Endogenous Adaptation: The Effects of Technology Position and Planning Mode on IT‐Enabled Change*
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT The redesign of information technology (IT)‐enabled work processes often necessitates fundamental design changes to the intended work process, the IT platform hosting the work process, or both. Research suggests that such design changes often can be traced to earlier decisions involving endogenous adaptation or internal organizational change. Two such decisions are a firm's technology position and planning mode. This study examines the relationship between technology position and planning mode in predicting the magnitude of design change in process redesign projects. The conceptual frame applied in examining these relationships involves a synthesis of Miles and Snow's adaptive cycle with elements central to concurrent engineering. Our results indicate that the magnitude of design change is related to differences in technology position and planning mode. To effectively implement organizational change, firms must leverage their IT platform by carefully timing IT investments in accordance with their adopted technology position. Directing the trajectory of a firm's IT platform and deploying it so as to complement the firm's technology position reduces design uncertainty, promoting reengineering success.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it