IS action research: State of the art and future directions

1
IS action research State of the art and future
directions

• Ola Henfridsson
• Viktoria Institute Halmstad University

2
Action Research

• Dual goal The action researcher is concerned to
  create organizational change and simultaneously
  study the process (Baskerville and Myers 2004,
  p. 329-330)
• Common motivations
• Epistemology pragmatism
• Relevance to practice
• Promising methodology, but many different models
  of action research
• Action research characteristics (Baskerville and
  Wood-Harper 1998)
• Process model (Iterative, reflective, linear)
• Structure (rigid, fluid)
• Researcher involvement (collaborative,
  facilitative, experiment)
• Primary goals (organizational development,
  systems design, scientific knowledge, training)

3
Types of IS action research (Baskerville
Wood-Harper 1998)
4
IS action research

• Two observations
• 1. Few examples of empirical AR studies (with the
  objective of making a domain-specific
  (substantive) contribution to, e.g., KM or ERP)
• Relatively many examples of AR theorizing (new
  models of, or perspectives on, AR)
• 2. The IT-artifact has a marginal role in IS
  action research
• IT-artifact bundles of material and cultural
  properties packaged in some socially recognized
  form such as hardware and/or software
  (Orlikowski and Iacono 2001)

5
Observation 1 Few examples of empirical AR
studies (with the objective of making a
domain-specific (substantive) contribution)
6
Dominance of AR methodology contributions
Dominance of AR methodology contributions

• Two lately published special issues
• IT People (2001 Editors Kock and Lau) 6
  articles
• MIS Quarterly (2004 Editors Baskerville and
  Myers) 6 articles
• Domain-specific (substantive) contributions
• Davison (2001)
• Iverson et al. (2004)
• Kohli and Kettinger (2004)
• Lindgren, Henfridsson, and Schultze (2004)
• Street and Meister (2004)
• Yoong and Gallupe (2001)
• AR methodology contributions
• Avison, Baskerville, and Myers (2001)
• Braa, Monteiro, and Sahay (2004)
• Chiasson and Dexter (2001)
• Mårtensson and Lee (2004)
• McKay Marshall (2001)
• Mumford (2001)

7
Reflections on the current state

• Methodological development important
• However, the value of AR must be evaluated in
  light of alternative methodologies
• in terms of its capacity to facilitate
  substantive research contributions
• in terms of its promised relevance to practice
• MISQ special issue important to legitimize AR
• However, action researchers have still things to
  prove

8
Observation 2 The IT-artifact has a marginal
role in IS action research
9
Background the role of the IT-artifact in AR

• IT-artifact
• bundles of material and cultural properties
  packaged in some socially recognized form such as
  hardware and/or software (Orlikowski and Iacono
  2001)
• Less inclusive than Hevner et al (2004)
  (constructs, instantiations, methods, and models)
• Role
• Part in the researchers action
• Part in developing the research contribution

10
(No Transcript)
11
Reflections on the current state

• The IT-artifact is part of the researchers
  action in some IS action research (3 out of the
  6/12)
• The IT-artifact is basically never a significant
  part of the contribution (developing the
  contribution)
• This is a problem in IS action research

12
Two recent AR projects

• Design principles for Competence Management
  Systems 1999-2001
• Lindgren, R., Henfridsson, O., and Schultze, U.
  "Design Principles for Competence Management
  Systems A Synthesis of an Action Research
  Study," MIS Quarterly (283) 2004, pp 435-472.
• Multi-Contextuality in Ubiquitous Computing
  2002-2004
• Henfridsson, O., and Lindgren, R.
  "Multi-Contextuality in Ubiquitous Computing
  Investigating the Car Case through Action
  Research," Information and Organization (152)
  2005, pp 95-124.

13
AR Methodology in Use at Viktoria

• Canonical action research (Davison et al. 2004
  Susman Evered 1978)
• Prototype-based action
• Delivering design principles for a specific
  system type grounded in socio-technical theory
• IT-artifact in focus without leaving social
  issues behind?

14
Background

• Modern automobile success for ubiquitous
  computing technologies
• Whole set of computer systems
• Weaved into the fabric of our everyday life
• However, the vehicle has been traditionally a
  closed system
• Telematics is slowly changing this
• The connected car
• Implications for product development, insurance,
  car maintenance, transportation,

15
What is telematics?

• The integrated use of telecommunications,
  positioning technologies, and IT
• Specifically, the use of such systems within road
  vehicles
• GMs OnStar
• All GM brands (and a few other) sold in the US
• Subscription model different service packages
• Fleet management, infotainment, remote
  diagnostics, vehicle management, and many more

16
Personal telematics

• Integrated use of mobile devices and embedded
  computing platforms for providing in-car user
  services
• Provides temporary and synchronized networks
  between vehicles and mobile devices for
  leveraging the convenience and safety such
  services
• Lifecycle differences
• Competition from aftermarket solution providers

17
Multi-contextuality in ubiquitous computing

• Mobile services are multi-contextual
• Used over different spatio-temporal contexts by
  people on the move
• Combining mass-scale with situated support
  design challenge
• Different use requirements in boundary-spanning
  mobility
• Minimal assumptions about use contexts for
  maximizing mobility and personalization (Lyytinen
  and Yoo 2002)
• Multi-contextuality the co-existence of
  different use contexts

18
Multi-Contextuality in the Car Setting

• The Car Setting
• Supports spatial/physical mobility
• Mobile devices used for handling the temporality
  of social activity (cf. Kakihara and Sørensen
  2002)
• Provides advanced computing and connectivity
  capabilities
• What are the socio-technical design implications
  related to the co-existence of different use
  contexts in the car?
• Grounded action research study (Baskerville
  Pries-Heje 1999)
• Saab Automobile, Mecel, and Vodafone
• Objectives
• Develop and evaluate design principles for
  handling multi-contextuality surrounding mobile
  device use in cars
• Explore socio-technical implications in an
  authentic setting

19
(No Transcript)
20
Mobile phone use in cars categories, concepts,
and data
21
MOBILE DEVICE MANIPULATION
(PHYSICAL) CONTEXT CHANGE
ATTENTION-SHIFTING
PRE-PARING
(WIRED) WORK-AROUNDS
22
Design principles

• The principle of context switching support
• Support switches between different physical and
  social contexts.
• The principle of contextually adapted
  manipulation
• Provide the user with device or service controls
  adapted to the spatio-temporal conditions in
  question.
• The principle of context-sensitive service
  synchronization
• Make selective services associated with the
  mobile device available (deemed plausible for the
  car setting) to users.

23
The SeamlessTalk prototype

• Facilitates driver (or passenger) control of
  Bluetooth-equipped mobile phones brought into the
  car
• Embeds the design principles developed

24
(No Transcript)
25
Evaluation overview
26
UbiComp challenges

• Synchronizing fluid use patterns
• Differences in individual use patterns make it
  hard to deliver mass-scale services
• The openness of mobile devices triggers an
  abundance of such use patterns
• Increased number of services provided by
  multi-purpose devices
• Scaling service manipulation
• A UbiComp environment cannot always be assumed to
  meet the specific requirements of the services
  hosted
• Different interaction models, e.g., differences
  in temporal assumptions
• Signaling context-switches through awareness
  support
• Context-switching can be a source of uncertainty
• Signaling context-switches can be an appropriate
  way to place computing in the background, e.g.,
  audio, motion, and visual feedback

27
Many thanks for your attention!