Exploring the role of informants in interpretive case study research in IS

Journal of Information Technology

Volumn 26, Issue 1, 2011, Pages 32-45

  Bygstad, Bendik ^a   Munkvold, Bjørn Erik ^b  

^a Norwegian School of IT   (Norway)

^b UNIVERSITY OF AGDER   (Norway)

Author keywords

informants' feedback; informants' involvement; interpretive case study research; member validation; respondent validation

Indexed keywords

INFORMANTS' FEEDBACK; INFORMANTS' INVOLVEMENT; INTERPRETIVE CASE STUDY RESEARCH; MEMBER VALIDATION; RESPONDENT VALIDATION;

COMPUTER SUPPORTED COOPERATIVE WORK; INFORMATION SYSTEMS;

RESEARCH;

EID: 79952044856     PISSN: 02683962     EISSN: 14664437     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1057/jit.2010.15     Document Type: Article

References (67)

1. Avgerou, C. (2002). New Socio-Technical Perspectives of IS innovation in Organizations, in C. Avgerou and R.L. LaRovere (eds.) ICT Innovation:Economic and organizational perspectives, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, pp. 141-161.
2. Baskerville, R. (1996). Deferring Generalizability: Four classes of generalization in social enquiry, Scandinavian Journal of Information Systems 8(2):5-28.
3. Benbasat, I., Goldstein, D.K. and Mead, M. (1987). The Case Research Strategy in Studies of Information Systems, MIS Quarterly 11(3):369-385.
4. Benbasat, I. and Zmud, R.W. (1999). Empirical Research in Information Systems: The practice of relevance, MIS Quarterly 21(1): 3-16.
5. Benbasat, I. and Zmud, R.W. (2003). The Identity Crisis within the IS Discipline: Defining and communicating the discipline's core properties, MIS Quarterly 27(2): 183-194.
6. Bloor, M. (1978). On the Analysis of Observational Data: A discussion of the worth and uses of inductive techniques and respondent validation, Sociology 12(3): 545-557.
7. Bloor, M. (2001). Techniques of Validation in Qualitative Research: A critical commentary, in R. Emerson (ed.) Contemporary Field Research: Perspectives and formulations, 2nd edn, Long Grove, IL: Waveland Press Inc, pp. 383-395.
8. Blumer, H. (1969). Symbolic Interactionism: Perspective and Method. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
9. Boland, R. (1985). Phenomenology: A preferred approach to research on information systems, in E. Mumford (ed.) Research Methods in Information Systems, North-Holland: Amsterdam, pp. 181-190.
10. Bryman, A. (1988). Quantity and Quality in Social Research, London: Unwin Hyman.
11. Butler, T. (1998). Towards a Hermeneutic Method for Interpretive Research in Information Systems, Journal of Information Technology 13: 285-300. (Pubitemid 128376767)
12. Bygstad, B. (2006). Managing Socio-Technical Integration in Iterative Information System Development Projects, International Journal of Technology and Human Interaction 2(4): 1-14.
13. Bygstad, B. and Nielsen, P.A. (2003). The Meeting of Processes, Proceedings of IRIS 26 (Helsinki, Finland).
14. Bygstad, B., Nielsen, P.A. and Munkvold, B.E. (2010). Four Integration Patterns: A socio-technical approach to integration in IS development projects, Information Systems Journal 20(1): 53-80.
15. Campbell, D.T. (1955). The Informant in Quantitative Research, The American Journal of Sociology 60(4): 339-342.
16. Carney, T.F. (1990). Collaborative Inquiry Methodology, Windsor, Ontario, Canada: University of Windsor, Division for Instructional Development.
17. Czarniawska, B. (2004). Narratives in Social Science Research, Thousand Oaks, CA: CA Sage
18. Doolin, B. (1998). Information Technology as Disciplinary Technology: Being critical in interpretive research on information systems, Journal of Information Technology 13: 301-311. (Pubitemid 128376768)
19. Dubé, L. and Paré, G. (2003). Rigor in Information Systems Positivist Case Research: Current practices, trends. and recommendations, MIS Quarterly 27(4): 597-635.
20. Fielding, N.G. and Fielding, J.L. (1986). Linking Data. Qualitative Research Methods Series No 4, London: Sage.
21. Fitzgerald, B. and Howcroft, D. (1998). Towards Dissolution of the IS Research Debate: From polarization to polarity, Journal of Information Technology 13: 313-326. (Pubitemid 128376769)
22. Goldstein, D.K. (1990). Information Support for Sales and Marketing. A case study at a small grocery manufacturer, Information & Management 19: 257-268.
23. Guba, E.G. and Lincoln, Y.S. (1989). Fourth Generation Evaluation, Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.
24. Hanseth, O. and Monteiro, E. (1996). Inscribing Behaviour in Information Infrastructure Standards, Accounting, Management and Information Systems 7(4): 183-211.
25. Hoffman, A. (2004). Reconsidering the Role of the Practical Theorist: On (re)connecting theory to practice in organization theory, Strategic Organization 2(2): 213-222.
26. Jacobson, I., Booch, G. and Rumbaugh, R. (1999). The Unified Software Development Process, 1st edn, Reading, MA: Addison Wesley.
27. Kallinikos, J. (2004). Farewell to Constructivism: Technology and context-embedded action, in C. Avgerou, C. Ciborra and F. Land (eds.) The Social Study of Information and Communication Technology, Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 140-161.
28. Klein, H.K. and Myers, M.D. (1999). A Set of Principles for Conducting and Evaluating Interpretive Field Studies in Information System, MIS Quarterly 23(1): 67-94.
29. Kvale, S. (1996). InterViews, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
30. Kvale, S. (2002). The Social Construction of Validity, in N.K. Denzin and Y.S. Lincoln (eds.) The Qualitative Inquiry Reader, Thousand Oaks, CA:Sage Publications, pp. 299-325.
31. Lanzara, G.F. (1991). Shifting Stories. Learning from a Reflective Experiment in a Design Process, in D.A. Schon (ed.) The Reflective Turn: Case studies in and on educational practice, New York: Teachers College Press of Columbia University, pp. 285-320.
32. Latour, B. (1987). Science in Action: How to follow scientists and engineers through society, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
33. Lee, A.S. (1989). A Scientific Methodology for MIS Case Studies, MIS Quarterly 13(1): 33-52.
34. Levine, H.G. and Rossmoore, D. (1993). Diagnosing the Human Threats to Information Technology Implementation: A missing factor in system analysis illustrated in a case study, Journal ofManagement Information Systems 10(2): 55-73.
35. Lincoln, Y.S. and Guba, E.G. (2003). Ethics: The failure of positivist science in Y.S. Lincoln and N.K. Denzin (eds.) Turning Points in Qualitative Research: Tying knots in a handkerchief, Walnut Creek, CA: AltaMira Press, pp.219-238.
36. Locke, K.D. and Velamuri, S.R. (2004). Member Checking Challenges, Working paper, Williamsburg, VA, The College of William and Mary.
37. Mårtensson, P. and Lee, A. (2004). Dialogical Action Research at Omega Corporation, MIS Quarterly 28(3): 507-536.
38. Mathiassen, L., Pries-Heje, J. and Ngwenyama, O. (2001). Improving Software Organisations, Boston, MA: Addison-Wesley Professional.
39. McDonnell, A., Lloyd Jones, M. and Read, S. (2000). Practical Considerations in Case Study Research: The relationship between methodology and process, Journal of Advanced Nursing 32(2): 383-390.
40. Miles, M.B. and Huberman, A.M. (1994). Qualitative Data Analysis, 2nd edn, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
41. Moody, D.L. (2000). Building Links Between IS Research and Professional Practice: Improving the relevance and impact of IS research, in W.J. Orlikowski, P. Weil, S. Ang and H.C. Krcmar (eds.) Proceedings of the Twenty-First International Conference on Information Systems (Brisbane), 351-360.
42. Morse, J.M., Barrett, M., Mayan, M., Olson, K. and Spiers, J. (2002). Verification Strategies for Establishing Reliability and Validity in Qualitative Research, International Journal of Qualitative Methods 1(2): 1-19.
43. Myers, M.D. (1997). Qualitative Research in Information Systems, MIS Quarterly 21(2): 242-242.
44. Myers, M.D. and Newman, M. (2007). The Qualitative Interviewin IS Research:Examining the craft, Information and Organization 17: 2-26.
45. Ngwenyama, O. (1998). Groupware, Social Action and Emergent Organizations:On the process dynamics of computer mediated distributed work, Accounting, Management and Information Technologies 8(2-3): 127-146.
46. Nicholsen, B. and Sahay, S. (2004). Embedded knowledge and offshore software development, Information and Organization 14: 329-365. (Pubitemid 39305424)
47. Pare, G. and Elam, J.J. (1997). Using Case Study Research to Build Theories of IT Implementation, Proceedings of IFIP TC8 WG 8.2, Philadelphia: Chapman & Hall, pp. 542-568.
48. Paulk, M.C. (1998). Using the Capability MaturityModel for Software to Drive Change, in T.J. Larsen and E. McGuire (eds.) Information Systems Innovation and Diffusion, Hershey, PA: Idea Group Publishing, pp. 196-219.
49. Pettigrew, A.M. (1985). Contextualist Research and the Study of Organizational Change Processes, in E. Mumford, R. Hirschheim, G. Fitgerald and A.T. Wood-Harper (eds.) Research Methods in Information Systems, North-Holland: Amsterdam, pp. 53-78.
50. Pettigrew, A.M. (1990). Longitudinal Field Research on Change Theory and Practice, Organization Science 3: 267-292.
51. Reason, P. and Rowan, J. (1981). Issues ofValidity in NewParadigm Research, in P. Reason and J. Rowan (eds.) Human Inquiry, Chichester: John Wiley, pp. 239-250.
52. Rosemann, M. and Vessey, I. (2008). Toward Improving the Relevance of Information Systems Research to Practice: The role of applicability checks, MIS Quarterly 32(1): 1-22.
53. Saunders, C. (1998). Editorial Preface: The role of business in IT research, Information Resources Management Journal 11: 4-6. (Pubitemid 128067993)
54. Sayer, A. (2000). Realism and Social Science, London: Sage Publications.
55. Schatzman, L. and Strauss, A.L. (1973). Field Research. Strategies for a Natural Sociology, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
56. Schon, D.A. (1983). The Reflective Practitioner, New York: Basic Books.
57. Silverman, D. (1985). Qualitative Methodology & Sociology, Brookfield, VT:Gower Publishing.
58. Silverman, D. (1993). Interpreting Qualitative Data: Methods for analysing talk, text and interaction, London: Sage Publications.
59. Smith, M.L. (2006). Overcoming Theory-Practice Inconsistencies: Critical realism and information systems research, Information and Organization 16(3): 191-211. (Pubitemid 44159232)
60. Van de Ven, A.H. (2007). Engaged Scholarship, New York: Oxford University Press.
61. Wagner, E.L. (2003). (Inter-)Connecting IS Narrative Research: Current status and future opportunities for process-oriented field studies, in E.H. Wynn, E.A. Whitley, M.D. Myers and J.I. DeGross (eds.) Global and Organizational Discourse About Information Technology, Boston, MA: Kluwer, pp. 419-436.
62. Walsham, G. (1993). Interpreting Information Systems in Organizations, Chichester: Wiley.
63. Walsham, G. (1995). Interpretive Case Studies in IS Research: Nature and method, European Journal of Information Systems 4: 74-81.
64. Walsham, G. (2006). Doing Interpretive Research, European Journal of Information Systems 15: 320-330. (Pubitemid 44146931)
65. Walsham, G. and Sahay, S. (1999). GIS for District-Level Administration in India: Problems and opportunities, MIS Quarterly 23(1): 39-66.
66. Weick, K. (1995). Sensemaking in Organizations, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
67. Yin, R.K. (1994). Case Study Research, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.