ACTOR-NETWORK THEORY & ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE:
EVALUATING THEORY IN PRACTICE
A Master Thesis
University of Groningen Faculty of Economics and Business
MSc Business Administration – Change Management
Student T.F.A. Schoemaker S2706881 t.f.a.schoemaker@student.rug.nl Supervisor Dr. C. Reezigt Co-assessor Dr. M.A.G. van Offenbeek
28 June 2017
2 ABSTRACT
3 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
4 TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION ... 5
THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK... 6
Origins of ANT ... 6
ANT & Organizational Change: Key Concepts ... 7
Actor-Networks ... 7
Translation ... 8
ANT & Organizational Change in sum ... 10
METHODOLOGY ... 11
DIAGNOSIS ... 15
Current Problematization of the Prime Mover ... 15
Current Interessement/Enrollment of Actors ... 17
SOLUTION DESIGN ... 21
1. Problematization: Become (In)dispensable ... 21
2. Interessement/Enrollment: Enroll each Actor ... 22
3. Mobilization: Mobilize and Sustain the Actor-Network ... 24
EVALUATION & LEARNING ... 24
Evaluation & Learning and the Implications ... 24
ANT as Diagnostic Tool ... 24
ANT as Solution Design ... 25
Limitations & Future Research ... 28
Conclusion ... 28
REFERENCES ... 30
APPENDICES ... 32
Appendix I Chart of the interviewed Representatives of Actors ... 32
Appendix II Interview guide: Problematization of the Prime Mover ... 33
Appendix III Interview guide: Interessement/Enrollment – A Senior Manager version ... 35
Appendix IV Interview guide: Interessement/Enrollment – A Manager version ... 38
Appendix V Interview guide: Interessement/Enrollment – An Employee version ... 41
Appendix VI Interview guide: Evaluation & Learning of the Prime Mover ... 43
Appendix VII Matrix 1: Input of the Prime Mover ... 45
Appendix VIII Matrix 2: Input of the Representatives of Actors ... 57
5 INTRODUCTION
One of the fundamental challenges of organizational change is how to get from a current state to a desired state in a specific context. There is no shortage of social theories how to manage this challenge according to Burnes (2014). However, the question is to what extent these theories are actually applicable in practice. This paper is about the applicability of Actor-Network Theory (ANT) as an organizational change approach.
With regard to organizational change, ANT has been applied predominantly as a theoretical lens to analyze case studies (e.g. Czarniawska & Hernes, 2005; Sarker, Sarker, & Sidorova, 2006). This is because of two distinctive aspects of ANT: (1) the theory does not exclude nonhuman components (e.g. documents and technical objects) from the analysis, and (2) it does not a priori distinguish between macro (e.g. the organization) and micro (e.g. the employee), allowing practitioners to increase or decrease the level of complexity depending on the purpose (Latour, 1999; Sarker et al., 2006).
However, little is known to what extent ANT can be applied as an actual change approach in a business context. Therefore, the aim of this research is to evaluate the applicability of ANT for this matter. As part of Academic Problem Solving, the following business problem is addressed to evaluate ANT in practice: A department of an Energy Network Operator (ENO as pseudonym) struggles with keeping its operational activities aligned with its ever-changing strategy. To overcome this struggle, a system known as Strategy Deployment is opted to be implemented within the department. The system, comprised of human and non-human components, ensures alignment between operational activities and strategic goals of the organization. The Specific Business Problem (SBP) addressed with ANT is how to implement this system within the department. The underlying Generic Business Problem (GBP) addressed with ANT is how to design a change approach where human and non-human components need to be realigned. By creating a solution for the SBP, the application of ANT as an organizational change approach can be evaluated while the GBP can be addressed.
From a theoretical perspective, the application of ANT as a change approach is interesting since the theory’s explanatory power is utilized descriptively and normatively to address the business problem. This leads to a better understanding of ANT’s capabilities and limitations when used for organizational change purposes, as the theory is not solely used as a theoretical lens but is also applied as a solution.
From a practical perspective, addressing the SBP/GBP with ANT can provide practitioners (e.g. change agents) valuable insights how to deal with the challenge of realigning human and non-human components in a business context. This research illustrates how the challenge can be overcome by showing how a context specific change approach can be designed based on ANT. Furthermore, this research points out to practitioners which aspects of ANT are suitable for organizational change and which aspects are inappropriate and/or neglected.
6 The paper begins with the Theoretical Framework. This chapter discusses ANT’s origins and key concepts with regard to organizational change. The concepts defined in this chapter are used throughout the paper as they form the foundation for addressing the SBP and GBP. Then, the Methodology is described to show how ANT is applied in this research to address the SBP and GBP. The research site is described, the data collection methods are presented, the analysis plan is clarified and the reliability and validly are discussed. The final three chapters are based on the Academic Problem Solving Cycle (Van Aken et al., 2012) and are as follows: Diagnosis, Solution Design and Evaluation & Learning. The Diagnosis and Solution Design chapters revolve around addressing the SBP. The outcomes are presented of applying ANT both descriptively and normatively. As final chapter, Evaluation & Learning addresses the GBP with ANT by discussing the key outcomes of the evaluation regarding the Diagnosis and Solution Design of the SBP. Furthermore, the implications are discussed of applying ANT as an organizational change approach. The paper closes with the conclusion.
THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
This chapter revolves around the key concepts of ANT with regard to organizational change. The chapter begins with a brief overview of the origins of the theory, followed by an examination of the key concepts of ANT with regard to organizational change, and closes with the synopsis of the chapter.
Origins of ANT
7 ANT & Organizational Change: Key Concepts
Actor-Network Theory (ANT), also known as Sociology of Translation, is an approach to systematically trace and describe how power relations form (Callon, 1986a; Latour, 1996; Law, 2009). It is “a toolkit for telling interesting stories about, and interfering in, those relations” (Law, 2009, p. 142). Actor-Networks and Translation are the key concepts behind ANT, as they cover the main characteristics of the theory and provide a workable set of tools for case studies (Law, 2009). These concepts form a theoretical lens that can be used for diagnosing business problems such as the SBP/GBP. This research also applies these concepts for the solution design of the SBP. This section begins with examining Actor-Networks, followed by Translation.
Actor-Networks
ANT is about Networks. When applying ANT for the purpose of organizational change, an Actor-Network is where change can be induced. To understand what Actor-Actor-Networks are, three intertwined concepts need to be examined: Actor, Network and Simplification.
In the late 1980s, Law (1989) applied the concept of Actor-Networks to study the Portuguese maritime expansion during the Age of Discovery. The question that Law (1989) asked himself was how the Portuguese maintained their imperial control during the fifteenth and sixteenth century. According to Law (2009), the Portuguese constructed a network that gave them the opportunity to control half of the world. The network that made it possible consisted out of “ships, sails, mariners, navigators, stores, spices, winds, currents, astrolabes, stars, guns, ephemerides, gifts [and] merchants’ drafts” (Law, 2009, p. 146). The enumeration illustrates that the Portuguese maritime network consisted not only out of human, but also out of non-human components. In ANT terms, this is referred to as a heterogeneous network. ANT sees nothing but networks, which are comprised of people and other components such as machines, texts and even animals (Latour, 1996; Law, 1992). This is one of the key characteristics of ANT (Law, 1992). By summing up the interactions between the human and non-human components, a network can be traced (i.e. analyzed) (Latour, 1996; Latour, 1999). The notion of regarding everything as heterogeneous networks opens up new possibilities. For instance, the distinction between micro and macro can be dissolved, since it is no longer the question of how big a network is, but how long and how intensely connected it is (Latour, 1996). This is why ANT does not make distinctions between micro and macro, since it is a matter of shorter or longer chains of connections and their mutual alignment (Callon, 1991; Latour, 1996). This way of looking, as illustrated by Law (1989), is part of what characterizes ANT and belongs to the “toolkit” for analyzing cases (Law, 2009) such as business problems. When analyzing complex networks such as organizations, this way of looking allows the analyst to increase or decrease the level of detail and complexity depending on the purpose (Latour, 1999; Sarker et al., 2006). ANT uses the concepts Simplification and Actor for this.
8 the network used during the Age of Discovery is a complex ensemble of human and nonhuman components. So complex and lengthy that in order to analyze, control and/or change it, the network needs to be simplified. The question is how. The answer lies in a concept known as actor.
An Actor could be “any element which bends space around itself, makes other elements depend upon itself” (Callon & Latour, 1981, p. 286) and makes others do things (Latour, 2005). Examples of actors include humans, documents, systems and other artifacts (Sarker et al., 2006). Callon (1986b) argues that objects such as reports and documents can be actors al well, since they are designed in such a way that others have to act upon their content and initiate movement. Words, concepts and ideas inscribed into documents (e.g. strategic documents) can represent whole populations of humans and non-humans and they can communicate, act and issue orders to these populations (Callon, 1991). By regarding human and non-human components equal, one is able to simplify a complex heterogeneous network (such as an organization) into black-boxes known as actors. This is what ANT considers to be as an Network (Callon, 1986b; Law, 1992). An actor is always a network; hence the term Actor-Network spelled with a hyphen (Law, 1992; Latour, 1999).
However, simplification of a complex network is not without risk. According to Latour (1996), actors are not fixed entities that will always remain the same throughout time, but they can change and become unstable by actions and trials. Law (2009) uses the term “precariousness” for this phenomenon. Actors used to represent complex underlying networks are “fallible” according to Law (1992), and “may degenerate into a failing network” (p. 5). To illustrate this, Law (1992) compares it to the human body. When it is healthy, it is seen as one body. When it is ill however, the physician needs to view the human body as a complex network to diagnose the illness and to treat it (Law, 1992). This is an interesting aspect of ANT with regard to organizational change, since it warns practitioners that identified stakeholders can always become unstable during change, which may cause a failing Actor-Network. To summarize, Actor-Networks provide an alternative perspective to look at complex interactions between human and non-human components. This perspective opens up new possibilities for analyzing and diagnosing business problems such as the SBP/GBP. Heterogeneous networks is the term used to describe this ensemble of people, documents and other objects required for achieving a common goal. Simplification is used to reduce the network complexity by defining actors as black-boxes. Actors make others depend upon themselves (Callon & Latour, 1981), make others do things (Latour, 2005) and interact with each other to form an Actor-Network. However, simplifying a complex heterogeneous network with actors is not without risk. Actors are subject to trials and could become unstable, which may lead to a failing Actor-Network if not handled properly. How to handle trials and changes within an Actor-Network is linked to the second key concept of ANT known as Translation.
Translation
9 a new Actor-Network, organizational change can be achieved and maintained (Sarker et al., 2006). Replacement of an Actor-Network can be accomplished through a process known as translation. Callon (1986a) distinguishes four moments that make up this process. The four moments of translation form the backbone of the Diagnosis and Solution Design of the SBP as these moments function as an organizational change approach.
Translation entails all the negotiations, calculations and acts of persuasion to speak or act on behalf of others (Callon & Latour, 1981). It is about defining and distributing roles that solidify the network by aligning the interests of actors (Callon, 1986b; Sarker et al., 2006). To maintain an Actor-Network for fulfilling its purpose, “we must enroll other wills by translating what they want and by reifying this translation in such a way that none of them can desire anything else any longer (Callon & Latour, p. 296). Aspects such as power, displacement and resistance are addressed during the translation process (Callon, 1986b; Law, 1992), which connect ANT with the realm of organizational change. The translation process consists of four moments known as (1) Problematization, (2) Interessement, (3) Enrollment and (4) Mobilization (Callon, 1986a). This process is orchestrated by the Prime Mover (primum movens), the key actor driving the process of enrolling other actors into a new Actor-Network in order to mobilize it (Callon, 1986a; Sarker et al., 2006).
During the moment of (1) Problematization, the Prime Mover frames the problem in own terms, identifies the actors and seeks a way to become indispensable (Callon, 1986a). The Prime Mover does this by highlighting how the problem affects those involved and outlining that it can be solved if the actors take a detour through its devised Obligatory Passage Point (OPP). The OPP refers to a situation specified by the Prime Mover in which every actor can achieve its own interest by pursuing a shared interest, i.e. the goal of the Actor-Network (see fig 1. in the Diagnosis chapter as illustration). However, cooperation of each actor is not always easily attained. This is because “all the actors we are going to deploy might be associated in such a way that they make others do things” (Latour, 2005, p. 107). According to ANT, each actor has its own interest which it tries to secure, even nonhuman actors such as systems and documents. Texts inscribed in these nonhuman actors “seek to create a reader with the skills needed to mobilize, consolidate, or transform the networks described” (Callon, 1991, p. 140).
10 However, the obstacles used for locking actors in place cannot guarantee success. This is because these obstacles will not necessarily form the desired alliances that constitute an Actor-Network, according to Callon (1986a). The moment of (3) Enrollment is focused on getting all actors to accept their attributed roles to form these alliances and attain cooperation for the goal of the Actor-Network. The devised obstacles are put through trials of strength and are negotiated to get actors to embrace their roles (Callon, 1986a). For the Prime Mover, this moment requires convincing and motivation to instill the desired state of the network and how to reach this state (Czarniawska & Hernes, 2005). The case study of Sarker et al. (2006) illustrates that unsuccessful Enrollment of actors may result in failure of the change initiative.
When actors do embrace their assigned roles, the newly formed Actor-Network has to be mobilized and sustained; the moment of (4) Mobilization is called for. Mobilization is about displacement, about organizing and structuring movements within an Actor-Network (Callon, 1986b). The question is whether or not the represented will follow their representatives (Callon, 1986a). Only a limited amount of individuals are involved during the moments of Interessement and Enrollment (Callon, 1986a). These individuals become the representatives of the actors which they represent. To mobilize the Actor-Network, the Prime Mover has to ensure that the representatives represent the represented (i.e. actors) properly so that its interests (i.e. the goal of the Actor-Network) does not get betrayed. Betrayal occurs when an enrolled actor acts in contradiction to the role it has agreed to play (Callon, 1986a). It may lead to open controversy or to abstention and can destabilize an Actor-Network by undoing the previous moments of translation (Callon, 1991). The Prime Mover reduces the chance of betrayal by creating irreversibility through inscription in texts or technical objects (Callon, 1991). Standardization plays a key role in this by keeping the actors and their representatives aligned by reducing the amount of information put into circulation to make the choices of actors become more predictable and translations more successful (Callon, 1991). Successful translation is when actors speak about others and themselves with minimum ambiguity. Therefore, a strongly aligned Actor-Network is one in which the translations are successful and are relatively similar (Callon, 1991). When an Actor-Network is strongly aligned, it can be simplified as a black box since its behavior has become predictable (Callon, 1991). The final moment of translation gives the Actor-Network its stability and ensures that actors keep playing their assigned role required for achieving the network’s goal (i.e. the OPP). ANT & Organizational Change in sum
This chapter examined ANT with regard to organizational change in an attempt to cover the essence of the theory for inducing organizational change. This section provides the synopsis.
11 An Actor-Network is where change can be induced. In ANT terms, organizational change can be achieved and maintained by replacing a current Actor-Network with a new Actor-Network. Replacement of an Actor-Network can be accomplished through the four moments of translation. These moments function as a change approach to realign the human and non-human components of the current Actor-Network to form the new Actor-Network. The first moment of translation is (1) Problematization, during which the Prime Mover defines the goal of the Actor-Network (i.e. the OPP) and identifies the actors and their representatives using simplification. During (2) Interessement, the Prime Mover speaks with representatives of the actors and devises obstacles to get them on board. During the moment of (3) Enrollment, the devised obstacles are put through trials of strength as the Prime Mover negotiates with the representatives to get actors to embrace their roles. When enrolled, (4) Mobilization is called for as the Actor-Network needs to be mobilized and stabilized. The Prime Mover has to ensure that the representatives represent the represented (i.e. actors) properly. The Prime Mover does this to prevent that its interests (e.g. the goal of the Actor-Network) does not get betrayed by the other actors. The chance of betrayal is reduced by creating irreversibility through inscription in texts or technical objects. Inscription and standardization are applied to make the behavior of actors more predictable and to keep them aligned with the goal of the Network. When actors keep playing their role, the Actor-Network is mobilized and its goal can be achieved.
The four moments of translation provide an approach to form a new and stable Actor-Network to accomplish a predefined goal. The next three chapters illustrate how this approach can be applied both descriptively (Diagnosis) and normatively (Solution Design) for organizational change.
METHODOLOGY
This chapter describes how ANT is applied in this research to address the specific business problem (SBP) and the generic business problem (GBP) of this paper. The chapter contains the description of: the SBP & GBP, research site, research approach, data collection, data analysis, reliability and validity. SBP & GBP
12 Research site
The research was conducted at ENO’s maintenance department. ENO is known for transporting energy in north-west Europe to its end-users. Safety and reliability of its transmission grid is vital. The core task of the maintenance department is to keep to the grid up and running. The maintenance department is the largest department of ENO with around 1200 FTEs out of the 1700 FTEs in total. The 1200 FTEs are divided across eight sub-departments, each with its own area of expertise. In February 2016, the head of the department approved the Terms of Reference to implement Lean. One of the aims is to make a system known as Strategy Deployment functional. A senior manager of the maintenance department and two external consultants were assigned to achieve this aim. The research started around the time that the senior management of the department got acquainted with Lean and Strategy Deployment. The rest of the department was unaware of the new system being implemented at that time. Research approach
13 problem (e.g. the SBP) needs to be researched in practice to study processes, behavior and interactions in depth. Qualitative research was used to describe the (learning) context as a whole (Baarda et al., 2005). Interviews were conducted with the Prime Mover and final adjustments were made to the design based on the evaluation. The key evaluation outcomes were used to address the GBP with ANT. Data collection
Two types of data were collected: interviews and business documents. A total of fourteen semi-structured interviews were conducted: twelve SBP interviews and two GBP interviews. Furthermore, three types of business documents were gathered: strategic documents, the business plan of the maintenance department and templates of visual management boards.
Regarding the SBP interviews: three interviews were conducted with the Prime Mover, six interviews with managers and three interviews with employees. The interviews with the Prime Mover were aimed at capturing the current Problematization. The Prime Mover identified five other actors by applying simplification, made an assumption of their interests, identified their representatives and defined the OPP. The sessions lasted between 50-110 minutes. An informal meeting was held afterwards to confirm the phrasing of the problem. The interviews with managers and employees were aimed at capturing the moment of Interessement/Enrollment of the five actors that the Prime Mover defined. The respondents were representatives of human as well as non-human actors (see appendix I). The representatives were determined with help from the Prime Mover and informants. This lead to a combination of pre-selected managers and randomly chosen employees. The emphasis of the interviews was on validating the defined actors, discovering their interests, determining their stance towards the OPP and identifying obstacles hindering their enrollment. The interviews lasted between 40-70 minutes.
Regarding the GBP interviews: two semi-structured interviews were conducted with the Prime Mover which lasted around 20-30 minutes each. Only the Prime Mover was interviewed because of the politically sensitive contents of the Diagnosis and Solution Design. An interview guide was used based on the following Evaluation & Learning objectives defined by Van Aken et al. (2012): (1) evaluating the results and determining the improvements, (2) learning for future problems in the same context, (3) professional learning and development and (4) advancing generic scientific knowledge about the business problem. The first three objectives were addressed during the interviews.
Interview guides were used based on predefined topic lists (Baarda et al., 2005) and are included as appendices. Furthermore, topic saturation was strived for within the interviews to gain as much data as possible (Baarda et al., 2005). The interviews were recoded with permission and the confidentiality was discussed up front as suggested by Baarda et al. (2005).
14 as they contained inscribed interests (e.g. non-human actors). The documents were gathered before the interviews were conducted as their contents was discussed during the meetings.
Data analysis
Within case analysis techniques from Miles and Huberman (1984) have been used for the data analysis. Regarding the SBP interviews: the interviews were transcribed and analyzed for patterns concerning the four moments of translation (Callon, 1986a). The template approach to coding was used which utilizes existing concepts (e.g. actors, obstacles, OPP) of a theory instead of building new ones (Van Aken et al., 2012). A role-ordered matrix was used to sort the data (i.e. Dutch quotes) into categories (Miles & Huberman, 1984). Two matrices were created containing: (1) input from the Prime Mover and (2) input from the representatives of actors. Both matrices were used as input for the Diagnosis and are included in the appendix (VII & VIII).
Regarding the GBP interviews: the same method was applied for analyzing the GBP interviews as for the SBP interviews. The interviews were transcribed, analyzed for patterns, coded by using the template approach and sorted in a role-ordered matrix. However, the Evaluation & Learning objectives were used (Van Aken et al., 2012) instead of the moments of translation (Callon, 1986a). Matrix 3, known as the evaluation and learning of the Prime Mover, was used as input for the Evaluation & Learning chapter and is included in the appendix (IX).
The business documents were analyzed for patterns regarding their inscribed interests. However, these patterns were not coded. Instead, document summary forms were used to describe the documents’ context, significance and key contents (Miles & Huberman, 1984). These forms were used as input for the Diagnosis. Unfortunately, the forms could not be included as appendix due to their confidential nature. Notwithstanding, this research used data obtained from interviews to a greater extent than data obtained from business documents since the respondents gave weight to the contents of these documents. Reliability
According to Baarda et al. (2005) and Van Aken et al. (2012), four potential sources of bias need to be addressed to ensure reliability: (1) researcher, (2) instruments, (3) respondents and (4) situation.
15 change within ENO makes repeatability difficult.
Regarding the GBP: reliability is difficult to guarantee of the Evaluation & Learning. This is because the justification of the Diagnosis and Solution Design was only possible by the (1) researcher who conducted the case study, interviewing was used as only (2) instrument and the (3) respondents were pre-selected. However, the interviews were conducted in a (4) private office where the respondents could speak out freely (Van Aken et al., 2012).
Validity
Validity of the results is determined by three criteria (Van Aken et al., 2012): (1) construct validity, (2) internal validity and (3) external validity.
Regarding the SBP: construct validity was assured by using operationalized concepts from Sarker et al. (2006) verified by the supervisor. Internal validity was strived for by arranging peer-debriefings with informants (i.e. colleagues), field note keeping and asking feedback from a mentor and supervisor to confirm findings and conclusions (Baarda et al., 2005). Furthermore, data from multiple organizational levels were combined and validated by the Prime Mover and informants. However, the external validity of the Diagnosis and Solution Design is limited due to their specific nature and purpose.
Regarding the GBP: the validity of the Evaluation & Learning is limited. This is because the construct validity and internal validity were only confirmed by the supervisor. However, the external validity is considered to be higher since the key findings and implications are not context specific, but are focused on ANT (in combination with organizational change) in general.
DIAGNOSIS
In this chapter, the concepts of ANT are applied to diagnose the specific business problem (SBP) to gain knowledge on the context and nature of the problem (Van Aken et al., 2012). The current state is described of the Actor-Network ‘Strategy Deployment’ which the Prime Mover needs to mobilize. The chapter is divided into two parts. Part one focusses on the current Problematization used by the Prime Mover. Part two describes the current Interessement/Enrollment of the actors. Both parts combined illustrate the causes of the SBP and give a rich image of the situation. The information in this chapter serves as input for the Solution Design.
Current Problematization of the Prime Mover
16 Framing the problems
The Prime Mover experiences two related issues that hinders it to play its role properly and triggers it to come into action. First, it has difficulties with the broadly formulated strategic goals of the company and the consequences of this for the maintenance department. According to the Prime Mover, the strategy of ENO “is politically formulated on the highest level [of the organization], resulting in meaningless content. [The managers] one level lower in the organization cannot do anything with it” [D3-2]. The top management of ENO has overhauled the company’s high level strategy in the past few years, but has not made a concrete translation of this for the maintenance department. According to the Prime Mover, this results in a high level strategy that is not connected with the rest of the organization and leads to an overgrowth of non-aligned initiatives and activities within the maintenance department. The second issue that the Prime Mover experiences is difficulties with closing the Plan-Do-Check-Act (PDCA) cycle within its focal department. “We [as maintenance department] are able to Plan and Do really well, but subsequently Checking if it works and then Acting on it.. We do it ad-hoc, but not consistently” [D2-1]. According to the Prime Mover, these two issues lead to inefficiencies in business processes, unclear and unfocused activities and employees who do not know their contribution to the company’s goals. “We are running back and forth and we are busy with everything. And once in a while the question is asked, do we have to do everything at the same time? We do everything at the same time causing everything to delay” [D2-1]. To fix these issues, the Prime Mover began with creating the new Actor-Network ‘Strategy Deployment’ in the summer of 2015. When mobilized, this Actor-Network should help to secure the Prime Mover’s interest of realizing strategic focus and control within the maintenance department that allows it to play its assigned role of managing and improving quality properly. The Prime Mover wants: (1) clearly formulated focused goals, (2) a planning horizon of three years, (3) well defined activities how to achieve these goals, (4) a continuous improvement work ethic where employees give input how to reach these goals and (5) more fact-based management to be able to monitor and control processes and activities more quantitatively. The SBP that the Prime Mover faces is how to mobilize the Actor-Network ‘Strategy Deployment’. First, actors need to be identified. Second, these actors need to support the goal of the network (i.e. the OPP).
Identifying Actors
17 Defining the OPP
The five identified actors need to support the OPP (i.e. the goal of the Actor-Network) in order for the network to function. The Prime Mover defined the OPP based on what is known as Strategy Deployment (hence the name of the Actor-Network) or Hoshin Kanri. As part of the Lean Manufacturing philosophy, it is a systematic approach to organization-wide management that integrates strategic management with daily operational management (Witcher & Butterworth, 2001). The approach is based on the Plan-Do-Check-Act (PDCA) cycle and is centered around continuous improvement of business processes (Hutchins, 2008). Strategy is deployed downwards in the organization, while feedback is sent upwards to the top of the organization. Human and non-human components need to be aligned and working together properly to make the deployment of strategy successful. The Prime Mover defined the OPP as follows: every actor needs to take part in the Strategy Deployment process. The Prime Mover divides the process in four parts: (1) Long term goals (±3 years in advance), (2) Annual goals, (3) Selection of activities to achieve the goals and (4) Execution of activities and monitoring contribution of activities to realize the goals. Each actor needs to play its role for Strategy Deployment to work (see next section). The Prime Mover has not defined the OPP in more detail.
An issue that arose during the OPP construction is the realization of the Prime Mover that the actor itself might not have the capability to motivate the other actors to take a detour through its OPP. “[A Prime Mover composed out of one senior manager and two external consultants] is really weak if this is the case. Way too weak [..] Especially if he [the senior manager] is helped only by two external consultants of which the preservability is limited” [D3-1]. Furthermore, the Prime Mover perceives that a sense of urgency to change is currently low within ENO. “There is no sense of urgency [to change]”[D3-2]. “I do not feel a sense of urgency [to change] anywhere. And that does not help with creating awareness [to change] and speeding up the [creation of] awareness [D3-1].
Current Interessement/Enrollment of Actors
Since the Prime Mover began in the summer of 2015 with setting up the Actor-Network ‘Strategy Deployment’, the current Interessement/Enrollment of actors could be analyzed and diagnosed. In this section, the following is presented per actor: a brief description of the actor, its interests, its current stance towards the OPP, its role in the Actor-Network and the obstacles hindering its enrollment. Figure 1 provides an overview of the current state of the Actor-Network ‘Strategy Deployment’.
Strategy Matrix (SX)
18
19 activities should be initiated by MGT to realize the strategic goals. SX does this by showing the connections between strategic goals and activities. Its stance towards the OPP is positive, since the only way to secure its inscribed interests is to join the Actor-Network. The role that SX should play in the network is providing MGT focus on what is strategically important for the maintenance department and make the connections clear between goals and activities for MGT and OS. An obstacle that hinders SX from playing its role properly is the shortage of strategic content, which MGT has to provide.
Visual Management Boards (VMBs)
VMBs make up the second non-human actor which the Prime Mover defined. The boards “should provide a representation of what happened last week and, as a figure of speech, yesterday along with where we should work on in the coming days or maybe even today” [H1-1]. The actor highlights aspects of operational processes in a visual manner and gives an overview of the performance. The Prime Mover introduced the boards around the time the new Actor-Network was created. Their interests inscribed in the template are twofold: (1) VMBs make the deployment of strategic goals clear for MGT and OS by showing it on the left side of the board. Furthermore, (2) VMBs monitor operational performance by depicting the KPIs of the business processes. Their stance towards the OPP is positive, since Strategy Deployment allows VMBs to display the deployment of goals. The role VMBs play in the new network is to make the connection clear for MGT and OS between the strategic and operational goals and to monitor the progress of operational goal realization. By bringing MGT and OS together, VMBs force exchange of operational information on a high frequency. However, two obstacles hinder their enrollment: (1) input from SX is required to make deployment of strategic goals clear. At the moment of data collection, SX could not provide this information to VMBs due to lack of input from MGT. Furthermore, (2) MGT and OS are somewhat reluctant to use VMBs. According to their representatives, the actors do not fully see the added value of VMBs and have difficulties with the standardized template.
Business Plan (BP)
20 Management (MGT)
According to one of its representatives, MGT ensures that OS “does the right things”, that OS and itself work on their competences and that both actors work safe and efficient while maintaining security of supply (H1-1). MGT’s interests are twofold: according to their representatives, (1) MGT wants to achieve long term focus and clarity, along with (2) better knowing the progress of (strategic) goal realization. The representatives of MGT are both positive and negative about the OPP. Representatives with a positive stance towards the OPP are interested in joining the Actor-Network since they believe that MGT can secure its interests if it passes through the OPP. “As it is currently presented, I think it [Strategy Deployment] helps to bring much more focus on activities that we have to develop. The benefit, I believe, is in determining what activities contribute to the main [strategic] activities we have identified as being important. We did that much less in the past. We did it, but not clearly and not written down” [G2-1]. Representatives with a negative stance towards the OPP have difficulties with SX and VMBs that want to join the Actor-Network and with the OPP that forces MGT to work with these actors. “I do not mind that others are working on it [SX inscription], but I struggle with it [..]“Now I am also forced to take what is currently available, and put it into a different format [SX in this case] so that others understand it.. I am not looking forward to that” [F2-1]. Furthermore, they are not convinced that the OPP allows MGT to secure its interests. “I [as MGT representative] do not need Strategy Deployment, I do not perceive it as support [F2-1]. According to its representatives and the Prime Mover, MGT’s role in the Actor-Network is to give direction to the organization, to make choices in the multitude of activities and to be clear and honest in its communication towards OS. Two obstacles that hinder MGT’s enrollment: (1) lack of discipline (as internal obstacle)“Everything is well thought-out and is well designed, but the execution demands discipline too. And it is lacking sometimes.. That can definitely be improved” [C3-1]. According to its representatives, MGT is more operationally than strategically oriented and MGT has difficulties with realizing the goals it set out to accomplish. Furthermore, (2) lack of adequate and timely performance information. Current management reports and dashboards do not suffice, according to two of MGT’s representatives. This makes strategic control more difficult to exert and hindering the actor to act timely.
Operational Staff (OS)
21 ‘Strategy Deployment’ was not used. OS representatives with an uninterested stance towards the OPP are disengaged with MGT’s plans. They feel that they have no influence on the goals of the organization and do not know to what they contribute to since “everything is so far removed from me [OS representative]” [C5-1]. According to the Prime Mover, the role defined for OS in the Actor-Network “demands of the employees that they should give input. You want to introduce continuous improvement, [so] you want that employees give input how to realize the goals” [D2-1]. Obstacles hindering OS’ enrollment are twofold: (1) a timing issue with the deployment of goals to working agreements. The strategic goals in BP are not yet approved when the working agreements between MGT and OS are finalized. This issue needs to be solved to allow OS to understand its contribution to these goals. Furthermore, (2) OS perceives a distance between MGT and itself. According to the representatives, the perceived distance is due to a lack of transparency of MGT: “you do not know the agenda of the men above you [in the hierarchy], but you have a certain feeling. They [MGT] say certain information, but you constantly have the feeling that there is somethings else going on” [F4-1]. Moreover, the representatives perceive low involvement of MGT: “the hierarchy of [ENO] is designed in such a way that I don’t have the feeling that they [MGT] listen to the shop floor..” [C5-1]. These aspects of the relationship between OS and MGT need to be addressed before OS can play its role well.
SOLUTION DESIGN
This chapter outlines the solution to the specific business problem (SBP) addressed in this paper. Based on the current Problematization and the current state of Interessement/Enrollment, the key question that is answered is: How to get the Actor-Network ‘Strategy Deployment’ mobilized within ENO’s maintenance department? The solution is designed for the Prime Mover and is presented based on the priority level of the advice. The first priority for the Prime Mover is to address its (in)dispensability as part of its Problematization. The second priority is to enroll each Actor as part of Interessement/Enrollment. The final priority is to mobilize and sustain the Actor-Network.
1. Problematization: Become (In)dispensable
22 more clearly and emphasize what the role requires of them (as done in the previous chapter). The Plan-Do-Check-Act cycle can be used as template for this as it is the core of Strategy Deployment (i.e. the OPP), easy to explain and widely known. Role assignment can be done as follows: assigning Plan to MGT supported by SX and BP, Do to OS supported by VMBs, Check to MGT supported by VMBs and SX, and Act to MGT. Secondly, the current Prime Mover should increase its power by forming an alliance with the representatives of MGT who have a positive stance towards the OPP. Working together with these representatives should increase the Prime Mover’s span of influence required for the moment of Interessement and Enrollment. Finally, the issue of a perceived low urgency to change need to be addressed as it hinders the Prime Mover to make the OPP significant to the other actors. From an ANT perspective, this issue can be bypassed when we convince the actors that their interests can only be secured when supporting the OPP (see priority 2).
2. Interessement/Enrollment: Enroll each Actor
The second priority should be the enrollment of each actor to the Actor-Network ‘Strategy Deployment’. Advice is given on how to get actors interested to join the network. Furthermore, obstacles need to be removed that hinder actors to join the network and new obstacles need to be placed to prevent actors from securing their interests without supporting the goal of the network. Note that certain obstacles make use of other actors to weave the Actor-Network together by creating interdependencies.
Strategy Matrix (SX)
SX is considered as being interested in joining the Actor-Network, since the only way for the actor to secure its interests is going through the OPP and play its role. This is because the actor is specifically created for this network. However, before SX can be considered as enrolled, MGT should provide input so that it is able to play its inscribed role. Obstacles do not have to be placed to make SX willing to take a detour through the OPP, since the actor has no legitimacy outside the Actor-Network.
Visual Management Boards (VMBs)
23 to be involved in order for the VMBs to function properly. This secures OS’ interest of more involvement of MGT. Inscription of goal deployment into VMBs’ template can be used as obstacle to keep the actor depended on the Actor-Network.
Business Plan (BP)
One of BP’s interests is to determine where MGT and OS should be in two years. Therefore, joining the network is a logical move since BP can get the input it seeks easily from SX. In addition, BP can use SX and VMBs to convey its contents to a wider audience. However, BP’s enrollment depends on the input it can obtain from SX. Therefore, MGT should complete its inscription in SX first. The Prime Mover has to ensure that BP allows MGT to spend resources to realize strategic goals, not just to realize operational goals. This can be done by forming an alliance with the representatives of the BP. Minimum risk of betrayal is present since the representatives themselves have a positive stance towards the OPP and their interests can only be secured by cooperating with the network.
Management (MGT)
As described in the previous chapter, MGT is divided in its stance towards the OPP. Representatives with a positive stance are interested in joining the network to secure their actor’s interests. The Prime Mover should make them an ally for helping to enroll the actor. Representatives with a negative stance are not convinced that joining the network will help to secure the interests. The Prime Mover should undertake five actions. Firstly, demonstrate that VMBs can help to secure MGT’s interest of better knowing the progress of goal realization by showing that VMBs can monitor operational processes on a weekly basis. The lack of adequate and timely performance information as obstacle can also be removed when using VMBs. Secondly, emphasize that VMBs’ template does not have to be very restricted. Thirdly, guide MGT through SX’ inscription process and ensure that MGT can still achieve its own interests when inscription is completed. Several representatives expressed their concerns that SX might become too detailed and numerically. Fourthly, address the lack of discipline. This obstacle can be removed by making use of fixed agendas and tight time keeping during meetings. Furthermore, assign a time keeper and, if necessary, ask for guidance from a management coach (B2-1). Finally, place the following four obstacles with help from MGT representatives with a positive stance towards the OPP: (1) inscribe long term focus and clarity in SX and VMBs, (2) organize frequently a meeting to discuss the content of SX, (3) ensure that MGT gets most of its information about the progress of goal realization from VMBs by inscribing this interest in the its template, and (4) ensure that the contents of SX is discussed in meetings between MGT and OS, such as bilateral meetings and performance evaluations. Make standardized agendas for these meetings (D3-3).
Operational Staff (OS)
24 honesty and involvement of MGT. To get OS enrolled, the Prime Mover should start with removing two obstacles hindering its enrollment: (1) a timing issue with the deployment of goals to working agreements need to be fixed to make OS’ contribution clear. It can be solved by using SX instead of BP. SX has a longer planning horizon than BP and can remove yearly fluctuations that result in timing issues. Furthermore, (2) the lack of transparency and low involvement of MGT need to be addressed. “Increasing transparency is a process that needs to grow [..] It is a long haul.” [G2-1]. However, VMBs can contribute by providing a context where MGT and OS work together and where they need to be transparent and involved to secure their interests. Moreover, VMBs can function as an obstacle to keep OS engaged with the network. By making MGT and OS dependent on VMBs and on each other, every actor can secure its interests while supporting the OPP.
3. Mobilization: Mobilize and Sustain the Actor-Network
After the obstacles and roles have been negotiated and accepted, the Prime Mover has to ensure that actors keep playing their role and reduce the change of betrayal. Ensure that the inscriptions in SM, BP, VMBs and obstacles are completed and put standardized procedures in place regarding the use of Strategy Deployment within the maintenance department to create irreversibility. To determine whether the network is fully mobilized, ask any actor/representative to speak about Strategy Deployment and their role in the Actor-Network. If actors/representatives speak about others and themselves with minimum ambiguity, translations are successful and the network is mobilized and sustainable (Callon, 1991).
EVALUATION & LEARNING
This chapter addresses the generic business problem (GBP) with ANT by discussing the key outcomes of the evaluation regarding the Diagnosis and Solution Design of the specific business problem (SBP). The emphasis is on the knowledge gained from applying ANT for the purpose of inducing organizational change and the corresponding implications. The chapter is divided into three parts: (1) Evaluation & Learning and the Implications, (2) Limitations & Future Research and (3) Conclusion.
Evaluation & Learning and the Implications
In this section, the extent to which ANT can be applied as an organizational change approach is evaluated. The section is divided into two parts: (1) ANT as Diagnostic Tool and (2) ANT as Solution Design. Each part contains the key evaluation outcomes linked to the literature along with the theoretical and practical implications.
ANT as Diagnostic Tool
25 (fig. 1) and argues that the model is applicable for diagnosing future problems in similar contexts (e.g. within ENO to implement Lean). More specifically, the Prime Mover favors the identification of human as well as non-human actors, the interests of the actors and the obstacles keeping them from joining the network. These findings correspond with Czarniawska and Hernes (2005) and Sarker et al. (2006).
However, one aspect was neglected in the Diagnosis according to the Prime Mover: the hierarchy. The hierarchy within ENO influences the interactions between actors and should therefore be accounted for when negotiating with representatives: “it sometimes appears that there is no hierarchy, but when it comes to it, you find that some things happen or not because the top [of the organization] said so” [D3-1]. ANT sees nothing but networks of actors (Latour, 1996) and neglects this aspect. This can be regarded as a shortcoming of the theory, since ANT does focus on structuration of networks (see e.g. Callon, 1986a; 1991). A comparison can be made with Structuration Theory (ST) to put this shortcoming into perspective. Like ANT, ST is concerned with bridging the micro and macro level (Pozzebon & Pinsonneault, 2005). However, ST does not use a concept such as simplification to bridge the gap between both levels. ST transcends the gap by proposing that the macro level in the form of structure (including hierarchy) and the micro level in the form of agency (e.g. actors) should be understood as a duality that influences each other (Jones, Orlikowski & Munir, 2004). According to ST, structure is embedded in the actions of actors that are recursively executed (Pozzebon & Pinsonneault, 2005). ST in ANT terms: actors determine the structure of the network and the structure of the network determines the behavior of actors. The Prime Mover indicates that ‘structure (in the form of hierarchy) determining behavior of actors’ is neglected in the Diagnosis, since the duality aspect lacks in ANT.
The theoretical implications of ANT as a diagnostic tool are threefold: (1) this research shows that ANT is capable of providing a recognizable overview of a business context required for designing a change approach. Furthermore, (2) ANT’s concepts (e.g. human and non-human actors, interests, obstacles) are applicable and suitable in practice. However, (3) ANT is limited regarding its explanatory power of how networks are being formed compared to alternatives such as ST.
The practical implications are threefold: (1) ANT can be used for diagnosing an organizational change problem and its context. Furthermore, (2) the identification of non-human actors prove to be insightful for practitioners as it helps to approach the problem more holistically by bridging the gap between human and non-human components present in organizations. However, (3) since the aspect of hierarchy is neglected, practitioners should apply the tool with care and have to be aware of this shortcoming when designing a change approach.
ANT as Solution Design
26 ANT as Approach
The change approach as a solution to the SBP is centered around ANT’s four moments of translation. The Prime Mover of the case study favors the main steps of the change approach and the devised obstacles to mobilize the actors. According to the Prime Mover, the main steps (i.e. priorities) are clear and the suggestions are helpful.
However, detailed steps and corresponding alternatives are missing in the design according to the actor. The Prime Mover argues that the practical applicability of the solution is pending on these steps and their sequencing: “[the future Prime Mover] cannot otherwise achieve the next [main] step. And it is not because they [the future Prime Mover] do not want to, but because they [the future Prime Mover] simply do not know what the next small step is” [D3-1]. Unfortunately, these design issues were difficult to solve with ANT due to (1) the theory’s descriptive nature and (2) its thinking first approach to change. According to Law (2009), (1) “ANT is descriptive rather than foundational in explanatory terms, which means that it is a disappointment for those seeking strong accounts [..] Instead it tells stories about “how” relations assemble or don’t” (p. 191). ANT’s descriptive nature could be utilized for the Diagnosis, but turned out to be counterintuitive when designing the solution. For instance, the sequencing issue could not be addressed with ANT literature. This resulted in design issues difficult to explain/solve with the theory. Furthermore, (2) ANT’s thinking first approach to change also contributed to the design issues. According to Mintzberg and Westley (2001), a thinking first approach is a rational way of addressing a problem with a clearly defined process: define, diagnose, design and decide. Callon’s (1986a) moments of translation can be classified as thinking first, since the approach is rational and starts with defining the network and roles (as part of Problematization). A thinking first approach works best when the issue is clear, facts prevail and data is reliable (Mintzberg & Westley, 2001). However, ANT is concerned with capturing complex heterogeneous networks that are anything but clear, factual-oriented and reliable in terms of data. This proved to be problematic in combination with the APSC (Van Aken et al., 2012), since it was difficult to anticipate and predict (counter)actions from actors in advance based on data of which the reliability is limited (e.g. conversations with representatives). Therefore, the detailed steps, sequencing and alternatives were too complex to design up front and were not included in the design.
The theoretical implication is that ANT, combined with the APSC, has fundamental shortcomings when applied as a change approach due to its thinking first emphasis. This research shows that ANT’s descriptive and thinking first nature limits the theory’s ability to solve complex organizational change issues.
27 iterative nature. Instead of one large cycle like the APSC, AR uses multiple small cycles to reduce the time between the diagnosis and the intervention. Therefore, ANT combined with AR would allow for a more trial-and-error friendly approach to experiment with detailed steps, alternatives and sequencing.
ANT’s emphasis on Power
The Solution Design of the SBP is centered around gaining and using power to get actors to (keep) play(ing) their assigned role. The design resembles the work of Callon (1986a) and Callon (1986b) and illustrates ANT’s emphasis on power. Although the Machiavellian character of ANT has been criticized before (Latour, 1999), it is important to discuss the consequences when applying the theory for organizational change.
Applying ANT led to the insight that the theory uses a bureaucratic approach to force actor participation: devising and deploying obstacles, inscribing interests in non-human actors and utilizing standardization. Furthermore, ANT’s emphasis on power puts the Prime Mover in the spotlight instead of the actors that have to undergo the change, as illustrated by priority one of the Solution Design. The underlying assumption is that if the Prime Mover is powerful enough to persuade actors to play their role, the network will function as intended. However, even if actors are enrolled, they need to have the required skills to play their assigned role. Unfortunately, ANT does not account for this aspect. A comparison can be made with Organizational Development (OD) to put these findings into perspective. As a change approach, OD is concerned with the transfer of knowledge and skills to make a system (i.e. network) able to manage change (Cummings & Worley, 2009). Unlike ANT, OD induces change by a participative and collaborative process of discussion, experimentation and learning (Burnes & Cooke, 2012) rather than forcing actors to play an assigned role by creating irreversibility. Compared to OD, ANT as a change approach is bureaucratic, obsessed with power and has shortcomings with regard to the development of skills required for playing the roles.
The theoretical implications are twofold: (1) due to its emphasis on power, ANT neglects fundamental aspects (such as development of skills) that limits the theory’s applicably as a change approach. The question is in which situation is ANT’s approach advisable. Finally, (2) the theory tends to stimulate bureaucratic solutions to force participation. This raises questions such as whether this is desirable and whether this is maintainable.
28 Limitations & Future Research
The outcomes of this research should be interpreted in the light of limitations and future research possibilities.
Firstly, at the start of data collection only the senior management of ENO’s maintenance department was acquainted with the change initiative (Strategy Deployment). Middle management received information about the initiative during the data collection, while the rest of the employees (OS) were unaware of its contents. Therefore, the data obtained from interviews with OS’ representatives is limited since these respondents had not been informed about the upcoming change at the time of interviewing.
Secondly, only a limited amount of respondents could be interviewed due to time and capacity restrictions. This, combined with the first limitation, resulted in an unbalanced distribution of respondents across actors. Furthermore, the precariousness of actors (Law, 2009) could not be studied due to this limitation. It is unknown to what extent this limitation has influenced the outcomes.
Thirdly, the Solution Design was not implemented at ENO. Although implementation was beyond the scope of this research, it would have provided additional insights regarding the application of ANT for organizational change. For future research, it might be interesting to examine to what extent bureaucratic solutions (based on ANT) lead to the desired outcomes and whether these outcomes are maintainable over time.
Finally, the change initiative could only be researched for a relative short amount of time (three months) at ENO with the APSC. It is unknown to what extent these factors have influenced the outcomes of this research. For future research, it might be interesting to compare different contexts in which ANT is applied to induce change to determine when the theory can be utilized and when its application should be avoided. Furthermore, future research should examine the application of ANT and AR to determine whether this combination works better than ANT combined with the APSC.
Conclusion
This paper described how ANT can be applied as an organizational change approach and to what extent the theory is applicable for this matter. By creating a solution for a specific business problem (how to implement Strategy Deployment at a department of an Energy Network Operator), the application of the theory could be evaluated while the generic business problem (how to design a change approach where human and non-human components need to be realigned) could be addressed.
30 REFERENCES
Baarda, D.B., De Goede, M.P.M., & Teunissen, J. (2005). Basisboek kwalitatief onderzoek (2nd ed.).
Groningen: Wolters-Noordhoff.
Burnes, B. (2014). Managing change (6th ed.). Harlow: Prentice Hall Financial Times.
Burnes, B., & Cooke, B. (2012). Review article: The past, present and future of organization development: Taking the long view. Human Relations, 65(11), 1395-1429.
Callon, M. (1986a). Some elements of a sociology of translation. In J. Law (Ed.), Power, action and belief: A new sociology of knowledge (pp. 196-229). London: Sociology review monograph London.
Callon, M. (1986b). The sociology of an actor-network: The case of the electric vehicle. In M. Callon, A. Rip, & J. Law (Eds.), Mapping the dynamics of science and technology: Sociology of science in the real world (pp. 19-34). Houndmills: The Macmillan Press.
Callon, M. (1991). Techno‐economic networks and irreversibility. The Sociological Review, 38(1), 132-161.
Callon, M., & Latour, B. (1981). Unscrewing the big leviathan: How actors macro-structure reality and how sociologists help them to do so. In K. Knorr & A. Cicourel (Eds.), Advances in Social Theory and Methodology (pp. 277-303). London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
Coughlan, P., & Coghlan, D. (2002). Action research for operations management. International journal of Operations & Production Management, 22(2), 220-240.
Cummings, T., & Worley, C. (2009). Organization development & change (9th ed.). Mason, OH:
Cengage Learning.
Czarniawska, B., & Hernes, T. (2005). Actor-network theory and organizing. Copenhagen: Copenhagen Business School Press.
Hutchins, D. (2008). Hoshin Kanri: The strategic approach to continuous improvement. Aldershot: Gower Publishing.
Jones, M., Orlikowski, W., & Munir, K. (2004). Structuration theory and information systems: A critical reappraisal. In J. Mingers & L. Willcocks (Eds.), Social theory and philosophy for information systems (pp. 297-328). Chichester: John Wiley & Sons.
31 Latour, B. (1999). On recalling ANT. In J. Law & J. Hassard (Eds.), Actor network and after (pp.
15-25). Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.
Latour, B. (2005). Reassembling the social: An introduction to Actor-Network-Theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Law, J. (1989). Technology and heterogeneous engineering: The case of Portuguese expansion. In W.E. Bijker, T. P. Hughes, & T. Pinch (Eds.), The social construction of technological systems (pp. 111-134). Massachusetts: The MIT Press.
Law, J. (1992). Notes on the theory of the actor-network: Ordering, strategy, and heterogeneity. Systems practice, 5(4), 379-393.
Law, J. (1999). After ANT: Complexity, naming and topology. In J. Law & J. Hassard (Eds.), Actor network and after (pp. 1-14). Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.
Law, J. (2009). Actor network theory and material semiotics. In B. S. Turner (Ed.), The new blackwell companion to social theory (pp. 141-158). Chichester: Blackwell Publishing.
Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1984). Qualitative data analysis: A sourcebook of new methods. California: SAGE Publications.
Mintzberg, H., & Westley, F. (2001). Decision making: It's not what you think. MIT Sloan Management Review, 42(3), 89.
Pozzebon, M., & Pinsonneault, A. (2005). Challenges in conducting empirical work using structuration theory: Learning from IT research. Organization studies, 26(9), 1353-1376.
Sarker, S., Sarker, S., & Sidorova, A. (2006). Understanding business process change failure: An actor-network perspective. Journal of management information systems, 23(1), 51-86.
Schmidgen, H. (2014). Bruno Latour in pieces: An intellectual biography. New York: Fordham University Press.
Van Aken, J. E., Berends, H., & Van der Bij, H. (2012). Problem solving in organizations: A methodological handbook for business and management students (2nd ed.). Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
32 APPENDICES
33 Appendix II Interview guide: Problematization of the Prime Mover
Zoals u weet ben ik een student aan de RuG en ben ik bezig met onderzoek doen ten behoeve van mijn master scriptie voor mijn studie Change Management, een specialisatie van Bedrijfskunde.
Het onderzoek gaat over het implementeren van ‘Strategy Deployment’, het doorvertalen van strategie volgens de Lean gedachte, binnen [ENO’s onderhoudsafdeling]. Met de uitkomsten van het onderzoek en bijbehorend advies hoop ik een steentje bij te dragen aan het realiseren van deze systematiek. Ik ben geïnteresseerd in hoe het doorvertalen van strategie nu gaat binnen [de onderhoudsafdeling] en wat de beweegredenen zijn om de Lean variant ‘Strategy Deployment’ te gaan gebruiken.
In dit interview zou ik het graag met u hebben over deze verandering; hoe het gewenste resultaat er uit ziet, een inschatting maken welke stakeholders (actoren) er zijn en welke belangen zij hebben. Dit interview is vertrouwelijk, wat betekent dat uw naam niet gekoppeld zal worden aan wat u zegt tijdens het interview. Ik ben hier persoonlijk verantwoordelijk voor.
Graag zou ik dit interview opnemen zodat ik het later kan verwerken en mij nu goed kan richten op het gesprek. De opname zal alleen door mijzelf worden teruggeluisterd en wordt niet openbaar gemaakt. Geeft u toestemming hiervoor?
34 DEEL I: INLEIDING
Input vanuit de onderzoeker - Methodologie toelichten
- [Bovenste deel figuur 1] laten zien. Doel van deze sessie: invullen van dit figuur - Concepten en definities uitleggen
Het probleem
Wat is het probleem waar u [als Prime Mover] tegenaan loopt op gebied van Strategy Deployment implementatie?
Hoe is dit probleem ontstaan?
DEEL II: ACTOREN & NETWERKEN De Prime Mover & het Netwerk
Wat wilt u [als Prime Mover] bereiken met Strategy Deployment? Welke actoren* zijn noodzakelijk om dit te bereiken? * zowel mensen als niet-mensen.
Voorbeeld: Een autoriem heeft als belang om de passagier veilig te houden; dit belang is er ingestopt door de ontwerpers van de riem (Latour, 2005)
Actoren simplificeren
- Wie & hoeveel interviewen?
- Risico van beperkte capaciteit voor een te grote scope
OPP
Welke activiteit moet plaatsvinden om het doel van het netwerk te kunnen realiseren?
Belangen van Actoren
Welke belangen schat u in dat de gedefinieerde actoren hebben m.b.t. de verandering?
Obstakels
Welke ‘obstakels’ zijn er op dit moment geplaatst om ervoor te zorgen dat de actoren mee doen met het behalen van het doel van het netwerk?
AFRONDING
35 Appendix III Interview guide: Interessement/Enrollment – A Senior Manager version
Beste [senior manager],
Aan het begin van mijn afstudeerstage bij [ENO] mocht ik getuigen zijn van de strategie-vormingssessie van het MT [van de onderhoudsafdeling]. Naar aanleiding van deze sessie heb ik u uitgenodigd voor een interview op [datum], om meer te weten te komen omtrent ‘Strategy Deployment’ binnen [de onderhoudsafdeling].
Ik ben benieuwd wat uw gedachtes zijn over dit onderwerp en over de daar bijbehorende aansturing en monitoring.
Twee belangrijke punten die ik graag wil mededelen zijn de volgende:
- Het interview is vertrouwelijk, wat betekent dat uw naam niet gekoppeld zal worden aan wat u zegt tijdens het interview. Ik ben hier persoonlijk verantwoordelijk voor.
- Graag zou ik dit interview opnemen zodat ik het later kan verwerken en mij goed kan richten op het gesprek. De opname zal alleen door mijzelf worden teruggeluisterd en wordt niet intern gedeeld of openbaar gemaakt. Geeft u hier toestemming voor?
