Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-mkpzs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-18T20:43:35.831Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Chapter 5 - Power, Knowledge and Digitalization

A Qualitative Research Agenda

from Part I - Philosophical, Epistemological and Theoretical Considerations

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 June 2023

By
Boyka Simeonova  and
Robert D. Galliers
Edited by
Boyka Simeonova  and
Robert D. Galliers
Boyka Simeonova
Affiliation:
University of Leicester
Robert D. Galliers
Affiliation:
Bentley University, Massachusetts and Warwick Business School
Get access

Summary

The chapter theorizes power, knowledge and digitalization in the digital era. It theorizes the roles of knowledge and power in the current era and how these are impacted, reinforced, redistributed, challenged and transformed through increased digitalization. The chapter develops a Knowledge-Power-Digitalization framework where the influence of episodic and systemic power on knowledge and the role of Information Systems and digitalization are outlined. The framework outlines the following quadrants: power as possession, power as asymmetries, power as empowerment and power as practice. The role of digitalization is outlined within these quadrants. The Knowledge-Power-Digitalization framework developed outlines avenues for future research in the digital era pertinent to digitalization, knowledge and power dynamics, which are important current and complex phenomena in need of qualitative research understanding and theorization.

Keywords

powerepisodic powersystemic powerknowledgedigitalizationtheorizationframeworkqualitative research
Type
Chapter
Information
Cambridge Handbook of Qualitative Digital Research , pp. 60 - 76
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2023

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Acquisti, A., Brandimarte, L. and Loewenstein, G. (2015). Privacy and human behavior in the age of information. Science, 348(6221), 509–514.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alavi, M. and Leidner, D. E. (2001). Knowledge management and knowledge management systems: Conceptual foundations and research issues. MIS Quarterly, 25(1), 107–136.Google Scholar
Amershi, S., Cakmak, M., Knox, W. and Kulesza, T. (2014). Power to the people: The role of humans in interactive machine learning. AI Magazine, 35(4), 105–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Aversa, P., Cabantous, L. and Haefliger, S. (2018). When decision support systems fail: Insights for strategic information systems from Formula 1. Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 27(3), 221–236.Google Scholar
Azad, B. and Faraj, S. (2011). Social power and information technology implementation: A contentious framing lens. Information Systems Journal, 21(1), 33–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bailey, D. E. and Barley, S. R. (2020). Beyond design and use: How scholars should study intelligent technologies. Information and Organization, 30(2), 100–286.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barrett, M. and Oborn, E. (2010). Boundary object use in cross-cultural software development teams. Human Relations, 63(8), 1199–1221.Google Scholar
Barrett, M., Oborn, E. and Orlikowski, W. (2016). Creating value in online communities: The sociomaterial configuring of strategy, platform, and stakeholders. Information Systems Research, 27(4), 706–723.Google Scholar
Beaudry, A. and Pinsonneault, A. (2010). The other side of acceptance: Studying the direct and indirect effects of emotions on information technology use. MIS Quarterly, 34(4), 689–710.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beaudry, A. and Pinsonneault, A. (2005). Understanding user responses to information technology: A coping model of user adaptation. MIS Quarterly, 29(3), 493–524.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blackler, F. (2011). Power, politics, and intervention theory: Lessons from organisation studies. Theory and Psychology, 21(5), 724–734.Google Scholar
Blackler, F. (1995). Knowledge, knowledge work and organisations: An overview and interpretation. Organisation Studies, 16(6), 1021–1046.Google Scholar
Blackler, F. and McDonald, S. (2000). Power, mastery and organisational learning. Journal of Management Studies, 37(6), 833–852.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bradley, R. V., Byrd, T. A., Pridmore, J. L., Thrasher, E., Pratt, R. M. and Mbarika, V. W. (2012). An empirical examination of antecedents and consequences of IT governance in hospitals. Journal of Information Technology, 27(2), 156–177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brooks, A. K. (1994). Power and the production of knowledge: Collective team learning in work organisations. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 5(3), 213–235.Google Scholar
Brown, A., Gabriel, Y. G. and Gherardi, S. (2009). Storytelling and change: An unfolding story introduction. Organisation, 16(3), 324–334.Google Scholar
Brynjolfsson, E. and McAfee, A. (2014). The Second Machine Age: Work, Progress, and Prosperity in a Time of Brilliant Technologies. New York, NY: W. W. Norton.Google Scholar
Brynjolfsson, E. and Mitchell, T. (2017). What can machine learning do? Workforce implications. Science, 358(6370), 1530–1534.Google Scholar
Bunderson, J. (2003). Recognising and utilising expertise in work groups: A status characteristics perspective. Administrative Science Quarterly, 48(4), 557–591.Google Scholar
Bunderson, J. and Reagans, R. E. (2011). Power, status, and learning in organisations. Organisation Science, 22(5), 1182–1194.Google Scholar
Burton-Jones, A., Recker, J., Indulska, M., Green, C. P. and Weber, R. (2017). Assessing representation theory with a framework for pursuing success and failure. MIS Quarterly, 41(4), 1307–1334.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Busquets, J. (2010). Orchestrating smart business network dynamics for innovation. European Journal of Information Systems, 19(4), 481–493.Google Scholar
Cendon, V. and Jarvenpaa, S. (2001). The development and exercise of power by leaders of support units in implementing information technology-based services. Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 10(2), 121–158.Google Scholar
Chuang, C. H., Jackson, E. and Jiang, Y. (2016). Can knowledge-intensive teamwork be managed? Examining the roles of HRM systems, leadership, and tacit knowledge. Journal of Management, 42(2), 524–554.Google Scholar
Clegg, S. R. (1989). Frameworks of Power. London: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clegg, S. R., Courpasson, D. and Phillips, N. (2006). Power and Organisations. London: Sage.Google Scholar
Constantinides, P. and Barrett, M. (2006). Large-scale ICT innovation, power, and organisational change: The case of a regional health information network. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 42(1), 78–90.Google Scholar
Contu, A. (2013). On boundaries and difference: Communities of practice and power relations in creative work. Management Learning, 45(3), 289–316.Google Scholar
Cook, D. and Brown, S. (1999). Bridging epistemologies: The generative dance between organisational knowledge and organisational knowing. Organisation Science, 10(4), 381–400.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davenport, T. H. and Kirby, J. (2016). Only Humans Need Apply: Winners and Losers in the Age of Smart Machines. New York, NY: HarperCollins.Google Scholar
Demetis, D. and Lee, A. S. (2018). When humans using the IT artifact becomes IT using the human artifact. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 19(10), 929–952.Google Scholar
Deutsche Telekom. (2018). Deutsche Telekom’s guide for artificial intelligence. Digital Responsibility | Deutsche Telekom.Google Scholar
Dhillon, G., Caldeira, M. and Wenger, M. (2011). Intentionality and power interplay in IS implementation: The case of an asset management firm. Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 20(4), 438–448.Google Scholar
Díaz Andrade, A. and Techatassanasoontorn, A. A. (2021). Digital enforcement: Rethinking the pursuit of a digitally‐enabled society. Information Systems Journal, 31(1), 185–197.Google Scholar
Doolin, B. (2004). Power and resistance in the implementation of a medical management information system. Information Systems Journal, 14(4), 343–362.Google Scholar
Ekbia, H., Mattioll, M., Kouper, I., Arave, G., Ghazinejad, A., Bowman, T. et al. (2015). Big data, bigger dilemmas: A critical review. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 66(8), 1523–1545.Google Scholar
Elmes, M., Strong, D. and Volkoff, O. (2005). Panoptic empowerment and reflective conformity in enterprise systems-enabled organizations. Information and Organization, 15(1), 1–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Faraj, S., Pachidi, S. and Sayegh, K. (2018). Working and organizing in the age of the learning algorithm. Information and Organization, 28(1), 62–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fleming, P. and Spicer, A. (2014). Power in management and organisation science. Academy of Management Annals, 8(1), 237–298.Google Scholar
Forsythe, D. E. (1993). The construction of work in artificial intelligence. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 18(4), 460–480.Google Scholar
Foss, N., Husted, K. and Michailova, S. (2010). Governing knowledge sharing in organisations: Levels of analysis, governance mechanisms, and research directions. Journal of Management Studies, 48(5), 455–485.Google Scholar
Foucault, M. (1980). Power/Knowledge: Selected Interviews and Other Writings, 1972–1977. New York, NY: Pantheon.Google Scholar
Foucault, M. (1977). Discipline and Punish. Harmondsworth, UK: Penguin.Google Scholar
Fricke, M. (2015). Big data and its epistemology. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 66(4), 651–661.Google Scholar
Galinsky, A., Magee, J. C., Gruenfeld, D. H., Whitson, J. A. and Liljenquist, K. A. (2008). Power reduces the press of the situation: Implications for creativity, conformity, and dissonance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 95(6), 1450–1466.Google Scholar
Galinsky, A., Magee, J. C., Inesi, M. K. and Gruenfeld, D. (2006). Power and perspectives not taken. Psychological Science, 17(12), 1068–1074.Google Scholar
Gherardi, S. (2010). Telemedicine: A practice-based approach to technology. Human Relations, 63(4), 501–524.Google Scholar
Göhler, G. (2009). ‘Power to’ and ‘power over’. In Clegg, S. R., and Haugaard, M. (eds), The Sage Handbook of Power. London: Sage, pp. 27–39.Google Scholar
Gray, P.H. (2001). The impact of knowledge repositories on power and control in the workplace. Information Technology and People, 14(4), 368–385.Google Scholar
Guinote, A. (2007). Power and goal pursuit. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 33(8), 1076–1087.Google Scholar
Haas, M. (2006). Knowledge gathering, team capabilities, and project performance in challenging work environments. Management Science, 52(8), 1170–1185.Google Scholar
Hayes, N. and Walsham, G. (2001). Participation in groupware-mediated communities of practice: a socio-political analysis of knowledge working. Information and Organization, 11(4), 263–288.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heizmann, H. (2011). Knowledge sharing in a dispersed network of HR practice: Zooming in on power/knowledge struggles. Management Learning, 42(4), 378–393.Google Scholar
Hicks, J., Nair, P. and Wilderom, C. P. (2009). What if we shifted the basis of consulting from knowledge to knowing? Management Learning, 40(3), 289–310.Google Scholar
Hirschheim, R. (2021). The attack on understanding: How big data and theory have led us astray – a comment on Gary Smith’s Data Mining. Journal of Information Technology, 36(2), 176–183.Google Scholar
Howcroft, D. and Wilson, M. (2003). Paradoxes of participatory practices: The Janus role of the systems developer. Information and Organization, 13(1), 1–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Howison, J., Wiggins, A. and Crowston, K. (2011). Validity issues in the use of social network analysis with digital trace data. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 12(12), 767–787.Google Scholar
Hussain, Z. I. and Cornelius, N. (2009). The use of domination and legitimation in information systems implementation. Information Systems Journal, 19(2), 197–224.Google Scholar
Huzzard, T. (2004). Communities of domination? Reconceptualising organisational learning and power. Journal of Workplace Learning, 16(6), 350–361.Google Scholar
Inkpen, A. C. and Tsang, E. W. (2005). Social capital, networks, and knowledge transfer. Academy of Management Review, 30(1), 146–165.Google Scholar
Jasperson, J. S., Carte, T. A., Saunders, C. S., Butler, B. C., Croes, H. J. and Zheng, W. (2002). Review: power and information technology research: A metatriangulation review. MIS Quarterly, 26(4), 397–459.Google Scholar
Kärreman, D. (2010). The power of knowledge: Learning from ‘learning by knowledge‐intensive firm’. Journal of Management Studies, 46(7), 1405–1416.Google Scholar
Kaufman, R. (2006a). Interdisciplinary perspectives on the ‘digital divide’ Part I: Economic perspectives. Journal of the Association for Information Systems.Google Scholar
Kaufman, R. (2006b). Interdisciplinary perspectives on the ‘digital divide’ Part II: Sociological perspectives. Journal of the Association for Information Systems.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kitchin, R. (2014). Big Data, new epistemologies and paradigm shifts. Big Data & Society, 1(1), 1–12.Google Scholar
Klein, H. K. and Myers, M. D. (1999). A set of principles for conducting and evaluating interpretive field studies in information systems. MIS Quarterly, 23(1), 67–93.Google Scholar
Koch, H., Gonzalez, E. and Leidner, D. E. (2012). Bridging the work/social divide: The emotional response to organizational social networking sites. European Journal of Information Systems, 21(6), 689–706.Google Scholar
Kumar, M., Jha, V. and Vaidya, D. (2007). Empirical investigation of impact of organizational culture, prosocial behavior and organizational trust on sharing mistakes in knowledge management systems. PACIS Proceedings.Google Scholar
La Roche, J. (2017). IBM’s Rometty: The skills gap for tech jobs is ‘the essence of divide’. Yahoo! Finance, https://finance.yahoo.com/news/ibms-rometty-skills-gap-tech-jobs-essence-divide.html.Google Scholar
Lawrence, T., Malhotra, N. and Morris, T. (2012). Episodic and systemic power in the transformation of service firms. Journal of Management Studies, 49(1), 102–143.Google Scholar
Lawrence, T., Mauws, M. K., Dyck, B. and Kleysen, R. (2005). The politics of organisational learning: Integrating power into the 4I framework. Academy of Management Review, 30(1), 180–191.Google Scholar
Lee, L. and Sobol, D. (2012). What data can’t tell you about customers. Harvard Business Review.Google Scholar
Leidner, D. E., Gonzalez, E. and Koch, H. (2018). An affordance perspective of enterprise social media and organizational socialization. Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 27(2), 117–138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leidner, D. E. and Tona, O. (2020). The CARE theory of dignity amid personal data digitalization. MIS Quarterly, 45(1), 343–370.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leonardi, P. (2017). The social media revolution: Sharing and learning in the age of leaky knowledge. Information and Organization, 27(1), 46–59.Google Scholar
Leonardi, P. (2015). Ambient awareness and knowledge acquisition: Using social media to learn ‘who knows what’ and ‘who knows who’. MIS Quarterly, 39(4), 746–762.Google Scholar
Leonardi, P. (2014). Social media, knowledge sharing, and innovation: Toward a theory of communication visibility. Information Systems Research, 25(4), 786–816.Google Scholar
Leonardi, P. (2013). When does technology use enable network change in organizations? A comparative study of feature use and shared affordance. MIS Quarterly, 37(3), 749–775.Google Scholar
Leonardi, P., Huysman, M. and Steinfield, C. G. (2013). Enterprise social media: Definition, history, and prospects for the study of social technologies in organisations. Journal of Computer‐Mediated Communication, 19(1), 1–19.Google Scholar
Leong, C., Pan, S., Bahri, S. and Fauzi, A. (2019). Social media empowerment in social movements: Power activation and power accrual in digital activism. European Journal of Information Systems, 28(2), 173–204.Google Scholar
Leong, C., Pan, S., Ractham, C. P. and Kaewkitipong, L. (2015). ICT-enabled community empowerment in crisis response: Social media in Thailand flooding 2011. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 16(3), 50–60.Google Scholar
Lightfoot, G. and Wisniewski, T. P. (2014). Information asymmetry and power in a surveillance society. Information and Organization, 24(4), 214–235.Google Scholar
Lindebaum, D., Vesa, M. and den Hond, F. (2020). Insights from ‘the machine stops’ to better understand rational assumptions in algorithmic decision making and its implications for organizations. Academy of Management Review, 45(1), 246–263.Google Scholar
Liyanage, C., Elhag, T., Ballal, T. and Li, Q. (2009). Knowledge communication and translation – a knowledge transfer model. Journal of Knowledge Management, 13(3), 118–131.Google Scholar
Markus, M. L. (1983). Power, politics, and MIS implementation. Communications of the ACM, 26(6), 430–444.Google Scholar
Marshall, N. and Rollinson, J. (2004). Maybe Bacon had a point: The politics of interpretation in Collective Sensemaking. British Journal of Management, 15(S1), 71–86.Google Scholar
McAfee, A. P. (2006). Enterprise 2.0: The dawn of emergent collaboration. MIT Sloan Management Review, 46(3), 21–28.Google Scholar
Messner, M., Clegg, S. and Kornberger, M. (2008). Critical practices in organisations. Journal of Management Inquiry, 17(2), 68–82.Google Scholar
Moe, C. E., Newman, M. and Sein, M. K. (2017). The public procurement of information systems: Dialectics in requirements specification. European Journal of Information Systems, 26(2), 143–163.Google Scholar
Muthusamy, S. and White, M. (2005). Learning and knowledge transfer in strategic alliances: A social exchange view. Organisation Studies, 26(3), 415–441.Google Scholar
Ngwenyama, O. and Nielsen, P. A. (2014). Using organisational influence processes to overcome IS implementation barriers: Lessons from a longitudinal case study of SPI implementation. European Journal of Information Systems, 23(2), 205–222.Google Scholar
Orlikowski, W. J. (2002). Knowing in practice: Enacting a collective capability in distributed organising. Organisation Science, 13(3), 249–273.Google Scholar
Pettigrew, A. (2012). Context and action in the transformation of the firm: A reprise. Journal of Management Studies, 49(7), 1304–1328.Google Scholar
Pozzebon, M. and Pinsonneault, A. (2012). The dynamics of client–consultant relationships: Exploring the interplay of power and knowledge. Journal of Information Technology, 27(1), 35–56.Google Scholar
Raisch, S. and Krakowski, S. (2020). Artificial intelligence and management: The automation-augmentation paradox. Academy of Management Review, 46(1), 192–210.Google Scholar
Raman, R. and Bharadwaj, A. (2012). Power differentials and performative deviation paths in practice transfer: The case of evidence-based medicine. Organisation Science, 23(6), 1593–1621.Google Scholar
Ravishankar, M. N. (2015). The realignment of offshoring frame disputes (OFD): An ethnographic ‘cultural’ analysis. European Journal of Information Systems, 24(3), 234–246.Google Scholar
Ravishankar, M. N., Pan, S. and Myers, M. (2013). Information technology offshoring in India: A postcolonial perspective. European Journal of Information Systems, 22(4), 387–402.Google Scholar
Schuetz, S. and Venkatesh, V. (2020). The rise of human machines: How cognitive computing systems challenge assumptions of user-system interaction. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 21(2), 460–482.Google Scholar
Simeonova, B. (2018). Transactive memory systems and Web 2.0 in knowledge sharing: A conceptual model based on activity theory and critical realism. Information Systems Journal, 28(4), 592–611.Google Scholar
Simeonova, B. (2015). Power and knowledge within activity theory: Applying activity theory to knowledge sharing. Conference: European Group for Organizational Studies, Athens, Greece.Google Scholar
Simeonova, B., Galliers, R. D. and Karanasios, S. (2020). Strategic information systems and organisational power dynamics. In Galliers, R. D., Leidner, D. E. and Simeonova, B. (eds), Strategic Information Management: Theory and Practice, 5th edition. London and New York, NY: Routledge, pp. 221–238.Google Scholar
Simeonova, B., Karanasios, S., Galliers, R. D., Kelly, P. R. and Mishra, J. (2018a). Where is power in information systems research? Towards a framework. International Conference on Information Systems, San Francisco, CA.Google Scholar
Simeonova, B., Karanasios, S., Galliers, R. D., Kelly, P. R. and Mishra, J. (2018b). New ways of organising in collaborative knowledge sharing: Examining the effects of power. Conference: European Group for Organizational Studies, Tallinn, Estonia.Google Scholar
Smith, P. K., Jostmann, N. B., Galinsky, A. D. and Van Dijk, W. W. (2008). Lacking power impairs executive functions. Psychological Science, 19(5), 441–448.Google Scholar
Stein, M. K., Newell, S., Wagner, E. and Galliers, R. D. (2015). Coping with information technology: Mixed emotions, vacillation, and nonconforming use patterns. MIS Quarterly, 39(2), 367–392.Google Scholar
Stein, M. K., Wagner, E., Tierney, P., Newell, S. and Galliers, R. D. (2019). Datafication and the pursuit of meaningfulness in work. Journal of Management Studies, 56(3), 685–718.Google Scholar
Szulanski, G., Cappetta, R. and Jensen, R. C. (2004). When and how trustworthiness matters: Knowledge transfer and the moderating effect of causal ambiguity. Organisation Science, 15(5), 600–613.Google Scholar
Tarafdar, M., Maier, C., Laumer, S. and Weitzel, T. (2020). Explaining the link between technostress and technology addiction for social networking sites: A study of distraction as a coping behavior. Information Systems Journal, 30(1), 96–124.Google Scholar
Townley, B. (1993). Performance appraisal and the emergence of management. Journal of Management Studies, 30(2), 221–238.Google Scholar
Trauth, E. (2017). A research agenda for social inclusion in information systems. The Data Base for Advances in Information Systems, 48(2), 9–20.Google Scholar
Trauth, E., Joshi, K. D. and Yarger, L. K. (2018). Social inclusion in the information systems. Information Systems Journal, 28(6), 989–994.Google Scholar
Tsoukas, H. (1996). The firm as a distributed knowledge system: A constructionist approach. Strategic Management Journal, 17, 11–25.Google Scholar
Vaast, E. and Pinsonneault, A. (2021). When digital technologies enable and threaten occupational identity: The delicate balancing act of data scientists. MIS Quarterly, 45(3), 1087–1112.Google Scholar
Van Kleef, G. A., Oveis, C., Van Der Löwe, I., LuoKogan, A., Goetz, J. and Keltner, D. (2008). Power, distress, and compassion: Turning a blind eye to the suffering of others. Psychological Science, 19(12), 1315–1322.Google Scholar
Wagg, S., Simeonova, B. and Cooke, L. (2019). An activity theory perspective on digital inclusion. Conference proceedings: European Group for Organizational Studies, Edinburgh, UK.Google Scholar
Wakabayashi, D. (2018). Uber’s self-driving trucks hit the highway, but not local roads. The New York Times, www.nytimes.com/2018/03/06/technology/uber-self-driving-trucks.html.Google Scholar
Walsham, G. (2006). Doing interpretive research. European Journal of Information Systems, 15(3), 320–330.Google Scholar
Walsham, G. (1995). Interpretive case studies in IS research: Nature and method. European Journal of Information Systems, 4(2), 74–81.Google Scholar
Wang, S. and Noe, R. A. (2010). Knowledge sharing: A review and directions for future research. Human Resource Management Review, 20(2), 115–131.Google Scholar
Westcott Grant, K. (2018). Netflix’s data-driven strategy strengthens claim for ‘best original content’ in 2018. Forbes, www.forbes.com/sites/kristinwestcottgrant/2018/05/28/netflixs-data-driven-strategy-strengthens-lead-for-best-original-content-in-2018/?sh=13dcaa863a94.Google Scholar
Wilkesmann, U., Wilkesmann, M. and Virgillito, A. (2009). The absence of cooperation is not necessarily defection: Structural and motivational constraints of knowledge transfer in a social dilemma situation. Organization Studies, 30(10), 1141–1164.Google Scholar
Willem, A., Buelens, M. and Scarbrough, H. (2006). The role of inter-unit coordination mechanisms in knowledge sharing: A case study of a British MNC. Journal of Information Science, 32(6), 539–561.Google Scholar
Yang, T. and Maxwell, T. (2011). Information-sharing in public organisations: A literature review of interpersonal, intra-organisational and inter-organisational success factors. Government Information Quarterly, 28(2), 164–175.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×