Information Technology and the Cultural Reproduction of Social Order: A Research Paradigm

  • Lynette Kvasny
  • Duane TruexIII
Part of the IFIP — The International Federation for Information Processing book series (IFIPAICT, volume 41)


This paper introduces the critical social theory of French sociologist Pierre Bourdieu. The objective of Bourdieu’s theoretical framework is to uncover the buried organizational structures and mechanisms that are used to ensure the reproduction of social order. This theoretical framework will be used in a research program that examines the structural processes by which information technology may be constrained from emancipating humankind, and may actually be disempowering and abandoning significant numbers of societal members.


Bourdieu critical social theory cultural capital field habitus organizational change social reproduction 


  1. Barthes, R. Mythologies. New York: Hill and Wang, 1957.Google Scholar
  2. Baskerville, R., and Lee, A. “Distinctions Among Different Types of Generalizing in Information Systems Research,” in New Information Technologies in Organizational Processes: Field Studies and Theoretical Reflections on the Future of Work, O. Ngwenyama, L. Introna, M. Myers, and J. I. DeGross (eds.). Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1999, pp. 49–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bell, D. The Coming of Post-Industrial Society: A Venture in Social Forecasting. New York: Basic Books, 1976.Google Scholar
  4. Berger, P., and Luckman, T. The Social Construction of Reality: A Treatise in the Sociology of Knowledge. New York: Anchor Books, 1966.Google Scholar
  5. Best, S., and Kellner, D. Postmodern Theory: Critical Interrogation. New York: The Guilford Press, 1991.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bourdieu, P. Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgement of Taste. Boston: Harvard University Press, 1984.Google Scholar
  7. Bourdieu, P. The Logic of Practice. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1990.Google Scholar
  8. Bourdieu, P. In Other Words: Essays Toward a Reflexive Sociology. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1990.Google Scholar
  9. Bourdieu, P., and Passeron, J. The Inheritors. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1979.Google Scholar
  10. Eisenhardt, K. “Control: Organizational and Economic Approaches,” Management Science, (2:31), 1985, pp. 134–149.Google Scholar
  11. Feidson, E. Professional Powers: A Study of the Institutionalization of Formal Knowledge. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1986.Google Scholar
  12. Foucalt, M. Discipline and Punish: The Births of the Prison. New York: Vintage Books, 1979.Google Scholar
  13. Goslee, S., and Conte, C. “Losing Ground Bit By Bit: Low-Income Communities in the Information Age,” 1998 (available online from; accessed December, 1999 ).Google Scholar
  14. Henderson, J., and Lee, S. “Managing I/S Design Teams: A Control Theory Perspective,” Management Science (6:38), 1992, pp. 757–777.Google Scholar
  15. Kirsch, L. “The Management of Complex Tasks in Organizations: Controlling the Systems Development Process,” Organization Science (7:1), 1996, pp. 1–21.Google Scholar
  16. Kirsch, L. “Portfolios of Control Modes and IS Project Management,” Information Systems Research (8: 3 ), 1997, pp. 215–239.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Klein, H., and Kraft, P. “Social Control and Social Contract in NetWORKing: Total Quality Management and the Control of Knowledge Work in the United States,” Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW), 1994, pp. 89–108.Google Scholar
  18. Kling, R. “Cultural Influences on the Process and Impacts of Computerization,” in Fostering Research on the Economic and Social Impacts of Information Technology, H. Varian (ed.). Washington, DC: National Academy of Science, 1998, pp. 150–151.Google Scholar
  19. Kling, R.,and Iacono, S. “The Control of Information Systems Developments After Implementation,” Communications of the ACM(27:12), 1984, pp. 1218–1226.Google Scholar
  20. Knights, D. “Changing Spaces: The Disruptive Impact of a New Epistemological Location for the Study of Management,” Academy of Management Review (17: 3 ), 1992, pp. 514–536.Google Scholar
  21. Kraft, P., and Truex, D. “Postmodern Management and Information Technology in the Modern Industrial Corporation,” in Information Technology and New Emergent Forms of Organizations, R. Baskerville, S. Smithson, O. Ngwenyama, and J. I. DeGross (eds.). Amsterdam: Elsevier Science Publications, 1994, pp. 113–127.Google Scholar
  22. Kraut, R., Scherlis, W., Mukhopadhyay, T., Manning, J., and Kiesler, S., “The HomeNet Field Trial of Residential Internet Service,” Communications of theACM(38:12), 1997, pp. 55–63.Google Scholar
  23. Latour, B. Science in Action: How to Follow Scientists and Engineers Through Society, Boston: Harvard University Press, 1988.Google Scholar
  24. McMaster, T., Vidgen, R., and Wastell, D. “Technology Transfer—Diffusion or Translation?” in Facilitating Technology Transfer Through Partnership: Learning from Practice and Research, T. McMaster, E. Mumford, E. B. Swanson, B. Warboys, and D. Wastell (eds.). London: Chapman & Hall, 1997, pp. 64–75.Google Scholar
  25. McMaster, T., Vidgen, R., and Wastell, D. “Networks of Association and Due Process in IS Developmentm,” in Information Systems: Current Issues and Future Changes, T. J. Larsen, L. Levine, and J. I. DeGross (eds.). Laxenburg, Austria: IFIP, 1999, pp. 341–357.Google Scholar
  26. Morrow, R. Critical Theory and Methodology. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publication, 1994.Google Scholar
  27. Ngwenyama, O. “The Critical Social Theory Approach to Information Systems: Problems and Challenges,” in Information Systems Research, H-E. Nissen, H. Klein, and R. Hirschheim (eds.). Amsterdam: Elsevier Science Publications, 1991, pp. 267–294.Google Scholar
  28. NTIA. “Falling Through the Net: Defining the Digital Divide,” National Telecommunications and Information Administration, Department of Commerce, Washington, DC, 1999 (available online from; accessed December, 1999 ).
  29. Orlikowski, W. “Integrated Information Environment or Matrix of Control? The Contradictory Implications of Information Technology,” Accounting, Management, and Information Technology (1:1), 1991, pp. 9–42.Google Scholar
  30. Ouchi, W. “A Conceptual Framework for the Design of Organizational Control Mechanisms,” Management Science (9: 25 ), 1979, pp. 833–848.Google Scholar
  31. Ouchi, W. “Markets, Bureaucracies, and Clans,” Administrative Science Quarterly (3:25), 1980, pp. 129–141.Google Scholar
  32. Postman, N. Amusing Ourselves to Death. New York: Penguin Books, 1985.Google Scholar
  33. PCAST. “Report to the President on the Use of Technology to Strengthen K-12 Education in the United States,” President’s Committee of Advisors on Science and Technology, Panel on Educational Technology, 1997 (available online from accessed December, 1999 ).Google Scholar
  34. Reed, M. “Expert Power and Control in Late Modernity: An Empirical Review and Theoretical Synthesis,” Organizational Studies (17: 4 ), 1996, pp. 573–597.Google Scholar
  35. Ritzer, G. Modern Sociological Theory. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1996.Google Scholar
  36. Romm, C., and Pliskin, N. “Toward a Virtual Politicking Model,” Communications of the ACM (40:11), 1997, pp. 95–100.Google Scholar
  37. Ross, P. “Software as Career Threat,” in Computers and Society, P. Winters (ed.). San Diego: Greenhaven Press, 1997, pp. 44–48.Google Scholar
  38. Schwandt, T. Qualitative Inquiry: A Dictionary of Terms. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, 1997.Google Scholar
  39. Swartz, D. Culture and Power: The Sociology of Pierre Bourdieu. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1997.Google Scholar
  40. Swerdlow, J. “Computers and Society: An Overview,” in Computers and Society, P. Winters (ed.). San Diego: Greenhaven Press, 1997, pp. 16.Google Scholar
  41. Townley, B. “Foucault, Power/knowledge, and Its Relevance for Human Resource Management,” Academy of Management Review (18:3), 1993, pp. 518–545.Google Scholar
  42. Truex, D., and Ngwenyama, O. “Unpacking the Ideology of Postindustrial Team-Based Management: Self-governing Teams as Structures of Control of IT Workers,” paper presented at the Work, Difference and Social Change: Two Decades After Bravermans’s Labor and Monopoly Capital, Binghamton, New York, 1998.Google Scholar
  43. Turkic, S. Life on the Screen: Identity in the Age of the Internet. New York: Simon & Schuster, 1995.Google Scholar
  44. Winter, S., Gutek, B., and Chudoba, K. “Misplaced Resources? Factors Associated with Computer Literacy Among End Users,” Information & Management (32:1), 1997, pp. 29–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© IFIP International Federation for Information Processing 2000

Authors and Affiliations

  • Lynette Kvasny
    • 1
  • Duane TruexIII
    • 1
  1. 1.Georgia State UniversityUSA

Personalised recommendations