240 likes | 252 Views
Critical Issues in Information Systems. BUSS 951. Seminar 3 Organisations. Agenda. Assignment 1 ontology and epistemology hypotheses and theories general questions. Other Assignment 1 Terms. Ontology & Epistemology.
E N D
Critical Issues in Information Systems BUSS 951 Seminar 3 Organisations
Agenda • Assignment 1 • ontology and epistemology • hypotheses and theories • general questions
Ontology & Epistemology • Epistemology: the theory of knowledge especially the critical study of its validity, methods and scope • Ontology: the set of entities presupposed by a theory
Hypotheses and Theories • Hypotheses are conjectures, speculations, or hunches, framed in such a way that it can tested • Result of a test often leads to a more refined hypotheses • in a sense there is no formal difference between a hypothesis and a theory • theories are hypotheses that experiments have not yet managed to refute and which seem to explain many facts about the world in one inclusive framework • theories like hypotheses are always provisional and the best ones can be surplanted eg. Newton’s theory of gravity contrasted with Einstein’s theory of relativity
Klings (1980) Taxonomy (1) • identifies two major perspectives in the social analysis of IS literature: • systems rationalism • segmented institutionalism • tries to classify the “array of assumptions” informing the claims made about new computing technologies
Klings (1980) Taxonomy (2) • classification based on: • recent empirical research of the use and consequences of computingin organisations • classified according to conceptions of ‘social life’ in organisations
Klings (1980) Taxonomy (3)Systems Rationalism • emphasis on positive roles that computer based systems play in organisations (‘social life’) • examine new capabilities of computing technologies, or new areas of application
Klings (1980) Taxonomy (4)Systems Rationalism • assume: a consensus on major social goals relevant to computing use • develop synoptic accounts of social behaviour (brief summaries emphasising general points of agreement)
Klings (1980) Taxonomy (5)Systems Rationalism • efficiency foregrounded (economic or organisational) • computer use limited to individual computer users- individualism What are the consequences of individualism?
Klings (1980) Taxonomy (6)Systems Rationalism • large variety of different types of ‘schools’: • “the systems approach” • managerial rationalism • structural analysis (within managerial rationalism) What disciplines would ‘recognise’ or comply with a systems rationalist argument about technology?
Klings (1980) Taxonomy (7)Systems Rationalism • privaledge the interests of managersas more legitimate than subordinates • Managerial Rationaliststry to ‘optimise’ organisations by using computing technology What happens when organisations restructure?
Klings (1980) Taxonomy (8)Systems Rationalism • others (including IS developers) simply concentrate on what is done independent of the reasons for why it is done the way it is (apart from costs?) • Structural Analystslook at contextual reasons which might help select the right technology (slack resources, channels...)
Klings (1980) Taxonomy (9)Systems Rationalism • Human Relationsanalysts emphasise the role of technology in altering the quality of working life- assumes common goals exist • historically arose as a consequence of a reaction to Scientific Mgmt • but, HR still assumes you can get a best fit between technology & organisations-Liberal-Humanist Discourse
Klings (1980) Taxonomy (10)Systems Rationalism • Considerable differences between the schools in relation to agency • managerial rationalists assume conflicts can be solved by appeals to an administrative authority (managerial)
Klings (1980) Taxonomy (11)Systems Rationalism • Considerable differences between the schools in relation to goals • some assume common consensus understood equally by all (others don’t) <Remember that goals are central to the application of systems thinking to organisations>
Klings (1980) Taxonomy (12)Systems Rationalism • Considerable differences between the schools in relation to decisions and by implications problems • some view decisions from a single rationality • others view managers (Simon) as having only a partial understanding at any point in time
Klings (1980) Taxonomy (13)Segmented Institutionalists • assume: broad scope for the use of computers • includes as many different members of organisations as possible (including clients, suppliers etc.)
Klings (1980) Taxonomy (14)Segmented Institutionalists • examine the consequences of computerized technology • don’t assume a consensus on goals and values in an organisation (intergroup conflict is just as likely as consensus) • privilege individual and group control over efficiency
Klings (1980) Taxonomy (15)Segmented Institutionalists • most reject ideas of ‘optimums’ or ‘equilibria’ applying to organisations at all • segmented institutionalists differ about how to understand ‘social life’ and the role of computing in organisations
Klings (1980) Taxonomy (16)Segmented Institutionalists • symbolic interactionists view social life as constructed from the interaction of people and groups as they create and respond to socially defined meanings