Synthesizing Diversity and Pluralism in Information Systems: Forging a Unique Disciplinary Subject Matter for the Information Systems Field

Hassan, Nik Rushdi; Will, H. J.

doi:10.17705/1cais.01707

Cited by 12 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 56 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Our paper resonates with messages from a number of IS publications arguing that pluralism in its various forms – ontological, epistemological, methodological, paradigmatic, theoretical – should not simply be tolerated but be a goal that the IS community should strive for (Robey, 1996; Goles & Hirschheim, 2000; Chen & Hirschheim, 2004; Hassan & Will, 2006; Becker & Niehaves, 2007). Pluralism helps in the recognition of the intrinsic complexity and diversity of issues faced by the community of IS researchers.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 74%

“…The issue of pluralism in information systems (IS) research has been contentious, with some authors fearing that the discipline may not survive without conformity to consistent research foundations and others arguing that diversity is a source of strength (Lee, 1991; Benbasat & Weber, 1996; Robey, 1996; Chen & Hirschheim, 2004; Hassan & Will, 2006). Not all pluralist research is multiparadigmatic, as researchers may use a plurality of methods or theories that still fall within the same paradigm.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Structuration bridging diffusion of innovations and gender relations theories: a case of paradigmatic pluralism in IS research

Pozzebon

Mackrell

Nielsen

2012

Information Systems Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper discusses the adoption of a pluralist theoretical framework – one that is also multiparadigmatic – for conducting and publishing information system (IS) research. The discussion is illustrated by a single case study involving the Australian cotton industry. The theoretical framework is informed by three sociological theories, each with its particular paradigmatic assumptions: structuration theory as a meta‐theory, and diffusion of innovations and gender relations as lower‐level theories from notionally opposing paradigms. Theoretical pluralism helped to produce rich findings, illuminating both the social nature of women farmers' roles, the materiality of the cotton farming context, the characteristics of the decision support systems in use and the recursive way in which human agency and institutional pressures shape each other. Because users of so‐called divergent paradigms often face criticism based on the incommensurability issue, one of the main contributions of this paper is to discuss the value of a pluralist and multiparadigmatic theoretical framework in dealing with complex IS social phenomena.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 74%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Structuration bridging diffusion of innovations and gender relations theories: a case of paradigmatic pluralism in IS research

Pozzebon

Mackrell

Nielsen

2012

Information Systems Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Both Toulmin (1972) and Foucault (1972Foucault ( ,1973 have attempted to describe this. In particular Foucault's historical analysis of how medicine evolved into a discipline is informative for IS as discussed in Hassan and Will (2006) and Hassan (2006). Based on their analysis we can sayin a simplified manner -that a necessary defining characteristic of a discipline is that it must have a subject matter (''objects of inquiry") that the adherents of one discipline recognize as -more or less -uniquely distinguishing their particular discipline from all others.…”

Section: On the Relationships Between A Discipline Paradigmatic Idenmentioning

confidence: 99%

The structure of the IS discipline reconsidered: Implications and reflections from a community of practice perspective

Klein

Hirschheim

2008

Information and Organization

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Alter's [2003] Systems in Organizations proposal broadly defines the IS discipline in an inclusive way that embraces our historic diversity and makes IS distinct too" (p. 557). Hassan and Will (2006) What does the IS discipline consist of and how is its unique subject matter being forged? "This essay argues for the IS field to forge its own unique disciplinary subject matter by synthesizing the diverse discourses of its "reference disciplines" and not by merely drawing from them.…”

Section: Guthrie (2003)mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Consolidate Hassan and Will (2006) Discusses the issues of diversity and pluralism in IS field and how IS field can forge its unique disciplinary subject matter by synthesizing the various discourses.…”

Section: Guthrie (2003)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Information Systems (IS) Discipline Identity: A Review and Framework

Teo¹,

Srivastava²

2007

CAIS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The recent debate about crisis in the Information Systems (IS) discipline is largely attributed to its having a fluid discipline identity. Myriad conceptualizations of IS discipline identity have resulted in a plethora of unstructured and disconnected recommendations for the survival and growth of the IS field. It is therefore essential to have a theoretical framework which explains: What is IS discipline identity? In this study, we address this void in the identity literature. By extending and borrowing from the concepts of organizational and self-identity, we propose a theoretical framework for discipline identity and explicate its dimensions with respect to the IS discipline. The three contextual questions of discipline identity about purpose, period, and place set the stage for an in-depth inquiry of the three constitutive questions (or dimensions): periphery, perspective, and process, to provide a holistic framework for conceptualizing IS discipline identity. Further, we conceptualize IS discipline identity process as consisting of four recursive and iterative sub-processes: copy, consolidate, differentiate, and demonstrate (CCDD). We posit that an iterative hermeneutic focus on these four sub-processes is vital for the health of the discipline and neglecting even one of them will lead to an imbalanced identity structure. Through this paper, we seek to stimulate and further the ongoing debate on the topic. Perspective (Who matters?) Internalist Externalist Periphery (What matters?) Inclusive Restrictive Process (How does it happen?) Copy Consolidate Differentiate Demonstrate Information Systems (IS) Discipline Identity: A Review and Framework by T.S.

show abstract

Synthesizing Diversity and Pluralism in Information Systems: Forging a Unique Disciplinary Subject Matter for the Information Systems Field

Cited by 12 publications

References 56 publications

Structuration bridging diffusion of innovations and gender relations theories: a case of paradigmatic pluralism in IS research

Structuration bridging diffusion of innovations and gender relations theories: a case of paradigmatic pluralism in IS research

The structure of the IS discipline reconsidered: Implications and reflections from a community of practice perspective

Information Systems (IS) Discipline Identity: A Review and Framework

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About