Research Commentary: Rethinking "Diversity" in Information Systems Research

Three types of diversity have been prominent in the Information Systems discipline for over a decade: a diversity in the problems addressed; b diversity in the theoretical foundations and reference disciplines used to account for IS phenomena; and c diversity in the methods used to collect, analyze, and interpret data. History has played a major part in encouraging IS researchers to use diversity as a means of countering criticisms of their discipline and increasing their research rigor and productivity. In particular, frequent recourse to reference disciplines has underpinned much of the research that has been undertaken since the early 1980s. There are now signs, however, that the level of diversity that currently exists in IS research may be problematic. In this paper, we consider some of the benefits and costs of allowing diversity to reign in the IS discipline. We also propose a structure that we hope will facilitate discourse on the benefits and costs of diversity and on the role that diversity should now play in the IS discipline.

[1]  T. Kuhn,et al.  The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. , 1964 .

[2]  J. V. Maanen,et al.  Crossroads Style as Theory , 1995 .

[3]  K. Lyytinen,et al.  Exploring the intellectual structures of information systems development: A social action theoretic analysis , 1996 .

[4]  T. Kuhn.  The structure of scientific revolutions, 3rd ed. , 1996 .

[5]  Maurice Landry,et al.  A disciplined methodological pluralism for mis research , 1992 .

[6]  Peter G. W. Keen,et al.  Mis Research: Reference disciplines and a Cumulative Tradition , 1980, ICIS.

[7]  K. L. Kraemer,et al.  The information systems research challenge (vol. III): survey research methods , 1991 .

[8]  J. Dearden.  MIS Is a Mirage. , 1972 .

[9]  E. Burton Swanson,et al.  Information Systems Research Thematics: Submissions to a New Journal, 1987-1992 , 1993, Inf. Syst. Res..

[10]  Guy Fitzgerald,et al.  Research methods in information systems , 1985 .

[11]  Paul R. Lawrence,et al.  The Information Systems Research Challenge: Qualitative Research Methods , 1990 .

[12]  R. Whitley.  The Intellectual and Social Organization of the Sciences (Second Edition: with new introductory chapter entitled 'Science Transformed? The Changing Nature of Knowledge Production at the End of the Twentieth Century') , 1984 .

[13]  Izak Benbasat,et al.  The Information Systems Research Challenge: Experimental Research Methods , 1990 .

[14]  H. Klein,et al.  Information systems research: contemporary approaches and emergent traditions , 1991 .

[15]  J. V. Maanen,et al.  Fear and Loathing in Organization Studies , 1995 .

[16]  J. Pfeffer.  Barriers to the Advance of Organizational Science: Paradigm Development as a Dependent Variable , 1993 .

[17]  Daniel Robey,et al.  Research Commentary: Diversity in Information Systems Research: Threat, Promise, and Responsibility , 1996, Inf. Syst. Res..

[18]  Maurice Landry,et al.  Can the field of MIS be disciplined? , 1989, CACM.

[19]  Ramona L. Paetzold,et al.  PFEFFER'S Barriers to The Advance Of Organizational Science: A Rejoinder , 1994 .