In this article the authors use G. Morgan's (1986, 1997) metaphors to look at the changes to stakeholder attitudes and behavior during an information systems—led organizational change. They discuss the introduction of an organization-wide intranet system in a U.K. National Health Service organization and elicit metaphorical attitudes and infer behavior by using multiple research methods within a longitudinal case study. The findings show that various contextual factors shift the organization's overall stance from psychic prison (repression) to organism (flexible) metaphor. Furthermore, many stakeholders aspire to more than one metaphor at a given time, although a predominant metaphor can still be identified for most stakeholders. The authors present the metaphorical journey map as a tool for capturing attitude and behavioral changes of individuals during the change period. The authors advocate that use of metaphors in such a way can help management better understand the overall social orientation of their organizations and devise appropriate interventions to expedite the change process and increase its legitimacy.
Barrett, F.J., & Cooperrider, D.L. (1990). Generative metaphor intervention: A new approach for working with systems divided by conflict and caught in defensive perception. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science , 26(2), 219-239.
2.
Barrett, F.J., Thomas, G.F., & Hocevar, S.P. (1995). The central role of discourse in large-scale change: A social construction perspective. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 31(3), 352-372.
3.
Bartunek, J.M. (1984). Changing interpretive schemes and organizational restructuring: The example of a religious order. Administrative Science Quarterly, 29, 355-372.
4.
Bhattacherjee, A., & Hikmet, N. (2007). Physicians' resistance toward healthcare information technology: A theoretical model and empirical test. European Journal of Information Systems, 16, 725-737.
5.
Boland, R.J., & Greenberg, R.H. (1992). Method and metaphor in organizational analysis. Accounting, Management and Information Technology, 2(2), 117-141.
6.
Bryman, A. (2001). Social research methods. Oxford : Oxford University Press.
7.
Burrell, G., & Morgan, G. (1979). Sociological paradigms and organizational analysis . London: Heinemann.
8.
Callahan, J.L. (2004). Reversing a conspicuous absence: Mindful inclusion in structuration theory. Human Relations, 57(11), 1427-1448.
9.
Constantinides, P., & Barrett, M. (2006). Large-scale ICT innovation, power, and organizational change: The case of a regional health information network. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 42(1), 76-90.
10.
Couger, J.D., Higgins, L.F., & McIntyre, S.C. (1993). (Un)Structured creativity in information systems organizations. Management Information Systems Quarterly, 17(4), 375-397.
11.
Cox, J.W., & Minahan, S. (2006). Organizational decoration: A new metaphor for organization development. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 42(2), 227-243.
12.
Davidson, E. (2006). A technological frames perspective on information technology and organizational change. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 42(1), 23-39.
13.
Dent, E.B., & Goldberg, S.G. (1999). Challenging "resistance to change." The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 35(1), 25-41.
14.
Eilam, G., & Shamir, B. (2005). Organizational change and self-concept threats: A theoretical perspective and a case study. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 41(4), 399-421.
15.
Eisenhardt, K.M. (1989). Building theories from case study research. Academy of Management Review, 14(4), 532-550.
16.
Fuller, L.L. (1978). The forms and limits of adjudication. Harvard Law Review, 92, 394-404.
17.
Giddens, A. (1984). The constitution of society: Outline of the theory of structuration. Cambridge, UK: Polity.
18.
Golden-Biddle, K., & Locke, K. (1993). Appealing work: An investigation of how ethnographic texts convince. Organization Science, 4, 595-616.
19.
Grant, D., & Oswick, C. (Eds.). (1996). Organization and metaphor . London: Sage.
20.
Hammersley, M. (1990). Reading ethnographic research. New York: Longman.
21.
Harley, B., Wright, C., Hall, R., & Dery, K. (2006). Management reactions to technological change: The example of enterprise resource planning. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 42(1), 58-75.
22.
Heiskanen, A. (1993). Organizational metaphors and information systems practice: A case example of implementation strategy formulation. In D. Avison, J. E. Kendall , & J. I. DeGross (Eds.), Human, organizational, and social dimensions of information systems development (pp. 399-417). Amsterdam: North-Holland.
23.
Heracleous, L. (2001). An ethnographic study of culture in the context of organizational change. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 37(4), 426-446.
24.
Hirschheim, R., Klein, H.K., & Lyytinen, K. (1995). Information systems development and data modeling: Conceptual and philosophical foundations. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
25.
Hussain, Z., Taylor, A., & Flynn, D. (2004). A case study of the process of achieving legitimation in Information Systems development. Journal of Information Science, 30(5), 408-417.
26.
Jacobs, C.D., & Heracleous, L.T. (2006). Constructing shared understanding: The role of embodied metaphors in organization development. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 42(2), 207-226.
27.
Jensen, T.B., & Aanestad, M. (2007). Hospitality and hostility in hospitals: A case study of an EPR adoption. European Journal of Information Systems, 16, 672-680.
28.
Klein, H.K., & Myers, M.D. (1999). A set of principles for conducting and evaluating interpretive field studies in information systems. Management Information Systems Quarterly, 23(1), 67-93.
29.
Kling, R., & Iacono, S. (1984). The control of information systems after implementation . Communication of ACM, 27(12), 1218-1226.
30.
Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by. Chicago : University of Chicago Press.
31.
Ledington, J., & Ledington, P.W.J. (1999). Decision-variable partitioning: An alternative modelling approach in soft systems methodology. European Journal of Information Systems, 8, 55-64.
32.
LeRouge, C., Mantzana, V., & Wilson, E.V. (2007). Healthcare information systems research, revelations and visions. European Journal of Information Systems, 16, 669-671.
33.
Marshak, R.J., Keenoy, T., Oswick, C., & Grant, D. (2000). From outer words to inner worlds. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 36(2), 245-258.
34.
McCourt, W. (1997). Discussion note: Using metaphors to understand and to change organizations: A critique of Gareth Morgan's approach. Organization Studies, 18(3), 511-522.
35.
Merali, Y. (2002). The role of boundaries in knowledge processes . European Journal of Information Systems, 11, 47-60.
36.
Morgan, G. (1980). Paradigms, metaphors and puzzle solving in organization theory. Administrative Science Quarterly, 25(4), 605-622.
37.
Morgan, G. (1986). Images of organization. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
38.
Morgan, G. (1997). Images of organization (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage .
39.
Mumford, E., & Weir, M. (1979). Computer systems in work design: The ETHICS method . New York: Wiley.
40.
Orlikowski, W.J., & Baroudi, J.J. (1991). Studying Information Technology in Organizations: Research Approaches and Assumptions. Information Systems Research , 2, 1-28.
41.
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.
42.
Ortony, A. (1975). Why metaphors are necessary and not just nice . Educational Theory, 25, 45-53.
43.
Pepper, S. (1942). World hypotheses: A study in evidence. Berkeley, California: University of California Press .
44.
Poole, P.P., Gioia, D.A., & Gray, B. (1989). Influence modes, schema change, and organizational transformation. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science , 25(3), 271-289.
45.
Schultze, U. & Orlikowski, W.J. (2001). Metaphors of virtuality: shaping an emergent reality. Information and Organization , 11, 45-77.
46.
Scroggins, W.A. (2006). Managing meaning for strategic change: The role of perception and meaning congruence. Journal of Health and Human Services Administration, 29(1), 83-103.
47.
Smith, K.K., & Simmons, V.M. (1983). A Rumpelstiltskin organization: Metaphors or metaphors in field research. Administrative Science Quarterly, 28(3), 377-392.
48.
Wagner, E.L., & Newell, S. (2006). Repairing ERP: Producing social order to create a working information system. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 42(1), 40-57.
49.
Walsham, G. (1991). Organizational metaphors and information systems research. European Journal of Information Systems, 1(2), 83-94.
50.
Walsham, G. (1993). Interpreting information systems in organizations . Chichester, UK: Wiley.
51.
Walsham, G. (1995). Interpretive case studies in IS research: nature and method. European Journal of Information Systems, 4, 74-81.
52.
Wilson, F.A. (1994). Computer-based systems and organizational structures: Designing the ghost in the machine. In R. Baskerville, O. Ngwenyama, S. Smithson, & J. I. DeGross (Eds.), Transforming organizations with information technology (pp. 343-355). Amsterdam: NorthHolland .
