Over recent years, two sides of a debate have formed concerning the identity of the information systems (IS) field. On one side, arguments have been presented for establishing a clearer identity by developing a distinct, core paradigm to guide IS research. On the other side of the debate, arguments have been made for increased diversity. Although this debate continues, the actual consequences of consensus and diversity for knowledge production remain unclear. This paper focuses on one aspect of diversity: the theoretical approaches underlying empirical research. Drawing from a review of the empirical literature on interorganizational information systems (IOS) published between 1990 and 2003, we identify both "tight" and "loose" areas of theory in the IOS literature. In the two tight areas (the economic theory approach and the diffusion of innovations approach), studies generally reinforce theorized relationships and establish robust findings. However, close examination also reveals areas of diversity within these tight areas. In the loose area (social systems approach), a wider variety of theories has been used, generating a larger number of empirical relationships that are less robust. We conclude that the IOS literature exhibits both consensus and diversity, suggesting that IS is a heterogeneous field in which both loose and tight areas of theory contribute.
|Estat de la publicació||Publicada - 2006|
|Esdeveniment||66th Annual Meeting of the Academy of Management, AOM 2006 - Atlanta, GA, United States|
Durada: 11 d’ag. 2006 → 16 d’ag. 2006
|Conferència||66th Annual Meeting of the Academy of Management, AOM 2006|
|Període||11/08/06 → 16/08/06|