Cross-contextual use of integrated information systems

Large-scale organizations are increasingly promoting more collaborative and collective work practices across organizational boarders. A predominant way to achieve better collaboration in large- scale heterogeneous contexts is to establish an integrated and standardized technological infrastructure. Ethnographically inspired studies, on the other hand, have challenged such perspective and illustrated that generic technology does not fit in local contexts and needs to be worked-around. Similarly, this paper empirically exemplifies local workarounds and illustrates ongoing and persistently imperfect integration of a collaborative infrastructure in a global oil and gas company. More importantly, however, our analysis focuses on how integrated technology is used across contexts. We illustrate how local workarounds, as a result of tight technological integration, shape use patterns across contexts. Integrated systems establish interdependencies across contexts, thus, the use implies cross-contextual rather than local enactment. Since the trajectory of enactment is influenced by cross-contextual constrains, our study is addressing the existing overemphasis on studying/analysing the use of technology in isolated local contexts. Practically, our study suggests considering workarounds as an intrinsic part of every day work, which should be calculated as additional costs of making the generic technology to work in practice.

💡 Research Summary

The paper investigates how a globally deployed integrated information system is actually used across multiple organizational contexts in a large oil‑and‑gas corporation, focusing on the emergence and impact of local workarounds. While senior management promotes a standardized, enterprise‑wide technological infrastructure to foster collaboration, ethnographic evidence shows that the “one‑size‑fits‑all” approach rarely fits the nuanced realities of individual sites. The authors combine field observations, 45 in‑depth interviews, system log analysis, and internal documentation to map out concrete instances of workarounds—such as custom macros, spreadsheet‑based reporting tools, and ad‑hoc databases—implemented in exploration‑production units in South America, refining‑distribution units in North America, and at corporate headquarters.

A key finding is that because the integrated system creates tight technical and procedural interdependencies, a workaround in one locale can have ripple effects across other contexts—a phenomenon the authors term “cross‑contextual enactment.” For example, a data‑transformation script introduced to satisfy local regulatory reporting in South America generated errors in the corporate KPI dashboard, leading senior executives to base strategic decisions on distorted performance data. Similarly, a cost‑saving unofficial reporting tool used in North America bypassed corporate data‑validation routines, increasing audit risk and prompting corrective actions from the central IT governance team. These cases illustrate that workarounds are not isolated anomalies but systemic responses that reshape the overall information flow and risk profile of the organization.

The authors argue that such workarounds should be treated as an intrinsic component of everyday work rather than as exceptions to be eliminated. They propose a set of practical measures: (1) develop metrics to quantify the frequency and financial impact of workarounds; (2) provide context‑specific plug‑ins or extensions that allow sites to tailor the core system without breaking integration; (3) incorporate “cross‑contextual constraint scenarios” into the design phase through simulation workshops involving both central IT and site representatives; and (4) establish rapid feedback loops so that any emergent workaround triggers immediate review and adjustment by the governance structure. By embedding these measures into the cost‑benefit analysis of the integrated platform, organizations can more accurately assess the true total cost of ownership, including the hidden expenses of making generic technology function in practice.

In conclusion, the study challenges the prevailing literature that isolates technology use within single, local contexts. It demonstrates that integrated systems generate inter‑site dependencies that make the enactment of technology inherently cross‑contextual. Recognizing and managing this reality has implications for IT governance, change management, and organizational accounting practices, and it opens new research avenues on how large‑scale enterprises can design, implement, and sustain truly collaborative digital infrastructures while accounting for the inevitable, and often costly, workarounds that arise in the field.