There's a good article on this topic by Andrew McAfee here:

http://blog.hbs.edu/faculty/amcafee/index.php/faculty_amcafee_v3/its_not_not_about_the_technology/

Essentially, he seems to be saying: OK, we all agree that INATT. Let's take this discussion to a more nuanced level. He says:

[One version of INATT] encourages the view that there's nothing new under the sun -- that one generation of technology aimed at addressing a business problem is the same as all other generations. So (for example) we need to collaborate and share knowledge better, but it's not about the technology. We've been disappointed with our past results in these areas for reasons that have nothing to do with the technologies we were using, and there's nothing about any new technologies that gives us better chances of success now.

This sense of INATT is pessimistic and self-defeating, even if it's not intended to be.

Don't get me wrong, I've said INATT a million times, and it's still a new concept to some people - but I think we need to acknowledge that there's an interplay between what is and isn't about the technology. (Makes a nice book title, though!)