IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/orisre/v12y2001i2p121-134.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Research Commentary: Desperately Seeking the “IT” in IT Research—A Call to Theorizing the IT Artifact

Author

Listed:
  • Wanda J. Orlikowski

    (Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02142)

  • C. Suzanne Iacono

    (National Science Foundation, Arlington, Virginia 22230)

Abstract

The field of information systems is premised on the centrality of information technology in everyday socio-economic life. Yet, drawing on a review of the full set of articles published in Information Systems Research ( ISR ) over the past ten years, we argue that the field has not deeply engaged its core subject matter—the information technology (IT) artifact. Instead, we find that IS researchers tend to give central theoretical significance to the context (within which some usually unspecified technology is seen to operate), the discrete processing capabilities of the artifact (as separable from its context or use), or the dependent variable (that which is posited to be affected or changed as technology is developed, implemented, and used). The IT artifact itself tends to disappear from view, be taken for granted, or is presumed to be unproblematic once it is built and installed. After discussing the implications of our findings, we propose a research direction for the IS field that begins to take technology as seriously as its effects, context, and capabilities. In particular, we propose that IS researchers begin to theorize specifically about IT artifacts, and then incorporate these theories explicitly into their studies. We believe that such a research direction is critical if IS research is to make a significant contribution to the understanding of a world increasingly suffused with ubiquitous, interdependent, and emergent information technologies.

Suggested Citation

  • Wanda J. Orlikowski & C. Suzanne Iacono, 2001. "Research Commentary: Desperately Seeking the “IT” in IT Research—A Call to Theorizing the IT Artifact," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 12(2), pages 121-134, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:inm:orisre:v:12:y:2001:i:2:p:121-134
    DOI: 10.1287/isre.12.2.121.9700
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/isre.12.2.121.9700
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/isre.12.2.121.9700?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Wanda J. Orlikowski & Jack J. Baroudi, 1991. "Studying Information Technology in Organizations: Research Approaches and Assumptions," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 2(1), pages 1-28, March.
    2. Daniel Robey & Marie-Claude Boudreau, 1999. "Accounting for the Contradictory Organizational Consequences of Information Technology: Theoretical Directions and Methodological Implications," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 10(2), pages 167-185, June.
    3. Gerardine DeSanctis & Marshall Scott Poole, 1994. "Capturing the Complexity in Advanced Technology Use: Adaptive Structuration Theory," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 5(2), pages 121-147, May.
    4. Cynthia Mathis Beath & Wanda J. Orlikowski, 1994. "The Contradictory Structure of Systems Development Methodologies: Deconstructing the IS-User Relationship in Information Engineering," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 5(4), pages 350-377, December.
    5. Joey F. George & George K. Easton & J. F. Nunamaker & Gregory B. Northcraft, 1990. "A Study of Collaborative Group Work With and Without Computer-Based Support," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 1(4), pages 394-415, December.
    6. Wanda J. Orlikowski, 2000. "Using Technology and Constituting Structures: A Practice Lens for Studying Technology in Organizations," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 11(4), pages 404-428, August.
    7. Andrew Trice & Randall Davis, 1993. "Heuristics for Reconciling Independent Knowledge Bases," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 4(3), pages 262-288, September.
    8. Wanda J. Orlikowski, 1992. "The Duality of Technology: Rethinking the Concept of Technology in Organizations," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 3(3), pages 398-427, August.
    9. Gary C. Moore & Izak Benbasat, 1991. "Development of an Instrument to Measure the Perceptions of Adopting an Information Technology Innovation," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 2(3), pages 192-222, September.
    10. Daniel Robey & Sundeep Sahay, 1996. "Transforming Work Through Information Technology: A Comparative Case Study of Geographic Information Systems in County Government," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 7(1), pages 93-110, March.
    11. M. Lynne Markus & Daniel Robey, 1988. "Information Technology and Organizational Change: Causal Structure in Theory and Research," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 34(5), pages 583-598, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Marie-Claude Boudreau & Daniel Robey, 2005. "Enacting Integrated Information Technology: A Human Agency Perspective," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 16(1), pages 3-18, February.
    2. Denolf, Janne.M. & Wognum, Nel P.M. & Trienekens, Jacques H. & van der Vorst, Jack G.A.J. & Omta, S.W.F. (Onno), 2012. "Towards a Supply-Chain Instrument to Monitor an Information Technology Implementation," 2012 International European Forum, February 13-17, 2012, Innsbruck-Igls, Austria 144968, International European Forum on System Dynamics and Innovation in Food Networks.
    3. Pamela J. Hinds & Diane E. Bailey, 2003. "Out of Sight, Out of Sync: Understanding Conflict in Distributed Teams," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 14(6), pages 615-632, December.
    4. Khuong, Le-Nguyen & Harindranath, G. & Dyerson, Romano, 2014. "Understanding knowledge management software-organisation misalignments from an institutional perspective: A case study of a global IT-management consultancy firm," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 34(2), pages 226-247.
    5. Kummitha, Rama Krishna Reddy, 2018. "Entrepreneurial urbanism and technological panacea: Why Smart City planning needs to go beyond corporate visioning?," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 137(C), pages 330-339.
    6. repec:dau:papers:123456789/2753 is not listed on IDEAS
    7. Russell L. Purvis & V. Sambamurthy & Robert W. Zmud, 2001. "The Assimilation of Knowledge Platforms in Organizations: An Empirical Investigation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 12(2), pages 117-135, April.
    8. Miralles, Francesc & Sieber, Sandra & Valor, Josep, 2005. "CIO herds and user gangs in the adoption of open source software," IESE Research Papers D/595, IESE Business School.
    9. Kun Shin Im & Varun Grover & James T. C. Teng, 2013. "Research Note---Do Large Firms Become Smaller by Using Information Technology?," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 24(2), pages 470-491, June.
    10. Carlos A. Osorio & Dov Dori & Joseph Sussman, 2011. "COIM: An object‐process based method for analyzing architectures of complex, interconnected, large‐scale socio‐technical systems," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 14(4), pages 364-382, December.
    11. Nagy, A., 2009. "Adoption of interorganizational information systems : The adoption position model," Other publications TiSEM af471297-bf03-43bf-88c1-4, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    12. Hung-pin Shih & Kee-hung Lai & T. C. E. Cheng, 2015. "Examining structural, perceptual, and attitudinal influences on the quality of information sharing in collaborative technology use," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 17(2), pages 455-470, April.
    13. Aurélie Leclercq-Vandelannoitte & Emmanuel Bertin, 2018. "From sovereign IT governance to liberal IT governmentality? A Foucauldian analogy," European Journal of Information Systems, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 27(3), pages 326-346, May.
    14. Matt Beane & Wanda J. Orlikowski, 2015. "What Difference Does a Robot Make? The Material Enactment of Distributed Coordination," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(6), pages 1553-1573, December.
    15. Daniel Beverungen, 2014. "Exploring the Interplay of the Design and Emergence of Business Processes as Organizational Routines," Business & Information Systems Engineering: The International Journal of WIRTSCHAFTSINFORMATIK, Springer;Gesellschaft für Informatik e.V. (GI), vol. 6(4), pages 191-202, August.
    16. Michiel Bal & Jos Benders & Lander Vermeerbergen, 2022. "‘Bringing the Covert into the Open’: A Case Study on Technology Appropriation and Continuous Improvement," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(10), pages 1-17, May.
    17. Kummitha, Rama Krishna Reddy, 2020. "Why distance matters: The relatedness between technology development and its appropriation in smart cities," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 157(C).
    18. Hunter, Starling David, 2003. "Same Technology, Different Outcome? Lessons on Dummy Variables & Dependent Variable Transformations," Working papers 4308-03, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Sloan School of Management.
    19. Joanna L.Y. Ho, 1999. "Technology and Group Decision Process in Going-Concern Judgements," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 8(1), pages 33-49, January.
    20. Bradley C. Wheeler, 2002. "NEBIC: A Dynamic Capabilities Theory for Assessing Net-Enablement," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 13(2), pages 125-146, June.
    21. Fang Liu & Dongming Xu, 2018. "Social Roles and Consequences in Using Social Media in Disasters: a Structurational Perspective," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 20(4), pages 693-711, August.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:inm:orisre:v:12:y:2001:i:2:p:121-134. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Asher (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.