Information Technology Reference
In-Depth Information
straining, than structures that depend on rules interpreted and enacted by people for
their enforcement (Giddens, 1984).
An analysis of the possible social impacts of such structures would be the central concern
for theory development in this area. While it is perhaps a little premature to identify
the issues in advance of the theory, three possible areas of interest can be mentioned.
These are, first, the likely lengthening of IS change cycles as the number of organisations
dependent on the same standardised structures continues to increase. Second is the ca-
pacity for standardised structures to be used to create, intentionally or otherwise, people
who are system 'outsiders' in some way (the history of Nazi Germany's use of IBM
technology is an extreme but nevertheless instructive illustration of what was already
possible in this regard fifty years ago [Black, 2001]). Third is the change in social risk
relationships - while the adoption of standard IS structures reduces the number of pos-
sible points of failure or breakdown, it simultaneously raises the stakes for any break-
down that does occur.
As the Y2K experience demonstrated, IS structures have considerable inertia once in-
stalled, making them highly resistant to change; much more so than structures maintained
by human behaviour. The argument in this paper is that the possibility of developing
an explanatorily powerful theory linking IS with organisational and societal structures
is therefore a real one, that IS is the discipline best placed to develop such a theory, and
that for the reasons discussed earlier, this would have a range of benefits for the discipline
as a whole.
Conclusions and recommendations
Bourdieu has made the theoretical claim that cultural capital is a source of social power,
and that it is crucial in the battle for relative standing within the academy (Swartz, 1997).
Theory is one form that cultural capital can take, and the ownership of interesting and
controversial theories is one of the ways in which a field can support its claims for rel-
evance, interest, and public endorsement. For a theory to generate that type of interest,
however, it is important that it addresses issues of general rather than specialised concern.
It has been argued that an opportunity exists for IS academics to develop a broad theory
linking IS structures to social relationships and behaviours. An influential theory would
bring with it a variety of benefits for the field, including an increase in public visibility,
new ideas for practitioners working at the portfolio level, and a set of framing concepts
for researchers.
Two recommendations are made; the first for an empirical investigation into the issues
surrounding disciplinary recognition, and the second for further theory-oriented research
into the social implications of contemporary IS developments. It would be possible, but
perhaps somewhat gratuitous, to recommend that 'somebody' take up the responsibility
for developing a grand theory in IS; history shows that the time and effort required are
such as to require a major personal commitment. There is also a risk involved, in that
the resulting theory is just as likely (perhaps more likely) to be received with an outpour-
ing of scorn and contumely (Fish, 1999, p. 117) than it is to be accepted with approbation.
An empirical investigation into the extent to which IS is a 'recognisable' discipline could,
however, be expected to be both possible and useful. A survey-based approach, designed
to investigate the extent to which samples of different populations are aware of IS, its
topics of interest, and its particular perspectives, is one possibility. Populations of interest
would include secondary-level students, parents of school-age children, tertiary-level
students already enrolled, and academics in other disciplines. Depending on their nature,
Search WWH ::
Custom Search