Is there a dominant paradigm for information systems development? An empirical study

Background Hirschheim and Klein (1989) applies a philosophical line of analysis to Information System Development (ISD) process. They group these assumptions into four paradigms, namely, the functionalist paradigm, the social relativist paradigm, the radical structuralist paradigm and the neohumanist paradigm.

They admit that in practice the paradigmatic influences are usually mixing. That is, the information system development approaches are influenced by assumptions from more than one paradigms However, they argue that the influence from one paradigm is typically dominant. the major merit of this article is that it provides a well structured framework to examine the effects of different ISD philosophies

Motivation However, almost all ISD approaches are influenced by several paradigms simultaneously. Nowadays, as more and more independent groups and individuals are involved in an IS project, it is usually hard to identify which paradigm plays a dominant role.

This study aims to provide empirical evidences to support the fact that many IS Development are not influenced by a dominant paradigm. Instead, they are influenced by the dynamic interaction of various paradigms. If it is the case, the research in the interactive dynamics of these four paradigms emerges as a promising topic.

Theoretical Justification Nowadays, as more and more independent groups and individuals are involved in an IS project, it is usually hard to identify which paradigm plays a dominant role. In this sense, exact identification of ISD paradigm for each project is of little use in practice.

In practice, it is relatively easy to identify an individual (e.g. a project director) or a small group's ISD philosophy. As mentioned before, a typical IS project involves many individuals and groups. So the usefulness of the research in ISD philosophy conflicts and interaction is manifest.

Methodology Question to be answered: Is there usually a dominant paradigm for information systems development? Methodology: Survey of ALL participants of several IS projects.

Survey design Step 1: Ask a series of questions to identify which paradigm a subject’s IS development philosophy belongs to. Step 2: Ask a series of questions to identify the subject’s importance in a IS project. For example, the project manager’s IS development philosophy should have more weights than a programmer’s.

Analysis of the result Calculate the weighted sum of each paradigm. The paradigm with the highest scores should be deemed as the candidate dominant paradigm (CDP). Check that whether the scores of CDP is significantly larger than any those of others.

If the score of CDPs are significantly larger for most IS projects. We accept Hirshheim and Klein’s arguement that the influence from one paradigm is typically dominant. Otherwise we reject their argument. We need to construct some dynamic models to examine the conflicts and interactions among these paradigms. Obviously, it is an interesting and challenging topic for further research.