Digital Desire Paths: Exploring the Role of Computer Workarounds in Emergent Information Systems Design

References

• Aanestad, M. (2012). What if design is something else: The challenges of dealing with interdependencies, Scandinavian Conference on Information Systems, Sigtuna, Sweden. Springer, pp. 95–108.
   Google Scholar
• Adler, P. S., & Borys, B. (1996). Two types of bureaucracy: Enabling and coercive. Administrative Science Quarterly, 41(1), 61–89. https://doi.org/10.2307/2393986
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ågerfalk, P. J. (2019). Stimulating academic discourse: A call for response. European Journal of Information Systems, 28(1), 1–5. https://doi.org/10.1080/0960085X.2019.1557853
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Alter, S. (2014). Theory of workarounds, communications of the Association for Information Systems. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 34, 34; Article 55. https://doi.org/10.17705/1CAIS.03455
   Google Scholar
• Azad, B., & King, N. (2008). Enacting computer workaround practices within a medication dispensing system. European Journal of Information Systems, 17(3), 264–278. https://doi.org/10.1057/ejis.2008.14
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Azad, B., & King, N. (2012). Institutionalized computer workaround practices in a mediterranean country: An examination of two organizations. European Journal of Information Systems, 21(4), 358–372. https://doi.org/10.1057/ejis.2011.48
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bannon, L. J., & Ehn, P. (2012). Design matters in participatory design. In J. Simonsen, & T. Robertson (Eds.), Routledge International Handbook of Participatory Design, (Vol. 711, pp. 37–63). Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Baskerville, R., Pries-Heje, J., & Venable, J. (2009). Soft design science methodology, Proceedings of the 4th international conference on design science research in information systems and technology, Malvern, PA, pp. 1–11.
   Google Scholar
• Beerepoot, I., & van de Weerd, I. (2018). Prevent, redesign, adopt or ignore: Improving healthcare using knowledge of workarounds, European Conference on Information Systems, Portsmouth, UK.
   Google Scholar
• Berente, N., & Yoo, Y. (2012). Institutional contradictions and loose coupling: Postimplementation of nasa’s enterprise information system. Information Systems Research, 23(2), 376–396. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.1110.0373
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beverungen, D. (2014). Exploring the interplay of the design and emergence of business processes as organizational routines. Business & Information Systems Engineering, 6(4), 191–202. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12599-014-0335-3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boudreau, M.-C., & Robey, D. (2005). Enacting integrated information technology: A human agency perspective. Organization Science, 16(1), 3–18. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1040.0103
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cao, L., Mohan, K., Xu, P., & Ramesh, B. (2009). A framework for adapting agile development methodologies. European Journal of Information Systems, 18(4), 332–343. https://doi.org/10.1057/ejis.2009.26
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Choudrie, J., & Zamani, E. D. (2016). Understanding individual user resistance and workarounds of enterprise social networks: The case of service ltd. Journal of Information Technology, 31(2), 130–151. https://doi.org/10.1057/jit.2016.9
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ciborra, C. U. (1997). De Profundis? Deconstructing the concept of strategic alignment. Scandinavian Journal of Information Systems, 9(1), 2.
   Google Scholar
• Coutts, C., Wenger, R., & Duncan, M. (2019). Exploratory analysis of revealed pedestrian paths as cues for designing pedestrian infrastructure. Journal of Urban Planning and Development, 145(4), 05019017. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)UP.1943-5444.0000539
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dahlbom, B., Hanseth, O., & Ljungberg, J. (2000). Conservative success: Organization and infrastructure evolution atskf. In C. Ciborra (Ed.), From control to drift: The dynamics of corporate information infrastructures (pp. 87–104). Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• D’Arcy, J., & Herath, T. (2011). A review and analysis of deterrence theory in the is security literature: Making sense of the disparate findings. European Journal of Information Systems, 20(6), 643–658. https://doi.org/10.1057/ejis.2011.23
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Debono, D. S., Greenfield, D., Travaglia, J. F., Long, J. C., Black, D., Johnson, J., & Braithwaite, J. (2013). Nurses’ workarounds in acute healthcare settings: A coping review. BMC Health Services Research, 13(175), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6963-13-175
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Denis, J.-L., Langley, A., & Rouleau, L. (2007). Strategizing in pluralistic contexts: Rethinking theoretical frames. Human Relations, 60(1), 179–215. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726707075288
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ejnefjäll, T., & Ågerfalk, P. J. (2019). Conceptualizing workarounds: Meanings and manifestations in information systems research. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 45(1), 20. https://doi.org/10.17705/1CAIS.04520
   Google Scholar
• Ferneley, E. H., & Sobreperez, P. (2006). Resist, comply or workaround? An examination of different facets of user engagement with information systems. European Journal of Information Systems, 15(4), 345–356.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fitzgerald, B., Hartnett, G., & Conboy, K. (2006). Customising agile methods to software practices at Intel Shannon. European Journal of Information Systems, 15(2), 200–213. https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.ejis.3000605
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fries, V. C., Wiesche, M., & Krcmar, H. (2016). The dualism of workarounds: Effects of technology and mental workload on improvement and noncompliant behavior within organizations. Thirty Seventh International Conference on Information Systems, Dubling, Ireland.
   Google Scholar
• Gioia, D. A., Corley, K. G., & Hamilton, A. L. (2013). Seeking qualitative rigor in inductive research: Notes on the gioia methodology. Organizational Research Methods, 16(1), 15–31. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428112452151
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Glaser, B. G. (1978). Theoretical sensitivity: Advances in the methodology of grounded theory. Sociology Press.
   Google Scholar
• Helbing, D., Keltsch, J., & Molnár, P. (1997). Modelling the evolution of human trail systems. Nature, 388(6637), 47. https://doi.org/10.1038/40353
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hevner, A., & Chatterjee, S. (Eds.). (2010). Design science research in information systems. In Design research in information systems (pp. 9–22). Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Holeman, I., & Barrett, M. (2017). Insights from an Ict4d initiative in kenya’s immunization program: Designing for the emergence of sociomaterial practices. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 18(12), 2. https://doi.org/10.17705/1jais.00476
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ignatiadis, I., & Nandhakumar, J. (2009). The effect of erp system workarounds on organizational control: An interpretivist case study. Scandinavian Journal of Information Systems, 21(2), 59–90.
   Google Scholar
• Iivari, J. (2003). The is Core-Vii: Towards information systems as a science of meta-artifacts. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 12(1), 37. https://doi.org/10.17705/1CAIS.01237
   Google Scholar
• Iivari, J., Isomäki, H., & Pekkola, S. (2010). The user–the great unknown of systems development: Reasons, forms, challenges, experiences and intellectual contributions of user involvement. Information Systems Journal, 20(2), 109–117. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2575.2009.00336.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kobayashi, M., Fussell, S. R., Xiao, Y., & Seagull, F. J. (2005). Work coordination, workflow, and workarounds in a medical context. CHI’05: CHI 2005 Conference on human factors in computing systems, Portland OR USA (pp. 1561–1564). ACM.
   Google Scholar
• Kohlstedt, K. (2016). Least resistance: How desire paths can lead to better design, 99% invisible. https://99percentinvisible.org/article/least-resistance-desire-paths-can-lead-better-design/
   Google Scholar
• Malaurent, J., & Karanasios, S. (2019). Learning from workaround practices: The challenge of enterprise system implementations in multinational corporations. Information Systems Journal, 30(4), 639–663. https://doi.org/10.1111/isj.12272
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• March, S. T., & Smith, G. F. (1995). Design and natural science research on information technology. Decision Support Systems, 15(4), 251–266. https://doi.org/10.1016/0167-9236(94)00041-2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Markus, M. L., & Keil, M. (1994). If we build it, they will come: Designing information systems that people want to use. Sloan Management Review, 35(4), 11–25.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook. Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Miller, P., & Wedell-Wedellsborg, T. (2013). The case for stealth innovation. Harvard Business Review, 91(3), 90–97.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mullarkey, M. T., Hevner, A. R., & Ågerfalk, P. (2019). An elaborated action design research process model. European Journal of Information Systems, 28(1), 6–20. https://doi.org/10.1080/0960085X.2018.1451811
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nichols, L. (2014). Social desire paths: An applied sociology of interests. Social Currents, 1(2), 166–172. https://doi.org/10.1177/2329496514524926
   Google Scholar
• Orlikowski, W. J. (2004). Managing and designing: Attending to reflexiveness and enactment. In R. J. B. Jr & F. Collopy (Eds.), Managing as designing (pp. 90–95). Stanford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Orlikowski, W. J., & Gash, D. C. (1994). Technological frames: Making sense of information technology in organizations. ACM Transactions on Information Systems, 12(2), 174–207. https://doi.org/10.1145/196734.196745
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Patterson, E. S., Cook, R. I., & Render, M. L. (2002). Improving patient safety by identifying side effects from introducing bar coding in medication administration. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association, 9(5), 540–553. https://doi.org/10.1197/jamia.M1061
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peffers, K., Tuunanen, T., Rothenberger, M. A., & Chatterjee, S. (2007). A design science research methodology for information systems research. Journal of Management Information Systems, 24(3), 45–77. https://doi.org/10.2753/MIS0742-1222240302
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pries-Heje, J., Venable, J., & Baskerville, R. (2014). Soft design science methodology. MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Przybilla, L., Schreieck, M., Klinker, K., Pflügler, C., Wiesche, M., & Krcmar, H. 2018. Combining design thinking and agile development to master highly innovative it projects. In M. Mikusz, A. Volland, M. Engstler, M. Fazal-Baqaie, E. Hanser, & O. Linssen (Eds.), Projektmanagement und Vorgehensmodelle 2018-Der Einfluss der Digitalisierung auf Projektmanagementmethoden und Entwicklungsprozesse, Düsseldorf, Germany (pp. 113–124). Gesellschaft für Informatik E.V. (GI).
   Google Scholar
• Röder, N., Wiesche, M., & Schermann, M. (2014). A situational perspective on workarounds in it-enabled business processes: A multiple case study, In: European Conference on Information Systems, Tel Aviv, IL.
   Google Scholar
• Röder, N., Wiesche, M., Schermann, M., & Krcmar, H. (2014). Why managers tolerate workarounds – the role of information systems, In: Americas Conference on Information Systems Savannah.
   Google Scholar
• Röder, N., Wiesche, M., Schermann, M., & Krcmar, H. (2016). Toward an ontology of workarounds: A literature review on existing concepts, 49th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS) Koloa, HI: IEEE, pp. 5177–5186.
   Google Scholar
• Rogers, S. (2019).Desire paths: When design and the needs of users diverge. Weburbanist, from https://weburbanist.com/2019/03/13/desire-paths-when-design-and-the-needs-of-users-diverge/
   Google Scholar
• Safadi, H., & Faraj, S. (2010). The role of workarounds during an opensource electronic medical record system implementation, Thirty First International Conference on Information Systems, St. Louis, MI, p. 47.
   Google Scholar
• Sein, M. K., Henfridsson, O., Purao, S., Rossi, M., & Lindgren, R. (2011). Action design research. MIS Quarterly, 35(1), 37–56. https://doi.org/10.2307/23043488
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Strong, D. M., & Volkoff, O. (2010). Understanding organization-enterprise system fit: A path to theorizing the information technology artifact. MIS Quarterly, 34(4), 731–756. https://doi.org/10.2307/25750703
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ungvarai, A., & Kisgyoergy, L. (2016). Human pathways analysed with Finite-Element-Method. Procedia Engineering, 161, 1174–1179. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2016.08.534
   Google Scholar
• Venable, J., Pries-Heje, J., & Baskerville, R. (2016). Feds: A framework for evaluation in design science research. European Journal of Information Systems, 25(1), 77–89. https://doi.org/10.1057/ejis.2014.36
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wiedemann, A., Wiesche, M., Gewald, H., & Krcmar, H. (2020). Understanding how devops aligns development and operations: A tripartite model of intra-it alignment. European Journal of Information Systems, 29(5), 458–473. https://doi.org/10.1080/0960085X.2020.1782277
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wiesche, M., Jurisch, M. C., Yetton, P. W., & Krcmar, H. (2017). Grounded theory methodology in information systems research. MIS Quarterly, 41(3), 685–701. https://doi.org/10.25300/MISQ/2017/41.3.02
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yang, Z., Ng, B.-Y., Kankanhalli, A., & Yip, J. W. L. (2012). Workarounds in the use of is in healthcare: A case study of an electronic medication administration system. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 70(1), 43–65. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2011.08.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar