Symbolic interactionist ethnography: implications for information systems research and practice

This paper attempts to contribute to the positivist-interpretivist and rigor-relevance debates in IS research. We accomplish this by reflecting on the implications of symbolic interactionist ethnography for enriching interpretive research, and by highlighting how the adaptation of the “constant comparison” technique from grounded theory may help move the ethnography study towards theoretical interpretation of symbolic interactions in varied IS research settings. In particular, we argue that the approach as outlined in this paper may effectively combine the theoretical strengths of the interactionist perspective with the empirical strengths of ethnography and the analytical edge of grounded theory. This approach may thus provide one starting point to help reconcile between the pursuit of academic knowledge vis-à-vis practice-oriented insights in IS research.

[1]  Karen Locke.  Grounded Theory in Management Research , 2000 .

[2]  Julie E. Kendall,et al.  Metaphors and Methodologies: Living Beyond the Systems Machine , 1993, MIS Q..

[3]  T. Abel,et al.  Mind, Self, and Society , 1934 .

[4]  P. Prasad,et al.  Symbolic processes in the implementation of technological change: a symbolic interactionist study of work computerization. , 1993, Academy of Management journal. Academy of Management.

[5]  Jacques F. Brissy.  Chapter 15. Computers in Organizations: The (White) Magic of the Black Box , 1990 .

[6]  Anselm L. Strauss,et al.  Basics of qualitative research : techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory , 1998 .

[7]  E. Guba,et al.  Competing paradigms in qualitative research. , 1994 .

[8]  Wanda J. Orlikowski,et al.  Studying Information Technology in Organizations: Research Approaches and Assumptions , 1991, Inf. Syst. Res..

[9]  Suzanne K. Damarin,et al.  The second self: Computers and the human spirit , 1985 .

[10]  Rudy Hirschheim,et al.  Symbolism and Information Systems Development: Myth, Metaphor and Magic , 1991, Inf. Syst. Res..

[11]  Geoff Walsham,et al.  The Emergence of Interpretivism in IS Research , 1995, Inf. Syst. Res..

[12]  Kathy Charmaz,et al.  Grounded Theory in Ethnography , 2001 .

[13]  A. Strauss,et al.  The Discovery of Grounded Theory , 1967 .

[14]  Barry M. Staw,et al.  Spinning on Symbolism: A Brief Note on the Future of Symbolism in Organizational Research , 1985 .

[15]  Karen Locke,et al.  Appealing Work: An Investigation of How Ethnographic Texts Convince , 1993 .

[16]  Sharan B. Merriam,et al.  Qualitative research and case study applications in education , 1998 .

[17]  Michael D. Myers,et al.  A Set of Principles for Conducting and Evaluating Interpretive Field Studies in Information Systems , 1999, MIS Q..

[18]  David R. Maines,et al.  Social Organization and Social Structure in Symbolic Interactionist Thought , 1977 .

[19]  M. Hammersley.  What's Wrong With Ethnography?: Methodological Explorations , 1992 .

[20]  Y. Lincoln.  Emerging Criteria for Quality in Qualitative and Interpretive Research , 1995 .

[21]  P. Prasad.  Systems of meaning: ethnography as a methodology for the study of information technologies , 1997 .

[22]  P. Rock,et al.  Symbolic Interactionism and Ethnography , 2001 .

[23]  M. Markus,et al.  Information technology and organizational change: causal structure in theory and research , 1988 .

[24]  R. Emerson,et al.  Writing Ethnographic Fieldnotes , 1995 .

[25]  H. Blumer,et al.  Symbolic Interactionism: Perspective and Method , 1988 .

[26]  Ulrike Schultze,et al.  A Confessional Account of an Ethnography About Knowledge Work , 2000, MIS Q..

[27]  Oswald Werner,et al.  Systematic Fieldwork. Vol. I: Foundations of Ethnography and Interviewing. , 1989 .

[28]  Michael D. Myers,et al.  Investigating Information Systems with Ethnographic Research , 1999, Commun. Assoc. Inf. Syst..

[29]  Michael D. Myers,et al.  Scholarship and practice: the contribution of ethnographic research methods to bridging the gap , 1994, Business Process Re-Engineering.

[30]  Allen S. Lee.  Rigor and relevance in MIS research: beyond the approach of positivism alone , 1999 .

[31]  C. Geertz,et al.  The Interpretation of Cultures , 1973 .

[32]  Abhijit Gopal,et al.  Understanding GDSS in Symbolic Context: Shifting the Focus from Technology to Interaction , 2000, MIS Q..

[33]  M. Lynne Markus,et al.  Rituals in Information System Design , 1984, MIS Q..