1. Clarke, R. J (2001) L951-03: 1 Critical Issues in Information Systems BUSS 951 Seminar 3 Organisations

2. Clarke, R. J (2001) L951-03: 2 Agenda Assignment 1 ontology and epistemology hypotheses and theories general questions

3. Clarke, R. J (2001) L951-03: 3 Other Assignment 1 Terms

4. Clarke, R. J (2001) L951-03: 4 Ontology & Epistemology Epistemology: the theory of knowledge especially the critical study of its validity, methods and scope Ontology: the set of entities presupposed by a theory

5. Clarke, R. J (2001) L951-03: 5 Hypotheses and Theories Hypotheses are conjectures, speculations, or hunches, framed in such a way that it can tested Result of a test often leads to a more refined hypotheses in a sense there is no formal difference between a hypothesis and a theory theories are hypotheses that experiments have not yet managed to refute and which seem to explain many facts about the world in one inclusive framework theories like hypotheses are always provisional and the best ones can be surplanted eg. Newton’s theory of gravity contrasted with Einstein’s theory of relativity

6. Clarke, R. J (2001) L951-03: 6 Social Analysis of Computing a taxonomy by Kling (1980)

7. Clarke, R. J (2001) L951-03: 7 Klings (1980) Taxonomy (1) identifies two major perspectives in the social analysis of IS literature: systems rationalism segmented institutionalism tries to classify the “array of assumptions” informing the claims made about new computing technologies

8. Clarke, R. J (2001) L951-03: 8 Klings (1980) Taxonomy (2) classification based on: recent empirical research of the use and consequences of computing in organisations classified according to conceptions of ‘social life’ in organisations

9. Clarke, R. J (2001) L951-03: 9 Systems Rationalism Social Analysis of Computing

10. Clarke, R. J (2001) L951-03: 10 Klings (1980) Taxonomy (3) Systems Rationalism emphasis on positive roles that computer based systems play in organisations (‘social life’) examine new capabilities of computing technologies, or new areas of application

11. Clarke, R. J (2001) L951-03: 11 Klings (1980) Taxonomy (4) Systems Rationalism assume: a consensus on major social goals relevant to computing use develop synoptic accounts of social behaviour (brief summaries emphasising general points of agreement)

12. Clarke, R. J (2001) L951-03: 12 Klings (1980) Taxonomy (5) Systems Rationalism efficiency foregrounded (economic or organisational) computer use limited to individual computer users- individualism What are the consequences of individualism?

13. Clarke, R. J (2001) L951-03: 13 Klings (1980) Taxonomy (6) Systems Rationalism large variety of different types of ‘schools’: “the systems approach” managerial rationalism structural analysis (within managerial rationalism) What disciplines would ‘recognise’ or comply with a systems rationalist argument about technology?

14. Clarke, R. J (2001) L951-03: 14 Klings (1980) Taxonomy (7) Systems Rationalism privaledge the interests of managers as more legitimate than subordinates Managerial Rationalists try to ‘optimise’ organisations by using computing technology What happens when organisations restructure?

15. Clarke, R. J (2001) L951-03: 15 Klings (1980) Taxonomy (8) Systems Rationalism others (including IS developers) simply concentrate on what is done independent of the reasons for why it is done the way it is (apart from costs?) Structural Analysts look at contextual reasons which might help select the right technology (slack resources, channels...)

16. Clarke, R. J (2001) L951-03: 16 Klings (1980) Taxonomy (9) Systems Rationalism Human Relations analysts emphasise the role of technology in altering the quality of working life- assumes common goals exist historically arose as a consequence of a reaction to Scientific Mgmt but, HR still assumes you can get a best fit between technology & organisations-Liberal- Humanist Discourse

17. Clarke, R. J (2001) L951-03: 17 Klings (1980) Taxonomy (10) Systems Rationalism Considerable differences between the schools in relation to agency managerial rationalists assume conflicts can be solved by appeals to an administrative authority (managerial)

18. Clarke, R. J (2001) L951-03: 18 Klings (1980) Taxonomy (11) Systems Rationalism Considerable differences between the schools in relation to goals some assume common consensus understood equally by all (others don’t)

19. Clarke, R. J (2001) L951-03: 19 Klings (1980) Taxonomy (12) Systems Rationalism Considerable differences between the schools in relation to decisions and by implications problems some view decisions from a single rationality others view managers (Simon) as having only a partial understanding at any point in time

20. Clarke, R. J (2001) L951-03: 20 Segmented Institutionalist Social Analysis of Computing

21. Clarke, R. J (2001) L951-03: 21 Klings (1980) Taxonomy (13) Segmented Institutionalists assume: broad scope for the use of computers includes as many different members of organisations as possible (including clients, suppliers etc.)

22. Clarke, R. J (2001) L951-03: 22 Klings (1980) Taxonomy (14) Segmented Institutionalists examine the consequences of computerized technology don’t assume a consensus on goals and values in an organisation (intergroup conflict is just as likely as consensus) privilege individual and group control over efficiency

23. Clarke, R. J (2001) L951-03: 23 Klings (1980) Taxonomy (15) Segmented Institutionalists most reject ideas of ‘optimums’ or ‘equilibria’ applying to organisations at all segmented institutionalists differ about how to understand ‘social life’ and the role of computing in organisations

24. Clarke, R. J (2001) L951-03: 24 Klings (1980) Taxonomy (16) Segmented Institutionalists symbolic interactionists view social life as constructed from the interaction of people and groups as they create and respond to socially defined meanings