Despite the considerable attention which the growth of information systems technology in
government has received over the past two decades, research focusing on the development,
confirmation, or extension of theories which explain the use of a wide range of technological
innovations has had a mixed record of success. In particular, two issues stand out. Divergent
and frequently ambiguous definitions of utilization have led to relatively little replication of
findings in various public settings. Second, relatively little empirical research has been under taken which explicitly incorporated and tested multiple alternative explanations of potential
determinants of utilization, leading to continued fragmentation in the research literature. This
analysis, using a national sample of state budgeting offices, draws on theoretical propositions
offered over the past decade and more to operationalize utilization as the impact of technology
on key organizational deciston-making processes and assess the relative explanatory power
offered by three alternative explanations for the successful use of information systems technology. The findings suggest that unique combinations of three types of factors—environmental,
managerial-organizational, and technological—will explain and account for the successful
uutilization of technology in various settings.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Alexander, J. W., & Randolph, W. A. (1985). The fit between technology and structure as a predictor of performance in nursing subunits. Academy of Management Journal, 28, 844-859.
2.
Bergin, T. (1987). Curriculum considerations for information systems programs in the social sciences. Social Science Microcomputer Review, 5, 39-51.
3.
Bingham, R. D., Freeman, P. K., & Felbinger, C. L. (1984). Innovation adoption in an urban setting: An application of Down's and Mohr's methodological prescriptions. Knowledge , 5, 309-338.
4.
Carter, N. (1984). Computerization as a predominate technology: Its influence on the structure of newspaper organizations. Academy of Management Journal, 27, 247-270.
5.
Cohen, J., & Cohen, P. (1975). Applied multiple regression/correlational analysis for behavioral sciences. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
6.
Comfort, L., & Cahill, A. G. (1985). Increasing problem-solving capacity between organizations: The role of information in managing the May 31,1985 tornado disaster in western Pennsylvania. In L. Comfort (Ed.), Managing disaster: Strategies and policy perspectives (pp. 180-198). Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
7.
Daft, R. (1982). Bureaucratic versus non-bureaucratic structure and the process of innovation and change . Research in the Sociology of Organizations, 1, 129-166.
8.
Daft, R. L., & Lengel. (1986). Organization information requirements, media richness and structure design . Management Science, 32, 156-172.
9.
Daft, R. L., & Macintosh. (1981). A tentative exploration in the amount and equivocality of information processing in organizational work units. Administrative Science Quarterly , 26, 276-286.
10.
Danziger, J. H., & Dutton, W. H. (1977). Technological innovation in local government: The case of computing. Policy and Politics, 6, 127-149.
11.
Danziger, J. H., Dutton, W. H., Kling, R., & Kraemer, K. L. (1982). Computers and politics. New York: Columbia University Press.
12.
Downs, G. W., & Mohr, L. B. (1976). Conceptual issues in the study of innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 21, 700-714.
13.
Englander, V., & Englander, F. (1985). Communication networks: Towards a new paradigm for research (2nd ed.) New York: Free Press.
14.
Feller, I. (1979). Three coigns on diffusion research. Knowledge, 1, 293-313.
15.
Feller, I., & Menzel, D. (1978). Diffusion milieus as a focus of research on innovations in the public sector. Policy Sciences , 8, 49-68.
16.
Galbraith, J. R. (1977). Organizational design. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley .
17.
General Accounting Office. (1979). Federal productivity suffers because word processing is not well managed (Report No. FGMSD-79-1. Washington, DC: Author.
18.
General Accounting Office. (1981). Office automation in the federal government: A special report. Washington, DC: National Archives and Record Service .
19.
General Accounting Office. (1982). Strong central management of office automation will boost productivity (Report No. AFMO-82-54. Washington, DC: Author.
20.
General Accounting Office. (1983). Small computers in the federal government: Management is needed to realize potential and prevent problems (Report No. AFMD-83-36. Washington DC: Author.
21.
Gibson, C. F., & Nolan, R. L. (1974). Managing the four stages of EDP growth. Harvard Business Review, 52, 76-88.
22.
Glaser, G., Torrance, A. L., & Schwartz, M. H. ( 1983). Administrative applications. In A. Ralston & E. D. Reilly (Eds.), The encyclopedia of computer science and engineering (pp. 23-40). New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold.
23.
Huber, G. (1990). A theory of the effects of advanced information technology on organizational design, intelligence and decisionmaking. Academy of Management Review , 15, 47-71.
24.
Huber, G. P., & McDaniel, R. R. (1986). The decision-making paradigm of organizational design. Management Science, 32, 572-589.
25.
Ito, J. K., & Peterson, R. B. (1986). Effects of task difficulty and interunit interdependence on information processing systems. Academy of Management Journal, 29, 139-148.
26.
Johnson, B. M., & Rice, R. E. (1987). Managing organizational innovation: The evolution from word processing to office information systems. New York: Columbia University Press.
27.
Kearns, K. P. (1985). Sociocognitive networks and local government innovation. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Graduate School of Public and International Affairs, University of Pittsburgh .
28.
Kearns, K. P. (1989). Communication networks among municipal administrators. Knowledge, 14, 260-279.
29.
Kelly, P., & Kranzberg, M. (Eds.). (1978). Technological innovation: A critical review ofcurrent knowledge. San Francisco: San Francisco Press.
30.
Kiel, L. D. (1986). Information systems education in masters programs in public affairs and administration . Public Administration Review, 46, 590-594.
31.
King, J. L., & Kraemer, K. L. (1986). The dynamics of change in computing use: A theoretical framework. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems, 11, 5-25.
32.
Kmetz, J. L. (1984). An information-processing study of a complex workflow in aircraft electronics repair. Administrative Science Quarterly, 29, 255-280.
33.
Kraemer, K. L., Dutton, W. H., & Northrup, A. ( 1981). The management of information systems: Computing policy interventions in American local government. New York: Columbia University Press.
34.
Kraemer, K. L., & King, J. L. (1986). Computing and public organizations . Public Administration Review, 46, 488-496.
35.
Kraemer, K. L., King, J. L., Dunkle, D. E., & Lane, J. P. (1989). Managing information systems: Change and control m organizational computing. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
36.
Kraemer, K. L., King, J. L., Dunkle, D. E., Lane, J. P., & George, J. F. (1985). Microcomputers in large U.S. cities. Irvine: University of California, Public Policy Research Organization.
37.
Kraemer, K. L., & Northrup, A. (1989). Curriculum recommendations for public management education in computing: An update. Public Administration Review, 447-453.
38.
Kraemer, K. L., & Perry, J. (1989). Innovation and computing in the public sector. Knowledge in Society, 2, 72-87.
39.
LaPlante, J. (1985). Policy analysis and state executive budgeting. Public Productivity Review , 9, 190-201.
40.
Laudon, K. (1985). Environmental and institutional models of system development: A national criminal history system. Communications of the ACM, 28, 729-740.
41.
Lawless, M. W. (1987). Institutionalization of a management science innovation in police departments. Management Science, 33, 244-252.
42.
Mankin, D., Bikson, T., & Gutek, B. (1983). Factors in successful implementation of computer-based office information systems: A review of the literature with suggestions for organizational behavior management research. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation.
43.
Manross, G., & Rice, R. E. (1986). Don't hang up! Organizational diffusion of the intelligent telephone. Information and Management , 10, 161-175.
44.
Markus, M. L., & Robey, D. (1988). Information technology and organizational change: Causal structure in theory and research. Management Science, 34, 583-589.
45.
National Association of State Information Systems. (1988). Information systems technology in state government , 1987-88. Lexington, KY: Author.
46.
Nelson, R. R., & Winter, S. G. (1982). An evolutionary theory of economic change. Cambridge, MA: Belknap .
47.
Nolan, R. L. (1973). Managing the computer: A stage hypothesis. Communications of the ACM , 16, 399-405.
48.
Nolan, R. L. (1979). Managing the crises of data processing. Harvard Business Review, 57, 115-126.
49.
Norris, D. (1989). High tech effects: Uses and effects of microcomputers in United States local governments . Social Science Computer Review, 7, 137-146.
50.
Norris, D., & Thompson, L. (1988). Computing in public administration: Practice and education. Social Science Computer Review, 6, 556.
51.
Norris, D., & Thompson, L. (in press). High tech effects: A model for research on microcomputers in public organizations. In D. Garson & S. Nagel (Eds.), Research advances in the social sciences and computers, Vol. 2. Greenwich, CT. JAI.
52.
Norris, D., & Webb, V. (1983). Microcomputers (baseline data report . Washington, DC: International City Managers Association.
53.
Norris, D., & Webb, V. (1987). Computers in city hall: Case studies of their uses and effects. Omaha: University of Nebraska, Center for Applied Urban Research.
54.
O'Reilly, C. (1982). Variations in decision makers' use of information sources: The impact of quality and accessibility of information. Academy of Management Journal , 25, 756-771.
55.
Overman, E. S. (1985). Decentralization and microcomputer policy in state government. Public Productivity Review, 9, 143-153.
56.
Perry, J. L., & Kraemer, K. L. (1979). Technological innovation in American local governments: The case of computing. New York: Pergamon.
57.
Rahman, S., & Cahill, A. G. (in press). The growth of information systems technology in the public sector of developing nations. Public Budgeting and Financial Management.
58.
Rainey, H. G., Backoff, R. W., & Levine, C. H. ( 1976). Comparing public and private organizations. Public Administration Review, 36, 233-244.
59.
Rice, R. E., & Manross, G. (1986). The case of the intelligent telephone . In M. McLaughlin (Ed.), Communication yearbook 10 (pp. 727-742). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
60.
Rice, R. E., & Rogers, E. (1980). Reinvention in the innovation process . Knowledge, 1, 490-514.
61.
Ring, P. S., & Perry, J. L. (1985). Strategic management in public and private organizations: Implications of distinctive contexts and constraints . Academy of Management Review, 10, 276-286.
62.
Rogers, E. (1983). Diffusion of innovations (3rd ed.). New York: Free Press.
63.
Stevens, J. M., Cahill, A. G., & LaPlante, J. (in press). The utilization of information systems technology in state financial management: An empirical assessment. Journal of Management Information Systems.
64.
Stevens, J. M., Cahill, A. G., & Overman, E. S. ( 1990). The transfer of information systems technology in state government. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems, 14, 11-23.
65.
Stevens, J. M., & La Plante, J. (1986). Factors associated with financial-decision support systems in state government: An empirical exploration . Public Administration Review, 46, 522-531.
66.
Stevens, J. M., & Mc Gowan, R. (1985). Information systems andpublic management. New York: Praeger.
67.
Thompson, L., Sarbaugh-Mc Call, M., & Norris, D. ( 1989). The social impacts of computing: Control in organizations . Social Science Computer Review, 7, 407-417.
68.
Tomatsky, L. G., Eveland, J. D., Boylan, M. G., Hetzner, W. A., Johnson, E. C., Roitman, D., & Schneider, J. (1983). Innovation processes and their management: A conceptual, empirical and policy review of innovation process research. Washington, DC: National Science Foundation.
69.
Tornatsky, L. G., & Klein, K. J. (1982). Innovation characteristics and innovation-adoption-implementation: A meta analysis of findings. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 29, 28-45.
70.
Tushman, M. L., & Nadler, N. (1978). Information processing as an integrating concept in organizational design. Academy of Management Review , 3, 613-624.
71.
Ungson, G. R., Braunstein, D. N., & Hall, P. D. ( 1981). Managerial information processing: A research review . Administrative Science Quarterly, 26, 116-132.
72.
Van deVen, A. H., & Ferry, D. L. (1980). Measuring and assessing organizations. New York : Wiley.
73.
Waugh, W. L., Jr., & Hy, R. J. (1985). Policy analysis skills, microcomputers, and public administration education. Public Productivity Review, 9, 165-174.
74.
Wedley, W. C., & Field, R.H.G. (1984). Apredecision support system .Academy of Management Review, 9, 696-703.
75.
Weiss, J., Gruber, J., & Carver, R. (1986). Reflections on value: Policy makers evaluate federal information systems . Public Administration Review, 46, 497-505.
76.
Yin, R. (1978). Changing urban bureaucracies: How new practices become routinized. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation.
