What kind of world do we want to help make with our theories?

In response to Demetis and Lee's proposal that Information Systems needs to adopt system science in order to live up to the identity implied by its name and in order to develop better theory, this commentary seeks to answer two questions: What kind of reality does systems science produce? And, given that technological advances have moved the IS research agenda beyond the organizational realm, how likely is it that systems science will help generate better IS theory? Drawing on a relational ontology, reflections on these two questions are offered. Research theories and methods are performative; they do not only represent reality, but also produce it.Systems theory creates a world populated by stable entities that interact with each other without altering the interdependent entities.In contrast to substantialist theories like systems science, relational ontologies treat practices (rather than entities) as primary.Relational theories are more likely to advance theorizing of contemporary IS phenomena characterized by sociomaterial entanglements.

[1]  N. Luhmann.  Essays On Self-Reference , 1990 .

[2]  Tone Bratteteig,et al.  Creating a Space For Change Within Sociomaterial Entanglements , 2012, Scand. J. Inf. Syst..

[3]  Nik Rushdi Hassan,et al.  Editorial: A Brief History of the Material in Sociomateriality , 2016, DATB.

[4]  JoAnne Yates,et al.  The Autonomy Paradox: The Implications of Mobile Email Devices for Knowledge Professionals , 2013, Organ. Sci..

[5]  W. Orlikowski.  Sociomaterial Practices: Exploring Technology at Work , 2007 .

[6]  Daniel Nyberg,et al.  Computers, Customer Service Operatives and Cyborgs: Intra-actions in Call Centres , 2009 .

[7]  Wanda J. Orlikowski,et al.  Entanglements in Practice: Performing Anonymity Through Social Media , 2014, MIS Q..

[8]  Patrik Aspers.  Book Review: Donald MacKenzie, Fabian Muniesa and Lucia Siu(eds) Do Economists Make Markets? On the Performativity of Economics , 2008 .

[9]  E. Reed.  The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception , 1989 .

[10]  Ulrike Schultze,et al.  Performing embodied identity in virtual worlds , 2014, Eur. J. Inf. Syst..

[11]  W. Heisenberg.  Physics and Philosophy: The Revolution in Modern Science , 1958 .

[12]  Kevin Crowston,et al.  Validity Issues in the Use of Social Network Analysis with Digital Trace Data , 2011, J. Assoc. Inf. Syst..

[13]  Matthew Jones,et al.  A Matter of Life and Death: Exploring Conceptualizations of Sociomateriality in the Context of Critical Care , 2014, MIS Q..

[14]  Nicholas Berente,et al.  Toward Generalizable Sociomaterial Inquiry: A Computational Approach for Zooming In and Out of Sociomaterial Routines , 2014, MIS Q..

[15]  D. Haraway,et al.  A Cyborg Manifesto: Science, Technology, and Socialist-Feminism in the Late Twentieth Century , 2013 .

[16]  Csr Young,et al.  How to Do Things With Words , 2009 .

[17]  Karen Barad.  Posthumanist Performativity: Toward an Understanding of How Matter Comes to Matter , 2003, Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society.

[18]  Petter Grytten Almklov,et al.  Dual materiality and knowing in petroleum production , 2012, Inf. Organ..

[19]  Sue Newell,et al.  The Sociomaterialty of Information Systems: Current Status, Future Directions , 2014, MIS Q..

[20]  G. Symon,et al.  Performing the Responsive and Committed Employee through the Sociomaterial Mangle of Connection , 2015 .

[21]  Karlheinz Kautz,et al.  Sociomateriality at the royal court of IS: A jester's monologue , 2013, Inf. Organ..

[22]  Karlheinz Kautz,et al.  Debating Sociomateriality: Entanglements, imbrications, disentangling, and agential cuts , 2012, Scand. J. Inf. Syst..

[23]  Thomas A. Finholt,et al.  Artifacts that organize: Delegation in the distributed organization , 2013, Inf. Organ..

[24]  J. Urry,et al.  Enacting the social , 2004 .

[25]  Paul Dourish,et al.  Dynamic Reconfiguration in Planetary Exploration: A Sociomaterial Ethnography , 2014, MIS Q..

[26]  Lucas D. Introna,et al.  On sociomaterial imbrications: What plagiarism detection systems reveal and why it matters , 2011, Inf. Organ..

[27]  G. Bateson,et al.  STEPS TO AN ECOLOGY OF MIND COLLECTED ESSAYS IN ANTHROPOLOGY, PSYCHIATRY, EVOLUTION, AND EPISTEMOLOGY , 2006 .

[28]  Karen Barad.  Meeting the Universe Halfway: Quantum Physics and the Entanglement of Matter and Meaning , 2007 .

[29]  Gerald C. Kane,et al.  What's Different about Social Media Networks? A Framework and Research Agenda , 2014, MIS Q..

[30]  Youngjin Yoo,et al.  Computing in Everyday Life: A Call for Research on Experiential Computing , 2010, MIS Q..

[31]  Mustafa Emirbayer.  Manifesto for a Relational Sociology1 , 1997, American Journal of Sociology.

[32]  Will Venters,et al.  A Trichordal Temporal Approach to Digital Coordination: The Sociomaterial Mangling of the CERN Grid , 2014, MIS Q..

[33]  Pär J. Ågerfalk,et al.  Through the Printing Press: An Account of Open Practices in the Swedish Newspaper Industry , 2014, J. Assoc. Inf. Syst..

[34]  Alistair Mutch,et al.  Sociomateriality - Taking the wrong turning? , 2013, Inf. Organ..

[35]  Paul M. Leonardi,et al.  When Flexible Routines Meet Flexible Technologies: Affordance, Constraint, and the Imbrication of Human and Material Agencies , 2011, MIS Q..

[36]  Wanda J. Orlikowski,et al.  Sociomateriality - taking the wrong turning? A response to Mutch , 2013, Inf. Organ..