CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 1,736Information Systems Theories and ImplementationTechnology Adoption and User BehaviourInnovative Human-Technology Interaction

Technological frames: making sense of information technology in organizations

Open access
Orlikowski, Wanda J., Gash, Debra C.·1994·ACM Transactions on Information Systems
DOI 10.1145/196734.196745
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

In this article, we build on and extend research into the cognitions and values of users and designers by proposing a systematic approach for examining the underlying assumptions, expectations, and knowledge that people have about technology. Such interpretations of technology (which we call technological frames) are central to understanding technological development, use, and change in organizations. We suggest that where the technological frames of key groups in organizations—such as managers, technologists, and users— are significantly different, difficulties and conflict around the development, use, and change of technology may result. We use the findings of an empirical study to illustrate how the nature, value, and use of a groupware technology were interpreted by various organizational stakeholders, resulting in outcomes that deviated from those expected. We argue that technological frames offer an interesting and useful analytic perspective for explaining an anticipating actions and meanings that are not easily obtained with other theoretical lenses.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1145/196734.196745

Cites

90 of 90 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Within the TLC framework, technological frames capture how stakeholders categorize a technology relative to other technologies.

    “In addition, ref. [118] suggests that within this TLC framework, 'technological frames' which capture how stakeholders categorize a technology relative to other technologies can be understood.”

    From Digitisation and the Circular Economy: A Review of Current Research and Future Trends (2018) · cites this paper as [118]

  • In adopting Lotus Notes, users imposed their assumptions about familiar technologies on the new product, comparing it with word processing and spreadsheet programs.

    “Following this, ref. [118] shows that in adopting a new technology at the time, Lotus Notes, users imposed their assumptions about familiar technologies on the new product, where they made comparisons with word processing and spreadsheet programs.”

    From Digitisation and the Circular Economy: A Review of Current Research and Future Trends (2018) · cites this paper as [118]

  • In the same firm, variation in framing caused different Lotus Notes implementations.

    “The same research results show that in the same firm, variation in framing caused different Lotus Notes implementations.”

    From Digitisation and the Circular Economy: A Review of Current Research and Future Trends (2018) · cites this paper as [118]

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

6 of the 96 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. MARCH, J. G. AND SIMON, H. 1958. OrganrzatLons. John Wiley and Sons, New York.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Orlikowski, W. J., & Gash, D. C.
Affiliations
  • Massachusetts Institute of Technology (US)
  • Volpe National Transportation Systems Center (US)
ORCID
Orlikowski, Wanda J.
Venue
ACM Transactions on Information Systems
Publisher
Association for Computing Machinery (ACM)
Published
1994-04
Volume
12
Issue
2
Pages
174-207
ISSN
  • 1046-8188 (ISSN-L)
  • 1558-2868
DOI
10.1145/196734.196745
OpenAlex
W2127089424
Cited by
1,736
References
96
Citations by year
2026: 58 · 2025: 49 · 2024: 63 · 2023: 63 · 2022: 64 · 2021: 62 · 2020: 59 · 2019: 64 · 2018: 65 · 2017: 43 · 2016: 53 · 2015: 74 · 2014: 81 · 2013: 87 · 2012: 73
FWCI
71.94
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
www.acm.org/publications/policies/copyright_policy#Background (vor)
Locations
ACM Transactions on Information Systems (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Information Systems Theories and Implementation
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Technology Adoption and User Behaviour
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Innovative Human-Technology Interaction
Keywords
technological frames, technology value, organizational stakeholders, groupware, technology adoption, stakeholder conflict

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review