This paper explores the introduction of groupware into an organization to understand the changes in work practices and social interaction facilitated by the technology. The results suggest that people's mental models and organizations' structure and culture significantly influence how groupware is implemented and used. Specifically, in the absence of mental models that stressed its collaborative nature, groupware was interpreted in terms of familiar personal, stand-alone technologies such as spreadsheets. Further, the culture and structure provided few incentives or norms for cooperating or sharing expertise, hence the groupware on its own was unlikely to engender collaboration. Recognizing the central influence of these cognitive and organizational elements is critical to developers, researchers, and practitioners of groupware. The research was conducted in a large services firm, Alpha Corporation, where groupware product Notes was implemented. The study examined how the technology was adopted and used by individuals, and how work and social relations changed as a consequence. The findings suggest that two organizational elements—cognitive and structural—were especially relevant in influencing the effective utilization of groupware. Cognitive elements refer to individuals' mental models or frames of reference about technology, work, and their organization. Structural elements include policies, norms, reward systems, and work practices that shape organizational behavior. The study found that weakly developed technological frames around Notes in the office were a significant problem in technology transfer. Employees had little information about what Notes was and why it was being distributed, leading to weak understanding and skepticism towards the technology. Additionally, the lack of formal training and the emphasis on individual productivity rather than collaboration contributed to the limited use of Notes as a collaborative tool. Structural elements such as reward systems, policies, and firm culture also influenced the use of Notes. The competitive culture and individualistic values within Alpha discouraged cooperation and sharing of expertise, leading to Notes being used primarily as an individual productivity tool. The lack of clear policies and procedures around Notes further hindered its effective use. The findings suggest that for groupware to be effectively used, organizations need to align their cognitive and structural elements with the collaborative nature of the technology. This includes providing appropriate training, developing supportive policies, and fostering a culture that encourages cooperation and knowledge sharing. Without such changes, groupware is likely to be used primarily for individual productivity rather than for collective work practices.This paper explores the introduction of groupware into an organization to understand the changes in work practices and social interaction facilitated by the technology. The results suggest that people's mental models and organizations' structure and culture significantly influence how groupware is implemented and used. Specifically, in the absence of mental models that stressed its collaborative nature, groupware was interpreted in terms of familiar personal, stand-alone technologies such as spreadsheets. Further, the culture and structure provided few incentives or norms for cooperating or sharing expertise, hence the groupware on its own was unlikely to engender collaboration. Recognizing the central influence of these cognitive and organizational elements is critical to developers, researchers, and practitioners of groupware. The research was conducted in a large services firm, Alpha Corporation, where groupware product Notes was implemented. The study examined how the technology was adopted and used by individuals, and how work and social relations changed as a consequence. The findings suggest that two organizational elements—cognitive and structural—were especially relevant in influencing the effective utilization of groupware. Cognitive elements refer to individuals' mental models or frames of reference about technology, work, and their organization. Structural elements include policies, norms, reward systems, and work practices that shape organizational behavior. The study found that weakly developed technological frames around Notes in the office were a significant problem in technology transfer. Employees had little information about what Notes was and why it was being distributed, leading to weak understanding and skepticism towards the technology. Additionally, the lack of formal training and the emphasis on individual productivity rather than collaboration contributed to the limited use of Notes as a collaborative tool. Structural elements such as reward systems, policies, and firm culture also influenced the use of Notes. The competitive culture and individualistic values within Alpha discouraged cooperation and sharing of expertise, leading to Notes being used primarily as an individual productivity tool. The lack of clear policies and procedures around Notes further hindered its effective use. The findings suggest that for groupware to be effectively used, organizations need to align their cognitive and structural elements with the collaborative nature of the technology. This includes providing appropriate training, developing supportive policies, and fostering a culture that encourages cooperation and knowledge sharing. Without such changes, groupware is likely to be used primarily for individual productivity rather than for collective work practices.