Criticality, epistemology and behaviour vs. Design –information systems research across different sets of paradigms

Due to its dynamic and rapid development and due to a variety of academic disciplines and research communities contributing to information systems (IS) research, a broad variety of research approaches can be found. These approaches are often discussed as contrasting “paradigms”. Positivism and interpretivism are frequently accepted to be the most relevant paradigms (cf., for instance, Klein & Myers 1999; Lee 1991; Walsham 1995; Weber 2004). A further set of paradigms consists of behavioural science research (‘problem understanding paradigm’) and design science research (‘problem understanding paradigm’) which has been introduced in the IS literature and heavily adopted since (cf., for instance, Hevner et al. 2004; Jani 2001; March & Smith 1995). On top of this distinction, the critical research paradigm, including its logical complement, the non-critical paradigm, shaped the discussion of IS research philosophy for more than two decades (cf., for instance, Brooke 2002; Klein & Huynh 2004; Landry & Banville 1992; Mumford et al. 1985). Though it is essential to research theory and practice in the IS discipline to discuss the interconnections between these different sets of paradigms, such endeavour has not yet been undertaken. Some approaches address the interdependency between interpretivism and critical research. However, a holistic framework, also taking into account also behavioural and design science is still missing. Therefore, the aim of this paper is to provide an integrated discussion of these different sets of paradigms and to provide novel perspectives for IS research on how to deal with the apparent diversity of approaches. We will furthermore point out why this discussion is of great importance to IS research especially in Europe

A Paradigmatic Analysis of Digital Application Marketplaces

This paper offers a paradigmatic analysis of digital application marketplaces for advancing information systems (IS) research on digital platforms and ecosystems. We refer to the notion of digital application marketplace, colloquially called “appstores,” as a platform component that offers a venue for exchanging applications between developers and end-users belonging to a single or multiple ecosystems. Such marketplaces exhibit diversity in features and assumptions, and we propose that examining this diversity, and its ideal types, will help us to further understand the relationship between application marketplaces, platforms, and platform ecosystems. To this end, we generate a typology that distinguishes four kinds of digital application marketplaces: closed, censored, focused, and open marketplaces. The paper also offers implications for actors wishing to make informed decisions about their relationship to a particular digital application marketplace

Rámec pro posouzení kvalitativních hledisek informačních systémů

Záměrem předložené disertační práce je porozumět tomu, jak investoři v konkrétním společenském kontextu vnímají význam kvality informačních systémů. Ze studia literatury zabývající se přístupy a rámci hodnocení kvality informačních systémů vyplývá, že tato kvalita je obecně hodnocena z hlediska striktního přístupu. V této práci je ukázáno, že kvalitu informačního systému lze smysluplně pochopit použitím interpretačního paradigmatu a že kvalita informačního systému je definována společensky a ovlivňována kontextem tohoto systému. Studie byla zahájena průzkumem dvaceti libyjských organizací. Podrobnější data byla získána z případové studie dvou vybraných libyjských organizací působících ve veřejném sektoru. Při empirické analýze nashromážděných dat bylo využito rámce mnohočetné perspektivy, který zahrnuje hlediska teorie strukturalizace, pojem mnohočetných perspektiv a metodologii měkkých systémů. V práci se dospělo ke zjištění, že: a) kvalita informačních systémů je pojata šíře, než je tomu u tradiční definice kvality, b) mnohočetné perspektivy kvality informačních systémů jsou ovlivněny opakovanou interakcí mezi investorem a institucionálními vlastnostmi kontextu informačního systému a že c) rozdílné hodnoty v kulturním prostředí a vnějším kontextu ovlivňují rozsah působnosti investora a interakce v kontextu informačního systému. Ze závěru práce vyplývá, že společenská skladba mnohočetných perspektiv kvality informačního systému je ovlivněna strukturalizačními procesy mezi investory a vlastnostmi v kontextu informačního systému.This thesis is concerned with understanding how stakeholders in a particular cultural context construct the multiple meanings of ‘Information Systems Quality’ (IS Quality). A review of literature on approaches and frameworks for IS quality shows that the IS quality is generally examined through a ‘hard approach’. This study demonstrates that IS quality can be meaningfully understood through an interpretive paradigm, and that IS quality is socially constructed and influenced by the IS context. The study began with an exploratory survey of twenty Libyan organizations. Data were gathered through a case study of two public sector organizations in Libya. A Multiple Perspective Framework (MPF) that incorporates ideas from structuration theory, multiple perspectives concept, and soft systems methodology (SSM) was used to analyze the empirical work. The findings revealed that: (a) IS quality is a broader conception than the traditional quality definition, (b) the multiple perspectives of IS quality are influenced by repeated interaction between the stakeholder and institutional properties in the IS context, and (c) mediation of different values in the culture system and in the external context influence the extent of stakeholder agency and interaction in the IS context. The study concluded that the social construction of multiple perspectives of IS quality is influenced by the structuration processes between stakeholders and properties in the IS context.

Knowledge management research within the built environment: Research methodological perspectives

As built environment is of major importance to all societies and economies, it is essential that the discipline advances as rapidly and rigorously as possible. Only by use of appropriate methodologies and methods of research, the body of knowledge for construction can be established and advanced with confidence. Research is always executed in context and it is vital to give careful consideration to the research methodology at the outset of the research. This paper discusses available research philosophies and methodologies, while highlighting the main facets of the arguments on their relative characteristics. Issues that need to be considered when selecting the most appropriate approach and research methods when undertaking research in built environment context are outlined. In highlighting above, the paper explains and justifies the selected research strategy for a performance oriented knowledge management research in built environment context. Social constructionism stance in terms of epistemological undertakings and idealistic approach under the ontological assumptions with value laden purposes are suggested together with the deployment of multiple exploratory case studies approach and triangulation techniques

Reuse in Information Systems Development: Classification and Comparison

There has been a trend in recent years towards an increasing acceptance of reuse as an approach to information systems development. This trend however has not been accompanied by an understanding of the underlying implications of this approach for the development process. We attempt to briefly highlight these affects by an initial categorization of the reuse approach according to two alternative taxonomies for reuse techniques followed by three philosophical frameworks from the literature. The affects on the functional property of reusability is then discussed leading to some initial conclusions regarding the application of reuse in information systems development

Examining the Potential of Combining the Methods of Grounded Theory and Narrative Inquiry: A Comparative Analysis

Increasingly, qualitative researchers are combining methods, processes, and principles from two or more methodologies over the course of a research study. Critics charge that researchers adopting combined approaches place too little attention on the historical, epistemological, and theoretical aspects of the research design. Rather than discounting eclecticism in qualitative research, we prefer to place it on a continuum of integration whereby at the ideal end of the spectrum, the researcher demonstrates thorough knowledge of the approaches being drawn from and a thoughtful consideration of the rationale for combining methods. However, there is limited reflection in the literature on the combination of methods from specific methodological approaches. To address this gap we examine the extent to which the methods from two distinct qualitative methodologies, grounded theory and narrative inquiry might complement each other within a qualitative study using a framework that encompasses 10 key methodological features of research design

Epistemological Perspectives on Multi-Method Information Systems Research

There is a continuing discussion on methodological pluralism in IS research. Several claims have been made both for and against methodological pluralism. The debate focuses mainly on discussing the relationship between research methods and IS research paradigms, especially positivism and interpretivism. Also, the literature analyzes the epistemological assumptions of research paradigms, but pays little attention to a direct association of research methods with epistemology. We argue that the potential for methodological pluralism depends heavily on the epistemological characteristics of the research methods themselves. After analyzing various arguments pro and contra methodological pluralism, we then provide an epistemological framework addressing the relevant aspects in this context

Critical thinking and systems thinking: towards a critical literacy for systems thinking in practice

About the book: In reflective problem solving and thoughtful decision making using critical thinking one considers evidence, the context of judgment, the relevant criteria for making the judgment well, the applicable methods or techniques for forming the judgment, and the applicable theoretical constructs for understanding the problem and the question at hand. In this book, the authors present topical research in the study of critical thinking. Topics discussed include developing critical thinking through probability models; the promotion of critical thinking skills through argument mapping; an instructional model for teacher training in critical thinking; advanced academic literacy and critical thinking and critical thinking and higher education