Evaluation and Control at the Core: How French Scholars Inform the Discourse

  • Frantz Rowe
  • Duane Truex


Other disciplines now lay claim to research topics belonging to the domain of IS research, and the field itself is under challenge in academic institutions around the world. Thus having a clear conception of those concepts lying at the core of our field and which establish the legitimacy of Information Systems (IS) as an independent discipline is more important than ever before. This manuscript seeks to contribute a clearer understanding of what we mean by the central issues driving the field. But this manuscript takes a new twist by approaching this question from the point of view of a set of French IS scholars and social theorists. It advances the discourse by examining how French scholars, many of whom are not well known outside of French academic circles, may impact our reading of those issues considered to be most persistent and frequent in the IS literature.


cores of the discipline ontology information system definition evaluation control social theories French scholars 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Banville, C., and Landry, M. (1989) Can the Field of MIS Be Disciplined? Communications of the ACM, 32(January), 48-60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Culnan, M.J. (1986) The Intellectual Development of Management Information Systems, 1972-1982: A Co-citation Analysis. Management Science, 32(2),156-172.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Culnan, M.J., and Swanson, E.B. (1986) Research in Management Information Systems, 1980-1984: Points of Work and Reference. MIS Quarterly, 10(3), 288-303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Robey, D. (1996) Diversity in Information Systems Research: Threat, Promise, and Responsibility. Information Systems Research,7(4), 400-408.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Walsham, G. (2005) Agency Theory: Integration or a Thousand Flowers? Scandinavian Journal of Information Systems, 17(1), 153-158.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Alter, S. (2003) A General, Yet Useful theory of Information Systems. Communications of the AIS, 1(13).Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Baskerville, R.L., and Myers, M.D. (2002) Information systems as a reference discipline. MIS Quarterly, 26(March), 1-14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Dhar, V., Brynjolfsson, E., DeSanctis, G., Gurbaxani, V., Mendleson, H., and Severance, D. (2004) Should the Core Information Systems Curriculum Be Structured Around a Fundamental Question? ICIS 25 Capital Exchange: Crossing Boundaries and Transforming Institution through Information Systems, ICIS-AIS, Washington, D.C., 2004, pp. ICIS-AIS, Washington, DC, 1021-1023.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Karahanna, E., Davis, G., Mukhopadhyay, T., Watson, R., and Weber, R. (2003) Embarking on Information Systems' Voyage to Self-Discovery: Identifying the Core of the Discipline. ICIS 24 IT is Everywhere: Impacts on Life, Work and Learning SeattleGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Washington, 998.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hirschheim, R., and K.Klein, H. (2003) Crisis in the IS Field? A Critical Reflection on the State of the Discipline. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 4(5), 237-293.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Weber, R. (2003) Editor’s Comments. MIS Quarterly, 27(3), iii- xiii.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Benbasat, I., and Zmud, R. (2003) The Identity Crisis within the IS Discipline: Defining and Communicating the Discipline’s Core Properties. MIS Quarterly, 27(2), 183-193.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Albert, S., and Whetten, D.A. (1985) Organizational Identity. Research in Organizational Behavio,r (7), 263-295.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Postman, N. (1988) Conscientious Objections: Stirring up Trouble about Language, Technology and Education Vintage Books, New York.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Gray, R. (2003) A Brief Historical Review of the Development of the Distinction Between Data and Information in the Information Systems Literature. 9th AMCIS 2003, AIS, Tampa, Florida, 2843-2849.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Orlikowski, W.J., and Iacono, C.S. (2001) Research commentary: Desperately seeking the “IT” in IT research – A call to theorizing the IT artifact. Information Systems Research, 1(2), 121-134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Sawyer, S., and Chen, T. (2002) Conceptualizing Information Technology in the Study of Information Systems:Trends and Issues,” in: Global and Organizational Discourse About Information Technology, E. Wynn, E. Whitley, M. Myers and J. DeGross (eds.), Kluwer Academic Publishers, London, 109-131.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Hirschheim, R., Klein, H. K. and Lyytinen, K. (1995) Information Systems Development and Data Modeling: Conceptual and Philosophical Foundations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Parsons, J. and Wand, Y. (2000) Emancipating Instances from the Tyranny of Classes in Information Modelling. ACM Transactions on Database Systems, 25(2)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Sartre, J.P. (1943) L'être et le Néant: Essai d'Ontologie Phénoménologique Gallimard, Paris.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Desq, S., Fallery, B., Reix, R., and Rodhain, F. (2002) 25 ans de recherches en systèmes d’informations. Systèmes d’Information et Management, 7(3), 5-33.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Banker, R.D., and Kauffman, R.J. (2004) The Evolution of Research on Information Systems: A Fiftieth-Year Survey of the Literature in Management Science. Management Science, 50(3), 281-299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Soh, C., and Markus L. (1985) How IT creates business value: a process theory synthesis “How IT creates business value: a process theory synthesis. Sixteenth International Conference on Information Systems, ICIS, Amsterdam: the Netherlands, 29-41.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Willcocks, L., and Lester, S. (1993) How Do Organizations Evaluate and Control Information Systems Investments? Recent UK Survey Evidence, in: Human, Organizational, and Social Dimensions of Information System Development, D. AvisonGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    J.E. Kendall and J.I. DeGross (eds.), North-Holland, Amsterdam, 15-40.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Purao, S., M. Rossi and A. Bush, (2002) Towards an Understanding of the Use of Problem and Design Spaces During Object-Oriented System Development. Information and Organization 12(4).Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Saga, V., and Zmud, R. (1994) The Nature and Determinants of Information Technology Acceptance, Routinization and Infusion, in: Diffusion, Transfer and Implementation of Information Technology, L. Levine (ed.), North-Holland, 67-86.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Rowe, F. (2006) The editorial view of Frantz Rowe, Editor in Chief: of Systemes d’Information et Management. Third in a series – On dissemination, national language and interacting with practitioners. European Journal of Information Systems, 15 (3), 244-248.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Kinsey/CIGREF, M. (2005) Relational Dynamics around Information Systems within Management Teams of Major French Companies.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Luftman, J. and McLean, E. R. (2004) Key Issues for IT Executives. MIS Quarterly Executive, 3 (2), 89-104.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Orlikowski, W. (1991) Integrated Information Environment or Matrix of Control? The Contradictory Implications of Information Technology. Accounting Management and Information Technologies (now Information and Organizations), (1) 1, 9-42.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Monod, E. (2002) Epistémologie de la Recherche en Systèmes d’Information, in: Faire de la Recherche en Systèmes d’Information, F. Rowe (ed.), Vuibert, Paris.Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Peaucelle, J.L. (1981) Les Systèmes d’Information: la Représentation Presses Universitaires de France, Paris.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Rolland, C. (1986) Introduction à la conception des systèmes d’information et panorama des méthodes disponibles. Revue Génie logiciel, 4(June), 7-62.Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    LeMoigne, J.L. (1977) La théorie du système général, théorie de la modélisation [The theory of general systems, theory of modeling].Presses Universitaires de France, Paris.Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    LeMoigne, J.L. (1996) La conception des systèmes d’information organisationnels: de l’ingénierie informatique à l’ingéniérie systémique, in: Organisation intelligente et système d’information stratégique, J.A. Bartoli and J.L. LeMoigne (eds.), Economica, Paris, 25-52.Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Dehaene, P. (1992) Organization, project and strategy as symbols. CEMIT-CECOIA III Proceedings, 243-247.Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Von Foerster, H. (1984) Principles of Self-Organization In a Socio-Managerial Context, in: Self-Organization and Management of Social Systems, H. Ulrich and G.J.B. Probst (eds.), Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 22.Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Simon, H.A. (1996) The Sciences of the Artificial. The MIT Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Reix, R., and Rowe, F. (2002) La recherche en systèmes d’information: de l’histoire au concept in: Faire de la Recherche en Systèmes d’Information, F. Rowe (ed.), Vuibert, Paris, 1-17.Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Bourdieu, P. (1980) The Logic of Practice. Stanford University Press, Stanford, CA,.Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Crozier, M., and Friedberg, E. (1977) Actors and Systems: the Politics of Collective Action Ginn and Co., Boston.Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Marciniak, R., and Rowe, F. (2009) Systèmes d’information et dynamique des organizations. Economica, Paris.Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Rowe, F. (2007) Systèmes d’information ; variations philosophiques sur une proposition de définition in: Connaissance et Management, Ouvrage dédié a Robert Reix, P.L. Dubois et Dupuy Y. (eds), Economica, Paris, 167-175.Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Coyne, R. (1995) Designing Information Technology in the Postmodern Age: From Method to Metapho.r MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass.Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Attali, J., and Stourdzé, Y. (1977) The birth of the telephone and economic crisis: the slow death of monologue in French society,” in: The Social Impact of the Telephone, I.D.S. Pool (ed.), MIT Press, Cambridge, 97-111.Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Besson, P., and Rowe, F. (2001) ERP Project Dynamics and Enacted Dialogue: Perceived Understanding, Perceived Leeway, and the Nature of Task-Related Conflicts. DataBase 32(4), 47-66.Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Schultze, U., and Boland Jr., R.J.B. (2000) Knowledge management technology and the reproduction of knowledge work practices. Journal of Strategic Information Systems, (9), 193-212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Schultze, U. (2001) Reflexive Ethnography in Information Systems Research, in: Qualitative Research in IS: Issues and Trends, E. Trauth (ed.), Idea Group, 78-103.Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    VanMaanen, J. (1988) Tales from the Field: On Writing Ethnography University of Chicago Press, Chicago.Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Kvasny, L., and Keil, M. (2003) The Challenges of Redressing the Digital Divide: A Tale of Two Cities. International Conference on Information Systems, Barcelona, Spain, 817-828.Google Scholar
  53. 53.
    Kvasny, L., and Truex, D. (2000) Information Technology and the Cultural Reproduction of Social Order: A Research Program, in: Organizational and Social Perspectives on Information Technology, J.S. R. Baskerville, and J. DeGross (ed.), Kluwer Academic Publishers, New York, 277-294.Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    Kvasny, L., and Truex, D. (2001) Defining Away the Digital Divide: A Content Analysis of Institutional Influences on Popular Representations of Technology,” in: Realigning Research and Practice in Information Systems Development: The Social and Organizational Perspective, B.F. Nancy Russo, Janice DeGross (ed.), Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston, 399-414.Google Scholar
  55. 55.
    Richardson, H. (2003) CRM in Call Centres: The Logic of Practice, in: Organizational Information Systems in the Context of Globalization, M. Korpela, R. Montealegre and A. Poulymenakou (eds.), Kluwer Academic Publishers, London, 68-83.Google Scholar
  56. 56.
    Crozier, M. (1963). Le phénomène bureaucratique, Paris: Seuil. Google Scholar
  57. 57.
    Caillé (1981) La sociologie de l’intérêt est-elle intéressante? Sociologie du travail, 23(3), 257-274.Google Scholar
  58. 58.
    Ballé, C., and Peaucelle, J., L. (1973) The Power of Data Processing. Editions d’organisation, Paris,.Google Scholar
  59. 59.
    Monteiro, E., and Hanseth, O. (1996) Social Shaping of Information Infrastructure, in: Information Technology and Changes in Organizational Work, W.J. Orlikowski, G. Walsham, M. Jones and J.I. DeGross (eds.), Chapman and Hall, London,.Google Scholar
  60. 60.
    Monteiro, E. (2000). “Actor-Network Theory and Information Infrastructure,” in: From Control to Drift, C. Cibbora (ed.), Oxford University Press, Oxford, 71-83.Google Scholar
  61. 61.
    Monteiro, E., and Hanseth, O. (1995) Social shaping of information infrastructure: on being specific about the technology, in: Information Technology and Changes in Organizational Work, W.J. Orlikoswki, G. Walsham, M.R. Jones and J.I. DeGross (eds.), Chapman & Hall, London, 325-343.Google Scholar
  62. 62.
    Latour, B. (1996) Social theory and the study of computerized work sites, in: Information technology and changes in organizational work, W.J. Orlikowski, G. Walsham, M.R. Jones and J.I. DeGross (eds.), Chapman & Hall, London, 295-307.Google Scholar
  63. 63.
    Rose, J., Jones, M., and Truex, D. (2003) The Problem of Agency; How Humans Act, How Machines Act, Action in Language, Organizations and Information Systems, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden, 91-106.Google Scholar
  64. 64.
    Rose, J., Jones, M., and Truex, D. (2005a) Socio-Theoretic Accounts of IS: The Problem of Agency. Scandinavian Journal of Information Systems 17(1), 133-152.Google Scholar
  65. 65.
    Rose, J., Jones, M., and Truex, D. (2005b) The Problem of Agency Re-visited. Scandinavian Journal of Information Systems (17) 187-196.Google Scholar
  66. 66.
    Rose, J., and Truex, D. (2000) Machine agency as perceived autonomy: an action perspective, in: IS 2000 The Social and Organizational Perspective on Research and Practice in Information Technology, R. Baskerville, J. Stage and J.I. DeGross (eds.), Kluwer Academic Publishers, Aalborg, Denmark, 371-390.Google Scholar
  67. 67.
    Foucault, M., Faubion, J.D., and Hurley, R. (2000) Power. New Press, New York, p. 484.Google Scholar
  68. 68.
    Willcocks, L. (2004). Foucault, Power, Knowledge and Information Systems: Reconstructing the Present, in: Social theory and philosophy for Information Systems, J. Mingers and L. Willcocks (eds.), Wiley, Chichester, 238-296.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.France Institut d’Economie et Management de Nantes and Skema Business SchoolUniversity of NantesNantesFrance
  2. 2.USA CIS DepartmentGeorgia State UniversityAtlantaUSA

Personalised recommendations