For Peer Review

Hybridity, Consulting and e-Development: Inscribing New Practices of Value

Journal: Information Technology for Development

Manuscript ID: 05-09-0025-ITD-R.R1

Manuscript type: Research Article

Keywords: Public Policy for the IT Industry < IT Policy, IT Strategies for Development (national and sectoral) < IT Policy

Taylor & Francis

Information Technology for Development

For Peer Review

1

Hybridity, Consulting and e-Development:

Inscribing New Practices of Value

1. Introduction

The development field is said to have undergone considerable transformation over recent years

attributed in part to the ambitious Millennium Development Goals that were set by the UN

(Ballantyne, 2002). This has led, many suggest, to development agencies transforming their ways of

operating and thinking to resemble the discourses and methods of the private sector, including,

specifically, an intensified focus on measuring outcomes and performance. At the same time, there

has been an increasing emphasis on partnership between development agencies, governments and the

private sector as a key means to drive international development. The focus upon partnership from the

late 1990s onwards was considered to be an acknowledgement that markets cannot alone bring about

development. Global development requires sharing good management practice where lessons from the

private and public sector can be deployed in the development sector.

This paper attends to the ways in which large private sector IT consultancies may come to shape the

possibilities for e-development. In examining this theme we will attend to the proprietary

methodologies that they employ and the ways in which donors, the sources of revenue for consultants,

are implicated in this. This has implications not only for the reconstitution of e-development practice,

but also for information technology for development (ICT4D) research. By e-development we mean

the use of information and communication technologies (ICTs) to support development (Heeks, 2002;

Avgerou, 2002). Thus more broadly we seek to better understand what constitutes the ways in which

e-development is being constructed. This encapsulates not only specific information and

communication technologies, which is often the focus of the e-development literature, but also all the

supporting activities, discourses and practices that contribute to their operation such as software

development, training and management consultants (Heeks, 2002). While much of the literature on

ICT4D to date has focussed on particular ICTs and / or have examined specific domains of e-

development such as in healthcare, economic development and in education very little of the ICT4D

literature has considered those supporting activities and practices and specifically private sector

management and IT consultancies and their proprietary methodologies. (Madon, 2000: 88) In this

sense we echo Silva and Westrup (2009) who argued in a recent edition of this journal that

“Frequently, ICT4D has restricted itself to what it identifies as the contribution of technologies to

development with other relationships being placed in a black box of context.”

While this paper will focus primarily on the role of IT consulting in the ongoing shaping of e-

development, we will contend that in understanding the ways in which IT consultants are positioning

themselves, it is crucial to understanding the shifting priorities of donor organisations, as they are the

ones that private sector consultancies will seek to secure their projects and revenue from. Donors of

Page 1 of 31

Taylor & Francis

Information Technology for Development

123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960

For Peer Review

2

development assistance are most typically national governments, groupings of national governments

or supra-national international organisations such as the World Bank, as well as some large not for

profit organisations that fund specific development organisations. Few industrialised countries meet

the UN’s 0.7 per cent of GDP as the minimum level for development aid. In this context, ICTs have

come to form a central platform for the development agenda as they are viewed by donors as a means

for developing countries to leapfrog the normal time period that industrialisation took in advanced

industrialised countries (Heeks, 2002; Walsham & Sahay, 2006; Walsham et al, 2007). We are able

to offer early insights into such change.

In order to better understand the role of private sector IT consultants in shaping e-development, our

paper has set out to answer the following three research questions: Most broadly, our paper has set out

to critically examine how upstream donor organisations are shaping the agenda of IT consulting in the

development sphere? Secondly, and more specifically, how large private sector IT consultancies are

seeking to position themselves in the e-development sector? And finally how may the methodologies

of private sector IT consultants come to inscribe new forms of development? To answer these three

research questions we draw upon primary empirical data collected at a multinational ICT consulting

company. We report on the development of a performance evaluation technique—what is termed the

Value Management Model (a pseudonym) or VMM—at the international development group of the

consultancy (Omega, a pseudonym). This performance evaluation model is to be deployed to manage

Omega’s development projects, and, significantly, also as a methodology that the consultancy can

provide to international development agencies so that they can evaluate their own development

initiatives.

Our paper is structured as follows. The next section outlines some of the key issues and trajectories

emerging in the development literature that are relevant to understanding our case. Following this, in

the third section we will outline some of the key ideas from actor-network theory, particularly a

concerns with hybrids that inform our analysis. Section four discusses methodology while the

following section outlines our empirical research site—Omega and the Value Management Model—

and describes consultancy’s concept of value and situates this is wider debates about public service

modernisation. The sixth section discusses the empirical findings in terms of the broader context of

development, the inscription of new forms of development value, legitimacy and emerging

approaches to consulting. Section seven connects our analysis to the concept of hybridity through an

analysis of Value Management in terms of knowledge, control and power. We conclude by suggesting

future research directions.

2. E-Development: Situating a Changing Context

Page 2 of 31

Taylor & Francis

Information Technology for Development

123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960

For Peer Review

3

This section reviews some of the key themes emerging with regard to the reformulation of the

international development sector with a focus on ICTs and the private sector.

2.1 Donors, NGOs and e-Development

Concerns with value—in different forms such as financial, social and environmental value and across

scales in terms of upward and downward accountability—are increasingly ubiquitous in development

contexts. One of the most significant changes in the development sector has been in relation to the

ways in which donors allocate funds to NGOs. It has become increasingly commonplace for a number

of states to pool their funding and then distribute it to one NGO to undertake the development projects

on their behalf. This has resulted in development institutions such as the World Bank positioning

themselves as being central in the development network through claims of being a knowledge broker

for development work (see Ballantyne, 2002). Consequently, donors also now take a much stronger

lead in framing the priorities for NGOs (Wallace et al., 2006). Madon (1999) argues that where

donors frame NGOs as implementers of their development projects then donors decide the problems

to be addressed (see also Gould, 2005). In a later publication she highlights how this conglomerate

approach to development has led to NGOs becoming more concerned with meeting the donors’

expectations than undertaking work that is crucial in specific developing contexts (Madon, 2000;

Lewis & Madon, 2004). Especially pertinent to this paper, Hulme (1994: 257) claims that the

expansion of NGOs throughout the 1980s have resulted in “the third sector is being encouraged to

restructure itself … into a contractor of national governments and international aid agencies”.

Donors have also been reported to have become increasingly concerned with seeking to make NGOs

more accountable for their “impacts.”While some have suggested the increased centrality of donors

has led to often excessive accountability upward and too little downward (Lewis and Madon, 2004;

Madon & Sahay, 2002), there is a view emerging that that evidence of the performance of NGOs has

been elusive—finding it especially difficult to prove that they have made a difference with regard to

more qualitative outcomes such as empowerment or equality (Lewis & Madon, 2004). This has led to

donors questioning the effectiveness of NGOs and hence increasing demand for more sophisticated

ways to measure the impact of activities through, for example, evidence-based programming and

evaluation.

Information and communication technologies are often a central strategic priority area for donors

(Walsham and Sahay, 2006) both in terms of the possibilities they provide for developing countries to

be able to participate in transnational economic, political and social networks (Thompson, 2004;

Sayed & Westrup, 2003), and also in relation to measuring performance. Indeed, Lewis & Madon

(2004) argue that ICTs have an important role to play in enhancing data about the performance of

NGOs and specific projects, and thus allowing for more accountability and performance

Page 3 of 31

Taylor & Francis

Information Technology for Development

123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960

For Peer Review

4

measurement. Silva and Westrup (2009) draw our attention to some of the critical management

studies work, most notably the work of Dar and Cooke (2008) and ask us to question “the certainties

of a market-based framework of development and the scope of a managerial set of recipes for

development”.

2.2 Partnership and Development

Many have argued that the broadening range of goals and targets associated with contemporary

development are exemplified in the UN Millennium Development Goals as leading to increasing

private sector involvement (Ballantyne, 2002; White & Black, 2004). Chattaway (1999) argues that

the private sector has an important role to play as they are able to share their experiences from

developed to developing countries and can assist in creating a stable competitive market (see also

Moore, 1999). Consultancies for their part are keen to engage in this work as it represents a new and

large source of funding. This has led to management discourses and frameworks becoming more

central in the practices of international development agencies (Veldon; 2002; Ballantyne, 2002).

It is worth noting that the increasing importance of partnerships is connected to the broader debate

about social capital. The concept of social capital in the development context refers to the

establishment of norms, trust and networks between many varied organisations that share an interest

in reforming and improving civil society (Harriss, 1999). However, social capital has come under

scrutiny from a number of writers as being a contested, slippery and all-inclusive term that is infused

with relations of power and control (see Harriss, 2001; Fine, 2003).

3. Theoretical Framework: Actor Network Theory and Hybridity

This section outlines the theoretical underpinnings that have formed the basis for our analysis of the

ways in which large private sector IT consulting organisations may come to shape future possibilities

for e-development. Actor Network Theory (ANT) posits that when tasks are being undertaken we

should consider the heterogeneous engineering (e.g. across social, technical and natural domains and

so on) that makes them possible. Networks themselves become stabilised and taken for granted when

the interests of actors are aligned over times and spaces (Law, 1992). This alignment involves

processes of translation. Translations are the modifications, deflections, betrayals, additions and

appropriations that displace subjects and objects into someone or something otherwise (Latour 1987:

267). In the context of our research ANT lends itself to assisting in understanding the translations that

are taking place in the e-development sector more generally, and between private sector IT

consultancies, donors and propriety methodologies more specifically, This working out thus provides

Page 4 of 31

Taylor & Francis

Information Technology for Development

123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960

For Peer Review

5

an account of development in the making. In this sense ANT provides a strong conceptual

underpinning to assist in answering our three research questions.

Callon (1986) discerns four moments of translation: Problematisation, where a focal actor seeks to

define the problems to all other actors in their terms, and by doing so, establishes their own

superiority. Interessment involves enticing other actors to undertake the roles that they identify for

them. Enrolment refers to the actual undertaking of such roles; in this process of translation, the

certain actors seek to establish what constitutes an Obligatory Passage Point, through which all other

actors must pass through, so that the particular actors becomes indispensible in the network.

Inscriptions are central in establishing particular courses of actions as indispensible. Inscription refers

to the processes of creating a technical artefact that is aligned closely to the focal actor’s interests and

through doing so, serves to ensure their centrality to the network. Examples of inscriptions include

policy documents, performance management models and software. Through such processes, focal

actors seek to make their dominance in the network irreversible (see also Walsham, 1997: Monteiro,

2000). Thus, in the context of our research focus, we might say that in order to answer our research

questions we want to understand how the e-development actor network is being reconstituted by the

emergence of large multi-national conglomerates of donors, the centrality of NGOs and the increasing

role that multinational IT consultants may have in shaping this.

A further important, though often overlooked, tenet of ANT is Hybridity. Latour (1993:50) argues that

though hybrids are all pervasive we tend to view the world through binary schemas (developed versus

developing, for instance); though this has a utility of action, Latour claims that this does not reflect the

way the world operates in practice. Instead he suggests we should best conceive of the world as co-

constitutive entanglements. Watson and Shove (2008) highlight that practices are located neither in

the subject or the object, but through distributed practices that enlist and circulate agency. Such hybrid

connections are not guaranteed, however, and therefore active work is required to bring heterogeneous

elements together over times and spaces—for, in other words, the network to hold and stabilise (Elam,

1999).

Hybrids signify the invention and the emergence of new ways acting where “new realities are created

out of dreams and schemes of diverse agents and experts based in a multiplicity of locales” (Miller

and O’Leary, 1994: 120-1) as much as hierarchical relations within specific domains. Put in these

terms, hybrids denote not just the inter-connections of established entities; they are also the immanent

condition for new ways of acting, thinking and intervening. In the sections that follow we will we

draw upon the concept of the hybrid to develop our analysis of the emergence of the Value

Management Model (VMM) at Omega. We will describe the entangled practices of donors, private

sector consultants, local actors and non human actors, most notably the value management

Page 5 of 31

Taylor & Francis

Information Technology for Development

123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960

For Peer Review

6

methodology. We will contend that this entanglement can be conceived of as hybrid practices that

comprise of changes in knowledge, technologies of control and power relations. We will argue that

this is not an intentional outcome necessarily but represents the ways in which different actors within

the e-development network become co-constituted—with many intended and unintended

consequences.

4. Methodology

In order to critically examine the ways in which IT consulting organisations are shaping e-

development, our study of Omega’s Development Group (DG) is rooted within the interpretive case

study tradition. Such epistemological and ontological underpinnings seek to understand the social

phenomena being researched through the perspectives of the actors, and how the differing meanings

attributed to work are understood and constructed (Klein and Myers, 1999; Orlikowski & Baroudi,

1991; Walsham, 1995; Orlikowski, 1996). Such a methodological approach is consistent with our

theoretical commitments (ANT) and lends itself to qualitative research methods (Klein & Myers,

1999; Walsham, 1993). In order to investigate the ways in which large multinational IT consulting

companies are coming to shape the possibilities for e-development we undertook some initial primary

and secondary empirical work. Access was secured through an associate of the authors who worked

for Omega at the time. Our associate had also previously worked for Omega’s Development Group

on a number of occasions. Thus he was able to not only introduce us to the head of the DG, but also

some other staff who had worked or currently work for the Development Group. Detailed access was

negotiated with the head of the Develpment Group. In return for access, we agreed to feedback the

findings to the Director of DG on the condition that the anonymity of interviewees would be

guaranteed.

Primary research was undertaken at Omega from January 2006 to January 2007. This comprised of

semi-structured interviews with 12 staff either working for or associated with the Development

Group, and included the Director of the Development Group, operational staff and managers and

consultants in the UK and US who had been part of a DG project. We also interviewed a senior

member of staff working who had experience in developing the Value Management Model for public

service organisations in the US. Our initial interviews tended to be quite broad in scope and gradually

as familiarity with the context was gained and similar issues emerged the questions became more

focused. Semi-structured questions sought to examine the reasons for the Value Management Model

being adopted, the history of the model and the issues that may have arisen from it being disembedded

from its public sector origins and revised and reembeded in an e-development context. We were also

keen to understand how Omega through the expansion of development group might be achieved.

Page 6 of 31

Taylor & Francis

Information Technology for Development

123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960

For Peer Review

7

Here we focussed on discussions around the increasing scale of the projects they wanted to get

involved in, and diversifying the client base to include more NGOs. Each interview lasted at least an

hour. A number of consultants and managers were interviewed more than once either to continue

where the prior discussion left off or to ask further questions based on our analysis of the previous

interview, or to discuss issues and themes that were emerging that were relevant to them. Interviews

were usually recorded and detailed notes were made, with sections of interviews transcribed, after

interviews to elicit emerging and common themes. The authors then compared their analysis of their

field notes and worked up analytical themes based on their theoretical underpinnings of actor network

theory and hybridity. It was here that the centrality of donors in shaping private sector IT consulting

practices become fundamental. It was also here that the issue of hybridity, a concept within ANT,

became central to our analysis.

In conjunction with the primary interviews we were given access to the Development Group’s internal

documentation. This included information on DGs structure and operations, but also internal

documentation about Omega’s Value Management Methodology for public services and DG’s

strategy for scaling up its operations from a non-for-profit to profit making part of Omega. We also

made extensive use of publicly available secondary material such as government policy reports in the

UK and the US on public value, white papers on value management and creation, and proceedings

from value management conferences in the UK. Given that Omega has significant research links with

high-profile universities in the US we also reviewed the academic and practitioner literature on the

Public Value and tracked the transnational circulation of ideas and practices through the formation of

formal and informal links between Omega and universities in the US and UK.

5. Research Context

This section has two purposes. It introduces Omega’s Development Group (DG) and specifically their

approach, vision and rationale for introducing impact assessment in the form of a Value Management

Model

5.1 Background: Omega’s Development Group

Omega is a major international management and technology consultancy employing over 100,000

people and has offices in 48 countries at the time the research was conducted. Omega established its

Development Group (DG) as a not-for-profit initiative late in 2001, it was piloted in 2002 and a

formal structure was established in 2004 including a global roll-out. The organisational structure, at

the time the research was conducted, is made up of Director who reports to the DG board, an

operations division that is responsible for internal and external marketing, recruitment, training and

Page 7 of 31

Taylor & Francis

Information Technology for Development

123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960

For Peer Review

8

financial management, and a field programmes division responsible for setting up projects, project

management and coordination.

DG “provides high quality business and technology consulting to the international development

sector, working with charitable organisations that wouldn’t normally have access to these skills”

(Omega, undated document). DG’s mission is to help their clients in the development sector achieve

their goals by adopting leading-edge business and technology. Since it was established DG has

completed over a hundred projects across Africa, Asia, Latin America, and Eastern Europe. Their

clients have been mainly international NGOs such as CARE, Plan and Action Aid, but also national

development agencies such as the UK’s DFID, the UNDP, the World Bank and the African

Development Foundation. They have undertaken projects in areas relating to IT systems analysis and

design, supply chain, leadership development, knowledge management and performance

measurement. These are all areas that Omega has long established expertise in, albeit in the private

and public sector context. In order for the projects to be non-profit making, Omega staff accept a 50

per cent salary reduction for the duration of their time spent working on a DG project. Consultants

usually work on DG projects for between three to six months and then return to their regular job at

Omega. A partner is assigned to the field team to oversee a specific project.

5.2 Omega’s Development Group’s Problematisation of Impact Assessment

As a consequence of the growth in the number of projects being undertaken, and their increasing

scale, the founder and director of DG had become increasingly concerned that they could not provide

evidence of the impact of their projects, and sought to make impact assessment central to DGs

strategic aims:

“I would like to see us to move from opportunistic and ad hoc consulting and technology services to

the non-profit and development sector to get a little bit more strategic in terms of deeper relationships

with organisations that we really think we can impact rather than working broadly with loads of

people.”

Specifically, he was interested in impact assessment in three domains of activity. First, he was keen to

account for the impact DG projects had had in relation to wider socio-economic issues such as

poverty reduction or improvement of living conditions in the areas where DG works. Second, he was

keen to explore the specific impact that their projects had had on the client organisation, and finally,

he was also interested to account for the impact DG had had on Omega itself. In relation to the latter,

DG was marketed as an attractive option for staff considering joining the company, and as a way to

Page 8 of 31

Taylor & Francis

Information Technology for Development

123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960

For Peer Review

9

highlight the firm’s corporate responsibility. Importantly, he considers impact assessment to be a

crucial issue for DG and NGOs alike. He anticipates that:

“I think these demands will increase on us to demonstrate our impact … there will be more rigour and

focus on looking on outcomes than there has been in the past. So that’s really the problem, it’s a

future problem that I am anticipating.”

The information that DG currently has about the impact it has had through its consulting projects is

described as being ‘very light, very limited, very ad hoc’. The only information they have about

impact assessment stems from the personal experiences of the consultants, and through a rudimentary

questionnaire that clients complete upon the conclusion of a project. The questionnaire is based on

similar one that Omega uses for its commercial projects in developed countries. There is no

information about the wider socio-economic impact of the projects they have undertaken. Neither

does DG have ongoing relations or follow up their interventions to gauge medium- to long-term

impacts.

5.3 From New Public Management to Public Value: The Value Management Model

The development of the VMM, DG’s preferred impact assessment model, can be situated in policy

and academic debates relating to public service modernisation and development management over the

past two decades. The emergence of new public management (NPM) has been central to the

emergence of these debates. NPM denotes a range of government-led policies deployed from the

1980s onwards, aimed at changing governance practices, improving efficiency and establishing a

flexible organisational structure for the provision of public services, but is also connected to forms of

organising in the not-for-profit or third sector. Commentaries on the “managerialisation” of the public

sector abound whilst less has been written on the emergence of managerialism in the development

sector (but see Jomo and Fine, 2006; Roberts et al., 2005; Teegen et al., 2004; Kerr 2008).

More recently NPM approaches have also been problematised by Public Value (Moore, 1995).

Debates surrounding public sector modernisation have been based on particular interpretations of the

relationship and interaction between elected politicians and senior public managers (see Blaug et al.,

2006). Principle-agent theory, for example, regards governance structures as both enabling and

constraining the actions of public managers. The political system creates fixed, bureaucratic top-down

governance structures and through this holds managers accountable through these structures.

Politicians, as principals and primary drivers of change, ultimately control public managers as agents

through constitutional powers such as oversight, appointment, budgeting and legislation (Whynes,

1993).

Page 9 of 31

Taylor & Francis

Information Technology for Development

123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960

For Peer Review

10

For our purposes, NPM and more recently Value Management can be analysed as hybrids in

formation between strategy and policy making and operational activities of development assistance

(see also Kerr 2008). In terms of development this denotes the linkage between donors (such as

USAID or DFID in the UK) and contracted, third sector organisations; managing these inter-

organisational relationships is important because NGOs are accountable to those that fund their

operations. The central tenet of the NPM approaches that emerged was the premise that the lessons

learnt from the corporate sector could be better could be applied across public sectors and the third

sector. Similarly, creating value could be achieved by adopting the management, organisational and

financial systems used by corporations (see Newman 2001).

Recent debates on the role of the public sector, particularly in the US and the UK, have widened from

preoccupations about transparent and accountable governance to the role of the public sector in

fostering an engaged civil society and commitment to public action. Moore (1995, 2000) argues that

participation in the allocation of public resources is a means to engage citizens, build trust in public

institutions and measure performance. Kelly et al., (2002) set out two key dimensions of public sector

value: firstly, citizen consultation and public engagement, and, secondly, measurement of outcomes.

Value management draws upon ideas of liberal democratic citizenship and attempts to strengthen

community and civil society across developed and developing countries. Moore (1995) proposed that

value can be understood as strategy to produce outcomes that meet “users” needs and to re-orientate

public bodies or NGOs away from means to consider the ends to which activity is focused (e.g.

health, sustainability). This involves co-production or collaboration (that is, involvement of users) and

competition (different definitions of value) as the means through which value can be negotiated and

realised. The role of managers is to help build a collective, shared notion of the interest (Moore

1995). Accountability requires managers to attend to not only market relations but also with

community values, professional standards and citizens’ interests (Denhardt et al, 2001).

Whilst the concept of public value is associated with the public sector, for Moore (2000: 186) the

distinctiveness of the public sector can also be applied to the not-for-profit or third sector, stating:

“The principle value delivered by the non-profit sector is the achievement of its social purpose and the

satisfaction of the donors’ desires to contribute to the cause that the organisation embodies”

(emphasis added).

In terms of managing value the public sector and the third sector can be understood in similar terms

because both secure revenue from ‘people who are (voluntarily or involuntarily) paying for external

Page 10 of 31

Taylor & Francis

Information Technology for Development

123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960

For Peer Review

11

benefits to people other than themselves rather than customers who buy things for their own benefit’

(Moore, 2000: 189). NGOs create value because they can act as a channel for individuals’ and

societies’ aspirations. For Moore (2000: 202) this means that value is also created ‘upstream’ and this

means that ‘the encounter with donors is value creating, as is the encounter with clients’. This

formulation of value also emphasises ‘achieving positive social and environmental outcomes’ and to

do this, argues Moore (1995), there needs to be engagement with relevant stakeholders and in

particular with the range of actors who might contribute to decisions on NGO funding (Stoker, 2006:

47).

The VMM (with worldwide patents pending) at Omega is premised upon Moore’s (1995) conception

of value management. Specifically, the VMM measures quantitative and qualitative performance

against two dimensions: outcomes (the purpose, aims or social achievements) and cost-effectiveness

(with a view to minimising costs for the agency and citizens).

“In the private sector, value is generally defined as the total return to shareholders. The shareholder

value methodology states that value is created as a combination of growth and spread…. Although

this definition is not applicable directly to the public sector, it is possible to learn lessons from … and

apply them to the government sector…. Agencies can isolate individual outcomes and determine

which factors are the most meaningful for driving overall value” (Omega, undated: 3).

Omega’s definition of outcomes follows Moore’s (1995) concern with the value creation citizens

receive even if they are not direct recipients of services: “Our approach looks at any public service as

something that is of value to all citizens as singular beneficiaries. We understand the value a service

produces as the value generated both directly for users as well as indirectly for non-users who

nevertheless benefit from the operation of the service” (Omega, undated: 4)

Our research suggests that the director of DG is evaluating an intervention technique for NGOs based

on the VMM. The director believes that with some adaptation the VMM can be offered to NGOs and

other development organisations interested in evaluating the outcomes of their activity with a view to

improving their ability to measure outcomes:

“I mentioned our clients have to do impact assessment and I think that’s an area where we can help

them as consultants, to come with the processes, the methodologies and the tools to do that effectively

… I think a lot of the thinking behind the VMM tool and the intellectual property behind it could be

adapted by DG to come up with an offering, a generic offering that could be a good line of business, a

good consulting non-profit revenue stream for us.”

Page 11 of 31

Taylor & Francis

Information Technology for Development

123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960

For Peer Review

12

The emphasis on managing outcomes as opposed to solely tracking the outputs of an institution is a

major selling point for the VMM, as a senior manager specialising in the public sector explained:

“The question is if we want to help governments and agencies to become high performance

organisations, how would we know that they are performing well. That is the motivation to create the

VMM.”

The VMM is a technique to help organisations to find a balance between the pressure for increasing

outcomes and reducing cost. According to Omega’s literature on the VMM, it is a technique for

measuring and evaluating. It does not judge the performance of a particular institution as appropriate

or inappropriate; it provides evidence of outcomes against costs. Rather the VMM “provides a

baseline for comparing performance of a particular government agency over time and/or compared to

other agencies.” (Omega VMM, 2006).

Debates within Omega about the VMM centre upon defining relevant outcomes for development

organisations. According to the senior manager the VMM usually works with three to seven

outcomes. In a pilot study of a police department in the USA, outcomes included, for example,

reducing crime, investigating crime and maintaining public safely. There are usually three building

blocks that are used for defining the outcomes. These are the stakeholders (government, welfare

recipients, citizens, agencies, and so forth) and their expectations. A further building block is the

mission statement of the organisation, and another is the core function of the organisation. Usually the

different outcomes of an organisation are not of equal importance and this is something the

organisation decide upon. Outcomes are therefore weighted before they are used in the VMM. Once

the outcomes are established and weighted corresponding indicators need to be established in order to

monitor the outcomes. For example, in the case of reducing crime in the pilot police study, a metric

may be the number of days between a murder per 1000 citizens, or the number of days between thefts

per 1000 citizens.

While some thought that the VMM would work equally well in the development sector, some were

more sceptical. One consultant considered the main question to be whether one could define common

outcome models across specific development sectors in which DG is working, which would then

allow to compare the outcome of an organisation with the average of the sector. Some expressed the

difficultly of filtering out the specific contribution of DG against wider socio-economic outcomes

achieved by other institutions. A number of those we interviewed articulated how the work of DG was

mostly strategic and thus direct outcomes and impacts are difficult to measure and are long-term. The

director of DG describes this in relation to work that DG has done with a mobile phone operator in

Bangladesh:

Page 12 of 31

Taylor & Francis

Information Technology for Development

123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960

For Peer Review

13

“I know that the work we are doing in mobile phones in Bangladesh alone is bringing technology to

480 villages in Bangladesh which is 80 percent of the rural population in Bangladesh and giving them

access to this kind of business in a box. Now, that’s on a huge scale in terms of millions of people but

I don’t know how many jobs will be created, I don’t know how the GDP of Bangladesh will be

increased. If the GDP of Bangladesh goes up 1 per cent the next year, is any of that attributable to

what we have done?”

The director of DG, despite some difficulties of operationalising the technique, remained enthusiastic

about developing the VMM into NGO impact assessment with a view of offering this as a consultancy

service to clients.

6. Discussion: Translating e-development

This section examines the ways in which impact assessment specifically, and the inclusion of the

private sector more generally, may be implicated in reshaping e-development. We argue that our case

of one of the leading consulting companies in the ICT sector offers an insight into the ways in which

e-development is currently being constructed. In ANT terms we suggest that the current shaping of

development can be understood as being at a stage of intense hybridisation, where the different NGOs

and the private sector are aligning themselves with donors’ expectations. Table 1 highlights the key

analytical issues.

Concept Manifestation Problematisation

and Interessment • Complexity of e-development, need for collaboration and partnership

• Millennium Development Goals

• Value and impact assessment

• Donors as focal actor

• Social capital upstream and downstream

• New market for Omega

• NGOs lack expertise and scale to measure value comprehensively over

space and time Translation and

Enrolment • Private sector expertise

• Conglomerates of donors

• Reforms in NGOs beyond service provision

• University origins in the US

• Government interest in public value, particularly in the UK Inscription • Management methodologies become an obligatory passage point for

development projects

• Measurement and comparability over time and between agencies

become central as sector-wide impact analysis becomes more important

Page 13 of 31

Taylor & Francis

Information Technology for Development

123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960

For Peer Review

14

Table 1: The emerging context of e-development: Value management as an Obligatory Passage Point

in e-development.

6.1 Establishing Development Trajectories

This first subsection begins with a discussion of the ways in the VMM model may be located with the

broad context of donors and NGOs. We will suggest that such a model is well placed to problematise

e-development. Omega’s DG is concerned to establish longer-term partnerships and this can be

analysed in terms of the wider dynamics in the development sector. Partnership in the global

development policy arena increasingly means ‘support for sector-wide reforms’ (DFID, 2000: 93),

focusing on poverty alleviation and enabling markets to function (DFID, 1997). Aligning the

provision of services to the development sector is one way in which DG can attempt to secure external

legitimacy. In this way, DGs private sector consultancy initiatives can be understood as afforded by a

range of national and international institutions, which in a significant way define the scope and scale

of its opportunities. Understood in actor network theoretical terms, if DG is to establish a successful

partnership model it needs to first convince its prospective NGO partners that impact assessment and

value measurement is a problematic that is crucial for their ongoing legitimacy and operation. Linking

into the attainment of the development goals, commitments all NGOs have sought to attain, means

there is an established and legitimate baseline for performance measurement (Ballantyne, 2002).

Through the development of the VMM, and specifically by linking it to development goals, this

provides the potential for DG to establish itself as the obligatory passage point in defining what

projects are considered valuable, and what is considered valuable activity while undertaking such

projects. An obligatory passage point requires other actors to pass through a specific route and thus

makes itself indispensible.

By aligning itself with the development goals, it becomes difficult for specific NGOs to argue against

the aims and scope of DGs offering. Further, through their own links with international development

agencies and governments, mobilising allies who support such an agenda would further enhance DGs

network. Thus impact assessment is very much central to the new discourse of development. In other

words, the VMM locates itself and allies itself closely with the discourse of modernising

development, meaning it would be very hard for any prospective client to argue against impact

assessment linked tightly to development goals. It is very much bound up with ideas around social

capital and partnership (Fine, 2003; Harriss, 1999). Thus as well as the specific development goals,

the aligning with a discourse of social capital, value and development favoured by donors also adds to

the enrolment and irreversibility. Being able to occupy such a position will very much depend upon

them enrolling the large NGOs and, importantly, their donors. Thus it is important to recognise that

with regard to problematisation and interessment, this has to be aligned to the focus of the network,

Page 14 of 31

Taylor & Francis

Information Technology for Development

123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960

For Peer Review

15

the donors, and those ideas that are central to them (Lewis & Madon, 2004). As the literature review

pointed out, a similar trajectory occurred with regard to the transformation of public management

where the political parties rather than the civil servants were enrolled as central allies in establishing

the centrality of the private sector (Hood & Jackson, 1991; Heeks, 2002).

It is also important to consider that such a methodology has its origins in a leading US university, and

thus has already enrolled actors into a network of consultancy firms, research centres, publishers and

leading US universities those transverse national boundaries (Thrift, 1997). The VMM gains its

durability from the potential of linking of diverse sites of authority and expertise so that is becomes

what has been termed a ‘soft-law’ of governance that cannot be ignored. Here we are suggesting that

by aligning themselves with a legitimate network such as Harvard University, where the model was

originally derived, this further adds to the durability and legitimacy of the network that the VMM

rests upon, and makes it more possible to enrol other actors. In the context of increasing competition

for fewer development resources such forms of governance become increasingly important, but yet

this still does not account for the novel forms of value with which the VMM is associated. Being able

to identify where resources have been used to the greatest effect and most efficiency then becomes of

increasing importance, in the context of ambitions to increase the scale of development projects and

the centrality of conglomerate donor funding. If DG are not able to align themselves with the donors,

then there would be no partnership.

6.2 Inscribing New Forms of Value into Development

As well as looking at the ways in which different allies are enrolled into a network, actor network

theory also sensitises us to how such material objects may become durable. As Law (1992:3) notes,

“Thoughts are cheap but they don't last long, and speech lasts very little longer. But when we start to

perform relations—and in particular when we embody them in inanimate materials such as texts and

buildings—they may last longer.” Thus for DG seeking to establish itself in the e-development sector,

from Law’s perspective would be to embody a set of relations in durable materials. By doing this it

would make the network of relationships more stable as opposed to it being purely based on

consulting discourse. By establishing the VMM as a way to evaluate the impact of development

projects, this may provide a way for DG to establish itself as being the organisation that is best placed

to undertake specific impact evaluations and importantly, from the perspective of donors, be able to

compare and contrast the performance of different NGOs and different projects within specific NGOs.

Thus the VMM may be seem to be a central aspect of reshaping evaluation, and, as such, is central in

shaping what may come to constitute e-development.

Page 15 of 31

Taylor & Francis

Information Technology for Development

123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960

For Peer Review

16

The regular evaluation of projects and interventions is already well established within the

development sector, but as we have set out in the previous section, the VMM inscribes specific ways

of seeing and acting that has novel features. As such evaluation based on the VMM constitutes certain

forms of success and failure in particular contexts. Inscription in ANT refers to a how technical

artefacts may be created that can protect an actor's interests (Latour, 1992). This leads to other actors’

possibilities for action being configured by such an artefact. Akrich (1992: 208) describes

innovation—or creating new forms of value in our terms—as a process of inscription that culminates

in particular ‘scripts’ and ‘scenarios’. With DG, a significant international ICT consulting

organisation is seeking to increase its influence on development through performance evaluation, this

may start to change the nature of e-development projects, which become far more focussed on

achieving identifiable impacts through the lens of the VMM. If it becomes sufficiently durable, the

VMM, and especially the notion of value assessment may provide a new form of control and

coordination, and, in so doing, has the propensity to form an immutable mobile that positions itself as

the mechanism for distinguishing good value from poor value development initiatives. Of course, the

degree to which it becomes immutable depends very much on whether DG can secure the allegiance

of donor agencies. In this sense this resonates with Lewis & Madon (2004) when they argue that

there is excessive accountability upwards and too little downwards.

As the VMM was, at the time the primary research was conducted, still to be implemented in the

development context, we can analyse the VMM in terms of a number of inscribed interests.

Inscriptions through a technology are central if specific actors are to make their interests durable.

Inscription in the context of DG refers to the VMM as being an artefact that would represent their

interests (Latour, 1992). Perhaps most significantly is the emphasis upon the ‘stock of social and civic

capital’ that NGOs produce for their donors. Moore (2000: 202) connects this to Putnam’s (1993)

work on social capital to suggest that NGOs create social value because “to the extent, then, that non-

profit organizations created a world where neighbours helped neighbours…. This, too, happens

upstream where the organization is amassing resources, in the production process when volunteers are

involved in helping clients, and downstream where the food and clothing [for example] are delivered

to needy clients”.

What Moore is suggesting is that supporting the well-being of donors, whether they be organisational

and individual, is a legitimate concern for NGOs. It is an appropriate activity for NGOs because it

helps to secure ongoing resources from donors who are engaged in a network of reciprocity with the

NGO. But more significant is Moore’s (2000: 202) claim that giving to those in need provides a basis

for ‘channelling individual aspiration and the creation of social capital’.

Page 16 of 31

Taylor & Francis

Information Technology for Development

123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960

For Peer Review

17

The recognition that the satisfaction of donors is an important feature of NGOs work, and one that

should be measured through techniques such as the VMM, inscribes a view that suggests that the

benefits to those who donate is as important as those who are the recipients of donors’ resources. The

VMM can, then, be conceived in terms of not only boundary spanning between Omega and its trans-

national network, but also in terms of constructing new forms of value for development—specifically

value defined in terms of the ‘authorising environment’ or ‘focusing up’ (Moore 1995) of NGOs work

as an important end in itself. In Moore’s (1995) formulation the authorising environment included

political actor, overhead agencies, the media, interest groups and courts. In the not for profit sector it

would comprise of individual and institutional donors, national development agencies such as DFID

and USAID, international organisations such as the UN, the World Bank and the International

Federation of the Red Cross.

Evaluating the process and outcomes in terms of value becomes important for sustaining the NGOs

funding and for demonstrating appropriate governance processes and practices. Upstream impacts that

the VMM measure provides a further means to demonstrate the impacts or outcomes of NGOs

activities in terms of expanded range of capabilities, in Sen’s (2005) terms—albeit capabilities

inscribed onto the donors of revenues rather than those typically considered the receivers of

development initiatives.

The VMM model is, we have argued, originally derived from the broadening of a shareholder value

model to public management contexts. More directly, the VMM was derived from public sector

consulting engagements in the US and the UK, and, as such, it is also important to attend to how such

a model may well first introduce the assumptions underpinning public sector modernisation and

consulting, and, second, the assumptions of consultancies located in advanced, developed economies

(see also Sahay & Walsham, 1995; Barrett et al., 2001; Walsham, 2001). In terms of the public

management, the vast majority of the revenues come from taxation and effectiveness is the impact on

citizens.

The development context, by contrast, comprised of a greater number of actors. Development projects

are funded by advanced industrialised countries and individual donations, but impacts occur in a

developing country on groups designated as ‘beneficiaries’. Because those who receive development

assistance are ‘beneficiaries’ this raises concerns about approaches being ‘top-down’. Gardner and

Lewis (1996: 106) describe how ‘the notion of the target group is closely related to the controlling

urge embodied in the idea of ‘projected development’. They continue that the language of

beneficiaries encourages a view of groups as ‘variables’ to be managed by project staff with policy

formulation and decisions about how to evaluate projects decided elsewhere. Thus, the VMM may

transplant assumptions about how value should be understood from its private and public sector origin

Page 17 of 31

Taylor & Francis

Information Technology for Development

123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960

For Peer Review

18

to developing contexts. This will, we suggest, further compound the dilemmas of such practices being

far removed from the development context itself—the VMM is a technique that formalises a

multiplicity of actors, both downstream and upstream, as legitimately concerned with impact.

6.3 Gaining Legitimacy and Changing Forms of Consulting

We have argued that Omega’s DG is attempting to align its consultancy interventions to global

development policies whilst drawing upon well-established methodologies deployed by the parent

consultancy for managing public value. Since it was established, DG has not had to make a significant

profit, but instead to ensure that they did not make a loss. This more charitable aspect was evident in

how consultants take a 50 per cent reduction in their salary for the duration of a project. Here we

discuss the ways in which the adoption of the VMM is shaped and inscribed by the socio-political

context within Omega. We argue it was also important for DG to enrol the board of Omega if it was to

expand in the e-development sector.

DG is concerned to secure internal legitimacy not least because it is a subsidised part of the Omega.

At the time the research was conducted DG was part of the Omega’s worldwide corporate social

responsibility initiatives. Most of Omega’s CSR policies originate from its headquarters in the US.

The Development Group, in contrast, originated and remains based in London. As we have already

mentioned, DG was started from the ‘bottom up’ in Omega, largely as the outcome of the founder’s

experience during a sabbatical project within the consultancy. The changing identity of DG is,

similarly, the outcome of efforts internal to DG. The director of DG can be described as a ‘policy

entrepreneur’. Hansen and Salskov-Ivensen (2005: 157) describe how such focal actors play important

roles in acting on behalf of new forms of organising. They ‘broker their knowledge to their potential

patrons and political allies’. This we argue is central to interessment, where DG needed to entice

Omega’s executive board to back their expansion.

DG is not a central part of the Omega’s corporate responsibility initiatives and neither does the

founder and others associated with DG consider it to be a CSR initiative. Notwithstanding this,

stakeholder approaches are one of the primary techniques in the CSR literature (see Waddock 2001).

One of the common critiques of CSR activities is that they are usually not integrated into the strategy

of a firm and this is in part how the director of DG wishes to reorient DG away from an association

with CSR. In order to construct DG as integral to Omega, the services that it provides are increasingly

framed in terms of a new and innovative form of consultancy provision for Omega—one which is

connected to an emerging market for consultants’ services in developing countries and a different way

of managing staff internally. It is articulated as different from existing ways of organising and

different from other consultancy services Omega offers.

Page 18 of 31

Taylor & Francis

Information Technology for Development

123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960

For Peer Review

19

Boundary making activity is an important dimension of DGs efforts to transform the content and

context of its interventions. At the time the research was conducted, this involved constructing

organisational practices at Omega as needing to be updated—as individuals demand different sorts of

career opportunities (including working in developing countries), as NGOs’ transparency and

legitimacy is scrutinised and as transnational companies seek new markets in developing countries.

Adopting the VMM for use in a new context is significant because it aligns DG with the type of

consultancy interventions that Omega already deploys in other sectors; it marks DG as more integral

to Omega than CSR activities. This is especially the case with consulting, where evidence indicates

that it is unusual for consultants to start from a blank piece of paper. Instead they appropriate previous

practices and reports and seek to modify them to the local context of use. Thus, in line with Fincham

(1999) it is important when making sense of the emerging context of development to look at the

internal power relations of private sector consulting organisations, as they are undoubtedly involved

in power relations of their own. One instance of this power is how DG aligns itself with the possibility

of reusing many of Omega’s existing consultancy services whilst simultaneously distancing itself

from Omega current consultancy services.

7. Hybridity and e-Development

Based on our actor-network theory informed analysis of the ways in which an ICT consultancy

company may be implicated in shaping the context of e-development, this penultimate section will

offer some concluding insights into e-development more broadly. Our research has indicated that e-

development should be conceived of something that is constantly ‘in the making’ (Hewitt, 2000). At

present the e-development sector is undergoing considerable transformation. This is due to the

increased scale of e-development projects being undertaken by NGOs, the increased power of

‘conglomerates of donors’, and also the emergence of private sector IT consultancies and their

methodologies in transforming e-development. This has disrupted the stability of the e-development

actor-network and allowed for its reconfiguration. As illustrated in Figure 1, we suggest that e-

development can be conceived of a hybrid practice comprising of changes in knowledge, technologies

of control and power relations. Due to the increasing importance of donors and the interest of large IT

consulting companies in the IT4D space such themes may also come to shape future ICT4D research.

Each of these themes within hybridity will be discussed below.

Page 19 of 31

Taylor & Francis

Information Technology for Development

123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960

For Peer Review

20

Figure 1: e-Development as a Hybrid Practice

7.1 Knowledge and hybridity

With regard to changes in knowledge, the emergence of the VMM represents a melding of knowledge

from different sectors and with different histories. Links between Omega, government policy-makers

in the UK and an Ivory League university in the US are constitutive of this melding activity. Melding

occurs through a series of translations of texts, practices and knowledge claims stemming from the

private sector, the public sector and the e-development sector. As discussed, in contrast to the private

sector practices focusing on competition (specific marketplaces and niches), public sector knowledge

is concerned with coordinating the generation and allocation of resources wisely for the best of

citizens as a whole (Chattaway, 1999; Harriss, 1999; Ciborra & Navarra, 2005). Though they serve a

great diversity of citizens with very different requirements, as does the e-development sector, one

might argue that the complexity of the e-development sector, or civil society more broadly, is greater

while the infrastructure from which to operate is not as up-to-date (Harris, 2001). Further, we have a

melding of knowledge that has its context in the developed and developing world. Thus we suggest

that we should come to understand e-development as a melding of knowledge’s with different origins,

rationalities, expectations and priorities. With reference to Harris (1999) we argue that it is becoming

a hybrid configuration of knowledge pertaining to market mechanisms and ideas, statist modes of

accountability and administration and civil society organisational ideals around identification to

common goals values and needs.

7.2 Technologies of control and hybridity

In relation to the durability of the codification of knowledge, we suggest that the emergence of new

management and information technologies of control as being centrally shaped by hybrid practices

(Hasselbladh & Kallinikos, 2000; Law, 1992). Literature highlights that once knowledge becomes

codified through such a methodology, then it becomes more durable, and as such more difficult to

untangle (Hasselbladh & Kallinikos, 2000). This occurs through processes of purification, where

HYBRID PRACTICES Technologies

of Control Power

Relations

Forms of Knowledge

Page 20 of 31

Taylor & Francis

Information Technology for Development

123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960

For Peer Review

21

hybridised contexts (i.e. the public and development sector or donors and recipients) are separated out

as distinct zones that make hybridised roots of practices inaccessible (see Frenkel and Shenhav,

2006). In our research we witnessed the beginnings of an internal purification process, to use ANT

terminology, with the Development Group articulating its innovative practices, with DG as a ‘new

model’ of consultancy for Omega, as distinct from other activities within the organisation.

The concept of hybridity should not, however, be taken as a symmetrical mixing or as an attempt to

reconcile contradictory practices. Hybrids are part of and embedded in power relations and, as such,

hybrids do not deny asymmetries in power. Power is invoked when the hybrid becomes stripped of its

historical trajectory and the melding of distinct practices are black-boxed so that they become

unquestioned. Once purified, the hybrid can be deployed from context to context—it becomes a

universal technology of control and coordination which is decontextualised and can be deployed in a

range of contexts. Such technologies of control will become the basis for donors and NGOs to

prioritise future funding in part, we suggest, through the infrastructural black-boxing that occurs

through, for example, the development of ICT systems. It is commonplace for NGOs, for instance, to

develop their internal management reporting systems, and embody these in ICT systems, in line with

their major donors reporting practices.

It is central to the interests of all members working on projects that have such measures of

performance to be seen as performing well to their upstream, authorising environment. It is well

established in the performance management literature that staff often seek to conform, or at the very

least account for, their activities in relation to the introduction of new performance measures

(Townley, 1999; Lewis & Madon, 2004). For the private sector to provide a management

methodology such as the VMM (as typifies such large consulting companies) such an offering needs

to be generic enough so as to allow them to sell its application from context to context (Bloomfield &

Danieli, 1992; Howcroft & Light, 2006; Lui, &Westrup, C., 2003). Applying generic consulting

frameworks is likely to require the putting together of broad understandings within very diverse

contexts. Thus, comparing and contrasting projects between such diverse contexts at anything other

than the most general level is likely to be potentially meaningless. Making the project work in

specific development contexts will require staff to seek to ensure that they are mindful of both the

frameworks being deployed as well as making the project work locally. These practices of

accountability then are likely to supplement rather than supplant the everyday practices undertaken in

a development context (Woolgar, 2002). This is likely to be especially so when there are tensions

between the management technologies criteria and the criteria ‘on the ground’ in developing contexts.

The introduction of management technologies such as performance measurement that are not sensitive

to the local situation, or that identify inappropriate criteria for selection thus could not only have a

Page 21 of 31

Taylor & Francis

Information Technology for Development

123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960

For Peer Review

22

negative impact on a specific project, but also as they may be used to identify the donors future

criteria for funding, and may influence e-development projects more broadly. When comparing the

value that is attributed to derive from one e-development project with another within a particular

NGO, or the performance between NGOs, then ICTs are likely to be fundamental as they will be seen

as a way to enhance data about the performance of specific NGOs and thereby may allow for greater

accountability (Lewis & Madon, 2004). Thus we argue that these new technologies of control are

likely to play a prominent role in shaping the e-development sector. Here it is important to be

reminded of the many accounts that have pointed to the western notions of development that dominate

the development of ICTs for development (Thompson, 2004, Heeks, 2002). In relation to hybridity,

NGO staff are likely to undertake practices that aim to satisfy the new measures of performance so as

to secure ongoing funding from donors, while also seeking ensure that they make a difference in

specific e-development contexts (Heeks 2002). Following Silva and Westrup (2009), we suggest that

it is likely that there will be ongoing dilemmas between up-stream managerial decision making versus

local priorities for development.

7.3 Power and hybridity

One of the central themes arising out of our analysis has been the changes in power relations between

the different stakeholders involved in the current making of e-development. Donors, or more

accurately stated ‘conglomerates of donors’, have become central in the development network over

the last twenty years. This has lead other groups to seek to align themselves with the donors and

development goals in terms of receiving funding for projects, or with regard to the private sector,

being able to generate an income from NGOs by helping them aligning themselves with donors

(Ballantyne, 2002). However, by focussing on donors there is a potential danger that they will not be

aligning themselves with the requirements of specific e-development contexts (Madon, 1999; Lewis

& Madon, 2004). Melding these two requirements will be central to the hybrid practices of those

working in the developing context. Further, as the case highlighted, private sector organisations also

have to provide an offering to the e-development sector that not only meets their requirements, but

also the requirements for profitability and internal power relations within their own organisations

(Fincham, 1999). One might say a very different form of value management! Aligning the interests of

internal stakeholders, donors, NGOs and the development context itself is central in understanding

hybrid practices that are emerging in the development sector. It also demonstrates the multiple

tensions and realisations of social capital (Fine, 2002), as citizens, donors and consumers become a

guiding hand in the deployment of development interventions (see also Peacock, 2002).

With regard to power, knowledge and hybridity, our case has highlighted how an emerging form of

knowledge about how projects should be prioritised and are operationalised is seeking to gain

credence and legitimacy in the e-development sector. Clearly, the reforms that have taken place in the

Page 22 of 31

Taylor & Francis

Information Technology for Development

123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960

For Peer Review

23

public sector have changed the ways in which governments conceive of how projects should be

funded and managed (Saint Martin, 1998). Public sector reforms have themselves been undertaken

with significant input from private sector consulting organisations. Why would governments not

believe that private sector consulting companies may have useful knowledge and expertise to help

transform e-development initiatives? A management discourse that has its origins in the private sector

is, we think, currently a significant feature in the formation of current e-development preoccupations.

It shapes the ways in which we come to conceive of e-development, the types of management and

information technologies developed and introduced, the projects undertaken, and their duration

(Velden, 2002; Heeks, 2002; Ballantyne, 2002). When added to the expanded conception of social

capital as including up-stream citizens, this becomes potentially even more problematic (Fine, 2002).

Hybridity in relation to power represents a melding of interests within and between those different

organisations involved in e-development, aligning themselves with the centre of the network and the

discourse that come to regulate the making of e-development.

8. Conclusion

This paper has provided an account of the hybridisation of the e-development network as it is going

through a period of transition. We have argued that the authorising environment is being comprised of

new forms of value centred, in particular, upon the upstream donors and upstream preoccupations

with social capital. This marks an expansion of the remit of evaluation from the perspective of those

involved in the specific development context. In relation to existing ICT4D research our analysis

adds to Walsham and Sahay’s (2006) call for there to be more work at broader levels of analysis

(Silva and Hirschheim, 2007). Specifically we have suggested that of contemporary importance is

understanding the ways in which donor and private sector actors are aligning themselves and through

this are shaping the nature of ICT4D as both a practical domain and also as an area of academic

research (Silva, 2002; Walsham, 2005). Perhaps more specifically we have attempted to respond to

Silva and Westrup (2009) who have called for research that is not just restricted to contributions of

technologies to development, but also research that critically opens up what they refer to as those

relationships that are typically placed in a black box of context (Avgerou, 2008). Our paper has also

reconfirmed and updated the importance of Madon’s work (along with her co-authors) in terms of the

shifting priorities of donors. This opens up new sites for research, first with regard to the internal

practices of Northern NGOs, and, second, further studies of the differing offerings to e-development

provided by ICT organisations. Further, developing an in-depth account of the ways in which NGO’s

and private sector IT consulting organisations are forming alliances and partnerships is also likely to

be crucial in furnishing our understandings of issues such as scalability and sustainability (Sahay and

Walsham, 2006). Further, in relation to the ICT4D literature that has considered the theme of impact

assessment, this paper highlights how impact assessment is a political construction. This contrasts

significantly with much of the impact assessment literature to date that has tended to view it is as

Page 23 of 31

Taylor & Francis

Information Technology for Development

123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960

For Peer Review

24

being able to be classified as an objective measure where inputs and outputs can be compared and

assessed (Duncombe, 2009; Heeks and Molla, 2008; Heeks et al, 2008). There has been much less

literature that has critically evaluated these types of initiatives (Heeks, 2002; Duncombe, 2009). Our

research thus provides response to Heek’s (2002) observation that international development is

influenced greatly by donors. For as Heeks argues NGOs and other development agencies tend to

mimic the views of donors to be in the best position to secure further funding (see also Duncombe,

2009).

One of the central features of contemporary development practice is that NGOs and other

development agencies must respond to a wider range of measures of performance. Research into how

public value is deployed in conjunction with the range of activities with which NGOs are associated,

would illuminate how different forms of value are enacted as concurrent, separate or coherent in

NGOs work. The context of NGO work is characterised, according to the concept of public value, by

multiple strategic demands, where the different interests of a range of stakeholders and the social

capital of recipients and donors of development resources are legitimate goals for the organisation.

Public value provides an analytical template for further research that offers, we think, the possibility

to sharpen conceptual insights into the formation of emergent realities of development intervention

broadly and ICT4D intervention specifically and offers new empirical sites for detailed studies of

development in practice over time and in different contexts.

We have suggested that e-development can be usefully described as a hybridised practice. As the

impure melding and intersection of techniques of performance calculation from the public and private

sector, preoccupations with impacts on upstream donors’ social capital and a belief in technologically-

led development, our research has documented the emergence a particular form of hybridity in which

performance measurement and impacts on a wide range of actors becomes an important feature. Much

of the critical debate in development studies and in the ICT4D literature focuses on the

conditionalities set by donors and problems associated with the top-down interventions. This paper

has added a concern with the diverse circulation and melding of practices between actor-networks and

organisational contexts. From this we can also suggest that thick description, tracing and deciphering

of hybridised practices challenges specific fields such as development studies, information systems

and the study of management generally. Omega’s attempts at constructing new forms of value and a

technique for managing performance in the development sector provides an exemplar of current

attempts e-development for policy makers, development organisations and communities across the

developing world. Future research questions that would be useful to pursue would include how do

NGOs navigate through the demands of Value Management? What are the connections and dilemmas

between donors, consultants and communities in the deployment of Value Management practices.

Clearly, our insights into the emergence of a new hybrid for the management of development needs

Page 24 of 31

Taylor & Francis

Information Technology for Development

123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960

For Peer Review

25

elaboration in further studies to what we think is a significant reconfiguration of what is understood

by development management.

Acknowledgements

An initial version of this paper was presented ‘Taking Stock of E-Development’, Ninth International

Working Conference, IFIP WG 9.4, Sao Paulo, Brazil, 28-30 May 2007. We would also like to thank

the Associate Editor, Leiser Silva, and the anonymous reviewers for their constructive suggestions for

change. We would also like to acknowledge Robert Moosbrugger, and thank Omega for generous

research access.

References

Akrich, M. (1992). The de-scription of technical objects. In Bijker, W.E. and Law, J.,

(eds.), Shaping technology/building society, pages 205 -224. MIT Press.

Avgerou, C. (2002). Information systems and global diversity. Oxford/New York: Oxford

University Press.

Avgerou, C. (2008). Information systems in developing countries: a critical research

review, Journal of Information Technology, 23:3. 133-146

Ballantyne, P. (2002). e-development, eCooperation: connecting the worlds of

information and development, Compare: A Journal of Comparative Education, 32 (3): 365-

379.

Barrett, M., Sahay, S., & Walsham, G. (2001). Understanding IT and social

transformation: GIS for natural resources management in India. The Information Society,

17(1), 5–20.

Bloomfield, B.P. and A. Danieli (1995). The Role of Management Consultants in the

Development of Information Technology: The Indissoluble Nature of Socio-political and

Technical Skills, Journal of Management Studies, 32 (1), 23–46.

Blaug, R, L. Horner & R. Lekhi (2006), Public Value, Politics and Public Management:

A Literature Review (London, The Work Foundation)

Callon, M. (1986). Some elements of a sociology of translation: The domestication of the

scallops and the fisherman of St. Brieuc Bay. In: J. Law (ed.) Power, action and belief: A new

sociology of knowledge, London: Routledge.

Chattaway, J. (1999). Competitive markets and the private sector in development. in

Robinson, D., Hewitt, T. and Harriss, J. (eds) Managing Development: Understanding inter-

organisational relationships, Sage. London.

Page 25 of 31

Taylor & Francis

Information Technology for Development

123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960

For Peer Review

26

Ciborra, C. and Navarra, D. (2005). Good governance, development theory, and aid

policy: risks and challenges of e-government in Jordan. Information Technology for

Development 11 (2): 1-19.

Dar, S., and Cooke, B. (2008). The New Development Management Zed Books: London.

Denhardt, R.B., Denhardt, J and Aristigueta, M (2001) Managing Human Behavior in

Public and Nonprofit Organizations, Sage, London.

DFID (1997). Eliminating world poverty, White Paper, London: HMSO.

DFID (2000). Eliminating world poverty, White Paper, London: HMSO.

Elam, M. (1999). Living dangerously with Bruno Latour in a hybrid world. Theory,

Culture and Society, 16(4): 1-24.

Duncombe, R., (2009). Impact assessment of mobile phones on development: concepts,

methods and lessons for practice, Development Informatics Working Paper No.39, IDPM,

University of Manchester.

Fincham, R. (1999). The Consultant–Client Relationship: Critical Perspectives on the

Management of Organizational Change, Journal of Management Studies 36(3): 335–351.

Fine, B. (2003). Social Capital: The World Bank’s Fungible Friend. Journal of Agrarian

Change, 3(4): 586-603.

Fine, B. (2002). They F**k You Up Those Social Capitalists. Antipode, 34(4): 796-99.

Frenkel, M. and Shenhav, Y. (2006). From binarism to hybridity: A postcolonial reading

of management and organization studies, Organization Studies, 27(6): 855-876.

Gardner, K. and Lewis, D. (1996). Anthropology, development and the post-modern

challenge, London: Pluto Press.

Gould, J. (2005). The new conditionality: The politics of poverty reduction strategies.

London: Zed Books.

Hansen, H.K. & Salskov-Iversen, D. (2005). Remodelling the transnational political

realm: partnerships, best-practices schemas, and the digitalization of governance.

Alternatives, 30, 141-164.

Harriss, J. (2001). Public Action and the Dialectics of Decentralisation: Against the Myth

of Social Capital as "The Missing Link in Development". Social Scientist 29 (11-12): 25-40.

Harriss, J. (1999). Working Together: The Principles of Cooperation and Partnership. In

Managing Development: Understanding Inter-organizational Relationships. Edited by

Robinson, D.; Hewitt, T.; Harriss, J. Sage Publications and the Open University.

Page 26 of 31

Taylor & Francis

Information Technology for Development

123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960

For Peer Review

27

Hasselbladh, H. and Kallinikos, J. (2000). The Process of Institutionalization: A Critique

and Reappraisal of New Institutionalism in Organization Studies, Organization Studies.

21(4):197-220.

Heeks, R. (2002). Information systems and developing countries: Failure, success, and

local improvisations. The Information Society, 18:101–112.

Heeks, R. & Molla, A. (2009). Impact assessment of ICT-for-development projects: a

compendium of approaches, Development Informatics Working Paper No.36, IDPM,

University of Manchester.

http://www.sed.manchester.ac.uk/idpm/research/publications/wp/di/di_wp36.htm

Heeks, R., H Lee, S Jang and K Ko. (2008). Analysing South Korea's ICT for

development aid programme. Electronic Journal of Information Systems in Developing

Countries, 35(2): 1-15.

Hewitt, T. (2000). A Hybrid or a Third Way? Contemporary Thinking on Inter-

Organisational Relations. In Managing Development: Understanding Inter-organisational

Relationships. D. Robinson, T. Hewitt and J. Harriss, eds. London: Sage and Open

University.

Hood, C.C. and Jackson, M.W. (1991) Administrative Argument,Aldershot.

Howcroft, D. and Light, B. (2006). Reflections on issues of power in packaged software

selection, Information Systems Journal. 16 (3) , 215-235.

Hulme, D. (1994). NGOs and social development research. In. D. Booth (ed) Rethinking

Social Development. London: Longman.

Jomo, K.S. and Fine, B. (eds.) (2006). The New Development Economics, London: Zed

Books.

Kelly, G., Mulgan, G. and Muers, S. (2002). Creating public value: An analytical

framework for public sector reform, London: Cabinet Office.

Kerr, R. (2008). International development and the new public management: projects and

logframes as discursive technologies of governance. In: S. Dar and B. Cooke (eds.) The New

Development Management: Critiquing the Dual Modernization. London: Zed Books.

Klein, H. & Myers, M. (1999). A set of principles for conducting and evaluating

interpretive field studies in information systems. MIS Quarterly, 23(1), 67-93.

Latour, B. (1987). Science in action: How to follow scientists and engineers through

society, Harvard: Harvard University Press.

Page 27 of 31

Taylor & Francis

Information Technology for Development

123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960

For Peer Review

28

Latour, B. (1992). ‘One more turn after the social turn…', in E. McMullin (ed.), The

Social Dimension of Science (Notre Dame: Indiana University of Notre Dame Press), 272–

294.

Latour, B. (1993). We have never been modern, Harvard: Harvard University Press.

Law, J. (1992). Notes on the Theory of the Actor Network - Ordering, Strategy, and

Heterogeneity, Systems Practice, 5: 379-393.

Lewis, D. & Madon, S. (2004). Information systems and nongovernmental development

organizations: Advocacy, organizational learning, and accountability. The Information

Society, 20: 117-126.

Lui, W. and Westrup, C. (2003). ICTs and organizational control across cultures: The

case of a UK multinational operating in China. In Organizational information systems in the

context of globalisation, Korea et al (eds), Kleuwer Academic Publishers, Boston, 155-168.

Madon, S. (1999). International NGOs: networking, information flows and learning.

Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 8: 251-261.

Madon, Shirin (2000). The internet and socio-economic development: exploring the

interaction. Information technology and people, 13 (2). pp. 85-101.

Madon, S. & Sahay, S. (2002). An information based model of NGO-mediation for the

empowerment of slum dwellers in India. The Information Society, 18(1), 13–19.

Miller, P & O’Leary, T. (1994). The factory as laboratory. In M. Power (ed.) Accounting

and science: Natural inquiry and commercial reason. Cambridge: Cambridge University

Press.

Monteiro, E. (2000). Actor-network theory and information infrastructure, In: C. Ciborra

(ed.) From control to drift. The dynamics of corporate information infrastructure, Oxford

Univ. Press, pp. 71 - 84.

Moore, M. (1995). Creating public value, Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press.

Moore, M. (1999). Competition within and between Organizations. In Managing

Development: Understanding Inter-organizational Relationships. Edited by Robinson, D.;

Hewitt, T.; Harriss, J. Sage Publications and the Open University.

Moore, M. (2000). Managing for value: Orgaizational strategy in for-profit, nonprofit and

governmental organizations. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 29, 183-204.

Orlikowski, W.J. (1966). Improvising Organizational Transformation over Time: A

Situated Change Perspective, Information Systems Research, 7 (1), 63-92.

Page 28 of 31

Taylor & Francis

Information Technology for Development

123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960

For Peer Review

29

Orlikowski, W.J. and Baroudi, J.J. (1991). Studying Information Technology in

Organizations: Research Approaches and Assumptions. Information Systems Research, 4

(2), 1-28

Peacock, A. (2000). Market failure and government failure in broadcasting. London:

Institute for Economic Affairs.

Putnam, R. (1993). Making Democracy Work: Civic Traditions in Modern Italy.

Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Roberts, S.M., Jones, J.P and Frohling, O. (2005). NGOs and the Globalization of

Managerialism, World Development, 33(11): 1845-1864.

Sahay, S., & Walsham, G. (1995). Information technology in developing countries: A

need for theory building. Information Technology for Development, 6(3/4), 111–124.

Sahay, S. & Walsham, G. (2006) Scaling of health information systems in India:

challenges and approaches. Information Technology for Development, 12(3): 185-200.

Saint-Martin, D. (1998), The New Managerialism and policy influence of consultants in

government: an historical-institutionalist analysis of Britain, Canada and France,

Governance, 11, 3, 319-356.

Sayed, E.H., & Westrup, C. (2003). Egypt and ICTs bring national initiatives, global

actors and local companies together. Information Technology and People, 16(1), 93–110.

Sen, A. (2005). Human Rights and Capabilities. Journal of Human Development 6, (2),

151-166.

Silva, L. (2002). Outsourcing as an Improvisation: A case study in Latin America. The

Information Society, 18: 129-138.

Silva, L. and Hirschheim, R. (2007). Fighting against windmills: Strategic information

systems and organizational deep structures. MIS Quarterly, 31(2), No. 2, 327 – 354.

Silva, L. And Westrup, C. (2009). Development and the promise of Technological

Change Information Technology for Development, 15:2, 1-6.

Stoker, G. (2006). ‘Public value management: A new narrative for networked governance,

The American Review of Public Administration, 36, 1, 41-57.

Teegan, H., Doh, J.P. and Vachani, S. (2004). The importance of non-governmental

organization (NGOs) in global governance and value creation: an international business

research agenda. Journal of International Business Studies, 35, 463-483.

Thompson, M. (2004). ICT, power and development discourse: A crucial analysis,

Electronic Journal on Information Systems in Developing Countries. 20 (4): 1-25.

Thrift, N. (1997). The rise of soft capitalism, Cultural Values, 1, 1, 29-57.

Page 29 of 31

Taylor & Francis

Information Technology for Development

123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960

For Peer Review

30

Townley, B. (1999). Practical reason and performance appraisal. Journal of Management

Studies 36 (3): 287–306.

Velden, M. (2002). Knowledge facts, knowledge fiction: the role of ICTs in knowledge

management for development. Journal of International Development, 14(1): 25-37.

Waddock, S. (2001). Integrity and mindfulness: Foundations of corporate citizenship, In:

J. Andriof and M. McIntosh (eds.) Perspectives on corporate citizenship, Sheffield:

Greenleaf Publishing.

Wallace, T., Bornstein, L. and Chapman, J. (2006). The Aid Chain, Rugby: IDG Press.

Walsham, G. (1993). Interpreting Information Systems in Organizations. John Wiley &

Sons Inc.

Walsham G (1995). Interpretive case studies in IS research: nature and method. European

Journal of Information Systems 4(2), 74–81.

Walsham, G. (1997). “Actor-Network Theory and IS Research: Current Status and Future

Prospects”. In Lee, A. S., Liebenau, J. and DeGross, J. I. (eds.). Information Systems and

Qualitative Research: Proceedings of the IFUP TC8 WG 8.2. International Conference on

Information Systems and Qualitative Research, 31st May – 3

rd June 1997, Philadelphia,

Pennsylvania, USA. London: Chapman and Hall.

Walsham, G. (2001). Making a world of difference: IT in a global context.

Chichester/New York: Wiley.

Walsham, G. (2005). Development, global futures and IS research: a polemic. Journal of

Strategic Information Systems, 14: 5-15.

Walsham, G. Robey, D. & Sahay, S. (2007). Foreward: Special issue on information

systems in developing countries. MIS Quarterly, 31 (2): 317-326.

Walsham, G., Sahay, S. (2006). Research on information systems in developing countries:

Current landscape and future prospects. Information Technology for Development, 12:1, 7–

24.

Watson, M. & Shove, E. (2008). Product, Competence, Project and Practice, Journal of

Consumer Culture, 8(1): 69–89.

White, H. and Black, R. (2004). Millennium development goals: A drop in the ocean?’In:

Black, R. and White, H. (eds.) Targeting development: critical perspectives on the

millennium development goals. London: Routledge.

Whynes, D.K., 1993, 'Can Performance Monitoring Solve the Public Services' Principal-

Agent Problem?' Scottish Journal of Political Economy, Vol.40, No.4, pp.434-46

Page 30 of 31

Taylor & Francis

Information Technology for Development

123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960

For Peer Review

31

Woolgar, S. (2002). Five Rules of Virtuality. In Woolgar, S. (Ed.) Virtual Society:

Technology, Cyberbole, Reality. Oxford, Oxford University Press.

Page 31 of 31

Taylor & Francis

Information Technology for Development

123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960