How Internet Is Upsetting the Communication Between Organizations and Their Stakeholders: A Tentative Research Agenda
A new phenomenon is already visible around us: the use of the Internet as a platform to gather and diffuse information has been deployed to the casting of official data about politics provided by unofficial subjects, like citizens, whistle-blowers and so on. The increased data availability on behaviour and decisions of governors and administrators may profoundly alter their agenda and the relationships with the citizens, introducing a broader public control. However this change may also encounter a lot of limitations, which can lower its strength and relevance. This paper is a first step of a research programme on such phenomenon, its characteristics, novelty, and limits.
KeywordsInternet User Football Player Media Operator Official Data Emergent Phenomenon
- 1.(2011) Internet Usage Statistics – The Internet Big Picture, http://www.Internetworldstats.com/stats.htm, Accessed March 2011.
- 2.Kaufman, D. (2005). Special report, Transparency matters: The ‘Second generation’ of Institutional Reform, The World Bank.Google Scholar
- 3.Gant, D.B. and Gant, J.P. (2002). Enhancing e-Service Delivery. E-Government Series, State Web Portals: Delivering and Financing e-Services, PriceWaterhouse Coopers Endowment.Google Scholar
- 4.Islam, R. (2003). Do more transparent governments govern better? Policy Research Working Paper 3077, The World Bank.Google Scholar
- 5.Yin, R. (1994). Case Study Research: Design and Methods. Sage Publishing, CA, USA.Google Scholar
- 6.Governo Italiano (2010), Wikileaks, precisazioni da Palazzo Chigi, http://www.governo.it/Presidenza/Comunicati/dettaglio.asp?d=61569, last accessed: September 2011.
- 7.Arf, F., Mathieu, M., Hajdenberg, M. (2011). Quotas dans le foot: la vérité au mot près. Mediapart, http://www.mediapart.fr/journal/france/290411/quotas-dans-le-foot-la-verite-au-mot-pres, Accessed June 2011.
- 8.Adler, P. S., Forbes, L. C. & Willmott, H. (2007). Chapter 3: Critical Management Studies. The Academy of Management Annals, 1 119–179.Google Scholar
- 10.Dahl, R.A. (1961), Who Governs? Power and Democracy in an American City, Yale University Press, New Haven, CT.Google Scholar
- 12.Zahra, S. A., and George, G. Absorptive Capacity: A Review, Reconceptualization, and Extension. Academy of Management Review (27:2), 2002, pp. 185–203.Google Scholar
- 14.Thompson, J. D. (1967). Organizations in Action. McGraw-Hill, New York.Google Scholar
- 15.Bandura, A. Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1986.Google Scholar
- 17.Eisenhardt, M, K. (1989). Agency theory: An assessment and review. Academy of Management Review, 14(1), 57.Google Scholar
- 18.Latour, B. (1987). Science in action: How to follow scientists and engineers through society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar