This thesis investigates the process of aligning technology frames among diverse stakeholder groups to enable effective use of technologies in cultural heritage projects. Drawing on Orlikowski and Gash’s (1994) concept of technology frames, it examines how stakeholders’ assumptions and expectations of technology evolve over time. While prior studies often treat frame alignment as a static state, this research adopts a process perspective, viewing alignment as a dynamic, iterative negotiation.
The study draws on two in-depth qualitative case studies of digital archive projects, Alpha and Beta, implemented by MemoryOrg (a library) and TechOrg (a government technology organisation). Data includes 30 semi-structured interviews and document analysis. This thesis extends existing technology frame research, which focuses on two stakeholder groups, users and technologists, by analysing five groups: management, IT, IT governance, suppliers, and users. This broader lens reveals more nuanced patterns of misalignment, including tensions within “technology strategy” and “technology-in-use” domains, especially when contrasting managers’ strategic priorities with implementers’ practical concerns. It also highlights identity-based misalignments, where interpretations differ depending on stakeholders’ professional, public, or private-interest identities. The study uncovers both between-group and within-group misalignments, the latter largely overlooked in prior research.
A four-phase process model of technology frame alignment is developed: (1) initial frame formation, (2) misalignment emergence, (3) alignment approaches, and (4) alignment outcomes. Five alignment approaches: collaboration, compromise, accommodation, competition, and avoidance, are identified, adapted from Thomas’s (1992) conflict resolution model. The findings reveal three conditions that foster alignment: minor misalignments, an organisational culture that supports dialogue, and shared initial assumptions. Alpha met these conditions, whereas Beta faced more serious misalignments, tied to conflicting public-versus-commercial goals and legal concerns, leading to the project being frozen. This thesis contributes by expanding the conceptualisation of technology frames, advancing a dynamic view of alignment, and offering practical insights for managing technology frame misalignments.
