An Investigation into the adoption and implementation of computer aided production management systems:using the Rogers model of adoption and implementation and a social constuctionist account of technology

The research investigates the processes of adoption and implementation, by organisations, of computer aided production management systems (CAPM). It is organised around two different theoretical perspectives. The first part is informed by the Rogers model of the diffusion, adoption and implementation of innovations, and the second part by a social constructionist approach to technology. Rogers' work is critically evaluated and a model of adoption and implementation is distilled from it and applied to a set of empirical case studies. In the light of the case study data, strengths and weaknesses of the model are identified. It is argued that the model is too rational and linear to provide an adequate explanation of adoption processes. It is useful for understanding processes of implementation but requires further development. The model is not able to adequately encompass complex computer based technologies. However, the idea of 'reinvention' is identified as Roger's key concept but it needs to be conceptually extended. Both Roger's model and definition of CAPM found in the literature from production engineering tend to treat CAPM in objectivist terms. The problems with this view are addressed through a review of the literature on the sociology of technology, and it is argued that a social constructionist approach offers a more useful framework for understanding CAPM, its nature, adoption, implementation, and use. CAPM it is argued, must be understood on terms of the ways in which it is constituted in discourse, as part of a 'struggle for meaning' on the part of academics, professional engineers, suppliers, and users.

Research strategies for organizational history:a dialogue between historical theory and organization theory

If history matters for organization theory, then we need greater reflexivity regarding the epistemological problem of representing the past; otherwise, history might be seen as merely a repository of ready-made data. To facilitate this reflexivity, we set out three epistemological dualisms derived from historical theory to explain the relationship between history and organization theory: (1) in the dualism of explanation, historians are preoccupied with narrative construction, whereas organization theorists subordinate narrative to analysis; (2) in the dualism of evidence, historians use verifiable documentary sources, whereas organization theorists prefer constructed data; and (3) in the dualism of temporality, historians construct their own periodization, whereas organization theorists treat time as constant for chronology. These three dualisms underpin our explication of four alternative research strategies for organizational history: corporate history, consisting of a holistic, objectivist narrative of a corporate entity; analytically structured history, narrating theoretically conceptualized structures and events; serial history, using replicable techniques to analyze repeatable facts; and ethnographic history, reading documentary sources "against the grain." Ultimately, we argue that our epistemological dualisms will enable organization theorists to justify their theoretical stance in relation to a range of strategies in organizational history, including narratives constructed from documentary sources found in organizational archives. Copyright of the Academy of Management, all rights reserved.