Belief in the magic bullet theory can lead to situations in which effective change management techniques are not practiced, and the intended organizational transformation never occurs. The problem stems from the roles and behaviors that the theory prescribes for executives, IT specialists, users, and IT itself. Executives are supposed to define the change idea or devise improved “systems.” IT specialists are supposed to select or build technologies that, when used as expected, will produce the desired results. Users are supposed to use technologies as expected (and not to have competing solutions for organizational problems). IT is supposed to work — like magic.

People, not technology, create IT-enabled organizational change. In order to make real lasting improvements, people need more than good IT; they also need to use it in line with clear organizational goals. Agents of IT-enabled organizational change bring together all the necessary conditions for successful change: good technologies, supportive organizational conditions, and knowledgeable, mindful users. Whenever possible, they also empower all kinds of people (technologists, users, executives) about IT. They expand their opportunities to learn more about IT and organizational change and to participate effectively in IT decision making. Most of all, they foster a state of mind in which people accept responsibility for their IT-oriented behavior, however great or small their potential impact on organizational results.s

IT can enable organizational change, but change is created by people who know the objective and how to use their tools to achieve it. Agents of ITnization can see clearly how the people in an organization can achieve better performance by adopting different work practices and using certain kinds of tools in certain ways. They are tireless, inventive promoters of the effective use of IT to achieve organizational goals. They use whatever tactics seem likely to work to change people’s minds about the goals, the means, and the outcomes of their everyday actions. They convince them through constant repetition, persuade them, and use all the rewards and sanctions within their legitimate organizational authority. Agents’ tactics pay off; eventually, they get results. However, they let others take the credit for the success (a tactic that pays off in credibility when it’s time for the next big idea).

Change Advocates are not necessarily people who would be tapped for top management positions; they include “the seemingly low-profile go-getters who always get the job done.”. Thus both mid-level line managers and functional specialists can play the IT change advocate role. To get under the skin of this critical role I offer a realistic metaphor of the Trojan horse.

Greek warriors faced powerful resistance at the walls of Troy when they attempted to recapture their queen. They respected their enemy’s fighting skills, valor, weaponry, and defenses. They knew that they would have to fight hard, even if they succeeded in breaching the walls. They needed an edge, not a magic weapon. They improvised a clever idea grounded in sound human psychology. They built supporting technologies — a great hollow wooden horse and a wheeled carriage to get it to the walls. Then they executed their plan flawlessly. Brave trained warriors hid inside the horse, while others pulled the horse to the gates at night. In the morning, the curious Trojans brought the horse inside their walls. The warriors inside the horse remained quiet and ready until night fell again, and the Trojans went to sleep. Then the warriors climbed out of the horse, slew the guards at the walls, and opened the gates of the city to the rest of the invading force, who were standing by, ready to finish the job.

There was no magic bullet here. The Trojan horse was a highly coordinated effort in which warriors, temporarily playing different roles (creative initiators, skilled builders, highly trained fighters, and a strong support staff ) all worked together to achieve a difficult task. They did not have narrowly defined roles, they were all just warriors. All had to remain alert to new opportunities and challenges that would necessitate changing their plans.