Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Exploring the Role of Informants in Interpretive Case Study Research in IS

  • Chapter
Enacting Research Methods in Information Systems: Volume 2

  • 883 Accesses

Abstract

Interpretive case study research constitutes an important and increasing part of the information systems (IS) knowledge base (Walsham, 1993; Myers, 1997; Paré and Elam, 1997; Walsham, 2006). Interpretive case studies can be distinguished from positivist case study research (Benbasat et al., 1987; Lee, 1989; Dubé and Paré, 2003) by the focus on close interaction between researcher and participants throughout the case study process, viewing the case members as active participants in the construction of the case narrative (Boland, 1985; Guba and Lincoln, 1989; Kvale, 2002). However, while the interpretivist perspective ascribes an active role to the case study informants, in practice the extent of this involvement is normally confined to the data collection process and discussion of early versions of the case narrative. In few cases is the involvement of the informants reported to continue further to the final stages of analytical abstraction of the case study data, where the aim is to develop the overall patterns and explanations.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Avgerou, C. (2002). New Socio-Technical Perspectives of IS innovation in Organizations, in C. Avgerou and R.L. LaRovere (eds.) ICT Innovation: Economic and organizational perspectives, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, pp. 141–161.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baskerville, R. (1996). Deferring Generalizability: Four classes of generalization in social enquiry, Scandinavian Journal of Information Systems 8(2): 5–28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Benbasat, I., Goldstein, D.K. and Mead, M. (1987). The Case Research Strategy in Studies of Information Systems, MIS Quarterly 11(3): 369–385.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Benbasat, I. and Zmud, R.W. (1999). Empirical Research in Information Systems: The practice of relevance, MIS Quarterly 21(1): 3–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Benbasat, I. and Zmud, R.W. (2003). The Identity Crisis within the IS Discipline: Defining and communicating the discipline’s core properties, MIS Quarterly 27(2): 183–194.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bloor, M. (1978). On the Analysis of Observational Data: A discussion of the worth and uses of inductive techniques and respondent validation, Sociology 12(3): 545–557.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bloor, M. (2001). Techniques of Validation in Qualitative Research: A critical commentary, in R. Emerson (ed.) Contemporary Field Research: Perspectives and formulations, 2nd edn, Long Grove, IL: Waveland Press Inc, pp. 383–395.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blumer, H. (1969). Symbolic Interactionism: Perspective and Method. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boland, R. (1985). Phenomenology: A preferred approach to research on information systems, in E. Mumford (ed.) Research Methods in Information Systems, North-Holland: Amsterdam, pp. 181–190.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bryman, A. (1988). Quantity and Quality in Social Research, London: Unw in Hyman.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Butler, T. (1998). Towards a Hermeneutic Method for Interpretive Research in Information Systems, Journal of Information Technology 13: 285–300.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bygstad, B. (2006). Managing Socio-Technical Integration in Iterative Information System Development Projects, International Journal of Technology and Human Interaction 2(4): 1–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bygstad, B. and Nielsen, P.A. (2003). The Meeting of Processes, Proceedings of IRIS 26 (Helsinki, Finland).

    Google Scholar 

  • Bygstad, B., Nielsen, P.A. and Munkvold, B.E. (2010). Four Integration Patterns: A socio-technical approach to integration in IS development projects, Information Systems Journal 20(1): 53–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, D.T. (1955). The Informant in Quantitative Research, The American Journal of Sociology 60(4): 339–342.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carney, T.F. (1990). Collaborative Inquiry Methodology, Windsor, Ontario, Canada: University of Windsor, Division for Instructional Development.

    Google Scholar 

  • Czarniawska, B. (2004). Narratives in Social Science Research, Thousand Oaks, CA: CA Sage.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Doolin, B. (1998). Information Technology as Disciplinary Technology: Being critical in interpretive research on information systems, Journal of Information Technology 13: 301–311.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dubé, L. and Paré, G. (2003). Rigor in Information Systems Positivist Case Research: Current practices, trends. and recommendations, MIS Quarterly 27(4): 597–635.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fielding, N.G. and Fielding, J.L. (1986). Linking Data. Qualitative Research Methods Series No 4, London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fitzgerald, B. and Howcroft, D. (1998). Towards Dissolution of the IS Research Debate: From polarization to polarity, Journal of Information Technology 13: 313–326.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goldstein, D.K. (1990). Information Support for Sales and Marketing. A case study at a small grocery manufacturer, Information & Management 19: 257–268.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guba, E.G. and Lincoln, Y.S. (1989). Fourth Generation Evaluation, Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hanseth, O. and Monteiro, E. (1996). Inscribing Behaviour in Information Infrastructure Standards, Accounting, Management and Information Systems 7(4): 183–211.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoffman, A. (2004). Reconsidering the Role of the Practical Theorist: On (re) connecting theory to practice in organization theory, Strategic Organization 2(2): 213–222.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jacobson, I., Booch, G. and Rumbaugh, R. (1999). The Unified Software Development Process, 1st edn, Reading, MA: Addison Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kallinikos, J. (2004). Farewell to Constructivism: Technology and context-embedded action, in C. Avgerou, C. Ciborra and F. Land (eds.) The Social Study of Information and Communication Technology, Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 140–161.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klein, H.K. and Myers, M.D. (1999). A Set of Principles for Conducting and Evaluating Interpretive Field Studies in Information System, MIS Quarterly 23(1): 67–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kvale, S. (1996). Interviews, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kvale, S. (2002). The Social Construction of Validity, in N.K. Denzin and Y.S. Lincoln (eds.) The Qualitative Inquiry Reader, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, pp. 299–325.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lanzara, G.F. (1991). Shifting Stories. Learning from a Reflective Experiment in a Design Process, in D.A. Schon (ed.) The Reflective Turn: Case studies in and on educational practice, New York: Teachers College Press of Columbia University, pp. 285–320.

    Google Scholar 

  • Latour, B. (1987). Science in Action: How to follow scientists and engineers through society, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, A.S. (1989). A Scientific Methodology for MIS Case Studies, MIS Quarterly 13(1): 33–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levine, H.G. and Rossmoore, D. (1993). Diagnosing the Human Threats to Information Technology Implementation: A missing factor in system analysis illustrated in a case study, Journal of Management Information Systems 10(2): 55–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lincoln, Y.S. and Guba, E.G. (2003). Ethics: The failure of positivist science, in Y.S. Lincoln and N.K. Denzin (eds.) Turning Points in Qualitative Research: Tying knots in a handkerchief, Walnut Creek, CA: AltaMira Press, pp. 219–238.

    Google Scholar 

  • Locke, K.D. and Velamuri, S.R. (2004). Member Checking Challenges, Working paper, Williamsburg, VA, The College of William and Mary.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mårtensson, P. and Lee, A. (2004). Dialogical Action Research at Omega Corporation, MIS Quarterly 28(3): 507–536.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mathiassen, L., Pries-Heje, J. and Ngwenyama, O. (2001). Improving Software Organisations, Boston, MA: Addison-Wesley Professional.

    Google Scholar 

  • McDonnell, A., Lloyd Jones, M. and Read, S. (2000). Practical Considerations in Case Study Research: The relationship between methodology and process, Journal of Advanced Nursing 32(2): 383–390.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miles, M.B. and Huberman, A.M. (1994). Qualitative Data Analysis, 2nd edn, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moody, D.L. (2000). Building Links Between IS Research and Professional Practice: Improving the relevance and impact of IS research, in W.J. Orlikowski, P. Weil, S. Ang and H.C. Krcmar (eds.) Proceedings of the Twenty-First International Conference on Information Systems (Brisbane), 351–360.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morse, J.M., Barrett, M., Mayan, M., Olson, K. and Spiers, J. (2002). Verification Strategies for Establishing Reliability and Validity in Qualitative Research, International Journal of Qualitative Methods 1(2): 1–19.

    Google Scholar 

  • Myers, M.D. (1997). Qualitative Research in Information Systems, MIS Quarterly 21(2): 242–242.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Myers, M.D. and Newman, M. (2007). The Qualitative Interview in IS Research: Examining the craft, Information and Organization 17: 2–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ngwenyama, O. (1998). Groupware, Social Action and Emergent Organizations: On the process dynamics of computer mediated distributed work, Accounting, Management and Information Technologies 8 (2–3): 127–146.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nicholsen, B. and Sahay, S. (2004). Embedded knowledge and offshore software development, Information and Organization 14: 329–365.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pare, G. and Elam, J.J. (1997). Using Case Study Research to Build Theories of IT Implementation, Proceedings of IFIP TC8 WG 8.2, Philadelphia: Chapman & Hall, pp. 542–568.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paulk, M.C. (1998). Using the Capability Maturity Model for Software to Drive Change, in T.J. Larsen and E. McGuire (eds.) Information Systems Innovation and Diffusion, Hershey, PA: Idea Group Publishing, pp. 196–219.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pettigrew, A.M. (1985). Contextualist Research and the Study of Organizational Change Processes, in E. Mumford, R. Hirschheim, G. Fitgerald and A.T. Wood-Harper (eds.) Research Methods in Information Systems, North-Holland: Amsterdam, pp. 53–78.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pettigrew, A.M. (1990). Longitudinal Field Research on Change Theory and Practice, Organization Science 3: 267–292.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reason, P. and Rowan, J. (1981). Issues of Validity in New Paradigm Research, in P. Reason and J. Rowan (eds.) Human Inquiry, Chichester: John Wiley, pp. 239–250.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosemann, M. and Vessey, I. (2008). Toward Improving the Relevance of Information Systems Research to Practice: The role of applicability checks, MIS Quarterly 32(1): 1–22.

    Google Scholar 

  • Saunders, C. (1998). Editorial Preface: The role of business in IT research, Information Resources Management Journal 11: 4–6.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sayer, A. (2000). Realism and Social Science, London: Sage Publications.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Schatzman, L. and Strauss, A.L. (1973). Field Research. Strategies for a Natural Sociology, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schön, D.A. (1983). The Reflective Practitioner, New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Silverman, D. (1985). Qualitative Methodology & Sociology, Brookfield, VT: Gower Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Silverman, D. (1993). Interpreting Qualitative Data: Methods for analysing talk, text and interaction, London: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, M.L. (2006). Overcoming Theory-Practice Inconsistencies: Critical realism and information systems research, Information and Organization 16(3): 191–211.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van de Ven, A.H. (2007). Engaged Scholarship, New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wagner, E.L. (2003). (Inter–)Connecting IS Narrative Research: Current status and future opportunities for process-oriented field studies, in E.H. Wynn, E.A. Whitley, M.D. Myers and J.I. DeGross (eds.) Global and Organizational Discourse About Information Technology, Boston, MA: Kluwer, pp. 419–436.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Walsham, G. (1993). Interpreting Information Systems in Organizations, Chichester: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walsham, G. (1995). Interpretive Case Studies in IS Research: Nature and method, European Journal of Information Systems 4: 74–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walsham, G. (2006). Doing Interpretive Research, European Journal of Information Systems 15: 320–330.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walsham, G. and Sahay, S. (1999). GIS for District-Level Administration in India: Problems and opportunities, MIS Quarterly 23(1): 39–66.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weick, K. (1995). Sensemaking in Organizations, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yin, R.K. (1994). Case Study Research, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Norwegian School of IT, Norway

    Bendik Bygstad

  2. University of Agder, Norway

    Bjørn Erik Munkvold

Authors
  1. Bendik Bygstad
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Bjørn Erik Munkvold
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. London School of Economics and Political Science, UK

    Leslie P. Willcocks

  2. Oxford University, UK

    Chris Sauer

  3. University of Missouri-St Louis, USA

    Mary C. Lacity

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Association for Information Technology Trust

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Bygstad, B., Munkvold, B.E. (2016). Exploring the Role of Informants in Interpretive Case Study Research in IS. In: Willcocks, L.P., Sauer, C., Lacity, M.C. (eds) Enacting Research Methods in Information Systems: Volume 2. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-29269-4_4

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation