Empiricism in interpretive IS research: a response to Stahl

Abstract

This short article is a response to that of Stahl (2013) who argued that there is an empiricist ‘bias’ in interpretive IS research, not justified by its philosophical roots in hermeneutics and phenomenology. Stahl calls for a wider range and quantity of non-empirical approaches. I am broadly supportive of this call but, in this response, I also argue for the value of studies based on empirical data. In addition, I think that Stahl overstates his empiricist case somewhat and I identify a range of existing non-empirical genres of publication including theoretical papers, literature reviews, polemics and future-oriented speculations. However, I do like the idea of extending non-empirical approaches and I suggest some ideas for the future including short stories and novels, plays and artistic comparisons. I end with a brief discussion of the feasibility of such ideas bearing in mind the politics of academic publishing.

Keywords:

• IS field
• interpretive research
• empirical studies
• non-emprical approaches
• academic publishing

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Geoff Walsham

About the Author

Geoff Walsham is Emeritus Professor of Management Studies at Judge Business School, Cambridge University. In addition to Cambridge, he has held academic posts at the University of Lancaster in the United Kingdom, the University of Nairobi in Kenya and Mindanao State University in the Philippines. His teaching and research is focused on the question: are we making a better world with ICTs? He was one of the early pioneers of interpretive approaches to research on information systems.