MIS Problems and Failures: A Socio-Technical Perspective.

Part I: The Causes

Author(s): Robert P. Bostrom and J. Stephen Heinen
Source: MIS Quarterly , Sep., 1977, Vol. 1, No. 3 (Sep., 1977), pp. 17-32
Published by: Management Information Systems Research Center, University of
Minnesota

Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/248710

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
https://about.jstor.org/terms

Management Information Systems Research Center, University of Minnesota is collaborating

with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to MIS Quarterly

This content downloaded from

102.115.189.225 on Tue, 15 Sep 2020 17:38:34 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 STS Perspective

MIS Problems and Introduction

The major reason Management Information
Failures: A Socio- Systems (MIS) have had so many failures and

Technical Perspective problems is the way systems designers view

organizations, their members, and the function
of an MIS within them.' These views are

PART I: THE CAUSES imbedded in a design methodology or appr

which guides development and implementa
of an MIS. This article is the first of two which will
By: Robert P. Bostrom appear in consecutive issues. The intent of the
J. Stephen Heinen two articles is to provide the MIS practitioner and
researcher with an overview of a design
approach which is based on a more realistic view
of organizations. This design approach is
referred to as the Socio-Technical System (STS)
Abstract design. STS is a fairly recent development in the
quest for organizational systems which are both
Many of the problems and failures of Management
more satisfying to their members and more
Information Systems (MIS) and Management effective in meeting task requirements. This
Science/Operations Research (MS/OR) projects
approach is used for redesigning existing work
have been attributed to organizational behavioral
systems as well as for new site designs. We
problems. The millions of dollars organizations
spend on MIS and MS/OR development are of little believe that the utilization of the STS approach
benefit because systems continue to fail. Steps can will solve many of the problems facing MIS and
be taken to understand and solve these behavioral substantially reduce the number of MIS failures.2
problems.
The STS approach assumes that an organization
This article argues that in most cases these
behavioral problems are the result of inadequate or organizational work system, e.g., a depart-
ment, can be described as a socio-technical
designs. These bad designs are attributed to the
way MIS systems designers view organizations, system. In other words, a work system is made
their members, and the function of an MIS withinup of two jointly independent, but correlative
interacting systems - the social and the
them, ie., systems designers' frames of reference.
These frames of reference cause faulty design technical. The technical system is concerned
choices and failures to perceive better design alter-
with the processes, tasks, and technology
natives. Seven conditions are discussed which
needed to transform inputs to outputs. The social
reflect current systems designers' points of view.
system is concerned with the attributes of people
The discussion of these conditions demonstrates(e.g., attitudes, skills, values), the relationships
the need to reframe MIS design methodology among people, reward systems, and authority
within the Socio-Technical Systems (STS) designstructures. It is assumed that the outputs of the
approach and change systems designers' work system are the result of joint interactions
perspectives. The STS approach is introduced asbetween
a these two systems. Thus, any design or
realistic view of organizations and a way to change
redesign of a work system must deal with both
them.

This article is the first of two to appear in conse-

cutive issues of the MIS Quarterly. The purpose of
1A Although we will use the term MIS, our arguments
this first article is to demonstrate the need for the
would generally apply to any computer-based infor-
STS approach. The second will present the basic mation systems effort. The basic difference between
concepts and principles of the STS methodology MIS and other information systems is its decision-
and how it can be utilized in the design of an MIS. making support orientation.

2. Since the STS design approach is an organizational

design technique, we would also stress its
Keywords: MIS problems and failures, behavioral applicability for the design and management of an
problems, MIS design and implementation, MIS department. Many of the organizational and other
socio-technical design, systems designers types of problems facing an MIS department could be
Categories: 1.3, 2.10, 2.40, 3.30, 3.50 effectively attacked with the STS approach.

MIS Quarterly / September 1977 17

This content downloaded from

102.115.189.225 on Tue, 15 Sep 2020 17:38:34 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
STS Perspective

systems in an integrated form. The purpose of then to be able to adapt as much as possible this
this article is to demonstrate the need in MIS general definition of high quality worklife to
design for the STS approach. The second article individual differences. The typical goal of an
will present the basic concepts and principles intervention
of into the technical system is an
STS and how they can be utilized in the design improvement in task accomplishment, while
of an MIS. interventions which focus on the social system
In these articles, MIS is viewed as an interventiontend to look for improvement in QWL. The STS
approach argues that any intervention must deal
strategy. To intervene is to enter into an ongoing
with these goals simultaneously.
work system for the purpose of improving its
function. The terms interventionist, change
agent, and organizational designer will be used
interchangeably. They all imply someone who is Background
changing, designing, or redesigning a work Lucas [40] summarized the results of his
system. An MIS designer is a specific example of empirical research involving over 2000 infor-
an interventionist. We will also use the terms mation system users in 16 organizations as
intervention strategy, change program, andfollows: new
organizational design synonymously; they all
It is our contention that the major reason
denote a planned change effort. An MIS is an
most information systems have failed is that
example of an intervention strategy. When we have ignored organizational behavior
discussing concepts that have general appli- problems in the design and operation of
cation we will use the term change agent, and computer-based information systems [40,
when discussing specific issues regarding MIS, p. 6].
the specific term systems designer will be used.
The behavioral problem argument is supported
The use of the these general terms is to stress to
by other authors and researchers in the field of
the reader the change aspects of MIS implemen-
MIS [2, 27, 31, 36, 49, 51, 55, 56, 64, 65]. In
tation and to make the point that MIS design
addition, support for the above thesis is growing
cannot be isolated from organizational design. It
in the related field of Management Science and
is important to note that the use of the terms
Operation Research (MS/OR) [57, 59]. The
"design" and "planned change" make explicit
behavioral problems range from outright
the view that organizations are not "natural"
sabotage to non-usage of the MIS [23]. The
phenomena but are artificial, man-made
implication of these findings is that if steps are
inventions.
not taken to understand and solve these organi-
When one intervenes in a work system, two zational behavioral/social system problems, the
potential improvements are possible. The first ismillions of dollars organizations spend on the
an improvement in task accomplishment, i.e., development of information systems will be of
improvement in productivity and/or quality of thelittle benefit because systems will continue to
product, reduced costs, etc. The second is anfail.
improvement in the quality of working life (QWL)
Many would argue that these social system
of the work system's members. Historically, the
problems are the result of the inflexibility of
idea of QWL has included only the issues of
computer-related technology. Further, they
wages, hours, and physical conditions. These
would argue that this technology must be
issues are still included in any definition of QWL,
accepted as a necessary requirement if we want
but the concept is expanding to include other
to maximize our wealth and comfort. People will
concerns such as meaningful and satisfying
adapt!
work, control and influence, and opportunities
for learning. Consistent with the expanding We would disagree. Our basic premise is that
definition of QWL, we will consider a high-quality computer-related technology is essentially
worklife as one that involves an interesting, neutral; whether its application succeeds or fails
challenging, and responsible job as perceived by depends entirely on the decisions that are made
the job holder. We would be the first to admit thaton how it shall be used.3 This position is some-
there are individual differences which make
3. This basic premise applied to all technologies is one
unanimity about what constitutes a high or low
of the basic building blocks of the STS approach.
quality worklife almost impossible. It is important

18 MIS Quarterly / September 1977

This content downloaded from

102.115.189.225 on Tue, 15 Sep 2020 17:38:34 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 STS Perspective

where between two extreme positions, one examples]. Both problems stem from the current
indicating that to maximize the use of tech- frames of reference of system designers.
nology, and the other be wary of technology for
This article describes seven conditions which are
it will only lead to disaster. The neutral position
becomes clearer and the extreme positions tend the major causes of inadequate designs and
to dissolve as one realizes that when technology unsuccessful change strategies, and which
is mentioned, the reference is not to basic collectively reflect the existing frames of
reference. We will demonstrate the need for the
technology, but a technical design put together
by designers for a given set of technical diffusion of the STS design methodology into
requirements. The problem is that the basic the field of MIS by making the current frames of
technology is only one input into the design reference explicit through the discussion of the
process. Other major forces which influence the seven conditions.' Figure 1 summarizes the basis
technical design are the designer's knowledge, for this approach.
skills, values, and assumptions about people and
The term "systems designers" is being used to
organizations. For example, a technical design
which feeds back information from a machine to
include all people who actually influence MIS
design decisions, i.e., systems analysts, users,
someone other than the person operating the
union officials, top management, computer
machine says something about the designer's
system designers, etc. As pointed out in
assumptions about people. This feedback loop is
Condition 2, today the dominant power resides
certainly not a technical requirement of the
with the computer specialists, i.e., analysts,
design. But once designed this way, it is passed
designers, programmers, etc.; they consciously
on to the user as a technical requirement. Thus,
or unconsciously direct the development and
most technical system design includes some
use of computer technology in organizations. It
social system design. Failure of designers and
is very important not to place the blame for the
users to recognize this fact leads to many
inappropriate designs and change strategies
dysfunctional consequences in the social
entirely upon the person who occupies the
system.
systems designer's role. The formation of frames
These forces mold frames of reference which of reference, reflected in the conditions,
serve as perceptual filters through which one described in Figure 1 is a very complex process
perceives the world and provides guides for which is not completely under the conscious
actions. Thus, a work system designer's frame of control of the person. This fact also implies that
reference serves as a foundation for examining, people are not always aware of the content of
understanding, and changing organizations. In their frames of reference. In addition, the
terms of the design and implementation of an resulting actions or behaviors of designers in a
MIS, the system designer's frame of reference given situation are not always based on their
helps determine the perceived design alter- frames of reference. For example, the organiza-
natives and the chosen design alternative. They tional reward system may force or support
also influence the perceived change strategies behaviors incongruent with the designer's frame
and chosen change strategy. Design alternatives of reference.
include combinations of hardware, software,
operating procedures, work flow, etc. Change
strategies include decisions on issues such as
Conditions
user involvement, user education and training, Condition 1: Systems Designer's
project team development, and implementation
plans. Change strategies are important because
Implicit Theories
people respond to the manner in which changes Systems designers clearly make assumptions
are determined and implemented as much as about people - e.g., "people are poor infor-
they do to the actual change [4, 19, 20, 51, 59]. mation processors;" about organizations - e.g.,
The current social system/behavioral problems "information flow downward must be
associated with an MIS originate in the lack of controlled;" and about the change process -
awareness of available design alternatives and e.g., "we must get users to participate or they
change strategies and faulty decisions will not accept the system." Whatever the level of
concerning perceived options [see 31 for case sophistication, these assumptions or set of

MIS Quarterly / September 1977 19

This content downloaded from

102.115.189.225 on Tue, 15 Sep 2020 17:38:34 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
STS Perspective

beliefs, taken as a set, could be described as the to organizational effectiveness.4

systems designer's implicit theories about
people, organizations, and the change process. Which theories do systems designers hold?
These theories are "implicit" because systems It is quite apparent that system designers in
designers have never attempted to develop a general hold a Theory X view. The systems
carefully worked through, "logical" description designer's primary role today seems to be one of
of their assumptions and beliefs. The designer's servant to the technical system needs, consistent
assumptions about people and organizations with Theory X assumptions. Hedberg and
affect which design alternatives are considered Mumford [30, 31] have empirically verified that
and chosen. Additionally, the designer's European systems designers' operational model
assumptions about how one should change of a non-management person and the
organizations influence the change strategies appropriate organizational structure for non-
chosen. The case study research of Pettigrew management people is closer to Theory X than
[53] and Hedberg, et al. [311 clearly supports Theory Y. Unpublished studies by Bostrom and
these conclusions. by Taylor [61] have found in the U.S. a similar
Theory X orientation toward management and
No general theory will reflect precisely the non-management persons.5 Finally, one needs
implicit theories of any single designer. Never- only to examine the MIS literature to see the
theless, scholars have attempted to capture the extent of the Theory X orientation.
main thrust of key concepts and assumptions.
An illustration of the systems designer's
Two theories which scholars have been
Theory X view is the "operating unit" concept of
presenting are Theory X, traditional or machine
Boguslaw [6]. Boguslaw concluded from his
theory, and Theory Y, human resource theory.
research that the "new utopians" or systems
Theory X assumes a person is one who likes
designers retain an aloofness from the human
order, wishes to work within tightly specified
and social problems by treating the human
boundaries, and does not want to have a great
component as just another operating unit within
deal of personal control over one's activities.
the system with people taking their places
Theory Y assumes a person is a responsible, self-
alongside computers, display consoles, and
achieving individual who can take full control of
other forms of system operating units. Taking
one's work environment. Schein [58] points out
this view, the systems designer is the expert
that there is a great deal of confusion about
who analyzes the problem, defines it, and
Theories X and Y. They are viewed as managerial
provides the solution. Any human problems are
philosophies, management styles, types of
treated by adjusting the operating units through
organizations, etc. Thus, we should stress
training, incentives, etc., to suit the technical
again that Theories X and Y are sets of
system.
assumptions about human nature that a given
person holds, consciously or subconsciously.
4. It is beyond the scope of this article to give any more
than a brief description of the theories. For further
These basic assumptions about people shape discussion of the theories, see Miles [47], McGregor
one's approaches to organizational designs, (45], Davis 115, 19] and Schein [58]. Miles, in his
treatment, adds a third major theory, Human
work and job designs, and change strategies. For
Relations. We did not include the Human Relations
example, a design based on Theory X theory because from a design framework it makes the
assumptions would tend to create a tightly same basic assumptions as Theory X.
structured organization, with precise job
5. The research done by Bostrom was a pilot study
definitions and clear lines of hierarchical
focusing on a number of issues in this article. The
authority, emphasizing order and stability as sample was 34 graduate students at the University of
necessary to obtain technical efficiency. On the Minnesota who had an average of three years
other hand, a design based on Theory Y computer systems design experience. This study will
be referenced throughout the paper.
assumptions would tend to create a flexible
All of the data referenced represents computer
organization which has a great deal of self- systems designers' views. Hedberg and Mumford
direction and self-control at all levels because indicate that the views on the user side are more
the integration of individual growth with Theory Y. The U.S. data does not support this
technological improvement is seen as the key difference found in Europe (see 47].

20 MIS Quarterly / September 1977

This content downloaded from

102.115.189.225 on Tue, 15 Sep 2020 17:38:34 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 STS Perspective

Systems Faulty design

cause lead
choices; and
Designers' Bad
frames of the failure to
designs
perceive better to
reference
design alternatives

cause

Behavioral

reflected in problems
I lead
to

MIS problems
and failures

Seven Conditions:

1. "Implicit" theories held by systems designers about organizations,

their members, and how to change them.

2. The concept of responsibility held by systems designers.

3. Limited conceptualizations of frameworks for organizational work
systems or user systems used by systems designers in the design
process, i.e., non-systemic approach.
4. Limited view of the goal of an MIS implementation held by designers.
5. Failure of the systems designers to include relevant persons in the
design referent group. Who is the user?
6. The rational/static view of the systems development process held
by systems designers.

7. The limited set of change technologies available to systems

designers who attempt to improve organizations.

demonstrated
the need \
to: a. reframe MIS design
methodology within the
STS design approach; and
b. change systems designers'
frames of reference.

Figure 1. The Rationale for the Socio-Technical Design Methodology

MIS Quarterly / September 1977 21

This content downloaded from

102.115.189.225 on Tue, 15 Sep 2020 17:38:34 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
STS Perspective

Greater emphasis on user involvement in the reference. It will be virtually impossible to

recent MIS literature might at first seem to alleviate the remaining conditions discussed in
indicate a shift toward a Theory Y orientation; this section without first establishing an
however, in most cases the approach is used to understanding of the basic assumptions.
gain acceptance by the users of the systems Theory X assumptions currently are reflected in
designer's solution, rather than create an MIS designs, design procedures, and design
effective reciprocal relationship between the methods. Based on available evidence from
MIS resource and the user system. Argyris [2]
other fields [15, 16, 35, 45, 47, 58] and problem
and Bostrom both found participation by users
in MIS, there is a very strong indication that
was a means to gain acceptance rather thanthese Theory X assumptions are inaccurate.
collaborative problem solving. Thus, more effective MIS designs will result from
making designers' implicit theories explicit and
Theories X and Y assumptions focus on the determining if their assumptions about their
motivational patterns of individuals. The clients are accurate and congruent. Knowledge
about motivational
tendency of systems designers to hold Theory X patterns and information
processing capabilities of people need to be
assumptions is related to the implicit theories
they hold about people as information developed and diffused to support this latter
processors. Two somewhat paradoxical stage.
assumptions tend to be emphasized in the
literature:

1. Decision-makers are not getting enough of Condition 2: Systems Designer's

the right information.
2. The person is not a very efficient information
Concept of Responsibility
processor.
The concept of responsibility is a very important
aspect in change theory, but it has received very
Designs based on the "give them more" theory
little discussion in the literature.6 The focus here
have been convincingly attacked by a number of
authors [1, 29]. Thus, one no longer sees this will be on the concept of responsibility as it
idea referenced in the literature, but many applies to one type of change, the introduction of
applications continue to appear in practice. a new MIS. The critical question is, "Who is
responsible for the change effort?" Based on
The research on human information processing available research, the systems designers are
generally supports the "inefficient" theory. This the ones taking responsibility for the system
leads many MIS writers to advocate a design development process [6, 31]. This concept of
approach which would automate as many responsibility is congruent with the Theory X
decisions as possible. Decision aids should assumptions that people will not take and do not
be supplied, if the decision is not fully want responsibility. Therefore, some external
programmable. The difficulty with this source must take responsibilty for the client.
design
approach is that it is congruent with a Theory X difficulty with this whole approach to
The
view that a person is replaceable by a machine.responsibility
It from a change theory perspective
neglects the fact that persons have information is that it overlooks the fact that the change
processing strengths. We would agree with agent can never truly assume the responsibility
Hedberg [28] that an MIS design should be based for another's change because only that
on a detailed knowledge of both the strengths individual is capable of changing his/her own
and weaknesses of human beings as information behavior. The change agent can only facilitate or
processors. The division of labor between the inhibit individual change through the handling of
person and the computer in their respective roles
in the MIS design should be guided by the
principle of comparative advantages, keeping in 6. We cannot begin to develop the Importance of this
mind the motivational consequences. aspect in this article. It is sufficient to say that this
issue - "Who is responsible: change agent or
Implicit theories are a key input into the client" - will sooner or later have to be dealt with by
formation of the systems designer's frame of someone in a change agent or helping role.

22 MIS Quarterly / September 1977

This content downloaded from

102.115.189.225 on Tue, 15 Sep 2020 17:38:34 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 STS Perspective

the change programs.7 Therefore, we would constraints which necessitate a noncollaborative

argue that an MIS change effort can be relationship.

successful only if the client assumes the Some attempts have been initiated to implement
responsibility for its success. The systems greater user responsibility:
designer then should act in such a way that the
user retains the responsibility. 1. a) The user departments are given finan-
cial responsibility for the MIS.
Typically systems designers would deny
completely that they assume responsibility: "I b) The systems analysts are placed within
only do what the customer tells me to do. I the user departments with primary
implement the values [implicit theories] of responsibility for the final detailed
someone else, rather than my own. And in the design [53].
absence of specific instructions, I use a guideline
2. a) The user is made the head of the project
of technical efficiency or cost or speed or team.
something similar" [6, p. 198]. This response
raises a number of issues. First, it highlights b) A user steering committee is
the issue of "who is the user?" Discussion of this established.

point is presented under Condition 5. Secondly, c) User representatives are placed on the
it stresses the point that designers make
project team.
decisions based on the goal of technical
optimization of cost speed, etc., which is 3. Power is shared during the system develop-
discussed in Condition 4. Finally, the response ment process, a collaborative design
clearly recognizes that the user has the approach [28, 36, 41].
responsibility for all components of the system 4. Ongoing management of the system is done
provided that the user can specify them in by the user.
complete and rigorous detail; however, the
designer assumes responsibility for all items that Approaches 1 and 2 and other similar structural
cannot be specified in this fashion. Since users techniques may be useful in certain situations,
are not experts and are unable to specify detailed but they do not attack the responsibility issue
design guidelines, the designers end up taking directly. Approach 4 is too late for the implemen-
responsibility through their de facto decision tation of responsibility. Once the system design
making. is completed, there is typically very little that can
The belief that the client should assume be done about it for a period of time.
responsibility for the MIS change effort is Note that options 2a and 2c are structural
congruent with the Theory Y assumptions. This mechanisms for implementing some type of
belief further assumes that both the systems sharing of power between users and systems
designers and clients work collaboratively, but designers during the development process.8
are able to identify and to understand situational They were not included under 3 because in most
situations which stress user participation, users
7. A similar argument is developed by Bowers, et al. [9] do not significantly influence the chosen
in their development of the Principle of Succession. design alternative. The major reasons for using
The indirect nature of change is difficult to see in these mechanisms appear to be the acceptance
certain situations. For example, suppose a new
of the new MIS by the users and/orthe gathering
machine is brought in to improve task accomplish-
ment, i.e., more productive behavior on the part of of information in order to design the system. An
machine operations. The new machine will force new example of this latter approach is shown in
behaviors and constrain other behaviors of the
operators. But the operators may develop various
defensive behaviors: a norm of low productivity, 8. It is important to note that there are really three parties
physical withdrawal, or absenteeism. The defensive that have influence or power in the design of an MIS.
behaviors may cause the change effort to fail, i.e., no
Besides the user and the designer, there is the
improvement or even a decrease in productivity. computer equipment manufacturer whose technical
Thus, although the change, the new machine, appears designs have a large influence in the ultimate design
of an MIS. Users and designers need better
to have direct effects, the success of the change effort
mechanisms to influence the design of components
is still basically the responsibility of the operators,
i.e., success based on indirect effects. of systems supplied by computer manufacturers.

MIS Quarterly / September 1977 23

This content downloaded from

102.115.189.225 on Tue, 15 Sep 2020 17:38:34 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 STS Perspective

Argyris' [2] research on an MS/OR project team. native design choices. The explanation is that
The team continually attempted to elicit infor- designers' existing frames of reference implicitly
mation about decision-making from the line determine the domains of lower level decisions.
management. The line management felt a Improved design methods must aim at making
tremendous need to be open with the MS/OR strategic criteria and rules explicit and subjectto
team, but saw the team as unrevealing and design.
secretive in their use of the information given.
The MS/OR team viewed itself as a rational Currently, systems designers are taking
responsibility for MIS designs, but they do not
reform group that would supplement the
effectively use the power it provides. The real
"inadequate" line managers with efficient
systems.
power resides in the prevailing frames of
reference which implicitly guide many design
decisions. The reciprocal part of the problem is
Even if the situation existed for a truly colla-
that users let designers take the responsibility,
borative design, there still would be a major although on the user side there seems to be an
problem in the complete focus on the system apparent paradox. Guthrie [27] in his empirical
design process. Problem solving takes place in
research on 2000 middle managers in Canada,
the language and abstractions of the computer
found that 80% of the responding managers
specialists and leads to the need for educating wanted to have a lot of influence in the MIS
and training of user representatives in computer
design and implementation, but were unwilling
and systems design skills. Given this focus, the
to devote the study, time, and effort required to
only way one can have a truly collaborative
make their participation meaningful. The large
design is to train the user to be an expert so that user commitment is a result of the reliance on
he/she can help the computer specialist create
technical models for user/designer interaction.
detailed design plans. However, as Hedberg
More attention needs to be given to the strategic
argues, "including employee representatives in
design phase and the appropriate sharing of
actual design activities and training them to
models, assumptions, and goals between users
become good systems analysts may be a waste
and designers in order to develop meaningful
of time and skills" [28, p. 219]. As an alternative,
collaboration. MIS designs, in our opinion, have
Hedberg [28] proposes that users focus on the
a high probability of failure if the users do not
strategic design which precedes the system assume responsibility for them.
design stage, formulating and reformulating the
goals and policies which guide the systems
design activities.
Condition 3: Limited
Hedberg's approach affords the best mechanism Frameworks - Non-systemic
for implementing user responsibility. The major View
task of the designers is to translate the output of
the strategic design process into technically The third condition responsible for inadequate
operational solutions. The problem today is that designs was the limited conceptualization of
the strategic design process is not clearly work systems/user systems used by systems
recognized. Reference to anything resembling a designers in the design process. The primary
strategic design process is clearly absent in the targets of an operational information system or
literature and/orthe system life cycle models and decision-support MIS are the decision-making,
project management schemes that are used in data collection, data manipulation, and data
practice. Thus, the strategic decisions usually transmission tasks of the work system. Upon
are dealt with implicitly during the system completion of an analysis of information
design process, giving systems designers the requirements and flow, the MIS is designed to
dual role of policy maker and interpreter [31]. reallocate data processing and decision-making
This observation helps explain the apparent tasks between people and computer-related
paradox that designers do not perceive them- technology, and to create new tasks and modify
selves as decision-makers or organizational old ones to support this reallocation. This limited
designers [30, 31]. They feel they have very little focus on decision-making and data processing
influence in the design process and few alter- tasks is reflected in the traditional framework

24 MIS Quarterly / September 1977

This content downloaded from

102.115.189.225 on Tue, 15 Sep 2020 17:38:34 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 STS Perspective

Social Technical
System System

Structure 4 I Technology

MIS
(Direct)

People I/ \ Tasks I

People _ m,._ Tasks

Figure 2. The Interacting Variable Classes Within a W

which views work systems in an in information

the task and technology variable. All of these
processing system. This framework typesisofpresented
changes should be designed to
in almost every book dealing with MIS. An complement and reinforce each other as shown
example is the book by Blumenthal [5] in which in Figure 2. The Mumford [49] and Whisler [65]
he concludes that the systems designer should studies of operational information systems
conceptualize a work system as a set of com- illustrate the importance of secondary effects.
plementary or interdependent information Some of the direct and secondary effects found
systems. were:

DIRECT

The limited focus on particular changes in the D1. Modification of old tasks or the creation
task and technology variables leads the systems of new tasks which lack interest and
designer to ignore the fact that these changes
challenge.
cause more changes within other variables in
the work system. These other changes are D2. Many decisions made by clerks and
labeled secondary changes or effects, because their supervisors have been automated
they were not given primary consideration in the or passed up to middle management.
MIS design. Substantial, changes in the work The focus of decision-making moves
relationships among people accompany upward.
changes in task structure. The strong SECONDARY
association between these work relationships
changes and the attitudes, motivations, and the S1. The direct changes indicate a de-
interpersonal behavior of the individuals within enrichment of the supervisor and
the system [3, 4] is of particular importance clerk jobs which can lead to lower
[3, 4]. An equally important relationship exists motivation, decreases in job satis-
between these people variables and the changes faction, etc.
in the task structure [12,17,19, 25,34,38]. These S2. Clerks seem to work less at their own
secondary changes in the work relationships and pace and are more tied to deadlines for
people variables are as important as the changes computer runs.

MIS Quarterly / September 1977 25

This content downloaded from

102.115.189.225 on Tue, 15 Sep 2020 17:38:34 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
STS Perspective

S3. Clerks and supervisors tend to commu- performance-monitoring MIS where a de

nicate less with each other, while choice must be made to feed back data
middle managers increase their concerning individual performance and
interactions with each other. performance-related problems either to a
manager or to the employee performing the
S4. Strong trend toward increased centrali-
tasks. Current frames of reference identify the
zation of control.
manager as the most efficient choice, ie., a
These secondary effects clearly indicate a lower better control mechanism. Our point is that this
quality of working life for the clerks and super-choice is made without concern for quality of
visors. Argyris [2] discusses the possible working life issues. It is also worth noting that
secondary effects of a decision-supported MIS the research literature would certainly not
intervention. He concludes that a manager support the choice of the manager in this
whose decisions and alternatives are prescribed situation either from an improvement in task
by sophisticated decision-making algorithms accomplishment, better control, or QWL [10, 13].
may feel his/her action alternatives reduced and The MIS literature clearly indicates the dominant
opportunities for effective, satisfying perform- goal of an MIS intervention is technical
ance diminished or lost. system optimization. Empirically this fact has
been demonstrated by Hedberg and Mumford
As MIS practitioners and researchers, we pride [30, 31 ] in Europe and by Bostrom and by Taylor
ourselves on being very system-oriented people. [61] in the U.S. These researchers found that
system designers mentioned most frequently
It should be clear by now that this is not the case;
we are not very systemic. We do not understand that "greater efficiency" and "better information
the relationship between the variables we for management" were the prime contributions
manipulate and other variables within the work of an implementation of an MIS. In addition, one
system. This statement is not intended to negate can examine almost any text and find authorities
the importance of the information processing in the field stating such things as:
view. Many researchers and practitioners across
multiple disciplines have concluded that The computer resource exists solely to help
information is the critical resource on which staff offices and operating units to execute
their responsibilities better through cheaper
organizations operate. Our point is that if
processing of data, more efficient organi-
systems designers want to improve the zation of information systems, and procure-
information processing system of an organi- ment and development of information that is
zation, they must incorporate their information too expensive to obtain otherwise. The
processing view into a more complete systemic resource has no reason for existing except
framework. to provide such services, and these services
should result in greater profits. In short, the
resource has a purely economic purpose.
Condition 4: Limited Goal [20. p. 68]. [Emphasis in quote by authors.]

Orientation - Optimizing the

MIS is still a relatively young technology.
Technical System Besides the notable exception of operational
The non-systemic view held by systems information systems [7, 40, 43, 44, 46, 48, 49, 56,
designers reflects their servant role to the 60, 65], little field research exists on the
technical system. Thus, we would expect to find effectiveness of MIS interventions in terms of
that the designer's view of the goal of an MIS technical system optimization. Some of the
would be the typical goal of an intervention indirect effects of these operational information
which focuses on the technical system, i.e., system interventions were cited in Condition 3.
improvement in task accomplishment. Even The effects clearly indicated a lack of concern for
those changes in the social system explicitly the improvement in the quality of working life for
designed into the MIS are attempts to improve certain users, clerks, and supervisors. This
task accomplishment through better control of situation is usually rationalized by systems
the variations in the technical system. An designers as being inevitable due to the
instance of this situation would be a cherished assumption that the two goals are at

26 MIS Quarterly / September 1977

This content downloaded from

102.115.189.225 on Tue, 15 Sep 2020 17:38:34 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 STS Perspective

opposite ends of the same continuum, i.e., MIS development efforts must take seriously the
task of using computer technology to broaden
productivity/efficiency vs. quality of working life.
Some of the learnings and tentative conclusions the concept of organizational efficiency to
from international experiments indicate that include QWL issues. The social system
viewing productivity/efficiency and quality of improvement needs to be considered jointly with
working life as opposing points of view is an the technical system improvement in the design
inappropriate concept [18]. They are not of an MIS.
opposite ends of a continuum, but two different
scales. Enhancing one does not necessarily
require diminishing the other. Given the
appropriate organizational design, experience Condition 5: Limited Design
shows that both can increase together [13, 18, Referent Group - Who is the
35].
User?
Even though designers are operating under the Tichy [63] in his empirical study of 91 change
dominant goal of technical system optimization, agents classified systems designers as "analysis
all empirical effects in terms of quality of working for the top" (AFT's). This classification resulted
life are not negative; however, negative from the commitment by AFT's to aid, advise,
outcomes dominate the literature. The indirect
and design for the heads of systems. The
effects cited in Condition 3, although negative secondary effects of an MIS intervention
for clerks and supervisors, appear to be positivediscussed in Condition 3 further support the
for middle managers - jobs were enriched. limited referent group position. Their results
Other examples of positive effects are discussed indicate that middle management was the
by Lucas [39] and demonstrated in the research primary referent group and received the main
by Mueller [48], Mann and Williams [43], and benefits of the system while the secondary users
Marenco [44]. However, the conclusions of these of the system, the supervisors and clerks, were
studies are obscured by what appears to be ignored. This lack of concern for secondary
inappropriate ongoing management of the new users resulted in a de-enrichment of the
organizational design. Although social system supervisor and clerks' jobs. We are left with the
improvement was not planned, its potential is conclusion that systems designers design
clearly shown in the above empirical research. systems for a very small set of primary users,
Also, European researchers [31] recently found usually managers who receive the outputs of the
that there were a number of unexplored, possible information system.9
alternative designs for existing MIS designs
that would have improved not only task The significance of the limited referent group
accomplishment, but also quality of working life. condition is that even if the systems designer no
These results support the opinion that both longer operates under conditions 1, 2, 3, and 4,
goals can increase together for an MIS inter- he or she may do so for only a select group of
vention. people, the primary users. The secondary users,
the clerks, data collection people, customers,
Further evidence of the importance of MIS
etc., on the periphery of the MIS are ignored in
intervention on social system change can be
the design. This situation is very unfortunate for
found in the research by Taylor [61]. He
three reasons. First, the secondary users are
concluded that the direct effect of a technical
usually those people who have continual day to
system intervention on the social system seems
day contact with the system. Second, the sucess
to create constraints on employee behavior. He
of the secondary users doing their jobs in many
found, on the other hand, the technical systemcases determines how successful the MIS will be.
intervention provides an "unfreezing force" on
Third, the design of the MIS critically affects the
the social system. There seems to be a freedom
jobs of the secondary users. Little attention has
provided by the new technology to seek new
ways of behaving. This new freedom may make a 9. It should be noted that the introduction of database
planned social system change possible. technology in the U.S. is forcing a larger referent
Technical system intervention can actually group orientation in certain areas. But this larger
facilitate social system change. referent group still remains a set of primary users.

MIS Quarterly / September 1977 27

This content downloaded from

102.115.189.225 on Tue, 15 Sep 2020 17:38:34 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
STS Perspective

been paid to the alternatives available for these become distorted and overlaid by political or
job designs. power issues which are not always recognized
nor made explicit [26, 54, 55]. Political issues
A related problem is that an MIS often feeds arise due to conflicts of interest among various
information to people who cannot take action on groups [2, 39, 55] and/or anticipated shifts in the
that information [10, 21, 33]. The magnitude of balance of power caused by the implementation
this problem grows larger as one looks at the of an MIS [37, 39, 55]. There is no correct or ideal
findings of Cummings, et al. [13] in their solution in the development of an MIS. Each set
comprehensive review of 2000 references on the of involved parties will have its own preferences.
empirical literature on job satisfaction, industrial This means that the constraints and alternative
organization, and productivity. They found that designs emerge only in the social interaction
information/feedback appears to have the among the people who represent different roles
greatest impact on productivity. They argue that and positions of power. The choice between
the probable reason for the increase in produc- alternatives quite often is based on the mobili-
tivity is that information/feedback provides zation of power resources by individuals [26, 37,
workers with an indication of performance- 55].
related problems and, more importantly, pro-
vides them with meaningful feedback on their Also unrecognized in the design and implemen-
own performance. Therefore, if the information/ tation of the MIS is the fact that the organization
feedback is not given to the people who can continues to change and does not remain in
respond to it with action, little improvement in some suspended state. The implementation is
organizational efficiency will result. not immediate and several transitional states
may be passed through by the organization
Systems designers must take a "total system"
during the implementation process. More
referent group orientation in order to improve
attention needs to be paid to the adjustment and
their designs. Total system orientation implies
on-going management of the new MIS design.
that consideration be given in some degree to all
The actions carried out during the design
people affected by the design.
process may also create organizational changes.
For example, gathering data from users may
raise expectations or create fears. Dickson and
Powers [24] found that users undergo significant
Condition 6: Rational/Static View
learning during the design process. Similar
of the Systems Development learning may also occur for systems designers.
Process This learning may be reflected in new problems,
alternatives, criteria, constraints, etc. The
The traditional approach to the development implication is that the design process is a fluid,
process of an MIS treats design and implemen- iterative process and not a linear sequence of
tation as a rational, systematic process that steps as in the rational/static view.
proceeds in a static environment. The organi-
zation is assumed to have a set of well-defined
The rational/static view could be useful in short,
information processing problems which the MIS
simple MIS projects, but it is rather obvious that
designer expertly analyzes. A rational decision- this view does not accurately reflect the MIS
making process which examines alternative development process in real life. Yet most
designs in terms of the goals of the system is organizations use project planning and control
followed to select the specific design. Implemen- techniques based on this view. In addition, most
tation of this expert solution is then assumed to
textbooks and training materials emphasize this
transform the organization immediately into a view. Based upon this, it is no surprise to find that
more effective state. This viewpoint overlooks current project control techniques can be
many of the dynamic properties of the environ-
dysfunctional to project success [24]. We are not
ment in which the design decisions are made. It
negating the importance of project planning and
can be labeled rational/static.
control techniques or training. We are merely
Attempts at what is seen as rational, decision- stressing that the current emphasis on the
making in the development process frequently rational/static view must be replaced by a more

28 MIS Quarterly / September 1977

This content downloaded from

102.115.189.225 on Tue, 15 Sep 2020 17:38:34 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 STS Perspective

realistic view of the political/dynamic dimen- Successful integration of the change tech-
sions of MIS development. nologies requires new roles for both the systems
designer and the behavioral scientist. First, they
must develop some type of mutual design theory
Condition 7: Limited Change so that they can effectively communicate with
Technologies each other. Second, the design effort must be a
truly collaborative effort." This means that the
Tichy [63] found in his study that systems behavioral scientist whose past role has been
designers use a limited set of change tech-
primarily to help implement predesigned
nologies. Conditions 2 - 6 cannot be effectively
interventions must assume a new design role.
resolved with the limited change technologies at
Third, for a collaborative design effort to be
the disposal of systems designers. Systems
successful, each party will have to learn more
designers essentially draw from MIS and MS/OR
about the other's change technologies. Thus, the
technology.,
behavioral scientist needs to have a good under-
An integration between the MIS technology and standing of MIS related technology while the
other technologies is needed to produce a more systems designer must understand the
effective intervention. It should be clear from usefulness and consequences of OD type
our previous discussion that the techniques interventions.
should be those that tend to facilitate the
These new roles offer a new challenge to both
improvement of both social and technical
the systems designer and the behavioral
systems. These techniques coupled with an MIS
scientist. The new design role for the behavioral
intervention would allow us to pursue the goal of
scientist offers the enormous challenge of
joint optimization. For example, the problems of
helping to find systematic ways of introducing
de-enriching jobs might be solved through job quality of work considerations into a sophisti-
design techniques, such as job enrichment, job cated technical design. The systems designers
enlargement, etc. [12, 17, 19, 25, 34]. The on the other hand, will have their skills and
ineffective work organizations supporting
creativity severly tested by the necessity of
information systems might be improved through
developing a substantial number of alternative
the use of autonomous or semi-autonomous
technical designs which allow more choices in
group structures [19, 32]. In addition, many of
social system design within which quality of
the techniques that focus on the social system work considerations and constraints can be
could be utilized during the development
evaluated. For an excellent description of this
process. For example, the interpersonal
collaborative process and the challenge of the
problems of the MS/OR project team identified
new roles, see the short case history by Lupton
by Argyris [2] might be eliminated through team
[42] describing the design of a new manu-
building interventions. The problem of getting
facturing process by engineers, behavioral
more participation by secondary users in the
scientists, and users.
MIS design process could be handled by using
the survey-feedback method [4]. These
techniques along with many other interventions
are part of the field known as Organizational Conclusion
Development (OD). The OD practitioner, usually
a behavioral or social scientist, is simply When examining the social system/behavioral
translating what is known about people and problems associated with the introduction of a
organizations from the behavioral sciences into new MIS, three questions become crucial:
applicable programs whose primary intervention 1. What are the human or behavioral
point is usually the social system.10 A further problems?
discussion of integration of MIS and OD can be
2. What are the causes of the behavioral
found in Bostrom and Heinen [8].
problems?

10. The most notable exception to this is the job design

and redesign techniques which focus on the tasks in 11. For a more detailed discussion of this point, see
the technical system. Mumford, et al. [52J or Clark [11].

MIS Quarterly / September 1977 29

This content downloaded from

102.115.189.225 on Tue, 15 Sep 2020 17:38:34 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 STS Perspective

3. How can the causes be eliminated to solve practitioners see a work system only as a social
the behavioral problems? system. They accept the technical system as
given and then try to adapt the social system to it.
MIS practitioners and researchers spent a great
This type of OD approach deals only with asmall
many years focusing on question 1, with some
portion of organizational life. All of these
very futile attempts at question 2; this could
approaches are appropriate and contain useful
be called the story telling phase. This focus on
techniques and interventions. But these
the story telling phase was due to inadequate
approaches are marginally effective because
frames of reference to help better explain and
they fail to take into account all of the important
deal with these situations. Today, we seem to
elements of the work system.
have switched our focus to question 3 without a
complete understanding of the answer to What is needed is a more realistic view of
question 2. This instant solution phase, focusingorganizations embedded in a solid design
on question 3, has resulted from the develop- methodology through which various interven-
ment of techniques that appear to solve some oftions can be integrated into effective change
these behavioral problems. User participation programs. The STS approach argues that any
and the utilization of job-enrichment schemes design/redesign of a work system must deal
are examples of these techniques. This type of jointly with the social and technical systems.
approach is piecemeal and ignores the The application of the STS approach to MIS
contingencies in each unique situation. The design provides an adequate frame of reference
missing link is an effective design approach, to eliminate the seven conditions outlined. The
such as the STS design methodology. joint focus on social and technical systems
implies that the STS design approach facilitates
Our focus in this article has been on question 2. efforts in dealing with the technical system. For
it was argued that the social system problems example, one of the major problems in MIS
are the result of inadequate designs and design is determining information needs of a
unsuccessful change strategies which arise from work system. The STS approach via its technical
the failure of systems designers to perceive system analysis techniques provides a means for
available opportunities. Designers' existing directly determining certain information needs.
frames of reference must be made explicit in
The success of the application of the STS
order to understand and change this situation.
Seven conditions were identified and discussed approach to MIS can only be determined through
its monitored use in a variety of organizational
as the major causes of the inappropriate designs
settings and situations. The STS design
and change strategies to aid this process. The
approach must be diffused to MIS practitioners
goal was to demonstrate the need for the
and researchers before this can be done. As a
diffusion of the STS approach into the field of
MIS.
first step in this diffusion process, our
subsequent article to appear in the next issue of
The problem of inadequate designers' frames the MIS Quarterly will present the basic concepts
of reference is not unique to MIS, and tends to be and principles of the socio-technical system
design approach, demonstrating how they apply
a universal problem with change programs in the
to MIS design.
U.S. This problem is reflected in the piecemeal
approach in which people try to change
organizations. Job enrichment experts tend to
view a work system as a set of jobs. Their
interventions focus on enriching a particular set References
of jobs. They fail to realize that one person's
[1] Ackoff, R. L. "Management Misinformation Systems,"
enrichment is often another's impoverishment.
Management Science, Vol. 14, No. 4, December 1967.
Production engineers view a work system as a [2] Argyris, C. "Management Information Systems: The
technical production system. They fail to realize Challenge to Rationality and Emotionality," Manage-
that their designs contain many social system ment Science, Vol. 17, No. 6, 1970, pp. B275-B292.
design decisions which are made by default or as [3] Beer, M. 'The Technology of Organization Develop-
ment," in Handbook of Industrial and Organizational
a byproduct of optimizing some technical Psychology, M. Dunnette (ed.). Chicago: Rand
variable. Many organizational development (OD) McNally, 1976.

30 MIS Quarterly I September 1977

This content downloaded from

102.115.189.225 on Tue, 15 Sep 2020 17:38:34 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 STS Perspective

[4] Bell, C. and French, W. Organization Development: Management Information System: Some Empirical
Behavioral Science Interventions for Organization Observations," Management Information Systems
Improvement, Prentice-Hall, Inc., Englewood Cliffs, Research Center Working Paper 69-3, University of
New Jersey, 1973. Minnesota, 1969.
[5] Blumenthal, Sherman C. Management Information
Systems: A Framework for Planning and Develop- [24] Dickson, Gary and Powers, Richard. "MIS Project
ment, Prentice-Hall, Inc., Englewood Cliffs, New Management: Myths, Opinions, and Reality," Cali-
Jersey, 1969. fornia Management Review, Vol. 15, No. 3, Spring
1973.
[6] Boguslaw, Robert. The New Utopians: A Study of the
[25] Ford, R. Motivation Through Work Itself, American
System Design and Social Change, Prentice-Hall,
Management Assoc., New York, 1969.
Inc., Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, 1965, 213 pages.
[26] Gibson, Cyrus F. "A Methodology for Implementation
[7] Borodin, A. and Gotlieb, C. C. "Computers and
Research," in Implementing Operations Research/
Employment," CACM, Vol. 15, No. 7, 1972, pp. 695-
702.
Management Science, Randall L. Schultz and Dennis
[8] Bostrom, Robert P. and Heinen, J. Stephen. "Organi- P. Slevin (eds.), American Elsevier Publishing Com-
pany, New York, 1975.
zation Development: Its Relationship to MIS,"
Midwest AIDS Proceedings, 1974, pp. P1-P12.
[27] Guthrie, Art. "Attitudes of the User-Managers
[9] Bowers, David G., Franklin, Jerome L., and Percorella,
Towards Management Information Systems,"
Management Informatics, Vol. 3, No. 5, 1974, pp. 221-
Patricia A. "Matching Problems, Precursors, and 232.
Interventions in OD: A Systemic Approach," The
Journal of Applied BehavioralScience, Vol. 11, No. 4, [28] Hedberg, Bo. "Computer Systems to Support Indus-
1975, pp. 391-409. trial Democracy," in Human Choice and Computers,
[10] Cherns, Albert B. "The Principles of Socio-Technical E. Mumford and H. Sackman (eds.), American
Design," Human Relations, Vol. 29, No. 8, 1976, Elsevier Publishing Co., New York, 1975.
pp. 783-792. [29] Hedberg, Bo. "Towards A Credo of MIS Design,"
[11] Clark, Peter A. Organizational Design: Theory and International Institute of Management, Berlin,
Practice, London: Tavistock, 1972. Preprint 1/73-52, May 1973.
[12] Cooper, Robert. Job Motivation and Job Design, [30] Hedberg, Bo and Mumford, Enid. "The Design of
London: Institute of Personnel Management, 5 Computer Systems: Man's Vision of Man as an
Winsley Street, Oxford Circus, WIN 7AQ, England, Integral Part of the System Design Process," in
1974.
Human Choice and Computers, E. Mumford and H.
[13] Cummings, T. G., Malloy, E. S., and Glen, R. H. "Inter- Sackman (eds.), American Elsevier Publishing Co.,
vention Strategies for Improving Productivity and the New York, 1975.
Quality of Work Life," Organizational Dynamics, [31] Hedberg, Bo, Mumford, Enid, Anderson, Niels, et a/.
Summer 1975.
Computer Systems, Work Design and Job Satisfac-
[14] Davis, G. B. Management Information Systems:
tion, Pergamon Press, New York, (to be available Fall
Conceptual Foundations, Structure and Develop- 1977).
ment, McGraw Hill, New York, 1974.
[15] Davis, L. E. 'The Coming Crisis for Production [32] Herbst, P. G. Autonomous Group Functioning: An
Management: Technology and Organization," Inter- Exploration in Behavior Theory and Measurement,
national Journal Production Research, Vol. 9, 1971, Tavistock Publications, London, 1962.
pp. 65-82. [33] Herbst, P. G. Socio-Technical Design: Strategies in
[16] Davis, L E. "Job Satisfaction Research: The Post- Multidisciplinary Research, Tavistock Publications,
Industrial View," Industrial Relations, Vol. 10, No. 2, London, 1974, 242 pages.
May 1971, pp. 176-193. [34] Herzberg F., Paul, W. J., and Robertson, K. B. "Job
[17] Davis, L. E. and Taylor, James C. Design of Jobs, Enrichment Pays Off," Harvard Business Review,
Penguin Books, London, 1972. January/February 1968.
[18] Davis, L E. and Trist, E. L. "Improving the Quality of [35] Katzell, R. A. and Yankelovich, D. "Improviog
Work Life: Experience of the Socio-Technical Productivity and Job Satisfaction," Organizational
Approach," A background paper commissioned by Dynamics, Summer 1975.
H.E.W. for a report on work in America, June 1972.
[36]
[19] Davis, L. E., Cherns, Albert B., and Associates. Quality Kling, R. 'Towards a Person-Centered Computer
of Working Life, Volume One: Problems, Prospects, Technology," Proceedings of the ACM National
and The State of the Art, Free Press, New York, 1975. Conference, 1973, pp. 387-391.
[37] Kling, R. "Computers and Social Power," Computers
[20] Davis, L. E., Cherns, Albert B., and Associates. Quality
of Working Life, Volume Two: Cases and Commen- and Society, Vol. 5, No. 3, Fall 1974.
tary, Free Press, New York, 1975. [38] Lawler, Edward E., III. Motivation in Work Organiza-
[21] Davis, L E. Talk given at National AIDS Conference, tions, Brooks/Cole Publishing Company, Monterrey,
November 1975. California, 1973.
[22] Dearden, J. and Nolan, R. L. "How to Control the [39] Lucas, Henry C. Computer Based Information
Computer Resource," Harvard Business Review, Systems in Organizations, Science Research
November/December 1973, pp. 68-78. Associates, Palo Alto, California, 1973.

[23] Dickson, G. W., Simmons, J. K., and Anderson, J. C. [40] Lucas, Henry C. Why Information Systems Fail,
"Behavioral Reactions to the Introduction of a Columbia University Press, New York, 1975.

MIS Quarterly / September 1977 31

This content downloaded from

102.115.189.225 on Tue, 15 Sep 2020 17:38:34 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
STS Perspective

[41] Lucas, Henry C. Toward Creative Systems Design, [60] Sollenberger, Harold M. Major Changes Caused by
Columbia University Press, New York, 1975. Implementation of a MIS, Research Monograph 4,
[42] Lupton, Tom. "Efficiency and the Quality of Worklife: National Association of Accountants, 1968.
The Technology of Reconciliation," Organizational [61] Taylor, James C. Technology and Planned Organi-
Dynamics, Autumn 1975. zational Change, CRUSK: Institute for Social
[43] Mann, F. C. and Williams, L. K. "Organizational Research, The University of Michigan, .Ann Arbor,
Impact of White-Collar Automation," Industrial Rela- Michigan, 1971, 151 pages.
tions Research Association Proceedings, 1959. [62] Taylor, James C. "A Report of Preliminary Findings
[44] Marenco, C. "Gradualism, Apathy, and Suspicion in a from February 1976 Work Organization Pilot Study."
French Bank," in OfficeAutomation, W. H. Scott (ed.), Center for Quality of Working Life, UCLA, Los
OECD, Paris, 1965. Angeles, California, 90024.
[45] McGregor, D. The Human Side of Enterprise,
[63] Tichy, Noel M. "Agents of Planned Social Change:
McGraw-Hill Book Company, New York, 1960.
Congruence. of Values, Cognitions and Actions,"
[46] Meyers, Charles A. (ed.). The Impact of Computers Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 19, No. 2,
on Management, The MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass., 1974, pp. 164-182.
1967.
[64] Tomeski, Edward A. "Building Human Factors into
[47] Miles, Raymond E. Theories of Management: Impli- Computer Applications: The Computer Profession
cations for Organizational Behavior and Develop- Must Overcome a 'Jackass Fallacy'!" Management
ment, McGraw-Hill Book Company, New York, 1975.
Datamatics, Vol. 4, No. 4, August 1975, pp. 115-120.
[48] Mueller, E. Automation in an Expanding Economy,
[65] Whisler, T. L. The Impact of Computers in Organiza-
Institute for Social Research, Ann Arbor, Michigan,
tions, Praeger, 1970.
1969.
[49] Mumford, E. and Banks, O. The Computer and the
Clerk, The Villafield Press, Slasgow, England, 1967.
[50] Mumford, E. and Ward, T. B. Computers: Planning
for People, B. T. Badsford Ltd., London, 1968.
About the Authors
[51] Mumford, E., Mercer, D., Mills, S., and Weir, M. "The Bob Bostrom is an Assistant Professor of MIS in
Human Problems of Computer Introduction,"
Management Decision, Vol. 10, No. 1, 1972, pp. 6-17.
the Department of Operations and Systems
[52] Mumford, E., Mercer, D., Mills, S., and Weir, Management
M. at the Graduate School of Busi-
ness, Indiana University - Bloomington. He has
"Discuss the Suggestion that No Project Team Con-
cerned with the Implementation of the MIS Should been
Be involved with STS design approach for over
without a Trained Social Scientist," The Computer
Bulletin, July 1972, pp. 356-358.
two years through collaborative efforts with
[53] Nolan, Richard L. and Gibson, Cyrus F. "Managingthe Center for Quality of Working Life (CQWL) at
the Four Stages of EDP Growth," Harvard BusinessUCLA. The CQWL is a major source of STS
Review, January/February 1974, PP. 76-88. knowledge in this country. He holds a B.A.
[54] Pettigrew, Andrew. "Towards a Political Theory ofand MBA from Michigan State University, an MS
Organizational Intervention," Human Relations, Vol.
28, No. 3, pp. 191-208.
in Computer Science from SUNY at Albany and
a Ph.D. in MIS from the University of Minnesota.
[55] Pettigrew, Andrew and Mumford, Enid. Implementing
Strategic Decisions, Longman, New York, 1975. He also has extensive consulting experience
[56] Pollock, Ken, et al. Improvements Needed in especially in the areas of database management
Managing Automated Decision-Making by Com- and MIS design. Professor Bostrom Is currently
puters Throughout the Federal Government,
Report to the Congress by the Comptroller Generalengaged in research related to the STS
of the United States (FGMSD-76-5), 1976, available approach.
from U.S. General Accounting Office, Distribution
Section, P.O. Box 1020, Washington, D.C., 20013.
Steve Heinen is an Assistant Professor of
D.C., 20013. Managerial Psychology at the University of
[57] Rubenstein, A. H., Radnor, M., Buker, N., Heiman, D., Minnesota. Steve has been Involved with
and McCally, J. B. "Some Organizational Factors problems of organizational change and develop-
Related to the Effectiveness of Management Science
ment and has consulted with several companies
Groups in Industry," Management Science, Vol. 13,
No. 8, April 1967, pp. B-508- B-518. in Minnesota and Michigan on more effective
(58] Schein, Edgar H. "In Defense of Theory Y," Organi- management of people. Steve has an AB degree
zational Dynamics, Summer 1975, pp. 17-30. from Xavier University of Ohio and an MA and
[59] Schultz, Randall L and Slevin, Dennis P. (eds.). Ph.D. In psychology from Michigan State
Implementing Operations Research/Management
Science, American Elsevier, New York, 1975. University.

32 MIS Quarterly / September 1977

This content downloaded from

102.115.189.225 on Tue, 15 Sep 2020 17:38:34 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms