Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Doing critical information systems research – arguments for a critical research methodology

  • Special Section Article
  • Published:
European Journal of Information Systems

Abstract

Critical information systems (IS) research, it is argued, does not have a distinct methodological identity. While some research methods are closely related to the positivist research paradigm (experiments, surveys, and structural equation modelling) and others to the interpretivist paradigm (field study, ethnography, and action research), the critical paradigm is not identified with specific ‘critical methods’ and typically relies on the appropriation of interpretivist methods (such as critical ethnography). The criticism of the critical research paradigm in IS has often focused on the lack of distinctly critical research methods and even the neglect of methodological issues (Klein; McGrath). This paper questions the notion of and the arguments behind the quest for ‘critical research methods’ defined in contrast to positivist and interpretivist methods. Instead, the paper argues that it is a critical research methodology – understood as an overall strategy of conceptualizing and conducting an inquiry, engaging with studied phenomena, and constructing and justifying socially relevant knowledge, which distinguishes critical from other research paradigms. Building on a Kleinian argument regarding the need for common principles across diverse critical IS inquiries (Klein; Myers & Klein) this paper proposes a framework that describes key dimensions of a critical research methodology that distinguish critical from other research paradigms and provide methodological guidance in the doing of critical research.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Figure 1

References

  • Adam A, Griffiths M, Claire KC, Karenza MK, Richardson H and Tattersall A (2006) Being an ‘it’ in IT: gendered identities in IT work. European Journal of Information Systems 15, 368–378.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alvarez R (2005) Taking a critical linguistic turn: using critical discourse analysis for the study of information systems. In Handbook of Information Systems Research: Critical Perspectives on Information Systems Design, Implementation and Use (HOWCROFT D and TRAUTH EM, Eds), pp 104–122, Edward Elgar Publishing, Cheltenham, U.K.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alvarez R (2008) Examining technology, structure and identity during an enterprise system implementation. Journal of Information Systems 18, 203–224.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alvesson M and Aschroft KL (2009) Critical methodology in management and organization research. In The SAGE Handbook of Organizational Methods (Buchanan DA and Bryman A, Eds), pp 61–78, SAGE Publishing, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alvesson M, Bridgman T and Willmott H (Eds) (2009) The Oxford Handbook of Critical Management Studies. Oxford University Press, Oxford, U.K.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Alvesson M and Deetz SA (2000) Doing Critical Management Research. SAGE Publications, London.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Alvesson M and Skoldberg K (2000) Reflexive Methodology – New Vistas for Qualitative Research. SAGE Publications, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alvesson M and Willmott H (1992) On the idea of emancipation in management and organization studies. Academy of Management Review 17 (3), 432–464.

    Google Scholar 

  • Avgerou C (2002) Information Systems and Global Diversity. Oxford University Press, Oxford, U.K.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beardsley PL (1980) Redefining Rigor: Ideology and Statistics in Political Inquiry. SAGE Publications, Beverly Hills, CA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bohman J (2009) Critical theory, Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy, fall 2009 edition. [WWW document] http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2009/entries/critical-theory/ (accessed 15 November 2009).

  • Braa J and Hedberg C (2002) The struggle for district – based health information systems in South Africa. The Information Society 18 (2), 113–127.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brocklesby J and Cummings S (1996) Foucault plays Habermas: an alternative philosophical underpinning for critical systems thinking. Journal of Operations Research Society 47, 741–754.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brooke C (Ed) (2009) Critical Management Perspectives on Information Systems. Elsevier Publishers, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cecez-Kecmanovic D (2001) Doing critical IS research: the question of methodology. In Qualitative Research in Information Systems: Issues and Trends (TRAUTH EM, Ed), pp 142–163, Idea Group Publishing, Hershey, PA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cecez-Kecmanovic D (2005) Basic assumptions of the critical research perspectives in information systems. In Handbook of Information Systems Research: Critical Perspectives on Information Systems Design, Implementation and Use (HOWCROFT D and TRAUTH E, Eds), pp 19–46, Edward Elgar Publishing, Cheltenham, U.K.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cecez-Kecmanovic D and Janson M (2009) Participatory and emancipatory information systems development: principles, practices and pitfalls. In Critical Management Perspectives on Information Systems (BROOKE C Ed), pp 69–101, Elsevier Publishers, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cecez-Kecmanovic D, Janson M and Brown A (2002) The rationality framework for a critical study of information systems. Journal of Information Technology 17, 215–227.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cecez-Kecmanovic D, Klein H and Brooke C (2008) Exploring the critical agenda in information systems research. Information Systems Journal 18 (2), 123–135.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen WS and Hirschheim R (2004) A paradigmatic and methodological examination of information systems research from 1991 to 2001. Information Systems Journal 14 (3), 197–235.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cordoba J-R and Midgley G (2008) Beyond organisational agendas: using boundary critique to facilitate the inclusion of societal concerns in information systems planning. European Journal of Information Systems 17, 125–142.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crotty M (1998) The Foundations of Social Research: Meaning and Perspective in the Research Process. Allen and Unwin, St Leonards, NSW, Australia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Czarniawska B and Sevon B (2005) Global Ideas: How Ideas, Objects and Practices Travel in the Global Economy. Copenhagen Business School Press, Copenhagen.

    Google Scholar 

  • Doolin B (2004) Power and resistance in the implementation of a medical management information system. Information Systems Journal 14 (4), 343–362.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fairclough N (1995) Critical Discourse Analysis: The Critical Study of Language. Longman, London, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Foucault M (1980) Power/Knowledge: Selected Interviews and Other Writings 1972-1977 (GORDON C, Ed.) Pantheon books, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fuchs M (1993) The reversal of the ethnological perspective: attempts at objectifying one's own cultural horizon. Dumont, Foucault, Bourdieu? Thesis Eleven 34, 104–125.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Galtung J (1977) Methodology and Ideology: Essays in Methodology Vol. 1. Christian Ejlers, Copenhagen.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gebhardt E (1978) A critique of methodology: introduction. In The Essential Frankfurt School Reader (ARATO A and GEBHARDT E, Eds), pp 371–406, Basil Blackwell, Oxford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Habermas J (1972) Knowledge and Human Interest. Heinemann, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Habermas J (1974) Theory and Practice (VIERTEL J, trans), Beacon Press, Boston, MA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Habermas J (1984) The Theory of Communicative Action – Reason and the Rationalization of Society, Vol. I. Boston, MA. Beacon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Habermas J (1987) The Theory of Communicative Action – A Critique of Functionalist Reason, Vol. II. (MCCARTHY T, trans), Beacon Press, Boston, MA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Habermas J (1990) Reconstruction and interpretation in the social sciences. In Moral Consciousness and Communicative Action (HABERMAS J, Ed), MIT Press, Mass, Cambridge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heng M and de Moor A (2003) From Habermas’ communicative theory to practice on the internet. Information Systems Journal 13 (4), 331–352.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hirschheim RA and Klein HK (1994) Realizing emancipatory principles in information systems development: the case for ETHICS. MIS Quarterly 18 (1), 83–109.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Horkheimer M (1982) Critical Theory. Seabury Press, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Howcroft D and Trauth EM (Eds) (2005) Handbook of Critical Information Systems Research: Theory and Application. Edward Elgar Publishing, Cheltenham, U.K.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Howcroft D and Trauth EM (2008) The implications of the critical agenda on gender and IS research. Information Systems Journal 18, 185–202.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Janson M and Cecez-Kecmanovic D (2005) Making sense of eCommerce as social action. Information Technology & People 18 (4), 311–342.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jones C (2009) Poststructuralism in critical management studies. In The Oxford Handbook of Critical Management Studies (ALVESSON M, BRIDGAM T and WILLMOTT H, Eds), Chapter 4, pp 76–98, Oxford University Press, Oxford, U.K.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Kincheloe LJ and McLaren P (2000) Rethinking critical theory and qualitative research. In Handbook of Qualitative Research (DENZIN NK and LINKOLN YD, Eds), 2nd edn, pp 279–313, SAGE publications, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klecun E and Cornford T (2005) A critical approach to evaluation. European Journal of Information Systems 14, 229–243.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klein HK (1999) Knowledge and methods in is research: from beginnings to the future. In New Information Technologies in Organizational Processes: Field Studies and Theoretical Reflections on the Future of Work (NGWENYAMA O, INTRONA LD, MYERS MD and GEGROSS J, Eds), pp 13–26, IFIP, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Klein HK (2009) Critical social is research today: a reflection of past accomplishments and current challenges. In Critical Management Perspectives on Information Systems (BROOKE C, Ed), pp 249–272, Elsevier Publishers, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klein HK and Huynh MQ (1999) The potential of the language action perspective in ethnographic analysis. In New Information Technologies in Organizational Processes: Field Studies and Theoretical Reflections on the Future of Work (NGWENYAMA O, INTRONA LD, MYERS MD and GEGROSS J, Eds), pp 79–98, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Klein HK and Huynh MQ (2004) The critical social theory of Jurgen Habermas and its implications for is research. In Social Theory and Philosophy for Information Systems (MINGERS J and WILLCOCKS L, Eds), pp 157–237, John Wiley & Sons, Chichester, U.K.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klein HK and Myers MD (1999) A set of principles for conducting and evaluating interpretive field studies in information Systems. MIS Quarterly 23 (1), 67–93.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Knights D (2009) Power at work in organizations. In The Oxford Handbook of Critical Management Studies (ALVESSON M, BRIDGAM T and WILLMOTT H, Eds), pp 144–165, Oxford University Press, Oxford, U.K.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Lyytinen K (1992) Information systems and critical theory. In Critical Management Studies (ALVESSON M and WILLMOTT H, Eds), pp 159–180, SAGE Publications, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lyytinen K and Hirschheim R (1988) Information systems as rational discourse: an application of Habermas. Scandinavian Journal of Management Studies 4 (1/2), 19–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lyytinen K and Klein H (1985) The critical theory of Jurgen Habermas as a basis for a theory of information systems. In Research Methods in Information Systems (MUMFORD E, HIRSCHHEIM R, FITZGERALD G and WOOD-HARPER T, Eds), pp 219–236, Elsevier Science Publishers, North Holland, Amsterdam.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCarthy T (1996) The Critical Theory of Jurgen Habermas 10th print. MIT Press, Cambridge.

    Google Scholar 

  • McGrath K (2005) Doing critical research in information systems: a case of theory and practice not informing each other. Information Systems Journal 15 (2), 85–101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mingers J and Walsham G (2008) Towards ethical information systems: the contribution of discourse ethics. International Conference on Information Systems (ICIS).

  • Mingers JC (1981) Towards an appropriate social theory for applied system analysis: critical social and soft system methodologies. Journal of Applied System Analysis 7 (1), 41–49.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mingers JC (2003) The paucity of multimethod research: a review of the information systems literature. Information Systems Journal 13, 233–249.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mitev NN (2006) Postmodernism and criticality in information systems research – what critical management studies can contribute. Social Science Computer Review 24 (3), 310–325.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morrow RA and Brown DD (1994) Critical Theory and Methodology. SAGE Publications, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Myers MD (1997) Critical ethnography in information systems. In Information Systems and Qualitative Research (LEE AS, LIEBENAU J and DEGROSS JI, Eds), pp 276–300, Chapman and Hall, London.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Myers MD and Klein HK (forthcoming) A set of principles for conducting critical research in information systems. MIS Quarterly.

  • Neuman WL (2006) Social Research Methods – Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches, 6th edn. Pearson, Boston.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ngwenyama OK and Lee AS (1997) Communicative richness in electronic mail: critical social theory and the contextuality of meaning. MIS Quarterly 21 (2), 145–167.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Orlikowski WJ and Baroudi JJ (1991) Studying information technology in organizations: research approaches and assumptions. Information Systems Research 2 (1), 1–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scherer AG (2009) Critical theory and its contribution to critical management studies. In The Oxford Handbook of Critical Management Studies (ALVESSON M, BRIDGAM T and WILLMOTT H, Eds), pp 29–51, Oxford University Press, Oxford, U.K.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Spicer A, Alvesson M and Karreman D (2009) Critical performativity: the unfinished business of critical management studies. Human Relations 62 (4), 537–560.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stahl BC (2008) The ethical nature of critical research in information systems. Information Systems Journal 18, 137–163.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thomas J (1993) Doing Critical Ethnography. Sage Publications, Newbury Park, CA.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Thompson JB (1981) Critical Hermeneutics: A Study in the Thought of Paul Ricoeur and Jurgen Habermas. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, MA.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Ulrich W (1987) Critical heuristics of social systems design. European Journal of Operational Research 12 (3), 240–259.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ulrich W (2002) Boundary critique. In Informed Student Guide to the Management Science (DAELLENBACH HG and Flood RL, Eds), p 41f, Thompson Learning, London, U.K.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ulrich W (2006) Rethinking critically reflective research practice: Beyond Popper's critical rationalism. Journal of Research Practice 2 Article P1. [WWW document] http://jrp.icaap.org/index.php/jrp/article/view/64/63 (accessed 3 March 2007).

  • Vatimo G (1994) Beyond Interpretation: The Meaning of Hermeneutics for Philosophy. Stanford University Press, Stanford, CA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walsham G (2005) Critical engagement: why, what and how? In Handbook of Information Systems Research: Critical Perspectives on Information Systems Design, Implementation and Use (HOWCROFT D and TRAUTH E, Eds), pp 225–243, Edward Elgar Publishing, Cheltenham, U.K.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yogesh KD and Kuljis J (2008) Profile of IS research published in the European journal of information systems. European Journal of Information Systems 17, 678–693.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

I am grateful to the guest editor Kalle Lyytinen and three anonymous reviewers for their fair criticism and constructive comments. I am also thankful for reviewers’ suggestions and discussions with participants at the European Conference on Information Systems, ECIS 2007, where an early, much shorter version of the paper was presented.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Information Systems, Technology and Management, Australian School of Business, University of New South Wales, Australia

    Dubravka Cecez-Kecmanovic

Authors
  1. Dubravka Cecez-Kecmanovic
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Dubravka Cecez-Kecmanovic.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Cecez-Kecmanovic, D. Doing critical information systems research – arguments for a critical research methodology. Eur J Inf Syst 20, 440–455 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1057/ejis.2010.67

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/ejis.2010.67

Keywords

Search

Navigation