IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/orisre/v21y2010i4p835-848.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Research Commentary ---Seeking the Configurations of Digital Ecodynamics: It Takes Three to Tango

Author

Listed:
  • Omar A. El Sawy

    (Marshall School of Business, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California 90089)

  • Arvind Malhotra

    (Kenan-Flagler School of Business, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina 27599)

  • YoungKi Park

    (Marshall School of Business, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California 90089)

  • Paul A. Pavlou

    (Fox School of Business, Temple University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19122)

Abstract

This paper starts from the premise that the simultaneous increase in environmental turbulence, the requisite speed of organizational change, and the intensified ubiquity of digital technologies are spawning a phenomenon that is messy, complex, and chaotic. Accordingly, we need to change the way we examine how information technology (IT) can help organizations build a strategic advantage in turbulent environments. We propose a more systemic and holistic perspective to theory building and testing in the information system (IS) strategy area and correspondingly appropriate methods that capture the complexity of this phenomenon. We term this phenomenon digital ecodynamics , defined as the holistic confluence among environmental turbulence, dynamic capabilities, and IT systems---and their fused dynamic interactions unfolding as an ecosystem. We believe that a more holistic understanding of digital ecodynamics will fuel the next leap in knowledge in the IS strategy area. First, extending the strategic management literature that has mainly focused on two-way interactions between environmental turbulence and dynamic capabilities, we foreground IT systems as a third central element. We use a “threesome tango” analogy 1 with strong mutual interdependence to accentuate our view of digital ecodynamics---while also stressing the emerging role of IT systems in triggering environmental turbulence and shaping dynamic capabilities to build a strategic advantage. Second, we propose a different paradigmatic lens (configuration theories) as an appropriate inquiring system to better understand the complexity of digital ecodynamics. The paper articulates the key aspects of configuration theories as inquiring systems, compares them with the more common variance theories and process theories, and illustrates the power of recent advances in configurational methods. Third, we create a preliminary roadmap for IS researchers to better examine digital ecodynamics using novel structural properties afforded by configuration theories (i.e., mutual causality, discontinuity, punctuated equilibria, nonlinear change). Fourth, we reflect on the broader opportunities that the configurational perspective of digital ecodynamics can create for IS strategy research. The paper ends by highlighting the double-barreled opportunity that digital ecodynamics renders, both as an energizing vision for IS strategy research and also as a reshaper of strategic management research and practice in a turbulent and digitized world.

Suggested Citation

  • Omar A. El Sawy & Arvind Malhotra & YoungKi Park & Paul A. Pavlou, 2010. "Research Commentary ---Seeking the Configurations of Digital Ecodynamics: It Takes Three to Tango," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 21(4), pages 835-848, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:inm:orisre:v:21:y:2010:i:4:p:835-848
    DOI: 10.1287/isre.1100.0326
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/isre.1100.0326
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/isre.1100.0326?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mary Tripsas & Giovanni Gavetti, 2000. "Capabilities, cognition, and inertia: evidence from digital imaging," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 21(10‐11), pages 1147-1161, October.
    2. Arvind Malhotra & Sanjay Gosain & Omar A. El Sawy, 2007. "Leveraging Standard Electronic Business Interfaces to Enable Adaptive Supply Chain Partnerships," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 18(3), pages 260-279, September.
    3. Paul A. Pavlou & Omar A. El Sawy, 2006. "From IT Leveraging Competence to Competitive Advantage in Turbulent Environments: The Case of New Product Development," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 17(3), pages 198-227, September.
    4. Alan D. Meyer & Vibha Gaba & Kenneth A. Colwell, 2005. "Organizing Far from Equilibrium: Nonlinear Change in Organizational Fields," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 16(5), pages 456-473, October.
    5. Burgelman, Robert A. & Grove, Andrew S., 2007. "Cross-Boundary Disruptors: Powerful Inter-Industry Entrepreneurial Change Agents," Research Papers 1978, Stanford University, Graduate School of Business.
    6. William C. Bogner & Pamela S. Barr, 2000. "Making Sense in Hypercompetitive Environments: A Cognitive Explanation for the Persistence of High Velocity Competition," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 11(2), pages 212-226, April.
    7. M. Lynne Markus & Daniel Robey, 1988. "Information Technology and Organizational Change: Causal Structure in Theory and Research," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 34(5), pages 583-598, May.
    8. Kathleen M. Eisenhardt & Jeffrey A. Martin, 2000. "Dynamic capabilities: what are they?," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 21(10‐11), pages 1105-1121, October.
    9. Raymond F. Zammuto & Terri L. Griffith & Ann Majchrzak & Deborah J. Dougherty & Samer Faraj, 2007. "Information Technology and the Changing Fabric of Organization," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 18(5), pages 749-762, October.
    10. Wanda J. Orlikowski, 2010. "The sociomateriality of organisational life: considering technology in management research," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 34(1), pages 125-141, January.
    11. Wayne S. DeSarbo & C. Anthony Di Benedetto & Michael Song & Indrajit Sinha, 2005. "Revisiting the Miles and Snow strategic framework: uncovering interrelationships between strategic types, capabilities, environmental uncertainty, and firm performance," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(1), pages 47-74, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Dean A. Shepherd & Jeffery S. Mcmullen & William Ocasio, 2017. "Is that an opportunity? An attention model of top managers' opportunity beliefs for strategic action," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(3), pages 626-644, March.
    2. Filipe M. Santos & Kathleen M. Eisenhardt, 2005. "Organizational Boundaries and Theories of Organization," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 16(5), pages 491-508, October.
    3. Liu, Yi & Liao, Yonghai & Li, Yuan, 2018. "Capability configuration, ambidexterity and performance: Evidence from service outsourcing sector," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 200(C), pages 343-352.
    4. Bradley C. Wheeler, 2002. "NEBIC: A Dynamic Capabilities Theory for Assessing Net-Enablement," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 13(2), pages 125-146, June.
    5. Tomi Laamanen & Johan Wallin, 2009. "Cognitive Dynamics of Capability Development Paths," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 46(6), pages 950-981, September.
    6. Ansari, Shahzad (Shaz) & Krop, Pieter, 2012. "Incumbent performance in the face of a radical innovation: Towards a framework for incumbent challenger dynamics," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(8), pages 1357-1374.
    7. YoungKi Park & Paul A. Pavlou & Nilesh Saraf, 2020. "Configurations for Achieving Organizational Ambidexterity with Digitization," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 31(4), pages 1376-1397, December.
    8. Angelidou, Sofia & Mount, Matthew & Pandza, Krsto, 2022. "Exploring the asymmetric complementarity between external knowledge search and management innovation," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 115(C).
    9. Michael L. Harris & Rosann Webb Collins & Alan R. Hevner, 2009. "Control of Flexible Software Development Under Uncertainty," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 20(3), pages 400-419, September.
    10. Waleczek, Peter & von den Driesch, Till & Flatten, Tessa C. & Brettel, Malte, 2019. "On the dynamic bundles behind operations management and research and development," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 37(2), pages 175-187.
    11. Sarah Kaplan, 2008. "Framing Contests: Strategy Making Under Uncertainty," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 19(5), pages 729-752, October.
    12. Garud, Raghu & Gehman, Joel, 2012. "Metatheoretical perspectives on sustainability journeys: Evolutionary, relational and durational," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(6), pages 980-995.
    13. Tobias Knabke & Sebastian Olbrich, 2018. "Building novel capabilities to enable business intelligence agility: results from a quantitative study," Information Systems and e-Business Management, Springer, vol. 16(3), pages 493-546, August.
    14. FeCheng Ma & Farhan Khan & Kashif Ullah Khan & Si XiangYun, 2021. "Investigating the Impact of Information Technology, Absorptive Capacity, and Dynamic Capabilities on Firm Performance: An Empirical Study," SAGE Open, , vol. 11(4), pages 21582440211, November.
    15. Jun Hong Park & Sang Ho Kook & Hyeonu Im & Soomin Eum & Chulung Lee, 2018. "Fabless Semiconductor Firms’ Financial Performance Determinant Factors: Product Platform Efficiency and Technological Capability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(10), pages 1-22, September.
    16. Mammassis, Constantinos S. & Kostopoulos, Konstantinos C., 2019. "CEO goal orientations, environmental dynamism and organizational ambidexterity: An investigation in SMEs," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 37(5), pages 577-588.
    17. Mary J. Benner, 2010. "Securities Analysts and Incumbent Response to Radical Technological Change: Evidence from Digital Photography and Internet Telephony," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 21(1), pages 42-62, February.
    18. Hazhir Rahmandad, 2012. "Impact of Growth Opportunities and Competition on Firm-Level Capability Development Trade-offs," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(1), pages 138-154, February.
    19. Sheth, Ananya & Sinfield, Joseph V., 2022. "An analytical framework to compare innovation strategies and identify simple rules," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 115(C).
    20. Iman Seoudi & Matthias Huehn & Bo Carlsson, 2008. "Penrose Revisited: A Re-Appraisal of the Resource Perspective," Working Papers 14, The German University in Cairo, Faculty of Management Technology.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:inm:orisre:v:21:y:2010:i:4:p:835-848. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Asher (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.