This article discusses the conduct and evaluation of interpretive research in information systems. While the conventions for evaluating information systems case studies conducted according to the natural science model of social science are now widely accepted, this is not the case for interpretive field studies. A set of principles for the conduct and evaluation of interpretive field research in information systems is proposed, along with their philosophical rationale. The usefulness of the principles is illustrated by evaluating three published interpretive field studies drawn from the IS research literature. The intention of the paper is to further reflection and debate on the important subject of grounding interpretive research methodology.

Abstract not found

Link analysis in various forms is now an established technique in many different subjects, reflecting the perceived importance of links and that of the web. A critical but very difficult issue is how to interpret the results of social science link analyses. It is argued that the dynamic nature of the web, its lack of quality control and the online proliferation of copying and imitation mean that methodologies operating within a highly positivist, quantitative framework are ineffective. Conversely, the sheer variety of the web makes qualitative methodologies and pure reason very problematic to apply to large-scale studies. Methodology triangulation is consequently advocated, in combination with a warning that the web is incapable of giving definitive answers to large-scale link analysis research questions concerning social factors underlying link creation. Finally, it is claimed that whilst theoretical frameworks with which to guide research are appropriate, a Theory of Link Analysis is not possible.

Two complementary schools of thought exist with regard to the basic underlying assumptions and philosophies that guide our research in information navigation and access. As with all of HCI, and indeed most of informatics, we can place theories and design practices based in objectivity and mathematics at one end of a spectrum, and those emphasising subjectivity and language at the other. The first school of thought sees itself as part of traditional computer science, rooted in models that encompass the individual variations of users and that are often derived from experimentation and observation in controlled conditions. Mainstream information retrieval, cognitive psychology and task analysis exemplify such a philosophy. Complementary views are held by those who hold the sociological and the semiological as primary, and consider that objective categorical models are insufficient to model the complexity of human activity and ultimately of limited utility in guiding system design and development. Collaborative filtering, ecological psychology and ethnography are examples here. The techniques and systems presented in this book do not all lie towards one end of this spectrum, but instead show a variety of choices and emphases. This chapter, however, focuses on theory firmly towards the subjective and linguistic end of the spectrum: tools to let us place, compare and design techniques and systems. Such theory is noticeable by its absence in the majority of literature in this burgeoning research area. Here we try to redress the balance, aiming to build up a more abstract and general view of our work. At the most applied level, this chapter deals with one approach to social information navigation systems, the path model [1], and describes its origin in an analogy with a theory...

The success of collaborative hypermedia systems in business, engineering, or humanities heavily depends on the discursive nature of knowledge creation. Informing systems that assist crossdisciplinary communities of practice in these fields should therefore be able to capture, to visualize, and to support the ongoing scientific discourse to keep participants informed and committed to the knowledge creation process. We present a solution for this issue, using the MECCA discourse support system for a movie research community as an example. MECCA integrates research processes with teaching processes in the humanities. Our study demonstrates that knowledge creation discourses involve a lot of re-“writing ” (transcription) of discourse artifacts within or across media. We introduce an underlying formal technique to support flexible and adaptable transcription on hypermedia artifacts in the community. Our approach includes a linkage of knowledge to action which aims at seamless de-contextualization from action and recontextualization into action. Keywords: Hypermedia, discourse support, humanities, MPEG-7, CSCL.

On-Line Papers – Copyright This online paper may be cited or briefly quoted in line with the usual academic conventions. You may also download them for your own personal use. This paper must not be published elsewhere (e.g. to mailing lists, bulletin boards etc.) without the author's explicit permission. Please note that if you copy this paper you must: • include this copyright note • not use the paper for commercial purposes or gain in any way • you should observe the conventions of academic citation in a version of the following form: Bob Jessop, ‘Institutional (Re)Turns and the Strategic-Relational Approach’, published by

Needs analysis is a process for defining what kind of information or IT solution is appropriate to a particular organizational situation. It is a common practical approach to ensuring that effective IT solutions are adopted. The argument presented in this paper is that the process may appear rational, but it also takes place in a political context. In order to explore this area, an interpretive field study of a needs analysis project was conducted, concentrating on the political context. The interpretation applies Foucault's theory of power relations to the political context of a needs analysis project for a document control system. The project was carried out in an Australian rail organization. The field study looks at a period during which a decision was required on the most appropriate form of document control system for the organization's needs at that time. The negotiating processes are discussed in terms of the dominant discourses that appeared to be active in the organization.

Abstract: This study is about the interaction of scientific expertise and local knowledge in the context of a contested issue: the quality and quantity of safe drinking water available to some residents in one Canadian community. We articulate the boundary work in which scientific and technological expertise and discourse are played out against local knowledge and water needs to prevent the construction of a watermain extension that would provide a group of residents with the same water that others in the community already access. We draw on an extensive database constructed during a three-year ethnographic study of one community; the database includes the transcript of a public meeting, newspaper clippings, interviews, and communications between residents and town council. We show not only that scientists and residents differ in their assessment of water quality and quantity but also that there is a penchant for undercutting residents in their attempts to make themselves heard in the political process. In our society, the stories of ordinary peoples ’ relationships to ordinary places remain largely a hidden and untapped resource for understanding the complicated, shifting connections between human behaviour and environmental conditions. (Bowerbank, 1997, p. 28) This article is concerned with the conflict between scientific expertise and local knowledge in the context of a case study that focuses on the attempt of some residents of one Canadian community to become connected to the watermain

Most discussions of qualitative research organize research methodologies according to their place in a set of research paradigms identified by epistemological and ontological commitments. Drawing on the work of Bourdieu, the authors argue for a theory of research as social practice in which researchers ’ purposes are determined not by philosophical paradigms but by their commitments to specific forms of social action. The authors offer a model of research practices organized according to their relationship to social power rather than abstract paradigms. From this perspective, the dilemmas presented by recent postmodern critiques of representation, the inclusion and co-optation of participants ’ voices, and validity become a question of ethics. The authors explore the problems of postmodern ethics and qualitative research through the work of Bauman.

It is odd, very odd, to be writing about "transfer, " given that my imagination has been preoccupied of late by young schoolchildren like 6-year-old Denise, the author of the preceding text. Denise liked to play KMEL (the local hip hop radio station) and, along with her friend Vanessa, often displayed her sense of the rhythmic rhyming style of the current youth scene. She sometimes transferred this material from her unofficial school activities to her official ones, including her daily writing workshop entries. The text shown is an entry about an upcoming family move, and those familiar lines about family and sisters were quite deliber-ately taken from Whoopi Goldberg in the film Sister Act II (Steel, Rudin, & Duke, 1994). Although Denise and Vanessa were unique personalities, not so unique was the ease with which they transferred unofficial cultural materials to official school contexts (i.e., applied them in new ways). Cartoons, video games, recent films, and radio songs--as well as school reading materials--all were potential sources of genres, textual elements, and appealing utterances ("We are family") for child writing. In an ongoing project, I am focusing on what schoolchildren appropriate from textual practices located outside the official school world and, thus, the cultural, social, and semiotic negotiations that ensue inside the official world between and among children, teachers, and texts. In the midst of this work, then, comes an invitation to write about "transfer, " and I, of course, am at least partially oriented the wrong way around. In educational psychology circles, transfer has been set firmly within an official school frame: It involves learners ' possession of the necessary intellectual The research reported herein was supported in part by the Spencer Foundation. I would likc to thank my project research assistant, Soyoung Lee, and my consulting editors, Celia Genishi and Sonia Nieto. Although I have benefitted enormously from the thoughtful support of all named, the responsibility for the findings and opinions expresmd here rcsts solely with me. 141