Abstract
Understanding how technical artefacts are created and used within organizations is a central aspect of the IS research discipline. The conduct of research in an organizational setting is thus a major issue for the IS community. A research framework for in-context IS research is presented and used to position purified and hybrid forms of research method. From the framework, theoretical support for an action case research method is presented. The research framework is then used to describe and explain an IS research project from which a practice-based rationale for an action case method is argued. Characteristics of the action case method, a hybrid of interpretation and intervention, are described. Learning at three levels of analysis — concrete, general, and meta — is proposed as a way of reflecting on both the content of an IS research project and the IS research methods employed.
Chapter PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Keywords
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
References
Argyris, C., and Schön, D. A. (1991). “Participatory Action Research and Action Science Compared.” In W. F. Whyte (Editor), Participatory Action Research. Newbury Park, California: Sage.
Braa, K., and Vidgen, R. (1997). “An IS Research Framework for the Organization as Laboratory.” In M. Kyng and L. Mathiassen (Editors), Computers in Context: Joining Forces in Design. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press (forthcoming).
Bansler, J. (1989). “Systems Development Research in Scandinavia: Three Theoretical Schools.” Scandinavian Journal of Information Systems, Volume 1, pp. 3–20.
Baskerville, R., and Wood-Harper, A. T. (1996). “A Critical Perspective on Action Research as a Method for Information Systems Research.” Journal of Information Technology, Volume 11, pp. 235–246.
Bateson, G. (1972). Steps to an Ecology of Mind. New York: Ballantine.
Burrell, G., and Morgan, G. (1979). Sociological Paradigms and Organizational Analysis. London: Heinemann Educational Books.
Callon, M. (1986). “Some Elements of a Sociology of Translation: Domestication of the Scallops and the Fishermen of St Brieuc Bay.” In J. Law (Editor), Power, Action and Belief London: Routledge and Keagan Paul, pp 196–233.
CCTA, (1990). SSADM Version 4 Reference Manual. Oxford: NCC Blackwell. Checkland, P. (1981). Systems Thinking, Systems Practice. Chichester, England: Wiley.
Checkland, P. (1991). “From Framework through Experience to Learning: the Essential Nature of Action Research.” In H.-E. Nissen, H. K. Klein, and R. Hirschheim (Editors), Information Systems Research: Contemporary Approaches and Emergent Traditions. Amsterdam: North Holland.
Checkland, P., and Scholes, J. (1990). Soft Systems Methodology in Action. Chichester, England: Wiley.
Clegg, S. (1990). Modern Organizations: Organization Studies in the Postmodern World. Newbury Park, California: Sage.
Cook, T. D., and Campbell, D. T. (1989). Quasi-Experimentation: Design and Analysis Issues for Field Settings. Chicago: Rand McNally.
Dean, J., and Susman G. (1989). “Organizing for Manufacturable Design.” Harvard Business Review, January-February, pp. 28–36.
Ehn, P., and Kyng, M. (1987). “The Collective Resource Approach to Systems Design.” In G. Bjerknes, P. Ehn, and M. Kyng (Editors), Computers and Democracy: A Scandinavian Challenge. Aldershot, England: Avebury, pp. 17–58.
Galliers, R. D. (1985). “In Search of a Paradigm for Information Systems Research.” In E. Mumford, R. Hirschheim, G. Fitzgerald, and A. T. Wood-Harper (Editors), Research Methods in Information Systems. Proceedings of the IFIP WG 8.2 Colloquium, 1–3 September, 1984, Manchester Business School. Amsterdam: North Holland.
Galliers, R. D. (1992). “Choosing Information Systems Research Approaches.” In R. D. Galliers (Editor), Information Systems Research: Issues, Methods and Practical Guidelines. Oxford: Blackwell Scientific.
Galliers, R. D., and Land, F. F. (1987). “Choosing Appropriate Information Systems Research Methodologies.” Communications of the ACM, Volume 30, Number 11, pp. 900–902.
Giddens, A. (1984). The Constitution of Society. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Glaser, B., and Strauss, A. (1967). The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research. Chicago: Aldine.
Habermas, J. (1972). Knowledge and Human Interests. London: Heinemann. Hirschheim, R. A., and Klein, H. K. (1989). “Four Paradigms of Information Systems Development.” Communications of the ACM, Volume 32, Number 10, pp. 1199–1216.
Iivari, J. (1991). “A Paradigmatic Analysis of Contemporary Schools of IS Development.” European Journal of Information Systems, Volume 1, Number 4, pp. 249272.
Keen, P. (1991). “Relevance and Rigor in Information Systems Research: Improving Quality, Confidence, Cohesion and Impact.” In H.-E. Nissen, H. K. Klein, and R. Hirschheim (Editors), Information Systems Research: Contemporary Approaches and Emergent Traditions. Amsterdam: North Holland.
King, R. (1989). Better Designs in Half the Time: implementing QFD. Methuen, Massachusetts: GOAL/QPC.
Latour, B. (1987). Science in Action. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.
Lee, A. S. (1989). “A Scientific Methodology for MIS Case Studies.” MIS Quarterly, Volume 13, March, pp. 33–50.
Liker, J.; Fleischer, M.; and Arnsdorf, D. (1992). “Fulfilling the Promises of CAD.” Sloan Management Review, Spring 1992, pp. 74–85.
McGrath, J. (1982). “Dilemmatics: The Study of Research Choices and Dilemmas.” In J. McGrath, J. Martin, and R. Kulka (Editors), Judgement Calls in Research. Beverly Hills: Sage, pp. 69–102.
Orlikowski, W. (1992). “The Duality of Technology: Rethinking the Concept of Technology in Organizations.” Organization Science, Volume 3, Number 3, pp. 398–427.
Rumbaugh, J.; Blaha, M.; Premerlani, W.; Eddy, F.; and Lorensen, W. (1991). Object-Oriented Modeling and Design. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.
Slabey, R. (1990). “QFD: A Basic Primer.” Transactions from the Second Symposium on Quality Function Deployment, June 18–19, Novi, Michigan.
Susman, G. (1983). “Action Research: A Sociotechnical System Perspective.” In G. Morgan (Editor), Beyond Method: Strategies for Social Research. Newbury Park, California: Sage.
Star, S. L., and Ruhleder, K. (1994). “Steps Toward an Ecology of Infrastructure: Complex Problems in Design and Access for Large-Scale Collaborative Systems.” Proceedings of the CSCW’94: Transcending Boundaries. New York: ACM Press, pp. 253–265.
Vidgen, R. (1996). Multiple Perspectives of Information System Quality. Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis, April, University of Salford.
Walsham, G. (1993). Interpreting Information Systems in Organizations. Chichester, England: Wiley.
Walsham, G. (1995). “Interpretive Case Studies in IS Research: Nature and Method.” European Journal of Information Systems, Volume 4, pp. 74–81.
Yin, R. K. (1984). Case Study Research: Design and Methods. Second Edition. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage.
Zmud, R. W.; Olson, M.; and Hauser, R. (1989). “Field Experimentation in MIS Research.” In I. Benbasat (Editor), The Information System Research Challenge: Experimental Research Methods, Volume 2. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard Business School Research Colloquium.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1997 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Vidgen, R., Braa, K. (1997). Balancing Interpretation and Intervention in Information System Research: The Action Case Approach. In: Lee, A.S., Liebenau, J., DeGross, J.I. (eds) Information Systems and Qualitative Research. IFIP — The International Federation for Information Processing. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-35309-8_26
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-35309-8_26
Publisher Name: Springer, Boston, MA
Print ISBN: 978-1-4757-5487-2
Online ISBN: 978-0-387-35309-8
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive