Information Systems: The State of the Field (John Wiley Series in Information Systems) - Hardcover

Hardcover

ISBN 10: 0470017775 ISBN 13: 9780470017777

Publisher: Wiley, 2006

Synopsis

Discussion of the precise nature of the Information System discipline has raged for more than twenty years and continues fiercely today. The most interesting aspect of recent debate is not only the sharpness and depth of the arguments, but the diverse conclusions arrived at by participants. While very different, these have all been reached with the genuine aim of strengthening IS scholarship, and they all add to our specific understanding of the discipline in the last two decades. Edited by two of the most prominent academics in the field, Information Systems - The State of the Field brings together such perspectives along with wider contextual discussion to provide a fertile ground for reflection, learning and further debate. It includes articles from Izak Benbasat, Robert Galliers, Rudi Hirschheim, Heinz Klein, Suzi Iacono, Wanda Orlikowski, Gerry DeSanctis, Bob Zmud, Dan Robey, Kalle Lyytinen, John King, Sal March and Ron Weber, all of whom also provide a short original commentary of their views on this debate.

About this title

About the Author

John Leslie King is Dean and Professor in the School of Information at the University of Michigan. He previously served on the faculty of the University of California, Irvine. He has published many articles and five books on the relationship between technical and social change, and has served in key editorial positions for many academic journals, including Information Systems Research, Information Infrastructure and Policy, Information Polity, Organization Science, Organizational Computing and Electronic Commerce, Information Systems Frontiers, ACM Computing Surveys, the Journal of Strategic IT, Computer Supported Cooperative Work, and the Journal of Information Systems Management. He is currently a member of the National Science Foundation’s Advisory Committees for the directorates of Computer and Information Science and Engineering and Social, Behavioral and Economic Sciences, and a member of the Board of Directors of the Computing Research Association. He holds a PhD in Administration from the University of California, Irvine.

Kalle Lyytinen is Iris S. Wolstein Professor at Case Western Reserve University. He has published books, articles and conference papers on his research, which includes system design, method engineering, implementation, software risk assessment, computer-supported cooperative work, standardization, ubiquitous computing, IT-induced innovation in architecture and the construction industry, design and use of ubiquitous applications in health care, high level requirements model for large scale systems, and the development and adoption of broadband wireless standards and services. He serves currently on the editorial boards of several leading IS journals including the Journal of AIS (Senior Editor), Information Systems Research, the Journal of Strategic Information Systems, Information and Organization, Requirements Engineering Journal and Information Systems Journal among others. He holds a PhD from the University of Jyväskylä, Finland.

From the Back Cover

The information systems field has contributed greatly to the rise of the information economy and the information society. Yet, after more than a quarter-century since its formation, it still is plagued by doubts about its identity and legitimacy. Information Systems: The State of the Field contains the reflections of leading IS scholars on the nature of the discipline, its core identity and the challenges of creating a strong and legitimate academic enterprise centred on information systems. It includes debates, reflections and commentaries from a group of leading information system scholars, and offers an overview of the state of the field at this time. This book is intended for all who are interested in the nature and direction of the information system field as it enters the 21st century.

"The sociologist Zygmund Bauman has defined a discipline which is constantly debating its credentials as a “flawed” discipline. This critique can certainly be applied to the IS discipline. The editors of this book must be congratulated on collecting together the principal writings reflecting the nature of the debate to provide a learned and fascinating account of where the field now stands and perhaps where it is going. It is essential reading for any student of IS."
―Frank Land, Emeritus Professor, Department of Information Systems, London School of Economics

"The struggle for identity, according to Alford North Whitehead entails a dialectic of “becoming”. It evolves from coping with continuous change, a conflict of perspectives and always asking: “Who am I?”, “Who are we?”, “Who are we not?”, “What do we inherit from our past?”. In this imaginatively edited volume, King and Lyytinen recount information systems' restless pursuit for identity. Anyone who is affected by the struggles, but more importantly everyone who wants to join it must read this book."
―Richard O. Mason, Carr P. Collins Distinguished Professor, Management Information Sciences, Edwin L. Cox School of Business, Southern Methodist University

From the Inside Flap

This volume explores key questions on the state of the information systems field:

• What is at the core of the IS field?
• What part does the ‘IT artifact’ play in the shaping of the field?
• What are the best ways to build the identity, legitimacy and institutional strength of the field?
• What roles do analytical, empirical and design perspectives play?
• How does the field best balance its intellectual and professional dimensions?
• How best can the IS field be sustained as a learning community?

The volume offers a unique set of influential essays from thought leaders in the field, followed by commentaries and critical reflections on what can be learned from the ongoing debate as the field moves forward in the 21st century.

Excerpt. © Reprinted by permission. All rights reserved.

Information Systems

The State of the Field

John Wiley & Sons

Copyright © 2006 John Leslie King
All right reserved.
ISBN: 978-0-470-01777-7

Chapter One

Scoping the Discipline of Information Systems

David Avison and Steve Elliot

INTRODUCTION

In reflecting on the academic discipline of information systems (IS) we might first look at what we mean by 'discipline'. Here we mean 'a branch of instruction or learning' though we do not wish to imply the desirability of, nor actual, agreement on a limited field of study nor total 'control', 'obedience' nor too much 'order' about what we research. This would give grounds for concern, for information systems is a pluralistic field, founded on knowledge from other, more established, source disciplines and frequently borrowing from these disciplines. On the other hand, a lack of 'discipline'-for example, not having an agreed general area for teaching, research and practice-is also a concern, as it leads to a perceived lack of coherence in the discipline and a low status as a consequence. It is this balancing act, between too much control about limiting the issues relevant to the discipline on the one side and the danger of incoherence on the other, which is a central theme of this chapter. This balancing act might be considered to be only of academic interest except for the importance of information systems to industry and to society.

Since the 1990s, applications of information and communication technology (ICT) have been fundamentally changing the way organizations conduct business. These changes create opportunities for researchers to make significant contributions to knowledge while they assist organizations to manage this change better. The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) acknowledges the structural impact of these technology-enabled innovations:

The Internet and related advances in information and communication technology (ICT) are transforming economic activity, much as the steam engine, railways and electricity did in the past (OECD, 2001).

But we have reservations about the above as a basis for understanding the discipline of information systems in its concentration on economic activity with technology, rather than the broader activity between people and organizations and technology, and also in its comparison between ICT and the more static technologies mentioned. Major developments in ICT seem to occur every day and there are so many different strands and applications. Further, there can be no doubt that it is transforming society, at least in the developed world and some regions in the developing world.

IS is a relatively new discipline. We consider the start of the discipline to be the widespread use of computers to process data in the 1950s. Of course they existed well before the advent of computers. There can today be IS without computers. The grapevine is a powerful information system. Further, if technology is used, it does not have to be sophisticated. But in practice, information systems are now almost invariably computerized, and can be very sophisticated in their use of technology. The rejoinder is that the organizational context is key, that people will be involved as much as computers, and that not all parts of the information system will be automated.

IS as a field of study developed in response to the increasing necessity of organizations to improve their capabilities to process and to manage data. Reflecting this origin, an information system was initially seen to be an application of computers to help organizations process their data so they could improve their management of information. Indeed, information systems used to be referred to as data processing systems.

While the types of computer technologies developed and potential areas of their application increased, so too did the role of an information system and the scope of the discipline. Information and communication technologies are now ubiquitous in industrialized nations and widespread in much of the rest of the world. Their impact extends from business, across a broad range of application areas, including health and government, to the community at large and into many private homes.

By looking at some potential definitions for the discipline, we will set the scene for our discussion on its scope. Our starting point for a definition of information systems is that of Avison and Fitzgerald (2003, p. xi): 'The effective design, delivery, use and impact of information [and communication] technologies in organizations and society.' This definition captures an important part of IS, that is the development of IT applications, and it recognizes that successful applications of ICT require broader attention than just that on the technology. The IS discipline has steadily developed from its initial 'techno-centric' focus to a more integrated technology, management, organizational and social focus.

But this definition does not capture the excitement of the discipline. We are now in a period of great transformation, as organizations change to address their challenges or achieve their goals. It is also a period of structural transformation of the global economy. ICT supports and enables most of these changes, and IS is the only discipline with a primary focus to study the applications of technology by organizations and society. It is therefore particularly relevant during this period of great change.

The following definition suggested by the UK Academy for Information Systems is somewhat broader than the definition looked at previously:

The study of information systems and their development is a multi-disciplinary subject and addresses the range of strategic, managerial and operational activities involved in the gathering, processing, storing, distributing and use of information, and its associated technologies, in society and organizations.

The above definition is, however, somewhat passive about IS as it does not give a sense of the creativity and innovative effort that is part of the potential contribution of IS. The definition might also include some scholars from other disciplines, such as the computing disciplines or some management and social science ones, such as sociology or psychology. In his definition, Allen Lee tries to distinguish information systems from other disciplines without presenting too narrow a view. He argues that the IS discipline is distinct in that it:

examines more than just the technological system, or just the social system, or even the two side by side; in addition it investigates the phenomena that emerge when the two interact. (Lee, 2001, p. iii)

As Lee points out: 'This embodies both a research perspective and a subject matter that differentiate the academic field of information systems from other disciplines' (Lee, 2001, p. iii). However, although it provides a focus, it lacks a sense of the richness of the discipline and its possible contribution.

The above discussion has set the scene on our perspective on the scope of the discipline and, having suggested a fairly broad scope, we turn to differentiating between IS and other related disciplines, both on the technology side and the social side, using Lee's definition above.

DIFFERENTIATING IS FROM RELATED DISCIPLINES

On the technology side of information systems, it is differentiated from computer and IT disciplines by its focus. In a controversial article in the Harvard Business Review of May 2003, Nicholas Carr argues that IT doesn't matter. He compares IT to the electricity or telephone infrastructure: the early mover advantage has gone, everyone has it and organizations cannot gain competitive advantage because of it (Carr, 2003). In some respects this is similar to the OECD perspective given at the beginning of the chapter.

But IS is different from IT. As illustrated graphically in Figure 1.1, compared with two other IT-related disciplines, computer science and computer systems engineering, IS emphasizes the applications of technology rather than a focus on fundamental technologies and theories. It focuses more on interactions between people and organizations (the 'soft' issues) and technology rather than on the technologies (the 'hard' issues) themselves. (It should be noted that Figures 1.1 and 1.2 represent the focus of the different disciplines, not the quantum of work conducted in or contributed by any of the disciplines.)

Figure 1.3 is a comic-strip representation of the different viewpoints of the computer scientist and the IS researcher vis--vis the computer. Whereas the computer scientist and systems engineer will be looking at the technology, interested in technology itself, the information systems researcher is looking away from the computer to its impacts on people and organizations. In the same way, in practice, the software developer is focused on the technology, whereas the systems analyst is focused on the business.

This emphasis on soft, or human and organizational, issues may suggest that IS should be seen more as a social science discipline rather than science or engineering. But as shown in Figure 1.2, sociology, psychology, anthropology and other social sciences do not share our emphasis on the applications of technology to organizations and society.

Like computer science, these other disciplines can be seen as both related disciplines and foundation disciplines of IS. But, while there may be considerable overlap of the disciplines at the boundaries, the disciplines are still differentiated by the focus, purpose and orientation of their activities.

FOUNDATIONS OF IS

We now turn to some of the foundations that support the discipline, beginning with the theoretical foundations. We have seen that the IS discipline is in essence an applied social science pertaining to the use and impact of technology. As researchers were drawn to the discipline, they began by applying the theories, methods and research practices from their original disciplines, primarily computer science on the one side and social sciences and management on the other. A diversity of theory from reference disciplines, including economics, mathematics, linguistics, semiotics, ethics, political science, psychology, sociology and statistics, along with computer science, was applied.

For example, we can see how economic theories might be used to cost-justify an information system to the organization's management; how psychology might be used to assess the impact of the system on individual users; how sociology might be used to assess the impact of the system on organizations and society; and semiotics to study the meaning of signs, how people and computers can communicate, as well as computer science to study the efficiency of software.

One potential problem is that, within these disciplines, different theories exist and these may be mutually inconsistent. As Orlikowski and Baroudi (1991) argue, the social sciences are 'marked by a plethora of "schools of thought," each with its own metatheoretic assumptions, research methodologies, and adherents'.

The theories include systems theory, information theory, design theory, the theory of science and scientific method. It is true that many disciplines (including medicine, management and geography) also do not have a simple and single disciplinary status and can further be described as a collection of social practices. However, as we have already suggested, such a discipline can be seen by other academics as confused and lacking in coherence and academic rigor: in short, the discipline of information systems could lack credibility because it does not have theoretical clarity.

The interdisciplinary nature of the subject is no excuse for a lack of rigor. One of the problems with the use of concepts from another discipline is that they may be used uncritically. Avison and Myers (1995) give an example of the uncritical use of a concept within information systems with the use of the term 'culture'. Researchers in information systems may be unaware of their historical development within the source discipline, and may gloss over the fact that there may be a range of perspectives that operate concurrently.

The way that IS seems to take on board major theoretical underpinnings of other disciplines has been lax at times. In attacking the once-prevalent view that systems theory can be used to underpin IS, Checkland (1999) argues that this should be dispelled as 'nave optimism ... there is no simple link between systems theory and information systems'. Similarly, information theory (Shannon and Weaver, 1949) is a very technical, indeed mathematical, way to perceive communication between humans and organizations that is the essence of IS. It is not mathematical complexity that underpins IS. Stamper (1997) argues the case for the related theory of semiotics (and also linguistics) to be fundamental to IS. The unifying work of Simon (1981) continues to be influential in branches of economics, sociology, psychology, computer science and elsewhere, as well as in IS. The theory of communicative action (Habermas, 1979), structuration theory (Giddens, 1987), and actor-network theory (Latour, 1987) have also become popular in some IS academic circles. As an emerging discipline, IS has also been influenced by writers giving a sociological perspective from within and outside the discipline (for example, the socio-technical theory expressed in Mumford, 1995, and also by Kling, 1996).

Even well-established concepts in IS research such as 'users' have been found simplistic and unrepresentative of the multitude of roles undertaken by users in their interactions with a diversity of applications and people within varying social contexts (Lamb and Kling, 2003). The authors consider earlier research approaches based on the concept of an individualistic user to be limited, leading to an inadequate understanding of information selection, manipulation, communication and exchange in a variety of social contexts.

New insights into the strategic role of IT have also been sought, for example by Sambamurthy, Bharadwaj and Grover (2003), by drawing on recent thinking in strategy, entrepreneurship and IT management. Stressing the critical impact on organizational performance related to its capabilities (agility, digital options and entrepreneurial alertness) and strategic processes (capability-building, entrepreneurial action and co-evolutionary adaptation) these authors consider their antecedents to be research into IT investments and capabilities.

Thus IS has been reliant on the theories espoused in other disciplines. Interestingly, the view that IS serves as a reference for emerging disciplines in a discourse with other reference disciplines has also been promoted recently. Baskerville and Myers (2002) note the development of new fields of study that refer to IS theory for explanations; for example, biotechnology. They also note the increasing influence of IS on disciplines, including accounting, banking and marketing, experiencing structural transformation resulting from application of ICT. As illustrated in Figure 1.4, they present an argument that no single discipline is able to completely address today's multi-faceted research issues so well as IS. A more viable reference model is a network of disciplines in continuous dialogue and exchange, with IS at the center of the network.

These diverse perspectives on the focus of IS theory development, with compelling arguments on all sides, should be recognized as being complementary. The discussion is beneficial to the discipline. The dynamic IS domain requires both excitement and enthusiasm in its research as well as reflective consideration on how dynamically developing research may contribute to, and be consistent with, the discipline's overall development. The diversity of perspectives means that IS is vibrant both as a discipline and as an area of research.

(Continues...)

Excerpted from Information Systems Copyright © 2006 by John Leslie King. Excerpted by permission.
All rights reserved. No part of this excerpt may be reproduced or reprinted without permission in writing from the publisher.
Excerpts are provided by Dial-A-Book Inc. solely for the personal use of visitors to this web site.

Edition details

• Publisher: Wiley
• Publication date: 2006
• Language: English
• ISBN 10: 0470017775
• ISBN 13: 9780470017777
• Binding: Hardcover
• Edition number: 1
• Number of pages: 394
• Editor: King John Leslie, Lyytinen Kalle