Style Composition in Action Research Publication

Examining action research publications in leading Information Systems journals as a particular genre of research communication, we develop the notion of style composition to understand how authors structure their arguments for a research contribution. We define style composition as the activity through which authors select, emphasize, and present elements of their research to establish premises, develop inferences, and present contributions in publications. Drawing on this general notion, we identify a set of styles that is characteristic of how IS action researchers compose their argument. Premise styles relate to the dual goals of action research through practical or theoretical positioning of the argument; inference styles combine insights from the problem-solving and the research cycles through inductive or deductive reasoning; and contribution styles focus on different types of contributions--experience report, field study, theoretical development, problemsolving method, and research method. Based on the considered sample, we analyze the styles adopted in selected publications and show that authors have favored certain styles while leaving others underexplored; further, we reveal important strengths and weaknesses in the composition of styles within the IS discipline. Based on these insights, we discuss how action research practices and writing can be improved, as well as how to further develop style compositions to support the publication of engaged scholarship research.

[1]  P. Checkland From framework through experience to learning: The essential nature of action research , 1991 .

[2]  F. Lau,et al.  A review on the use of action research in information systems studies , 1997 .

[3]  D. Coghlan,et al.  Action research for operations management , 2002 .

[4]  Steve John Simon,et al.  The reorganization of the information systems of the US Naval Construction Forces: an action research project , 2000, Eur. J. Inf. Syst..

[5]  Richard Baskerville Semantic database prototypes , 1993, Inf. Syst. J..

[6]  S Hitchman Using DEKAF to understand data modelling in the practitioner domain , 1997 .

[7]  A. Strauss,et al.  The discovery of grounded theory: strategies for qualitative research aldine de gruyter , 1968 .

[8]  Hilkka Merisalo-Rantanen,et al.  Engineering E-Collaboration Processes to Obtain Innovative End-User Feedback on Advanced Web-Based Information Systems , 2009, J. Assoc. Inf. Syst..

[9]  Jan Pries-Heje,et al.  Grounded action research: a method for understanding IT in practice , 1999 .

[10]  G. Susman,et al.  An Assessment of the Scientific Merits of Action Research. , 1978 .

[11]  Alan Eardley,et al.  ALTAR in action: knowledge management , 2007, Eur. J. Inf. Syst..

[12]  Alan Eardley,et al.  ALTAR: achieving learning through action research , 2007, Eur. J. Inf. Syst..

[13]  Pelle Ehn The art and science of designing computet artifacts , 1991 .

[14]  Richard T. Watson,et al.  Analyzing the Past to Prepare for the Future: Writing a Literature Review , 2002, MIS Q..

[15]  Peter Axel Nielsen,et al.  Situated assessment of problems in software development , 1999, DATB.

[16]  Izchak M. Schlesinger,et al.  The Structure of Arguments , 2001 .

[17]  Mariëlle den Hengst,et al.  Collaborative Business Engineering: A Decade of Lessons from the Field , 2004, J. Manag. Inf. Syst..

[18]  Ojelanki K. Ngwenyama,et al.  Developing end-users' systems development competence: An exploratory study , 1993, Inf. Manag..

[19]  Kristin Braa,et al.  Interpretation, intervention, and reduction in the organizational laboratory: a framework for in-context information system research , 1999 .

[20]  Ook Lee,et al.  An action research report on the Korean national digital library , 2002, Information Manager (The).

[21]  M. P. A. Thompson,et al.  Cultivating meaning: interpretive fine-tuning of a South African health information system , 2002, Inf. Organ..

[22]  W. Orlikowski,et al.  Genres of Organizational Communication: A Structurational Approach to Studying Communication and Media , 1992 .

[23]  Dick Stenmark,et al.  Rethinking competence systems for knowledge-based organizations , 2003, Eur. J. Inf. Syst..

[24]  Jan Kietzmann,et al.  Interactive innovation of technology for mobile work , 2008, Eur. J. Inf. Syst..

[25]  Frank F. Land,et al.  The moving staircase - Problems of appraisal and evaluation in a turbulent environment , 1999, Inf. Technol. People.

[26]  Sundeep Sahay,et al.  An institutional analysis on the dynamics of the interaction between standardizing and scaling processes: a case study from Ethiopia , 2008, Eur. J. Inf. Syst..

[27]  Peter Axel Nielsen,et al.  Understanding the implementation of software process improvement innovations in software organizations , 2004, Inf. Syst. J..

[28]  Varun Grover,et al.  A Critical Assessment of Information Systems Action Research , 2007 .

[29]  Enid Mumford,et al.  Advice for an action researcher , 2001, Inf. Technol. People.

[30]  Ari Heiskanen,et al.  Reflecting over a practice: Framing issues for scholar understanding , 1995, Inf. Technol. People.

[31]  Albert L. Lederer,et al.  Information systems planning in a turbulent environment , 2000, Eur. J. Inf. Syst..

[32]  Judy McKay,et al.  Driven by Two Masters, Serving Both , 2007 .

[33]  Richard Baskerville,et al.  Diversity in information systems action research methods , 1998 .

[34]  Bjørn Gustavsen,et al.  Action Research and the Generation of Knowledge , 1993 .

[35]  Mike Chiasson,et al.  Pluralist action research: a review of the information systems literature * , 2009, Inf. Syst. J..

[36]  Lars Mathiassen,et al.  Managing Risks in Software Process Improvement , 1999, ECIS.

[37]  Ned Kock,et al.  Asynchronous and distributed process improvement: the role of collaborative technologies , 2001, Inf. Syst. J..

[38]  C. Eden,et al.  Action Research for Management Research , 1996 .

[39]  Jef Verschueren,et al.  The pragmatic perspective , 1987 .

[40]  Rikard Lindgren,et al.  Multi-contextuality in ubiquitous computing: Investigating the car case through action research , 2005, Inf. Organ..

[41]  J. Ledington,et al.  Decision-Variable Partitioning: an alternative modelling approach in Soft Systems Methodology , 1999 .

[42]  Pelle Ehn,et al.  Work-oriented design of computer artifacts , 1989 .

[43]  Karin Hedström,et al.  The values of IT in elderly care , 2007, Inf. Technol. People.

[44]  Robert Davison,et al.  GSS and action research in the Hong Kong police , 2001, Inf. Technol. People.

[45]  Oǵuz N. Babüroǵlu,et al.  Normative Action Research , 1992 .

[46]  Rikard Lindgren,et al.  Design Principles for Competence Management Systems: A Synthesis of an Action Research Study , 2004, MIS Q..

[47]  Alastair David Shaw Fowler Kinds of Literature: An Introduction to the Theory of Genres and Modes , 1982 .

[48]  Joseph S. Valacich,et al.  Virtual teams in and out of synchronicity , 2006, Inf. Technol. People.

[49]  David E. Avison,et al.  Controlling action research projects , 2001, Inf. Technol. People.

[50]  Mike Chiasson,et al.  The tail & the dog: agency and structure influences on the development of an e-commerce information system in a new venture startup , 2002, DATB.

[51]  Andrew Stein Re-engineering the executive: The 4th generation of EIS , 1995, Inf. Manag..

[52]  Gert-Jan de Vreede,et al.  Exploring the Boundaries of Successful GSS Application: Supporting Inter-Organizational Policy Networks , 1999, HICSS.

[53]  Brian Fitzgerald,et al.  Multi‐metaphor method: organizational metaphors in information systems development , 2007, Inf. Syst. J..

[54]  Georgios I. Doukidis,et al.  An internet retailing data framework for supporting consumers and business processes , 2003, Inf. Syst. J..

[55]  Enid Mumford,et al.  Computer systems in work design--the ETHICS method : effective technical and human implementation of computer systems , 1979 .

[56]  Richard T. Vidgen,et al.  Constructing a web information system development methodology , 2002, Inf. Syst. J..

[57]  Frada Burstein,et al.  Supporting post-Fordist work practices: A knowledge management framework for supporting knowledge work , 2003, Inf. Technol. People.

[58]  Karen Locke,et al.  Composing Qualitative Research , 1997 .

[59]  Peter Kawalek,et al.  Information systems and partnership in multi-agency networks: an action research project in crime reduction , 2004, Inf. Organ..

[60]  Lars Mathiassen,et al.  Collaborative Practice Research , 2000, Scand. J. Inf. Syst..

[61]  Ned Kock Information Systems Action Research: An Applied View of Emerging Concepts and Methods (Integrated Series in Information Systems) , 2006 .

[62]  Joe Peppard,et al.  Whose job is it anyway?: organizational information competencies for value creation , 2000, Inf. Syst. J..

[63]  Robert P. Bostrom,et al.  Personality Characteristics of MIS Project Teams: An Empirical Study and Action-Research Design , 1982, MIS Q..

[64]  W. Orlikowski,et al.  Genre Repertoire: The Structuring of Communicative Practices in Organizations , 1994 .

[65]  Linda A. Macaulay,et al.  Individual trust and development of online business communities , 2007, Inf. Technol. People.

[66]  Gert-Jan de Vreede,et al.  Collaborative Business Engineering with Animated Electronic Meetings , 1997, J. Manag. Inf. Syst..

[67]  Robert M. Davison,et al.  Empowerment or enslavement?: A case of process-based organisational change in Hong Kong , 2002, Inf. Technol. People.

[68]  Agapol Na Songkhla A soft system approach in introducing information technology: A case study of an international broadcasting programme in Japan , 1997, Inf. Technol. People.

[69]  Richard Baskerville,et al.  Special issue on action research in information systems: making is research relevant to practice--foreword , 2004 .

[70]  Ben Clegg,et al.  Using process‐oriented holonic (PrOH) modelling to increase understanding of information systems , 2008, Inf. Syst. J..

[71]  Darren B. Meister,et al.  Small Business Growth and Internal Transparency: The Role of Information Systems , 2004, MIS Q..

[72]  Les Gasser,et al.  A Design Theory for Systems That Support Emergent Knowledge Processes , 2002, MIS Q..

[73]  A. Pettigrew Context and Action in the Transformation of the Firm , 1987 .

[74]  Mark Lycett,et al.  A programme management approach for ensuring curriculum coherence in IS (higher) education , 2007, Eur. J. Inf. Syst..

[75]  Michael D. Myers,et al.  Trying to improve communication and collaboration with information technology: An action research project which failed , 1999, Inf. Technol. People.

[76]  Nicolas Lesca,et al.  Strategic scanning project failure and abandonment factors: lessons learned , 2008, Eur. J. Inf. Syst..

[77]  P. Checkland Soft Systems Methodology: A Thirty Year Retrospective a , 2000 .

[78]  Paula M. C. Swatman,et al.  Educating tomorrow's managers for telecommunications and EDI: a cross-cultural experience , 1995, Inf. Technol. People.

[79]  Herbert A. Simon,et al.  The new science of management decision , 1960 .

[80]  Trevor Wood-Harper,et al.  The finding of thorns: user participation in enterprise system implementation , 2002, DATB.

[81]  Judy McKay,et al.  The dual imperatives of action research , 2001, Inf. Technol. People.

[82]  Lars Mathiassen,et al.  Reflective Systems Development , 1998, Scand. J. Inf. Syst..

[83]  Pernille Bjørn,et al.  Boundary factors and contextual contingencies: configuring electronic templates for healthcare professionals , 2009, Eur. J. Inf. Syst..

[84]  Lars Mathiassen,et al.  Between control and drift: negotiating improvement in a small software firm , 2008, Inf. Technol. People.

[85]  John Mingers,et al.  Combining IS Research Methods: Towards a Pluralist Methodology , 2001, Inf. Syst. Res..

[86]  Sten Jönsson,et al.  Accounting for improvement: Action research on local management support , 1992 .

[87]  Trevor Wood-Harper,et al.  Information Systems Development Research: An Exploration of Ideas in Practice , 1991, Comput. J..

[88]  Philip Powell,et al.  Applying triple loop learning to planning electronic trading systems , 2003, Inf. Technol. People.

[89]  Chad Perry,et al.  Action research in marketing , 2004 .

[90]  Max Elden,et al.  Features of Emerging Action Research , 1993 .

[91]  George D. Gopen,et al.  The Science of Scientific Writing If the reader is to grasp what the writer means, the writer must understand what the reader needs , 1990 .

[92]  Pär Mårtensson,et al.  Dialogical Action Research at Omega Corporation , 2004, MIS Q..

[93]  L. Mathiassen,et al.  Professional systems development: experience, ideas and action , 1990 .

[94]  John Lewis,et al.  Building participatory HIS networks: A case study from Kerala, India , 2009, Inf. Organ..

[95]  Nelson K. H. Tang,et al.  An application of the Delta Model and BPR in transforming electronic business – the case of a food ingredients company in UK , 2004, Inf. Syst. J..

[96]  Robert Vogel,et al.  Case Study GROUP SUPPORT SYSTEMS IN HONG KONG: An Action Research Project , 2000 .

[97]  E. AvisonD.,et al.  Information systems development research , 1991 .

[98]  Chrisanthi Avgerou,et al.  Information systems: what sort of science is it? , 2000 .

[99]  Shirley Gregor,et al.  Beef producers online: diffusion theory applied , 1999, Inf. Technol. People.

[100]  Henk Akkermans,et al.  Vicious and virtuous cycles in ERP implementation: a case study of interrelations between critical success factors , 2002, Eur. J. Inf. Syst..

[101]  Jørn Braa,et al.  Networks of Action: Sustainable Health Information Systems Across Developing Countries , 2004, MIS Q..

[102]  Ned Kock,et al.  Can communication medium limitations foster better group outcomes? An action research study , 1998, Inf. Manag..

[103]  Rajiv Kohli,et al.  Informating the Clan: Controlling Physicians' Costs and Outcomes , 2004, MIS Q..

[104]  Morten Levin,et al.  Creating Networks for Rural Economic Development in Norway , 1993 .

[105]  Trevor Wood-Harper,et al.  Multiview - An Exploration in Information Systems Development , 1986, Aust. Comput. J..

[106]  Mike Chiasson,et al.  System development conflict during the use of an information systems prototyping method of action research: Implications for practice and research , 2001, Inf. Technol. People.

[107]  Michael J. Gallivan,et al.  Furthering Information Systems Action Research: A Post-Positivist Synthesis of Four Dialectics , 2008, J. Assoc. Inf. Syst..

[108]  Ela Klecun,et al.  Bringing lost sheep into the fold: questioning the discourse of the digital divide , 2008, Inf. Technol. People.

[109]  Starr Roxanne Hiltz,et al.  A Wiki that knows where it is being used: insights from potential users , 2008, DATB.

[110]  Tom Butler,et al.  Understanding the design of information technologies for knowledge management in organizations: a pragmatic perspective , 2007, Inf. Syst. J..

[111]  Jeremy Rose,et al.  Interaction, transformation and information systems development - an extended application of Soft Systems Methodology , 2002, Inf. Technol. People.

[112]  Sue Newell,et al.  Critical Success Factors , 2005, ICEIS.

[113]  Helen Hasan,et al.  Approaches to the development of multi-dimensional databases: lessons from four case studies , 2000, DATB.

[114]  Karen Locke,et al.  Constructing Opportunities for Contribution: Structuring Intertextual Coherence and “Problematizing” in Organizational Studies , 1997 .

[115]  Jay F. Nunamaker,et al.  A Technology Transition Model Derived from Field Investigation of GSS Use Aboard the U.S.S. CORONADO , 1998, J. Manag. Inf. Syst..

[116]  Robert M. Davison,et al.  Principles of canonical action research , 2004, Inf. Syst. J..

[117]  Detmar W. Straub,et al.  Coping With Systems Risk: Security Planning Models for Management Decision Making , 1998, MIS Q..

[118]  Jan Stage,et al.  Controlling Prototype Development Through Risk Analysis , 1996, MIS Q..

[119]  A. Kellerman,et al.  The Constitution of Society : Outline of the Theory of Structuration , 2015 .

[120]  Judy McKay,et al.  Driven by two masters, serving both: the interplay of problem solving and research in information systems action research projects , 2007 .

[121]  B. Latour Science in action : how to follow scientists and engineers through society , 1989 .

[122]  Munir Mandviwalla,et al.  Mobile group support technologies for any-time, any-place team support , 1996, Inf. Technol. People.

[123]  Delvin Grant,et al.  A report on the use of action research to evaluate a manufacturing information systems development methodology in a company , 2003, Inf. Syst. J..

[124]  R. Rapoport Three Dilemmas in Action Research , 1970 .

[125]  A. Strauss,et al.  Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques. , 1992 .

[126]  Robert A. Day How to write and publish a scientific paper , 1979 .

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

[128]  Robert J. McQueen,et al.  Integrating groupware technology into a business process improvement framework , 1995, Inf. Technol. People.

[129]  P. Checkland,et al.  Action Research: Its Nature and Validity , 1998 .

[130]  David K. Allen,et al.  Trust, power and interorganizational information systems: the case of the electronic trading community TransLease , 2000, Inf. Syst. J..

[131]  Gamel O. Wiredu User appropriation of mobile technologies: Motives, conditions and design properties , 2007, Inf. Organ..

[132]  G.-J. de Vreede,et al.  Exploring the boundaries of successful GSS application: supporting inter-organizational policy networks , 1999 .

[133]  Adele Anderson,et al.  The ethnology of information: Cultural learning through cooperative action research in a multinational firm , 1997 .

[134]  Robert M. O'Keefe,et al.  Trust, planning and benefits in a global interorganizational system , 2004, Inf. Syst. J..

[135]  Mark Lycett,et al.  Evaluating business information systems fit: from concept to practical application , 1999 .

[136]  R. Godfrey,et al.  Web-based Information Systems , 1998, Proceedings. 1998 International Conference Software Engineering: Education and Practice (Cat. No.98EX220).

[137]  Robert M. Davison Inclusive or Exclusive? Methodological Practice and Policy for Organisationally and Socially Relevant IS Research , 2010, AMCIS.