Doing critical information systems research – arguments for a critical research methodology

Abstract

Critical information systems (IS) research, it is argued, does not have a distinct methodological identity. While some research methods are closely related to the positivist research paradigm (experiments, surveys, and structural equation modelling) and others to the interpretivist paradigm (field study, ethnography, and action research), the critical paradigm is not identified with specific ‘critical methods’ and typically relies on the appropriation of interpretivist methods (such as critical ethnography). The criticism of the critical research paradigm in IS has often focused on the lack of distinctly critical research methods and even the neglect of methodological issues (Klein; McGrath). This paper questions the notion of and the arguments behind the quest for ‘critical research methods’ defined in contrast to positivist and interpretivist methods. Instead, the paper argues that it is a critical research methodology – understood as an overall strategy of conceptualizing and conducting an inquiry, engaging with studied phenomena, and constructing and justifying socially relevant knowledge, which distinguishes critical from other research paradigms. Building on a Kleinian argument regarding the need for common principles across diverse critical IS inquiries (Klein; Myers & Klein) this paper proposes a framework that describes key dimensions of a critical research methodology that distinguish critical from other research paradigms and provide methodological guidance in the doing of critical research.

Keywords:

• IS research paradigms
• critical IS research
• critical concerns in information systems
• critical research methodology

Acknowledgements

I am grateful to the guest editor Kalle Lyytinen and three anonymous reviewers for their fair criticism and constructive comments. I am also thankful for reviewers’ suggestions and discussions with participants at the European Conference on Information Systems, ECIS 2007, where an early, much shorter version of the paper was presented.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Dubravka Cecez-Kecmanovic

About the Author

Dubravka Cecez-Kecmanovic is Professor of Information Systems in the School of Information Systems, Technology and Management at the Australian School of Business, University of New South Wales (UNSW). Her research interests include theoretical and methodological developments in understanding information systems (IS)’ intertwining within organizational and social contexts. She is particularly concerned with advancing a critical social agenda in IS research and IS practice. She has published in the Journal of Information Systems, Information Technology and People, International Journal of Global Information Technology Management, Decision Support Systems, the Journal of Information Technology, International Journal of Actor Network Theory and Technological Innovation, and others.