Understanding the Why, What, and How of Theories in IS Research

Researchers have emphasized theory’s pivotal importance in the information systems (IS) discipline since its inception. As in many science disciplines, IS scholars’ ability to understand and contribute to theory is an important qualification in research practice. As a discipline, we require solid foundations for why we engage with theory, what theory is for us, and how we work with theory. We synthesize and reflect on the debates on theories and theorizing in the IS discipline. In doing so, we inform (particularly new) authors about the current state of the IS discipline’s debate on theory and theorizing and help them identify opportunities in theorizing to put theory to work. We do not intend to advocate or cement that status quo we portray but rather, through informing the community about it, to support early efforts to further develop and move beyond the current state of the debate on theory and theorizing in IS research

Strategizing in the new normal : implications of digitalization for strategizing and uncertainty : philosophical and managerial considerations

Something fundamental is changing – or is it? The firms are preoccupied by transformations and disruptions, the scholars are reassessing the validity of old theories, the politicians are wondering where the power is, and the individuals are struggling to understand how to go about making a living tomorrow. Has this always been the normal, or are we evidencing an era that can rightfully be called a New Normal? This research is an attempt to synthetize knowledge from several rich sources in order to understand the drivers of the changes emerging from the phenomenon labelled digitalization. The research quandary of this conceptual monograph is the impact of digitalization – as a sociotechnical trinity of digital technological systems, humans and perceptions – on strategizing, the individual level actions and decisions tackling the fundamental uncertainty of anything future-oriented, subsequently coalescing into collective level outcomes. This research explores the constitutions of strategizing, uncertainty and digitalization in order to understand the impact of the drivers of digitalization on the constitution of uncertainty dealt with in strategizing, and the subsequent changes therefore reflected on strategizing. Tracing these ripples requires reconceptualizing uncertainty as consisting of three dimensions: lack of knowledge, difficulty of choosing between diverse standards of desirability, and the infathomability of the meaning making mechanisms that underpin the creation of those standards of desirability. As findings, this dissertation presents three theses: first, digitalization obliterates one type of uncertainty, while changing and enforcing other types; secondly, digitalization erodes the boundaries of extant entities and creates new boundary forming mechanisms; and thirdly, digitalization changes the shape and impact of what we take for granted, consider normal – the doxa. These findings have implications for both the theorists and the practitioners. As scholars, we need to redefine such units of analysis, as heretofore captured by concepts like the firm, market or nation. As practitioners, we need to cherish such rationalities that do not compete with the algorithmic intelligence, to emphasize such creative thinking a machine cannot do. As individuals, we need to understand how many of our actions are grounded on the unreflective acceptance of what we take for granted, and how susceptible our notion of normal is to manipulation. Together, we need to understand that the digital representation of reality, being constructed today to give the shape for our tomorrow, reflects not only the physical entities datafied and digitized, but also our values and preferences – whether we reflectively acknowledge them or not.Elämme perustavanlaatuisen muutoksen aikaa – vai elämmekö? Yritykset keskittyvät disruptioihin ja muutoksiin, tutkijat arvioivat vanhojen teorioiden kykyä selittää uusia ilmiöitä, poliitikot pohtivat vallan uusia muotoja ja yksilöt taistelevat huomisen toimeentulon kanssa. Onko tämä ollut aina yhtä normaalia, vai elämmekö aikaa, jota voimme rehellisesti kutsua uudeksi normaaliksi? Tämä tutkimus pyrkii yhdistämään rikasta, olemassaolevaa tietoa monista lähteistä luodakseen ymmärrystä digitalisaatioksi kutsutun ilmiön synnyttämien muutosten ajureista. Tämän teoreettisen monografian tutkimusalue on digitalisaation – digitaalisten teknologisten systeemien, ihmisten ja oletusten muodostaman sosioteknisen kolmiyhteyden – vaikutus strategiointiin, eli tulevaisuuteen elimellisesti liittyvän epävarmuuden käsittelyyn sellaisella yksilötason toiminnalla ja päätöksenteolla, joka yhdistyy kollektiivisen tason lopputuloksiksi. Tämä tutkimus perehtyy strategioinnin, epävarmuuden ja digitalisaation luonteeseen selvittääkseen digitalisaation ajurien vaikutusta strategioinnissa käsiteltävään epävarmuuteen, ja siitä syntyviin muutoksiin strategioinnissa. Tämän vaikutusketjun ymmärtäminen vaatii epävarmuuden uutta konseptualisointia: epävarmuus muodostuu kolmesta ulottuvuudesta, jotka ovat tiedon puute, eri arvoskaalojen välillä valitsemisen vaikeus, sekä niiden merkityksen muodostamismekanismien hahmottomuus, joista arvoskaalamme kumpuavat. Tämän kirjan tulokset muodostavat kolme väitöstä: ensinnäkin, digitalisaatio tuhoaa yhden epävarmuuden tyypin ja muuttaa sekä vahvistaa muita; toiseksi, digitalisaatio haurastuttaa olemassa olevien entiteettien rajoja ja synnyttää uusia rajanmuodostusmekanismeja; ja kolmanneksi, digitalisaatio muuttaa itsestäänselvänä ja normaalina pitämiemme asioiden muotoa ja vaikutusta. Näillä tuloksilla on niin teoreettisia kuin käytännönkin vaikutuksia. Tutkijoina meidän on uudelleen määriteltävä sellaisia analyysin yksiköitä kuten yritys, markkina tai valtio. Yritystoiminnan harjoittajina meidän on vaalittava sellaista rationaalisuutta, mihin algoritminen äly ei kykene, painotettava luovaa ajattelua. Yksilöinä meidän on ymmärrettävä miten iso osa toiminnastamme perustuu itsestäänselvyyksinä pitämiimme asioihin ja miten helposti käsitystämme normaalista voidaan manipuloida. Yhdessä, meidän on ymmärrettävä, että tänään muodostumassa oleva, huomistamme muovaava digitaalinen todellisuuden representaatio heijastelee, paitsi fyysisen maailman digitaaliseksi dataksi muunnettuja entiteettejä, myös arvojamme ja preferenssejämme – riippumatta siitä, tiedostammeko ja tunnistammeko ne vai emme

A Scientific Metaphysical Naturalisation of Information: with a indication-based semantic theory of information and an informationist statement of physicalism.

The objective of this thesis is to present a naturalised metaphysics of information, or to naturalise information, by way of deploying a scientific metaphysics according to which contingency is privileged and a-priori conceptual analysis is excluded (or at least greatly diminished) in favour of contingent and defeasible metaphysics. The ontology of information is established according to the premises and mandate of the scientific metaphysics by inference to the best explanation, and in accordance with the idea that the primacy of physics constraint accommodates defeasibility of theorising in physics. This metametaphysical approach is used to establish a field ontology as a basis for an informational structural realism. This is in turn, in combination with information theory and specifically mathematical and algorithmic theories of information, becomes the foundation of what will be called a source ontology, according to which the world is the totality of information sources. Information sources are to be understood as causally induced configurations of structure that are, or else reduce to and/or supervene upon, bounded (including distributed and non-contiguous) regions of the heterogeneous quantum field (all quantum fields combined) and fluctuating vacuum, all in accordance with the above-mentioned quantum field-ontic informational structural realism (FOSIR.) Arguments are presented for realism, physicalism, and reductionism about information on the basis of the stated contingent scientific metaphysics. In terms of philosophical argumentation, realism about information is argued for primarily by way of an indispensability argument that defers to the practice of scientists and regards concepts of information as just as indispensable in their theories as contingent representations of structure. Physicalism and reductionism about information are adduced by way of the identity thesis that identifies the substance of the structure of ontic structural realism as identical to selections of structure existing in re to combined heterogeneous quantum fields, and to the total heterogeneous quantum field comprised of all such fields. Adjunctly, an informational statement of physicalism is arrived at, and a theory of semantic information is proposed, according to which information is intrinsically semantic and alethically neutral