Mutual Understanding In Interoperable Financial Management Systems Development In The Public Sector Of Ghana: A Sensemaking Theory Perspective
Loading...
Date
2022-08
Authors
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
University Of Ghana
Abstract
The extent to which stakeholders have a shared understanding of a project in terms of its goals, processes, roles, and outcomes is known as mutual understanding (MU). MU is a focal cognitive outcome that stems from episodes of cognitive activities—sensegiving and sensemaking—during the ongoing dialogue among the diverse stakeholders of a project. The link between MU and the success of a project has been well established in research on information systems. A closer examination of information systems development (ISD) research, however, reveals the lack of a theoretical and practice-oriented understanding of how MU is created and sustained among key stakeholders throughout the phases of an ISD project. To address this lack of understanding, the purpose of this study is to develop a framework to explain the creation and sustenance of mutual understanding between stakeholders in the development of an interoperable financial management system (IOFMS) in the public sector of a developing economy. In the public sector, interoperability occurs when independent information systems of different governmental departments, agencies, units and external partners work together (exchange information) efficiently and effectively in a predefined or agreed-on fashion. The development of interoperable systems in the public sector is complex, in that it involves unifying diverse interests, emotions, and political nuances. This makes it an ideal setting for investigating how MU is created and sustained. Further, three interrelated research gaps have been identified in the literature: the need for more theorisation in interoperability research, the need for more social theories in integrated financial management information systems research, and the need to examine how barriers or influencing factors shape the development of interoperable platforms in government.
To address the above gaps, three research questions are examined in this study: (a) What are the triggers for creating and sustaining mutual understanding in the development of an IOFMS in a developing economy? (b) How do ISD project mechanisms (problem definition, requirement analysis, development, and implementation) affect the sensemaking process and outcomes during the development of an IOFMS in a developing economy? (c) What are the factors that influence the creation and sustenance of mutual understanding in the development of an IOFMS in a developing economy? This study employs sensemaking theory and the paradigm of critical realism to explore the mechanisms that underpin the creation and sustenance of mutual understanding in the development of an IOFMS. A case study of the payroll add-on systems in the public sector of Ghana is the vehicle for this exploration. As an example of a developing economy, Ghana provided the opportunity to examine a government institution that had experienced the development and implementation of three new systems that were interoperable with an existing payroll management system. The payroll add-on system consists of three independent, interoperable modules: the Electronic Salary Payment Voucher, the Electronic Payslip, and the Third-Party Referencing System. Through the paradigm of critical realism and the analytical techniques of Miles and Huberman, the study led to the development and verification of a framework and 14 findings that explain how MU is created and sustained throughout the development of interoperable systems.
Concerning the first research question, the findings suggest that in the development of interoperable systems in the public sector, a mix of major planned and unplanned events tend to trigger organisational actors to engage in sensemaking and sensegiving activities. ISD is thus more likely to start as a major event or activity involving senior management in this setting. These events may originate from internal contradictions and ambiguities or from an external stimulus. The triggers tend to increase in severity as a project progresses to meet the demands of its later stages/phases. The project stages/phases and their mutually agreed-on deliverables also serve as triggers for sensemaking in subsequent phases of the project. Previous research has not identified the increasing severity of triggers or the function of project stages as triggers for sensemaking.
Concerning the second research question, previous studies outlined three sensemaking processes: creation, interpretation, and enactment. However, these processes had not been explored in ISD projects. The findings of this thesis confirm these processes and then outline the mechanisms that characterise each of them. This thesis establishes the creation mechanisms as sense integration, data integration, and developing and distributing new data/information for use; the interpretation mechanisms as prototyping, joint reviewing, consultation, testing, and training; and the enactment mechanisms as formalisation and institutionalisation, the establishment of consent, illustration/demonstration, and documentation. Beyond outlining these mechanisms, the study also explains how they affect MU in interoperable systems development. For example, enactment mechanisms can serve as protective mechanisms that reduce or remove the potential for actors to revoke, undermine, subvert, or weaken the ‘sense’ or mutual understanding that has been established. Concerning sensemaking outcomes, the study reveals four levels of MU that hierarchically span the ISD project phases. It was found that MU starts as a shared understanding at the senior management level and then progresses to broader consensus beyond the senior management. As more consensus is gained, there is a need to demonstrate the viability of the ‘sense’ that has been made. The focus, therefore, moves to the technical expression of the shared understanding (e.g. a prototype), which can serve as an enactment mechanism to protect the shared understanding. In addition to the technical expression, measures may be taken to ensure that the MU is institutionalised and formalised. At the start of a project, mutual understanding may manifest as shared understanding between the developer and the senior management on the client side, but as the project progresses, it expands to include other organisational members, thereby institutionalising the new understanding. This progressive perspective of MU in ISD projects and interoperability research is a novel contribution of this study.
Concerning the third research question, this thesis identifies factors that can stall a project [inhibitors]—financial resources, context-based experiences, and negative emotions—and factors that reinforce the need for sensemaking or demonstrate its value [enablers]—technology [prototypes] and cognitive frames. This categorisation of influencing factors is not mentioned in the sensemaking literature, but it is important. Sensemaking processes have the potential to create or affect the cognitive framing of the project actors. When the processes or tangible outcomes [prototypes] adequately address the context-based experiences of the beneficiary actors, MU is a more plausible outcome. Hence, this study establishes that understanding the relationships between influencing factors is as important as identifying the factors.
The originality and contributions of this study to research and practice are as follows. This study is the first to propose a framework that explains how the triggers, processes, outcomes, and influencing factors of MU change throughout the phases of ISD projects. This provides knowledge to researchers and practitioners that hitherto could not be found in other studies. Although projects may differ in scale and the nature of stakeholder interaction, the framework and findings of this study can be adapted as a guide for other IOFMS and ISD projects in the public sector. The study also suggests that the techno-organisational perspective of interoperability should be the focus of academics and practitioners. The findings of this study indicate that both actors and technology shape MU and project outcomes. The above contributions have been published in one book chapter and one conference paper (see Appendix D). A manuscript is also under preparation for submission to Information Systems, a tier 4 journal in the information systems discipline.
Description
PhD. Information Systems
Keywords
Interoperable Financial Management Systems Development, Public Sector, Ghana