Situación actual: TIC y proyecto Educativo

Throughout observations, it was realised that one of the mechanisms that enabled routines to be enacted flexibly was the different options that the actors could choose from. In order to distinguish which routine activity involved a new option or a conventional one, I compared the enactment of three complete iterations of the sourcing routine, which is made up of several key activities that lead to the purchase of a product or service.

The sourcing routine

In PublicCo, the procurement of products or services follow a process made up of a series of activities that starts when a request for a product or service is sent to Procurement, followed by some sourcing activities and ends when the product is procured. Similar to the software support routine studied by Pentland and Rueter’s (1994) which had many steps but could be simplified to just three main activities, the Procurement process can be represented by 3 main steps: (1) Product/service request, (2) sourcing, and (3) procure. This is confirmed by the various participants that I interviewed at the initial stages of my study where I asked each interviewee to explain the procurement process in PublicCo. These steps were consistently mentioned by actors in procurement as well as technical and management roles. They all iterated similar activities involved in procuring a product/service which can be simplified into the three steps above. For non-complex requests such as to procure furniture for a new office, or to request cleaning services for a special event, the sourcing activity only involves the Procurement team gathering a few quotations. However, if the request is more complex such as procuring of the entire print device fleet for the organisation, the three activities become much more complex. So the ostensive understanding is similar for any type of sourcing exercise (i.e. whether complex or non-complex), but the performative aspect changes depending on the complexity of the sourcing routine. PublicCo makes use of an online portal to track complex sourcing exercises. On the system, the Procurement process is made up of 9 main activities as seen in figure 3.2. ‘Product creation’ is

when Procurement receives a request for a product/service (step 1), and ‘Award project’ is when the product/service is finally procured (step 3). So all the activities in between are sourcing activities (step 2).

60

Figure 3.2 – Sourcing routine activities as listed in the Procurement portal

Although the portal is used to manage the Procurement process, the activities listed in the portal do not dictate or manage the actual routine. It only acts as a means of communication and to record the activities completed. In my study, only activities i (Project creation), iii (Create ITT), iv (Accept ITT), vi (Evaluation period), and v (Award project) were observed. So for the purpose of this study, the sourcing routine is represented by the five activities seen in figure 3.3below.

Figure 3.3 – The observed performative of the sourcing routine

The case: The emergence of options in routine enactment

Three complete iterations of the sourcing routine were observed during the observation period: (1) buying the services of print specialists, (2) purchasing of print software, and (3) purchasing of print hardware. Although there were three iterations, some of the activities ran concurrently with each other, so it was important that I was able to identify and distinguish the beginning and ends of the three routine iterations as they are not often very obvious (Pentland and Feldman 2005).

As described earlier, the sourcing routine is made up of three main steps. The start of the routine is when the request for a product or service is put forward. In this Print Project, this was not always an obvious point in the project as the meetings and discussions were rather fluid and occurred in a back-and-forth manner. Because of this, I chose the first instance where a participant

61

mentioned about the procuring of the product or service as the starting point of the routine. For the procuring of Print Specialists, the need for their service was initially mentioned in the very first Board meeting as suggested by the Project Manager:

“We found we didn’t really know enough about it and what our future demand would be in sort of going into a full tender requirements at the moment…so I’m suggesting that we get, we procure some help from some print specialists who will…there’s a couple of key examples of companies that do this to actually help us flash out what our requirements would be for the tender”

For the procuring of the print software as an individual product, it was also mentioned in this Board Meeting when the Project Manager stated that:

“I think the preference would be to purchase that software as an independent activity because it releases from sort of entanglement between different printer types and different suppliers and their relationships with the different printer suppliers and so forth”

Subsequently, the procurement of the hardware as an individual product was also first mentioned in the same meeting by the Project Manager when he asked whether there should be a separate business case for all three products, therefore legitimising the thought that they would be procuring the print hardware on its own i.e. separate from the software:

“Can I ask a question? Do we need a business case where all the components captures the whole requirements of the project? Should it be a business case as a whole, or should it be if you like…almost separate projects? So we’ve got the software, we’ve got the print specialists and we got the devices [print hardware] themselves for example. They’re probably the three main parts.”

As seen in figure 3.4, the beginning of all three iterations of the sourcing routine occurred at the same point in time which was during Board Meeting 0. However the end of each routine iteration was significantly different. Each routine iteration ends when the contract is awarded to the winning supplier. This supports Pentland and Feldman’s (2005) statement that not all routines will begin and end at the same time as the exact replication of a routine performance is impossible. The activities between the beginning and end of the routine are all ‘sourcing activities’ which include all activities relating to the ITT and the evaluation of the supplier responses.

62

Figure 3.4 – The beginning and end of the three separate sourcing routines

By comparing the enactment of the three sourcing routines, it can be identified where options appear (i.e. at what particular activity), and what they are. Thus, this sub-case has the potential to provide insight into a new mechanism of routine flexibility, through the emergence of options.