Contextual Analysis as Support for Successful Innovation in Complex Environments

  • Peter M. Bednar
  • Christine Welch
Part of the IFIP International Federation for Information Processing book series (IFIPAICT, volume 235)


In order to survive and thrive, organizations need to adapt, reinvent themselves, and innovate. However, many intentional efforts to bring about innovation do not succeed. In order to be successful, innovation requires the support of individuals throughout the environment in which it is emerging. In many cases, such support is not forthcoming for a variety of reasons. In this paper, the authors discuss a number of barriers that may inhibit the success of innovative practice. They then discuss a role for contextual analysis as the means to target individual engagement, and present an example of a method which could be used to conduct such analysis.


Organizational Learn Problem Space Organizational Knowledge Contextual Analysis Contextual Dependency 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Argyris, C. Overcoming Organizational Defenses: facilitating Organizational Learning, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1990.Google Scholar
  2. Argyris, C. Reasons and Rationalizations: The Limits to Organizational Knowledge, New York: Oxford University Press, 2004.Google Scholar
  3. Argyris, C., and Schön D. A. Organizational Learning, Reading, MA: Addison Wesley, 1978.Google Scholar
  4. Argyris, C., and Schön D. A. Organizational Learning II: Theory, Method and Practice, Reading, MA: Addison Wesley, 1996.Google Scholar
  5. Ashby, W. R. An Introduction to Cybernetics, London: Methuen, 1964.Google Scholar
  6. Avgerou, C., and Madon, S “Framing IS Studies: Understanding the Social Context of IS Innovation,” in C. Avgerou, C Ciborra, and F. Land (eds.), The Social Study of Information and Communication Technology: Innovation, Actors, and Contexts, New York: Oxford University Press, 2004, pp 162–182.Google Scholar
  7. Bateson, G. Steps to an Ecology of Mind, Part III, Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1972.Google Scholar
  8. Bednar, P. M. “A Contextual Integration of Individual and Organizational Learning Perspectives as Part of IS Analysis,” Informing Science (3:3), 2000.Google Scholar
  9. Bednar, P. M., and Welch, C. “Incentive and Desire: Covering a Missing Category,” in Proceedings of Mediterranean Conference on Information Systems: A Comparative Distinction of Mediterranean Information Systems, San Servolo, Venice, Italy, October 5–9, 2006, pp. 53–61.Google Scholar
  10. Bergvall-Kåreborn, B. “Enriching the Model-Building Phase of Soft Systems Methodology,” Systems Research and Behavioral Science (19:1), 2002, pp. 27–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Carlsson, S. A Longitudinal Study of User Developed Decision Support Systems, Ph.D. Thesis, Department of Informatics, Lund University, Sweden, 1993.Google Scholar
  12. Churchman C. W. The Design of Inquiring Systems: Basic Concepts of Systems and Organizations, New York: Basic Books, 1971.Google Scholar
  13. Checkland, P. Systems Thinking, Systems Practice: A 30-Year retrospective. Chichester, England: Wiley, 1999.Google Scholar
  14. Ciborra, C. U. The Labyrinths of Information: Challenging the Wisdom of Systems, Oxford, England: Oxford University Press, 2002.Google Scholar
  15. Ciborra, C. U. Teams, Markets and Systems: Business Innovation and Information Technology, Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press, 1993.Google Scholar
  16. Davenport, T. H., and Prusak, L. Working Knowledge: How Organizations Manage What They Know, Boston: Harvard Business School Press, 2000.Google Scholar
  17. Grunig, J E Excellence in Public Relations and Communication Management, Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1992.Google Scholar
  18. Kuhn, T. S. The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1970.Google Scholar
  19. Latour, B. Pandora’s Hope: Essays on the Reality of Science Studies, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1970.Google Scholar
  20. Markus, M. L., and Robey, D. “Why Stuff Happens: Explaining the Unintended Consequences of Using IT,” in K. V. Andersen and M. T. Vendelo (eds.), The Past and Future of Information Systems, New York: Elsevier, 2004, pp. 61–93.Google Scholar
  21. Maturana, H., and Varela, F. Autopoeisis and Cognition, Dordrecht, Holland: D.Reidel Publishing, 1980.Google Scholar
  22. Michael, D. N. On Learning to Plan—and Planning to Learn, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1985.Google Scholar
  23. Morgan, G. Images of Organization, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, 1997.Google Scholar
  24. Mumford, E. Systems Design: Ethical Tools for Ethical Change, Baskingstoke, England: Macmillan Press, 1996.Google Scholar
  25. Nissen, H-E. “Beyond Double Helix Relationships to Understand and Change Informing Systems,” Informing Science Journal, Special Issue: A Double Helix Relationship of Use and Redesign in IS?, 2007 (forthcoming).Google Scholar
  26. Pearsall, J., and Hanks, P. (eds.). The Oxford Dictionary of English (2nd revised edition), Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005Google Scholar
  27. Pralahad, C. K., and Hamel, G. “The Core Competences of the Corporation,” Harvard Business Review (68:3), May–June 1990, pp. 79–93Google Scholar
  28. Radnitzky, G. Contemporary Schools of Metascience, Göteborg, Sweden: Akademiforlaget, 1970.Google Scholar
  29. Rogers, E. M. Diffusion of Innovation (5th ed.), New York: Free Press, 2003.Google Scholar
  30. Schein, E.H. Organizational Culture and Leadership (2nd ed.), San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1992.Google Scholar
  31. Seely Brown, J., and Duguid, P. The Social Life of Information, Boston: Harvard Business School Press, 2002.Google Scholar
  32. Stowell, F., and West, D. Client-Led Design: A Systemic APproach to Information Systems Definition, London: McGraw-Hill, 1994.Google Scholar
  33. Ulrich, W. “Critically Systemic Discourse: A Discursive Approach to Reflective Practice in ISD, Parts 1 and 3,” The Journal of Information Technology Theory and Application (3:3), 2001, pp. 55–106.Google Scholar
  34. Van de Ven, A. H., and Polley, D. “Learning While Innovating,” Organization Science (3:2), February 1992, pp. 92–116.Google Scholar
  35. Walsham, G. Interpreting Information Systems in Organizations, Chichester, England: Wiley. 1993.Google Scholar
  36. Weick, K. Sense-Making in Organizations, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publicatoins, 1995.Google Scholar
  37. Weick, K., and Sutcliffe, K. Managing the Unexpected, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2002.Google Scholar
  38. Worthen, B. “Nestlé’s ERP Odyssey,” CIO Magazine, May 15, 2002 (available online at Scholar

Copyright information

© International Federation for Information Processing 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Peter M. Bednar
    • 1
  • Christine Welch
    • 1
  1. 1.University of PortsmouthPortsmouthUK

Personalised recommendations