INFORMATION SYSTEMS

Information Systems

Information Systems

Introduction

The organisation of work is in the midst of transformation. In many industries, mass production by large, vertically-integrated, hierarchically-organized firms is giving way to more flexible forms of both internal organisation and industrial structure. Work is increasingly accomplished through networks of smaller, more focused enterprises. The resulting structure of loosely coupled sub-organisations blurs the boundaries of both firms and industries.

A canonical case in point is the computer industry. In the past, the industry was dominated by large, vertically-integrated firms such as IBM and Digital Equipment which created products and services throughout the value chain -- from the microprocessor level all the way up to the provision of solutions. The vertical structure is now being replaced by a series of layers, each of which is, in effect, a separate industry. Value is generated by ever-changing coalitions, where each member of a coalition specializes in its area of core competence and leverages it through the use of tactical or strategic partnerships. Internally, team structures are replacing the traditional hierarchical form, and the Silicon Valley model of internal organisation is emerging as a clear winner.3 Internal incentives are increasingly based on performance, and this further blurs the differences between inter- and intra-firm contracts. In sum, modern enterprise is undergoing major restructuring.

In this short paper we briefly discuss the newly emerging organisational paradigms and their relationship to the prevailing trends in information technology (IT). We argue that IT is an important driver of this transformation. Finally, we place the studies selected for this special issue of the Journal of Organisational Computing within this context.

Emerging Organisational Paradigms: Symptoms and Causes

At the turn of the century, Frederick Taylor sought to put the nascent wisdom for successful business organisation on a scientific basis. His work guided a generation of managers towards success in meshing their organisations with the technologies, markets, labor and general environment of the era. By the 1920s, Henry Ford had applied the Taylorist approach with a vengeance and soon dominated the automobile market, driving dozens of competitors under. Ironically, these same principles are almost diametrically opposed to the prevailing wisdom of the 1990s. For example, consider the following guideline from The Science of Management (Kanter, 2004: 85).

It is necessary in any activity to have a complete knowledge of what is to be done and to prepare instructions... the laborer has only to follow instructions. He need not stop to think.

The current emphasis on "empowerment", "learning organisations", and even "thriving on chaos" stands in sharp contrast to Meyers' advice (Meyers, 2005). Similar contrast can be found with many, if not most, of the other principles that lead to success even as late as the 1960s. Consider, for example, the growing calls for downsizing (vs. economies of scale), focus (vs. conglomerates), total quality (vs. cost leadership), project teams (vs. functional departments), supplier partnerships (vs. maximizing bargaining power), networked organisation (vs. clear firm boundaries); performance-based pay (vs. fixed pay), and local autonomy (vs. rigid hierarchy).

Milgrom and Roberts make the point that the different characteristics ...