Information systems theory as cultural capital: an argument for the development of ‘grand’ theory - Information Systems Foundations: Constructing and Criticising - page 23

the findings from such a study would help either to confirm the existence of an IS
identity problem, or to refute the idea that the discipline is facing a crisis.
The second recommendation is that detailed literature-based research into what is known
about the 'hard-wiring' of societal structures be undertaken. Anthropologists (e.g. Wolf,
1999), sociologists (e.g. Foucault, 1972) and linguists (e.g. Chomsky, 1996) have all ad-
dressed the ways in which societies constrain their human constituents. A synthesis of
this work would be a useful preliminary to introducing IS considerations, and addressing
the fact that it is now possible for social controls to be exercised, and influence exerted,
by IS that operate independently of people. Such systems are no longer 'representations'
of more fundamental systems (Wand and Weber, 1995), but rather are independent en-
tities with significant social autonomy.
The development of one or more general IS theories will not, of course, be a panacea for
IS image problems, but it can contribute to their correction. General theory has played
an important part in the advancement of other disciplines (Abbott, 1988), and could do
the same for IS. It is not necessary for all, or even a significant proportion, of IS academics
to be involved in this type of theory development, or to be interested in its implications.
The issue is one of public perceptions, and promotion of the view that IS has relevance
beyond its own borders.