The Organisational Impact of Implementing Integrated IS in HE
Institutions
A Case Study from a UK University
Dimitra Skoumpopoulou and Teresa Waring
Northumbria University, Faculty of Business and Law, Newcastle Upon Tyne, U.K.
Keywords: Integrated Information Systems (IS), Higher Education (HE), Case Study.
Abstract: This paper explores the implementation process of integrated Information Systems (IS) in Higher Education
(HE) institutions. This is achieved through the analysis of a HE institution’s strategy during the
implementation process of the integrated IS and the impact that the new system had on the working
practices of the HE institution. Through the use of interviews, the research indicates that there has been a
growth of alternative power bases within the university, new roles and responsibilities for administrative
staff and a different working environment for academics.
1 INTRODUCTION
In HE institutions, as in many other organisations
Information Systems (IS) started as in house
developments that tended to satisfy the immediate
needs of the different departments and schools. As
the universities continued to grow and become
international organisations, incorporating students
from all over the world, their needs changed and the
need for integration intensified (Cornford and
Pollock, 2003; Pollock and William, 2009). More
specifically thre is a recent push towards
reconceptualising universities as informational and
more integrated organisations.
Mutch (2008) suggests that despite the enormous
expenditure on information technology, many
organisations still feel uncertain whether they
realise, much value, from their investment. This
situation seems to have continued in recent years
since organisations, in particular Higher Education
institutions, seem to make huge investments on
integrated information systems such as Enterprise
Resource Planning (ERP) systems; however they do
not seem to achieve the full potential of these
systems (Pollock and Williams, 2009). Thus, the
focus of this research is to further explore and
understand the organisational impact that integrated
IS have on HE institutions.
Previous research (Wainwright and Waring,
2004; Gajendran and Brewer, 2012) takes a holistic
view of information systems’ integration and argues
that it is beyond “technical” perspective but it is
important to also include other perspectives such as
organisational, strategic, operational, etc. Therefore,
this research is using a theoretical framework that
examines the implementation of an integrated IS
from a variety of perspectives with an emphasis on
organisational aspects.
This paper consists of four main sections.
Section two provides a brief review of the pertinent
literature in aspects related to universities as
organisations and integrated IS implementation in
HE institutions. Section three reviews a theoretical
model for the implementation of integrated IS.
Section four discusses the methodology
underpinning this research while sections five and
six present and discuss the findings of the HE case
study. Finally section seven draws relevant
conclusions and suggests future research in the area
of integrated IS implementation in the HE sector.
2 LITERATURE REVIEW
Before exploring the current literature on the
implementation of integrated IS in HE institutions it
is important to understand the organisational aspects
of universities in order to better understand the
nature and complexity of the HE sector.
119
Skoumpopoulou D. and Waring T..
The Organisational Impact of Implementing Integrated IS in HE Institutions - A Case Study from a UK University.
DOI: 10.5220/0004860201190127
In Proceedings of the 16th International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems (ICEIS-2014), pages 119-127
ISBN: 978-989-758-027-7
Copyright
c
2014 SCITEPRESS (Science and Technology Publications, Lda.)
2.1 Universities as Organisations
Due to the increasing numbers of students in Higher
Education, the formalization of universities has
become inevitable and funding for mass Higher
Education has brought increasing demand for
accountability (McNaught and Vogel, 2006).
Consequently this has increased the use of business
models and methods by senior management in the
HE sector which in turn has led some universities to
identify themselves as corporate (McNaught and
Vogel, 2006). However, can universities be solely
corporate?
In some very insightful research McNay (1995)
identified that the universities of the 21st Century
are increasing in diversity and in an effort to shed
light in this growing diversity, he classified
universities into four types, the corporate, the
collegium, the bureaucratic and the enterprise
university. While universities tend to be a complex
mix of all four organisational cultures, McNay
(1995) argues that over the years universities have
been progressing from a primarily collegial
organisational structure through bureaucratic and
corporate modes to a predominantly enterprise style.
The important differences between the types of
university are not structural but relate more to
relationships and values (McNaught and Vogel,
2006). However, the growth in size of the modern
university has resulted in a growing emphasis on
systems of budgeting and resource allocation,
financial accounting, personnel management and
infrastructure planning and all these are
characteristics of a corporate university. Nowadays,
universities also feel the emerging need to integrate
all their disparate systems in order to be able to
satisfy the students’ needs more effectively and to
utilise information to support a growing need for
Government statistics in particular from HEFCE.
2.2 Integrated IS in the HE Sector
Researchers suggest that social and organisational
issues are the most important aspects of integrated
IS implementations (Kayas, 2008; Koh, et al. 2011;
Elbana, 2007) and urge IS researchers to engage in
more explicit research regarding the cultural and
organisational presence of the information
technology. Kallunki, Laitinen and Silvola (2011)
argue that integrated IS can be seen as an umbrella
which management use in order to gain a wider
control across an organisation. Thus an integrated IS
can be used either to centralise control of top
management or to decentralise power to demonstrate
more visible management control throughout the
organisation.
One growing area of integrated IS research is in
the area of Higher Education (HE) (Cramer, 2006;
Mutch, 2008; Fowler and Gilfillan, 2003; Wagner et
al., 2006; Sabau et al., 2009; Pollock and Williams,
2009). Nevertheless there are few studies that
explicitly use an organisational lens to explore the
influence these systems have within the
organisation.
As Alt and Auth (2010) argue research and
theory building in the area of implementation of
integrated IS in HE institutions is still in its infancy.
However, Lechtchinskaia, Uffen and Breitner (2011)
identified a number of CSF for the implementation
of integrated IS which are specific to the HE sector.
Through a comprehensive literature review they
found that change management and organizational
culture were two factors that draw most attention
and they suggest that due to the fragmented
organizational nature of HE institutions a different
approach is needed to research compared to ERP
implementations in private companies and cultural
issues should be at the forefront of this.
Within the UK HE there have been two major
studies on ES implementations that did to a small
extent explore culture (Pollock and Cornford, 2004
and Fowler and Gilfillan, 2003). Their work focused
on research intensive organisations and took a
strategic, higher level management view of the
organisations under investigation. Insight into
cultural change was limited and did not provide
empirical evidence into how the culture changed
over time or how it impacted the individual front
line staff.
In addition, Wagner et al.’s (2006) study
illustrates how a best practice ERP system was
actually created for the HE sector in the USA. Their
research reveals that although the creation of new
software-based best practices is assumed to be a
thorough, exhaustive, investigative process they may
have been determined by a relatively small interest
group and when considering the early progress of ES
for HE this was surrounded by controversy. Sabau et
al. (2009) who conducted their research in the
Romania HE sector concluded that at the end of the
day an ES does not provide an institution with a
competitive advantage. Instead this comes from the
type of services it provides to its students with an ES
being a facilitator and not a driver in a university’s
processes. However, this integrated, whole
institution approach is intended to require all parts of
a university to use a standardised format and moves
it towards a highly coupled centralised organisation
ICEIS2014-16thInternationalConferenceonEnterpriseInformationSystems
120
no matter how decentralised it is and how
autonomous are its faculties (Pollock and Williams
2009). The next section discusses the theoretical
framework used in this research in order to gain a
deeper understanding of the organisational aspects
involved in an integrated IS implementation.
3 A THEORETICAL MODEL FOR
THE IMPLEMENTATION OF
INTEGRATED SYSTEM
Wainwright and Waring (2004) developed a model
for the implementation of integrated IS based on the
literature and empirical work which proposes that
three major domains should be taken into
consideration while implementing integrated IS.
These three domains are technical, strategic and
organizational. The technical domain sees
integration mainly from a technical perspective but
fail to recognise the importance of organizational
issues. The strategic domain views integration as a
way to achieve competitive advantage and mainly
concentrates on strategic issues. Finally, the
organizational domain concentrates on issues such
as structure, power and politics, social and historical
and finally cultural issues. This research is based on
the work of Waring and Wainwright (2004) and by
using their theoretical model will specifically
investigate the implementation process of an
integrated IS in a HE institution.
The framework for integration by Wainwright
and Waring (2004) presents a systematic framework
discussing IS integration issues and stresses the need
for soft (organizational and strategic) issues to be
studied in a proactive manner while implementing
integrated Information Systems. This is in line with
this research since it seeks to gain a better
understanding of the organisational impact that the
implementation of integrated IS have on an
organisation.
For the purpose of this research we are focusing
on the organisational domain and we therefore seek
to gain a better understanding of the implementation
of an integrated IS by exploring soft issues such as
structural, cultural, political and power analysis as
well as the social and historical context of the
implementation.
4 METHODOLOGY
The study of the SITS (Strategic Information
Technology Services) implementation began in 2006
as an ethnographic study after what had been a very
challenging year for many of the academics at
EducationCom. Watson (2011) argues that
ethnography should involve participant observation,
content analysis of documents, stories, myths,
rituals, symbols and other artefacts. This may be
supplemented and strengthened by interviews,
statistical analysis and even small surveys. The
research began with an in-depth critical analysis of
the documentation leading up to the SITS
implementation. This was followed during 2008 by
twenty two interviews, averaging one hour each,
with university staff who had been in the university
for no less than five years.
Interviewees were taken from the five largest
faculties (Business, Arts and Humanities, Health and
Education, Computing and Engineering, Design)
where student business was more complex as well as
staff from the postgraduate research department. A
non-directive interviewing technique was used
which allowed respondents to express their own
views about organizational life in their own words
rather than force them into predetermined categories
(Hirschheim and Newman, 1991). The interviews
involved a discussion of issues surrounding the
participants’ prior experience of student information
systems, the implementation of SITS, life in the
organization and change during and after SITS went
live. Interviews were audio taped with permission,
transcribed and returned to the interviewees for
verification.
Participant observation took place throughout the
research study and was recorded using a diary. As a
member of staff one of the authors was able to
participate in the activities which contributed to the
academic role in providing student data. Working
alongside other colleagues she was able to observe
the action of various individuals and interpret them
in order to gain insight into the cultural
manifestations of the organization. Waddington
(2004) suggests that being part of day to day
activities or important events can provide valuable
understanding of organizational practice which can
become ritualised over time.
Using a general inductive approach informed by
grounded theory (Crabtree and Miller 1999; King
2004) the interviews, documentation and diary data
were coded according to theoretical concepts
suggested by the data rather than imposed by the
researcher. The approach used involved a process of
developing initial categories, grouping data,
identifying patterns and then making comparisons to
uncover shared elements and properties. The
TheOrganisationalImpactofImplementingIntegratedISinHEInstitutions-ACaseStudyfromaUKUniversity
121
documentation and transcripts were also read
critically to identify statements which reflected
values, beliefs and assumptions about SITS as well
as for evidence of organizational stories, myths and
rituals which may have arisen over the period of the
research. The analysis of the case study is presented
in a form of narrative taking into consideration the
improvisations which took place and the elements of
each circuit.
5 FINDINGS
It is impossible within this paper to explore the
extensive rich data captured during the research
process. Therefore we have focussed on data that
provides insight into the implementation and how it
has not just delivered an integrated administration
system but also other unforeseen challenges for the
organization. Nevertheless it is important to
understand some of the background to the
implementation and why the new system was
deemed necessary.
EducationCom has always had computerised
administrative systems and these have been
distributed, located within academic departments
and developed by academic users. Prior to 2006
EducationCom had attempted to install and use an
Oracle system to undertake a centralised approach to
the university administrative business. A decision
was taken by the CEO of the university to abandon
the Oracle system and purchase a new integrated IS,
SITS. There was no consultation with academic staff
and limited discussions with senior administrative
managers. The system went live just before the
autumn term started in 2006 without the general
knowledge of academics which resulted in chaos for
students and staff. Since then much has changed in
the university and this will be discussed in greater
detail below. We have grouped and presented our
findings based on the organisational domain aspects
of the Wainwright and Waring (2004) framework
discussed above. Therefore we explored the social
and historical context of the implementation, we
examined the organisational structures and culture
involved with the implementation as well as any
power and politics issues which arose because of the
introduction of the new system.
5.1 Social and Historical Context – The
Rise of Uncertainty
The failure in implementing the Oracle system prior
to SITS as well as the pressure from central
government and funding bodies for more detailed
statistics meant that the implementation of a
‘system’ was imperative. However, this led to the
selection and implementation of SITS to be done in
a very rushed way and a senior academic said:
“There was communication but the
communication however, was ‘this is what is
happening’! Without really much opportunity to
feedback so it was very much a driven project and it
was not really a consultation project ... They got
themselves into a mess ...” (P10, June 2008)
The implementation team had to implement the
new system in a limited time frame and there was no
room for delays. This had a negative impact on how
people perceived the new system and because staff
were not involved, they could not understand how to
use or appreciate the new system.
Most importantly the fact that SITS was
implemented so quickly caused initially stress,
tension and chaos across schools. Perhaps if the
implementation team had spent some time to
involve, inform and educate people around the
university about the new system, what is suppose to
do and why they need to implement it, then people
might have not had such high expectations and life
after SITS might have been smoother. Interviewees
dealing with standard taught undergraduate
programmes believe that the system is working.
Nevertheless EducationCom has seen a big turnover
of administrative staff since the introduction of the
new system because it requires attention to detail
and familiarity with a system that is not intuitive.
Although the new system should have automated
the institution’s processes and make things easier, it
seems that in certain cases it causes extra confusion
and still some processes are paper based rather than
automated and more flexible. It appears that SITS is
not adaptable or flexible and on top of that creates a
lot of frustration to people because they do not know
how the system works, thus employees blame the
system since they do not know who else to blame.
5.2 New Structures – The Loss of Trust
When SITS was introduced academics could see that
administration staff were not familiar with the
system and therefore this led to some concerns about
whether administrators knew what they were doing.
Although academics were trying to be sympathetic
to some administration staff, they were very
annoyed and it was a period of increased tension.
However, the culture of an organisation can
determine how its members will deal with a crisis
situation. EducationCom went through a crisis
period and there was a lot of tension among its
employees which appears to have caused not only
lack of trust in the new system but also in academics
ICEIS2014-16thInternationalConferenceonEnterpriseInformationSystems
122
and administrators.
A senior academic discusses how people do not
trust SITS but also how SITS seems to be the easy
target for employees to blame when things do not go
as planned:
“It is the frustration that the system can be
blamed for everything … blaming the system is the
best place to hide and I think that this culture is
greater than this respect!”. (P1, July 2008)
The loss of trust between the various university
staff members meant that often people were
reluctant to take responsibilities and admit that
something was wrong. It is clear that relationships
have changed between academics and administrators
– some might argue not for the better:
“it has to do with power, but it is more than that.
It is the defensiveness, paranoia of being criticised
and there is the habit of witch-hunting in the
administration department certainly…” (P5, May
2008)
The highly rigid structure and formal ways of
operating imposed by SITS does not work for all
academic schools. A number of schools were
required to undertake a re-structure in order to align
their work with SITS. The evidence seems to
indicate that administrators have control of SITS
data and make decisions about when marks should
come in, set the dates for exam boards and when the
graduation should take place. They argue that the
administrative burden has been lifted from
academics. Yet with this has come a new authority
and political power – much of which has bypassed
many academics.
The assumption that SITS will make life better
seems like a dream that might still need a few years
to come true. SITS could perhaps make life easier
for staff members but how could it improve
university life when many academics do not know
the capabilities of the new system. Some people’s
perception is that life is not better with SITS since it
did not deliver what it was promised and
consequently it did not meet many staff
expectations.
5.3 Power and Politics – The Power
Game
The perception of senior academic staff is that none
of the schools have been consulted about the new
system. The Academic Registrar did point out that
the schools were consulted, but the consultation was
done through the administrative staff and not
through the academic faculty (P11, June 2008). The
main focus of an administration system such as SITS
which has been implemented in a HE institution
should aim to facilitate the role of an academic and
not primarily that of an administrator. Most
academic research in IS would suggest that
stakeholders involvement is essential and should not
be put aside as happened in the case of
EducationCom.
During the initial implementation an interesting
finding was the fact that Academic Registry and the
implementation team sent messages that SITS
implementation was going very well and there were
no problems. They were trying to convince people
that SITS was going fine and that if there was a
problem, then the problem is with the school,
although at the end of the day every school was
facing the same problems (P10, June 2008; P14,
June 2008).
“ ... the message came back from the centre was
always that SITS implementation is going well. The
feedback from individual departments was that there
were tremendous problems” (P10, June 2008)
An academic (P5, May 2008) stated that
EducationCom is an extremely bureaucratic
institution and that this bureaucracy existed before
SITS. However, there has been a missed opportunity
to improve the system. Consequently even after
implementing such a big system they still use many
paper based processes e.g. for the marks entry. In
fact it appears to have become even more
bureaucratic.
A senior member of staff from the central
department suggested that often academics do not
treat administrators in an appropriate manner which
consequently nurtures tension and rivalry in their
professional contact.
“I think there has been a general culture
throughout the school where I don’t think academics
treat administrators necessarily in a very helpful
way.” (P11, June 2008)
In addition, the implementation of SITS brought
the introduction of the SITS helpline, and the
introduction of a new role; that of the “good
housekeeper” which brought to the surface a new
power that of the administrators. This new role
appears to have first changed the identity of
administrators who have more power and second the
identity of the academics. After SITS academics are
required to comply with the requirements of the new
system when prior to SITS academics seemed to
determine what kind of systems they needed and in
some cases they were the ones designing these
systems. Finally, it could also be argued that
organisational politics played a significant role in
this major shift in the locus of control.
TheOrganisationalImpactofImplementingIntegratedISinHEInstitutions-ACaseStudyfromaUKUniversity
123
6 DISCUSSION
The discussion of the findings is based on the
framework by Wainwright and Waring (2004). We
discuss how the new system had an impact on the
organisational life of the University by looking into
the aspects of the social and historical context of the
implementation, new structures that developed as
part of the implementation, power and politics
involved with the introduction of the new systems
and finally how the overall culture of the HE
institution was influenced by SITS.
Taking into consideration the changing HE
cultural environment and the analysis of the primary
data, what appears to emerge are a number of
themes which are indicative of possible
organisational changes within EducationCom. While
analysing the transcripts the authors extracted coded
texts from participants’ interviews. The authors were
looking for statements that show beliefs, emotions,
disagreement, stories or other evidence that
indicated organisational changes in relation to
implementation. Each of these texts was numbered
from 1 to 122, and links between them were made
by identifying any similarities in these text extracts.
From the coded pieces of texts extracted from the
interviews, the themes became evident (social and
historical context, structural analysis, power and
politics analysis and cultural analysis).
6.1 Social and Historical Context – The
Rise of Uncertainty
From the outset of the project it was not clear to
academics why they were not involved during the
implementation of SITS. This caused uncertainty to
the academic members of staff since they were not
sure how the new system will affect their jobs.
Administrators are the sole users of SITS which
often makes academics uncertain what can or cannot
be done, thus relying heavily on administrators for
tasks that prior to SITS was performed equally by
academics and administrators. Agee and Holisky
(2003) suggest that the key to highly effective
organisations is to build relationships while they also
argue that successful collaboration opens up new
possibilities for achievements that are not available
when people are working alone.
Another issue that increased uncertainty was the
fact that no proper training was given. Although
training is an issue frequently mentioned in the IS
field (Gupta, 2000) as a major contributing factor
when a new information system is implemented, and
everybody is aware of its significance and necessity,
EducationCom is another example where the
implementation team underestimated the importance
of training the right people. Therefore employees, in
particular administrative staff, were not sure about
the role they will play after the implementation of
SITS or how their role might change.
6.2 New Structures – The Loss of Trust
Writing in the early 1980s Dill (1982) foresaw that
the strength of the academic culture is declining and
almost thirty years later it appears that he was right.
Considering the academics’ position after the
implementation of SITS in the EducationCom case
study it can perhaps be argued that the influence of
the academics is at its lowest’ with administrators
holding major control of university processes and
policies around academic programmes.
Similarly, Noble (1998) argues that rather than
providing academics with greater freedom and
control over their work, the introduction of network
technology into universities has instead contributed
to the commoditisation of education. With the
introduction of new technologies the role of
academics is being restructured, via the technology,
in order to reduce their autonomy, independence and
control over their work and to place workplace
knowledge and control as much as possible into the
hands of the administration (Noble, 1998, p. 7).
In the case of EducationCom the identity of the
academic and the administrator has significantly
changed. More specifically, SITS has enabled the
reconstitution of formal management structures and
processes within the university and has led to
identity change with some groups of staff being
winners and others possibly losers. These groups are
the central finance department, the registry
department, academics and administrators.
6.3 Power and Politics – The Power
Game
Power relations have been strongly impacted and in
some cases completely reversed. In a university
whose core competence is education it can be seen
that administrators and administrative managers are
now determining policies, procedures and by
implication the strategy of the university.
Administrators decide on the academic calendar,
recruitment criteria (now an automated points based
system), examination boards, quality audit, staff
performance management, to name but a few. Many
of these areas used to be under the direct control of
the academic faculty members and the head of
department.
ICEIS2014-16thInternationalConferenceonEnterpriseInformationSystems
124
Additionally, the literature suggests that
information systems implementations should be seen
as cultural shifts and the different stakeholders
involved in the project should realise that the new
system is not a co-mingling of people but an
appreciation and combination of cultures (Agee and
Holisky, 2003; Ayers, 2004). Nevertheless, in
EducationCom they excluded the academic culture
from the implementation causing a lot of tension,
mistrust between academics and administrators and
consequently difficulties for them in working
together. For example academics cannot develop
new degrees easily or innovative ways of running
them because the system struggles to cope. In
particular certain senior administrators it appears are
assuming authority they never had before and they
are using it on academics which consequently cause
problems and difficulties in working relationships.
One of the most pertinent findings of Fowler and
Gilfillan (2003) which was also apparent in
EducationCom is that an informal network often
evolves to “get things done” outside of the formal
role and responsibility structure in institutions where
an ERP system was implemented.
6.4 The Emerging Organisational
Culture
It is often evident that beliefs and values that might
be shared most keenly by individuals and groups
within an institution may not be those most equally
supported by the institution itself. Ali et al. (2008)
claim that when there is a focus in analysing an
institution‘s culture the interpretations generally
have a theoretical and observational basis, but only
rarely encompass the perceptions of the actors
themselves. They suggest that Becher’s (1989)
research is perhaps the only exception. Becher
(1989) conducted early research in Britain and
focused his study on the various departments in an
academic institution, in order to identify their central
beliefs and values. Pursuing the “cultural identity”
of groups, he examined their features and those of
the knowledge territory they inhabit. He found that
the characteristics of the various departments were
parallel within as well as between departments
(Becher, 1989).
This research found that there is a gap between
the various departments and schools, even between
the various roles (academics, administrators and
central departments) and that their differences are
greater than their similarities. Since academics were
not involved during implementation and are not
aware of how to use the system, they are therefore
fully reliant on the administrators.
The implementation of a complex IS such as
SITS can have a major impact on an organisation
and it was evident in EducationCom that there was
some miscommunication between the SITS team
and the academic schools in that they wanted the
SITS implementation to be seen as running
smoothly. Although SITS was seen as a solution to
the increasing numbers of students and demands of
government reporting the new system seems to have
caused more problems than it actually solved. Prior
research on the implementation of integrated IS in
academia has reported that systems such as ERP
systems have helped universities to realise a number
of advantages (e.g Cornford and Pollock, 2003).
However, this might not always be the case because
the HE sector environment is a complex one and in
constant flux. The introduction of a major
organisational change such as SITS can affect
unanticipated change that may not be for the best as
it was evident in the case of EducationCom.
7 CONCLUSIONS
This research has followed a fairly structured
approach and tried to be more analytical in order to
make sense of the impact that integrated IS such as
SITS can have on an institution‘s culture.
More specifically at EducationCom a HE
institution there has been a re-constitution of
management which has reified the SITS system and
subjugated all other forms of management. The new
management agenda has become firmly cemented
within the new technology which has then become
an agent and an enforcer of strict instrumental policy
and power. This has enabled a significant power
shift to central non-academic departments at the
expense of academics who directly support the core
competence of the University, teaching and research,
without which the university would fail. Academics
become wedded to formal inflexible processes and
form filling and are unable to think outside the
“black box” which is SITS. Well qualified and
experienced administrators fight on a daily basis to
enter data into a system that is unfriendly and non-
intuitive, relying on an elite group of staff (Good
housekeepers) to solve their problems.
The themes identified in this research can be
further explored in the context of another HE
institution in order to examine whether the same
themes apply or if there are more themes to be
added. Additionally each of the themes identified
can be explored in more detail in a different context
TheOrganisationalImpactofImplementingIntegratedISinHEInstitutions-ACaseStudyfromaUKUniversity
125
and from a different perspective. For example, our
interpretations being academics might differ if an
administrator or a member of the academic registry
or a SITS expert was conducting the same research.
Thus, this can be the topic of further research which
will shed more light into the impact that integrated
information systems have specifically on an
organisation’s culture.
REFERENCES
Agee, A.S. and Holisky, D.A. 2003. Crossing the great
divide: implementing change by creating collaborative
relationships. in Leadership, Higher Education and
the Information Age: A new era for Information
Technology and Libraries. Edited by Regenstein, C. E.
and Dewey, B. I. NY, Neal Schuman, pp. 61-80
Ali, M., Brooks, L. and Alshawi, S. 2008. Culture and IS:
A Criticism of Predefined Cultural Archetypes
Studies, Proceedings of the Fourteenth Americas
Conference on Information Systems. Toronto. ON,
Canada August 14th-17th 2008.
Alt, R. and Auth, G. 2010. Campus Management System.
Business Informatics and Systems Engineering
(BISE). Vol. 2 No.3. pp. 187-190.
Ayers, E.L. 2004. The academic culture and the IT
culture: their effect on teaching and scholarship.
EDUCAUSE review. November/December. pp. 48-62
Becher, T. 1989. Academic Tribes and Territories.
Buckingham: Open University Press. SRHE.
Cornford, J. and Pollock, N. 2003. Putting the university
online: information, technology and organisational
change. The Society for Research into Higher
Education and Open University Press.
Crabtree B. F., and Miller, W. L. 1999. Doing Qualitative
Research. Sage. 1999.
Cramer, S. F. 2006. Student Information Systems
Implementations: a context for campus change.
College and University Journal. 81 (2). pp. 21-33.
Dill, D. D. 1982. The management of academic culture:
notes on the management of meaning and social
integration. Higher Education. 11. pp. 303–320.
Elbanna, A. R., 2007. Implementing an integrated system
in a socially dis-integrated enterprise: A critical view
of ERP enabled integration. Information Technology
& People. 20 (2). pp. 121-139.
Fowler A, and Gilfillan M. 2003. A framework for
stakeholder integration in Higher Education
information systems projects. Technology Analysis
and Strategic Management. 15(4). pp. 467–89.
Gojendran, T. and Brewer, G. 2012. Cultural
consciousness and the effective implementation of
information and communication technology.
Construction Innovation. Vol. 12. No. 2. pp. 179-197.
Gupta, A. 2000. Enterprise resource planning: the
emerging organizational value systems. Industrial
Management & Data Systems. 100 (3). pp. 114-18.
Hirschheim, R. and Newman, M. 1991. Symbolism and
information systems development: myth, metaphor
and Magic. Information Systems Research. 2(1).29-62.
Kallunki, J.P., Laitinen, E.K. and Silvola, H. 2011. Impact
of enterprise resource planning systems on
management control systems and firm performance.
International Journal of Accounting Information
Systems. Vol. 12. pp. 20–39
Kayas, G., Mclean, R., Hines, T. and Wright, G. 2008.
The panoptic gaze: Analysing the interaction between
enterprise resource planning technology and
organisational culture. International Journal of
Information Management. Vol. 28. No. 6. pp. 446-452
King, N. 2004. Using templates in the thematic analysis of
text. in C.Cassell and G.Symon (Eds.) Essential Guide
to Qualitative Methods in Organisational Research.
London: Sage. Pp. 256-270.
King, N. 2004. Using Interviews in Qualitative Research.
in Cassell, C. and Symon, G. (2004). Essential guide
to qualitative methods in organisational research.
Sage Publications.
Koh, S.C.L., Gunasekaran, A. and Goodman, T. 2011.
Drivers, barriers and critical success factors for ERPII
implementation in supply chains: A critical analysis.
Journal of Strategic Information Systems. 20. 385–402.
Lechtchinskaia, L., Uffen, J. and Breitner, M.H. 2011.
Critical Success Factors for adoption of integrated
information systems in Higher education institutions
– A meta-analysis. in 17
th
Americas Conference on
Information Systems. Detroit, August 2011.pp.470-479
McNaught, C. and Vogel, D. 2006. The fit between e-
learning policy and institutional culture. International
Journal of Learning Technology. 2 (4). pp. 370-385
McNay, I. 1995. From the collegial academy to corporate
enterprise: the changing cultures of universities. in
Schuller, T. (Ed.). The Changing University?, Open
University Press/SRHE. Buckingham. pp. 105-15.
Mutch, A. 2008. Managing Information and knowledge in
organisations: a literacy approach. Routledge Series
in Information Systems.
Noble, D.F. 1998. Digital Diploma Mills: the automation
of Higher Education. Science as Culture. Vol. 7. No.
3. pp. 355-368
Pollock, N. and Cornford, J. 2004. ERP systems and the
university as a “unique” organisation. Information
Technology and People. 17 (1). pp. 31-52.
Pollock, N. and Williams, R. 2009. Software and
Organisations: the biography of the enterprise-wide
system or how SAP conquered the world. Routledge
Studies in Technology. Work and Organisations.
Sabau, G., Munten, M., Bologa, A.R., Bologa, R. and
Surcel, T. 2009. An Evaluation Framework for Higher
Education ERP Systems. WSEAS Transactions on
Computers. Vol. 8. no. 11.
Waddington, D 2004. Participant Observation in Essential
guide to qualitative methods in organizational
research. eds. Cassells, C and Symon, G.Sage.
London. 154-164
Wagner, E. L., Scott, S.V. and Galliers, R. D. 2006. The
creation of ‘best practice’ software: Myth, reality and
ICEIS2014-16thInternationalConferenceonEnterpriseInformationSystems
126
ethics. Information and Organization. Vol.16. pp 251–
275
Wainwright, D. and Waring T. 2004. Three domains for
implementing integrated information systems:
redressing the balance between technology, strategic
and organizational analysis. International Journal of
Information Management. Vol. 24. pp. 329-346
Waring, T. and Wainwright, D. 2008. Innovative
developments in the use of Template Analysis: Two
comparative case studies from the field. ECRM
Conference. Regents College. London. UK. 19-20
June.
Watson, T. J. 2011, Ethnography, Reality, and Truth: The
Vital Need for Studies of ‘How Things Work’ in
Organization and Management. Journal of
Management Studies. 48(1). 202-217.
TheOrganisationalImpactofImplementingIntegratedISinHEInstitutions-ACaseStudyfromaUKUniversity
127
