Organizational affordances: A structuration theory approach to affordances

Affordance is an important concept in the field of human–computer interaction. There are various interpretations of affordances, often extending the original notion of James J. Gibson. Often the treatment of affordances in the current human–computer interaction literature has been a one-to-one relationship between a user and an artefact. We believe that the social and cultural contexts within which an artefact is situated affect the way in which the artefact is used and the notion of affordance needs to be seen as a dynamic, always emerging relationship between people and their environment. Using a Structuration Theory approach, we conceptualize the notion of affordance at a much broader level, encompassing social and cultural aspects. We suggest that affordances should be seen at three levels: single user, organizational (or work group) and societal. Focusing on the organizational level affordances, we provide details of several important factors that affect the emergence of affordances. - This article provides a new perspective on the discourse of affordance with the use of Structuration Theory. - It shows how affordance can be understood as ‘use’ in situated practices (i.e. ‘technology-in-practice’) - The Structuration Theory approach to affordances is showcased using two case studies.

A structuration theory perspective on the institutional change in Higher Education sector

Budgeting system has been traditionally viewed as a control mechanism rather than a communication tool to facilitate the institutionalisation of organisational change. A good budgeting system not only reflects the organisational reality but also socially constructs the reality. This paper uses the structuration perspective to understand budget-related behaviour in a UK research-intensive university and especially, study the role of budgeting system in achieving organisational sustainability. Giddens’ structuration theory offers a valuable framework for the study of the duality of structure and emphasises on the structural properties of social systems. Based on the semi-structured interviews with top management and budget holders, it is concluded that in this specific context, budgeting system may place a significant role in establishing and legitimising institutional change.

La transition postcommuniste en Roumanie (entre 1989 et 2004) : une étude à partir de la structuration de la famille

Cette thèse propose une analyse des transformations postcommunistes en Roumanie à partir d’une étude de la structuration de trajectoires familiales. La réflexion sur les itinéraires très variés de ces trajectoires familiales met en valeur les pratiques développées par les familles dans la construction de leur mode de vie quotidienne après la chute du communisme. L’approche utilisée privilégie deux axes d’analyse. Le premier vise les aspects socio-structurels concernant les cadres de la vie incluant les aspects matériels, alors que le deuxième, l’axe socio-symbolique, concerne les aspects subjectifs liés au vécu des acteurs en corrélation avec le contexte social en mutation. L’analyse est fondée sur des éléments issus de la théorie de la structuration qui ont contribué à la construction du cadre conceptuel. Elle s’appuie aussi sur la méthodologie qualitative qui comprend des récits de vie obtenus à partir des entretiens semi-dirigés réalisés avec les membres de 11 familles. Les thématiques retenues après l’analyse du corpus de données nous ont permis d’identifier des stratégies que les familles ont mises en place et les projets familiaux qui ont orienté leur parcours de vie durant la période de transition postcommuniste. Ces deux concepts révèlent des éléments liés à l’ordre général permettant ainsi la mise en évidence des tendances structurelles de la société postcommuniste.

Shaping strategy as a structuration process

Research on top managers’ strategizing behavior has addressed how they shape either the structural context or the interpretations of organization members. I offer a structuration theory framework integrating these two partial explanations and treating strategy shaping as socially dynamic. A qualitative seven-year analysis of top managers in three universities shows a sequential pattern of shaping strategy first in the action and then in the institutional realm, and also a simultaneous pattern of shaping strategy in both realms at once. Both patterns are successful in weakly institutionalized strategy contexts, whereas the simultaneous pattern is more successful in strongly institutionalized strategy contexts.

Identifying the knowledge management structures in enterprise systems projects

Enterprise System (ES) implementation and management are knowledge intensive tasks that inevitably draw upon the experience of a wide range of people with diverse knowledge capabilities. Knowledge Management (KM) has been identified as a critical success factor in ES projects. Despite the recognized importance of managing knowledge for ES benefits realization, systematic attempts to conceptualize KM-structures have been few. Where the adequacy of KM-structures is assessed, the process and measures are typically idiosyncratic and lack credibility. Using the ‘KM-process’, itself based in sociology of knowledge, this paper conceptualizes four main constructs to measure the adequacy of KM-structures. The SEM model is tested using 310 responses gathered from 27 ES installations that had implemented SAP R/3. The findings reveal six constructs for KM-structure. Furthermore, the paper demonstrates the application of KM-structures in the context of ES using the Adaptive Structuration Theory. The results demonstrate that having adequate KM-structures in place, while necessary, is not sufficient. These rules and resources must be appropriated to have greater positive influence on the Enterprise System. Furthermore, the study provides empirical support for knowledge-based theory by illustrating the importance of knowledge use/re-use (vs. knowledge creation) as the most important driver in the process of KM.

Entrepreneurship and family firms : growth and survival

Family businesses dominate in a majority of economies (Astrachan and Shanker, 2003; Chrisman, Chua, and Sharma, 2005; Morck and Yeung, 2004). As entrepreneurial activities have been shown to be central to economic growth it is essential that family businesses, irrespective of ownership patterns, not only survive but also grow thus growing the economy overall. While a great deal is known about entrepreneurial activities and a body of knowledge is being developed in relation to entrepreneurial processes in family firms, more needs to be understood in relation to the dynamics of entrepreneurial activities at the individual family firm level. One area of particular interest is the dynamics within the business and the family and how these dynamics impact upon entrepreneurial activities. Specifically how relationships between and among family members engaged in the business can interact with professional non-family member senior executives. The senior executives can actively use their positions in such ways that initiatives suggested by family members are less successful than they might be. This paper addresses how ‘family’ aspects of a business can assist or impede the entrepreneurial activities of individuals. It takes into account some of the unique features of family businesses – such as the importance of ‘familiness’ as a competitive advantage; the direct links between ownership and control of a business and the recognition (often implicit) that individuals in families do make a difference to how the business functions (Habbershon and Williams, 1999, Sharma, 2004; and Tokarczyk, Hansen Green, and Down, 2007). This emphasis on individuals in families fits well with the idea of entrepreneur as individual, as expressed by Schumpeter (1934), Baumol et al (2007). The theoretical approach that adopted to explore the dynamics of processes occurring within family firms is structuration theory combined with a theory of embeddeness (Dacin, Ventresca and Beal, 1999; Giddens, 1979, 1984, Jack and Anderson, 2002; and Sarason, Dean and Dillard, 2006).

A Marxian model of technology appropriation

This paper explores the philosophical roots of appropriation within Marx's theories and socio-cultural studies in an attempt to seek common ground among existing theories of technology appropriation in IS research. Drawing on appropriation perspectives from Adaptive Structuration Theory, the Model of Technology Appropriation and the Structurational Model of Technology for comparison, we aim to generate a Marxian model that provides a starting point toward a general causal model of technology appropriation. This paper opens a philosophical discussion on the phenomenon of appropriation in the IS community, directing attention to foundational concepts in the human-technology nexus using ideas conceived by Marx.

Inciting the social imagination to realising the dream : An unfolding story of reform in a low-socioeconomic school

This paper presentation addresses design-based research that became a catalyst for social change among a disadvantaged school community. The aim of the longitudinal research was to protoype an evidence-based model for whole school digital and print literacy pedagogy renewal among students from low socioeconomic, Indigenous, and migrant backgrounds. Applying Anthony Gidden’s principle of the “duality of structure”, the paper presentation interprets how the collective agency of researchers and the school community began to transform the structural properties of the institution in a two-way dynamism, so that the structural properties of the school were not outside of individual action, but were implicated in its reproduction and transformation.