Advertisement

The Critical Information Systems Practitioner

Listening to the “Babble of Voices”?
  • Brian Nicholson

Abstract

The ‘grail — like’ quest for the ultimate super methodology has led the information systems community to witness a veritable “babble of voices” (Schon, 1983) with between 300 (Avison and Fitzgerald, 1988) and 1000 (Jayaratna, 1994) methodologies available. All of these methodologies claim to have advantages over others and jostle for position in an overcrowded, confused marketplace. The ‘voices’ come from many directions each advocating its own philosophy which it attempts to sell as the ultimate’ silver bullet’ or universal approach. What of the bemused practitioner at the receiving end? It has become close to impossible to effectively select an appropriate methodology due to the sheer diversity of offerings from a plethora of different schools of thought. The practitioner must make sense of chaos before he/she can even begin the problem solving effort. The aim of this paper is to examine the available means for selection of information systems methodologies considering the assumptions they make about the problem solver. The methodology selection arena is broadly reviewed and some potential threats to effective practice are discussed. An educational agenda is proposed to enable present and future practitioners to make sense of this “...diverse and ill-defined intellectual enterprise” (Checkland, 1983) of methodology selection.

Keywords

Problem Solver System Methodology Critical Thinking Skill Soft System Methodology Health Warning 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Avison, D., and Fitzgerald, G., 1988 “Information Systems Development”, Blackwell Scientific Publications, Oxford.Google Scholar
  2. Avison, D., and Wood-Harper, A.T., 1990, “Multiview”, Blackwell Scientific Publications, Oxford.Google Scholar
  3. Bell, F., and Oates, B., 1994, Framework for method integration, in: “Proceedings of the Second Conference of the British Computer Society Information Systems Methodologies Specialist Group” Herriot Watt University, Edinburgh.Google Scholar
  4. Checkland, P.B., 1981, “Systems Thinking, Systems Practice,” Wiley, Chichester.Google Scholar
  5. Checkland, P.B., 1983, OR and the systems movement: mappings and conflicts, JORS, 34.Google Scholar
  6. Checkland, P.B., 1988, Information systems and systems thinking: time to unite?, in: P.B. Checkland, and J. Scholes, 1990, “Soft Systems Methodology in Action,” John Wiley & Sons, Chichester.Google Scholar
  7. Checkland, P.B., and Scholes, J., 1990, “Soft Systems Methodology in Action,” John Wiley & Sons, Chichester.Google Scholar
  8. De Marco, T., 1982, “Controlling Software Projects: Management, Measurement and Estimation,” Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs.Google Scholar
  9. Episkopou, D.M., and Wood-Harper, A.T., 1986, Towards a framework to choose appropriate IS approaches, The Computer Journal 29 (3).Google Scholar
  10. Jackson, M.C., 1991, “Systems Methodology for the Management Sciences,” Plenum, New York.Google Scholar
  11. Jayaratna, N., 1994, “Understanding and Evaluating Methodologies,” Mc Graw-Hill, Maidenhead.Google Scholar
  12. Kronlof, K., 1993, “Method Integration, Concepts and Case Studies”, John Wiley & Sons, Chichester.Google Scholar
  13. Middleton, P., 1994, Euromethod: the lessons from SSADM, in: “Proceedings of the Second European Conference on Information Systems,” Walter Beats, Breukelen, Nijenrode, Holland.Google Scholar
  14. Mumford, E., 1983, “Designing Human Systems” Manchester Business School, Manchester.Google Scholar
  15. Oliga, J., 1988, Methodological foundations of systems methodologies, in: R.L. Flood and M.C. Jackson “Critical Systems Thinking: Directed Readings,” John Wiley & Sons, Chichester.Google Scholar
  16. Rittel, H.W.J., and Webber M.M., 1974, Dilemmas in a general theory of planning, in: “Systems and Management Annual” Petrocelli, New York.Google Scholar
  17. Schon, D., 1983, “The Reflective Practitioner — How Professionals Think in Action,” Basic Books, USA.Google Scholar
  18. Wood Harper, A.T., and Fitzgerald, G., 1982, A taxonomy of current approaches to systems analysis, The Computer Joumal 25 (1).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1995

Authors and Affiliations

  • Brian Nicholson
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of TechnologyAnglia Polytechnic UniversityChelmsfordUK

Personalised recommendations