The Trojan Horse Phenomenon
An issue in relation to theory and practice centres on the different perspectives we have in information systems development. The purpose of this paper is to consider what is entailed in a perspective. That is, in developing an argument we do not proceed in isolation since we depend on some of the language and assumptions of others, if only to contrast them with our own point of view.
KeywordsSoft System Methodology Marginal Version Information System Development Ideal Speech Situation Describe Information System
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- Avison, D., and Wood-Harper, T., 1990, “Multiview: an Exploration in Information Systems Development,” Blackwell Scientific, London.Google Scholar
- Burrell, G., and Morgan, G., 1979, “Sociological Paradigms and Organisational Analysis,” Heinemann, New York.Google Scholar
- Checkland, P., 1982, Soft systems methodology as process: a reply to M.C. Jackson, JASA. 9: 37–39.Google Scholar
- Culler, J., 1983, “On Deconstruction: theory and criticism after structuralism,” Routledge, London.Google Scholar
- Habermas, J., 1976, Systematically distorted communication, in: “Critical Sociology,” P. Connerton, ed., Penguin, New York.Google Scholar
- Jackson, M., 1982, The nature of soft systems thinking: the work of Churchman, Ackoff and Checkland, JASA. 9: 17–29.Google Scholar
- Lakoff, G., and Johnson, M., 1980, “Metaphors We Live By,” The University of Chicago Press, Chicago.Google Scholar
- Lyytinen, K., 1987, A taxonomic perspective of information systems development: theoretical constructs and recommendations, in: “Critical Issues in Information Systems Research,” R.J. Boland and R.A. Hirschheim, eds., John Wiley and Sons Ltd., Chichester.Google Scholar
- Mumford, E., 1983, “Designing Human Systems,” Manchester Business School, Manchester.Google Scholar
- Rosenhead, J., 1984, Debating systems methodology: conflicting ideas about conflict and ideas, JASA. 11: 79–83.Google Scholar