As algorithmic control (AC)—broadly defined as the managerial use of algorithms to direct, evaluate, and discipline workers—is increasingly implemented across a wide range of organisations, understanding how workers judge the legitimacy of AC becomes ever more critical. While prior research in this area often remains fixated on the effects of individual AC mechanisms, our study adopts a system-level perspective on AC. Specifically, we propose a three-layered conceptual framework for AC systems—consisting of (1) a control layer, (2) a data layer, and (3) an organisational embedding layer—and identify key design choices within each layer. Based on this framework, we conducted an experimental vignette study with 329 workers to assess how these design choices affect workers’ perceptions of autonomy and exploitation and, ultimately, their legitimacy judgments of AC systems. Our study advances research by shifting the focus beyond the level of individual control mechanisms to the system level and by providing empirical evidence that workers’ legitimacy judgments are highly sensitive to managerial design choices along all three layers. In particular, our results suggest that design choices within the data and organisational embedding layers are at least as critical as the AC mechanisms themselves in shaping workers’ judgments.

Digital transformation (DT) has emerged as a central and strategically relevant research phenomenon in information systems (IS) and related disciplines. As a result, a significant body of research on the DT phenomenon has accumulated in recent years. However, while existing research highlights the processual nature of the phenomenon, our theoretical understanding of DT processes remains fragmented. Against this background, the present study sets out to take stock of and critically review the IS literature on DT processes. To do so, we build on previous research to conceptualize DT as a network of interrelated processes, and draw on two conceptual frameworks from outside IS to guide our assessment of the current state of research. On this basis, we define a set of three review criteria, with a particular focus on (1) the specific DT processes studied and their interplay, as well as both (2) the styles of and (3) the time-related considerations involved in DT process theorizing. We then use these criteria to assess each study in our sample of 48 studies published in premier IS journals. The results of our critical review contribute to prior research by providing context-specific insights into the network of DT processes, as well as by highlighting key shortcomings in our understanding of this network along with numerous opportunities for ‘stronger’ DT process theorizing. Moreover, by linking the identified shortcomings and opportunities, we propose a set of six promising directions that equip IS scholars with actionable guidance for future research on DT processes and related theorizing efforts.

Information systems (IS) projects represent key building blocks of large-scale digital transformation and innovation initiatives. As a result, IS projects have become increasingly ambitious in terms of both goals and scale, making it even more challenging for managers to exercise control over such projects. While prior research focused primarily on the direct and interactive effects of formal and informal control modes on IS project performance, recent research directs attention to the importance of considering project managers’ control styles (i.e., how managers interact with controlees to enact controls). Corresponding studies also indicate that “either/or” control approaches – as opposed to “both/and” approaches – are no longer viable in today’s complex environment. As such, our study draws on an ambidexterity perspective to theoretically develop and empirically test the direct and interactive effects of control-style ambidexterity on IS project performance. Using matched-pair data from 146 IS projects (from 146 high-tech firms), we find that control-style ambidexterity improves project performance – directly and in combination with both formal and informal control. The study results contribute novel insights regarding the effective control of IS projects in the digital era and help explain mixed findings in prior literature, thereby facilitating continued theory development in the research area.

Organisations increasingly rely on algorithms to exert automated managerial control over workers, referred to as algorithmic control (AC). The use of AC is already commonplace with platform-based work in the gig economy, where independent workers are paid for completing a given task (or “gig”). The combination of independent work alongside intensive managerial monitoring and guidance via AC raises questions about how gig workers perceive AC practices and judge their legitimacy, which could help explain critical worker behaviours such as turnover and non-compliance. Based on a three-dimensional conceptualisation of micro-level legitimacy tailored to the gig work context (autonomy, fairness, and privacy), we develop a research model that links workers’ perceptions of two predominant forms of AC (gatekeeping and guiding) to their legitimacy judgements and behavioural reactions. Using survey data from 621 Uber drivers, we find empirical support for the central role of micro-level legitimacy judgements in mediating the relationships between gig workers’ perceptions of different AC forms and their continuance intention and workaround use. Contrasting prior work, our study results show that workers do not perceive AC as a universally “bad thing” and that guiding AC is in fact positively related to micro-level legitimacy judgements. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed.

Extant research on the control of IS development projects is largely oriented around control choices and enactments from the perspective of managers, thereby neglecting employees’ legitimacy perceptions. Little is known about how such perceptions affect employees’ intentions to comply with controls. To address this shortcoming, we conducted a factorial survey with 258 IS developers nested in 19 organizations. Our multilevel analysis shows that all four considered legitimacy dimensions are primarily a function of control mode and style, and to a lesser extent of control degree. Moreover, legitimacy operating on fairness and autonomy is an important lever for increasing compliance intentions.

While IS development (ISD) projects are essential for deploying digital technologies in organisations, they are notoriously challenging to control and complete successfully. Prior ISD project control research mostly conceptualises control activities in terms of formal and informal control modes and frequently focuses on performance effects at the project level. We argue that new insight can be gained by moving beyond these conventions to include control enactment as well as individual-level control effects. In this study, we present new findings that could precipitate a change in how researchers think about, and practitioners exercise, control in ISD projects. Specifically, we provide a first test of the recently proposed Integrated IS Project Control Theory by analysing the impacts of control modes (what) and control styles (how) on project team members’ task performance and job satisfaction. Employing data from 171 ISD projects, we find significant support for this theory by confirming the positive impact of an enabling control style on both task performance and job satisfaction, and by demonstrating that control style is more important than control modes in explaining individual-level control effects. Further, the results of a post-hoc analysis suggest complex interaction effects between an enabling control style and formal controls.

As firms increasingly engage in interorganizational information systems (IS) projects, including IS offshoring projects, the challenge for client firms of effectively exercising control across organizational boundaries becomes critical. Although the importance of informal controls (clan and self-control) in this context has been recognized, prior research has focused primarily on formal controls. Consequently, our understanding of the use of clan and self-control in interorganizational IS projects is scarce, and partly inconsistent or contradictory. This study focuses the client’s role in promoting informal controls in interorganizational projects involving distant client–vendor relationships as well as the effectiveness of such controls. We use matched-pair survey data from 86 IS offshoring projects involving client and vendor relationship managers. Our results show an interesting pattern: while clan control is considerably more difficult to promote than self-control in client–vendor project relationships, only clan control has a direct positive impact on project performance. Moreover, formal control modes, national cultural values, and project context factors moderate both the promotion and the effectiveness of informal controls. Our study’s main contributions lie in establishing the relevance of the distinction between informal control given and received, and the importance of the client’s role in promoting informal controls.

Prior research has focused on factors influencing the choice of controls in traditional project settings. Building on this research, this paper investigates the amount of control—defined as the variety and intensity of control mechanisms—in offshore software development projects. Using a comparative case study approach, the authors put forward eight propositions regarding the factors that influence the amount of control and its dynamics. Their results not only confirm existing findings, such as the predominance of formal controls and the negative effect of trust on the amount of formal control, but also contribute with new findings. For instance, they were able to identify particularly high levels of control in projects with high task complexity and/or high offshore team involvement as well as intensive use of formal (outcome) control in high volume and strategically important projects. The authors’ empirical findings are integrated in a conceptual model that leads to a better understanding of the antecedents of the amount of both formal and informal controls. In contrast with previous studies, their findings do not support the notion that the amount of control is directly related to project success.