IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jomega/v28y2000i5p567-579.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Information systems: what sort of science is it?

Author

Listed:
  • Avgerou, Chrisanthi

Abstract

The academic field of Information Systems (IS) is concerned with a large range of multifaceted questions regarding the development, use and implications of information and communication technologies in organisations. Responsive to the challenge that profound technological innovation in the last 30 years posed to all types of social life, IS studies have developed a wealth of detailed knowledge at the organisational level. Yet, the field of IS is not well understood by academics and professionals in other fields, even in fields related to IS, such as Operational Research, Management, or Psychology. In this paper, written mainly for academics and professionals who are not IS specialists, we outline the IS field in terms of its main thematic areas, theories, and investigation approaches and discuss its institutional characteristics. We argue that the major strength of the field is its responsiveness to a large variety of issues emerging in organisations as they learn to exploit the new technological potential. However, being so far mainly issue oriented rather than theory driven, IS lacks the distinctiveness and rigour usually associated with scientific disciplines and remains institutionally weak.

Suggested Citation

  • Avgerou, Chrisanthi, 2000. "Information systems: what sort of science is it?," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 28(5), pages 567-579, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:jomega:v:28:y:2000:i:5:p:567-579
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0305-0483(99)00072-9
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Wanda J. Orlikowski & Jack J. Baroudi, 1991. "Studying Information Technology in Organizations: Research Approaches and Assumptions," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 2(1), pages 1-28, March.
    2. E. Burton Swanson & Neil C. Ramiller, 1993. "Information Systems Research Thematics: Submissions to a New Journal, 1987–1992," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 4(4), pages 299-330, December.
    3. Gerardine DeSanctis & Marshall Scott Poole, 1994. "Capturing the Complexity in Advanced Technology Use: Adaptive Structuration Theory," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 5(2), pages 121-147, May.
    4. Eom, Sean B, 1998. "The Intellectual Development and Structure of Decision Support Systems (1991-1995)," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 26(5), pages 639-657, October.
    5. Daniel Robey, 1996. "Research Commentary: Diversity in Information Systems Research: Threat, Promise, and Responsibility," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 7(4), pages 400-408, December.
    6. Russell L. Ackoff, 1971. "Towards a System of Systems Concepts," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 17(11), pages 661-671, July.
    7. Geoff Walsham, 1995. "The Emergence of Interpretivism in IS Research," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 6(4), pages 376-394, December.
    8. Eom, S. B., 1995. "Decision support systems research: Reference disciplines and a cumulative tradition," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 23(5), pages 511-523, October.
    9. Hammer, Michael & Champy, James, 1993. "Reengineering the corporation: A manifesto for business revolution," Business Horizons, Elsevier, vol. 36(5), pages 90-91.
    10. Wanda J. Orlikowski, 1992. "The Duality of Technology: Rethinking the Concept of Technology in Organizations," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 3(3), pages 398-427, August.
    11. Amit Basu & Robert W. Blanning, 1994. "Metagraphs: A Tool for Modeling Decision Support Systems," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 40(12), pages 1579-1600, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Jan Claes & Irene Vanderfeesten & Frederik Gailly & Paul Grefen & Geert Poels, 2015. "The Structured Process Modeling Theory (SPMT) a cognitive view on why and how modelers benefit from structuring the process of process modeling," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 17(6), pages 1401-1425, December.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Goles, Tim & Hirschheim, Rudy, 2000. "The paradigm is dead, the paradigm is dead...long live the paradigm: the legacy of Burrell and Morgan," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 28(3), pages 249-268, June.
    2. Wanda J. Orlikowski & C. Suzanne Iacono, 2001. "Research Commentary: Desperately Seeking the “IT” in IT Research—A Call to Theorizing the IT Artifact," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 12(2), pages 121-134, June.
    3. John Mingers, 2001. "Combining IS Research Methods: Towards a Pluralist Methodology," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 12(3), pages 240-259, September.
    4. Robin Williams & Neil Pollock, 2012. "Research Commentary ---Moving Beyond the Single Site Implementation Study: How (and Why) We Should Study the Biography of Packaged Enterprise Solutions," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 23(1), pages 1-22, March.
    5. Rod Jarman, 2005. "When Success Isn’t Everything – Case Studies of Two Virtual Teams," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 14(4), pages 333-354, July.
    6. Miralles, Francesc & Sieber, Sandra & Valor, Josep, 2005. "CIO herds and user gangs in the adoption of open source software," IESE Research Papers D/595, IESE Business School.
    7. Mariek Vanden Abeele & Ralf De Wolf & Rich Ling, 2018. "Mobile Media and Social Space: How Anytime, Anyplace Connectivity Structures Everyday Life," Media and Communication, Cogitatio Press, vol. 6(2), pages 5-14.
    8. Emmanuelle Vaast & Geoff Walsham, 2009. "Trans-Situated Learning: Supporting a Network of Practice with an Information Infrastructure," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 20(4), pages 547-564, December.
    9. Pamela J. Hinds & Diane E. Bailey, 2003. "Out of Sight, Out of Sync: Understanding Conflict in Distributed Teams," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 14(6), pages 615-632, December.
    10. Daniel Beverungen, 2014. "Exploring the Interplay of the Design and Emergence of Business Processes as Organizational Routines," Business & Information Systems Engineering: The International Journal of WIRTSCHAFTSINFORMATIK, Springer;Gesellschaft für Informatik e.V. (GI), vol. 6(4), pages 191-202, August.
    11. Michiel Bal & Jos Benders & Lander Vermeerbergen, 2022. "‘Bringing the Covert into the Open’: A Case Study on Technology Appropriation and Continuous Improvement," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(10), pages 1-17, May.
    12. Fatuma Namisango & Kyeong Kang & Ghassan Beydoun, 2022. "How the Structures Provided by Social Media Enable Collaborative Outcomes: A Study of Service Co-creation in Nonprofits," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 24(2), pages 517-535, April.
    13. Kummitha, Rama Krishna Reddy, 2020. "Why distance matters: The relatedness between technology development and its appropriation in smart cities," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 157(C).
    14. Khuong, Le-Nguyen & Harindranath, G. & Dyerson, Romano, 2014. "Understanding knowledge management software-organisation misalignments from an institutional perspective: A case study of a global IT-management consultancy firm," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 34(2), pages 226-247.
    15. Hart O. Awa & Ojiabo Ukoha & Best C. Eke, 2016. "Adoption of emerging ICTs: The role of actors in a social network," Cogent Business & Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 3(1), pages 1259879-125, December.
    16. Verena Wolf & Christian Bartelheimer & Daniel Beverungen, 2020. "Workarounds as Generative Mechanisms for Restructuring and Redesigning Organizations - Insights from a Multiple Case Study," Working Papers Dissertations 68, Paderborn University, Faculty of Business Administration and Economics.
    17. Steinhilber, Simone & Wells, Peter & Thankappan, Samarthia, 2013. "Socio-technical inertia: Understanding the barriers to electric vehicles," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 531-539.
    18. repec:dau:papers:123456789/2753 is not listed on IDEAS
    19. Dandi, Roberto, 2002. "E-mail and Direct Participation in Decision Making: A Literature Review," MPRA Paper 14397, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    20. Jennifer A. Howard-Grenville, 2005. "The Persistence of Flexible Organizational Routines: The Role of Agency and Organizational Context," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 16(6), pages 618-636, December.
    21. Sébastien Tran, 2010. "Quand les TIC réussissent trop bien dans les organisations : le cas du courrier électronique chez les managers," Post-Print halshs-00638824, HAL.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:jomega:v:28:y:2000:i:5:p:567-579. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/375/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.