Content area
Full Text
Abstract. Actor-network theory (ANT) has achieved a measure of popularity in the analysis of information systems. This paper looks at ANT from the perspective of the social realism of Margaret Archer. It argues that the main issue with ANT from a realist perspective is its adoption of a flat' ontology, particularly with regard to human beings. It explores the value of incorporating concepts from ANT into a social realist approach, but argues that the latter offers a more productive way of approaching information systems. Keywords. actor-network theory; agency and structure; critical realism; information systems
`In matters of grave importance, style, not sincerity, is the vital thing.1 (Gwendolen, in The Importance of Being Earnest [Wilde, 1986: 301)
This is written from the marcherlands, the debatable territory between information systems and organizational studies. Actually, that might be to stretch the historical analogy a little too far. For the border lands between England and its neighbours Wales and Scotland were characterized for much of the period up to the 17th century by incessant feuding. In our debatable territory, by contrast, the opposing hordes tend to march straight past each other and not lock horns directly. A pertinent example for the discussion that follows is contained in the treatments of the impact of information technology (IT) in the British National Health Service. Both Bloomfield (1995) and Checkland and Holwell (1998) have a focus on the initiative known as Resource Management, but neither refers to the other. Given the increased importance of topics such as knowledge management and the clear relationship of this to information systems and technology on the one hand, and to organizational structures and actors on the other, such a situation seems less than helpful. This article is concerned with the contribution that social theory can make to our analysis of information systems within organizations.
The relatively underdeveloped nature of theoretical approaches in the IS domain is frequently bemoaned, with writers such as Checkland and Holwell (1998: xii) calling for acts of `conceptual cleansing'. However, they are clearly sceptical about the value of existing discussions in the organizational domain, choosing to ignore work they find there. Their reason for this is that `Many academics, even including some in management schools, never move beyond the disputes over...