Entries Tagged 'Information Systems Research' ↓

Just completed reading Orlikowski’s “Integrated information environment or matrix of control? The contradictory implications of information technology.”

This paper describes a research project undertaken to understand how organizations use information systems as control mechanism. The author used a ethnographic research method during this project over the course of the eight month research project.  The author collected data using participant observation, interview, documentation review, and historical documents (Orlikowski, 1991).  To perform this research, the author selected five specific projects to analyze deeply for how the organization (a company called SCC) had implemented control mechanisms using information technology as well as other managerial control types.

The author claims that there were there forms of control found at SCC with two being internal control mechanisms and one being an external control method.   Internal control mechanisms are what are considered ‘normal’ methods of control and are implemented via systems (using technology, organizational processes, etc) and social structure and organizational culture (using personal controls mechanisms) (Orlikowski, 1991). External forms of control are found outside of an organization with professional associations and certifications for specialized job functions.   The author found both internal and external controls being used at SCC through this research project and reported on these controls and their effects throughout the organization.  A brief summary of these controls follows.

During this research, the author found that there were multiple forms of systemic and personal control mechanisms.  In particular, the forms of control were found to be based around organizational structure, human resource policies, knowledge of processes and development, cultural, socialization and technological tools and supervisory controls (Orlikowski, 1991).   The author notes that over the course of eight years, the organization implemented information systems to help implement these control mechanisms and found these systems to be helpful in implementing current and new forms of control.

One of the stated goals of this research was to understand if and/or how information systems can create organizational change by “loosening the hierarchical stranglehold on organizational practices, creating networked and lateral relations that can usher in new organizational forms and practices” (Orlikowski, 1991, p. 9).  The author doesn’t believe that information systems can, by themselves, bring about this change and, based on the outcome of this research, this viewpoint is backed up.  The systems implemented by SCC to enforce systemic and personal controls were developed to follow the structure, processes and policies, therefore the systemic controls that were built to follow the existing controls did exactly that. SCC implemented a system to enforce control mechanisms that were already in place.

While I agree with the author’s findings that information technology can enforce control, I do believe that the use of information systems within organization can bring about a great deal of change throughout the culture, processes and organization.  With the right mindset in place, an organization can use information systems to bring about change but the organization has to want to change.  With the example shown in the SCC research project, the organization set about to implement current controls and improve upon those controls rather than allow those new information systems to change the culture of the organization.

References

• Orlikowski, W. J. (1991). Integrated information environment or matrix of control? The contradictory implications of information technology. Accounting, Management, and Information Technologies, 1(1), 9-42.

I just finished reading Hidden Agendas, Power, and Managerial Assumptions in Information Systems Development: An Ethnographic Study by Myers & Young.

This paper describes an ethnographic research project conducted to study the development of an information system in a mental health setting.  During this research project, the researchers used an ethnographic research method known as critical ethnography.  A review of the research method as well as the project itself follows.

As mentioned, the critical ethnography research method has been described by Thomas (1993) as a means to “describe, analyze and open to scrutiny otherwise hidden agendas, power centers, and assumptions that inhibit, repress, and constrain” (Thomas, 1993, pp. 2-3).   The critical ethnography approach entices the researcher(s) to not only study a subject but also the context in which that subject is operating in, thereby seeing the broader context and issues (such as political agendas, etc) (Myers & Young, 1997).  Using a critical ethnography approach in information systems development makes perfect sense as many information systems projects are wrapped in politics, hidden agendas and assumptions that can cause these IS projects to fail.

The theoretical model for the concepts studied in this project is based on Broadbent, Laughlin & Read’s (1991) model of societal development, which in itself is based on Habermas’ (1984) social development model that states that governments and systems can be ‘steering mechanisms’ to drive change and enforce some control into organizations.  The idea of information system as steering mechanism to enforce change and control mechanisms is the at the heart of this research project (Myers & Young, 1997).

The researchers were able to insert themselves into a mental health institution in New Zealand to study information system development and implementation.   The system being implemented was to provide a new ‘control’ mechanism instituted by the New Zealand government as well as other managerial controls that the hospital was looking to implement.  While many within the hospital were initially OK with these controls, it became apparent to many doctors and nurses that some aspects of this new information system would affect how they did their job and their work practices. According to the authors, this alarmed many within the hospital to the point where coalitions began to appear that threatened to undermine the information system deployment.  Using the critical ethnographic approach, the researchers were able to uncover this resistance using interviews, participant observation, documents and reports (Myers & Young, 1997).

The ‘top-level’ results of this study aren’t surprising to anyone who’s been involved in information system development and deployment.  It’s clear that there are political and hidden agendas within any organization and team and these agendas do cause issues within information system development and deployment projects.   In addition to agendas, there are usually assumptions made by organizations about why information systems should be deployed and/or why users are having a difficult time ‘accepting’ a new system.

The authors, using critical ethnography, were able to look past these agendas and agendas to find the real causes of issues.  For example, the senior leaders within the mental institution were able to realize, with the help of the researchers, that the issues that they were seeing with the information system deployment wasn’t necessarily a system issue or user’s not understanding how to use the system.  The real, underlying issue for user acceptance of the information system had to do with their beliefs that the new ‘controls’ being placed on them by the hospital and New Zealand government would have consequences on to their jobs.  Realizing this, the hospital administration elected to postpone the deployment of some of the modules that enforced these controls until users became more comfortable with the underlying reasons for the new controls.

While the critical ethnographic approach worked well to help the researchers uncover hidden agendas and assumptions, the authors ethnographic data did not support Broadbent et. al.’s (1991) societal development model.  This model suggested that a steering mechanism whose goal was cost control (as found in this research project) would be seen by doctors as a management edict rather something that made sense for their medical practice.  The authors were able to show through this research project that most doctors agreed with the management ideas of cost control but disagreed with the method in which it would be implemented, which is a different outcome as the one proposed in Broadbent et. al.’s (1991) societal development model.

References

• Broadbent, J., Laughlin, R., & Read, S. (1991). Recent financial and administrative changes in the NHS: a critical theory analysis. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 2(1), 1-29.
• Habermas, J. (1984). The Theory of Communicative Action Volume 1: Reason and Rationalisation of Society (Vol. 1). London: T. McCarthy Heinemann.
• Myers, M. D., & Young, L. W. (1997). Hidden Agendas, Power, and Managerial Assumptions in Information Systems Development: An Ethnographic Study. Information Technology & People, 10(3), 224-240.
• Thomas, J. (1993). Doing critical ethnography Qualitative Research Methods (Vol. 26). Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.

The article by Street and Meister (2004) titled “Small business growth and internal transparency: The role of information systems” describes an action research project that was undertaken by the authors working with a small manufacturing company (hereafter known as ‘manufacturer’) in Canada.  The project investigated the role of information systems in small business growth and how a small business management team can plan for and build an appropriate information system strategic plan to address current and future growth needs.

The authors were placed in contact with the manufacturer by a third-party governmental funding agency.  This introduction and source of funding helped the manufacturer tremendously as they didn’t feel as though they were paying a consultant to recommend a system…they were getting answers to the main issues they were facing. The authors also were able to gain from this introduction, as they were able to put their academic and research experience to good use in a real-world setting.

The main contribution of this paper is subtle but very important one: when a small business begins to move into a growth cycle, the internal communication within the organization must be maintained.  The authors describe this as ‘internal transparency’ and claim that by ensuring that internal transparency is maintained, an organization can navigate the dangerous perils found during growth periods.  Using internal transparency as a means of guidance, organizations can begin to consider the use of information systems as a way to increase (or at least hold steady) internal communications throughout the organization.

As mentioned, the authors conducted this research project as an action research project using three separate phases with different planned outcomes for each phase. The three phases were split into three separate activities: Baseline Analysis, Strategic Planning, Requirements Specification (Street & Meister, 2004).  Each phase is briefly discussed in the following paragraphs.

The Baseline Analysis phase was performed to determine the existing systems, policies and procedures within the manufacturer.  It was during this phase that the authors determined that the communications between the management team of the organization was breaking down due a lack of proper information systems.  Prior to the growth that they were experiencing, the management team had ample time to communicate with each other but while planning for the future growth, their ability to communicate clearly about operational activities was impeded due to the poor information systems in existence.  The authors realized during this phase that the organization didn’t have any strategic plan for growth nor was there a plan for information system growth.

Phase two of the project was the Strategic Planning phase.  During this phase the authors and manufacturer deviated from the original plan for developing a growth plan for information systems and instead built a strategic plan for the business, which included a plan and strategy for the IS of the organization. This phase also saw some investigation into what was causing the internal transparency issues found in phase 1.   The authors found that the lack of proper IS planning was to blame for the reduction in internal transparency within the organization.   Because the management team didn’t have the proper information systems in place, they had to spend more time finding and reviewing operational data in a format that was not easy to review or digest. The more time spent reviewing operational data in this manner, the less time the management team had to focus on internal communications, which caused a reduction the reduction in internal transparency.

Phase three of this project was the Requirements Specification phase where the authors and manufacturer developed a “Request for Quote” (RFQ) to send out to vendors to bid on developing and implementing three distinct information systems.   This final phase of the research project was a key factor for the project as it forced the authors and the manufacturer’s management team to specifically state what their needs were in an information system.  This forced both parties to realize that the biggest need at hand wasn’t a need for automated manufacturing or some other manufacturing related information system. Their biggest need was for an information system that would provide communication across the different functions of the organization to improve internal transparency.

This paper provides an excellent walk-through of using action research in a real world. More importantly though, this paper provides a significant contribution to the world of IS research by showing the connection between information systems, strategic planning and growth in business.

References

• Street, C. T., & Meister, D. B. (2004). Small Business Growth and Internal Transparency: The Role of Information Systems. MIS Quarterly, 28(3), 473-506.

This is part 5 of a 5 part series on using case study research methods in information systems research

This essay provides an overview and review of Eisenhardt’s (1989) article titled “Building theories from case study research” published in Volume 14 of the Academy of Management Review in 1989. In this paper, Eisenhardt (hereafter known as ‘the author’) the author presents a roadmap to help researchers use case study research to build theories.  The roadmap is made up of nine ‘building blocks’. These building blocks are described in more detail in the following paragraphs and examples from research are given for each.

The first building block for using case studies is arguably the most important.  Prior to starting any research project, the basic research question must be determined so that the research project is well defined.  This holds true for case study research as well. Santora & Sarros (2008) clearly defined their research question to be specifically around the reasons that an interim executive director wouldn’t seek to become the full-time executive director of a non-profit organization.  This narrow focus helped set the stage for the case study research.   Another example can be seen in Haunschild & Eikhof’s (2009) case study use to build a theoretical basis for managing a mobile workforce.  In this case study, the authors defined their research question in terms of human resource practices and policies for managing telecommuting and mobile workers in the creative industry.

The second building block consists of selecting appropriate cases for the study.  By ‘appropriate’, it is meant that the theory being built should be tested against a population that allows for testing of the specific theory being built as well as providing variation in environments.  An example of this can be in the case study by Moller, et al., (2005) that reports on school leadership in Norway. The authors chose their cases based on a set of criteria that allowed them to use ‘good schools’ (as defined by the Norwegian Ministry of Education and Research) and school size, structure, location and the principal’s gender.  This variation allowed the researchers to vary the demographics across their cases to test their theories.  Another example can be found in a case study by Opoku (2006) where the author conducted multiple case studies on different small and medium sized businesses to conduct research on these types of companies’ methods of collecting customer feedback.  The author used similar sized companies with similar backgrounds to try to have a similar population across multiple organizations.

The third building block has to do with research methodologies, data collection methods and types of data to be used in the case study.   Prior to beginning any research project, the research methodology should be determined and a game plan for collection, storing and analyzing data should be created.  An example of this building block can be found in Masterman, Jameson & Walker’s (2009) article describing their use of data collection techniques during a research project to determine best practices for learning design.  Yet another example can be found in Abdullah & Zainab’s (2008) article that describes data collection methods during a research project on digital libraries.

The fourth building block is the aspect of entering the field to simultaneously collect and analyze data.  By collecting and analyzing data at the same time, researchers are able to adjust data collection methods as needed. Abdullah & Zainab’s (2008) article describe this in detail as they use data collection methods to collect user requirements and analyze said requirements while working in the field. Haunschild & Eikhof’s (2009) article also provides a good example of collecting and analyzing case study data while in the field.

The fifth building block is analyzing and writing up case data on a per-site basis.  This provides a few benefits to the research; namely by writing up and analyzing data for each site (case), the research becomes intimately familiar with each case while staying away from ‘data overload’ trap that multiple-site case studies normally create (Eisenhardt, 1989).   Excellent examples of the use of within-case analysis can be found in Yeo’s (2003) research on linking organizational learning to performance and  Seawright & Gerring’s (2008) article on case selection techniques.

The sixth building block is analyzing data across the multiple cases to find patterns that may exist.  In performing cross-case data analysis, it is imperative to use multiple analysis methods to keep from over-simplifying the outcomes and/or to keep from jumping to any conclusions based on initial impressions. Great examples of the use of cross-case analysis can be seen in Doolin & Ali’s (2008) research on mobile technology adoption in the supply chain and Masumoto & Brown-Welty’s (2009) case study of leadership practices and community relationships in high school education in California.

The seventh building block involves using the within-case and cross-case analysis that was performed in previous steps to shape a hypothesis.  This is done by reviewing the cases and data collected and refining the definition of the theory and ensuring that the collected data provides evidence to help solidify the hypothesis. An example of building and shaping a hypothesis using cross-case and within-case analysis (and other methods) can be see in Kambil’s (2008) article that looked at multiple organization’s recesession strategies to create a hypothesis for organizational strategies for recession planning.  Another example can be seen in Scholes, Westhead & Burrows (2008) research project involving family firm succession planning and buyout/buy-in rules and strategies.

The eighth building block involves performing an extensive literature review to determine if the theory being developed is similar to other theories and/or to determine if there are other studies that support or conflicts with the theory. An example of an extensive literature review can be found in many of the previously mentioned papers with Abdullah & Zainab (2008) and Haunschild & Eikhof’s (2009) articles.

The ninth building block is the final block and involves closing the case study process down.   This is an important step in theory building, as it requires the researcher to really think about how much data and how many cases are ‘enough’.   While no specific examples were found that specifically mentioned ‘closure’, two good examples that show some signs of selecting the ‘right’ number of cases to study can be seen in Moller, et al., (2005) and an excellent write-up of case selection techniques (including choosing the number of cases) can be found in Seawright and Gerring’s (2008) article.

References

• Abdullah, A., & Zainab, A. N. (2008). The digital library as an enterprise: the Zachman approach. The Electronic Library, 26(4), 446.
• Doolin, B., & Ali, E. (2008). Adoption of Mobile Technology in the Supply Chain: An Exploratory Cross-Case Analysis. International Journal of E-Business Research, 4(4), 1.
• Eisenhardt, K. (1989). Building Theories from Case Study Research. The Academy of Management Review, 14(4), 532-550.
• Haunschild, A., & Eikhof, D. (2009). From HRM to Employment Rules and Lifestyles. Theory Development through Qualitative Case Study Research into the Creative Industries**. Zeitschrift f¸r Personalforschung, 23(2), 107.
• Kambil, A. (2008). What is your recession playbook? The Journal of Business Strategy, 29(5), 50.
• Masterman, E., Jameson, J., & Walker, S. (2009). Capturing teachers’ experience of learning design through case studies. Distance Education, 30(2), 223.
• Masumoto, M., & Brown-Welty, S. (2009). Case Study of Leadership Practices and School-Community Interrelationships in High-Performing, High-Poverty, Rural California High Schools. Journal of Research in Rural Education (Online), 24(1), 1.
• Moller, J., Eggen, A., Fuglestad, O. L., Langfeldt, G., Presthus, A.-M., Skrovset, S., et al. (2005). Successful school leadership: the Norwegian case. Journal of Educational Administration, 43(6), 584.
• Opoku, R., A. (2006). Gathering customer feedback online and Swedish SMEs. Management Research News, 29(3), 106.
• Santora, J., & Sarros, J. (2008). Interim Leadership in a Nonprofit Organization: A Case Study. The Business Review, Cambridge, 11(2), 66.
• Scholes, L., Westhead, P., & Burrows, A. (2008). Family firm succession: the management buy-out and buy-in routes. Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, 15(1), 8.
• Seawright, J., & Gerring, J. (2008). Case Selection Techniques in Case Study Research: A Menu of Qualitative and Quantitative Options. Political Research Quarterly, 61(2), 294.
• Yeo, R. (2003). Linking organisational learning to organisational performance and success: Singapore case studies. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 24(1/2), 70.

This is part 4 of a 5 part series on using case study research methods in information systems research

This essay provides an overview and review of Darke, Shanks & Broadbent’s (1998) article titled “Successfully completing case study research: combining rigour, relevance and pragmatism” published in the Information Systems Journal in 1998. In this paper, Darke, Shanks & Broadbent (hereafter known as ‘the authors’) provide an excellent overview of using case studies in information system research.  In providing this overview, the authors have touched on every aspect of the use of case studies and provided guidance on how to prepare for, perform and present research to ensure rigor and relevance.

Unlike papers that attempt to show the case study as a means to perform information systems research, this paper provides a great deal of pragmatic advice in an easy to read and comprehend manner.  Compared to other papers like Lee (1989), Eisenhardt (1989), Gable (1994) and Kaplan & Duchon (1988), this paper is much more readable and informative, especially for students and practitioners new to the world of information systems research.   This paper would be an ideal ‘first step’ for any person moving into the world of using case studies in information systems research. Once the concepts of this paper are understood and mastered, it would seem much easier for the novice information system research to move on to the more involved articles mentioned previously.

The main contribution of this paper is found in the five frequently asked questions that the authors constantly hear about case study research (Darke, et al., 1998).  These five questions are summarized and briefly discussed in the following paragraphs.

The first frequently asked question has to do with the types of research that can be addressed using the case study approach.  The authors suggest, based on research from other authors, that the case study is best used in those circumstances where a phenomenon needs to be studied in its real-world environment in the context in which it exists (Benbasat, Goldstein, & Mead, 1987; Darke, et al., 1998; Yin, 2009).  In addition, the case study research approach is a better fit when the theory of a phenomenon is not fully formed nor understood (Benbasat, et al., 1987; Darke, et al., 1998; Yin, 2009).

The second frequently asked question revolves around the design and scope of a case study so that it can answer a research question in an appropriate manner.  The first step in designing a research project is to develop a valid and significant research question (Darke, et al., 1998). The second step in designing and scoping a case study project is to perform an in-depth literature review to understand existing theory and research. Lastly, the researcher needs to consider the usefulness and interest in their research topic to ensure that the project will be well received once complete.

The third question that the authors constantly receive has to do with obtaining the approval of an organization targeted for inclusion in the case study.  This approval and participation is key since the research may not be usable or achievable without the consent of the organization and people included in the research project.

The fourth question deals with the effective use of data collected during the case study research project.  The authors provide guidance on effectively collecting, storing and using data during (and after) a research project.  Suggestions and tips are given for collecting data during research and how to ensure that data is available for review after the research project is complete.

The fifth question is arguably the most important as it deals with writing up the research for others to consume. While the previous questions are important, the inability to clearly state reason and outcome of the research project in a meaningful way will cause any research project to flounder.  The authors suggest that any research project should be written up well but the since the case study shows real-world phenomenon in a real-world setting, the researcher must go to great lengths to show that the research was designed and performed in a rigorous manner.

As mentioned, the authors provide a great deal of background information about the use of case studies.  This background includes the various approaches for case studies, why case study research should and shouldn’t be used and how data can be collected and utilized within the case study framework.   In addition, the authors provide a  great contribution by describing providing answers to commonly asked questions about the case study research approach.

References

• Benbasat, I., Goldstein, D. K., & Mead, M. (1987). The case research strategy in studies of information systems. MIS Q., 11(3), 369-386.
• Darke, P., Shanks, G., & Broadbent, M. (1998). Successfully completing case study research: combining rigour, relevance and pragmatism. Information Systems Journal, 8(4), 273-289.
• Eisenhardt, K. (1989). Building Theories from Case Study Research. The Academy of Management Review, 14(4), 532-550.
• Gable, G. G. (1994). Integrating case study and survey research methods: an example in information systems. European Journal of Information Systems, 3(2), 112-126.
• Kaplan, B., & Duchon, D. (1988). Combining qualitative and quantitative methods information systems research: a case study. Management Information Systems Quarterly, 12(4), 571-586.
• Lee, A. S. (1989). A scientific methodology for MIS case studies. MIS Q., 13(1), 33-50.
• Yin, R. K. (2009). Case Study Research: Design and Methods (Vol. 5): SAGE.

This is part 3 of a 5 part series on using case study research methods in information systems research

This essay provides an overview and review of Walsham’s (1995) article titled “Interpretive case studies in IS research: Nature and method” published in the European Journal of Information Systems in 1995. In this paper, Walsham (hereafter known as ‘the author’) provides a compelling argument that the interpretative approach to case studies can be a valid approach for information system researchers.

The author provides an excellent walkthrough of the background and philosophical basis for interpretative research using a literature review approach. The author does an outstanding job of providing definitions and background to the use of the interpretive approach using the ethnographic research tradition found in anthropology.  Comparing anthropology research to that of information systems research is an extremely smart thing to do since, in most instances, IS research deals with the same types of complex events and structures involving people in addition to technology.  The author makes an argument that using an interpretive approach that has been well documented and widely adopted in the world of anthropological research makes perfect sense in the world of information systems research. This argument is an interesting one that has found its way into other research in the field of information systems research (Avison & Myers, 1995; Marietta, 1999).

In addition the groundwork described above, the author provides three usage modes for using the interpretative approach in information systems case research. These three usage models, taken from Eisenhardt’s (1989) research are: as an initial guide for designing research and collecting data; as part of the data collection and analysis process; as a product of the research itself (Eisenhardt, 1989; Walsham, 1995).  The three usage models help to guide the IS researcher in the use of interpretive research in case studies.  The author provides a well-rounded argument for these three usage models and goes so far as to provide strong evidence that the usage of interpretive research isn’t a viable approach if used as an initial guide for designing research and collecting data (Glaser & Strauss, 1967; Walsham, 1995).

Although the previously mentioned information should be considered significant contributions to knowledge, the second part of this paper is even more significant as it provides arguments on three extremely important topics for any field of research.  These three topics are: the role of the researcher, the evidence obtained from interviews and the way in which research is reported. These three topics are discussed in the following paragraphs.

The role of the researcher in interpretive research is key as the research is providing interpretations of other people’s interpretations.   This role is tricky because the research has to be fully aware that their contextual ‘lens’ may provide a different interpretation to an interviewee’s comments.

While evidence for research can come from many different areas (documents, historical records, interviews, observations, etc), the main evidence gathering tool for the interpretive researcher is the interview.    Because of the interview being the main tool for gathering data, the author notes that the IS researcher who wants to use an interpretive case method should be aware of various interview methods.

Perhaps the most significant contribution in this section of the paper is the description of how researchers should present their research.  Because interpretive researchers are not reporting facts, the researcher has to quickly build credibility by providing as much detail on the research methods used (Walsham, 1995).

The author does a great job describing the three main topics & issues faced by interpretive researchers.  These issues, while important, can be overcome as long as the research is aware of them and has a plan to address them during their research project.

In addition to the theoretical groundings for using the interpretative approach, the author provides many examples of the use of the interpretative approach in information systems research.  These examples, from the 1980’s and 1990’s, where excellent resources but were a bit old, so a quick search in libraries found other examples of successfully using the interpretive approach in information systems research (Doolin, 1999; Lamb & Kling, 2003; Marietta, 1999; Mingers, 2004; Myers, 1999). For example, Lamb & Kling (2003) performed research on user-centered information systems and presented the concept of users as ‘social actors’ using an interpretative approach (Lamb & Kling, 2003).

While using the interpretative approach for IS research wasn’t new to the world of IS research of at the time of the paper’s publishing, the author has presented a strong argument for the interpretive approach and its use in IS research.

References

• Avison, D. E., & Myers, M. D. (1995). Information systems and anthropology: and anthropological perspective on IT and organizational culture. Information Technology & People, 8(3), 43.
• Doolin, B. (1999). Information systems, power, and organizational relations: a case study. Paper presented at the ICIS ‘99: Proceedings of the 20th international conference on Information Systems, Charlotte, North Carolina, United States.
• Eisenhardt, K. (1989). Building Theories from Case Study Research. The Academy of Management Review, 14(4), 532-550.
• Glaser, B., & Strauss, A. (1967). The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research: Aldine Transaction.
• Lamb, R., & Kling, R. (2003). Reconceptualizing Users as Social Actors in Information Systems Research. MIS Quarterly, 27(2), 197-236.
• Marietta, L. B. (1999). Dangerous liaisons: Trust, distrust, and information technology in American work organizations. Human Organization, 58(3), 331.
• Mingers, J. (2004). Real-izing information systems: critical realism as an underpinning philosophy for information systems. Information and Organization, 14(2), 87-103.
• Myers, M. (1999). Investigating information systems with ethnographic research. Commun. AIS, 2(4).
• Walsham, G. (1995). Interpretive case studies in IS research: Nature and method. European Journal of Information Systems, 4, 74-81.

This is part 2 of a 5 part series on using case study research methods in information systems research.

This essay provides an overview and review of Lee’s article titled “A Scientific Methodology for MIS Case Studies” published in MIS Quarterly in 1989. In this paper, Lee (hereafter known as ‘the author’) provides a review of using scientific methods during case study research in the information systems field.

The scientific model used by the author is based on the natural science model found in social science research and described in detail by many researchers.  On of these researchers, Behling (1980), describes the use of research methods similar to the natural science model in organizational behavior as being widely accepted and used (Behling, 1980).  This natural science model is the basis for the author’s model for us in MIS case studies.

The author defines an MIS case study as “the examination of a real-world MIS as it actually exists in its natural, real-world setting” (Lee, 1989, p. 34). This definition, while excellent, introduces a few problems with respect to the use of the scientific model described by the author.  These issues, described in detail by the author, are summarized in the next few paragraphs.

The first problem has to do with controlling the observations during the research. With the definition given of real-world system in real-world settings, it is virtually impossible to control variables and/or settings thereby taking away the scientific approaches used to control variables that are found in other types of research.

The second problem has to do with making controlled deductions from the research being performed. When looking at real-world situations using case studies, it is rare to have controlled, quantitative data to make controlled deductions.  Without quantitative data, the qualitative data that is gathered must be interpreted, which could leave room for interpretation errors.  It is worth nothing that Cavaye (1996) and Kaplan & Duchon (1988) provide some evidence that quantitative data can and is used within case research (Cavaye, 1996; Kaplan & Duchon, 1988).

The third problem revolves around the replicability of the results of the case study. Again, since the case study is looking at real-world systems in a real-world setting, it will extremely difficult for a researcher to find the exact same set of variables configured in exactly the same way (people, technology, political atmosphere, etc). This inability to replicate the case study makes it difficult for future researchers to validate and verify the results reported in the case.

The fourth problem has to do how the research and result can made to be generalizable to other problems and locations. Being as the case study is composed of real-world, non-replicable events and interactions, researchers must find ways to show that the case study outcome is valid and prepare for arguments from critics.

While the problems listed above are quite serious, the author provides excellent advice to overcome these issues while using case research for real-world systems.  The author argues that these problems can be overcome by providing for the requirements of “falsifiability, logical consistency, predictive power exceeding that of competing theories and survival of the empirical tests aimed at falsifying it” (Lee, 1989, p. 37).  Using these four requirements as guidelines, a researcher can use the case study method as defined by the author to ensure quality research.

As an example of a case study using this approach, the author provides a review of Markus (1983) “Power, Politics and MIS Implementations” case study.  This study describes an MIS implementation and looks at the competing theories on resistance to MIS implementation theories (Markus, 1983).   The author provides a detailed description of how Markus has met the four requirements to overcome the problems associated with using the scientific model for case study research.

This paper might have provided more insight if it had taken wider view of the types of research that might be undertaken.  This paper takes a positivist approach to case study research without providing and insight into how an interpretivist approach might provide different approaches to information systems research. In addition, the quickness of the author to disregard the availability of quantitative data in case study research for information systems researchers is disturbing. Cavaye (1996), Kaplan & Duchon (1988) and Gable (1994) have shown that quantitative data can be used in MIS case study research quite effectively.

This paper provides a significant contribution to IS research by describing the use of case studies as a scientific method for studying management information systems.  Although there are some limitations, the problems described and the descriptions for overcoming these problems are excellent.

References

• Behling, O. (1980). The Case for the Natural Science Model for Research in Organizational Behavior and Organizational Theory. Academy of Management Review, 5(4), 483-490.
• Cavaye, A. L. M. (1996). Case study research: A multi‐faceted research approach for IS. Information Systems Journal, 6, 227-242.
• Gable, G. G. (1994). Integrating case study and survey research methods: an example in information systems. European Journal of Information Systems, 3(2), 112-126.
• Kaplan, B., & Duchon, D. (1988). Combining qualitative and quantitative methods information systems research: a case study. Management Information Systems Quarterly, 12(4), 571-586.
• Lee, A. S. (1989). A scientific methodology for MIS case studies. MIS Q., 13(1), 33-50.
• Markus, M. L. (1983). Power, politics, and MIS implementation. Commun. ACM, 26(6), 430-444.

This is part 1 of a 5 part series on using case study research methods in information systems research

This essay provides an overview and review of Cavaye’s (1996) article titled “Case study research: a multi-faceted research approach for IS” published in Volume 6 of the Information Systems Journal in 1996. In this paper, Cavaye (hereafter known as ‘the author’) provides an impressive description of the case study research method and the various ways in which case research can be used by information systems researchers.

While there is no generally agreed upon definition of case research, the author uses the characteristics of case research to help describe this valuable research method. Case research is often used by researchers when they are attempting to fully understand the “context of a phenomenon” (Cavaye, 1996, p. 229) and attempts to contribute to subject knowledge by relating research output to generalizable theories (Cavaye, 1996). While describing the strengths and weaknesses of case research, the author also provides a description of related research strategies that utilize the case method.  These methods are: Field Study, Action Research, Application Descriptions and Ethnographic Research (Cavaye, 1996).  Including these related research methods helps the reader to understand the different approaches that the case method can take.

The author takes a much-appreciated approach of providing a non-critical and seemingly unbiased view of case research as it is used in the field of information systems research.  The non-critical approach taken by the author of this paper is appreciated because it steps away from the mindset of previous researchers that there are ‘better’ approaches for IS research (Cavaye, 1996).  The dominant approach used in information systems research is positivist (Benbasat, Goldstein, & Mead, 1987; A. S. Lee, 1989; Orlikowski & Baroudi, 1991; Yin, 2009) with most researchers and authors claiming that the positivist approach is the superior approach (Cavaye, 1996).  The author argues, using contributions and research from the field, that while the positivist approach may be the dominant one, there are other methods (e.g., the interpretivist approach) for case research is a valid method and one that beginning to appear in more information systems case research.  This open-ended and non-biased approach is quite refreshing when compared to other articles that do not mention other case research methods for use in information systems (Benbasat, et al., 1987).

In addition to providing a discussion of the interpretivist versus positivist approach to case research, the author provides a significant contribution to the body of knowledge by describing case research approaches and alternatives. As previously mentioned, the author’s un-biased approach to describing the various approaches and alternatives provides the reader with straightforward information about case research and its alternatives.  For example, the author provides descriptions of the interpretivist and positivist approaches as well an approach that combines both the positivist and interpretivist approaches described by using one approach to support the other (Kaplan & Duchon, 1988; A. Lee, 1991).

Another significant contribution of this paper is the simple but important descriptions of the use of case research.  The author argues that research is performed for many reasons but the basic reason for research to be performed can be found in the following three reason: To Describe, To Discover and/or To Test Theory (Cavaye, 1996, p. 234).  The author continues to argue that case research can be used for all three and describes various approaches for using case research for these three research reasons.

Lastly, the author provides evidence that case research can be used with either qualitative or quantitative research methods or using a combination of qualitative and quantitative methods.  The combination of these two methods is described in detail in Kaplan and Duchon’s (1988) research using both qualitative and quantitative methods in case research.

The author does a great job describing case research and the various approaches and alternatives for case research.  The author claims in the introduction that case research can be either positivist or interpretivist, deductive or inductive, qualitative or quantitative and can be used for many different types of information research (Cavaye, 1996).  After reading through the paper and many of the articles that the author provides references to, it’s clear that case research is an excellent option for information systems researchers.

References

• Benbasat, I., Goldstein, D. K., & Mead, M. (1987). The case research strategy in studies of information systems. MIS Q., 11(3), 369-386.
• Cavaye, A. L. M. (1996). Case study research: A multi‐faceted research approach for IS. Information Systems Journal, 6, 227-242.
• Kaplan, B., & Duchon, D. (1988). Combining qualitative and quantitative methods information systems research: a case study. Management Information Systems Quarterly, 12(4), 571-586.
• Lee, A. (1991). Integrating Positivist and Interpretive Approaches to Organizational Research. Organization Science, 2(4), 342-365.
• Lee, A. S. (1989). A scientific methodology for MIS case studies. MIS Q., 13(1), 33-50.
• Orlikowski, W. J., & Baroudi, J. J. (1991). Studying Information Technology in Organizations: Research Approaches and Assumptions. Information Systems Research, 2, 1-28.
• Yin, R. K. (2009). Case Study Research: Design and Methods (Vol. 5): SAGE.

As part of my doctorate work, I’ve been looking at many different research methodologies.  One of the more interesting qualitative methods is the use of the case study in information systems research.

While reviewing the case study, I found a few articles that discuss the use of the case study approach in the field of inforamtion systems and that i’d provide a brief review of each.

Over the coming weeks, I’ll be publishing reviews of the following articles:

• Cavaye, A. L. M. (1996). Case study research: A multi‐faceted research approach for IS. Information Systems Journal, 6, 227‐242.
• Lee, A. S. (1989). A Scientific Methodology for MIS Case Studies. MIS Quarterly, 13(1), 33‐50.
• Walsham, G. (1995). Interpretive case studies in IS research: Nature and method. European Journal of Information Systems, 4(2), 74‐82
• Darke, P., Shanks, G., & Broadbent, M. (1998). Successfully completing case study research: combining rigour, relevance and pragmatism. Information Systems Journal, 8(4), 273‐289.

My plan is to publish one review per week.  Check back later this week for the first article review.