IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Renewing Literature Reviews in MIS Research? A Critical Realist Approach


  • François-Xavier de Vaujany

    (DRM - Dauphine Recherches en Management - Université Paris Dauphine-PSL - PSL - Université Paris sciences et lettres - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique)

  • Nathalie Mitev

    (LSE - Department of Management - London School of Economics and Political Science - LSE - London School of Economics and Political Science)

  • Matthew Smith

    (autre - AUTRES)

  • Isabelle Walsh

    (autre - AUTRES)


Literature Reviews (LR) are particularly useful for demonstrating the coherence and cumulativeness (or lack thereof) of MIS research and for developing avenues for further research. Most top-tier journals now publish LRs, and many have even begun devoting specific sections to them. Our starting point is that LRs are not epistemologically neutral, and three approaches commonly underlie literature reviews: positivism (identifying the concepts, theories and models closest to the phenomenon that is being explained); interpretivism (identifying the various concepts and theories expressed by various actors and grouping them into multiple perspectives); and critical approaches (identifying both the underlying assumptions and conditions of the production of theories and their effects). We suggest a fourth approach to LRs underpinned by the philosophy of critical realism (CR) and argue that it can enable the (re)interpretation of existing literature through the identification of underlying generative mechanisms. These generative mechanisms provide a common denominator to enable the synthesis of concepts and theories in new ways, helping to bridge previously thought to be incompatible theories, and contributing to a more cumulative view of academic knowledge. We illustrate the value of a CR-based literature through its application to the topic of IT Strategic Value in the MIS and strategic management literature; we show how the identification of four generative mechanisms and three core agencies can support a more integrated view of IT Strategic Value. We then discuss the implications of the use of generative mechanisms and propose guidelines from a CR perspective for carrying out literature reviews.

Suggested Citation

  • François-Xavier de Vaujany & Nathalie Mitev & Matthew Smith & Isabelle Walsh, 2017. "Renewing Literature Reviews in MIS Research? A Critical Realist Approach," Working Papers hal-01648133, HAL.
  • Handle: RePEc:hal:wpaper:hal-01648133
    Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server:

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. Steve Fleetwood, 2001. "Causal Laws, Functional Relations and Tendencies," Review of Political Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 13(2), pages 201-220.
    2. Andrew Burton-Jones & Detmar W. Straub, 2006. "Reconceptualizing System Usage: An Approach and Empirical Test," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 17(3), pages 228-246, September.
    3. Matthew Longshore Smith & Carolina Seward, 2009. "The Relational Ontology of Amartya Sen's Capability Approach: Incorporating Social and Individual Causes," Journal of Human Development and Capabilities, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 10(2), pages 213-235.
    4. Jack E. Triplett, 1999. "The Solow productivity paradox: what do computers do to productivity?," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 32(2), pages 309-334, April.
    5. C. Ranganathan & Carol V. Brown, 2006. "ERP Investments and the Market Value of Firms: Toward an Understanding of Influential ERP Project Variables," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 17(2), pages 145-161, June.
    6. Alistair Mutch, 2005. "Concerns with "Mutual Constitution": A Critical Realist Commentary," International Journal of Technology and Human Interaction (IJTHI), IGI Global, vol. 1(3), pages 60-72, July.
    7. 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.
    8. Fred D. Davis & Richard P. Bagozzi & Paul R. Warshaw, 1989. "User Acceptance of Computer Technology: A Comparison of Two Theoretical Models," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 35(8), pages 982-1003, August.
    9. repec:dau:papers:123456789/9071 is not listed on IDEAS
    10. Stiroh, Kevin J, 1998. "Computers, Productivity, and Input Substitution," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 36(2), pages 175-191, April.
    11. J Mingers, 2000. "The contribution of critical realism as an underpinning philosophy for OR/MS and systems," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 51(11), pages 1256-1270, November.
    12. Wanda J. Orlikowski & JoAnne Yates & Kazuo Okamura & Masayo Fujimoto, 1995. "Shaping Electronic Communication: The Metastructuring of Technology in the Context of Use," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 6(4), pages 423-444, August.
    13. Erik Brynjolfsson & Lorin M. Hitt, 2000. "Beyond Computation: Information Technology, Organizational Transformation and Business Performance," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 14(4), pages 23-48, Fall.
    14. Randolph B. Cooper & Robert W. Zmud, 1990. "Information Technology Implementation Research: A Technological Diffusion Approach," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 36(2), pages 123-139, February.
    15. John Mingers, 2001. "Combining IS Research Methods: Towards a Pluralist Methodology," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 12(3), pages 240-259, September.
    16. François-Xavier de Vaujany & Isabelle Walsh & Nathalie Mitev, 2011. "An Historically-Grounded Critical Analysis of Research Articles in MIS," Post-Print hal-00644398, HAL.
    17. Nathalie Mitev & François-Xavier de Vaujany, 2012. "Seizing the Opportunity: Towards a Historiography of Information Systems," Post-Print halshs-00671690, HAL.
    18. 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.
    19. Alistair Mutch, 2010. "Technology, Organization, and Structure---A Morphogenetic Approach," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 21(2), pages 507-520, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Russell L. Purvis & V. Sambamurthy & Robert W. Zmud, 2001. "The Assimilation of Knowledge Platforms in Organizations: An Empirical Investigation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 12(2), pages 117-135, April.
    2. Pradeep Racherla & Munir Mandviwalla, 2013. "Moving from Access to Use of the Information Infrastructure: A Multilevel Sociotechnical Framework," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 24(3), pages 709-730, September.
    3. Sora Kang & Kai H. Lim & Min Soo Kim & Hee-Dong Yang, 2012. "Research Note ---A Multilevel Analysis of the Effect of Group Appropriation on Collaborative Technologies Use and Performance," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 23(1), pages 214-230, March.
    4. Kevin J. Stiroh, 2002. "Information Technology and the U.S. Productivity Revival: What Do the Industry Data Say?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 92(5), pages 1559-1576, December.
    5. Jonghak Sun, 2017. "The effect of information technology on IT-facilitated coordination, IT-facilitated autonomy, and decision-makings at the individual level," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 49(2), pages 138-155, January.
    6. Abhay Nath Mishra & Ritu Agarwal, 2010. "Technological Frames, Organizational Capabilities, and IT Use: An Empirical Investigation of Electronic Procurement," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 21(2), pages 249-270, June.
    7. J Mingers, 2006. "A critique of statistical modelling in management science from a critical realist perspective: its role within multimethodology," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 57(2), pages 202-219, February.
    8. François-Xavier de Vaujany & Vladislav Fomin & Kalle Lyytinen & Stefan Haefliger, 2013. "Sociomaterial regulation in organizations: The case of information technology," Post-Print hal-01648122, HAL.
    9. Karl Whelan, 2002. "Computers, Obsolescence, And Productivity," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 84(3), pages 445-461, August.
    10. Kiley, Michael T., 2001. "Computers and growth with frictions: aggregate and disaggregate evidence," Carnegie-Rochester Conference Series on Public Policy, Elsevier, vol. 55(1), pages 171-215, December.
    11. Prasanna Tambe & Lorin M. Hitt, 2014. "Measuring Information Technology Spillovers," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 25(1), pages 53-71, March.
    12. Zand, Fardad & Van Beers, Cees & Van Leeuwen, George, 2011. "Information technology, organizational change and firm productivity: A panel study of complementarity effects and clustering patterns in Manufacturing and Services," MPRA Paper 46469, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    13. Dirk Pilat, 2001. "Productivity Growth in the OECD Area: Some Recent Findings," International Productivity Monitor, Centre for the Study of Living Standards, vol. 3, pages 32-44, Fall.
    14. Sarv Devaraj & Ming Fan & Rajiv Kohli, 2002. "Antecedents of B2C Channel Satisfaction and Preference: Validating e-Commerce Metrics," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 13(3), pages 316-333, September.
    15. Gerald C. Kane & Maryam Alavi, 2008. "Casting the Net: A Multimodal Network Perspective on User-System Interactions," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 19(3), pages 253-272, September.
    16. McLean, Graeme & Osei-Frimpong, Kofi & Al-Nabhani, Khalid & Marriott, Hannah, 2020. "Examining consumer attitudes towards retailers' m-commerce mobile applications – An initial adoption vs. continuous use perspective," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 139-157.
    17. Sven Heidenreich & Katrin Talke, 2020. "Consequences of mandated usage of innovations in organizations: developing an innovation decision model of symbolic and forced adoption," AMS Review, Springer;Academy of Marketing Science, vol. 10(3), pages 279-298, December.
    18. Vachara Peansupap & Derek Walker, 2006. "Innovation diffusion at the implementation stage of a construction project: a case study of information communication technology," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 24(3), pages 321-332.
    19. Laura Dabbish & Robert Kraut, 2008. "Research Note ---Awareness Displays and Social Motivation for Coordinating Communication," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 19(2), pages 221-238, June.
    20. Roman Beck & Sven Weber & Robert Wayne Gregory, 2013. "Theory-generating design science research," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 15(4), pages 637-651, September.

    More about this item


    Literature review; Information Technology (IT); critical realism; strategic value; generative mechanism;
    All these keywords.

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:


    Access and download statistics


    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:hal:wpaper:hal-01648133. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: . General contact details of provider: .

    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: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.