Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Choosing Between Competing Design Ideals in Information Systems Development

  • Published:
Information Systems Frontiers Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Whenever information systems are developed, they serve some interests at the expense of others. Just what those interests are and who possesses them need to be understood and debated as they involve value judgments. This paper contends that advice concerning the design of information systems must not be limited to technical design, but should also address what is good or bad, or right or wrong in any particular situation—a notion termed a design ideal. The paper offers an approach on how such value judgments involving competing design ideals may be approached in a rational way. This necessitates the adoption of a wider concept of rationality, one, which allows the insights of critical philosophical analysis to be brought to bear on the question of how information systems can best serve all project stakeholders. In order to address likely objections to our proposal, the conclusions discuss several research issues.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Albert H. Traktat Uber Kritische Vernunft. J.C.B. Mohr (Paul Siebeck), Tubingen, 1968.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Alter S. Decision Support Systems: Current Practice and Continuing Challenges. Reading, Mass: Addison-Wesley, 1980.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Apel Karl-Otto. The a priori of the Communication Community and the Foundations of Ethics. Apel, 1980, 1973, in English.

  4. Apel Karl-Otto. The Transformation of Philosophy. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1980.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Bass B. Organizational Decision Making.Homewood, Ill: Irwin, 1983.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Beck U, Ritter M, Ritter P. The Reinvention of Politics: Rethinking Modernity in the Global Social Order. London: Polity Press, 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Bjorn-Andersen N, Turner J. The Metamorphosis of Oticon. In: Galliers R and Baets, W, eds., Information Technology and Organizational Transformation. Chichester: J. Wiley & Sons, 1998: 65–83.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Bostrom R., Heinen JS. MIS Problems and Failures. A Socio-Technical Perspective. Part I: The causes. MIS Quarterly. 1977: (3).

  9. Burns, A. The Microchip: Appropriate or Inappropriate Technology. Chichester: Ellis Horwood, 1981.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Churchman CW. Challenge to Reason. New York: Delta Books, 1970.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Churchman CW. The Design of Inquiry Systems. New York: Basic Books, 1981.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Cecez-Kecmanovic D, Janson M. Communicative Action Theory: An Approach to Understanding the Application of Information Systems. In: Proceedings of the 10th Australasian Conference on Information Systems (ACIS), 1999:183–195.

  13. Cooley M. Architect or Bee? The Human/Technology Relationship. Slough: Hand and Brain Publication, 1980.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Cosier R, Ruble Aplin. An Evaluation of the Effectiveness of Dialectic Enquiry Systems. Management Science. 1978;241(14): 1483–1490.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Cyert R, March J. The Behavioral Theory of the Firm. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall, 1963.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Cyert R, Simon H, Trow D. Observation of a Business Decision. Journal of Business, 1956;29:237–248.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Davis G. Strategies for Information Requirements Determination. IBM Systems Journal, 1982;21(1):4–30.

    Google Scholar 

  18. DeMarco T. Structured Analysis and System Specification. New York: Yourdon Press, 1978.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Dennis AR, George JF, Jessup LM, Nunamaker JF, Vogel D. Information Technology to Support Electronic Meetings. Management Information Systems Quarterly 1988;12(4):591–624.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Dewey R, Hurlbutt R. eds. An Introduction to Ethics. New York: Macmillan, 1977.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Foucault M. Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison. Alan Sheridan (translator) New York: Vintage, 1977.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Gasson S. Co-operative Information System Design, How Multi-Domain Information System Design Takes Place in UK Organisations. Doctoral dissertation, University ofWarwick, Coventry, Sept. 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Gasson S. The Reality of User-Centered Design. J. of End User Computing. 1999;11(4):3–13.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Giddens A. The Constitution of Society: Outline for a Theory of Structuration. Cambridge: Polity Press, 1984.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Habermas J. Theory and Practice. Boston: Beacon Press, 1973.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Habermas J. The Theory of Communicative Action-Reason and the Rationalization of Society, Vol 1. Boston: Beacon Press, 1984.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Hare RM. The Language of Morals. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1952.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Harrington HJ. Business Process Improvement: The Breakthrough Strategy for Total Quality, Productivity, and Competitiveness. NY: McGraw-Hill, 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Hirschheim, R. The Effect of a priori Views on the Social Implications of Computing: The Case of Office Automation. Computing Surveys. 1986;18(2):165–195.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Hirschheim R, Klein H. Four Paradigms of Information Systems Development. Communications of the ACM. 1989;32(10):1199–1216.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Hirschheim R, Klein H. Realizing Emancipatory Principles in Information Systems Development: The Case for ETHICS. MIS Quarterly, 1994;18(1):83–109.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Hirschheim R, Klein HK, Lyytinen, K. Information Systems Development and Data Modeling: Conceptual and Philosophical Foundations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Iivari J, Hirschheim R, Klein H. A Paradigmatic Analysis Contrasting Information Systems Development Approaches and Methodologies. Information Systems Research. 1998;9(2):164–193.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Janson M, Brown A, Taillieu T. Colruyt: An Organization Committed to Communication. Information Systems Journal. 1997; 7(3):175–199.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Kant I. Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals. Translated and analyzed by Patton HJ, New York: Harper Torch, Books, 1964.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Kant I. The Critique of Practical Reason. New York: Harper Torch Books, 1929.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Keen P, Scott-Morton M. Decision Support Systems: An Organizational Perspective. Reading: Addison-Wesley, 1978.

    Google Scholar 

  38. Klein H. The Reconstruction of Design Ideals. Paper presented at the TIMS Conference, Toronto, May 1981.

  39. Kling R. Value-Conflicts and Social Choice in Electronic Funds Transfer Developments. Communications of the ACM. 1978; 21(8):642–657.

    Google Scholar 

  40. Kling R. Social Analyses of Computing: Theoretical Perspectives in Recent Empirical Research. Computing Surveys 1980;12(1):61–110.

    Google Scholar 

  41. Kling R. Value Conflicts in the Deployment of Computing Applications: Cases in Developed and Developing Countries. Telecommunications Policy March, 1983;7(1):12–34.

    Google Scholar 

  42. Kuhn T. The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, 2nd ed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1970.

    Google Scholar 

  43. Kumar K, van Dissel H, Bielli P. The Merchant of Prato-Revisited: Toward a Third Rationality of Information Systems. MIS Quarterly June, 1998;22(2):199–226.

    Google Scholar 

  44. Kutchera F von. Philosophy of Language. Dordrecht: D. Reidel, 1975.

    Google Scholar 

  45. Land F, Hirschheim R. Participative Systems Design: Rationale, Tools and Techniques. Journal of Applied Systems Analysis 1983;10:91–107.

    Google Scholar 

  46. Lawler E. High-Involvement Management. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1986.

    Google Scholar 

  47. Lawler E, Ledford G, Mohrman S. Employee Involvement in America: A Study of Contemporary Practice. Houston: American Productivity & Quality Center, 1989.

    Google Scholar 

  48. Lukes S. Power: A Radical View. London: Macmillan, 1974.

    Google Scholar 

  49. March J, Simon H. Organizations. New York: Wiley, 1958.

    Google Scholar 

  50. Mason R. A Dialectical Approach to Strategic Planning. Management Science. 1969;15:B403-B414.

    Google Scholar 

  51. Mattessich R. Instrumental Reasoning and Systems Methodology: An Epistemology of the Applied and Social Sciences. Dordrecht: D. Reidel Publishing Company, 1978.

    Google Scholar 

  52. McFarlan FW. Information Technology Changes the Way You Compete. Harvard Business Review, May-June, 1984;98–103.

  53. Mintzberg H. Power In and Around Organizations. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall, 1983.

    Google Scholar 

  54. Mowshowitz A. Computers and the Myth of Neutrality. In: Proceedings of the 1984 Computer Science Conference, Philadelphia, February 14–16, 1984: 85–92.

  55. Mumford E. Participation-From Aristotle to Today. In: Bemelmans T. ed. Beyond Productivity: Information Systems Development for Organizational Effectiveness, Amsterdam: North Holland, 1984: 95–104.

    Google Scholar 

  56. Orlikowski W. Integrated Information Environment or Matrix of Control? The Contradictory Implications of Information Technology. Accounting, Management and Information Technologies 1991; 1(1): 9–42.

    Google Scholar 

  57. Popper K. Conjectures and Refutations. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1963.

    Google Scholar 

  58. Provenzo E. The Electronic Panopticon: Censorship, Control, and Indoctrination in a Post-Typographic Culture. In: Tuman M. ed. Literacy Online: The Promise (and Peril) of Reading and Writing with Computers. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  59. Rawls J. A Theory of Justice. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press, 1971.

    Google Scholar 

  60. Rule J. Value Choices in an Electronic Funds Transfer Policy. Office of Telecommunications Policy, Executive Office of the President, Washington, D.C., October, 1975.

    Google Scholar 

  61. Searle JR. How to Derive "Ought" from "Is". Philosophical Review. 1964; 73, January. Reprinted in Dewey R and Hurlbutt R, eds. (1977), An Introduction to Ethics, NewYork: Macmillan, 452–463.

    Google Scholar 

  62. Searle JR. Expression and Meaning. London: Cambridge University Press, 1979.

    Google Scholar 

  63. Simon H. Models of Man. New York: McGraw Hill, 1957.

    Google Scholar 

  64. Simon H. Theories of Decision Making in Economics and Behavioral Science. In: Greenwood W. T. Management and Organizational Behavior Theories: An Interdisciplinary Approach. Cincinnati, Ohio. 1965, 300.

  65. Slovic P. Fischoff B, Lichtenstein S. Behavioral Decision Theory. Annual Review of Psychology. 1977;28:1–39.

    Google Scholar 

  66. Stamper R. Information: in Business and Administrative Systems. New York: Halsted Press, 1973.

    Google Scholar 

  67. Thompson JD. Organizations in Action. New York, 1967.

  68. Tjosvold D, Wedley W, Field R. Constructive Controversy, the Vroom-Yetton Model, and Managerial Decision Making. Journal of Occupational Behavior. 1986;7:125–138.

    Google Scholar 

  69. Toulmin S. The Uses of Argument. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1958.

    Google Scholar 

  70. Vogel D, Nunamaker JF, Martz B, Grohowski R, McGoff C. Electronic Meeting System Experience at IBM. Journal of Management Information Systems. 1990;6(3):25–43.

    Google Scholar 

  71. Wallach M, Kogan N. The Roles of Information, Discussion and Consensus in Group Risk Taking. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology. 1965;1:1–19.

    Google Scholar 

  72. Wilensky H. Organizational Intelligence, Knowledge and Policy in Government and Industry. New York: Basic Books, 1967.

    Google Scholar 

  73. Zemke R, Schaaf D. The Service Edge: 101 Companies That Profit from Customer Care. New York: New American Library, 1989.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. The Fox School of Management Temple University, Philadelphia, PA, 19122-6083, USA

    Heinz K. Klein

  2. University of Houston, Houston, TX. 77204-6282, USA

    Rudy Hirschheim

Authors
  1. Heinz K. Klein
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Rudy Hirschheim
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Heinz K. Klein.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Klein, H.K., Hirschheim, R. Choosing Between Competing Design Ideals in Information Systems Development. Information Systems Frontiers 3, 75–90 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1011453721700

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1011453721700

Search

Navigation