Doing critical research in information systems: a case of theory and practice not informing each other

Abstract

For more than thirty years critical research in information systems (IS) has challenged the assumption that technology innovation is inherently desirable and hence to the benefit of all. Although critical researchers clearly distinguish their contributions from work that has a functionalist or managerialist agenda, what is less evident is how they understand the relationship between critical and interpretive perspectives, particularly in light of how definitions of the nature of “being critical” have changed over the last three decades. Some researchers with a critical bent will argue that we need to understand in order to be critical, so that gaining rich insight by engaging with multiple interpretations is a necessary basis for producing critique. Others use particular critical theories to inform their work, sometimes within a specific research agenda that represents the interests of a predetermined marginalized group, for example, women or ethnic minorities. In this paper I examine both types of discourse, so that I may ask how researchers who lay claims to “being critical” go about the task, and what we can learn from their work. My main argument is that theory on how to conduct critical IS research needs further empirical testing, which in turn needs to inform theory. In effect, the IS field has not yet reached a position where the theory and practice of doing critical research are informing each other.