both non managers and also suggest that such interpretative schemescan lead to
managers. In general it was found that the highest impact widely differing Email cultures with the sametechnologies
was felt in use of the system for those function where an and within the sameor similar types of organization. As an
explicit designed feature of the software was being example, the author recently participated in an on-line
employed. This was in contrasts to (again generally) conference group where the issueof whether contributions to
disappointing use of the system for new and creative the forum should be considered‘copyright’ of the creator was
applications of the technology such as managing teams or raised. Some membersof the group took up this issue and
organising shared work on reports and projects. So, a view debated it in earnest... others (including the author) were
is that with respect to the facility modality, there is a greater perplexed by this issue, believing that the conference group
effect exerted on individuals actions and interactions than is was simply an electronically mediated ‘virtual’ discussion
occasioned by their actions in altering the form or mode of and the contributions, speech acts, subject to an informal
domination. The technological facilities provided will tend interpretation.
to reproduce and re-enforce existing patterns of power and VI. NORMS
control within the organization.
The evolution of norms of behaviours in relation to
technical facilities provided, like the interpretative scheme,
 search

can be complex. When deciding to implement a system requiring he or sheto model their working world in order to
comprising groupware technology managers within an use them Orlikowski [20]. So, the focus for development
organization may typically express a variety of aspirational may need to shift towards consideration of the end-user
objectives to be obtained. The aspirations for groupware actors, their skills, aspirations and internal models, which
products may be framed as a desire to develop new and more may have far greater effect upon the overall organizational
flexible ways of working, ways of sharing knowledge and impact of new information technologies than any explicit
developing ‘virtual’ teams, Orlikowski [20], [2 11, Hassall technological capability that is introduced.
[ 141, [ 151. In effect this represents an aim relating to the
‘norming’ or ‘re-norming’ of behaviours around the new VIII. DISCUSSION AND REFLECTION
technological paradigm. But, as structuration would
suggest, such an aim is far fi-om easy to pursue in the light of Structuration is a perspective that presents action (of
the action/structure duality. In much the same way that personswithin an organization) as partially constrained by
different communications cultures will emerge around and partially creating the structures (meanings, functions
different interpretative schemes, so the development of the and norms) of the organization. At one level this is a
norm modality will exhibit a dynamic nature. common senseway of looking at the world and also of
The dynamic shifts in the norm modality may be considering how technological mediation within an
illustrated with further reference to Table I and the organization can affect, through the modalities of
differences in the responses of managers and non managers. interpretative schemes, facilities and norms, how
Whereas 58% of non managers list informal organizations are changedby technology.
communications as a most useful task, only 29% of The model encourages a view of organizations and
managers do so. Moreover, the situation is reversed in the technology which makes apparent the interconnected nature
case of the use of document attachments, 29% of managers of technological capability and organizational and individual
listing this as a most useful task and only 13% of non responses. As such it is a useful model, and one which is
managers. The latter result undoubtedly reflects, at least in increasingly being cited within the information system
part, differences in the nature of managers and non research field Walsham [26], Champion [5], Hussain and
managers jobs. However, it is also possible that these two Flyn [16].
items taken together are suggestive of a dialectic between the In the casesituation discussedit is clear that a variety of
two groups. Possibly managers are more likely to articulate observations may be framed in terms of modalities, the
the use of GroupWise in a business connected and formal specific ways in which signification, domination and
way; they seek to sanction its use for purposes directly linked legitemation are related to interpretation, power and
to the business. Non managers by contrast, are not thinking sanction. So, we see electronic means of communication
of the use of the technology in as focused a fashion, but adjusting the interpretation of communicative events (the
articulate its use and function in relation to a more social curious formality/informality of EMail); we appreciate how
rather than business context. managers are provided with powerful facilities to schedule
meetings and events by direct accessto staff diaries and we
VII. IMPLLCATIONS FOR PRACTICE witness signs of tension over the degree to which
communications media should be employed for social
Based upon considerationsof structuration theory, earlier functions at work as opposed to business functions.
work on systemic refocusing, Dudley and Hassall [9],[ lo], Structuration thus provides a way of framing and
and results of surveys and case studies within various interpreting outcomeswhich illustrates and illuminates the
organizations, Hassall [ 151, it is considered that groupware interaction of technological capabilities with the socio-
systems aim to affect those modalities which dynamically cultural environment of the organization.
determine the balance between interactions (work?) and
structure(s) of organizations. Planning for successful IX. CONCLUSION
implementation must recognisethe power of this action and
structure dynamic. But how should this problem be The theory of structuration has been presented as an
approached? interpretative framework in the case of implementation of
Often the problem of implementation of information groupware technology. The central conception of
systems is framed as that of defining requirements in structuration, action and structure duality, is considered to
sufficient technical detail and in a way that reflects represent a useful perspective for information systems and
organization socio-technical realities, Eason [ 111. The organizational research.
particular situation with groupware and related products, A number of specific examples of data extracted from a
including thosenow emerging on the Internet, is that (on the longitudinal study of groupware implementation have been
whole) they present technical capabilities rather than discussedand interpretation attempted. The results show
functions and applications directly to the end user actor,
 search

that the theory of structuration can be useM for generating WI Hassall, J, 1998, Evaluating Co-operative Information
insights fi-om such case data. Technologies Using Fuzzy Measures, Matching Technology
With Organizational Needs, Proceedings of the 3rd UKAIS
Conference, Lincoln University, 15th-17th April 1998,
REFERENCES
David Avison and Denis Edgar-Nevill Eds, ISBN O-07-
709454-9, McGraw-Hill, Maidenhead, England, 1998.
Avison, D E, Wood-Harper, A T, 1990, Multiview - An Hussain, 2, I, Flynn, D, 1999, Applying Structuration
Exploration in Information Systems Development, Theory within Information Systems Research, Information
Blackwell Scientific Publications, UK, ISBN 0-632-03026- Systems - The Next Generation, Proceedings of the 4th
7. UKAIS Conference, York University, 7th-9th April 1999,
Bannon, L J, 1998, Computer Supported Collaborative Laurence Brooks and Chris Kimble Eds, ISBN 0-07-
Working: Challenging Perspectives on Work and 709558-8, McGraw-Hill, Maidenhead, England, 1999,
Technology, Information Technology and Organizational ~~624-633.
Transformation - Innovation for the 21 st Century Jackson, M, C, 1997, Towards Coherent Pluralism in
[17
Organization, Robert Galliers and Walter Baets, Eds, John Management Science, Lincoln School of Management,
Wiley and Sons Ltd, 1998, ISBN o-471-97073-5, Chapter Working paper Series, NO. 16.
2. Kunda, B, Brooks, L, 1999, Applying Socio-Technical
[18
Beer, S, 1979, The Heart of Enterprise, John Wiley and Approach for COTS Selection, Information Systems - The
Sons Ltd, UK, ISBN O-471-27599-9. Next Generation, Proceedings of the 4th UKAIS
Beer, S, 1985, Diagnosing the System for Organizations, Conference, York University, 7th-9th April 1999, Laurence
John Wiley and Sons Ltd, UK, ISBN 0-471-90675-l. Brooks and Chris Kimble Eds, ISBN o-07-709558-8,
Champion, D, 1999, Structuration Theory and Conversation McGraw-Hill, Maidenhead, England, 1999, ~~552-565.
Modelling: A Possible Interpretivist Approach to Bridging
the Gap in Information Systems Design, Information
[W Mumford, E, 1991, Participation in Systems Design - What
can it offer?, Human Factors for Informatics Usability, B
Systems - The Next Generation, Proceedings of the 4th Shakel, S Richardson, Cambridge University Press, UK,
UKAIS Conference, York University, 7th-9th April 1999, Chapter 12, ~~267-290, ISBN O-52 l-36570-8.
Laurence Brooks and Chris Kimble Eds, ISBN 0-07- 20 Orlikowski, W J, 1992, Learning from Notes:
709558-8, McGraw-Hill, Maidenhead, England, 1999, Organizational Issues in Groupware Implementation,
pp6 16-623. Conference on Computer Supported Co-operative Work,
Checkland, P, 1981, Systems Thinking Systems Practice, CSCW Proceedings 1992, ~~362-369.
Wiley, Chichester, ISBN O-47 l-279 11-O. 21 Orlikowski, W J, 1996, Evolving with Notes:
Checkland, P, Scholes, J, 1990, Soft Systems Methodology Organizational Change around Groupware Technology,
in Action, Wiley, Chichester, ISBN O-471 -92768-6. Groupware and Teamwork, Invisible Aid or Technical
Ciborra, C U, Patriotta, G, 1996, Groupware and Hindrance?, Claudio U Ciborra, John Wiley and Sons, UK,
Teamwork in New product Development: The Case of a Chapter 2, ~~23-60, ISBN O-47 l-97064-6.
Consumer Goods Multinational, Groupware and Poole, M S, and DeDanctis, G 1990, Understanding the use
Teamwork, Invisible Aid or Technical Hindrance?, Claudio of group decision support systems: The theory of adaptive
U Ciborra, John Wiley and Sons, UK, Chapter 5, ~~23-60, structuration In Fulk, J and Steinfield, C Eds, Organisations
ISBN O-47 l-97064-6. and Communications Technology, Newbury Park, Sage,
Dudley, P, Hassall, J.C., 1995, Systemic Refocusing 1990, pp173-193.
Strategy, An Emancipatory Approach To Intervention, in:
P31 Remenyi, D, Sherwood-Smith, M, White, T, 1997,
Critical Issues in Systems Theory and Practice, &Ellis, Achieving Maximum Value From Information Systems: A
A.Gregory, B.R.Mears-Young, G.Ragsdell, Eds, pp 465- process Approach, John Wiley and Sons Ltd, 1997, ISBN O-
478, Plenum, London, UK. 471-97500-l.
Dudley, P, Hassall, J.C., 1996, Applying Systemic Rogers, S, McTague, R, 1996, Novell’s GroupWise 5 User’s
[24
Refocusing Strategy to Information Systems Innovation, in: Handbook, Novell Press, San Jose, Calif, USA, ISBN, O-
Technology Management in a Changing World, 7645-4509-4.
R.M.Mason, L.A.Lefebvre, T.M.Khalil, Eds, pp 41-50, Sutton, D, 1998, Matching Technology with Organizational
125
Elsevier Advanced Technology, Oxford, UK. Needs is a Two Way Process, Matching Technology With
Eason, K, 1996, Division of Labour and the design of Organizational Needs, Proceedings of the 3rd UKAIS
systems for computer support of cooperative work, Journal Conference, Lincoln University, 15th.17th April 1998,
of Information Technology, Association for Information David Avison and Denis Edgar-Nevill Eds, ISBN 0-07-
Technology, UK, 11, ~~39-50. 709454-9, McGraw-Hill, Maidenhead, England, 1998.
Giddens, A, 1984, The Constitution of Society, Polity Walsham, G, 1993, Interpreting Information Systems in
W
Press, 1984, ISBNO-7456-0007-7, Oxford, UK. Organizations, John Wiley and Sons Ltd, UK, ISBN 0-471-
Hares, J, Royle, D 1994, Measuring the Value of 93814-9.
Information Technology, Wiley, Chichester (1994). ISBN O- Yates, J and Orlikowski, W J 1992, Genres of
471-94307-x. organizational communication: a structurational approach to
Hassall, J C, 1999, Developing Performance Models for studying communication and media. Academy of
Co-operative Information Systems in an Orgnisational Management Review, Vol 17 No 2, ~~299-326.
Context, Doctoral Thesis, Aston University, July 1999.