Restructuring the classification structure for simplification and focus

The analysis of the results obtained at the end of Iteration 6 and the review of the research model and questions triggered a 7th and final iteration where the classification structure was restructured for the simplification of the model and the increase of the focus of the research. In the Qualitative Analysis Journal in Appendix 6, the restructuring process of Iteration 7 is explained in more detail. This simplification process consisted of the following major tasks:

 Focus on innovation as opposed to project performance

 Extraction of the secondary themes from the core model

 Merging, splitting and recoding themes to reduce ambiguity

While most of the restructuring work aimed at simplifying the model, some broad themes like Performance Criteria had to be segmented (split) in a number of sub-categories for clarification.

See Appendix 8 for all Nvivo exports at the end of iteration 7. This graph shows the important changes in the classification structure after Iteration 7 (Iteration 7 results exclude the secondary themes):

Figure 3-3 Changes in the classification structure after Iteration 7

All blocks in the classification structure decreased in size. The total number of themes fell from 64 to 31 themes in the core model and 16 secondary themes were extracted. The final set of themes in the core model is distributed in the following way:

- Block 1 (Project Governance): 11 themes

- Block 2 (Intra-Organizational Governance): 8 themes - Block 3 (Inter-Organizational Governance): 10 themes

- Block 4 (Innovation): 2 themes

Focus on innovation (exploitative and exploratory)

Before reaching this stage of the research, project performance was still an issue that was addressed simultaneously with innovation. However, it became clear at this point that project performance (as opposed to innovation) was much less of an issue and distinction between the 18 IT initiatives in the sample. Most importantly, because all projects were relatively successful in reaching the intended strategic objectives, and were doing well from a project management perspective, the research focus could clearly be devoted to innovation from the buyer’s perspective. In consequence, four themes in the Innovation & Performance block were extracted, the remaining two themes were refined and clarified, and finally the block (or category) was renamed to Innovation. See Appendix 6 for more detail.

The following four themes that were not direct indicators of innovation were extracted: (1) Performance Criteria, (2) Respondent Satisfaction, (3) Organizational Innovations, and (4) Fast Execution. The themes that reflected project performance in general were no longer necessary.

First, Performance Criteria reflected the types of performance criteria used by senior IT managers throughout their initiative to monitor the evolution of their work and make decisions.

These criteria could thus be regarded as determinants of innovation (used in the governance system) and not indicators of innovation. This theme was thus moved to Project Governance.

Second, Respondent Satisfaction was too general and reflected too many types of achievements like innovation, project performance, learning, and organizational performance. This theme was removed from the model but used to examine and compare the overall success and performance of the projects from the respondents’ perspectives.

Third, Organizational Innovations was ambiguous and had to be extracted because the theme drew upon many of the same meaning units used throughout the governance categories. In fact, it reflected the organizational innovations or the creative managerial approaches used by the senior IT managers that should normally be coded in the governance categories (as determinants of innovation instead of indicators). Many of these innovative managerial approaches were double coded in both the governance blocks and the innovation block, which posed a problem.

Fourth, Fast Execution reflected project performance and the normative project management criteria instead of the innovation outcome for the business. Furthermore, several meaning units (in the content) were double coded with Fast Execution and Performance Criteria (Project Governance).

The remaining two themes that are direct indicators of innovation were renamed and refined using the innovation typologies found in the literature used to distinguish between efficiency and innovation or between exploitative innovation and exploratory innovation.

First, Business Innovation was split in two themes: (1) IT-Enabled Exploitative Innovation &

Efficiency, and (2) IT-Enabled Exploratory Innovation & Growth. The definition of Business Innovation was too broad and included both IT-enabled process and product innovations. The research at this point distinguished between the type of innovation that affected growth and the top line of the business, and the type affecting efficiency and the bottom line of the business.

Additionally, the content was re-coded to reflect both sub-themes.

Second, the content in IT Innovations was mostly recoded with IT-Enabled Exploratory Innovation & Growth because of the way it described the market innovation and exploration results of the IT initiatives. In the context of IT initiatives, growth and market innovation imply new IT developments that are commercialized by either the IT external partner (consultant or vendor), the buyer or by both. These are hybrid innovations because they consist of commercializing sophisticated and complex business processes and best practices in software packages.

In general, there is no established way to measure innovation and from the multi-dimensional and multi-disciplinary views that exist, the two-dimensional typology (that opposes exploitative innovation to exploratory innovation) used in strategic management (March, 1997; Shapira, 1997; Saloner et al., 2001) and recently introduced in innovation studies (Miller and Olleros, 2007; Jansen et al., 2006), inspired the two categories introduced at this stage of the research to compare the innovation outcome of strategic IT initiatives.

In short, the remaining themes had the following characteristics:

- They are indicators of innovation as opposed to determinants of innovation.

- They focus on innovation for the business as opposed to project performance.

- They distinguish between two types of business innovations: (1) IT-enabled exploratory innovations for growth and effectiveness (top line) including product and market

innovations, (2) IT-enabled exploitative innovation (mainly process innovations) for profit and efficiency (bottom line).

- They are mutually exclusive categories when compared to each other or to the other categories in the model (especially governance categories).

The decision to remove the ambiguous themes, to overlook project performance, and to make a clear distinction between exploitative and exploratory innovations was a major evolution in the research model that reduced the scope of the research. Instead of understanding the relationship

between governance in IT initiatives, innovation and project performance, and the research focused on the relationship between governance and innovation only.

Extraction of the secondary themes from the core model

In this iteration, 16 secondary themes were extracted from the research model. Secondary themes are rare themes that only one or very few respondents mentioned. In other words, if a theme has a high average (high density) but is only stressed by one respondent (low coverage), it is usually considered a secondary and case-specific theme. Nevertheless, certain secondary themes such as R&D Role should be used in future studies because even though they were mentioned by a small number of respondents, they could have an important effect on innovation in certain cases. This table shows an example of the secondary themes extracted from the Intra-Organizational Governance block:

Table 3-7 Example of Iteration 5 adjustments: Block 3 secondary themes

Block Themes Respondents References

2: Intra-Organizational Governance 1. IT Strategy & Organization 5 15

2: Intra-Organizational Governance 2. Decentralization 4 8

2: Intra-Organizational Governance 3. R&D Role 1 10

2: Intra-Organizational Governance 4. Knowledge Management 1 3

2: Intra-Organizational Governance 5. IS University 1 2

In this part of the seventh iteration, eight themes were extracted from Inter-Organizational Governance, five themes were extracted from Intra-Organizational Governance, and three themes from Project Governance. All the extracted themes are presented in the journal in Appendix 6.

Merging, splitting and recoding themes to reduce ambiguity

Several adjustments were brought to the primary themes after the secondary themes were removed from the core model. Similar (and narrow) themes like Competence Center and Shared Services (in Intra-Organizational Governance) were merged together, and broad themes like Strategic Motivations were split. Furthermore, themes that were not completely mutually

exclusive like New Capabilities (Strategic Motivations block) and IT-Enabled Product Innovation (Innovation block) were compared and recoded. See the appendix for more examples.

The following graph illustrates the variation in the number of references per block throughout the 18 cases at the end of Iteration 7 (the end of the overall categorization process):

Figure 3-4 Variation in references throughout interviews at the end of Iteration 7

The references per case portrayed above exclude all the secondary themes. The total number of references fell to 2190 and the average references per case to 122 in comparison to 2575 and 143 respectively before the final adjustments in Iteration 7.

The exact numbers after Iteration 7 adjustments are presented in the table below.

Table 3-8 Scores of all primary themes after Iteration 7 adjustments

Theme references (final results)

1A: DDS-THEME PARK 1B: BASEL II-BANK 1C: PLM-AEROSPACE1 2A: MC-OPTIC 2B: PLM-ENERGY 2C: ERP-FOOD 3A: CRM-POST 3B: CRM-ENERGY 3C: CRM-RESORTS 4A: EHR-HEALTH 4B: ECM-DEFENSE 4C: CM-INSURANCE 5A: PLM-AEROSPACE2 5B: PLM-ELECTRONICS 5C: ERP-RETAIL 6A: ESE-FINANCE 6B: AD-BANK 6C: PLM-TOYS TOTAL AVERAGE

Project Governance 63 52 38 49 40 46 52 52 28 52 55 50 38 30 42 37 29 21 774 43.00

Intra-Organizational Governance 30 22 14 46 32 47 17 21 34 43 37 46 14 11 25 19 16 27 501 27.83

Inter-Organizational Governance 54 35 60 47 71 24 26 33 42 60 63 51 55 39 28 20 27 32 767 42.61

Innovation 11 5 8 11 14 9 8 9 6 10 7 4 12 9 7 7 5 6 148 8.22

TOTAL 158 114 120 153 157 126 103 115 110 165 162 151 119 89 102 83 77 86 2190 121.67

The block with the largest number of references is Block 1 (Project Governance) followed by Block 3 (Inter-Organizational Governance). Case 4A (HER-HEALTH) has the largest number of references (165) whereas Case 6B has the smallest number (77). See Appendix 8 for the tables exported from Nvivo detailing the number of references to each one of the themes in the four blocks of the research model as well as the secondary themes and the descriptive themes (excluded from the research model) in the Free Nodes and Strategic Motivations blocks.