This paper situates the social implications of information systems (IS) within the broader context of progressive rationalization in modern organizations. Specifically, it examines the roles IS play in the rationalization of organizational processes and its social implications. The paper proposes a rationality framework that synthesizes different approaches to reason and rationality and provides a conceptual model for critical analysis of social and organizational consequences of rationalization in organizations that are enabled and supported by IS. By drawing on a field study the paper interprets three IS cases in order to demonstrate how the rationality framework helps explain different IS-organization relationships in the light of increasing levels of rationality that entail both substantial benefits and considerable risks.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AdeleB., MartensA., TordeurG., Van der SmissenB., and MuelenaerG. (1984). Dossier Colruyt (EPO, Antwerp).
2.
AdornoT.W., and HorkheimerM. (1944). Dialectic of Enlightenment (Herder and Herder, New York) (translated by J. Cumming).
3.
AngJ., and PavryF. (1994). A survey and critique of the impacts of information technology. International Journal of Information Management, 14, 122–33.
4.
AttewellP., and RuleJ. (1984). Computing and organisations: what we know and what we don't know. Communications of the ACM, 27, 1184–92.
5.
AvisonD.E., and MyersM.D. (1995). Information systems and anthropology: an anthropological perspective on IT and organisational culture. Information Technology and People, 8, 43–56.
6.
Bjorn-AndersenN., and EasonK. (1980). Myths and realities of information systems contributing to organisational rationality. In Human Choice and Computers, MowshowitzA. (ed.) (North Holland, Amsterdam), pp. 92–110.
7.
BolandR. (1985). Phenomenology: a preferred approach to research on information systems. In Research Methods in Information Systems, MumfordE., HirschheimR., FitzgeraldG., and Wood-HarperA.T. (eds) (North Holland, Amsterdam), pp. 193–203.
8.
BrubakerR. (1987). The Limits of Rationality – An Essay on the Social and Moral Thought of Max Weber (Routledge, London).
9.
Cecez-KecmanovicD. (2001). Doing critical IS research: the question of methodology. In Qualitative Research in Information Systems: Issues and Trends, TrauthE. (ed.) (Idea Group Publishing, Hershey, PA), pp. 142–63.
10.
Cecez-KecmanovicD., and JansonM. (1999). Communicative action theory: an approach to understanding the application of information systems. In Proceedings of the Tenth Australasian Conference on Information Systems ACIS'99, Wellington, New Zealand, pp. 183–95.
11.
ColruytJ. (1984). What is different at Colruyt? In There are no Gentlemen Here, Sir, PennemanT. (ed.) (Druco, Halle) (in Flemish), pp. 53–6.
12.
DeSanctisG., and PooleM.S. (1994). Capturing the complexity of advance technology use: adaptive structuration theory. Organization Science, 5(2), 121–47.
13.
GalliersR.D., and BaetsW.R.J. (1998). Information Technology and Organisational Transformation (John Wiley & Sons, Chichester).
14.
GephartR.P.Jr., BojeD.M., and ThatchenkeryT.J. (1996). Postmodern management and the coming crises of organisational analysis. In Postmodern Management and Organization Theory, BojeD.M., GephartR.P.Jr., and ThatchenkeryT.J. (ed.) (Sage, London), pp. 1–18.
15.
GopalA., and PrasadP. (2000). Understanding GDSS in symbolic context: shifting the focus from technology to interaction. MIS Quarterly, 24(3), 509–44.
16.
HabermasJ. (1971). Knowledge and Human Interests (Beacon Press, Boston, MA).
17.
HabermasJ. (1984). The Theory of Communicative Action – Reason and the Rationalisation of Society, Vol. I (Beacon Press, Boston, MA).
18.
HabermasJ. (1987). The Theory of Communicative Action – The Critique of Functionalist Reason, Vol II (Beacon Press, Boston, MA).
19.
HabermasJ. (1990). Moral Consciousness and Communicative Action (The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA).
20.
HabermasJ. (1993). The Philosophical Discourse of Modernity (The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA).
21.
HirschheimR., KlainH., and LyytinenL. (1996). Exploring the intellectual structures of information systems development: a social action theoretic analysis. Accounting, Management and Information Technology, 6(1/2), 1–64.
22.
JansonM., BrownA., and TaillieuT. (1997a). Colruyt: an organization committed to communication. Information Systems Journal, 7, 175–99.
23.
JansonM., GuimaraesT., BrownA., and TaillieuT. (1997b). Exploring a chairman of the board's construction of organisational reality: the Colruyt case. In Information Systems and Qualitative Research, LeeA., LiebenauJ., and DegrossJ.I. (eds) (IFIP, Chapman & Hall, London), pp. 303–32.
24.
KleinH.K. (1999). Knowledge and methods in IS research: from beginnings to the future. In New Information Technologies in Organization Processes – Field Studies and Theoretical Reflections on the Future of Work, NgwenyamaO., IntronaL., MyersM.D., and DeGrossJ.I. (eds) (IFIP, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston), pp. 13–25.
25.
KleinH., and AlvarezR. (1987). The collective resource approach to systems design. In Computers and Democracy: A Scandinavian Challenge, BjerknesG., EhnP., and KingM. (eds) (Avery, Brookfield, VT), pp. 97–116.
26.
KleinH.K., and HirschheimR. (1991). Rationality concepts in information system development methodologies. Accounting, Management and Information Technology, 1(2), 157–87.
27.
KoningsveldH., and MertensJ. (1992). Communicatief and Strategisch Handelen (Muiderberg, Coutinho, The Netherlands) (in Dutch).
28.
LyytinenK. (1992). Information systems and critical theory. In Critical Management Studies, AlvessonM., and WillmottH. (eds) (Sage, London), pp. 159–80.
29.
LyytinenK., and HirschheimR. (1988). Information systems as rational discourse: an application of Habermas's theory of communicative action. Scandinavian Journal of Management, 4(1/2), 19–30.
30.
LyytinenK., and KleinH.K. (1985). The critical theory of Jurgen Habermas as a basis for a theory of information systems. In Research Methods in Information Systems, MumfordE., HirschheimR., FitzgeraldG., and Wood-HarperA.T. (eds) (North Holland, Amsterdam), pp. 219–36.
31.
MyersM.D., and YoungL.W. (1997). Hidden agendas, power and managerial assumptions in information systems development. Information Technology & People, 10(3), 224–40.
32.
NgwenyamaO.K. (1991). The critical social theory approach to information systems: problems and challenges. In Information Systems Research: Contemporary Approaches and Emergent Traditions, NissenH.E., KleinH.K., and HirschheimR. (eds) (Elsevier Science Publishers, New York), pp. 267–80.
33.
OrlikowskiW.J., and RobeyD. (1991). Information technology and the structuring of organizations. Information Systems Research, 2(2), 143–69.
34.
RobeyD., and BourdeauM.-C. (1999). Accounting for contradictory organisational consequences of information technology: theoretical directions and methodology implications. Information Systems Research, 10(2), 167–85.
35.
WalshamG. (1993). Interpreting Information Systems in Organisations (Wiley, Chicester).
36.
WalshamG. (1995). The emergence of interpretivism in IS research. Information Systems Research, 6(4), 376–94.
37.
WeberM. (1958). The Protestant ethic and the spirit of capitalism (Scribner's, New York) (translated by T. Parsons).
38.
WeberM. (1964). Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft, Studienausgabe, 4th edn, WinckelmannJ. (ed.) (Kiepenheurer & Witsch, Koln) (in German).
39.
WeberM. (1978). Economy and Society, RothG., and WittichC. (eds) (University of California Press, Berkeley, CA).
40.
WellmerA. (1994). Reason, Utopia, and the dialectic of enlightenment. In Habermas and Modernity, BernsteinJ.R. (ed.) (The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA), pp. 35–66.
41.
WhiteS. (1988). The Recent Work of Jürgen Habermas: Reason, Justice, and Modernity (Cambridge University Press, New York, NY).
42.
WilsonF.A. (1997). The truth is out there: the search for emancipatory principles in information systems design. Information, Technology and People, 10(3), 187–204.
