On the account of intentionality in incremental change processes: an interpretive case study

(1)

1

On the account of intentionality in

incremental change processes: an

interpretive case study

The implementation of a project control system at Noordhoff

Uitgevers B.V.

Master Thesis BA Organizational & Management Control

Name: Aron Kampman

Adress: Boeier 12, 9408 CE (Assen) E-mail: Aron_kampman@hotmail.com Student#: 1609130

Supervisor faculty of Economics & Business: Dr. M.P. Van der Steen Second supervisor faculty of Economics & Business: Dr. B. Crom

(2)

2

FOREWORD

The choice for the topic of my master thesis was not a difficult one; organizational change has always fascinated me during my studies at the Rijksuniversiteit van Groningen. Thus, the opportunity to study such an organizational change process at Noordhoff Uitgevers (NU) was welcomed with open arms. However, this opportunity did not present itself, and for that I would like to thank Patrick van Hees for arranging me a meeting at NU. Moreover I would like to thank Sander Voorzanger for being my supervisor at NU and for supporting my research activities.

A special thanks goes out to Martijn van der Steen, my thesis supervisor. After having successfully guided me through the Bachelor thesis, the expectations for guidance during the Master thesis were high. The paper that lies here before you hopefully indicates that the supervision once more proved to be very fruitful. It shall provide the reader with some very interesting implications of incremental change processes and will clarify issues concerning the intentionality in this type of change. Last but not least, I would like to thank Ben Crom, the second thesis supervisor, for reading and assessing my thesis.

Finishing this paper about organizational change symbolizes the end of my student life. A student life full of changes, big and small, that have made me the person that I am now. However, these changes are part of a bigger whole; a period of even bigger change is coming up now: a career! But without the precedence of certain changes prior to this point, the future would not be the same. A different study, a different city, different friends or even another choice of courses could have all influenced the course of time. Thinking back, some changes were more significant than others, but which changes have I carefully intended?

(3)

3

ABSTRACT

This paper starts with the identification of success factors found in the academic literature concerning the implementation of Activity Based Costing, Enterprise Resource Planning and Performance Measurement Systems and combines them with success factors found in the project management literature. It then categorizes these factors in to intentional and fixed factors. The intentional success factors are coupled to the characteristics of incremental change processes to construct a coherent theoretical framework that serves the purpose of clarifying the issue concerning the intentionality in incremental change processes. A 5-month interpretive case study is conducted at Noordhoff Uitgevers B.V. to investigate an incremental change process: the implementation of a project control system. The findings suggest that an incremental change process can be positively influenced with the use of intentional success factors, making it a relevant organizational problem to cope with. However, it appears that the change characteristics have a big impact on the richness of the possibilities to successfully apply these intentional success factors.

(4)

4

5 1. Introduction

1.1 Introduction

Incremental and radical change are two approaches that can be distinguished in the area of organizational change. Looking at the existing literature on the nature of organizational change, it is not clear whether these approaches should be treated as the ends of a continuum, or as two opposites in a dichotomy. Also, the incremental approach seems to carry a veil of blindness and harmony, implying that a change with an incremental nature cannot be intended. It seems a problem is only relevant when it is put in a radical context. The question arises how to cope with these two types of change in researching organizational change, and whether incremental change can be intended.

Radical change is said to change the deep structure of the organization. A radical change unfolds rapidly and alters fundamentally the basic assumptions, business practices, culture, and organizational structure. A high level of identity crisis, disorder, and ambiguity are associated with radical change. Radical change promotes heroism and tough decisions, for example, relentless cost cutting, downsizing, and organizational structure changes that bend the backbone of the company (Jarvenpaa and Stoddard, 1998). Radical change ‚goes beyond augmenting the status quo, requiring a shift to fundamentally different products, practices, relationships, skills and norms. It involves adopting a different paradigm, a step that typically disrupts the established pattern of understandings and interests‛ (Orlikowski, 1993). These two definitions are consistent with an abundance of definitions of radical change; it always contains an element of a ‘burning platform’ and changes the basic elements of a business.

(6)

6

fashion when they’ve taken a proactive posture and anticipated the need for change. However, looking through a deterministic and harmonious lens at incremental change will mean that change issues classified as incremental, are not a change process that an organization can intend.

Where revolutionary change is clearly defined, but incremental change definitions carry contradictions, it is also unclear whether to treat the two approaches like a continuum or a dichotomy. Jarvenpaa and Stoddard (1998) state that evolutionary change inherently assumes that change is best accomplished in small increments at a time. They state that incremental and radical change ‚are ends of a continuum and most projects fall somewhere in the middle of the continuum both in design and implementation‛, implying that incremental change can carry, in some extent, radical characteristics that hold directedness and intentionality. Recently Johansson and Siverbo (2009) opted the question why research on management accounting change is not explicitly evolutionary, and argue why research on management accounting change should be based on evolutionary theory. Underpinning the importance of the nature of change, they argue that the full potential of evolutionary theory has not yet been described or used in management accounting research, and that, in old institutional economics, continuity and change both have an evolutionary, or incremental outcome.

However, authors also speak in terms of a dichotomy (Burns and Scapens, 2000), and argue that an organisation can chose an appropriate approach, or use them independently next to each other. Tushman and O’Reilly III (1996) argue that organizations evolve through periods of incremental change punctuated by radical change. They state that organizations must create an ambidextrous1_{organization -one capable of simultaneously pursuing both}

incremental and radical innovation. Also, Fornaciari et al. (1993) state: ‚serious questions exist about which process (incremental or radical) is more practical for managers wishing to pursue strategic change and under which conditions each type should be pursued‛.

As can be concluded from the above, it is not clear whether or not incremental change is blind and deterministic, or that it can be intended. Furthermore, some authors speak of a dichotomy of the two approaches (Burns and Scapens, 2000; Fornaciari, 1993; Tushman and O’Reilly III, 1996), while others hold the view of a continuum (Jarvenpaa and Stoddard, 1998). Where radical change processes are seen as a relevant organizational problem, the question arises if an incremental change process is a relevant organizational problem. Something that cannot be accounted for in an organization is not a relevant problem to deal with. However, if an incremental change process can be intended, it will be a relevant problem an organization should account for. A final note on this first review of the literature is that evolutionary- and incremental change, and revolutionary- and radical change are used interchangeably. In this paper, incremental change and radical change are used as the wordings for the types of change.

To examine the role of intentionality in an incremental change process, this paper will use an interpretive case study to examine the factors influencing an incremental change process at an organizational level. In managing change, the importance of (success) factors should be taken in high regard. Factors like top management support (Shields, 1995; Dezdar and

(7)

7

Sulaiman, 2011; Franco-Santos and Bourne, 2005; Krumwiede 1998; Hyvari, 2006), the empowerment of employees (Franco-Santos and Bourne, 2005) and the composition of the project team (Ngai, Law & Wat, 2008) are amongst a number of factors that have all proven to contribute to implementation- or project success in different change areas. These (success)factors remain well represented in the change literature and should be the high points in leading change. But besides their contribution in understanding change processes and managing them successfully, they also provide useful for researching the role of intentionality in an evolutionary change process.

People and systems can change in ways they desire, but this is not sustainable without intention. ‚It’s the intention or direction that leaders, managers and change agents employ that puts them in the driver’s seat of change in their lives and in their organizations‛ (Van Oosten, 2006). When a change agent deliberately and consciously sets out to establish conditions and circumstances that are different from what they are now and then accomplishes that trough a set or series of actions and interventions, the change occurred is viewed as intentional (Ford and Ford, 1995). This set or series of intentional actions and interventions can be viewed as intentional factors a change agent can use in a change process. On the contrary, there are also factors a change agent cannot use during a change process. Factors that cannot be used by the change agent to accomplish change, but do play a role in determining change success, are fixed factors. By analysing whether and in to what extent intentional factors contribute to incremental change success, conclusions can be made concerning the intentionality of incremental change processes. Also, by researching factors, insights can be given if the two approaches should be treated as a dichotomy or a continuum; when factors influencing an incremental change process are identified, they can be compared with factors influencing change processes that have a radical nature. This way, on the account of (success) factors, it can be clarified how these two approaches should be viewed. To be able to make conclusions concerning these issues, this paper aims to answer the following research question:

What are the possible success factors that play a role in an incremental change process, and how can an incremental change process be influenced?

(8)

8

incremental change will not be biased by high environmental dynamics or that changes are pressured highly by a competitive market.

This paper develops a theoretical framework to investigate whether an incremental change process can be influenced. To be able to identify the factors that play a role in an incremental change process, grounded change theories and implementation literature concerning enterprise resource planning (ERP), performance measurement systems (PMS) and activity-based costing systems (ABC), are reviewed. These theories are used because they all share great commonalities with the selected research topic; the implementation of a PCS. Since the implementation itself can be seen as a project, project management literature is also included in the literature review. After having reviewed the relevant success factors, a categorization will be made in to intentional and fixed factors. The last step before the theoretical framework is presented, is to explore the concepts of radical and incremental change. In the theoretical framework, the selected intentional factors are coupled to the incremental change characteristics. What emerges is a framework that argues how an incremental change process can be influenced by intentional success factors.

Answering the research question will result in three contributions to the existing literature: (1) it identifies (success) factors to be taken in to account for incremental change processes (2) it will clarify issues concerning the intentionality of incremental change processes and finally, (3) it will give valuable insights concerning the boundaries of the two types of change.

1.2 Practical cause and relevance

NU is planning to implement the ‘Project Doorreken Module 3‛ (PDM3), a new project control system. The PCS is used by publishers for making forecasts of project costs and benefits. The system also aids in planning and control. At the start of every project, investments, costs and sales, and returns are projected in to the cash flow of the project. The forecasts will be adjusted when new relevant information becomes available, in order to maintain control over the forecasted costs and benefits. This information is one of the financial components of the business case that will be reviewed by the management of NU, who will then decide whether or not to go along with the project. Because of changes in the way top management is handling investments, the need is expressed for improvements towards the ‚Project Doorreken Module 2‛.

For future (incremental) change processes it is important for NU to know which factors to take in to account. This will mean savings in time, money and valuable resources. Also, to make full use of the new and improved PCS, it is important that its implementation is a success. When not implemented in its full use, valuable additions may not be used, and in turn, may not provide useful for the internal process efficiency. In short, NU will benefit from a smooth implementation in itself and will benefit when the incremental changes are in full use.

1.3 Composition of the paper

(9)

(10)

10 2. Literature overview

The literature overview will first discuss the background of the project control system. To follow up, the light will be shed on the theoretical base for the identification of success factors. Next, these factors will be presented, and categorized in intentional and fixed factors. This categorization will serve an important function for answering the research question, because it allows that the intentionality in an incremental change can be researched. After having presented the background of the project control system and theoretically relevant (intentional) success factors, the two types of change will be discussed in more depth. This in depth analysis of incremental and radical change will serve as a basis for the theoretical framework. Characteristics of incremental change, offset against radical change, will be coupled to intentional success factors. This way a proper and constructive framework will emerge and serve as a basis for analysis of the case situation, and give insight in to if – and how – an incremental change process can be influenced.

2.1 Management control systems

A management control system is described as a means of gathering data to aid and co-ordinate the process of making planning and control decisions throughout the organization (Horngren and Foster, 1991). It is a means for ‚keeping things on track‛ and ‚influencing people to behave as the organization would have them behave‛ (Merchant, 1985). A superior is thought to use the control system to motivate, control and evaluate a subordinates performance (Young, 1988).

Merchant and van der Stede (2003) opted that there are three different reasons for using management control systems. The first reason is to overcome a lack of direction, in the sense of unclear goals. Also, tension between the goals of the organization and personal goals is a reason for the existence of management control systems; it contributes in overcoming motivational problems. Finally personal limitations in the form of a lack of education, information, knowledge and intelligence is a high point for a management control system. Furthermore, Merchant and van der Stede (2003) describe four forms of control:

1. Results control 2. Action control 3. Personnel control 4. Cultural control

(11)

11

measurement (action control) and output measurement (results control), Ouchi (1979) distinguishes clan control, which can be seen as the equivalent of cultural control.

Figure 1: Ouchi`s (1979) control framework

2.2 The identification and categorization of relevant implementation factors

In this section the theoretical base for the identification of relevant implementation factors will be discussed. This will be followed by an overview of these factors, found in the literature. To finalize, these factors will be categorized as intentional or fixed in order to couple intentional factors to the characteristics of an incremental change process.

2.2.1 Theoretical base for the identification of relevant implementation factors

This paper aims on researching factors influencing an incremental change process, in this case the implementation of a new PCS. As can be concluded by assessing the literature review of Rozenes et al (2006) on project control, and due to an extensive search on project control literature, it can be concluded that literature on project control systems is limited. This also accounts for literature concerning the implementation of such a system. To substitute for this impediment, factors contributing to implementation success in the areas of activity-based costing (ABC), enterprise resource planning (ERP), project management and performance measurement systems (PMS) are identified to make statements concerning the intentionality of an incremental change process.

(12)

12

which are important measures in a PMS. Since an implementation process can be viewed as a project, project management literature is also included in the framework. Project management is the application of knowledge, tools and techniques to a broad range of activities to meet the requirements of a particular project (Mahany and Lederer, 2011).

In reviewing the implementation literature concerning these systems, it becomes clear that there is great commonality in the success factors. Most success factors can be found in all knowledge areas and concern organizational and behavioural factors, which are seen as the most important factors in managing an implementation process (Shields, 1995). Since there is a great commonality in success factors, a high coverage of knowledge areas by the PCS, and these factors are used for exploratory purposes, this blending of knowledge areas is justified. 2.2.2 Success factors relevant for the implementation of the PCS

This section presents relevant factors for the implementation of a project control system in a random order.

Top management support: In reviewing the academic literature, it becomes clear that

successful change can depend significantly on management support. Articles concerning successful project execution, ABC-implementation, ERP-implementation and the implementation of performance measurement systems all underline the important and significant effect of management support on successful change (Shields, 1995; Dezdar and Sulaiman, 2011; Franco-Santos and Bourne, 2005; Krumwiede 1998; Hyvari, 2006). Shields and McEwan (1996) highlight three reasons why this is so important. First of all, top management has the power to appoint resources to innovations they think are worthwhile. Second, top management can provide political support in the form of motivation of employees and overcoming resistance. Finally top management plays a key role in the development of goals and strategies, and thus in the alignment of the change project with the business strategy. Shields (1995, p.150) states that: ‚As with other administrative innovations, top management support for ABC is crucial because they can focus resources (e.g. money, time, talent), goals, and strategies on initiatives they deem worthwhile, deny resources for innovations they do not support, and provide the political help needed to motivate or push aside individuals and coalitions who resist the innovation‛. On the account of implementing ERP-systems, Dezdar and Sulaiman (2011) state that top management support is emphasized in an abundance of ERP-implementation literature. Top management plays such a significant role because ERP-systems are normally large-scale and require extensive resources. In ERP-implementation, two major aspects are supported by the top management of a company, namely: providing the necessary resources and providing leadership.

Link to strategy, performance evaluation and compensation: Linkage to competitive

(13)

13

Training: In implementing ABC-systems, the appropriate training of employees should be

taken in high regard (Krumwiede, 1998). Training in designing, implementing and using activity based costing is an important way to interrelate ABC among strategy, performance evaluation, compensation and ABC-objectives (Shields, 1995). It helps in understanding, accepting and feeling comfortable with the ABC-system. In the field of ERP, training is also regarded as a critical factor to implementation success (Bradley, 2008; Dezdar and Sulaiman, 2009). As compared with unsuccessful projects, successful ERP-projects spent more time on training and provided a higher quality of training. Training enhances the users` level of knowledge and thus increases their performance (Dezdar and Sulaiman, 2011). Training also contributes to positive user attitudes and satisfaction; it assists the organization to build positive feelings towards the system and helps ERP users to adjust to the organizational change taking place (Dezdar and Sulaiman, 2011).

Adequate resources: It is important to provide employees with adequate resources

supporting the change. On the account of implementing an ABC-systems (Shields, 1995); resources should be provided that allow employees the opportunity to learn about the system to be implemented and to experiment with alternative designs and design methods. To not make employees feel that the change initiative is pressuring them to do more without adequate support, sufficient internal resources are desirable. Adequate internal resources is also linked to general project success (Hyvari, 2006).

Information technology quality: The results of the study of Krumwiede (1998), concerning

the influence of factors during several implementation stages, finds a significant relationship concerning the existing IT-system quality. In order to fully integrate a new ABC system, IT is a critical factor to reach the highest level of ABC implementation. Strong existing information systems facilitate the integration with ABC and provide the needed operational data. Ngai, Law and Wat (2008) and Dezdar and Sulaiman (2009) state that legacy of existing IT systems influence ERP-implementation success. The structure and complexity of existing IT systems influence the extent of IT-changes and the organizational changes needed for a successful ERP-implementation. The greater the complexity of the existing systems, the greater the technological and organizational changes. These results overlap with findings in the IT-implementation literature. Wixom and Watson (2001) find that the quality of the existing data sources, meaning that data is well structured, is linked with IT-implementation success.

Relationship with the software vendor: The extent in which a good relationship is held with

the vendor, fastens the implementation of an ERP-system (Wixom and Watson, 2001; Ngai, Law and Wat, 2008). This relationship should be based on mutual trust and the exchange of knowledge. The organization implementing ERP should work well with vendors to resolve software problems. Quick response, patience, perseverance, problem solving and firefighting capabilities are important. Troubleshooting errors is critical (Nah, Lau and Kuang, 2001).

Quality of the used technology: Wixom and Watson (2001) find that the technology used by

(14)

14

technology is not understood or is not coupled to existing systems, this will have a negative influence on the efficiency and effectiveness of the project team.

Composition of the project team: Ngai, Law and Wat (2008) and Dezdar and Sulaiman (2009)

state that the composition of the project team contributes positively to ERP-implementation success. A project team should exist of organization experts and IT experts. These IT-experts can be attained externally. This way the existing employees can attain the appropriate technical skills and abilities for the implementation. A combination of organizational and technological knowledge is critical. Furthermore Nah & Delgado (2006) state that an ERP project includes all functional areas of an enterprise. The effort and cooperation of technical (Hyvari, 2006) and business experts as well as end-users is necessary for the success of an ERP implementation. Therefore, involving people with both business and technical knowledge into the project is essential for success. The involvement of the change agent, vendors, consultants and internal staff is also critical. The best people in the organization should make part of the implementation team in order to foster innovation and creativity that are important for success.The project team should be balanced and cross-functional. It is important that the functional team members in the organization be involved in the project on a full time basis. These team members must be empowered to make quick decisions and performance should be tied to compensation. Creating incentives and risk sharing agreements will help the achievement of common goals. Moreover, Jiang, Klein & Chen (2001) state that two common risks have a major significant impact on a projects success: the team’s lack of general expertise and a lack of clear role definitions.

The use of a project leader: The project leader has been found to be one of the most critical

factors to project success, therefore much published research exists on the roles and skills of project managers (Jiang, Klein, Balloun, 1996; Jiang, Klein and Margulis, 1998). An effective project manager’s role should be one of an idea generator, project leader, gatekeeper, sponsor and coach (Roberts and Fusfeld, 1997 in: Jiang, Klein and Margulis, 1998). Findings from a survey on project manager performance in information systems projects, bring about several activities a project leader should perform to promote success, next to the tasks of completing the system (Jiang, Klein and Chen, 2001, p. 53). A project manager should obtain commitment and maintain the involvement of key personnel at all levels. Also communication with all team members, concerned management and impacted users should be executed effectively. Understanding the objectives of the project and the potential barriers to success is another important issue to take in to account. A project manager should also build an effective team, wherein team member roles are clearly defined and a team structure is created. Finally the project manager should conduct effective planning and monitor performance against expectations on an ongoing basis. Also Hyvari (2006) finds that the critical project manager related factors are commitment, the ability to coordinate and effective leadership. Furthermore Bradley (2008) finds that organizing the ERP implementation project under the direction of a project manager, whose sole responsibilities are the project, is positively related to implementation project success.

The use of a project champion: Important to project success is the use of a project champion

(15)

15

champion is more like a transformational leader that inspires others to ‚transcend self-interest for a higher collective purpose‛ (Burns, 1978 in: Bradley, 2008). They vigorously promote their vision and overcome hurdles in the authorization and implementation phases. When successful, they can break down bureaucratic barriers and drive change through the organization. They communicate the vision, maintain motivation in the project, fight political battles and are influential with other stakeholders including senior management.

Communication: The exchange of verbal or non-verbal information concerning all facets of

the implementation is called communication. The dispersion of manuals and newsletters or providing training are means of communication (Franco-Santos and Bourne, 2005). Also the feedback of employees and the contacts between the different functional departments concerning the implementation, is a form of communication. Communication is concerned as a critical success factor for both implementing PMS (Franco-Santos and Bourne, 2005) and ERP-systems (Dezdar and Sulaiman, 2011). Concerning ERP-systems, Dezdar and Sulaiman (2011) state that both internal communication among project team members and external communication to the entire company are very essential. It is important that employees are informed about the scope, objectives, activities and updates in advance to make ERP implementation more efficient. ‚Communication should start early, be consistent and continuous, and include an overview of the system, the reasons for implementing it, and a vision on how the business will change and how the system will support these‛ (Dezdar and Sulaiman, 2011).

Clear goal setting and monitoring: In the project literature, a significant positive relationship

is found with clear project goals and project success. The amount invested in defining clear project goals has a positive influence on project success (Dvir, Raz & Shenhar, 2003; Hyvari, 2006). Achievements should be measured against project goals. The projects’ progress should be monitored actively through set milestones and targets. Project based criteria should be used to measure against completion dates, costs and quality (Nah, Lau and Kuang, 2001). However, according to Shields (1995), clear goals do not significantly relate with successful ABC-implementation, it appears this (success) factor differs in different knowledge areas.

Empowerment of employees: The empowerment of employees is important in any change

process. On the account of implementing performance measurement systems, Franco-Santos and Bourne (2005) state that empowerment consists of involving employees in the development and implementation of the PMS. Only agreement amongst top management will not suffice for a successful implementation. Empowering employees will result in higher commitment and job satisfaction. Also ownership ads significantly to the prediction of organization-based self-esteem (Dyne and Pierce, 2004). Results supporting the importance of user involvement are also found in the ERP-literature (Dezdar and Sulaiman, 2009).

2.2.3 Categorization: Intentional and fixed success factors

(16)

16

intentional, or on the other hand, fixed. In the following sub-paragraphs, factors are assigned to a category according to these three criteria:

- Can the change agent use a success factor in his or her set of actions and interventions?

- Can the success factor be applied or changed during the case research (5 months)? - Does the success factor influence the organization configuration of NU?

In this paper, factors that a change agent can use in his or her set of actions and interventions are called intentional factors. Factors that cannot be used by the change agent in the intentional series of actions and interventions to accomplish changed are fixed factors. To further support the categorization, and due to the time that the research will be conducted, intentional factors are factors that can be applied or changed within the time period of 5 months of this case research. Also, unlike fixed factors, intentional factors are assumed to be unable to change the organization configuration (Ferguson and Ketchen, 1999) of Noordhoff Uitgevers. An organizational configuration is a common profile along important characteristics such as strategy, structure and decision processes, shared by sets of organizations.

2.2.3.1 Selection of intentional implementation factors

Top management support can be created by the change agent. By putting effort in creating top

management support, the allocation of resources for training or communication efforts, and political support for the change project can be influenced within a period of 5 months. Also, top management support is focused on the implementation of the PCS, and does not influence the strategy, structure or other configuration characteristics. A change agent can put effort in communication by the dispersion of manuals and newsletters and provide

training initiatives. These efforts are realizable within 5 months, are focused on the PCS and

do not influence organization configuration characteristics.

A change agent can also set out project goals and monitor employees that have to accomplish those goals. Furthermore the change agent can empower these employees, meaning that employees are involved in the designing the project control system. Maintaining a good

relationship with the software vendor is also an example of a deliberate and intentional action

that can be performed by the change agent. Finally, composing a project team can be an important task. Besides being influenced and used by the change agent, these success factors are focused on the implementation of the PCS only and therefore are relevant for the time period of 5 months. Moreover, because of the focus of these factors on the implementation of the PCS, organization configuration characteristics are not influenced.

2.2.3.2 Selection of fixed implementation factors

(17)

17

about the system to be implemented and to experiment with alternative designs and design methods. To not make employees feel that the change initiative is pressuring them to do more without adequate availability of time and resources, sufficient internal resources are desirable. Since the available internal resources depends on the organisation configuration, it is considered to be a fixed factor. The information technology quality is another fixed implementation factor. High quality existing information systems facilitate the integration with a new system and provide the needed operational data, whereas low quality information technology can hinder an implementation process. Also, the quality of the used

technology is a fixed factor influencing implementation success. If the hardware, software,

methods and programs available to the project team are of insufficient quality, this will not contribute to a successful implementation. These two technological factors, are considered to be part of the organization configuration of NU, and are not changeable within the time period of 5 months.

Because this paper assumes that intentional change is something a change agent can influence, the factors ‘the use of a project leader’ and ‘the use of a project champion’ are not attributed to one of the categories above, because a change agent is a project leader or champion. To enhance the chances of success, such a leader or champion deals with fixed and intentional factors as illustrated in the two sub-paragraphs above. The categorization of success factors is depicted in figure 2.

Figure 2: implementation success factors

2.3 Exploring the concepts of incremental and radical change

(18)

18

process can be influenced by a change agent the characteristics of this change process are presented and supported by several perspectives of different authors. To further illustrate the difference between the two types of change, the radical change characteristics are also summed up. With this in-depth analysis, it is possible to develop a framework which couples intentional factors to incremental change characteristics. There are 6 characteristics that are distinguishing for the types of change found in the literature.

Size and rate of change: An incremental change process is a series of relatively small and

frequent strategic adjustments, refinements and extensions within the organization (Fornaciari, 1993; Dewar and Dutton, 1986). In contrast, the radical viewpoint argues that these periods of stable, slow and predictable incremental change are interrupted with ‚short and intense periods of massive changes in momentum‛ (Fornaciari, 1993). It unfolds rapidly (Jarvenpaa and Stoddard, 1998). In incremental change ‚the pace and nature of the change is adapted to be comfortable for the current personnel and is accomplished in small increments at a time‛ (Jarvenpaa and Stoddard, 1998). Furthermore, Burns and Scapens (2000) state this form of change happens over time and holds inertial forces that provide continuity.

Outside versus inside perspective: Another important difference between the two types of

change is that incremental change is promoted from within and radical change is imposed from outside (Jarvenpaa and Stoddard, 1998). Incremental change is managed with current employees and leadership. The motivation for the change arises internally. However, incremental change is externally imposed. It requires outside resources and viewpoints. The change is led by the CEO and senior management which drive the change by building alliances and providing the right culture and vision. Also, consultants, outside IT-experts and outside executives are used to lead and participate in the change initiative. This is done because these outsiders have no fear of challenging the status quo. The change team is small, dedicated and isolated from the rest of the organization. In incremental change, few, if any consultants are used and the project team consists of part-time team members (Jarvenpaa and Stoddard, 1998).

Impact on employees’ motivation: The impact on employees’ motivation is an important

issue in discriminating between the two types of change. Tushman and O`Reilly (1996) acknowledge that incremental change tactics require managers to ‚cannibalize their own business‛. They state that these tactics promote the exclusion of current organizational expertise. The tactics require strong control from the top and counter to the very values that most organizations want to institutionalize: empowerment, self-management and innovation from the bottom up. It requires the daily personal involvement of top management. It is associated with high disorder, identity crisis and ambiguity (Jarvenpaa and Stoddard, 1998). Although not explicitly mentioned in the literature, the impact of an incremental change process on employees’ motivation can be assumed to be relatively small because incremental change stays close to the status quo and is imposed from the inside (Dewar and Dutton 1986; Jarvenpaa and Stoddard, 1998).

Risk: Incremental change is less risky than radical change (Jarvenpaa en Stoddard, 1998). The

(19)

19

compared to incremental change. It invites greater risk because radical change is often associated with ambiguity and chaos and usually only attempted in times of crises or the availability of a rare opportunity.

Impact on the organization`s resources: For radical innovations which incorporate a large

degree of new knowledge, organizational complexity (the number of different occupational specialties) and the depth of the organizations knowledge resources (the number of expert personnel) should strongly relate to their adoption (Orlikowski, 1993).

In contrast, complexity and knowledge depth should be less important for incremental innovations because adoption of these types require less knowledge resources in the organization for development or support. While the depth of knowledge resources in an organization is more important for radical change, it is less so for incremental change. Incremental tactics also increase the overall capacity for change. Employees participating in implementation, tend to grow and improve in their understanding of the organization (Orlikowski 1993).

Orlikowski (1993) states that incremental change ‚builds on existing skills, work practices, and norms, and requires programs and policies that reinforce the existing cognitive and social processes‛ radical change, which departs from these existing skills, work practices, and norms, requires programs and policies that aims on the acquisition of new cognitive and social processes.

In the literature, radical change is considered to be costly. Such change is disruptive and generally viewed as unduly risky and counter cultural (Jarvenpaa and Stoddard, 1998). On the contrary, incremental change tactics offer the organization the opportunity to accomplish change in a managed and measured fashion where change efforts can be dispersed among current employees and will not disrupt the workload.

Performance measurement and evaluation: Another difference noted by Jarvenpaa and

Stoddard (1998) is the distinction between flexible and firm milestones. As opposed to incremental change, milestones in radical change processes are firm to empower the new ways of doing. Furthermore, since a radical change fundamentally changes a business’s core activities, new rewards and compensation are present in radical change. Since incremental change stays close to the status quo, no new rewards and compensation are present in incremental change processes (Jarvenpaa and Stoddard, 1998).

In table 1, the abovementioned characteristics of radical and incremental change are presented.

Radical change Incremental change

High impact on resources Low impact on resources

Firm milestones Flexible milestones

New rewards and compensation No new rewards and compensation

High risk Low risk

Negative impact on motivation Low (negative) impact on motivation

Imposed from outside Imposed from inside

Intense and short change Small and slow change

(20)

20

2.4 Theoretical framework: How can an incremental change process be influenced? In order to build the theoretical framework for analysis, the intentional factors will be coupled to the in-depth analysis of incremental change characteristics. By coupling the characteristics of an incremental change process to intentional success factors, the possibilities of these success factors to influence an incremental change processes will be made insightful. As discussed earlier in this paper, the implementation of the PCS can be viewed as a project. A project is a success when it is completed within or near the estimated schedule and budget, and produces an acceptable level of performance (Mahany & Lederer, 2011). These three criteria are widely accepted in the project management literature for measuring project success (Martin, Pearson and Furumo, 2007). Although it is a broad measure of success, it is appropriate for this study because it serves to argue how the success factors can influence an incremental change process. Moreover, the definition is applicable to the case situation at Noordhoff Uitgevers. After having coupled the success factors to the incremental change characteristics, it will be argued how the adjusted success factors can positively influence the incremental change process by contributing to the budget-, schedule- and performance goals.

Training: Training helps in accepting and feeling comfortable with a new system. It

interrelates the system with strategy, performance evaluation and compensation (Shields, 1995). Training enhances the users’ level of knowledge, satisfaction and increases their performance (Dezdar and Sulaiman, 2011). Looking at the characteristics of an incremental change process, it appears that there is low need for training initiatives. Orlikowski (1993) states that in incremental change processes, the complexity and knowledge depth is low, because it requires less knowledge resources for development or support. He furthermore states that an incremental change process requires programs and policies that reinforce the existing cognitive and social processes, instead of programs aimed at acquiring new knowledge. Because of this difference, it is also expected that training initiatives in incremental change processes are not high in intensity and frequency. Also, since an incremental change process is characterized as having a low impact on motivation, training efforts are likely not to focus on this aspect.

However, the change agent could create a possible merit by investing in training efforts. Although the knowledge gap to be bridged is low, good training efforts can contribute to the understanding of the new possibilities, adjustments and refinements of the new PCS. This can result in a faster implementation and good functioning of the system.

Possible training efforts to influence an incremental change process are: - Aimed at adjustments, refinements, new system possibilities

- Not high in intensity - Infrequent

Communication: Communication efforts within the organization can occur through

(21)

21

expected to be redundant. The communication efforts are expected to be infrequent and conform with the small impact of the change.

As with training initiatives, communication efforts can contribute to the reinforcement of the existing cognitive and social processes (Orlikowski, 1993), and possibly contribute to an effective change process. The new possibilities, adjustments and refinements can be communicated and understood sooner.

Possible communication efforts to influence an incremental change process are: - Aimed at scope, objectives, activities and updates

- Small - Infrequent

Composition project team: Considering the importance of the right composition of the

project team it is stated that the team should consist of business and technical experts (Hyvari, 2006). The involvement of vendors and consultants is critical and the teams general level of expertise is of great importance for the team`s success (Jiang, Klein & Chen, 2001). However, as discussed in the previous paragraph, an incremental change process builds on existing skills, work practices, and norms, reinforces the cognitive process and requires little knowledge depth (Orlikowski, 1993). Concerning the knowledge aspect, it can be expected that the composition of the project team is of low importance, because the required knowledge is already available within the organization and little knowledge depth is required. Also, an incremental change process is internally imposed, and few, if any outside consultants, vendors, IT-experts are used to form the project team. Furthermore, the project team in incremental change, consists of part-time team members (Jarvenpaa & Stoddard, 1998). In contrast, the use of full-time, outside vendors, consultants and IT-experts are considered as crucial characteristics of project teams in radical change. Another characteristic of incremental change that strengthens this expectation, is the rate and size of the change. When a change process holds radical characteristics (i.e. intense and short change), there will be a need for full-time commitment of team members and quick acquirement of knowledge resources to lead the change (outside consultants and experts). Since incremental change occurs slowly and stable, there will be no need for this (rapid) acquirement of full-time team members.

Although it is expected that that the composition of the project team will not be a high point in an incremental change process, there could be a possible added value when the project team is composed with considerable attention. The use of outside IT-experts, vendors and consultants in a project team will not effect in much added value, because it is imposed from the inside and the required knowledge is already available. However, good involvement of the right part-time, inside IT- and business experts by the change agent, can contribute to a successful change process. It can contribute to an appropriate design in the form of low errors and a good fit. Also the business experts will be able to contribute to training and communication efforts. This can benefit a smooth implementation.

The possibilities of the composition of the project team to influence an incremental change process are:

(22)

22

Top management support: Top management support is considered important in managing

change processes and overcoming resistance to change. As discussed earlier, top management is important for the allocation of resources, for providing political support and leadership, and aligning the change project with goals and strategies (Shields and McEwan, 1996; Dezdar and Sulaiman, 2011; Shields, 1995). However, an incremental change process is characterized by a low impact on resources (Orlikowski, 1993), is accomplished in a managed and measured fashion, and is considered to be less costly and risky than radical change processes (Jarvenpaa and Stoddard, 1998). Since incremental change is characterized by its low risk and costs (Jarvenpaa and Stoddard, 1998; Orlikowski, 1993), it can be assumed that the political support and leadership are not needed in a high extent in incremental change processes. Hence, low costs and risks are unlikely to generate considerable resistance. This argument is supported by literature that concludes that switching costs and uncertainty tend to have a positive effect on user resistance (Kim and Kankanhalli, 2009).

However, top management must approve with the (additional work-) costs of the new system. Moreover, top management support results in the allocation of resources (time, money, knowledge). If resources are allocated for the change project, money and time will become available for training and communication efforts. Through training and communication, the existing cognitive and social processes will be reinforced sooner and more effectively. Because of this interrelatedness, creating management support is expected to be a possible contributor to the understanding and utilization of the PCS.

In short, possible ways of top management to influence an incremental change process are: - Approving with system development costs

- Approving with additional work costs

- Allocating resources to training and communication efforts

Relationship with the software vendor: The extent in which a good relationship is held with

the vendor, fastens the implementation of an ERP-system (Wixom and Watson, 2001; Ngai, Law and Wat, 2008). Since an incremental change process is characterized as slow and small, it is expected that the relationship is weak. The software solution will serve as an adjustment to the status quo, and thus not require intense mutual adjustments between the software solution and current IT-systems. Since the ‚pace and nature of the incremental change is adapted to be comfortable for the current personnel and is accomplished in small increments at a time‛ (Jarvenpaa and Stoddard, 1998), the frequency of meetings with the software vendor are estimated to be low. Moreover, the need for a software solution will be imposed from the inside, so the need for a vendor to be part of a project team full-time, is expected to be low. The absence of the software vendor in the project team contributes to a weaker relationship.

However, a good relationship with the vendor can lead to better tailor-made software solutions. This can prevent possible design errors causing implementation and utility problems, and costs of additional work. Also, these adjustments and improvements in the system`s design will be offered sooner if a good relationship is held, thus contributing to a speedy process. Nevertheless, since the needed software solution is small, in the form of additions and improvements, extra design meetings and more close and frequent contact will only result in more added value to a certain level.

(23)

23

- Preventing design errors

- Fast and effective adjustments and improvements - Saving costs of additional work

- Infrequent interaction

Clarity of project goals and monitoring efforts: According to Jarvenpaa and Stoddard (1998)

flexible milestones and no new rewards in compensation are characteristics of an incremental change process. A project goal tells both what is expected and when. Since milestones are used to measure the progress towards those goals, it is expected that flexible milestones will relate with a low clarity of project goals. This line of reasoning is supported by the fact that in incremental change, no new rewards in compensation are awarded. Moreover, since milestones are flexible, monitoring is difficult. A more likely thought is that existing performance measurement and control systems are used to monitor the project, since incremental change stays close to the status quo (Dewar and Dutton, 1986). Since this paper argues that low clarity of project goals and low project monitoring efforts are inherent to an incremental change process, it is unlikely that clear project goals and monitoring will contribute to the incremental change process.

To sum up, investing in clear project goals and monitoring efforts are unlikely to influence an incremental change process because:

- Unclear project goals are inherent to an incremental change process

- Low project related monitoring efforts are inherent to an incremental change process

Empowerment of employees: An incremental change process is internally imposed and

realized with current employees and leadership. A large number of current organizational members have the opportunity to participate and feel ownership for the changes taking place (Jarvenpaa and Stoddard, 1998). This is different from radical change tactics that require strong control from the top and counter to the very values that most organizations want to institutionalize: empowerment, self-management and innovation from the bottom up‛ (Jarvenpaa and Stoddard, 1998). Franco-Santos and Bourne (2005) state that empowerment consists of involving employees in the development and implementation of the PMS. Since an incremental change process is imposed from inside and managed with current employees, it is assumed that high empowerment is inherent to an incremental change process. Also, the design of the new system, is based on the current system. Thus, in a sense, empowerment has already taken place.

In short, investing in empowering employees is unlikely to influence an incremental change process because:

- Empowerment is inherent to an incremental change process

(24)

24

Figure 2: Theoretical

Framework

Intentional factors

\

Top management

support

Training

Relationship with the

software vendor (SV)

Composition of the

project team (PT)

Communication

Clear goal setting and

monitoring

Empowerment of

employees

Incremental change process: The implementation of a project control system

Incremental change

characteristics

Low impact on

resources

Flexible milestones

No new rewards and

compensation

Low risk

Low impact on

motivation

Imposed from inside

Small and slow change

Top management

Support

Approving with system development costs Approving with additional work costs

Allocating resources to training and communication efforts

Relationship with

the SV

Preventing design errors Fast and effective adjustments and improvements

Saving costs of additional work

infrequent

Composition PT

Assigning the right business experts Assigning the right IT-experts A part-time undertaking

Communication

Aimed at scope, objectives, activities andupdates Small Infrequent

Training

Aimed at adjustments, refinements, new system possibilities Low intensity Infrequent

Empowerment of

employees

Inherent to incremental change Clarity of project goals and monitoring efforts

Project goals are unclear

(25)

25 3. Research Methodology

This research has started with a literature overview to develop a theoretical framework. To investigate the devised theoretical framework in a natural setting, a 5-month (2011-2012) interpretive case study is used to investigate the implementation of a PCS at NU. In this section there will be elaborated on the research type used to answer the research question. Next, the methods for data collection will be argued. And finally, the methods used for the analysis of the empirical findings will be discussed.

3.1 Research type

The research that is conducted to answer the research question can be characterized as an interpretive case study (Andrade, 2009; Yin, 2003). A case study is used to answer ‚how‛ and ‚why‛ questions and is described as ‚an empirical inquiry that investigates a contemporary phenomenon within its real-life context, especially when the boundaries between phenomenon and context are not clearly evident‛ (Yin, 2003). It is conducted in a natural setting, with the intention of understanding the current processes’ nature in a little-studied area and allows the researcher to gain an holistic understanding of the phenomenon under investigation (Andrade, 2009). The interpretive approach assumes that ‚reality is socially constructed and the researcher becomes the vehicle by which this reality is revealed‛ (Andrade, 2009). The interpretations of the researcher are important in this type of study, where such subjectivity is ‚backed with quality arguments rather than statistical exactness‛. An interpretive case study provides the opportunity to get a deep insight into the problem, because the researcher is directly involved in collecting and analyzing data and has close interaction with the actors (Andrade, 2009). Interpretive case studies make it possible to present the researchers’ own constructions as well as those of all the participants. Also, qualitative research offers a valid base for scientific research within the management accounting (Lee and Humprey, 2006).

3.2 Data collection

Data is collected through observations, desk research and semi-structured interviews. By using different methods of collecting data, triangulation is used to improve the construct validity (Yin, 2003). These different approaches are complementary to each other by compensating the weaknesses of each individual method. The mentioned data collection methods are supported in the literature (Baarda en de Goede, 2001; Yin, 2003).

(26)

26

actors concerning the implementation of the PCS. Namely, the process map was used to investigate the core processes of Noordhoff Uitgevers. The map described the core processes and the role of the PCS in these processes. It also showed how and which actors dealt with the PCS in each stage of the process, and therefore enabled the researcher to make a selection of the most relevant interviewees. The e-mail conversations used in this study concerned communication between the Senior Controller and Software Vendor about the systems specifications, adjustments and updates. These e-mails were used to examine the relationship with the software vendor.

The first round of interviews had the objective to gather information concerning the status quo, was used to develop a thorough understanding concerning the processes surrounding the old PCS, and enabled the researcher to gain a first insight in the influence of the success factors on the incremental change process. After this first interview round with a broad character, a second interview round was performed in the final phase of the case study with the aim to get an in-depth insight in the role and influence of the success factors on the incremental change process. In the second interview round, which consisted of the same interviewees, the questions (appendix I) were determined with the theoretical framework as a guideline (Yin, 2003). Interviews we’re planned using e-mail and phone calls, and interviewees were informed concerning the interview topics. The interviews we’re semi– structured; a list with interview questions was used and left room for additional notes. Also, all interviews we’re one on one. The interviewees were selected with the help of the process map and the advice of the Senior Controller and are representative for the organisational functions the PCS is intertwined with. The organisational stakeholders that are selected are the Senior Controller that leads the project, a Market Researcher that provides qualitative and quantitative data for the PCS, a Production Manager that provides production and cost information, and a Publisher and Publishing Manager that use the PCS to develop a project plan. In retrospect, a critical note is that the involvement of the Market Researcher in the second interview round was better to be replaced by another interviewee. In the first interview round, the Market Researchers’ insights proved very valuable to develop an understanding concerning the role of, and the processes surrounding the PCS. However, in investigating the influence of the success factors on the incremental change process, the Market Researcher turned out to be less valuable in determining the effect of the success factors on change success than the other interviewees. The Market Researcher merely had the task to provide qualitative and quantitative information, but was not directly involved in utilising the system like the other interviewees. Below a schedule is presented, which presents the interviewees and dates.

Date Interviewees

11 October Senior Controller

11 October Market Researcher

12 October Production Manager

13 October Publisher

13 October Publishing Manager

1 March Senior Controller

2 March Publisher

3 March Publishing Manager

(27)

27

4 March Production Manager

3.3 Data analysis

The data to be analysed came from three sources: observations, desk research and interviews. Relevant findings from observations and desk research, were approached differently than data derived from interviews. As mentioned, these two methods were used to gain more insight in the processes surrounding the implementation of the PCS, added to the ability of the researcher to identify relevant sources of information and formulate interview questions, and were used to gain preliminary insights concerning the influence of the success factors. Findings from these sources were noted in a general file, which contained data that concerned broad findings that were, or could be, relevant for the research. As the research progressed, the data was structured with the theoretical framework as a guideline. Data was grouped under headings such as ‚General change characteristics‛, ‚Training‛, ‚Top Management Support‛ and ‚Relationship with the Software Vendor‛, and also left room for additional notes. The same categories were used in analysing the data derived from interviews, and were integrated in a later stage.

Analysing the interview data occurred in a stepwise approach. Preliminary to the interview, the process map was used to gain an holistic understanding about the role and function of the interviewee. This resulted in more detailed and relevant interview questions which meant that the general interview format was specified more, but was still guided by the theoretical framework. During the interview several notes were taken on relevant topics. These notes were used to memorize important statements. Moreover, to preserve the information in its richest format, the interviews were recorded with a voice recorder. The next step was summarizing the interview, with the help of the taken notes and the recordings. This was done directly after the interview, with the information still fresh in mind. On the basis of the previous steps and summary, the relevant findings were categorized under the same headings previously mentioned, but were kept in a separate file. An critical note is that the contribution of the success factors on the project success was analysed using the perceived success of the interviewees. Interviewees were asked to what extent a certain factor could or had influence(d) the success of the implementation of the PCS. This method of determining success is supported in the project literature. In the project literature, the measurement of project success has always been surrounded by ambiguity (Lavagnon, 2009). Studies of project success ‚have not led to a consensus on, a definition of, nor a means for measuring such success‛. Because of this findings, and since this study has an interpretive character, using perceived success as a measure for incremental change success is justified.

In the last stage of the data analysis, the structured data of observations, desk research and interviews were combined in to a master file that contained all relevant interpreted, structured and categorized information to present the case situation.

On the account of intentionality in incremental change processes: an interpretive case study

1