Implications for practice

There are potential sources of improvement in both public and private sectors, specifically related to policy, strategy and training that are derived from the above conclusions.

Policy

This study has discovered that the implementation of innovation and its diffusion are interrelated processes which involve uncertainty. Policy makers try to exclude uncertainty by publishing different regulations that need to be considered within technology projects. Many studies confirm that uncertainty is a part of innovation that cannot be avoided. A more adequate way of coping with uncertainty is recommended by

uncertainty as a chance to create guidelines which represent the contemporary situation in the process of innovation. In other words, regulations need to be guided by a deeper understanding of the nature of innovation facing practitioners. At the beginning, the guidelines can indeed increase innovative practices in the industry, for example, Moncrief (2008) points out that companies could be induced by government regulations to invest in new software applications. However, later on, when regulations become incorporated in other guidelines without further modification, they could slow down the innovation processes within project management. Further concern is expressed by House of Representatives Standing Committee on Science and Innovation (2006, p. 45) who argue that:

Non-R&D inputs to innovation include, for example, market research, design skills, trial production and testing, prototyping and engineering experimentation, and software development. These non-R&D inputs are essential to innovation across all industries, but they are often a larger component of low-tech activities. Non-R&D expenditures on innovation are usually significantly larger than R&D expenditures, so they should not be neglected by innovation policymakers.

From this perspective, policymakers are urged to acknowledge incremental innovative practices derived from trial-and-error approaches outside of traditional research and development procedures. This is particularly the practice in technology projects.

Consequently, policymakers need to rethink the scope of an innovation policy and suggest guidelines in accordance with the contemporary situation that is driven by knowledge-based economies.

Strategy

Woodside and Biemans (2005, p. 389) discuss innovative approaches in the context of strategic management and their implications for practice and recommend:

The primary and continuing focus needs to be on crafting and executing streams of complementary and synergistic behaviours rather than focusing on simple checklists of do’s and do nots.

In other words, organisations need to concentrate on actions which enhance the entire innovative process and do not explicitly rely on standard procedures.

The ICT project objectives and discussions with different types of change agents reveal

new global strategic paradigm. This kind of strategy is insufficient in the current knowledge-based society, for two main reasons. Firstly, the strategy is easy to copy and reproduce globally which gives rise to companies which are specialised in imitation.

Secondly, companies are increasingly dealing with demanding and sophisticated clients who fall into distinct adopter groups. Therefore, they need to be familiarised with new technologies on an ongoing basis. As a result, this study urges companies to enrich their cost-cutting approach with a new strategy stemmed from projects. Longman and Mullins (2004) suggest that projects are redesignated for the implementation of a new strategy. The new approach needs to be derived from project experimentation that Bowman (1999, p. 558) labelled as “Action-led strategy”. Strategy based on actions implies that adopters of ICT innovation will be encouraged to take an active role. Libert and Spector (2008) predict that it will become trendy for companies to interact with the potential adopters virtually who could help to design new products and services. Thus, companies need to experiment with diffusion and adoption of innovations by engaging diverse groups in virtual environments for product development and marketing purposes.

While innovators and early adopters are faster at adopting new technologies, other groups such as early majority, late majority and laggards might need virtual guidance in this process. They need specific technical assistance, for example, case-based reasoning software that could help them to design their own preferred products or services.

Bowman (1999, p. 563) concludes that:

… at an industry level often the real innovations stem from individuals or organisations that are outside the industry. These individuals or organisations are not constrained by the predominant mind-set or recipe in the industry …

Organisations could use the creativity and experiences of a social system to become more innovative. As an alternative to the standard development and diffusion processes, the ICT industry is urged to deliver software packages which can be customised by companies and their future adopters simultaneously. In that process, companies could develop new products and services and will be able to differentiate themselves from their competitors. This kind of innovative strategy could accelerate ICT diffusion and

implementation across organisational boundaries. Consequently, every company could create processes which suit their contemporary situation the best.

In addition, this DBA study shows that public and private sector ICT change agents’

behaviours within informal networks differ. Public sector ICT change agents’ informal roles include, but are not limited to, an ever-changing political environment while private sector ICT change agents usually act towards profit maximisation. In the future, both approaches may be essential for both sectors. In the case that the public sectors pursue a leading role in the innovation process, there is a need to employ ICT change agents who can sell new public sector products. On the other hand, private sector companies are facing globalisation which demands understanding and acting in accordance with local and national beliefs and politics. For example, in China, in order to make the business process work, the participation in different informal networks (guanxi) is a prerequisite (Wan, 2007). Chinese networking involves various parties, for instance, government bodies and business people. One of the Asian strategic advisers predicts that “China will be a formidable political, strategic and economic competitor”

(Earl, 2007 p. 24). In response to that new global challenge, companies are advised to adopt the short formal German process (Klein Dienstweg) because it is faster to diffuse and implement innovation if the informal process is a part of a larger formal procedure.

Moreover, private sector companies need to hire public sector ICT change agents who can operate within informal networks in highly political environments. This approach could contribute to a strategic fit within a Chinese domain.

Training

Currently, both sectors rely on standardised innovative activities captured in a project management framework. The set standards may lead to a lock-in situation where the technology is adopted because of path dependence and not because of the best possible technical solution (Hall, 2005). Moreover, with increasing technological and managerial standards, companies face the risk of becoming what Mintzberg (1993, p. 189) entitles a

“Professional Bureaucracy”. While a bureaucratic approach is adequate for a stable organisational setting, it is, however, unsuited to the contemporary situation reflected in increasing global rivalry which drives technological and organisational change. The

dynamics of organisational settings and fast-changing ICT innovation are not considered in various project management training materials. For example, training courses on project management teach the formal processes which are guided by various checklists (Buttrick, 2005). The principal findings of this research contradict those traditional project management courses by illustrating that ICT change agents’ roles in projects are also affected by the nature of ICT technologies and organisational settings and not explicitly by standard project management frameworks. Only a few core roles at every project stage are performed in accordance with standardised project management.

An effect of this is that the public and private sector organisations need to re-examine their current training courses. In order to accelerate diffusion, management and implementation of ICT innovations, new training programmes are required which incorporate this new model (see Figure 11) and emerging patterns regarding the differences in public and private sectors. Therefore, Figure 11 outlines the priorities reflected in components and processes within an ICT project in support of ICT change agents’ roles and organisational goals.