This article identifies a gap in the inclusion of the postmodern concept in critical information systems (IS) research. Starting from the three critical tasks, insight, critique, and transformative definition, we argue that the second task of critique has been less commonly addressed. Filling that gap can begin by exploring how critical management studies have used both critical theory and postmodernism. The authors draw on Alvesson and Deetz’s (1996) argumentation that these two bodies of literature can complement each other and cohabit. There is no need for a unitary critical position, but there is currently an imbalance in critical IS research, as Habermassian approaches have remained untouched by a poststructuralist critique. Postmodern approaches are more cautious on transformative definition, and they are well suited to the task of critique. They have also been applied to examine modernist themes such as performativity and managerialism, which relate to underresearched and undercritiqued modernist concepts in IS.
Ackroyd, S. (1996). The quality of qualitative methods: Qualitative or quality methodology for organisation studies?Organization, 3, 439-451.
2.
Adam, A., Basden, A., Richardson, H., & Robinson, B. (Eds.). (2004, July). Critical reflections on critical research in information systems. Presented at the 2nd International CRIS Workshop, Information Systems, Organisation and Society Research Centre, Salford University, Manchester, UK.
3.
Adam, A., Howcroft, D. A., & Richardson, H. (2001). Absent friends? The gender dimension in IS research. In N. L. Russo, B. Fitzgerald, & J. I. DeGross (Eds.), Realigning research and practice in information systems development: The social and organizational perspective. Proceedings of the IFIP Working Group 8.2 Conference (pp. 333-352). Boston: Kluwer Academic.
4.
Adam, A., Howcroft, D., Richardson, H., & Robinson, B. (Eds.). (2001, July). (Re-) defining critical research in information systems. Presented at An International Workshop, University of Salford, Manchester, UK.
5.
Alvesson, M., & Deetz, S. (1996). Critical theory and postmodernism approaches to organizational studies. In S. R. Clegg, C. Hardy, & W. R. Nord (Eds.), Handbook of organization studies (pp. 191-217). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
6.
Alvesson, M., & Deetz, S. (2000). Doing critical management research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
7.
Alvesson, M., & Skoldberg, K. (2000). Reflexive methodology. New vistas for qualitative research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
8.
Alvesson, M., & Willmott, H. (Eds.). (1992). Critical management studies. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
9.
Alvesson, M., & Willmott, H. (1996). Making sense of management: A critical introduction. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
10.
Bloomfield, B. B., & Vurdubakis, T. (1994). Boundary disputes: Negotiating the boundary between the technical and the social in the development of IT systems. Information Technology and People, 7(1), 9-24.
11.
Brooke, C. (Ed.). (2002a). Special issue on critical research in information systems. Journal of Information Technology, 17(2).
12.
Brooke, C. (2002b). What does it mean to be “critical” in IS research?”Journal of Information Technology, 17(2), 49-57.
13.
Brooke, C., Cecez-Kecmanovic, D., & Klein, H. K. (Eds.). (in press). Special issue on exploring the critical agenda in IS research. Information Systems Journal.
14.
Burrell, G., & Morgan, G. (1979). Sociological paradigms and organizational analysis. London: Heinemann.
15.
Butler, T. (1998). Towards a hermeneutic method for interpretive research in information systems. Journal of Information Technology, 13, 285-300.
16.
Cecez-Kecmanovic, D. (2001). Doing critical IS research: The question of methodology. In E. Trauth (Ed.), Qualitative research in IS: Issues and trends (pp. 141-163). Hershey, PA: Idea Group.
17.
Cleg, S. R. (1989). Frameworks of power. London: 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.
19.
Doolin, B., & Lowe, A. (2002). To reveal is to critique: Actor-network theory and critical information systems research. Journal of Information Technology, 17(2), 69-78.
20.
Dreyfus, H., & Rabinow, P. (1982). Michel Foucault: Beyond structuralism and hermeneutics. Brighton, UK: Harvester Press.
21.
Drummond, H. (1996). Escalation in decision-making: The tragedy of Taurus. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
22.
Edwards, R. (1979). Contested terrain. The transformation of the workplace in the twentieth century. London: Heinemann.
23.
Fournier, V., & Grey, C. (2000). At the critical moment: Conditions and prospects for critical management studies. Human Relations, 53(1), 7-32.
24.
Grey, C., & Willmott, H. (2002). Contexts of CMS. Organization, 9, 411-418.
25.
Grey, C., & Willmott, H. (2005). Critical management studies: A reader. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
26.
Guzzini, S. (2000). A reconstruction of constructivism in international relations. European Journal of International Relations, 6(2), 147-182.
27.
Hacking, I. (1999). The social construction of what?Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
28.
Harvey, L. J., & Myers, M. D. (1995). Scholarship and practice: The contribution of ethnographic research methods to bridging the gap. Information Technology and People, 8(3), 13-27.
29.
Heracleous, L., & Barrett, M. (2001). Organizational change as discourse: Communicative actions and deep structures in the context of information technology implementation. Academy of Management Journal, 44, 755-778.
30.
Hirschheim, R. (1984). Information systems epistemology: An historical perspective. In E. Munford, R. Hirschheim, G. Fitzgerald, & A. T. Wood-Harper (Eds.), Research methods in information systems, IFIP Working Group 8.2. Conference (pp. 8-36). Amsterdam: Elsevier Science.
31.
Hirschheim, R., & Klein, H. K. (1994). Realizing emancipatory principles in information systems development: The case of ETHICS. MIS Quarterly, 18(1), 83-109.
32.
Howcroft, D. A., Mitev, N. N., & Wilson, M. (2004). What we may learn from the social shaping of technology approach. In J. Mingers & L. Willcocks (Eds.), Social theory and philosophy for informationsystems (pp. 329-371). Chichester, UK: Wiley.
33.
Howcroft, D. A., & Trauth, E. M. (2004). The choice of critical information systems research. In B. Kaplan, D. P. Truex, III, D. Wastell, A. T. Wood-Harper, & J. I. DeGross (Eds.), Information systems research. Relevant theory and informed practice (pp. 195-212). Boston: Kluwer Academic.
34.
Howcroft, D., & Trauth, E. M. (2005a). Choosing critical IS research. In D. Howcroft & E. M. Trauth (Eds.), Handbook of information systems research: Critical perspectives on information systems design, implementation and use (pp. 1-15). London: Edward Elgar.
35.
Howcroft, D. A., & Trauth, E. M. (Eds.) (2005b). Handbook of information systems research: Critical perspectives on information systems design, implementation and use. London: Edward Elgar.
36.
Howcroft, D., & Wilson, M. (2003). Paradoxes of participatory design: The end-user perspective. Information & Organization, 13(1), 1-24.
37.
Introna, L. (2003). Disciplining information systems: Truth and its regimes. European Journal of Information Systems, 12, 235-240.
38.
Jones, M., Orlikowski, W. J., & Munir, K. (2004). Structuration theory and information systems: A critical reappraisal. In J. Mingers & L. Willcocks (Eds.), Social theory and philosophy for information systems (pp. 297-328). Chichester, UK: Wiley.
39.
Knights, D., & Murray, F. (1994). Managers divided: Organisation politics and information technology management. Chichester, UK: Wiley.
40.
Knights, D., & Murray, F. (1997). Markets, managers and messages: Managing information systems in financial services. In B. B. Bloomfield, R. Coombs, D. Knights, & D. Littler (Eds.), Information technology and organizations: Strategies, networks and integration (pp. 36-56). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
41.
Knights, D., & Willmott, H. (1988). New technology and the labour process. London: MacMillan.
42.
Lee, A. S. (1994). Electronic mail as a medium for rich communication: An empirical investigation using hermeneutic interpretation. MIS Quarterly, 18(2), 143-157.
43.
Lilley, S., Lightfoot, G., & Paulo Amaral, M. N. (2004). Representing organization: Knowledge, management and the information age. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
44.
McGrath, K. (2004). Doing critical research in IS: A case of theory and practice not informing each other. In A. Adam, A. Basden, H. Richardson, & B. Robinson (Eds.), Critical reflections on critical research in information systems (p. 24-24). Manchester, UK: Salford University, Organisation and Society Research Centre.
45.
Mingers, J. (2004). Re-establishing the real: critical realism and information systems. In J. Mingers & L. Willcocks (Eds.), Social theory and philosophy for information systems (pp. 372-406). Chichester, UK: Wiley.
46.
Mitev, N. N. (1996). Empowerment, change and information technology: Socio-technical design and business process re-engineering. Personnel Review, 25(3), 72-81.
47.
Mitev, N. N. (2005). Are social constructivist approaches critical? The case of IS failure. In D. A. Howcroft & E. Trauth (Eds.), Handbook of information systems research: Critical perspectives on information systems design, implementation and use (pp. 70-103). London: Edward Elgar.
48.
Monteiro, E., & Hanseth, O. (1996). Social shaping of information infrastructure: On being specific about the technology. In W. J. Orlikowski, G. Walsham, M. R. Jones, & J. I. DeGross (Eds.), Information technology and changes in organizational work, Proceedings of the IFIP WG8.2 Working Conference (pp. 308-324). London: Chapman & Hall.
49.
Mumford, E., & Geert, J. B. (1994). Tools for change and progress: A socio-technical approach to business process reengineering. Leiden, the Netherlands: C.S.G. Publications.
50.
Mumford, E., Hirschheim, R., Fitzgerald, G., & Wood-Harper, A. T. (1985). Research methods in information systems, IFIP Working Group 8.2. Conference. Amsterdam: Elsevier Science.
51.
Myers, M. D. (1994). Dialectical hermeneutics: A theoretical framework for the implementation of information systems. Information Systems Journal, 5, 51-70.
52.
Myers, M. D. (1997). Critical ethnography in information systems. In A. S. Lee, J. Liebenau, & J. I. DeGross (Eds.), Information systems and qualitative research (pp. 276-300). London: Chapman and Hall.
53.
Myers, M. D., & Klein, H. (2005, November). A set of principles for conducting and evaluating critical research in information systems. Paper presented to Information Systems Forum, University of Cambridge, Judge Business School, Cambridge, UK.
54.
Ngwenyama, O. K., Harvey, L., Myers, M. D., & Wynn, E. (1997). Ethnographic research in information systems: An exploration of three alternative approaches to ethnography. In 18 th International Conference on Information Systems (Panel 17, pp. 533-534). Atlanta, GA: Association of Information Systems.
55.
Ngwenyama, O. K., & Lee, A. S. (1997). Communicative richness in electronic mail: Critical social theory and the contextuality of meaning. MIS Quarterly, 21(2), 145-167.
56.
Orlikowski, W. J. (1992). The duality of technology: Rethinking the concept of technology in organizations. Organization Science, 3, 398-427.
57.
Orlikowski, W. J., & Baroudi, J. J. (1991). Studying information technology in organizations: Research approaches and assumptions. Information Systems Research, 2(1), 1-28.
58.
Phillips, N., & Brown, J. L. (1993). Analyzing communication in and around organizations: A critical hermeneutics approach. The Academy of Management Journal, 36, 1547-1576.
59.
Probert, S. K. (2004). Adorno: A critical theory for IS research. In J. Mingers & L. Willcocks (Eds.), Social theory and philosophy for information systems (pp. 129-156). Chichester, UK: Wiley.
60.
Richardson, H. (2003). CRM in call centres: The logic of practice. In M. Korpela, R. Montealegre, & A. Poulymenakou (Eds.), Organizational information systems in the context of globalization, IFIP WG8.2 and WG9.4 Conference on information systems perspectives and challenges in the context of globalization (pp. 69-84). Boston: Kluwer Academic.
61.
Robinson, B., & Wilson, F. (2004). Context is not enough: Towards an ontological foundation for critical IS research. In A. Adam, A. Basden, H. Richardson, & B. Robinson (Eds.), Critical reflections on critical research in information systems. Manchester, UK: Salford University, Organisation and Society Research Centre.
62.
Said, E. (2002). Power, politics and culture. New York: Random House.
63.
Silva, L., & Backhouse, J. (1997). Becoming part of the furniture: The institutionalisation of information systems. In A. S. Lee, J. Liebenau, & J. I. DeGross (Eds.), Information systems and qualitative research (pp. 389-416). London: Chapman and Hall.
64.
Walsham, G. (1993). Interpreting information systems in organizations. Chichester, UK: Wiley.
65.
Webster, F. (1995). Theories of the information society. London: Routledge.
66.
Willcocks, L. P. (2004). Foucault, power/knowledge and information systems: Reconstructing the present. In J. Mingers & L. Willcocks (Eds.), Social theory and philosophy for information systems (pp. 238-296). Chichester, UK: Wiley.
67.
Willmott, H. (1994). Bringing agency (back) into organizational analysis: Responding to the crisis of (post)modernity. In J. Hassard & M. Parker (Eds.), Towards a new theory of organizations (pp. 87-130). London: Routledge.
68.
Wilson, F. (1997). The truth is out there: The search for emancipation in information systems design. Information Technology and People, 10, 187-203.
69.
Wilson, M., & Howcroft, D. A. (2003). Re-conceptualising failure: Social shaping meets IS research. European Journal of Information Systems, 11, 236-250.
