Advancing Qualitative IS Research Methodologies: Expanding Horizons and Seeking New Paths (original) (raw)
Ibérica, 2021
One major purpose of the Introduction of a research text is to announce the direction of the study (DoS). Yet, formulating a DoS can be quite a demanding task for the novice writer. This explains why it is a common topic covered in research manuals and guidebooks of English for research and publication purposes (ERPP), with both offering advice on the use of three generic linguistic resources: the purpose statement, the research question and/or the hypothesis - collectively referred to by Lim (2018) as directional determinants (or the determinants hereafter). The coverage of the trio, however, varies greatly between the two types of literature. research manuals often emphasize the epistemological orientation of an inquiry as a key shaper of the use of the determinants, paying little attention to their textual realizations. In contrast, ERPP guidebooks tend to provide instructions concerning often overly-general linguistic conventions while downplaying how they may be constrained by ...
(2023) "The Importance of theory at the Information Systems Journal"
information Systems Journal, 2023
Theory is a crucial aspect of the information systems (IS) discipline. Authors draw from articles on how to develop theory and from the theories themselves to anchor knowledge contribution. Editors and reviewers expect to see novel theoretical insights in conjunction with empirical rigour and sophistication (cf. Hardin, Schneider, and Davison, 2022). The thinking of PhD students is shaped by discussions on the importance of theory through formal coursework and research seminars, as well as socialisation with peers, supervisors, and senior scholars in the field. Journals often solicit submissions to special issues that champion particular kinds of theory or theory on specific topics, e.g. indigenous theory (Davison, 2021). Advice is given to authors in different ways that they can theorise (Weick, 1989; Hong, Chan, Thong, Chasalow, and Dhillon, 2014; Sandberg and Alvesson, 2021; Hassan, Lowry, and Mathiassen, 2022). The peer review process emphasises the importance of theory and tends to reject research articles that lack substantial theoretical contribution. However, assessing theoretical contribution is often a challenging task. IS scholars research a variety of topics with a pluralistic set of methods and epistemological approaches, which have several implications for our engagement with theory. Traditionally, reference disciplines have informed the diversity of topics IS scholars investigate. The IS field is at a point in its disciplinary evolution where we are seeing an even greater ambit of the application and use of information systems, which fosters new topics being investigated from different epistemological and methodological viewpoints as well as new types of contributions (Tarafdar and Davison, 2018). Consequently, IS theories take on different roles for different types of epistemologies and methods, and not understanding or respecting these differences can lead to unreasonable or unbalanced evaluation of papers. In addition to the diversity of theoretical approaches, we also perceive differences in the nature of engagement with theory. For example, papers that analyse large amounts of secondary data (textual and numerical, structured and unstructured) often focus on sophisticated empirical techniques to analyse such datasets, engaging minimally with theory (Miranda, Berente, Seidel, Safadi and Burton-Jones, 2022). We believe that sophisticated data analysis does not relieve IS researchers from the obligation to make a theoretical contribution. In this context, we believe, that we should take heed of the advice by Gurbaxani and Mendelson (1994) who warned, almost 30 years ago, about “the risks of ignoring the guidance of theory” and recommended that IS researchers refrain from tinkering with “atheoretical ‘black box’ extrapolation techniques” (p. 180). In an earlier editorial in this journal, Davison and Tarafdar (2018) noted how baselines for what is an acceptable contribution in a discipline shift over time. However, it is our view that a robust theoretical contribution should be (and is) a consistent expectation, even if the nature of the theoretical contribution varies. Journals play a key role in establishing baselines and in that spirit, the recent intellectual trends in IS and other disciplines have implications for how we apply and develop theory in IS and point to an evolving and multi-focused role of theory in IS research. Therefore, in this editorial, we revisit and explicate why theory is important at the Information Systems Journal (ISJ) in these emerging scenarios. Seven of the ISJ’s regular senior editors (Andrew Hardin, Angsana A. Techatassanasoontorn, Antonio Díaz Andrade, Gerhard Schwabe, Monideepa Tarafdar, Paul Benjamin Lowry and Sutirtha Chatterjee) join the editor-in-chief (Robert Davison) to craft a position statement regarding the ISJ’s view on theory. It is applicable, with sensitivity, to the empirical research articles that we consider for publication. Specifically, we provide a set of guidelines to help ISJ authors consider the role of theory in crafting papers of different genres and different epistemological and methodological approaches. Consistent with the journal’s cultural values (Davison and Tarafdar, 2022), we lay out a pluralistic and inclusive view of theory and theoretical contributions. The guidelines are broadly indicative of what we believe are key points that authors should consider. We encourage authors submitting their research to the ISJ to consider these guidelines carefully, as we expect that reviewers will be aware of them, and senior and associate editors may also consider them as they craft their reports. However, these guidelines are not meant to serve as a comprehensive checklist, least of all a template for rejection.
Keeping pace with the digital age: Envisioning information systems research as a platform
Journal of Information Technology, 2022
In this paper, we respond to Grover and Lyytinen (2022). We agree with them that the advent of the digital age is calling for a reconsideration of the role of theory and theorizing. We also think their proposal does not go far enough. The time is ripe to question the role of theory in our field more fundamentally. We propose to instead focus on establishing IS research as a platform through which we can collect, organize, and provide access to digital trace data from various sources to analyze contemporary socio-technical phenomena. We believe that such a move allows us to more fully unleash the unique sociotechnical competences of our field in the digital age.
Journal of Information Technology, 2019
Although there has been a growing understanding of theory in the Information Systems (IS) field in recent years, the process of theorizing is rarely addressed with contributions originating from other disciplines and little effort to coherently synthesize them. Moreover, the field’s view of theorizing has traditionally focused on the context of justification with an emphasis on collection and analysis of data in response to a research question with theory often added as an afterthought. To fill this void, we foreground the context of discovery that emphasizes the creative and often serendipitous articulation of theory by emphasizing this important stage of theorizing as a reflective and highly iterative practice. Specifically, we suggest that IS researchers engage in foundational theorizing practices to form the discourse, problematize the phenomenon of interest and leverage paradigms, and deploy generative theorizing practices through analogies, metaphors, myths, and models to develop the IS discourse. To illustrate the detailed workings of these discursive practices, we draw on key examples from IS theorizing.