The Phenomenology of Information Systems Evaluation: Overcoming the Subject/Object Dualism

Abstract

In this paper, we argue that the path to better IS evaluation in organizations is to get beyond the dualisms of subject/object, mind/body, and cognition/action that limit our analysis, understanding, and practice of evaluation in the flow of organizationallife. We present a discussion of the unity of cognition and action using the work of phenomenologists such as Heidegger, Merleau-Ponty, and Henry. We argue that the subject/object dualism as described in the evaluation literature only seems to exist because we accept and depend on another dualism, namely the assumed split between cognition and action. We propose that managers do not apply methods, propose alternatives, argue costs and benefits, and attempt to subvert these, in order to judge or decide. Rather the applying, proposing, arguing and subverting-the discourse-is exactly already the judging and the deciding. We proceed to present a set of principles that take the unity of cognition and action seriously. We believe these point to a way of making IS evaluation more skillful while taking into account both the rational and the

How Does Representation Modality Affect User-Experience of Data Artifacts?

“…Due to its flexibility, the RGT has been used in a wide range of fields from clinical psychology to architecture. The RGT has also been proven to be a valuable technique in phenomenological studies to understanding user experience and for understanding the perceived qualities of computational objects [2,17]. One of the main reasons why the RGT is useful for this purpose, is that it provides an established method for eliciting user's personal constructs, in distinction to other methods such as semantic differential, which is usually based on predefined, given constructs [18].…”

Incommensurability and Multi-paradigm Grounding in Design Science Research: Implications for Creating Knowledge

“…Interpretive (Boland 1978;Niehaves 2007) or phenomenological (Introna and Whittaker 2002) approaches inform initial design and also evaluation by uncovering the ontology of the actual work (Butler and Murphy 2007;Suchman et al 1999) and viewing the technology through the actor's eyes. Although it is recognized that organizational actors learn and modify processes or technologies to better fit their actual work (Robey and Boudreau 1999), from the functionalist perspective of the artifact this is resistance (Lapointe and Rivard 2005) and a failure of the information system.…”

“…Few knowledge workers are thinking to themselves how efficient, profitable, or even how useful the artifact is. Research from phenomenological perspectives (Boland 1985;Introna and Whittaker 2002) and from pragmatic perspectives (Goldkuhl 2005;Goles and Hirschheim 2000) reveal that technology users may be motivated by pragmatic reasons such as "this is the only information systems available," "this will work if I tailor the system to shortcut three steps," or "my modified procedure makes more sense to me than the designed process. "…”

The ontological screening of contemporary life: a phenomenological analysis of screens

“…Phenomenology has also been used, in diverse forms, in the information systems (IS) field of research (e.g. Dreyfus, 1982Dreyfus, , 1992Boland, 1983Boland, , 1985Boland, , 1991Boland, , 1993Winograd & Flores, 1986;Zuboff, 1988;Boland & Day, 1989;Kjaer & Madsen, 1995;Ciborra, 1997Ciborra, , 1998Haynes, 1997;Introna, 1997Introna, , 1993Porra, 1999;Introna & Ilharco, 2000;Mingers, 2001;Whittaker, 2001;Ilharco, 2002;Introna & Whittaker, 2002). Most of these IS studies use a variety of phenomenological approaches, in more or less indirect ways -often in combination with other approaches.…”