Paper Number
ECIS2026-2236
Paper Type
CRP
Abstract
Healthcare digitalization promises improved efficiency, access, and quality of care, yet it simultaneously generates ethical, operational, and governance challenges. Our study examines how healthcare IT decision makers interpret and navigate these challenges through the lens of paradox theory and digital responsibility. Drawing on an inductive qualitative study of 13 healthcare IT leaders in Switzerland, we identify three persistent paradoxes shaping digital transformation: innovation-stability, accessibility-privacy, and ethics-agility. These paradoxes cannot be resolved through simple trade-offs but require continuous balancing and sensemaking across technological, organizational, and ethical domains. Our findings demonstrate that IT decision makers act as key mediators of responsible digitalization by adopting both/and strategies that preserve operational reliability while enabling innovation. Our study advances understanding of digital responsibility in practice and highlights paradox theory as a useful analytical mechanism for conceptualizing and managing ethical tensions in healthcare digitalization.
Recommended Citation
Obwegeser, Nikolaus; Konzag, Henrike; and Blom, Henriette, "Paradoxical Tensions In Healthcare Digitalization: Balancing Innovation And Responsibility" (2026). ECIS 2026 Proceedings. 15.
https://aisel.aisnet.org/ecis2026/is_adopt/is_adopt/15
Paradoxical Tensions In Healthcare Digitalization: Balancing Innovation And Responsibility
Healthcare digitalization promises improved efficiency, access, and quality of care, yet it simultaneously generates ethical, operational, and governance challenges. Our study examines how healthcare IT decision makers interpret and navigate these challenges through the lens of paradox theory and digital responsibility. Drawing on an inductive qualitative study of 13 healthcare IT leaders in Switzerland, we identify three persistent paradoxes shaping digital transformation: innovation-stability, accessibility-privacy, and ethics-agility. These paradoxes cannot be resolved through simple trade-offs but require continuous balancing and sensemaking across technological, organizational, and ethical domains. Our findings demonstrate that IT decision makers act as key mediators of responsible digitalization by adopting both/and strategies that preserve operational reliability while enabling innovation. Our study advances understanding of digital responsibility in practice and highlights paradox theory as a useful analytical mechanism for conceptualizing and managing ethical tensions in healthcare digitalization.