The problems of designing large software systems were studied through interviewing personnel from 17 large projects. A layered behavioral model is used to analyze how three lgf these problems-the thin spread of application domain knowledge, fluctuating and conflicting requirements, and communication bottlenecks and breakdowns-affected software productivity and quality through their impact on cognitive, social, and organizational processes.

We examined 155 information systems research articles published from 1983 to 1988 and found that although this research is not rooted in a single overarching theoretical perspective, it does exhibit a single set of philosophical assumptions regarding the nature of the phenomena studied by information systems researchers, and what constitutes valid knowledge about those phenomena. We believe that a single research perspective for studying information systems phenomena is unnecessarily restrictive, and argue that there exist other philosophical assumptions that can inform studies of the relationships between information technology, people, and organizations. In this paper, we present two additional research philosophies for consideration-the interpretive and the critical-and for each we provide empirical examples to illustrate how they are used. We conclude by suggesting that much can be gained if a plurality of research perspectives is effectively employed to investigate information systems phenomena. Philosophical assumptions—Research approaches—Positivist research—Interpretivist research—Critical research

Abstract. This paper examines and reviews research methods applied within the field of mobile human-computer interaction. The purpose is to provide a snapshot of current practice for studying mobile HCI to identify shortcomings in the way research is conducted and to propose opportunities for future approaches. 102 publications on mobile human-computer interaction research were categorized in a matrix relating their research methods and purpose. The matrix revealed a number of significant trends with a clear bias towards building systems and evaluating them only in laboratory settings, if at all. Also, gaps in the distribution of research approaches and purposes were identified; action research, case studies, field studies and basic research being applied very infrequently. Consequently, we argue that the bias towards building systems and a lack of research for understanding design and use limits the development of cumulative knowledge on mobile human computer interaction. This in turn inhibits future development of the research field as a whole. 1

The authors would like to thank the participants of the 1991 Queen's-HEC workshop and two anonymous reviewers and the Editor in chief of JMIS for their helpful comments on an earlier version of this paper. This study was supported financially by École des Hautes Études Commerciales de Montréal and the University of California at Irvine. Survey research is believed to be well understood and applied by MIS scholars. It has been applied for several years, it is well defined, and it has precise procedures which, when followed closely, yield valid and easily interpretable data. Our assessment of the use of survey research in the MIS field between 1980 and 1990 indicates that this perception is at odds with reality. Our analysis indicates that survey methodology is often misapplied and is plagued by five important weaknesses: (1) single method designs where multiple methods are needed, (2) unsystematic and often inadequate sampling procedures, (3) low response rates, (4) weak linkages between units of analysis and respondents, and (5) over reliance on cross-sectional surveys where longitudinal surveys are really needed. Our assessment also shows that the quality of survey research varies considerably among studies of different purposes: explanatory studies are of good quality overall, exploratory and descriptive studies are of moderate to poor quality.

The literature on electronic commerce (EC) and electronic marketplaces has long recognized the importance of different kinds of intermediaries and the different functions they serve [5]. The Internet is most often discussed in connection with digital intermediaries [76], as the displacement of traditional intermediaries. In this research, we propose a new conceptual framework for understanding how competition in business-tobusiness (B2B) EC in the presence of information technology (IT) innovations changes firm-level strategy choices and the structure of the marketplace. We also identify and discuss the economic forces that lead to these changes. In this context, we further describe a recurring pattern of intermediation, disintermediation and reintermediation through an "IDR framework." We also explain the impetus for technological reintermediation, where a disenfranchised traditional player is able to compete again, by leveraging technological innovations with co-specialized assets. W...

This paper presents a methodological framework, structured-case, that assists IS researchers to undertake and assess theory building research within the interpretive paradigm, and explains its value in achieving convincing explanations that are strongly linked to both the research themes and data collected in the field.

Many researchers have searched for evidence of organizational improvements from the huge sums invested in ICT. Unfortunately, evidence for such a pay back is spotty at best (e.g., Brynjolfsson, 1994; Meyer and Gupta, 1994; Brynjolfsson and Hitt, 1998). On the other hand, at the individual level, computing and communication technologies are increasingly merging into work in ways that make it impossible to separate the two (Gasser, 1986; Zuboff, 1988; Bridges, 1995).

The debate between 'hard ' positivist and 'soft ' interpretivist research approaches has been the subject of much discussion in the IS field. Typically, the debate is framed in issues central to the philosophy of science, an area where relatively few IS researchers are truly competent. This paper attempts to illuminate the issue, particularly for students and researchers not entirely familiar with the arguments. The opposing positions are caricatured in two anecdotes which illustrate the futility of research conducted at the cul de sac extremes of each approach. The main dichotomies characteristic of each research tradition are then summarised, and categorised according to various levels, namely, paradigmatic, ontological, epistemological, methodological, and axiological. Finally, the paper considers a number of strategies

The market for music products has recently been subject to dramatic forces for change. We propose a model and theoretical perspective for understanding the transformation of the market structure in the recorded music industry value chain due to new forms of digital distribution. We take into account the traditional music industry’s value chain and distribution network, and the product characteristics of digital music as they relate to consumer value creation. We also showcase changes in market structure from the various perspectives of the players in the music industry value chain. We then present propositions that characterize the forces at work in market transformation and how each player’s role in the digital music industry value chain is likely to change. We also explain how intellectual property rights issues are affected by the market structure changes. Finally, we explore a number of industry mini-cases that provide evidence in support of our proposed theoretical perspective. ______________________________________________________________________________

The debate between ‘hard ’ and ‘soft ’ research approaches continues in the IS field, but with little prospect of resolution. The debate is typically characterised by tendentious arguments as advocates from each approach offer a somewhat one-sided condemnation of the counterpart from the inimical research tradition. This paper begins by relating two fictitious tales which serve to highlight the futility of research conducted at the extremity of each research approach. The dichotomies which characterise these rival factions are also summarised. The debate is then framed in terms of the polarisation problem whereby IS researchers are divided geographically and paradigmatically into ‘hard ’ and ‘soft ’ camps. A variety of different strategies have been proposed for resolving the debate and these are discussed in detail. They are grouped into four categories, referred to as supremacism, isolationism, integration, and pluralism. Finally, the paper contends that the debate cannot be resolved, and offers the metaphor of magnetic polarity as a means of reflecting this. The paper concludes by arguing that it would be more appropriate to recast the debate at a macro level in order to accommodate different research agenda and recognise the strengths within each tradition.