Enterprise 2.0 in organization design: a case study of IT-enabled organization disruption model.

AuthorYang, Zhenyu

    In organization design research, an understanding of information/knowledge user's interpretations of a technology is critical to further explain their interaction with it (Orlikowski and D. Gash 1994).Nevertheless, such social cognitive approach only justifies one aspect of organization design with the interaction of technology while lost the analytical argument of organizational innovation theory. In order to provide a well-rounded analysis, I intend to present a model lies on the organizational design perspective that complements the traditional human cognitive analysis in designing and implementing technology into organization practice.


    What is the Enterprise 2.0 enabled organizational disruption? Traditionally, disruptive technologies have been identified in Christensen's disruptive innovation theory as "technologies ... which disrupt an established trajectory of performance improvement, or redefines what performances mean, are called disruptive technologies" (Christensen and Bower 1996), in contract to "sustaining technological changes that appealed to established market for mainstream customer, disruptive technologies rarely be employed in established markets. They tended instead to be valued in emerging markets." (Christensen and Bower 1996) The wide varieties of Enterprise 2.0 functions collectively improve collaboration and communication within organizations and across multiple vertical industries (Andriole 2010); it offers a new performance matrix than traditional trajectory of organization performance evaluation. Such observation of organizational change reflects similar value proposition mechanism in the context of organization design.

    I am leveraging the case study insights from global consulting house---Accenture, coupled with theoretical argument grounded in disruptive innovation theory and IT organization design research. The Enterprise

    2.0 enabled organizational disruption model seeks to provide a coherent roadmap that integrates both ongoing industrial trends with existing conceptual knowledge.

    2.1 Theoretical foundation

    Both the disruptive innovation theory and IT organization design research are accompanied with the developing of industrial evolution, by reviewing the theories with respective underpinning logic; it helps to justify the value proposition in developing the new model.

    2.2 Disruptive innovation

    Based on the analysis of industrial data from disk drive industry between 1975-1990s (Bower and Christensen 1995), Harvard Business School Professor Clay Christensen coined the term of "disruptive innovation" to explain the dilemma that market incumbent faced in deal with competition from new entrant. In contrast to most explanations that incumbent has either no resource or interest for such low-end or new-market competition; Christensen's argument indicates that incumbent's organizational resource allocation process is doomed to fail even by doing everything right--asymmetric motivation (Bower and Christensen 1995). He further extends such interpretation to different industries innovation (Christensen 1997). Based on that, RPV theory: "Resources, Processes and Values collectively define an organization's strength as well as weakness." (Christensen, Anthony et al. 2004) and value chain evolution VCE theory: "companies ought to integrate what is not good enough but critical for future competition and outsource what is more than good enough commoditized by industrial specialists". (Christensen, Anthony et al. 2004) have been introduced to tackle the innovation process.

    More specifically, as the theory indicates the "new-market disruptive innovation" will occur when...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT