The DOI matches its Crossref record; 28 of the 28 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Rituals In Information System Design
Abstract
Developing computer-based information systems is usually conceived as a rational process, intended to achieve identifiable and agreed upon goals. From this perspective, certain elements in the system development process are believed to enhance its effectiveness. For example, handoffs between one project phase and another, feasibility studies conducted prior to development work, and the use of project teams and steering committees are recommended in most texts as activities instrumental to effective system design. Recently, the political view of organizations has assumed greater stature in organization theory. This perspective interprets organizational events not only from the rational standpoint, but also in terms of negotiation and conflicting goals. From the political perspective, elements of the system design process can be interpreted as rituals which enable actors to remain overtly rational while negotiating to achieve private interests. This paper seeks to understand those rituals and to reveal their function in the systems design process.
Overview
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Sociological Paradigms and Organizational Analysis.
Louis, M. R., Burrell, G., & Morgan, G. (1983) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2392394 · Cited by 5,588
(1981) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 3,559
Power In and Around Organizations.
Krackhardt, D., & Mintzberg, H. (1985) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2392702 · Cited by 2,376
Power, politics, and MIS implementation
Markus, M. L. (1983) · Communications of the ACM · doi:10.1145/358141.358148 · Cited by 2,224
Self-citationAdapting to Environmental Jolts
Meyer, A. D. (1982) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2392528 · Cited by 1,909
Information in Organizations as Signal and Symbol
Feldman, M. S., & March, J. G. (1981) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2392467 · Cited by 1,721
The Politics of Organizational Decision-Making.
Pfeffer, J., & Pettigrew, A. M. (1976) · Contemporary Sociology · doi:10.2307/2063824 · Cited by 1,171
Information systems and organizational change
Keen, P. G. W. (1981) · Communications of the ACM · doi:10.1145/358527.358543 · Cited by 903
A Program for Research on Management Information Systems
Mason, R. O., & Mitroff, I. I. (1973) · Management Science · doi:10.1287/mnsc.19.5.475 · Cited by 833
Social Analyses of Computing: Theoretical Perspectives in Recent Empirical Research
Kling, R. (1980) · ACM Computing Surveys · doi:10.1145/356802.356806 · Cited by 783
Cited by
Carrots and Rainbows: Motivation and Social Practice in Open Source Software Development1
von Krogh, G., Haefliger, S., Spaeth, S., & Wallin, M. W. (2012) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.2307/41703471 · Cited by 698
Power, Rationality, and the Art of Living Through Socio-Technical Change1
Avgerou, C., & McGrath, K. (2007) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.2307/25148792 · Cited by 219
A disaster for everyone to see: An interpretive analysis of a failed is project
Myers, M. D. (1994) · Accounting, Management and Information Technologies · doi:10.1016/0959-8022(94)90022-1 · Cited by 203
Metadata
- Authors
- Robey, D., & Markus, M. L.
- Venue
- MIS Quarterly
- Publisher
- MIS Quarterly
- Published
- 1984-03-01
- Volume
- 8
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 5-15
- ISSN
- 0276-7783 (ISSN-L)
- 2162-9730
- OpenAlex
- W1520285215
- Cited by
- 253
- References
- 28
- FWCI
- 20.43
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Rituals In Information System Design. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2307/249240
- The paper
- Robey, D., & Markus, M. L. (1984). Rituals In Information System Design. MIS Quarterly. https://doi.org/10.2307/249240
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.