the Performative Cohesion of Organizing Visions

We link the concept of an ‘organizing vision’ to the idea of ‘performativity’ in order to better understand the challenges associated with implementing integrated care, i.e. the usage of ICT in order to coordinate medical treatments of the same patient by multiple medical professionals. More specifically, we focus on how medical autonomy affects the performativity of an organizing vision. Through an inductive case study of one German integrated care provider, we indicate that medical autonomy seems to be positively related to adoption decisions of ICT by medical professionals if an ICT-based business model embraces medical autonomy. However, through looking at the first four years of the implementation process, we also find that medical autonomy seems to be negatively related to important ICT-related outcomes of integrated care. Our study implies that a focus only on how actors translate organizing visions may run the risk of underemphasizing context factors that affect the adoption of integrated care on the organizational level. To depict how such contexts influence the degree at which an organizing vision is performative, we introduce the concept of ‘performative cohesion’.1. Auflag

A discursive framework

Despite the widespread interest in business models, relatively little is known about how organizations innovate business models. We conceptualize business model innovation as problem-atizing, i.e. a specific kind of ‘discursive practice’ that challenges the dominant paradigm under which a given collective operates. Therefore, we transplant the concept of problematizing from the literature on discourse theory to the literature on business models. Moreover, we develop four ideal types of problematizing that matter for the business model innovation process (determined prob-lematizing, exhaustive problematizing, pragmatic problematizing and symbiotic problematizing). Each of these types signifies a distinct probability whether the ‘ideated’ business model will be ‘implemented’ into the organization. We argue that the occurrence of these types is influenced by the degree of compatibility between different institutional logics of ‘ideating units’ and ‘imple-menters’ of business models, as well as their power balance

Advancing the discussion about Clinical Decision Support Systems to tackle Adverse Drug Events: a ‘problematizing’ approach

Clinical decision support systems (CDSS) can prevent situations in which doctors prescribe a drug to a patient that causes a harmful reaction with another drug that a patient already takes (adverse drug events (ADE)). This can be achieved through generating medication alerts in the moment that a drug is prescribed. Researchers have paid considerable attention to how to design these alerts in the best possible ways, however, largely with inconclusive results. We tackle this body of literature using a ‘problematizing’ approach that enables to understand why research results are inconclusive by disclosing underlying assumptions in a body of literature that have over time shaped a scholarly debate into a particular direction. We uncover four problematic assumptions, offer alternatives to these assumptions and outline potentials to implement our ideas in future research projects

Capability Development in Interorganizational Projects

We examine how capabilities emerge in repeated interorganizational projects and how they affect project development. A multifaceted understanding of project capabilities in interorganizational projects is important, because project management research emphasizes capabilities’ contribution to project performance, but has also stressed their tendency to grow rigid. We review the literature on interorganizational project collaboration to identify the foundations and drivers of project capabilities in project networks and to outline their potentially ambiguous consequences. Our systematic overview of these studies provides a basis for further empirical research and project management practice

Bringing Institutions in

This paper advances Picot and Baumann’s (2009) central paper on how organization and management theory (OMT) can enhance business infor-mation systems engineering (BISE). In particular, we extend their focus in three ways. We introduce the industry and inter-organizational relations as levels of analysis, which are of interests to BISE and we show specific methods to ad-vance the links between OMT and BISE. We exemplify these points by a case study on BreatheCorp., a multinational company that recently entered into the provision of eHealth-based ventilation care services in Germany. Through our empirical study, we can also contribute to theorizing the role of context for in-ter-organizational information systems (IOIS)

On the Relationship of OMT and BISE: Bringing Institutions in

This paper advances Picot and Baumann\u27s (2009) central paper on how organization and management theory (OMT) can enhance business information systems engineering (BISE). In particular, we extend their focus in three ways. We introduce the industry and inter-organizational relations as levels of analysis, which are of interests to BISE and we show specific methods to advance the links between OMT and BISE. We exemplify these points by a case study on BreatheCorp., a multinational company that recently entered into the provision of eHealth-based ventilation care services in Germany. Through our empirical study, we can also contribute to theorizing the role of context for inter-organizational information systems (IOIS)

Using “Panel Reports” to Advance Scholarly Discourse: A Change in Editorial Policy and Guidelines for Panel Report Authors

“Panel reports” reflect a particular category of submissions that authors can make to the Communications of the Association for Information Systems (CAIS). As the CAIS website states, panel reports (i.e., papers that report on panels, debates, symposia, workshops, and similar events) differ from traditional research papers in that they “have to clearly position the matter of discussion at the event, highlight the relevance of event and topic and outline the different views on the topic that emanated at the events” (see https://aisel.aisnet.org/cais/panel_reports.pdf). While this definition has persisted for some time and still holds true, it leaves room for interpretation as to what constitutes a contribution and how one knows that a particular paper has made enough of one. In this editorial, we interpret and elaborate on these principles based on our collective experience with such reports

Talking Past Each Other - A Discursive Approach to the Formation of Societal-Level Information Pathologies in the Context of the Electronic Health Card in Germany

An explorative case study is used to investigate the formation of information pathologies on the societal level. The paper conceptualizes these particular information pathologies as ‘interaction-related Information pathologies’ (Picot et al., Information, organization and management. Springer, Berlin, 2008) and proposes that the production of information by multiple stakeholders leads to ‘distortions’ (Cukier et al., Inf Syst J 19(2):175–196, 2009) on the societal level. This broad proposition is then explored by means of a qualitative case study of the media coverage surrounding the implementation of the ‘Electronic Health Card’ in Germany. Based on that study, the initial proposition is further specified by conceptualizing how a process of path constitution ‘distorts’ a debate from being about legitimacy of an ICT innovation to being about illegitimacy of stakeholders

Persistent Paradoxes in Pluralistic Organizations: A Case Study of Continued Use of Shadow-IT in a French Hospital

In times when employees increasingly use private IS in their workplaces, organizations need to bring into balance use of authorized with non-authorized systems. We entered the field with the aim to understand how this is possible but ended up seeing a paradox: Doctors in a French hospital continued to use WhatsApp and other technologies to share sensitive patient data and management let them proceed despite the fact that this practice violated the law and numerous organizational policies. Using grounded theory methodology, we increasingly understood that the underlying problem was one where over-arching institutional logics informed agency of different groups within the organization whose pragmatic decisions to go about their work let the paradox that we saw persist. We thus build theory around why paradoxes persist in organizations and contribute to research on paradoxes and institutional logics, respectively