Technochange management: using IT to drive organizational change

By M. Markus. Journal of Information and Technology, 2004

688 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Management Information Systems

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/e7b6a604cf6fd18215a81b8f9c98a63e8e18e304

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Management Information Systems

Citations in the corpus

A Multi-Project Model of Key Factors Affecting Organizational Benefits from Enterprise Systems (2010, background): “, Markus and Tanis (2000) and Hong and Kim (2002), appear in more than one band because they address more than one issue.”
An integrated big data analytics-enabled transformation model: Application to health care (2018, background): “Second, e ﬀ ective transformations within organizations can be achieved through IT-enabled transformation practices [11,37].”
Human well-being and system performance in the transition to industry 4.0 (2020, background): “, training, new performance metrics, and (re)design of business processes (Markus, 2004).”
Materiality and change: Challenges to building better theory about technology and organizing (2008, background): “Like Orlikowski, a number of other researchers have begun to argue that when misalignments surface between the functionality of an existing technology and users’ needs, people often physically adapt the technologies with which they work (Majchrzak et al., 2000; Markus, 2004; Pollock, 2005; Tyre & Or”
When Flexible Routines Meet Flexible Technologies: Affordance, Constraint, and the Imbrication of Human and Material Agencies (2011, positive): “Studies show that rejecting the technology (Constantinides and Barrett 2005; Lapointe and Rivard 2005; Markus 2004) or using its features for purposes other than designers or implementers intended (Boudreau and Robey 2005; DeSanctis and Poole 1994; Schultze and Boland 2000), are two common strategie”
When Does Technology Use Enable Network Change in Organizations? A Comparative Study of Feature Use and Shared Affordances (2013, background): “In fact, the evidence suggests that even in situations where people continue using the technology after implementation (i.e., they have not rejected it), network change does not always occur (Markus 2004; Poole and DeSanctis 2004).”
Participation in Development and Implementation - Updating An Old, Tired Concept for Today's IS Contexts (2004, background): “For example, through “groupthink,” participants might become highly satisfied with a system that satisfies their desires but does not meet organizational needs (Markus, 1981), one that is insufficiently radical to meet organizational objectives (Cooper, 2000; Markus, 1981), or one that is too radica”
Enacting Integrated Information Technology: A Human Agency Perspective (2005, methodology): “we chose to study the implementation and use of an ERP system, which potentially represents a "hard" con straint on human agency and is associated with orga nizational control (Markus 2004).”
Digital transformation by SME entrepreneurs: A capability perspective (2018, background): “…and deploying technical resources but also — perhaps even more importantly — tackling managerial issues (Doherty & King, 2005) such as redesigning business processes and training (Markus, 2004) and investing in e ‐ Commerce human resources and organizational capabilities (Cha et al., 2015).”
Investigating user resistance to information systems implementation: a status quo bias perspective (2009, background): “, when the system is first being deployed) is widespread and critical for project success (Markus 2004).”