Spagnoletti, Paolo

LUISSearch

Organisation designing though the practice of multi-method 
research in Information Systems 
(extended abstract) 
 
Paolo Spagnoletti 
 CeRSI-LUISS Guido Carli University, Roma, Italy 
pspagnoletti@luiss.it  
 
 
Purpose of the research 
Our increasingly knowledge and experience intensive economy (Yoo, Boland, & Lyytinen, 2006) poses new challenges 
and opportunities for organisation designing in an interconnected social world (Benkler, 2006). Practices for the 
strategic use of digital tools and platforms aimed at transforming organizations, redesigning cooperation models, and 
shaping the environment can benefit from the development of conceptual models and methods grounded on a deep 
understanding of the underlying logic of complex socio-technical systems. Also theorizing in such dynamic space 
requires the development of new intellectual frameworks and knowledge infrastructures (Edwards et al., 2013).  
Information Systems (IS) studies for their systemic view of organisations, design thinking orientation, and their 
multimethodology research process (Mingers, 2001, 2006) offer a promising perspective for developing knowledge 
across disciplinary boundaries (Baskerville & Myers, 2002) and providing solutions to the managerial challenges of 
digital transformation (Yoo, 2013). The aim of this paper is to deepen the understanding on how multi-methodology is 
applied in the practice of information systems research. To this purpose we adopt a practice lens (Feldman & 
Orlikowski, 2011) for analysing the case of an IS research centre by reflecting on the evolutionary pattern of its 
research agenda.  
Theories used and contribution to the literature 
As the relationship between Information Technology (IT) and organization evolves, the potential for new forms of 
organizing is continually created (Zammuto, Griffith, Majchrzak, Dougherty, & Faraj, 2007). On the one hand recent 
advancements in information infrastructures, platforms, and applications are blurring the boundaries between the 
physical and digital worlds by providing ubiquitous communication, sensing, and computing capabilities (Hanseth & 
Lyytinen, 2010; Yoo, Henfridsson, & Lyytinen, 2010). On the other hand individuals and organizations make use of IT 
as a resource for achieving their own goals in a given environment (Wade, 2004). This creates unparalleled 
opportunities for innovating current forms of organizing towards socially interactive, ethically sensitive, trustworthy, 
self-organized and resilient systems by connecting people and organizations. Nevertheless, IT also constrains practices 
and poses issues in terms of privacy, ownership, freedom of speech, responsibility, technological determinism, digital 
divide, cyber warfare, and other ethical issues (Floridi, 2010). In such environment, the architecture and governance of 
new organisational forms in which individuals, groups, and organisations interact beyond the boundaries of formal 
organisations, in both online and offline settings, requires a better understanding of the emerging phenomena. The 
dynamics of complex networks of people and IT artefacts must be deeply understood for setting up cooperative 
environments characterized by intensive information sharing, collaboration, and collective action (Benkler, 2006; 
Shirky, 2008). In this scenario, information infrastructures, platforms, and IT applications represent the material 
dimensions of organizational practices and are dynamically entangled with their social dimensions.  
Although some authors have recognized the relational character of IT affordances (Hutchby, 2001; Leonardi, 2011; 
Markus & Silver, 2008) the networked nature of both human and material agencies is still overlooked. In other words 
the relationship between a person and an IT artifact is considered as a dyadic relationship  but the composition and the 
structural aspects of social groups and digital products are seldom recognized. On one side social groups can be 
organized through hierarchies, markets, clans, fiefs in the physical world and as online communities in the virtual world 
(Shirky, 2008). On the other side, IT artifacts as digital products present a layered modular architecture (Yoo et al., 
2010). When both the individual view of human agency and the monolithical view of material agency are abandoned, 
the complexity generated by underlying mechanisms is revealed and new theoretical frameworks are required for 
analyzing the dynamics of such adaptation processes (Allen & Varga, 2006; Amaral & Uzzi, 2007; Anderson, 1999; 
Holland, 1998; Lewin, 1999). 
Our contribution to this body of knowledge is to apply these concepts to current IS research practices in order to show 
how organisation designing is enacted though the practice of multi-method research.  
Research method 
Our discussion draws on the evolutionary pattern of the research agenda of a research centre on information systems 
that embraces a multi-method research approach. With this purpose, an exploratory case study (Yin, 2009) is conducted 
in the context of the Research Center on Information Systems (CeRSI) of LUISS Guido Carli University.  
Since 1999 CeRSI is the unit in charge of both base and applied research in the areas of information systems, enterprise 
software and knowledge platforms, organization studies, and information and communication technologies. CeRSI 
regularly runs scientific research and consultancy activities, and participate to national, European, and international 
R&D programs. CeRSI also promotes the development of research in cooperation with most prominent Italian and 
foreign scientific communities, and performs, upon request by public or private, national or international, organizations, 
scientific counselling and researches in the aforementioned thematic areas (Spagnoletti, Baskerville, & De Marco, 
2013).  
Research at CeRSI is done in conjunction with project activities in which CeRSI members participate in the iterative 
phases of designing and evaluating IT artefacts. A multidisciplinary team of IS scholars with backgrounds in computer 
science, engineering, economics, management, cognitive and political sciences collaborate in both project and research 
activities by bringing together a multiplicity of methods for planning interventions and analyzing phenomena from 
different perspectives. This approach allows addressing relevant problems and engaging in national and international 
cooperation with other universities and research institutions.  
Main results  
Research at CeRSI focuses on three subject areas. The first is related to architectural and governance mechanisms for 
service environments enabling digital transformation (D’Urso, De Giovanni, & Spagnoletti, 2013; Resca, Za, & 
Spagnoletti, 2013; Spagnoletti & Resca, 2012). The second is related to organizational learning processes and capability 
development (North-Samardzic, Braccini, Spagnoletti, & Za, 2014; Za & Spagnoletti, 2013). The third refers to IT 
governance models, methods and tools in relationship with the evolution of socio-technical systems (Baskerville, 
Spagnoletti, & Kim, 2014; Spagnoletti & Federici, 2011; Spagnoletti & Resca, 2008; vom Brocke, Braccini, 
Sonnenberg, & Spagnoletti, 2013). Among the more recent application domains for these concepts are e-Health and 
social services, e-business, and e-participation. Beyond these topics oriented studies the research group is engaged in a 
continuous quest for new research methods through meta-level studies on existing approaches (Spagnoletti, Za, & 
Winter, 2013; Za & Spagnoletti, 2013) and the application of emerging methods (Marzo, Za, & Spagnoletti, 2013; Sein, 
Henfridsson, Purao, Rossi, & Lindgren, 2011).  
The analysis of scholarly contributions recently published by CeRSI members provides insights on the role of multi-
method research in shaping the evolutionary trajectories of organisation designing research and practice.   
 
References 
Allen, P. M., & Varga, L. 2006. A co-evolutionary complex systems perspective on information systems. Journal of 
Information Technology, 21(4): 229–238. http://www.palgrave-
journals.com/doifinder/10.1057/palgrave.jit.2000075, October 30, 2012. 
Amaral, L., & Uzzi, B. 2007. Complex Systems-A New Paradigm for the Integrative Study of Management, Physical, 
and Technological Systems. Management Science, 53(7): 1033–1035. 
Anderson, P. 1999. Complexity Theory and Organization Science. Organization Science, 10(3): 216–232. 
Baskerville, R., & Myers, D. 2002. Information systems as a reference discipline. MIS Quarterly, 26(1): 1–14. 
http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.2307/4132338, June 3, 2012. 
Baskerville, R., Spagnoletti, P., & Kim, J. 2014. Incident-centered information security: Managing a strategic balance 
between prevention and response. Information & Management, 51(1): 138–151. 
http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0378720613001171, December 30, 2013. 
Benkler, Y. 2006. The wealth of networks: how social production transforms markets and freedom: 515. New Haven 
[Conn.]: Yale University Press. 
D’Urso, P., De Giovanni, L., & Spagnoletti, P. 2013. A fuzzy taxonomy for e-Health projects. International Journal of 
Machine Learning and Cybernetics, 4(6). http://www.springerlink.com/index/10.1007/s13042-012-0118-4, 
September 9, 2012. 
Edwards, P. N., Jackson, S. J., Chalmers, M. K., Bowker, G. C., Borgman, C. L., Ribes, D., et al. 2013. Knowledge 
Infrastructures : Intellectual Frameworks and Research Challenges (Ann Arbor:): 40. 
http://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/97552. 
Feldman, M. S., & Orlikowski, W. J. 2011. Theorizing Practice and Practicing Theory. Organization Science, 22(5): 
1240–1253. http://orgsci.journal.informs.org/cgi/doi/10.1287/orsc.1100.0612. 
Floridi, L. 2010. The Cambridge Handbook of Information and Computer Ethics. Cambridge University Press. 
Hanseth, O., & Lyytinen, K. 2010. Design theory for dynamic complexity in information infrastructures: the case of 
building internet. Journal of Information Technology, 25(1): 1–19. 
Holland, J. 1998. Emergence: From chaos to order. Complexity: 258. New York: Basic Books. 
Hutchby, I. 2001. Technologies, texts and affordances. Sociology. http://soc.sagepub.com/content/35/2/441.short, 
February 8, 2013. 
Leonardi, P. 2011. When flexible routines meet flexible technologies: Affordance, constraint, and the imbrication of 
human and material agencies. MIS Quarterly, 35(1): 147–167. 
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1607718, February 2, 2013. 
Lewin, a. Y. 1999. Application of Complexity Theory to Organization Science. Organization Science, 10(3): 215–215. 
http://orgsci.journal.informs.org/cgi/doi/10.1287/orsc.10.3.215. 
Markus, M., & Silver, M. 2008. A foundation for the study of IT effects: A new look at DeSanctis and Poole’s concepts 
of structural features and spirit. Journal of the Association for Information Systems. 
http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.183.3995&rep=rep1&type=pdf, February 8, 2013. 
Marzo, F., Za, S., & Spagnoletti, P. 2013. Modeling Dependence Networks for Agent Based Simulation of Online and 
Offline Communities. Advances on Practical Applications of Agents and Multi-Agent Systems: 192–203. 
http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-642-38073-0_17, December 31, 2013, Springer Berlin 
Heidelberg. 
Mingers, J. 2001. Combining IS Research Methods: Towards a Pluralist Methodology. Information Systems Research, 
12(3): 240–259. 
Mingers, J. 2006. Realising systems thinking: knowledge and action in management science: 310. Springer. 
North-Samardzic, A., Braccini, A. M., Spagnoletti, P., & Za, S. 2014. Applying media synchronicity theory to distance 
learning in virtual worlds : a design science approach. International Journal of Innovation and Learning, 15(3). 
Resca, A., Za, S., & Spagnoletti, P. 2013. Digital platforms as sources for organizational and strategic transformation: a 
case study of the Midblue project. Journal of Theoretical and Applied e-Commerce Research, 8(2): 71–84. 
Sein, M. K., Henfridsson, O., Purao, S., Rossi, M., & Lindgren, R. 2011. Action design research. MIS Quarterly, 35(1): 
37–56. 
Shirky, C. 2008. Here Comes Everybody: The Power of Organizing Without Organizations: 327. New York: Penguin 
Press. 
Spagnoletti, P., Baskerville, R., & De Marco, M. 2013. The Contributions of Alessandro D’Atri to Organization and 
Information Systems Studies. In Richard Baskerville, M. De Marco, & Paolo Spagnoletti (Eds.), Designing 
Organizational Systems, LNISO vol. 1: 1–18. Heidelberg: Springer. 
Spagnoletti, P., & Federici, T. 2011. Exploring the Interplay Between FLOSS Adoption and Organizational Innovation. 
Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 29(15): 279–298. 
Spagnoletti, P., & Resca, A. 2008. The duality of Information Security Management: fighting against predictable and 
unpredictable threats. Journal of Information System Security, 4(3): 46–62. http://eprints.luiss.it/955/, December 
29, 2011. 
Spagnoletti, P., & Resca, A. 2012. A Design Theory for IT supporting Online Communities. Proceedings of the 45th 
Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences: 4082–4091. 
Spagnoletti, Paolo, Za, S., & Winter, R. 2013. Exploring Foundations for Using Simulations in IS Research. Thirty 
Fourth International Conference on Information Systems, Milan: 1–15. 
Vom Brocke, J., Braccini, A. M., Sonnenberg, C., & Spagnoletti, P. 2013. Living IT infrastructures — An ontology-
based approach to aligning IT infrastructure capacity and business needs. International Journal of Accounting 
Information Systems. http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S1467089513000432, December 18, 2013. 
Wade, M. 2004. The resource-based view and information systems research: Review, extension, and suggestions for 
future research. Mis Quarterly, 28(1): 107–142. http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=2017218, April 17, 2012. 
Yin, R. K. 2009. Case Study Research: Design and Methods: 219. Sage Publications. 
Yoo, Y. 2013. The Tables Have Turned: How Can the Information Systems Field Contribute to Technology and 
Innovation Management Research? Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 14: 227–236. 
Yoo, Y., Boland, R. J., & Lyytinen, K. 2006. From Organization Design to Organization Designing. Organization 
Science, 17(2): 215–229. http://orgsci.journal.informs.org/cgi/doi/10.1287/orsc.1050.0168. 
Yoo, Y., Henfridsson, O., & Lyytinen, K. 2010. The New Organizing Logic of Digital Innovation: An Agenda for 
Information Systems Research. Information Systems Research, 21(4): 724–735. 
Za, S., & Spagnoletti, P. 2013. Knowledge creation processes in Information Systems and Management: lessons from 
simulation studies. In P. Spagnoletti (Ed.), Organization Change and Information Systems, LNISO vol. 2. 
Heidelberg: Springer. 
Zammuto, R. F., Griffith, T. L., Majchrzak, a., Dougherty, D. J., & Faraj, S. 2007. Information Technology and the 
Changing Fabric of Organization. Organization Science, 18(5): 749–762. 
http://orgsci.journal.informs.org/cgi/doi/10.1287/orsc.1070.0307, January 28, 2013. 
 
 


Organisation designing though the practice of multi-method research in information systems

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

LUISSearch