Most importantly for our purposes, there is only a handful of studies that actually describe the process of diffusion of organizational Web technology within organizations. One of the pioneering studies in this area was recently conducted by Jarvenpaa and Ives (1996). In their research the authors explored in detail how two computer organizations in the US developed their Web technology capabilities. Based on the findings from these case studies, the authors noted five issues that should be of concern to researchers studying the process of organizational Web site development:

1. The role of top management
2. The role of the organization Information Technology (IT) department
3. The role of cross-functional, ad-hok groups
4. The development of the project over time, particularly in relation to "key events" or "deadlines" which can be real or manufactured by the project leaders.
5. The importance of a "performance crisis" as a impetus or justification for the project.

The objective of this paper is to use the Jarvenpaa and Ives (1996) research as a starting point for an ethical analysis of the dilemmas facing implementers of Web technologies in organizations. To achieve this goal, the paper goes through the following steps. First, in an attempt to frame the discussion within the relevant literature, a series of concepts pertaining to the ethical analysis of organizational dilemmas are presented. Second, a case study, outlining a Web site development project in an Australian university is presented. Third, the major ethical dilemmas faced by the Web site developers are discussed from an ethical perspective. Finally, conclusions are drawn from the discussion of these dilemmas to future research on ethical issues relating to organizational Web site development.

According to Cohen (1996) and many other authors in the field of ethics, decisions are made ethically when they are in accordance with principles. Decisions are, thus, unethical when they conflict with principles. Note that this understanding of ethics is highly relative, leaving the question of which principles are ethical wide open to conflict between individuals who adhere to different "principles".

How can ethical behavior in organizations can be analyzed? One of the recent attempts to conceptualize ethical behavior in the organizational context was undertaken by Nicholson(1994). His framework consists of four major levels of analysis:

1. "Ethical environment" is the first, macro level of analysis. It concerns the ethical context of the organization, i.e., the values of the general society in which it operates.

2. "Ethical domains" is the model’s second level of analysis. It denotes the orientation of the organization in relation to its context, i.e., the ethical focus of the organization’s goals and strategies and how these relate to its internal and external environment. The model differentiates between four types of ethical domains: (1) linkage issues, which arise from the organization’s stance in relation to external stakeholders and interest groups; (2) Stewardship issues which arise from the consequences of organizational outputs of products and services; (3) Values issues which connotes attributes about the ethical character of the organization as a moral agent and the evaluation of actions on the basis of their intent rather than their consequences; and (4) Interpersonal issues which denotes the actions by the organization or its agents as they relate to an implied social order or moral conduct.

3. "Ethical functioning" is the model’s third level of analysis. It is related to how goals are acted out via expressive forms, institutionalization, and behavior. Expressive forms are moral attitudes and beliefs held by organizational members. "Instituted forms" are the organizational structures within which action is framed, i.e., the stratification of roles and rules. The interaction between the two produces the third component of this triad, i.e., the actual behavior of organizational members as individuals and groups.

4. "Ethical process" is the model’s lowest level of analysis. It concerns how ethical beliefs and values are generated or altered by the flow of events and experiences in the working life of organizational members and agents. Organizations respond to ethical dilemmas by exhibiting one or more of the following behaviors:

1. Psychological Appraisal - This response involves introspection about one’s own psychological state and reflection on other’s behavior and intentions.
2. Inquisition - This response refers to attempts to arrive at a causal analysis of an event in order to identify its antecedents or consequences.
3. Choice - This response involves the process of confronting alternative courses of action and making choices between them.
4. Conflict - This response denotes occasions of debate between partially or totally exclusive courses of action as represented ;by different parties or interests.
5. Improvement - This response refers to the pursuit of quality and the likelihood that organizations or individuals within them will strive to meet excellence criteria rather than just materialistic ones.
6. Invocation - This response is exhibited when an individual or group seeks to place an event within the context of a moral order.
7. Compliance - This response is reflected in instances when individuals or organizations are compelled to comply with some ethical precept such as a government regulation, without necessarily agreeing with it.

Nicholson concludes his discussion of ethics in organizations with one last concept, "Ethical condition". Ethical condition is a holistic concept that relates to the way that organizational ethical functioning develops and changes over time. Most importantly, it assumes that organizational ethical functioning can and should be evaluated normatively, studying such issues as decline in organizational integrity and reputation decay.

It is only in recent years that researchers have been calling for an ethical analysis of information systems. Among the early proponents of this idea were Hirscheim, Klein and Lytinnen who in a series of publications (Hirscheim and Klein 1989, by Hirscheim, Klein and Lytinnen 1995) asserted that even though the designers and implementers of a particular information system may not be aware of it, their work is always based on a series of explicit or implicit ethical assumptions.

The assertion that designing and implementing information systems is a process which may be linked with ethics had led to several distinct research directions by others. First, some researchers have attempted to systematically study the relationship between information technology and philosophy, outlining different ways in which philosophy can assist information systems’ practitioners in making ethical decisions. For example, Seni and Hodges (1996) outlined two ways in which philosophy can assist information systems professionals, e.g., (1) in making explicit the implicit assumptions made by the technology, and (2) in relating these assumptions to the philosophy of technology in general.

Another direction taken by researchers in this area is the application of philosophical and ethical ways of thinking to pragmatic dilemmas in information systems. For example, Wells (1996) explored the effect of postmodernism on information technology, concluding that information technology is not just a catalyst or a cause for the postmodernist movement but also one of its by-products, with modern system design practices mirroring postmodernist ideas of indifference to formal systems and emphasis on ontological questions about the constitution of the subject and how we are constituted by our technologies.

A third, currently emerging direction taken by writers in this area is to directly explore the ethical implications of information systems. For example, Cohen (1996), building on the work of Mason (1986) called for an Information Systems Code of Conduct free of cultural constraints. In his discussion of the proposed code, Cohen indicates that ethics and culture are potentially in conflict in terms of their approach to morality, and yet, only by combining the two can the information systems discipline come close to a truly global guide for ethical conduct. Our study on the ethics of organizational Web site development falls within this emerging body of research.

How can concepts of ethics be applied to the process of designing and implementing an organizational Web site? To demonstrate the relevance of such concepts, we now present a case study which describes in detail the process of a Web site development in an Australian university. The major dilemmas in the case study are analyzed in the following sections in terms of the Nicholson’s organizational ethics framework.

3. CASE STUDY

3.1 Methodology

Data for this study were collected by the authors at an Australian university referred to here as UOA (the name of the University as well as the names of all characters in the case have been withheld to protect their anonymity - the names that are used are pseudonyms). Data was collected over a period of two years.

The major source of data for this study were interviews which were conducted with twenty members of the University. An additional source of information were a variety of hard copy documents supplied to the researchers by the interviewees. During data analysis, data from all sources pertinent to a particular event were analyzed and the interpretations of all interviewees for that event compared. A decision as to the meaning of the event for the various individuals involved was reached only when it was supported by the data from all sources and when it was agreed on by the researchers.

Interviews: In-depth interviews with twenty members of UOA were the most important source of data for this study. During data collection, a semi-structured interview schedule, consisting of a series of open ended topics was utilized. The questions gauged interviewees' memory of the events, as well as their interpretation of the events' meaning. Even though the interview schedule was semi-structured, an attempt was made to cover the same topics in all interviews. Issues on which interviewees disagreed received special attention. When such issues were identified, they were included in subsequent interviews, with special attempt made to reach consensus among the interviewees over these issues. In addition to gathering personal details (such as background information, career data, and future plans), interviewees were asked to describe the quality of their work life while the case events took place, relationships with other members of the organization, and areas of responsibility. The interviews lasted on average about ninety minutes, and were all taped, transcribed and analyzed by the authors.

A content analysis scheme was used for the interview data. The scheme included a categorization of major themes in the interviews, with particular emphasis on issues relating to the details of the implementation events and the interpretation of these events by the interviewees.

Interviews were conducted over a period of two years (1995 to 1996), which roughly corresponded to the duration of the case events. On average, two interviews were held with each interviewee, bringing the number of interviews to forty. Members of three major groups were interviewed:

1. Academic Staff - There were 10 interviewees from the academic staff; four Professors (including two Department Chairs and one Dean); three Associate Professors; and three Assistant Professors. The academic sample was derived from six different departments from all major divisions at UOA. All academics selected as interviewees had direct or indirect knowledge of the events on which the case focused. To make sure that information about the case events was as complete as possible, all members of the University CWIS committee (see following sections for more details) were interviewed.

2. Administrative Staff - Five interviews were conducted with individuals who were categorized as "administrative staff". From top management, the Provost and the Personal Assistant to the President were interviewed. Two secretaries were also interviewed. Each of the secretaries was from a different department within UOA strongly associated with the Web technology project.

3. Five interviewees were members of the Information Technology Department (ITD): the Head of the Department, the Head of User Services, the secretary of the CWIS committee and the past and present co-ordinators of the Web project support unit were interviewed.

Textual analysis: A variety of documents were collected at various stages of the implementation project. These included promotional materials, training transparencies, and minutes of relevant meetings. Textual analysis also included in-depth study of the organizational chart, hard and soft copy correspondence, newspaper clippings, and progress reports. A major source of data for the textual analysis was e-mail messages. Over 100 e-mail messages pertaining to the project were made available to the author by the key players in the case. The e-mail messages were analyzed using a specially constructed qualitative content analysis scheme. The scheme involved a thematic categorization of the issues discussed on e-mail by the various players in the case.

UOA is a medium- sized university, with over 1000 staff members and over 13,000 students. The university is centrally located within a densely populated, highly industrialized metropolitan area. UOA has a reputation for being one of the most technologically advanced academic institutions in the country, investing substantial resources in experimental emerging technologies. The diffusion of Web technologies at UOA followed a highly successful e-mail implementation, which started in 1988 and was completed in 1992, shortly before the case events started. In the following sections we will describe the diffusion of Web technologies at UOA in terms of four phases, spanning the years 1993-1996.

Following the success of the e-mail diffusion in the years prior to 1993, many staff members at UOA were using early Internet technology during 1992 and 1993. The majority of users were academics. They were using a variety of search engines such Mosaic, Archie and Gopher, to support their research and networking initiatives with colleagues in other academic institutions.

In mid 1993, the Head of the Information Technology Unit (ITU), Mr. Adam Neil, was becoming aware of the need to identify one UNIX based, multi-platform (compatible with both Mac's and PC's) to support the file servers around the university. In the search for the one technology that would be best suited for UOA, Mr. Neil instructed his subordinates to consider and test several options, including, Gopher, WAIS, Apple Share and Mandarin. Despite the search effort, by the end of 1993, a decision as to the best technology to support Internet servers on campus had not been made.

The first months of 1994 marked a dramatic change in the development of the Web technologies project. The change started when Professor Mark Lind, UOA Provost for Research and the Chair of UOA Computer Planning Policy committee (CPPC), announced during the committee's first meeting for the year that the President of UOA had authorized him to suggest to the committee the launching of a Campus Wide Information Systems (CWIS) project. A CWIS steering committee was to be created as a sub-committee of the CPPC. The CWIS committee was to supervise a project that would result in the creation of an integrative multi-platform Web based intranet for UOA. By the end of the meeting, the Computer Planning committee has appointed Mr. Anthony Moore, one of Mr. Neil's deputies and the Head of the Administration Information System (AIS) unit, as Chair of the newly established CWIS committee.

Following the decision of the CPPC, Mr. Neil has instructed a team of experts within ITU to renew the search for a technology that could support Internet servers around the campus. By this time (mid 1994), Web technologies have become popular in the industry. They were seen by the members of the ITU search team as much more exciting than the options that they considered in 1993. Most importantly, Web technologies were seen as the most appropriate solution to UOA's multi-platform problem. Following this line of reasoning, the group decided to recommend the Web as the anchor for the University information infrastructure. In line with this recommendation, contact was established with several Web technologies vendors. Within a few weeks, a contract was signed with Netscape. Within a few more months Netscape Enterprise, the company's more advanced product with more features to support an intranet was adopted as the UOA Web technologies infrastructure.

By the end of 1994 the newly established CWIS committee held its first meeting. The meeting was attended by five individuals. Three of the committee members were from ITU (including Mr. Neil and Mr. Moore). The remaining two members included Mr. Jack Ford, the Head of UOA Department of External Relations, and Professor Jeffrey Wood, Chair of the Department of MIS. The major decision made by the committee during its first meeting was to allocate $40,000 as a salary to a person appointed as co-ordinator of the Web technologies project. The money was to be allocated in equal shares by ITU and the University central administration. It was agreed the person hired as co-ordinator of the Web technologies project would also be the secretary of the CWIS committee.

Within a month after the committee's meeting took place, Mr. James Cooper took office as the new co-ordinator of the Web technologies project. Mr. Cooper had an extensive experience as a manager in the IS industry. He has been working with Web technologies for years, including several years experience as a private consultant in this area. By appointing him as co-ordinator of the project, the members of the CWIS committee have clearly expressed a commitment to Web technologies.

Mr. Cooper's appointment marked the formal start of the Web technologies project. Mr. Cooper interpreted his role as co-ordinator of the project in several ways. First, as secretary of the CWIS committee, he decided to make the committee more representative of the University community. To achieve this goal he decided to approach three additional academics and invite them to join the committee. The new members included Professor Jane Peel, the Chair of Computer Science, Professor Susan Brown, the Chair of Art History, and Professor Gill Grant, Chair of Psychology. The addition of the three professors did not only change the committee in terms of disciplinary representation (with less representation to IT people and more to members of other units within the University), but also made the committee significantly more balanced in terms of gender.

Another decision taken by Mr. Cooper was to focus the committee's work around the establishment of a new Web site. Even though the University already had a one page Web site, it was felt that a much more sophisticated site was needed, particularly if the Web server to become the anchor for the University corporate information intranet. During the remaining of 1995, discussions over the content of the Web site became the main issues of concern for the Steering committee. The members of the committee were divided over a large array of issues. First, was the question of design. While Mr. Ford, Mr. Moore, and Mr. Neil were adamant that the first page of the Web site should highlight issues relating to Foreign Students, who represented a major source of income for the University, Professor Brown and Professor Peel, insisted that such a design would be discriminatory to other sub-group within the student body such as blacks and females. It was finally resolved that all students would appear on the top of the list as one group.

Another issue on which the members of the committee were fiercely divided was whether one set of standards should be used for all parts of the Web site. Given that the Web site was going to be developed by the various units in the University with minimal involvement of the ITU, the question was raised whether Web site developers in the different departments should be required to use the same design tools, the same color scheme, the same logical structure (screens as opposed to pages). While the representative of the IT group and the External Affairs group within the committee (Mr. Cooper, Mr. Moore Mr. Neil, and Mr. Ford) were strong advocates of one set of standards, the academic members of the committee (Professor Brown, Professor Peel, Professor Wood, and Professor Grant) saw the attempt to impose such standards as "stifling of academic creativity". After long debates, it was finally agreed that the various departments within the University will be allowed to use whatever design tools, color scheme, or structure they chose. The only proviso was that all departments will put the University logo at the bottom of their "official" Web pages. Departments and individuals within them were expected to have their own, unofficial Web pages which would not have the University logo on them.

Finally, there was the issue of who will control the process of design and updating of the Web site. Here the committee was divided between the more technically oriented members (Mr. Cooper, Mr. Moore, Mr. Ford and Professor Wood) who felt that the ultimate control of the Web site should be with ITU, and the remaining members of the committee, led by Professor Brown, who felt that departments should not be pestered by the IT group on how to design their Web page or when to update it. The final decision of the committee was that ITU will make its expertise available to departments who will choose to approach it for training and advice. However, it will not police of the Web site and will not impose deadlines on update of individual Web pages. It was understood that such deadlines will be imposed by Department Chairs when instructed to do so by central administration.

By the end of 1995 the CWIS committee has met four more times (bringing the total number of meetings for that year to five). Toward the end of the year, the format for the University Web site (the first page) was agreed on. Mr. Cooper was instructed to construct individual pages for the different units within the University. In particular, he was to lead the very difficult and time consuming project of getting most of central administration documents on the Web - a project that was expected to continue for at least another year.

The CWIS committee continued to hold meetings during 1996 but not at the same frequency as during 1995. During the year only two meetings were held and these were attended by less than two thirds of the members of the committee.

During 1996 several members of the committee started to be disillusioned with the project. During the CWIS committee meetings, several of the academic members complained that the promise to create a "paper free organization" was not forthcoming. Indeed, many of the central administration departments who were supposed to convert their hard copy documents to electronic databases and make them available to users on the University's Web server, did not meet this goal, claiming that other responsibilities left them no time to perform this extra job. Other members of the committee appeared to be concerned about issues of data security. Thus, several of the academic members of the committee who were initially enthusiastic about the prospect of using the Web to send theses to external referees, started to worry that the Web was not secure enough for this purpose. Other members of the committee raised concerns about access to University databases by unauthorized personnel, most specifically, students.

By the end of 1996, Mr. Cooper, the project co-ordinator, was starting to realize that many departments within the University were simply not joining the Web technology bandwagon. Despite pressures from ITU, and continuing investment in training and promotion efforts, it was clear that the project was not going to be completed by the end of 1996 as was expected by the members of the CWIS committee. This prompted Mr. Cooper to ask for additional resources that would allow him to establish a special development group to assist units that were unable to meet the deadline. The proposal did not win the support of the majority of the CWIS committee members, many of whom claimed that the project leaders should concentrate on the "quality" of the University Web site rather than on its "quantity". The unanimous decision of the committee, was, however, that if Mr. Cooper felt that additional resources were necessary, he should attempt to secure them through his superiors at the ITU.

Five months later, when 1996 drew to a close, Mr. Cooper finally managed to secure the necessary resources to finish the project. By this time, the majority of the departments at UOA, had their own Web pages and so the money was to be invested in development of Web based databases to support the Administration services on the Web server. Interestingly, and despite the technical success of the Web technologies project the views of the UOA members about it were highly polarized. While many academics, (including the academic members of the CWIS committee) said that they were manipulated by the IT group into being a rubber stamp to IT's secret agenda, the IT people (including the IT members of the committee) blamed the "academics" for what they saw as "the less than optimal outcome of the project".

4. ETHICAL DILEMMAS IN ORGANIZATIONAL WEB SITE DEVELOPEMNT

As indicated in the above case, the members of the CWIS committee were divided over several major issues. These are presented in the following paragraphs in terms of the Nicholson’s model.

Ethical domains:

One of the major issues that were debated by the CWIS committee members was the design of the university Web page. While the three members of the committee that represented the administration were adamant that the first page of the Web site should highlight issues relating to international students, who represented a major source of income for the University, two of the academic members of the committee insisted that such a design would be discriminatory to other sub-groups within the student body such as blacks and females. It was finally resolved that all students would appear on the top of the list as one group.

This debate can be seen as an example of an ethical domain conflict because values originating from the external environment, i.e., market forces versus the rights of minorities, were influencing the positions taken by organizational members.

Ethical functioning:

Another issue on which the members of the committee were fiercely divided was whether one set of standards should be used for all parts of the Web site. Given that the Web site was going to be developed by the various units in the University, with minimal involvement of the Information Technology Unit (ITU), the question was raised whether Web site developers in the different departments should be required to use the same design tools, color schemes, and logical structure. While the representatives of ITU and the Marketing group within the committee were strong advocates of one set of standards, the academic members of the committee saw the attempt to impose such standards as "stifling of academic creativity". After long debates, it was finally agreed that the various departments within the University will be allowed to use whatever design tools, color schemes, or structure they chose. The only proviso was that all departments will put the University logo at the bottom of their "official" Web pages. Departments and individuals within them were expected to have their own, unofficial Web pages which would not have the University logo on them.

This debate can be seen as an example of an "ethical functioning" conflict because it relates to how goals are acted out via expressive forms, institutionalization, and behavior. The real conflict here was over the interpretation of "democracy" in university governance. While the university administration saw the application of standards as a legitimate prerogative of democratically appointed leaders, the academic members of the committee saw the standards as an attempt by management to restrict their democratic right for self expression and self rule.

Ethical process:

Finally, there was the issue of who will control the process of design and updating of the Web site. Here the committee was divided between the more technically oriented members, who felt that the ultimate control of the Web site should be with ITU, and the remaining members of the committee, who felt that departments should not be pestered by the IT group on when to update their Web pages. The final decision of the committee was that ITU will make its expertise available to departments who will choose to approach it for training and advice. However, it will not police the Web site and will not impose deadlines on update of individual Web pages. It was understood that such deadlines might be imposed by Department Chairs when instructed to do so by central administration.

This debate can be seen as an example of an "ethical functioning" conflict because it relates to how ethical beliefs and values are generated or altered by the flow of events and experiences in the working life of organizational members. In contrast to the "standards" debate which concerned a one-off issue, here the parties were divided over the continuous process of updating individual departments’ Web pages. The values that were in conflict here were essentially the same as in the previous debate, namely, the different interpretation of "democratic" rule and the right of management to dictate to its employees, but the focus was on the actual process of university control rather than on the principle.

5. CONCLUSIONS

This paper leaves ample scope for future research into the ethics of organizational Web page development. Some of the questions that could be explored by future research in this area are:

1. Ethical domains:

What are the external ethical influences that are impinging on organizations’ Web site development?

How do the values of different stakeholders (clients, suppliers, competitors, society in general) exert different ethical influences on Web site development?

How do organizations negotiate the conflicts between the pressures of external stakeholders on the content of their Web sites?

Ethical functioning:

What kind of dilemmas are experienced by organizations in the process of designing their Web sites?

How do such dilemmas change organizational members’ ethical awareness?

What actions are taken to negotiate the conflicts that such dilemmas involve?

How do variables such as type of industry, national culture etc. impinge on the type of dilemmas experienced by organizations in relation to their Web site development?

Ethical condition:

How do organizational Web sites reflect the changes in ethical assumptions, ideologies and rhetoric over time?

How does awareness of ethical issues by organizational members impinge on the content of organizational Web pages?

The most important conclusion to be drawn from this discussion is that organizational Web site management is not just the product of the organizational culture and ethics. The actual process of creating and maintaining an organizational Web site can impact and change the culture and ethics of an organization. By studying this researchers are, thus, looking at a process in which organizational Web sites both reflect and shape the organizations which create them.

REFERENCES

Cohen, E. (1996) "Cultures’ Constraints on Ethical Decision-making: A Call for an AIS Code of Conduct", Proceedings of the Americas Conference on Information Systems (Ed. Jane Carey), Arizona State University, Phoenix, Arizona, pp.826-828.

Hirscheim, R. and Klein, H. K.(1989) "Four Paradigms of Information Systems Development", Communications of the ACM, 32, 10, pp. 1199-1216.

Hirscheim, R. Klein, H. K. and Lytinnen, K. (1995) Information Systems Development: Conceptual and Philosophical Foundations, Cambridge University Press.

Nicholson, N. (1994) "Ethics in Organizations: A Framework for Theory and Research", Journal of Business Ethics, 13, pp. 581-596.

Wells, J. D. (1996) "Postmodernism and Information Technology: Philosophical Perspectives and Pragmatic Implications", Proceedings of the Americas Conference on Information Systems (Ed. Jane Carey), Arizona State University, Phoenix, Arizona, pp.602-604.

Seni, D. A. and Hodges, W. S. (1996) "Common Grounds and Relationships Between Information Technology and Philosophy", Proceedings of the Americas Conference on Information Systems (Ed. Jane Carey), Arizona State University, Phoenix, Arizona, pp.398-400.