@inproceedings{KopperWestner, author = {Kopper, Andreas and Westner, Markus}, title = {Towards a Taxonomy for Shadow IT}, series = {Proceedings of the 22nd Americas Conference on Information Systems (AMCIS 2016), San Diego, August 11-14}, booktitle = {Proceedings of the 22nd Americas Conference on Information Systems (AMCIS 2016), San Diego, August 11-14}, pages = {1 -- 10}, abstract = {In a comprehensive literature review, we identified 21 different terms used for Shadow IT related concepts. This variety makes it difficult to identify related research and build upon it. To address this ambiguity, we reduce the different terms to six distinct concepts by developing a taxonomy and examining their relation¬ships. We do so by using a rigorous iterative methodology to identify common characteristics and to classify terms along them. By clustering the results, we derive and visualize the taxonomy. The identified concepts are Feral Practices, Workarounds, Shadow IT, Shadow Systems, Un-enacted Projects, and Shadow Sourcing. We elaborate on the concepts along their characteristics and clearly define and delimit them. As a result, we create a guide for their usage, increase search- and comparability, and unify existing knowledge.}, subject = {Informationstechnik}, language = {en} } @article{KopperWestnerStrahringer, author = {Kopper, Andreas and Westner, Markus and Strahringer, Susanne}, title = {From Shadow IT to Business-managed IT: A qualitative comparative analysis to determine configurations for successful management of IT by business entities}, series = {Information Systems and e-Business Management}, volume = {18}, journal = {Information Systems and e-Business Management}, number = {2}, doi = {10.1007/s10257-020-00472-6}, pages = {209 -- 257}, abstract = {Shadow IT describes covert/hidden IT systems that are managed by business entities themselves. Additionally, there are also overt forms in practice, so-called Business-managed IT, which share most of the characteristics of Shadow IT. To better understand this phenomenon, we interviewed 29 executive IT managers about positive and negative cases of Shadow IT and Business-managed IT. By applying qualitative comparative analysis (QCA), we derived four conditions that characterize these cases: Aligned, local, simple, and volatile. The results show that there are three sufficient configurations of conditions that lead to a positive outcome; one of them even encompasses Shadow IT. The most important solution indicates that IT systems managed by business entities are viewed as being positive if they are aligned with the IT department and limited to local requirements. This allows to balance local responsiveness to changing requirements and global standardization. In contrast, IT systems that are not aligned and permanent (and either organization-wide or simple) are consistently considered as negative. Our study is the first empirical quantitative-qualitative study to shed light on the success and failure of Shadow IT and Business-managed IT.}, subject = {Informationsmanagement}, language = {en} } @inproceedings{KopperFurstenauZimmermannetal., author = {Kopper, Andreas and Furstenau, Daniel and Zimmermann, Stephan and Rentrop, Christopher and Rothe, Hannes and Strahringer, Susanne and Westner, Markus}, title = {Business-managed IT: A conceptual framework and empirical illustration}, series = {26. European Conference on Information Systems (ECIS 2018), Protsmouth, UK}, booktitle = {26. European Conference on Information Systems (ECIS 2018), Protsmouth, UK}, abstract = {Research on Shadow IT is facing a conceptual dilemma in cases where previously "covert" systems developed by business entities (individual users, business workgroups, or business units) are integrated in the organizational IT management. These systems become visible, are therefore not "in the shadows" anymore, and subsequently do not fit to existing definitions of Shadow IT. Practice shows that some information systems share characteristics of Shadow IT, but are created openly in alignment with the IT department. This paper therefore proposes the term "Business- managed IT" to describe "overt" information systems developed or managed by business entities. We distinguish Business- managed IT from Shadow IT by illustrating case vignettes. Accordingly, our contribution is to suggest a concept and its delineation against other concepts. In this way, IS researchers interested in IT originated from or maintained by business entities can construct theories with a wider scope of application that are at the same time more specific to practical problems. In addition, value-laden terminology is complemented by a vocabulary that values potentially innovative developments by business entities more adequately. From a practical point of view, the distinction can be used to discuss the distribution of task responsibilities for information systems.}, language = {en} } @inproceedings{KaessGodefroidBorghoffetal., author = {K{\"a}ss, Sebastian and Godefroid, Marie and Borghoff, Vincent and Strahringer, Susanne and Westner, Markus and Plattfaut, Ralf}, title = {Towards a taxonomy of concepts describing IT outside the IT department}, series = {Australasian Conference on Information Systems 2021, Sydney}, booktitle = {Australasian Conference on Information Systems 2021, Sydney}, abstract = {Due to technological advances, IT is increasingly introduced and managed outside of (or even hidden from) an organisation's IT department. As a result, researchers and practitioners have created multiple concepts describing different facets and trends of this development. While the individual concepts typically focus on different aspects, there are overlaps between these concepts. This effect hampers research progress as it creates redundancies and separate streams of knowledge development. We propose a taxonomy of the concepts Lightweight IT, IT Consumerisation, Bring Your Own Device, Shadow IT, and Business-Managed IT to solve this research problem based on a systematic literature review. For this purpose, we derive characterising dimensions of each concept from existing studies and analyse literature according to the usage of terms. As a result, we can describe and delineate the concepts. Thus, we contribute a taxonomy of IT outside the IT department to improve the transfer of research results between research streams.}, language = {en} } @article{KopperFuerstenauZimmermannetal., author = {Kopper, Andreas and F{\"u}rstenau, Daniel and Zimmermann, Stephan and Klotz, Stefan and Rentrop, Christopher and Rothe, Hannes and Strahringer, Susanne and Westner, Markus}, title = {Shadow IT and Business-Managed IT: A Conceptual Framework and Empirical Illustration}, series = {International Journal of IT/Business Alignment and Governance (IJITBAG)}, volume = {9}, journal = {International Journal of IT/Business Alignment and Governance (IJITBAG)}, number = {2}, publisher = {IGI Global}, doi = {10.4018/IJITBAG.2018070104}, pages = {53 -- 71}, abstract = {Research on Shadow IT is facing a conceptual dilemma in cases where previously "covert" systems developed by business entities are integrated in the organizational IT management. These systems become visible, are thus not "in the shadows" anymore, and subsequently do not fit to existing definitions of Shadow IT. Practice shows that some information systems share characteristics of Shadow IT but are created openly in alignment with the IT organization. This paper proposes the term "Business-managed IT" to describe "overt" information systems developed or managed by business entities and distinguishes it from Shadow IT by illustrating case vignettes. Accordingly,our contribution is to suggest a concept and its delineation against other concepts. In this way, IS researchers interested in IT originated from or maintained by business entities can construct theories with a wider scope of application that are at the same time more specific to practical problems. In addition, the terminology allows to value potentially innovative developments by business entities more adequately.}, subject = {Unternehmen}, language = {en} } @article{KopperKlotzWestneretal., author = {Kopper, Andreas and Klotz, Stefan and Westner, Markus and Strahringer, Susanne}, title = {Shadow IT and Business-managed IT}, series = {Journal of Information Technology Management (JITM)}, volume = {30}, journal = {Journal of Information Technology Management (JITM)}, number = {4}, issn = {1042-1319}, pages = {25}, abstract = {Two concepts describe the autonomous deployment of IT by business entities: Shadow IT and Business-managed IT. Shadow IT is deployed covertly, that is, software, hardware, or IT services created/procured or managed by business entities without alignment with the IT organization. In contrast, Business-managed IT describes the overt deployment of IT, that is, in alignment with the IT organization or in a split responsibility model. The purpose of this paper is to extend the conceptual understanding of Shadow IT and Business-managed IT, comparing the perceptions of 29 CIOs and senior IT managers with the results of a systematic literature review. By doing so, this paper presents a structured and comprehensive view of causing factors, outcomes, and governance of Shadow IT and Business-managed IT in practice. A comparison of academic literature and practitioner perceptions reveals the limitations and gaps of the current research and highlights avenues for future research. The authors find three category-spanning themes occurring as causing factors, outcomes, and—as part of governance measures—factors to improve the IT organization: (1) (Poor) business-IT alignment (2) (lack of) agility, and (3) (lack of) policies. This study is innovative with its comprehensive qualitative interview data that the authors compare to the existing literature. Therefore, the paper brings together theoretical and practical insights into Shadow IT and Businessmanaged IT, which should aid practitioners and scholars in decision making and future research.}, subject = {Corporate Governance}, language = {en} } @article{KlotzKopperWestneretal., author = {Klotz, Stefan and Kopper, Andreas and Westner, Markus and Strahringer, Susanne}, title = {Von Schatten-IT zu Business-managed IT: Fachbereichs-IT gezielt gestalten}, series = {Wirtschaftsinformatik \& Management}, volume = {14}, journal = {Wirtschaftsinformatik \& Management}, number = {4}, publisher = {Springer Nature}, issn = {1867-5913}, doi = {10.1365/s35764-022-00421-7}, pages = {282 -- 287}, abstract = {Fachbereichs-IT, Schatten-IT, Business-managed IT. All diese Begriffe beschreiben IT, die neben den eigentlichen, regul{\"a}ren IT-Systemen oder -Prozessen in Unternehmen existieren und von Mitarbeiterinnen und Mitarbeitern der Fachbereiche genutzt werden. Im Fall von„Schatten-IT" handelt es sich um IT-Systeme und -Prozesse (IT-Instanzen), die sich ohne Kenntnis der IT-Verantwortlichen etabliert haben; im Fall von„Business-managed IT" entstehen die IT-Systeme und -Prozesse in Kenntnis der bzw. in Abstimmung mit den IT-Verantwortlichen im Unternehmen.„Fachbereichs-IT" subsumiert Schatten-IT und Business-managed IT. Welche Ursachen f{\"u}hren zu solchen IT-Instanzen, welche Potenziale und Risiken haben diese IT-Instanzen und wie lassen sie sich steuern?}, language = {de} } @inproceedings{KlotzWestnerStrahringer, author = {Klotz, Stefan and Westner, Markus and Strahringer, Susanne}, title = {From Shadow IT to Business-managed IT and Back Again}, series = {Pacific Asia Conference on Information Systems (PACIS): 2020, Dubai}, booktitle = {Pacific Asia Conference on Information Systems (PACIS): 2020, Dubai}, pages = {14}, abstract = {Today, information technology (IT) is not anymore solely deployed and maintained by the IT organization, but also by business units. IT deployed or managed by business units is called Shadow IT (without alignment with the IT organization) or Business-managed IT (in alignment or a split responsibility model with the IT organization), contrasting "classical" IT. However, the responsibility for deployed IT might change over time. Therefore, this paper conceptualizes the progression of the responsibility for IT as a trajectory through initialization, potential transitions, and discontinuance. The paper illustrates this conceptual framework using four exemplary case vignettes of IT instances. Empirical findings of the case vignettes determine indications when employees initialize an IT instance as Shadow IT, Business-managed IT, or IT-managed systems and reasons why the responsibility for an IT instance changes over time. The results suggest that scholars and practitioners should add a temporal dimension to the governance of IT instances.}, subject = {IT-Governance}, language = {en} } @article{KlotzKopperWestneretal., author = {Klotz, Stefan and Kopper, Andreas and Westner, Markus and Strahringer, Susanne}, title = {Causing factors, outcomes, and governance of Shadow IT and business-managed IT}, series = {International Journal of Information Systems and Project Management}, volume = {7}, journal = {International Journal of Information Systems and Project Management}, number = {1}, issn = {2182-7796}, doi = {10.12821/ijispm070102}, pages = {15 -- 43}, abstract = {Shadow IT and Business-managed IT describe the autonomous deployment/procurement or management of Information Technology (IT) instances, i.e., software, hardware, or IT services, by business entities. For Shadow IT, this happens covertly, i.e., without alignment with the IT organization; for Business-managed IT this happens overtly, i.e., in alignment with the IT organization or in a split responsibility model. We conduct a systematic literature review and structure the identified research themes in a framework of causing factors, outcomes, and governance. As causing factors, we identify enablers, motivators, and missing barriers. Outcomes can be benefits as well as risks/shortcomings of Shadow IT and Business-managed IT. Concerning governance, we distinguish two subcategories: general governance for Shadow IT and Business-managed IT and instance governance for overt Business-managed IT. Thus, a specific set of governance approaches exists for Business-managed IT that cannot be applied to Shadow IT due to its covert nature. Hence, we extend the existing conceptual understanding and allocate research themes to Shadow IT, Business-managed IT, or both concepts and particularly distinguish the governance of the two concepts. Besides, we find that governance themes have been the primary research focus since 2016, whereas older publications (until 2015) focused on causing factors.}, subject = {Betriebliches Informationssystem}, language = {en} } @article{KlotzWestnerStrahringer, author = {Klotz, Stefan and Westner, Markus and Strahringer, Susanne}, title = {Critical Success Factors of Business-managed IT: It Takes Two to Tango}, series = {Information Systems Management}, volume = {39}, journal = {Information Systems Management}, number = {3}, publisher = {Taylor\&Francis}, doi = {10.1080/10580530.2021.1938300}, pages = {220 -- 240}, abstract = {This paper identifies critical success factors of Business-managed IT based on case study results. Four groups of critical success factors emerge: (1) general approach to Business-managed IT/Business-managed IT strategy, (2) Business-managed IT project prerequisites/Business-managed IT team, (3) Business-managed IT project execution and outcome, and (4) information technology management for Business-managed IT. The results suggest that bilateral responsibility between the business unit and the IT organization is the most favorable governance option for Business-managed IT.}, subject = {Betriebliches Informationssystem}, language = {en} } @inproceedings{KlotzWestnerStrahringeretal., author = {Klotz, Stefan and Westner, Markus and Strahringer, Susanne and Schieder, Christian}, title = {Transformed Knowledge Sharing Through Business-managed IT and Shadow IT}, series = {Proceedings of the 25th Americas Conference on Information Systems (AMCIS 2019), Canc{\´u}n, Mexiko, August 15-17}, booktitle = {Proceedings of the 25th Americas Conference on Information Systems (AMCIS 2019), Canc{\´u}n, Mexiko, August 15-17}, publisher = {AIS}, pages = {1 -- 10}, abstract = {Business-managed IT and Shadow IT describe the autonomous deployment/management of IT instances by business units. For the former, this happens in alignment with the IT organization of the enterprise, for the latter, without alignment. We analyze why and how Business-managed IT and Shadow IT transform knowledge sharing with two case studies drawing on the theoretical lens of the knowledge-based view. Several motivators lead to the autonomous implementation of knowledge management systems (KMSs), for example, shortcomings of existing systems. The implemented KMSs have multiple benefits for knowledge sharing, such as a reduction of knowledge sharing barriers. However, we notice that the Shadow IT KMS leads to challenges for cross-unit knowledge sharing due to the covert nature of Shadow IT. Based on the findings of our case studies, we develop a mid-range theory to explain the transformation of knowledge sharing in enterprises supported by Business-managed IT and Shadow IT.}, language = {en} } @article{KaessStrahringerWestner, author = {K{\"a}ss, Sebastian and Strahringer, Susanne and Westner, Markus}, title = {Archetypes, Situations, and Practices : a Guide to Successful Low-Code Adoption}, series = {Information Resources Management Journal}, volume = {38}, journal = {Information Resources Management Journal}, number = {1}, publisher = {IGI Global}, issn = {1040-1628}, doi = {10.4018/IRMJ.396005}, pages = {26}, abstract = {This paper extends prior work on low-code by explaining when adoption archetypes occur and how to use them. Motivated by information technology (IT) talent shortages and uneven low-code development platform (LCDP) outcomes, the paper seeks practical guidance for post-adoption choices in work systems. Using a multiple mini case study of 36 cases in large German organizations, this study analyzes interviews and context questionnaires with within-/cross-case coding and pattern matching against a 13-factor model. This analysis identifies situations that trigger three adoption archetypes—application development democratizers, synergy realizers, and IT resource shortage mitigators—and one non-adoption archetype, intricacy adversaries. The analysis also maps advantages and disadvantages and distills 12 good practices. Across adoption cases, efficiency is the dominant goal, whereas non-adoption stems from high application sophistication. The results give actionable guidance: align goals to an archetype, stick to LCDP standards, involve IT and foster an open culture, invest in skilling, reuse platform components, and reserve LCDPs for less-complex apps while planning architecture early.}, language = {en} }