THE ROLE OF TECHNOLOGY IN INSTITUTIONAL TRANSFORMATION: A THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK PROPOSAL BASED ON A CASE STUDY

Yıl 2025, Cilt: 8 Sayı: 1, 19 - 31, 29.01.2025

Mokrane Nait Bahloul , Khouloud Abderrahamene

https://doi.org/10.33416/baybem.1552723

Öz

This paper aims to propose a theoretical framework that highlights the institutional transformative capacities of technology. It seeks to move beyond the traditional dichotomy that confines technology to either a deterministic or a voluntarist perspective. These opposing views fail to grasp the organizational transformations driven by technology. In the era of ICTs, where technology becomes increasingly invisible yet profoundly impactful, adopting a paradigm capable of addressing this organizational complexity is essential. The constructivist paradigm provides a relevant framework for conceptualizing technology as a social construct with a dual dimension—both structured and structuring. The case study, focused on a water management entity, served as the empirical basis for developing this theoretical framework. By leveraging the structured and structuring dimensions of technology, this framework highlights its institutional transformative capacities while clarifying the origins of institutional arrangements. The findings contribute to a deeper understanding of technology as a driver of institutional transformation within organizations, emphasizing its dual role as both a product and a catalyst of institutional dynamics.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Organizational transformationn Technology, Constructivism, Structuration Theory, Institutionalization, Water Sector

Proje Numarası

Number 1

KURUMSAL DÖNÜŞÜMDE TEKNOLOJİNİN ROLÜ: BİR VAKA ÇALIŞMASINA DAYALI TEORİK BİR ÇERÇEVE ÖNERİSİ

Öz

Bu makale, teknolojinin kurumsal dönüştürücü kapasitelerini vurgulayan bir teorik çerçeve önermeyi amaçlamaktadır. Teknolojiyi deterministik veya voluntarist bir bakış açısıyla sınırlayan geleneksel ikiliğin ötesine geçmeyi amaçlamaktadır. Bu karşıt görüşler, teknoloji tarafından yönlendirilen kurumsal dönüşümleri kavramakta başarısız olmaktadır. Teknolojinin giderek daha görünmez hale geldiği ancak derin bir şekilde etkili olduğu BİT çağında, bu kurumsal karmaşıklığı ele alabilecek bir paradigmayı benimsemek esastır. Yapılandırmacı paradigma, teknolojiyi hem yapılandırılmış hem de yapılandıran ikili bir boyuta sahip sosyal bir yapı olarak kavramsallaştırmak için ilgili bir çerçeve sağlar. Bir su yönetimi kuruluşuna odaklanan vaka çalışması, bu teorik çerçeveyi geliştirmek için ampirik bir temel görevi görmüştür. Teknolojinin yapılandırılmış ve yapılandıran boyutlarından yararlanarak, bu çerçeve kurumsal düzenlemelerin kökenlerini açıklığa kavuştururken kurumsal dönüştürücü kapasitelerini vurgulamaktadır. Bulgular, teknolojiyi hem bir ürün hem de kurumsal dinamiklerin bir katalizörü olarak ikili rolünü vurgulayarak, kuruluşlar içinde kurumsal dönüşümün bir itici gücü olarak daha derin bir anlayışa katkıda bulunmaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Organizational transformationn Technology, Constructivism, Structuration Theory, nstitutionalization, Water Sector

Etik Beyan

Ethical rules and scientific citation principles were followed in all preparation processes of this study. The author declares that it was. This study is not included in the study group that requires ethics committee permission.

Destekleyen Kurum

Not concerned

Proje Numarası

Number 1

Teşekkür

Not concerned

Kaynakça

• Autissier, D., & Le Goff, J. (2000). Dualité du structurel et dynamique sectorielle : Application à la distribution des composants électroniques. In Structuration et Management des Organisations (pp. 181-204). L’Harmattan.
• Barley, S. R. (1986). Technology as an Occasion for Structuring: Evidence from Observations of CT Scanners and the Social Order of Radiology Departments. Administrative Science Quarterly, 31(1), 78-108. https://doi.org/10.2307/2392767
• Barley, S. R. (1990). The Alignment of Technology and Structure through Roles and Networks. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35(1), 61-103. https://doi.org/10.2307/2393551
• Baujard, C. (2009). Technologies organisationnelles : quels changements pédagogiques ?. 18e conférence internationale de management stratégique. Grenoble, du 02 au 05 Juin 2009. Lien : https://www.strategie-aims.com/conferences/3-xviiieme-conference-de-l-aims/communications/260-technologies-organisationnelles-quels-changements-pedagogiques/download
• Berger, P. L., & Luckmann, T. (1966). The Social Construction of Reality: A Treatise in the Sociology of Knowledge. Anchor Books.
• Berry, M. (1983). Une technologie invisible ? L’impact des instruments de gestion sur l’évolution des systèmes humains. Document du Centre de recherche en gestion, École polytechnique, Paris.
• Bijker, W. E. (1987). The social construction of Bakelite: Toward a theory of invention. In Bijker, W. E., Hughes, T. P., & Pinch, T. (Eds.), The Social Construction of Technological Systems (pp. 159-187). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
• Bijker, W. E., Hughes, T. P., & Pinch, T. (Eds.). (1987). The Social Construction of Technological Systems. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
• Bouchikhi, A. (1990). Structuration des organisations : Concepts constructivistes et étude de cas. Éditions Economica.
• Bourdieu, P. (1991). Langage et pouvoir symbolique. Fayard.
• Brennen, S., & Kreiss, D. (2016). Digitalization. In The International Encyclopedia of Communication Theory and Philosophy. Wiley-Blackwell. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118766804.wbiect111
• Castells, M. (1996). The Rise of the Network Society. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.
• Crozier, M., & Friedberg, E. (1977). L’acteur et le système. Éditions du Seuil.
• De Fornel, M., Lemieux, C., & Ogien, A. (2008). Naturalisme versus constructivisme. Éditions de l'EHESS.
• DeSanctis, G., & Poole, M. S. (1994). Capturing the complexity in advanced technology use: Adaptive structuration theory. Organization Science, 5(2), 121–147. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.5.2.121
• DiMaggio, P., & Powell, W. (1983). The Iron-Cage Revisited: Institutional Isomorphism and Collective Rationality in Organizational Fields. American Sociological Review, 48(2), 147-160. https://doi.org/10.2307/2095101
• Durkheim, E. (1967). Les règles de la méthode sociologique (16e éd.). Presses Universitaires de France.
• Ellul, J. (1964). The Technological Society. New York: Vintage Books.
• Giddens, A. (1976). New Rules of Sociological Method: A Positive Critique of Interpretative Sociologies. Basic Books.
• Giddens, A. (1994). The Constitution of Society: Outline of the Theory of Structuration. University of California Press.
• Goffman, E. (1973). La mise en scène de la vie quotidienne. Les Éditions de Minuit.
• Heidegger, M. (1977). The Question Concerning Technology and Other Essays. New York: Harper & Row.
• Laudon, K. C., & Laudon, J. P. (2018). Management Information Systems: Managing the Digital Firm (15th ed.). Pearson.
• Meyer, J. W. & Rowan, B. (1977). Institutionalized Organizations: Formal Structure as Myth and Ceremony. American Journal of Sociology, 83(2), 340-363. https://www.jstor.org/stable/2778293
• Midler, C. (1986). La logique de la mode managériale. Gérer et Comprendre. Annales des Mines. https://shs.hal.science/hal-00278147/
• Mintzberg, H. (1978). The Structuring of Organizations: A Synthesis of the Research. Prentice-Hall.
• Mintzberg, H. (1990). Mintzberg on Management: Inside Our Strange World of Organizations. Free Press.
• Mohrman, A. M., & Lawler, E. E. III. (1984). A review of theory and research. In F. W. McFarlan (Ed.), The Information Systems Research Challenge (pp. 135-164). Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
• Nait Bahloul, M. (2017). Impact des Tic sur l’organisation, tentative d’explication par un cadre constructiviste. Revue Algérienne d’Economie de gestion, 11(1).
• Nait Bahloul, M., & Kansab, E. M. (2024). The paradox of the liberated company: A successful but unattractive model! Economics and Finance, 12(2), 4-15. https://doi.org/10.51586/2754-6209.2024.12.2.4.15.
• Orlikowski, W. J. (1992). The duality of technology: Rethinking the concept of technology in organizations. Organization Science, 3(3), 398-427. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.3.3.398
• Orlikowski, W. J. (2000). Using technology and constituting structures: A practice lens for studying technology in organizations. Organization Science, 11(4), 404-428. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.11.4.404.14600
• Perrow, C. (1967). A framework for comparative analysis of organizations. American Sociological Review, 32(2), 194-208. https://doi.org/10.2307/2091811
• Perrow, C. (1983). The Organizational Context of Human Factors Engineering. Administrative Science Quarterly, 28(4), 521-541. https://doi.org/10.2307/2393003
• Piaget, J. (1970). The principles of genetic epistemology (W. Mays, Trans.). Routledge & Kegan Paul. (Original work published 1968).
• Pinch, T. J., & Bijker, W. E. (1987). The social construction of facts and artifacts. In W. E. Bijker, T. P. Hughes, & T. Pinch (Eds.), The social construction of technological systems (pp. 17–50). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
• Reynaud, J.-D. (1988). La régulation dans les organisations : régulation de contrôle et régulation autonome. Revue française de sociologie, 29(1), 5-18. https://doi.org/10.2307/3321884
• Reynaud, J.-D. (1997). Les règles du jeu, l’action collective et la régulation sociale. Armand Colin.
• Searle, J. (1997). The Construction of Social Reality. Free Press.
• Star, S. L., & Ruhleder, K. (1996). Steps toward an ecology of infrastructure: Design and access for large information spaces. Information Systems Research, 7(1), 111-134. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.7.1.111
• Tolbert, P. S., & Zucker, L. G. (1996). The institutionalization of institutional theory. In Clegg, S. R., Hardy, C., & Nord, W. R. (Eds.), Handbook of Organization Studies (pp. 175-190). London: Sage.
• Trist, E. L., Higgin, G. W., Murray, H., & Pollock, A. B. (1963). Organizational Choice. London, UK: Tavistock.
• Wacheux, F. (1998). Les situations de gestion stratégique et contexte organisationnel de l’action. Revue de gestion des ressources humaines, 26/27, 36-50.
• Weber, M. (1968). Economy and Society: An Outline of Interpretative Sociology (Vol. 1). New York: Bedminster Press.
• Weick, K. E. (1967). The social psychology of organizing. Addison-Wesley.
• Weick, K. E. (1995). Sensemaking in Organizations. Sage.
• Westerman, G., Bonnet, D., & McAfee, A. (2014). Leading Digital: Turning Technology into Business Transformation. Harvard Business Review Press.
• Woodward, J. (1965). Industrial Organization: Theory and Practice. Oxford University Press.
• Zuboff, S. (1988). In the Age of the Smart Machine. New York: Basic Books.