CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 4,760Information Systems Theories and ImplementationManagement and Organizational StudiesInnovative Education and Learning Practices

Using Technology and Constituting Structures: A Practice Lens for Studying Technology in Organizations

Orlikowski, Wanda J.·2000·Organization Science
DOI 10.1287/orsc.11.4.404.14600
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

As both technologies and organizations undergo dramatic changes in form and function, organizational researchers are increasingly turning to concepts of innovation, emergence, and improvisation to help explain the new ways of organizing and using technology evident in practice. With a similar intent, I propose an extension to the structurational perspective on technology that develops a practice lens to examine how people, as they interact with a technology in their ongoing practices, enact structures which shape their emergent and situated use of that technology. Viewing the use of technology as a process of enactment enables a deeper understanding of the constitutive role of social practices in the ongoing use and change of technologies in the workplace. After developing this lens, I offer an example of its use in research, and then suggest some implications for the study of technology in organizations.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1287/orsc.11.4.404.14600

Cites

124 of 124 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • Some employees react favorably to system-induced changes, while others perceive those changes as a threat to their well-being.

    “Some employees may react favorably to these changes, while the others may perceive these changes as a threat to their well-being (Orlikowski, 2000;Boudreau & Robey, 2005).”

    From Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions (2008) · cites this paper as Orlikowski, 2000

  • Opacity of AI-in-use is produced and enacted through practices situated in specific organizational configurations, rather than being inherent or fixed features of AI tools.

    “Therefore, instead of conceptualizing opacity as inherent or fixed features of AI tools, we view opacity as something produced and enacted through practices situated in specific organizational configurations (Leonardi 2011, Orlikowski 2000).”

    From To Engage or Not to Engage with AI for Critical Judgments: How Professionals Deal with Opacity When Using AI for Medical Diagnosis (2022) · cites this paper as Orlikowski 2000

  • People are an essential part of the information system, and business benefits are not produced by the technology alone.

    “That is, people are an essential part of the information system, and business benefits are not produced by the technology alone (Orlikowski, 2000).”

    From An Explanatory Framework for Achieving Business Benefits from ERP Systems (2012) · cites this paper as Orlikowski, 2000

  • Participants interpret their actions to make sense of what they are doing, and there is always the possibility of resisting expectations and doing otherwise.

    “They interpret their actions in order to make sense of what they are doing and, though their choices of how to proceed appear automatic or mindless at times, there is always the possibility of resisting expectations and doing otherwise (Giddens, 1984; Orlikowski, 2000).”

    From Reconceptualizing Organizational Routines as a Source of Flexibility and Change (2003) · cites this paper as Orlikowski, 2000

  • From this perspective, non- or partial adoption, mis-use, non-use and workarounds are not simply negative effects, pathologies or signs of failure, but are different enactments of the 'technology-in-use'.

    “From this perspective, non- or partial adoption, mis-use, non-use and workarounds, are not simply negative effects, pathologies or signs of failure, but are different enactments of the ‘technology-in-use’ [58,79].”

    From Building a house on shifting sand: methodological considerations when evaluating the implementation and adoption of national electronic health record systems (2012) · cites this paper as [79]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 126 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Orlikowski, W. J.
Affiliations
Massachusetts Institute of Technology (US)
Corresponding author
Orlikowski, Wanda J.
ORCID
Orlikowski, Wanda J.
Venue
Organization Science
Publisher
Institute for Operations Research and the Management Sciences (INFORMS)
Published
2000-08
Volume
11
Issue
4
Pages
404-428
ISSN
  • 1047-7039 (ISSN-L)
  • 1526-5455
DOI
10.1287/orsc.11.4.404.14600
OpenAlex
W1996293917
Cited by
4,760
References
126
Citations by year
2026: 251 · 2025: 197 · 2024: 111 · 2023: 192 · 2022: 151 · 2021: 191 · 2020: 220 · 2019: 208 · 2018: 173 · 2017: 151 · 2016: 192 · 2015: 240 · 2014: 289 · 2013: 270 · 2012: 262
FWCI
160.69
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Organization Science (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Information Systems Theories and Implementation
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Management and Organizational Studies
  • Social Sciences › Human Factors and Ergonomics › Innovative Education and Learning Practices
Keywords
technology in organizations, enactment, social practices, improvisation, innovation, situated practice

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