Keil, Mark

[["dc.bibliographiccitation.firstpage","57"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.issue","1"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.journal","Information Systems Research"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.lastpage","80"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.volume","26"],["dc.contributor.author","Gregory, Robert Wayne"],["dc.contributor.author","Keil, Mark"],["dc.contributor.author","Muntermann, Jan"],["dc.contributor.author","Mähring, Magnus"],["dc.date.accessioned","2018-08-23T14:42:34Z"],["dc.date.available","2018-08-23T14:42:34Z"],["dc.date.issued","2015"],["dc.description.abstract","Though information technology (IT) transformation programs are gaining in importance, we know little about the nature of the challenges involved in such programs and how to manage them. Using grounded theory methodology, we conducted a multiyear case study of a large IT transformation program in a major commercial bank, during which we encountered the interrelated themes of paradoxes and ambidexterity. Grounded in our case, we construct a substantive theory of ambidexterity in IT transformation programs that identifies and explains the paradoxes that managers need to resolve in IT transformation programs. The ambidexterity areas we identified are (1) IT portfolio decisions (i.e., IT efficiency versus IT innovation), (2) IT platform design (i.e., IT standardization versus IT differentiation), (3) IT architecture change (i.e., IT integration versus IT replacement), (4) IT program planning (i.e., IT program agility versus IT project stability), (5) IT program governance (i.e., IT program control versus IT project autonomy), and (6) IT program delivery (i.e., IT program coordination versus IT project isolation). What weaves these six areas together is the combined need for IT managers to employ ambidextrous resolution strategies to ensure short-term IT contributions and continuous progress of IT projects while simultaneously working toward IT transformation program success as a foundation for IT-enabled business transformation. However, in addition to this commonality, we find that the nature of paradoxical tensions differs across the six areas and requires slightly different management strategies for paradox resolution. Ambidexterity areas (1), (2), and (3) are associated with IT transformation strategizing and, in addition to balancing short- and long-term goals, require the mutual accommodation and blending of business and IT interests in the spirit of IT-business partnering to achieve IT-enabled business change and IT-based competitiveness. Ambidexterity areas (4), (5), and (6) are associated with IT program and project execution and, in addition to balancing short- and long-term requirements, require a recurrent and dynamic act of balancing “local” needs at the IT project level and “global” needs at the IT program level."],["dc.identifier.doi","10.1287/isre.2014.0554"],["dc.identifier.uri","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gro-2/15513"],["dc.language.iso","en"],["dc.notes.status","final"],["dc.relation.eissn","1526-5536"],["dc.relation.issn","1047-7047"],["dc.title","Paradoxes and the Nature of Ambidexterity in IT Transformation Programs"],["dc.type","journal_article"],["dc.type.internalPublication","yes"],["dspace.entity.type","Publication"]]

[["dc.bibliographiccitation.firstpage","1524"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.lastpage","1539"],["dc.contributor.author","Gregory, Robert Wayne"],["dc.contributor.author","Keil, Mark"],["dc.contributor.author","Muntermann, Jan"],["dc.date.accessioned","2020-02-05T13:23:01Z"],["dc.date.available","2020-02-05T13:23:01Z"],["dc.date.issued","2012"],["dc.description.abstract","Motivated by the lack of empirical IS strategy research in the M&A problem domain, in this paper we present a revelatory case study of a 7-year-long organizational balancing act of searching for the right information systems (IS) strategy in the pre-deal phase of a bank merger. Our case study is about simultaneous IT-driven organizational transformation and merger-driven integration, providing us with a fertile ground to study the development and evolution of ambidextrous IS strategies, which are underresearched. Based on the theoretical insights that emerge from our case study, we extend Chen et al.’s (2010) IS strategy typology and propose three different archetypes of IS ambidextrous strategy. Further theoretical insights relate to the required organizational capabilities for the successful implementation of IS ambidextrous strategies as well as the co-evolutionary interplay between business and IT units in that process. Future research should empirically test the IS ambidextrous strategy archetypes proposed in this paper as well as the associated findings."],["dc.identifier.uri","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gro-2/62944"],["dc.language.iso","en"],["dc.notes.preprint","yes"],["dc.publisher","AIS/ICIS Administrative Office"],["dc.publisher.place","Atlanta, Georgia"],["dc.relation.conference","Thirty Third International Conference on Information Systems, Orlando 2012"],["dc.relation.eventend","2012-12-19"],["dc.relation.eventlocation","Orlando, Föorida, USA"],["dc.relation.eventstart","2012-12-16"],["dc.relation.isbn","978-1-62748-604-0"],["dc.relation.iserratumof","yes"],["dc.title","Ambidextrous IS Strategy: The Dynamic Balancing Act of Developing a ‘Transform & Merge’ Strategy in the Banking Industry"],["dc.type","conference_paper"],["dc.type.internalPublication","yes"],["dspace.entity.type","Publication"]]