Page 77 -

62 MADSEN AND KAUTZ

Table 5.1

The Theoretical Framework
Description Object of study The emergent method—the unfolding development process and
the activities, and applied method elements that constitute this
process
Key concepts Relations between concepts
Content of change What characterizes the planned and actual product and
process of change?
Social process How do political and cultural aspects help explain the way
changes to the content take place?
Social context How do social relations, infrastructure, and history help explain
why the social process emerges as it does?
Process forms Which theoretical process form(s) does the emergent method
and drivers resemble, if any? Which generative motor(s) drives the
Explanation emergent method, if any?

(1995) suggest four different sequences of change driven by different generative motors: (1) life
cycle, the change process follows a necessary and linear sequence of events driven forward by
compliance to predefined rules regulated by nature, logic, or institutions; (2) evolution, the change
process takes place as a recurrent and cumulative sequence of variation, selection, and retention
driven forward by competitive survival; (3) dialectical, the change process takes the form of
thesis–antithesis–synthesis and is generated by conflict among opposing forces; (4) teleological,
the change process emerges as an ongoing sequence of goal setting, implementation, evaluation,
and modification driven forward by consensus among cooperating actors. The four process theories
constitute ideal types that individually or in combination help to explain how and why change
unfolds (Van de Ven and Poole, 1995). The theoretical framework (see Table 5.1) will be used to
organize and perform a comparative analysis of the two cases.

THE EMERGENT METHODS

This section presents narrative accounts of how the emergent methods unfolded first, in the Mul-
timedia case and second, in the Web case.
The Multimedia Case

The Multimedia project concerned the development of a complex MMIS for dissemination of
knowledge about SPI to practitioners. It was performed for the EU on a commercial fixed-price
contract, which specified the project, the financial budget, the formal project organization, and the
main building blocks and requirements for a phased development approach and project progress
reporting. The formal project organization consisted of an overall project manager and predefined
the distribution of work and responsibilities between a Norwegian IT consultancy and a Danish
academic organization as well as bimonthly project meetings for all involved developers. The
development was undertaken by a project team consisting of six to eight people, with three to four
people from each of the two organizations. The overall project manager was located in Norway,