Book contents
- Cambridge Handbook of Qualitative Digital Research
- Cambridge Handbook of Qualitative Digital Research
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Contributors
- Preface
- Part I Philosophical, Epistemological and Theoretical Considerations
- Part II Methodological Considerations
- Part III Illustrative Examples and Emergent Issues
- Index
- References
Part II - Methodological Considerations
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 08 June 2023
Book contents
- Cambridge Handbook of Qualitative Digital Research
- Cambridge Handbook of Qualitative Digital Research
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Contributors
- Preface
- Part I Philosophical, Epistemological and Theoretical Considerations
- Part II Methodological Considerations
- Part III Illustrative Examples and Emergent Issues
- Index
- References
Summary
A summary is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Cambridge Handbook of Qualitative Digital Research , pp. 89 - 190Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2023
References
References
Amnesty International. (2019). Facebook and Google’s pervasive surveillance poses an unprecedented danger to human rights, www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2019/11/google-facebook-surveillance-privacy/.Google Scholar
Answer the Call of Vanuatu. (n.d.). What is Kastom, www.vanuatu.travel/en/local-knowledge/local-knowledge-what-is-kastom.Google Scholar
Baier, K. (1971). What is value? An analysis of the concept. In Baier, K. and Rescher, N. (eds), Values and the Future: The Impact of Technological Change on American Values. New York, NY: Free Press, pp. 33–67.Google Scholar
Baskerville, R. L., Myers, M. D. and Yoo, Y. (2020). Digital first: The ontological reversal and new challenges for information systems research. MIS Quarterly, 44(2), 509–523.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Borgmann, A. (1984). Technology and the Character of Contemporary Life: A Philosophical Inquiry. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Brey, P. (2018). The strategic role of technology in a good society. Technology in Society, 52(C), 39–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brey, P. (2010). Values in technology and disclosive computer ethics. In Floridi, L. (ed.), The Cambridge Handbook of Information and Computer Ethics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, Vol. 4, pp. 41–58.Google Scholar
Cath, C., Wachter, S., Mittelstadt, B., Taddeo, M. and Floridi, L. (2018). Artificial intelligence and the ‘good society’: The US, EU, and UK approach. Science and Engineering Ethics, 24(2), 505–528.Google Scholar
Chatterjee, S., Sarker, S. and Fuller, M. (2009). Ethical information systems development: A Baumanian postmodernist perspective. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 10(11), 787–815.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chughtai, H. (2021). Taking the human body seriously. European Journal of Information Systems, 30(1), 46–68.Google Scholar
Chughtai, H. (2020). Human values and digital work: An ethnographic study of device paradigm. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 49(1), 27–57.Google Scholar
Chughtai, H., Myers, M. D., Young, A. G., Borsa, T., Cardo, V. M., Demirkol, Ö. et al. (2020). Demarginalizing interdisciplinarity in IS research: Interdisciplinary research in marginalization. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 46(1), 296–315.Google Scholar
Clarke, R. and Davison, R. M. (2020). Through whose eyes? The critical concept of researcher perspective. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 21(2), 483–501.Google Scholar
Constantinides, P., Chiasson, M. W. and Introna, L. D. (2012). The ends of information systems research: A pragmatic framework. MIS Quarterly, 36(1), 1–19.Google Scholar
Escobar, A. (2018). Designs for the Pluriverse: Radical Interdependence, Autonomy, and the Making of Worlds. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
Fällman, D. (2010). A different way of seeing: Albert Borgmann’s philosophy of technology and human–computer interaction. AI & Society, 25(1), 53–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Floridi, L. (ed.) (2010). The Cambridge Handbook of Information and Computer Ethics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Friedman, B. (ed.) (1997). Human Values and the Design of Computer Technology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Friedman, B. and Hendry, D. G. (2019). Value Sensitive Design: Shaping Technology with Moral Imagination. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gasser, U., Ienca, M., Scheibner, J., Sleigh, J. and Vayena, E. (2020). Digital tools against COVID-19: Taxonomy, ethical challenges, and navigation aid. Lancet Digital Health, 2(8), e425–e434.Google Scholar
Geismar, H. and Mohns, W. (2011). Social relationships and digital relationships: Rethinking the database at the Vanuatu Cultural Centre. Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute, 17(S1), S133–S155.Google Scholar
Haveman, H. A. and Gualtieri, G. (2017). Institutional logics. In Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Business and Management, https://oxfordre.com/business/view/10.1093/acrefore/9780190224851.001.0001/acrefore-9780190224851-e-137.Google Scholar
Heikkerö, T. (2005). The good life in a technological world: Focal things and practices in the West and in Japan. Technology in Society, 27(2), 251–259.Google Scholar
Hendry, D. G., Woelfer, J. P. and Duong, T. (2017). U-District Job Co-op: Constructing a future vision for homeless young people and employment. Information Technology & People, 30(3), 602–628.Google Scholar
Huang, Q., Davison, R. M. and Gu, J. (2011). The impact of trust, guanxi orientation and face on the intention of Chinese employees and managers to engage in peer-to-peer tacit and explicit knowledge sharing. Information Systems Journal, 21(6), 557–577.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kewell, B., Adams, R. and Parry, G. (2017). Blockchain for good? Strategic Change, 26(5), 429–437.Google Scholar
Korsgaard, C. M. (1983). Two distinctions in goodness. Philosophical Review, 92(2), 169–195.Google Scholar
Majchrzak, A., Markus, M. L. and Wareham, J. (2016). Designing for digital transformation: Lessons for information systems research from the study of ICT and societal challenges. MIS Quarterly, 40(2), 267–277.Google Scholar
McKenna, B. and Chughtai, H. (2020). Resistance and sexuality in virtual worlds: An LGBT perspective. Computers in Human Behavior, 105, 106–199.Google Scholar
Mingers, J. and Walsham, G. (2010). Toward ethical information systems: The contribution of discourse ethics. MIS Quarterly, 34(4), 833–854.Google Scholar
Myers, M. D., Chughtai, H., Davidson, E. J., Tsibolane, P. and Young, A. G. (2020). Studying the other or becoming the other: Engaging with indigenous peoples in IS research. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 47(1), 382–396.Google Scholar
Myers, M. D. and Venable, J. R. (2014). A set of ethical principles for design science research in information systems. Information & Management, 51(6), 801–809.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ortiz, J. C. A., Young, A. G., Myers, M. D., Bedeley, R. T., Carbaugh, D., Chughtai, H. et al. (2019). Giving voice to the voiceless: The use of digital technologies by marginalized groups. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 45(1), 21–38.Google Scholar
Pálsson, G. (2007). Anthropology and the New Genetics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Pan, S. L. and Zhang, S. (2020). From fighting COVID-19 pandemic to tackling sustainable development goals: An opportunity for responsible information systems research. International Journal of Information Management, 55, 1–6.Google Scholar
Ricard, M. (2014). A Buddhist view of happiness. Journal of Law and Religion, 29(1), 14–29.Google Scholar
Rowe, F. (2020). Contact tracing apps and values dilemmas: A privacy paradox in a neo-liberal world. International Journal of Information Management, 55, 1–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sakurai, M. and Chughtai, H. (2020). Resilience against crises: COVID-19 and lessons from natural disasters. European Journal of Information Systems, 20(5), 585–594.Google Scholar
Sellen, A., Rogers, Y., Harper, R. and Rodden, T. (2009). Reflecting human values in the digital age. Communications of the ACM, 52(3), 58–66.Google Scholar
Sengers, P., Boehner, K., David, S. and Kaye, J. J. (2005). Reflective design. Paper presented at the 4th Decennial Conference on Critical Computing: Between Sense and Sensibility. Aarhus, Denmark.Google Scholar
Srinivasan, R. (2017). Whose Global Village? Rethinking How Technology Shapes Our World. New York, NY: New York University Press.Google Scholar
Tang, Y., Xiong, J., Becerril-Arreola, R. and Iyer, L. (2019). Ethics of blockchain: A framework of technology, applications, impacts, and research directions. Information Technology & People, 33(2), 602–632.Google Scholar
Venable, J. R., Pries‐Heje, J., Bunker, D. and Russo, N. L. (2011). Design and diffusion of systems for human benefit: Toward more humanistic realisation of information systems in society. Information Technology & People, 24(3), 208–216.Google Scholar
Walsham, G. (2012). Are we making a better world with ICTs? Reflections on a future agenda for the IS field. Journal of Information Technology, 27(2), 87–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Winner, L. (1983). Technē and politeia: The technical constitution of society. In Durbin, P. T. and Rapp, F. (eds), Philosophy and Technology. Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Springer, pp. 97–111.Google Scholar
Xiao, X., Tan, B., Leong, C. and Tan, F. T. C. (2021). Powered by ‘Qinghuai’: The melding of traditional values and digital entrepreneurship in contemporary China. Information Systems Journal, 31(6), 769–802.Google Scholar
Young, A. G. (2018). Using ICT for social good: Cultural identity restoration through emancipatory pedagogy. Information Systems Journal, 28(2), 340–358.Google Scholar
Zuboff, S. (2019). The Age of Surveillance Capitalism: The Fight for a Human Future at the New Frontier of Power. New York, NY: Public Affairs.Google Scholar
References
Abbasi, A., Sarker, S. and Chiang, R. (2016). Big data research in information systems: Toward an inclusive research agenda. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 17(2), i–xxxii.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Agarwal, R. and Dhar, V. (2014). Editorial – big data, data science, and analytics: The opportunity and challenge for IS research. Information Systems Research, 25(3), 443–448.Google Scholar
Anderson, C. H., Van Essen, D. C. and Olshausen, B. A. (2005). Directed visual attention and the dynamic control of information flow. In Itti, L., Rees, G. and Tsotsos, J. (eds), Neurobiology of Attention. London, Burlington, MA and San Diego, CA: Elsevier, pp. 11–17.Google Scholar
Bansal, P. T., Smith, W. K. and Vaara, E. (2018). From the editors: New ways of seeing through qualitative research. Academy of Management Journal, 61(4), 1189–1195.Google Scholar
Bengio, Y., Courville, A. and Vincent, P. (2013). Representation learning: A review and new perspectives. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 35(8), 1798–1828.Google Scholar
Berente, N., Seidel, S. and Safadi, H. (2019). Research commentary – data-driven computationally intensive theory development. Information Systems Research, 30(1), 50–64.Google Scholar
Blei, D. M. and Lafferty, J. D. (2007). A correlated topic model of science. Annals of Applied Statistics, 1(1), 17–35.Google Scholar
Blei, D. M., Ng, A. Y. and Jordan, M. I. (2003). Latent dirichlet allocation. Journal of Machine Learning Research, 3, 993–1022.Google Scholar
Brehmer, M., Ingram, S., Stray, J. and Munzner, T. (2014). Overview: The design, adoption, and analysis of a visual document mining tool for investigative journalists. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics, 20(12), 2271–2280.Google Scholar
Charmaz, K. (2006). Constructing Grounded Theory: A Practical Guide through Qualitative Analysis. London: Sage, Vol. 10.Google Scholar
Chau, D. H., Kittur, A., Hong, J. I. and Faloutsos, C. (2011). Apolo: Making sense of large network data by combining rich user interaction and machine learning. In Proceedings of the 2011 Annual Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. New York, NY: ACM Press, Vol. 46, pp. 167–176.Google Scholar
Chuang, J., Manning, C. D. and Heer, J. (2012). Termite: Visualization techniques for assessing textual topic models. In Proceedings of the International Working Conference on Advanced Visual Interfaces. New York, NY: ACM Press, pp. 74–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cilibrasi, R. L. and Vitanyi, P. M. B. (2007). The google similarity distance. IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering, 19(3), 370–383.Google Scholar
Collobert, R. and Weston, J. (2008). A unified architecture for natural language processing. Proceedings of the International Conference on Machine Learning, Helsinki, Finland.Google Scholar
Collobert, R., Weston, J., Bottou, L., Karlen, M., Kavukcuoglu, K. and Kuksa, P. (2000). Natural language processing (almost) from scratch. Journal of Machine Learning Research, 1, 1–48.Google Scholar
Cook, S. D. N. and Brown, J. S. (1999). Bridging epistemologies: The generative dance between organizational knowledge and organizational knowing. Organization Science, 10(4), 381–400.Google Scholar
Dervin, B., Foreman-Wernet, L. and Lauterbach, E. (eds) (2003). Sense-Making Methodology Reader: Selected Writings of Brenda Dervin. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.Google Scholar
DiMaggio, P. (2015). Adapting computational text analysis to social science (and vice versa). Big Data & Society, 2(2), 1–5.Google Scholar
DiMaggio, P., Nag, M. and Blei, D. (2013). Exploiting affinities between topic modeling and the sociological perspective on culture: Application to newspaper coverage of U.S. government arts funding. Poetics, 41(6), 570–606.Google Scholar
Dou, W., Wang, X., Skau, D., Ribarsky, W. and Zhou, M. X. (2012). LeadLine: Interactive visual analysis of text data through event identification and exploration. Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Visual Analytics Science and Technology 2012, Seattle, WA.Google Scholar
Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989). Building theories from case study research. Academy of Management Review, 14(4), 532–550.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eisenstein, J. (2019). Introduction to Natural Language Processing. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Endert, A., Hossain, M. S., Ramakrishnan, N., North, C., Fiaux, P. and Andrews, C. (2014). The human is the loop: New directions for visual analytics. Journal of Intelligent Information Systems, 43(3), 411–435.Google Scholar
Fararo, T. J. and McClelland, K. A. (2006). Introduction: Control systems thinking in sociological theory. In McClelland, K. A. and Fararo, T. J. (eds), Purpose, Meaning, and Action: Control Systems Theories in Sociology. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 1–27.Google Scholar
Finlay, L. (2002). ‘Outing’ the researcher: The provenance, process, and practice of reflexivity. Qualitative Health Research, 12(4), 531–545.Google Scholar
Gaskin, J., Berente, N., Lyytinen, K. and Yoo, Y. (2014). Toward generalizable sociomaterial inquiry: A computational approach for ‘zooming in & out’ of sociomaterial routines. MIS Quarterly, 38(3), 849–871.Google Scholar
George, G., Osinga, E. C., Lavie, D. and Scott, B. A. (2016). Big data and data science methods for management research. Academy of Management Journal, 59(5), 1493–1507.Google Scholar
Gioia, D. A., Corley, K. G. and Hamilton, A. L. (2013). Seeking qualitative rigor in inductive research: Notes on the Gioia methodology. Organizational Research Methods, 16(1), 15–31.Google Scholar
Glaser, B. G. (2013). No Preconceptions: The Grounded Theory Dictum. Mill Valley, CA: Sociology Press.Google Scholar
Glaser, B. G. (2005). The Grounded Theory Perspective III: Theoretical Coding. Mill Valley, CA: Sociology Press.Google Scholar
Glaser, B. G. (1978). Theoretical Sensitivity: Advances in the Methodology of Grounded Theory. Mill Valley, CA: Sociology Press.Google Scholar
Glaser, B. G. and Strauss, A. L. (1967). The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research. New York, NY: Aldine de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Gotz, D., Zhou, M. X. and Aggarwal, V. (2006). Interactive visual synthesis of analytic knowledge. Proceedings of the IEEE Symposium on Visual Analytics Science and Technology 2006, Baltimore, MD.Google Scholar
Greenwald, A. G. (2012). There is nothing so theoretical as a good method. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 7(2), 99–108.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Grimmer, J. and Stewart, B. M. (2013). Text as data: The promise and pitfalls of automatic content analysis methods for political texts. Political Analysis, 21(3), 267–297.Google Scholar
Hannigan, T., Haans, R. F. J., Vakili, K., Tchalian, H., Glaser, V. L. et al. (2019). Topic modeling in management research: Rendering new theory from textual data. Academy of Management Annals, 13(2), 586–632.Google Scholar
Hegarty, M. (2004). Diagrams in the mind and in the world: Relations between internal and external visualizations. In Blackwell, A. F., Marriott, K. and Shimojima, A. (eds), Diagrammatic Representation and Inference: Third International Conference, Diagrams 2004, Cambridge, UK. Proceedings. Berlin and Heidelberg, Germany: Springer, pp. 1–13.Google Scholar
Heimerl, F., Lohmann, S., Lange, S. and Ertl, T. (2014). Word cloud explorer: Text analytics based on word clouds. Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, Waikoloa, HI.Google Scholar
Hindman, M. (2015). Building better models: Prediction, replication, and machine learning in the social sciences. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 659(1), 48–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hukal, P., Henfridsson, O., Shaikh, M. and Parker, G. (2020). Platform signaling for generating platform content. MIS Quarterly: Management Information Systems, 44(3), 1177–1206.Google Scholar
Johnson, S. L., Gray, P. and Sarker, S. (2019). Revisiting IS research practice in the era of big data. Information and Organization, 29(1), 41–56.Google Scholar
Kirsh, D. (2009). Interaction, external representation and sense making. In Taatgen, N. A. and van Rijn, H. (eds), Proceedings of the 31st Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society. Austin, TX: Cognitive Science Society, pp. 1103–1108.Google Scholar
Klein, D., Smarr, J., Nguyen, H. and Manning, C. D. (2003). Named entity recognition with character-level models. Proceedings of the Conference on Natural Language Learning at HLT-NAACL 2003, Edmonton, Canada, Vol. 4, pp. 180–183.Google Scholar
Klein, G., Moon, B. and Hoffman, R. R. (2006a). Making sense of sensemaking 1: Alternative perspectives. IEEE Intelligent Systems, 21(4), 70–73.Google Scholar
Klein, G., Moon, B. and Hoffman, R. R. (2006b). Making sense of sensemaking 2: A macrocognitive model. IEEE Intelligent Systems, 21(5), 88–92.Google Scholar
Kucher, K. and Kerren, A. (2019). Text visualization revisited: The state of the field in 2019. In Madeiras Pereira, J. and Raidou, R. G. (eds), EuroVis 2019 – Posters. The Eurographics Association, pp. 29–31.Google Scholar
Kucher, K. and Kerren, A. (2015). Text visualization techniques: Taxonomy, visual survey, and community insights. 2015 IEEE Pacific Visualization Symposium (pacificVis), Hangzhou, China.Google Scholar
Kumar, A., Irsoy, O., Su, J., Iyyer, M., Bradbury, J. et al. (2015). Ask me anything: Dynamic memory networks for natural language processing. ArXiv, pp. 1–10, http://arxiv.org/abs/1506.07285.Google Scholar
Landauer, T. K., McNamara, D. S., Dennis, S. and Kintsch, W. (2013). Handbook of Latent Semantic Analysis. London: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
Langley, A. (1999). Strategies for theorizing from process data. Academy of Management Review, 24(4), 691–710.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Larkin, J. and Simon, H. (1987). Why a diagram is (sometimes) worth ten thousand words. Cognitive Science, 11(1), 65–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Latour, B. (2010). Tarde’s idea of quantification. In Candea, M. (ed.), The Social after Gabriel Tarde: Debates and Assessments. New York, NY: Routledge, pp. 145–162.Google Scholar
Lazer, D., Pentland, A. S., Adamic, L., Aral, S., Barabasi, A.-L., Brewer, D. et al. (2009). Life in the network: The coming age of computational social science. Science, 323(5915), 721–723.Google Scholar
LeCun, Y., Bengio, Y. and Hinton, G. (2015). Deep learning. Nature, 521(7553), 436–444.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lee, A. S. (1989). A scientific methodology for MIS case studies. MIS Quarterly, 13(1), 33–50.Google Scholar
Levina, N. and Arriaga, M. (2014). Distinction and status production on user-generated content platforms: Using Bourdieu’s theory of cultural production to understand social dynamics in online fields. Information Systems Research, 25(3), 468–488.Google Scholar
Levina, N. and Vaast, E. (2015). Leveraging archival data from online communities for grounded process theorizing. In Elsbach, K. D. and Kramer, R. M. (eds), Handbook of Qualitative Organizational Research: Innovative Pathways and Methods. Abingdon, UK and New York, NY: Routledge, pp. 215–224.Google Scholar
Lindberg, A. (2020). Developing theory through integrating human and machine pattern recognition. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 21(1), 90–116.Google Scholar
Liu, Z., Nersessian, N. and Stasko, J. (2008). Distributed cognition as a theoretical framework for information visualization. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics, 14(6), 1173–1180.Google Scholar
Maitlis, S. and Christianson, M. (2014). Sensemaking in organizations: Taking stock and moving forward. Academy of Management Annals, 8(1), 57–125.Google Scholar
Manning, C. D., Schütze, H. and Raghavan, P. (2008). Introduction to Information Retrieval. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
McCallum, A. K. (2002). Mallet: A machine learning for language toolkit, http://mallet.cs.umass.edu.Google Scholar
McKenna, B., Myers, M. D. and Newman, M. (2017). Social media in qualitative research: Challenges and recommendations. Information and Organization, 27(2), 87–99.Google Scholar
Mikolov, T., Yih, W. and Zweig, G. (2013). Linguistic regularities in continuous space word representations. Proceedings of NAACL-HLT, Atlanta, GA.Google Scholar
Miller, G. A. (1984). Informavores. In Machlup, F. and Mansfield, U. (eds), The Study of Information: Interdisciplinary Messages. New York, NY: Wiley-Interscience, pp. 111–113.Google Scholar
Mohr, J. W. and Bogdanov, P. (2013). Introduction – topic models: What they are and why they matter. Poetics, 41(6), 545–569.Google Scholar
Morse, J. M., Stern, P. N., Corbin, J. M., Charmaz, K. C., Bowers, B. and Clarke, A. E. (2009). Developing Grounded Theory: The Second Generation, Vol. 5: Developing Qualitative Inquiry. Walnut Creek, CA: Left Coast Press.Google Scholar
Müller, O., Debortoli, S., Junglas, I. and vom Brocke, J. (2016). Using text analytics to derive customer service management benefits from unstructured data. MIS Quarterly Executive, 15(4), 243–258.Google Scholar
Neef, D. (2014). Digital Exhaust: What Everyone Should Know about Big Data, Digitization and Digitally Driven Innovation. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.Google Scholar
Neisser, U. (1976). Cognition and Reality: Principles and Implications of Cognitive Psychology. San Francisco, CA: W. H. Freeman/Times Books/Henry Holt & Co.Google Scholar
Nicolini, D. (2009). Zooming in and out: Studying practices by switching theoretical lenses and trailing connections. Organization Studies, 30(12), 1391–1418.Google Scholar
Østerlund, C., Crowston, K. and Jackson, C. (2020). Building an apparatus: Refractive, reflective, and diffractive readings of trace data. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 21(1), 1–22.Google Scholar
Pan, S. L. and Tan, B. (2011). Demystifying case research: A structured-pragmatic-situational (SPS) approach to conducting case studies. Information and Organization, 21(3), 161–176.Google Scholar
Pentland, B., Recker, J., Wolf, J. and Wyner, G. M. (2020). Bringing context inside process research with digital trace data. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 21(5), 1214–1236.Google Scholar
Pentland, B. T. (2016). ThreadNet: Tracing and visualizing associations between actions. IFIP Working Group 8.2, Dublin, Ireland.Google Scholar
Pirolli, P. and Card, S. (2005). The sensemaking process and leverage points for analyst technology as identified through cognitive task analysis. Proceedings of International Conference on Intelligence Analysis, McLean, VA.Google Scholar
Pirolli, P. and Card, S. (1999). Information foraging. Psychological Review, 106(4), 643–675.Google Scholar
Polanyi, M. (1962). Tacit knowing: Its bearing on some problems of philosophy. Reviews of Modern Physics, 34(4), 601–616.Google Scholar
Rehurek, R. and Sojka, P. (2010). Software framework for topic modelling with large corpora. Proceedings of LREC 2010 Workshop on New Challenges for NLP Frameworks, Valletta, Malta.Google Scholar
Richardson, R. and Kramer, E. H. (2006). Abduction as the type of inference that characterizes the development of a grounded theory. Qualitative Research, 6(4), 497–513.Google Scholar
Rosen-Zvi, M., Chemudugunta, C., Griffiths, T., Smyth, P. and Steyvers, M. (2010). Learning author-topic models from text corpora. ACM Transactions on Information Systems (TOIS), 28(1), 1–38.Google Scholar
Russell, D. M., Stefik, M. J., Pirolli, P. and Card, S. K. (1993). The cost structure of sensemaking. Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI’93), Amsterdam, the Netherlands.Google Scholar
Safadi, H. (2015). Knowledge creation in health IT online communities. Thesis, McGill University Libraries, https://escholarship.mcgill.ca/concern/theses/ng451m74d.Google Scholar
Safadi, H. and Boudreau, M.-C. (2017). Design of an interactive visual system to support grounded process theorizing from qualitative data. Academy of Management Proceedings, 2017, 11597.Google Scholar
Safadi, H., Johnson, S. L. and Faraj, S. (2020). Who contributes knowledge? Core-periphery tension in online innovation communities. Organization Science, 32(3), 752–775.Google Scholar
Satoshi Sekine, K. S. and Nobata, C. (2002). Extended named entity hierarchy. Third International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC 2002), Las Palmas, Spain.Google Scholar
Schirner, G., Erdogmus, D., Chowdhury, K. and Padir, T. (2013). The future of human-in-the-loop cyber-physical systems. Computer, 46(1), 36–45.Google Scholar
Schmiedel, T., Müller, O. and vom Brocke, J. (2019). Topic modeling as a strategy of inquiry in organizational research: A tutorial with an application example on organizational culture. Organizational Research Methods, 22(4), 941–968.Google Scholar
Schultze, U. (2012). Performing embodied identity in virtual worlds. European Journal of Information Systems, 23(1), 84–95.Google Scholar
Seale, C. (1999). Quality in qualitative research. Qualitative Inquiry, 5(4), 465–478.Google Scholar
Shirley, P., Ashikhmin, M. and Marschner, S. (2015). Fundamentals of Computer Graphics. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.Google Scholar
Shrinivasan, Y. B. and van Wijk, J. J. (2008). Supporting the analytical reasoning process in information visualization. Proceedings of the Annual CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Florence, Italy.Google Scholar
Sievert, C. and Shirley, K. (2014). LDAvis: A method for visualizing and interpreting topics. Proceedings of the Workshop on Interactive Language Learning, Visualization, and Interfaces, Baltimore, MD.Google Scholar
Singhal, A. (2012). Introducing the knowledge graph: Things, not strings. https://blog.google/products/search/introducing-knowledge-graph-things-not/.Google Scholar
Socher, R., Perelygin, A., Wu, J. Y., Chuang, J., Manning, C. D., Ng, A. and Potts, C. (2013). Recursive deep models for semantic compositionality over a sentiment treebank. Proceedings of the Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, Seattle, WA.Google Scholar
Stasko, J., Görg, C. and Spence, R. (2008). Jigsaw: Supporting investigative analysis through interactive visualization. Information Visualization, 7(2), 118–132.Google Scholar
Stohl, C., Stohl, M. and Leonardi, P. M. (2016). Managing opacity: Information visibility and the paradox of transparency in the digital age. International Journal of Communication, 10(1), 123–137.Google Scholar
Strauss, A. L. and Corbin, J. M. (1998). Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, Vol. 2.Google Scholar
Suddaby, R. (2006). From the editors: What grounded theory is not. Academy of Management Journal, 49(4), 633–642.Google Scholar
Thomas, G. and James, D. (2006). Reinventing grounded theory: Some questions about theory, ground and discovery. British Educational Research Journal, 32(6), 767–795.Google Scholar
Tsoukas, H. (2009). A dialogical approach to the creation of new knowledge in organizations. Organization Science, 20(6), 941–957.Google Scholar
Turian, J., Ratinov, L., Bengio, Y. and Turian, J. (2010). Word representations: A simple and general method for semi-supervised learning. Proceedings of the 48th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, Uppsala, Sweden.Google Scholar
Tweed, A. and Charmaz, K. (2011). Grounded theory methods for mental health practitioners. In Harper, D. and Thompson, A. R. (eds), Qualitative Research Methods in Mental Health and Psychotherapy: A Guide for Students and Practitioners. Chichester, UK: John Wiley, pp. 131–146.Google Scholar
Urquhart, C. (2013). Grounded Theory for Qualitative Research: A Practical Guide. London and Los Angeles, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Urquhart, C., Lehmann, H. and Myers, M. D. (2010). Putting the ‘theory’ back into grounded theory: Guidelines for grounded theory studies in information systems. Information Systems Journal, 20(4), 357–381.Google Scholar
Vaast, E., Safadi, H. and Cohen, L. (2015). The distributed construction of an occupational community with social media. International Conference of Information Systems, Fort Worth, TX.Google Scholar
Vaast, E., Safadi, H., Lapointe, L. and Negoita, B. (2017). Social media affordances for connective action: An examination of microblogging use during the Gulf of Mexico oil spill. MIS Quarterly, 41(4), 1179–1205.Google Scholar
Van de Ven, A. and Poole, M. (1990). Methods for studying innovation development in the Minnesota innovation research program. Organization Science, 1(3), 313–335.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Venkatesh, V., Brown, S. A. and Bala, H. (2013). Bridging the qualitative-quantitative divide: Guidelines for conducting mixed methods research in information systems. MIS Quarterly, 37(1), 21–54.Google Scholar
Walsh, I., Holton, J. A., Bailyn, L., Fernandez, W., Levina, N. and Glaser, B. (2015). What grounded theory is … a critically reflective conversation among scholars. Organizational Research Methods, 18(4), 1–19.Google Scholar
Walsh, R. A. (1995). The approach of the human science researcher: Implications for the practice of qualitative research. Humanistic Psychologist, 23(3), 333–344.Google Scholar
Ware, C. (2012). Information Visualization: Perception for Design. Waltham, MA: Elsevier.Google Scholar
Watts, D. J. (2013). Computational social science: Exciting progress and future directions. Bridge on Frontiers of Engineering, 43(4), 5–10.Google Scholar
Wright, W., Schroh, D., Proulx, P., Skaburskis, A. and Cort, B. (2006). The Sandbox for analysis: Concepts and methods. Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.Google Scholar
Xiong, C., Merity, S. and Socher, R. (2016). Dynamic memory networks for visual and textual question answering. Proceedings of the International Conference on Machine Learning, New York, NY.Google Scholar
Zachariadis, M., Scott, S. and Barrett, M. (2013). Methodological implications of critical realism for mixed-methods research. Management Information Systems Quarterly, 37(3), 855–879.Google Scholar
Zuboff, S. (2015). Big other: Surveillance capitalism and the prospects of an information civilization. Journal of Information Technology, 30(1), 75–89.Google Scholar
References
Atkinson, P. and Hammersley, M. (2007). Ethnography: Principles in Practice. New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
Avital, M., Mathiassen, L. and Schultze, U. (2017). Alternative genres in information systems research. European Journal of Information Systems, 26(3), 240–247.Google Scholar
Baym, N. K. (2000). Tune in, Log on: Soaps, Fandom, and Online Community. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Boellstorff, T. (2008). Coming of Age in Second Life: An Anthropologist Explores the Virtually Human. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Boellstorff, T., Nardi, B., Pearce, C. and Taylor, T. L. (2012). Ethnography and Virtual Worlds: A Handbook of Method. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Burrell, J. (2016). How the machine ‘thinks’: Understanding opacity in machine learning algorithms. Big Data and Society, 3(1), 1–12.Google Scholar
Burrell, J. (2009). The field site as a network: A strategy for locating ethnographic research. Field Methods, 21(2), 181–199.Google Scholar
Christin, A. (2020). The ethnographer and the algorithm: Beyond the black box. Theory and Society, 49(5–6), 897–918.Google Scholar
Coleman, E. G. (2010). Ethnographic approaches to digital media. Annual Review of Anthropology, 39(1), 487–505.Google Scholar
Coleman, G. (2014). Hacker, Hoaxer, Whistleblower, Spy: The Many Faces of Anonymous. London: Verso Books.Google Scholar
Eckhardt, A., Endter, F., Giordano, A. and Somers, P. (2019). Three stages to a virtual workforce. MIS Quarterly Executive, 18(1), 19–35.Google Scholar
Emerson, R. M., Fretz, R. I. and Shaw, L. L. (2011). Writing Ethnographic Fieldnotes. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Erickson, I. (2019). Working, being, and researching in place: A mixed methodological approach for understanding digital experiences. In Mir, R. and Jain, S. (eds), The Routledge Companion to Qualitative Research in Organization Studies. New York, NY: Routledge, pp. 291–305.Google Scholar
Erickson, I. (2010). Geography and community: New forms of interaction among people and places. American Behavioral Scientist, 53(8), 1194–1207.Google Scholar
Gaskin, J., Berente, N., Lyytinen, K. and Yoo, Y. (2014). Toward generalizable sociomaterial inquiry: A computational approach for zooming in and out of sociomaterial routines. MIS Quarterly, 38(3), 849–872.Google Scholar
Hafner, K. and Lyon, M. (1998). Where Wizards Stay up Late: The Origins of the Internet. New York, NY: Simon & Schuster.Google Scholar
Hedman, J., Srinivasan, N. and Lindgren, R. (2013). Digital traces of information systems: Sociomateriality made researchable. International Conference on Information Systems, Milan, Italy.Google Scholar
Hine, C. (2017). From the virtual to the embedded, embodied, everyday internet. In Hjorth, L., Horst, H., Galloway, A. and Bell, G. (eds), The Routledge Companion to Digital Ethnography. Abingdon, UK and New York, NY: Routledge, pp. 21–29.Google Scholar
Hine, C. (2015). Ethnography for the Internet: Embedded, Embodied and Everyday. Milton Park, UK: Bloomsbury Academic.Google Scholar
Howison, J., Wiggins, A. and Crowston, K. (2011). Validity issues in the use of social network analysis with digital trace data. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 12(12), 767–797.Google Scholar
Hultin, L. (2019). On becoming a sociomaterial researcher: Exploring epistemological practices grounded in a relational, performative ontology. Information and Organization, 29(2), 91–104.Google Scholar
Malinowski, B. (1922). Argonauts of the Western Pacific: An Account of Native Enterprise and Adventure in the Archipelagoes of Melanesian New Guinea. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Markham, A. and Baym, N. (2009). Internet Inquiry: Conversations about Method. London: Sage.Google Scholar
Mol, A. (2002). The Body Multiple: Ontology in Medical Practice. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
Möhlmann, M. and Zalmanson, L. (2018). Hands on the wheel: Navigating algorithmic management and Uber drivers. International Conference on Information Systems, Seoul, South Korea.Google Scholar
Oates, B. J. (2006). Researching Information Systems and Computing. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
O’Neil, C. (2016). Weapons of Math Destruction: How Big Data Increases Inequality and Threatens Democracy. Portland, OR: Broadway Books.Google Scholar
Østerlund, C., Crowston, K. and Jackson, C. (2020). Building an apparatus: Refractive, reflective, and diffractive readings of trace data. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 21(1), 1–22.Google Scholar
Ottenberg, S. (2019). Thirty years of fieldnotes: Changing relationships to the text. In Sanjek, R. (ed.), Fieldnotes. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, pp. 139–160.Google Scholar
Pink, S., Horst, H., Postill, J., Hjorth, L., Lewis, T. and Tacchi, J. (2016). Digital Ethnography: Principles and Practice. London: Sage.Google Scholar
Postill, J. and Pink, S. (2012). Social media ethnography: The digital researcher in a messy web. Media International Australia, 145(1), 123–134.Google Scholar
Przybylski, L. (2020). Hybrid Ethnography: Online, Offline, and in between. London: Sage.Google Scholar
Rogers, R. (2009). The End of the Virtual: Digital Methods. Amsterdam, the Netherlands: Amsterdam University Press.Google Scholar
Rosenblat, A. (2018). Uberland: How Algorithms Are Rewriting the Rules of Work. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Schultze, U. (2010). Embodiment and presence in virtual worlds: A review. Journal of Information Technology, 25(4), 434–449.Google Scholar
Schultze, U. (2000). A confessional account of an ethnography about knowledge work. MIS Quarterly: Management Information Systems, 24(1), 3–40.Google Scholar
Scott, S. V. and Orlikowski, W. J. (2012). Reconfiguring relations of accountability: Materialization of social media in the travel sector. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 37(1), 26–40.Google Scholar
Seaver, N. (2017). Algorithms as culture: Some tactics for the ethnography of algorithmic systems. Big Data and Society, 4(2), 1–12.Google Scholar
Sergeeva, A. V., Faraj, S. and Huysman, M. (2020). Losing touch: An embodiment perspective on coordination in robotic surgery. Organization Science, 31(5), 1248–1271.Google Scholar
Vaast, E. and Urquhart, C. (2018). Building grounded theory with social media data. In Mir, R. and Jain, S. (eds), The Routledge Companion to Qualitative Research in Organization Studies. New York, NY: Routledge, pp. 408–421.Google Scholar
Van Maanen, J. (2011). Tales of the Field: On Writing Ethnography, 2nd edition. Chicago, IL: Chicago University Press.Google Scholar
Venturini, T. (2010). Diving in magma: How to explore controversies with actor-network theory. Public Understanding of Science, 19(3), 258–273.Google Scholar
References
Aczel, P. (2016). Case study method. International Journal of Sales, Retailing and Marketing, 4(9), 15–22.Google Scholar
Andersen, J. V. and Bogusz, C. I. (2019). Self-organizing in blockchain infrastructures: Generativity through shifting objectives and forking. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 20(9), 1242–1275.Google Scholar
Avgerou, C. (2019). Contextual explanation: Alternative approaches and persistent challenges. MIS Quarterly, 43(3), 977–1006.Google Scholar
Avgerou, C. (2001). The significance of context in information systems and organizational change. Information Systems Journal, 11(1), 43–63.Google Scholar
Baskerville, R. (1999). Investigating information systems with action research. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 2(19), 1–32.Google Scholar
Benbasat, I., Goldstein, D. and Mead, M. (1987). The case research strategy in studies of information systems. MIS Quarterly, 11(3), 368–386.Google Scholar
Bryant, A., Black, A., Land, F. and Porra, J. (2013). Information systems history: What is history? What is IS history? What IS history? … and why even bother with history? Journal of Information Technology, 28(1), 1–17.Google Scholar
Cavaye, A. L. (1996). Case study research: A multi‐faceted research approach for IS. Information Systems Journal, 6(3), 227–242.Google Scholar
Cecez-Kecmanovic, D. (2011). On methods, methodologies and how they matter. European Conference on Information Systems, Helsinki, Finland.Google Scholar
Chanias, S., Myers, M. D. and Hess, T. (2019). Digital transformation strategy making in pre-digital organizations: The case of a financial services provider. Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 28(1), 17–33.Google Scholar
Chen, W. and Hirschheim, R. (2004). A paradigmatic and methodological examination of information systems research from 1991 to 2001. Information Systems Journal, 14(3), 197–235.Google Scholar
Cohen, M., Kahn, D. and Steeves, R. (2000). How to analyze the data. In Cohen, M., Kahn, D. and Steeves, R. (eds), Hermeneutic Phenomenological Research: A Practical Guide for Researchers. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, pp. 71–85.Google Scholar
Crotty, M. (1998). The Foundations of Social Research: Meaning and Perspective in the Research Process. London: Sage.Google Scholar
Darke, P., Shanks, G. and Broadbent, M. (1998). Successfully completing case study research: Combining rigour, relevance and pragmatism. Information Systems Journal, 8(4), 273–289.Google Scholar
Davis, G. (2000). Information systems conceptual foundations: Looking backward and forward. In Baskerville, R., Stage, J. and DeGross, J. (eds), Organizational and Social Perspectives on Information Technology. Boston, MA: Kluwer, pp. 61–82.Google Scholar
Denzin, N. K. (1983). Interpretive interactionism. In Morgan, G. (ed.), Beyond Method: Strategies for Social Research. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage, pp. 129–146.Google Scholar
Diefenbach, T. (2009). Are case studies more than sophisticated storytelling?: Methodological problems of qualitative empirical research mainly based on semi-structured interviews. Quality & Quantity, 43(6), 875–894.Google Scholar
Du, W. D., Pan, S. L., Leidner, D. E. and Ying, W. (2019). Affordances, experimentation and actualization of FinTech: A blockchain implementation study. Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 28(1), 50–65.Google Scholar
Dubé, L. and Paré, G. (2003). Rigor in information systems positivist case research: Current practices, trends, and recommendations. MIS Quarterly, 27(4), 597–636.Google Scholar
Eisenhardt, K. (1989). Building theories from case study research. Academy of Management Review, 14(4), 532–550.Google Scholar
Ezzy, D. (2002). Qualitative Analysis: Practice and Innovation. Crows Nest, NSW: Allen & Unwin.Google Scholar
Faraj, S. and Johnson, L. (2011). Network exchange patterns in online communities. Organization Science, 22(6), 1464–1480.Google Scholar
Fitzgerald, G. and Russo, N. (2005). The turnaround of the London ambulance service computer-aided despatch system. European Journal of Information Systems, 14(3), 244–257.Google Scholar
Flyvbjerg, B. (2011). Case study. In Denzin, N. K. and Lincoln, Y. S. (eds), The Sage Handbook of Qualitative Research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, pp. 301–316.Google Scholar
Gable, G. G. (1994). Integrating case study and survey research methods: An example in information systems. European Journal of Information Systems, 3(2), 112–126.Google Scholar
Gagnon, Y. (2010). The Case Study as Research Method: A Practical Handbook. Quebec: Presses de l’Université du Québec.Google Scholar
Gaskin, J., Berente, N., Lyttinen, K. and Yoo, Y. (2014). Towards generalizable sociomaterial inquiry: A computational approach for zooming in and out of sociomaterial routines. MIS Quarterly, 38(3), 850–871.Google Scholar
Gerring, J. (2006). Case Study Research: Principles and Practices. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Glaser, B. and Strauss, A. (1967). The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research. Chicago, IL: Aldine.Google Scholar
Glaser, B. and Strauss, A. (1965). Temporal aspects as a non-scheduled status passage. American Journal of Sociology, 71(1), 48–59.Google Scholar
Grover, V., Lindberg, A., Benbasat, I. and Lyytinen, K. (2020). The perils and promises of big data research in information systems. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 21(2), 268–293.Google Scholar
Hanseth, O. and Lyytinen, K. (2010). Design theory for dynamic complexity in information infrastructures: The case of building internet. Journal of Information Technology, 25(1), 1–18.Google Scholar
Harrison, H., Birks, M., Franklin, R. and Mills, J. (2017). Case study research: Foundations and methodological orientations. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung/Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 18(1), 1–17.Google Scholar
Hirschheim, R. and Klein, H. K. (2012). A glorious and not-so-short history of the information systems field. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 13(4), 188–235.Google Scholar
Howison, J., Wiggins, A. and Crowston, K. (2011). Validity issues in the use of social network analysis with digital trace data. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 12(12), 767–787.Google Scholar
Johansson, R. (2003). Case study methodology. A keynote speech at the International Conference ‘Methodologies in Research’ organized by the Royal Institute of Technology in cooperation with the International Association of People–Environment Studies, Stockholm, Sweden.Google Scholar
Kaplan, B. and Duchon, D. (1988). Combining qualitative and quantitative methods in information systems research: A case study. MIS Quarterly, 12(4), 571–586.Google Scholar
Kenny, M. and Fourie, R. (2014). Tracing the history of grounded theory methodology: From formation to fragmentation. Qualitative Report, 19(52), 1–9.Google Scholar
Kitchin, R. (2014). Big data, new epistemologies and paradigm shifts. Big Data Society, 1(1), 1–12.Google Scholar
Klein, H. and Myers, M. D. (1999). A set of principles for conducting and evaluating interpretive field studies in information systems. MIS Quarterly, 23(1), 67–93.Google Scholar
Kling, J. L. (2004). Rob Kling and the Irvine School. Information Society: An International Journal, 20(2), 97–99.Google Scholar
Lee, A. S. (1989). A scientific methodology for MIS case studies. MIS Quarterly, 13(1), 33–50.Google Scholar
Lee, A. S. and Baskerville, R. (2012). Conceptualizing generalizability: New contributions and a reply. MIS Quarterly, 36(3), 749–761.Google Scholar
Lee, A. S. and Baskerville, R. (2003). Generalizing generalizability in information systems research. Information Systems Research, 14(3), 221–243.Google Scholar
Lengermann, P. (1978). The founding of the American Sociological Review: The anatomy of a rebellion. American Sociological Review, 44(2), 185–198.Google Scholar
Leong, C., Pan, S., Bahri, S. and Fauzi, A. (2019). Social media empowerment in social movements: Power activation and power accrual in digital activism. European Journal of Information Systems, 28(2), 173–204.Google Scholar
Mann, F. C. and Williams, L. K. (1960). Observations on the dynamics of a change to electronic data-processing equipment. Administrative Science Quarterly, 5(2), 216–256.Google Scholar
Markus, M. L. (1981). Implementation politics: Top management support and user involvement. Systems, Objectives, Solutions, 1(4), 203–215.Google Scholar
Merriam, S. (2009). Qualitative Research: A Guide to Design and Implementation. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
Merriam, S. (1998). Qualitative Research and Case Study Applications in Education. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
Miles, M. (1978). Qualitative data as an attractive nuisance: The problem of analysis. Administrative Science Quarterly, 24(4), 590–601.Google Scholar
Miles, M. and Huberman, A. (1994). Qualitative Data Analysis: An Expanded Sourcebook. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Mingers, J. (2003). The paucity of multimethod research: A review of the information systems literature. Information Systems Journal, 13(3), 234–249.Google Scholar
Modell, S. (2005). Triangulation between case study and survey methods in management accounting research: An assessment of validity implications. Management Accounting Research, 16(2), 231–254.Google Scholar
Myers, M. D. (2013). Qualitative Research in Business and Management, 2nd edition. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Myers, M. D. (1999). Investigating information systems with ethnographic research. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 2(23), 1–19.Google Scholar
Orlikowski, W. J. and Baroudi, J. J. (1991). Studying information technology in organizations: Research approaches and assumptions. Information Systems Research, 2(1), 1–28.Google Scholar
Pan, S. L. and Tan, B. (2011). Demystifying case research: A structured–pragmatic–situational (SPS) approach to conducting case studies. Information and Organization, 21(3), 161–176.Google Scholar
Peng, G. C. and Nunes, M. (2009). Identification and assessment of risks associated with ERP post‐implementation in China. Journal of Enterprise Information Management, 22(5), 587–614.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peng, G. C., Nunes, M. and Annansingh, F. (2011). Investigating information systems with mixed-methods research. Proceedings of the International Workshop on Information Systems Research Trends, Approaches and Methodologies, Rome, Italy.Google Scholar
Pentland, T., Recker, J., Wolf, J. R. and Wyner, G. (2020). Bringing context inside process research with digital trace data. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 21(5), 1214–1236.Google Scholar
Pettigrew, A. M. (2012). Context and action in the transformation of the firm: A reprise. Journal of Management Studies, 49(7), 1304–1328.Google Scholar
Pettigrew, A. M. (1987). Context and action in the transformation of the firm. Journal of Management Studies, 24(6), 649–670.Google Scholar
Pinsonneault, A. and Kraemer, K. (1993). Survey research methodology in management information systems: An assessment. Journal of Management Information Systems, 10(2), 75–105.Google Scholar
Rockart, J. and Flannery, L. (1983). The management of end-user computing. Communications of the ACM, 26(10), 776–785.Google Scholar
Sarker, S., Xiao, X., Beaulieu, T. and Lee, A. S. (2018a). Learning from first-generation qualitative approaches in the IS discipline: An evolutionary view and some implications for authors and evaluators (part 1/2). Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 19(8), 752–774.Google Scholar
Sarker, S., Xiao, X., Beaulieu, T. and Lee, A. S. (2018b). Learning from first-generation qualitative approaches in the IS discipline: An evolutionary view and some implications for authors and evaluators (part 2/2). Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 19(9), 909–923.Google Scholar
Steel, D., Gonnerman, C. and O’Rourke, M. (2017). Scientists’ attitudes on science and values: Case studies and survey methods in philosophy of science. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science, 63(2017), 22–30.Google Scholar
Strauss, A. and Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of Qualitative Research: Grounded Theory Procedures and Techniques. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Strauss, A. and Corbin, J. (1994). Grounded theory methodology: An overview. In Denzin, N. K. and Lincoln, Y. S. (eds), Handbook of Qualitative Research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, pp. 273–285.Google Scholar
Tellis, W. (1997). The Qualitative Report, https://nsuworks.nova.edu/tqr/vol3/iss2/4/.Google Scholar
Tsang, E. W. (2014). Case studies and generalization in information systems research: A critical realist perspective. Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 23(2), 174–186.Google Scholar
Tumele, S. (2015). Case study research. International Journal of Sales, Retailing & Marketing, 4(9), 68–78.Google Scholar
Vaast, E., Safadi, H., Lapointe, L. and Negoita, B. (2017). Social media affordances for connective action: An examination of microblogging use during the Gulf of Mexico oil spill. MIS Quarterly, 41(4), 1178–1205.Google Scholar
Venkatesh, V., Brown, A. and Bala, H. (2013). Bridging the qualitative-quantitative divide: Guide for conducting mixed methods research in information systems. MIS Quarterly, 37(1), 855–878.Google Scholar
Walsham, G. (1995). Interpretive case studies in IS research: Nature and method. European Journal of Information Systems, 4(2), 74–81.Google Scholar
Walsham, G. (1993). Interpreting Information Systems in Organizations. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.Google Scholar
Wellman, B. and Starr, R. H. (2004). Sociological Rob: How Rob Kling brought computing and sociology. Information Society: An International Journal, 20(2), 91–95.Google Scholar
Yazan, B. (2015). Three approaches to case study methods in education: Yin, Merriam, and Stake. Qualitative Report, 20(2), 134–152.Google Scholar
Yin, R. K. (2018). Case Study Research and Applications, 6th edition. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Yin, R. K. (2009). How to do better case studies. In Bickman, L. and Rog, D. (eds), The SAGE Handbook of Applied Social Research Methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, pp. 256–280.Google Scholar
References
Ahmed, W. (2019). Using Twitter as a data source: An overview of social media research tools. LSE Impact Blog, https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2019/06/18/using-twitter-as-a-data-source-an-overview-of-social-media-research-tools-2019/.Google Scholar
Ameripour, A., Nicholson, B. and Newman, M. (2010). Conviviality of internet social networks: An exploratory study of Internet campaigns in Iran. Journal of Information Technology, 25(2), 244–257.Google Scholar
Amrollahi, A. and Rowlands, B. (2017). Collaborative open strategic planning: A method and case study. Information Technology & People, 30(4), 832–852.Google Scholar
Arriagada, A. and Ibanez, F. (2020). Content creators and platform evolution in the social media ecology. Social Media + Society, 6(3), 1–12.Google Scholar
Assenmacher, D., Clever, L., Frischlich, L., Quandt, T. D., Trautmann, H. and Grimme, C. G. (2020). Demystifying social bots: On the intelligence of automated social media actors. Social Media+ Society, 6(3), 1–16.Google Scholar
Baptista, J., Stein, M. K., Klein, S., Watson-Manheim, M. and Lee, J. (2020). Digital work and organisational transformation: Emergent digital work configurations in modern organisations. Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 29(2), 6–16.Google Scholar
Baptista, J., Wilson, A. D., Galliers, R. D. and Bynghall, S. (2017). Social media and the emergence of reflexiveness as a new capability for open strategy. Long Range Planning, 50(3), 322–336.Google Scholar
Beckmann, C. and Langer, R. O. (2005). Netnographie. In Buber, R. (ed.), Qualitative Marktforschung Konzepte – Methoden – Analysen. Wiesbaden, Germany: Gabler, pp. 216–226.Google Scholar
Berthod, O. P., Grothe-Hammer, M. and Sydow, J. (2016). Network ethnography: A mixed-method approach for the study of practices in interorganizational settings. Organizational Research Methods, 20(2), 299–323.Google Scholar
Bogers, M., Chesbrough, H. and Moedas, C. G. (2018). Open innovation: Research, practices, and policies. California Management Review, 60(2), 5–16.Google Scholar
Bonson, E., Torres, L., Royo, S. and Flores, F. (2012). Local E-Government 2.0: Social media and corporate transparency in municipalities. Government Information Quarterly, 29(2), 123–132.Google Scholar
Castelló, I. O., Etter, M. and Årup Nielsen, F. (2016). Strategies of legitimacy through social media: The networked strategy. Journal of Management Studies, 53(3), 402–426.Google Scholar
Chau, M. and Xu, J. (2012). Business intelligence in blogs: Understanding consumer interactions and communities. MIS Quarterly, 36(4), 1189–1216.Google Scholar
Dirksen, V., Huizing, A. and Smit, B. (2010). ‘Piling on layers of understanding’: The use of connective ethnography for the study of (online) work practices. New Media & Society, 35(1), 33–44.Google Scholar
Dobusch, L. and Kapeller, J. (2017). Open strategy-making with crowds and communities: Comparing Wikimedia and Creative Commons. Long Range Planning, 51(4), 561–578.Google Scholar
Fairclough, N. (1992). Intertextuality in critical discourse analysis. Linguistics and Education, 4(3–4), 268–293.Google Scholar
Feher, K. (2019). Digital identity and the online: Footprint strategies – an exploratory and comparative research study. Journal of Information Science, 46(2), 192–205.Google Scholar
Galliers, R. D. (2011). Further developments in information systems strategising: Unpacking the concept. In Galliers, R. D. and Currie, W. L. (eds), The Oxford Handbook of Management Information Systems: Critical Perspectives and New Directions. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 329–345.Google Scholar
Garcia, A. C., Standlee, A. I., Bechkoff, J. and Cui, Y. C. (2009). Ethnographic approaches to the internet and computer-mediated communication. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 38(1), 56–86.Google Scholar
Glozer, S., Caruana, R. and Hibbert, S. A. (2019). The never-ending story: Discursive legitimation in social media dialogue. Organization Studies, 40(5), 625–650.Google Scholar
Grigg, I. (2019). Which government departments are the best at using social media? PR Week.Google Scholar
Han, Y., Ozturk, P. and Nickersen, J. (2020). Leveraging the wisdom of the crowd to address societal challenges: Revisiting the knowledge reuse for innovation process through analytics. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 21(5), 1126–1156.Google Scholar
Huang, J., Baptista, J. and Galliers, R. D. (2013). Reconceptualizing rhetorical practices in organizations: The impact of social media on internal communications. Information & Management, 50(2–3), 112–124.Google Scholar
Hutter, K., Nketia, B. A. and Fuller, J. (2017). Falling short with participation – different effects of ideation, commenting, and evaluating behavior on open strategizing. Long Range Planning, 50(3), 355–370.Google Scholar
Internet Live Stats. (2021). Twitter usage statistics, retrieved from www.internetlivestats.com/twitter-statistics/.Google Scholar
Kane, G. C. (2015). Enterprise social media: Current capabilities and future possibilities. MIS Quarterly Executive, 14(1), 1–16.Google Scholar
Kaplan, A. M. and Haenlein, M. (2011). How to waltz the social media/viral marketing dance. Business Horizons, 54(1), 253–263.Google Scholar
Kaplan, A. M. and Haenlein, M. (2010). Users of the world, unite! The challenges and opportunities of social media. Business Horizons, 53(1), 59–68.Google Scholar
Koch, H., Gonzalez, E. and Leidner, D. E. (2012). Bridging the work/social divide: The emotional response to organizational social networking sites. European Journal of Information Systems, 21(6), 689–706.Google Scholar
Koles, B. and Nagy, P. (2013). Virtual worlds as digital workplaces: Conceptualizing the affordances of virtual worlds to expand the social and professional spheres in organizations. Organizational Psychology Review, 4(2), 175–195.Google Scholar
Kozinets, R. V. (2019). Netnography: The Essential Guide to Qualitative Social Media Research. London: Sage.Google Scholar
Kozinets, R. V. (2002). The field behind the screen: Using netnography for marketing research in online communities. Journal of Marketing Research, 39(1), 61–72.Google Scholar
Kozinets, R. V., Dolbec, C. P. and Earley, A. (2014). Netnographic analysis: Understanding culture through social media data. In Flick, U. (ed.), Sage Handbook of Qualitative Data Analysis. London: Sage, pp. 262–276.Google Scholar
Leonardi, P. M. (2017). Ambient awareness and knowledge acquisition: Using social media to learn ‘who knows what’ and ‘who knows whom’. MIS Quarterly, 39(4), 746–762.Google Scholar
Leonardi, P. M., Huysman, M. and Steinfield, C. (2013). Enterprise social media: Definition, history, and prospects for the study of social technologies in organizations. Journal of Computer‐Mediated Communication, 19(1), 1–19.Google Scholar
Lincoln, Y. S. (1995). Emerging criteria for quality in qualitative and interpretive research. Qualitative Inquiry, 1(3), 275–289.Google Scholar
Linders, D. (2012). From e-government to we-government: Defining a typology for citizen coproduction in the age of social media. Government Information Quarterly, 29(4), 446–454.Google Scholar
Majchrzak, A., Cherbakov, L. and Ives, B. (2009). Harnessing the power of the crowds with corporate social networking tools: How IBM does it. MISQ Executive, 8(2), 103–108.Google Scholar
Majchrzak, A. and Malhotra, A. (2020). Unleashing the Crowd: Collaborative Solutions to Wicked Business and Societal Problems. London: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
McKenna, B., Myers, M. D. and Newman, M. (2017). Social media in qualitative research: Challenges and recommendations. Information & Organization, 27(2), 87–99.Google Scholar
Mergel, I. and Bretchneider, S. I. (2013). A three-stage adoption process for social media use in government. Public Administration Review, 73(3), 390–400.Google Scholar
Morton, J. (2020). Hybrid legitimation strategies for managing the same legitimacy gap in the coffee industry. Academy of Management Proceedings.Google Scholar
Morton, J., Wilson, A. D. and Cooke, L. (2020). The digital work of strategists: Using open strategy for organizational transformation. Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 29(2), 1–17.Google Scholar
Newell, S., Morton, J., Marabelli, M. and Galliers, R. D. (2020). Managing Digital Innovation. London: Red Globe Press.Google Scholar
Ngai, E. W. T., Tao, S. S. C. and Moon, K. K. L. (2015). Social media research: Theories, constructs, and conceptual frameworks. International Journal of Information Management, 35(1), 33–44.Google Scholar
Papacharissi, Z. (2002). The virtual sphere: The internet as the public sphere. New Media & Society, 4(1), 5–23.Google Scholar
Piller, F., Vossen, A. and Ihl, C. G. (2011). From social media to social product development: The impact of social media on co-creation of innovation. De Unternehmung, 66(1), 7–27.Google Scholar
Pink, S., Horst, H., Postill, J., Hjorth, L., Lewis, T. and Tacchi, J. (2015). Digital Ethnography: Principles and Practice. London: Sage.Google Scholar
Plesner, U. P. and Gulbrandsen, I. T. (2015). Strategy and new media: A research agenda. Strategic Organization, 13(2), 153–162.Google Scholar
Roberts, D. and Pillar, F. (2016). Finding the role for social media in innovation. MIT Sloan Management Review, 57(3), 41–46.Google Scholar
Schlagwein, D., Conboy, K., Feller, J., Leimeister, J. M. and Morgan, L. (2017). ‘Openness’ with and without information technology: A framework and a brief history. Journal of Information Technology, 32(1), 297–305.Google Scholar
Schoenberg, N. E. and Ravdal, E. H. (2000). Using vignettes in awareness and attitudinal research. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 3(1), 63–74.Google Scholar
Shin, J., Jian, L., Driscoll, K. P. and Bar, F. (2018). The diffusion of misinformation on social media: Temporal pattern, message, and source. Computers in Behavior, 83, 278–287.Google Scholar
Surowiecki, J. E. (2004). The Wisdom of Crowds: Why the Many Are Smarter than the Few. London and New York, NY: Anchor.Google Scholar
Treem, J. W. and Leonardi, P. M. (2013). Social media use in organizations: Exploring the affordances of visibility, editability, persistence, and association. The International Communication Association, 36(1), 145–189.Google Scholar
Vaast, E., Safadi, H., Lapointe, L. and Negoita, B. (2017). Social media affordances for connective action: An examination of microblogging use during the Gulf of Mexico oil spill. MIS Quarterly, 41(4), 1178–1205.Google Scholar
Vaast, E. and Urquhart, C. (2017). Building grounded theory with social media data. In Mir, R. and Jain, S. (eds), The Routledge Companion to Qualitative Research in Organization Studies. Abingdon, UK and New York, NY: Routledge, pp. 406–421.Google Scholar
von Krogh, G. (2012). How does social software change knowledge management? Toward a strategic research agenda. Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 21(2), 154–164.Google Scholar
Ward, K. J. (1999). Cyber-ethnography and the emergence of the virtually new community. Journal of Information Technology, 14(1), 95–105.Google Scholar
Whiting, R. and Pritchard, K. (2020). Collecting Qualitative Data Using Digital Methods. London: Sage.Google Scholar
References
Ahern, B. (2007). Stepping up to the mark: The Taoiseach’s organisational review programme for departments & offices. LINK, Issue No. 49.Google Scholar
Argyris, C., Putnam, R. and Smith, D. (1985). Action Science. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
Baburoglu, O. and Ravn, I. (1992). Normative action research. Organization Studies, 13(1), 19–34.Google Scholar
Beer, M. and Eisenstat, R. A. (2000). The silent killer of strategy implementation and learning. MIT Sloan Management Review, 41(4), 29–40.Google Scholar
Bradbury, H., Mirvis, P., Neilsen, E. and Pasmore, W. A. (2008). Action research at work: Creating the future following the path from Lewin. In Reason, P. and Bradbury, H. (eds), The Sage Handbook of Action Research, 2nd edition. London: Sage, pp. 77–92.Google Scholar
Bresnen, M. and Burrell, G. (2012). Journals à la mode? Twenty years of living alongside mode 2 and the new production of knowledge. Organization, 20(1), 25–37.Google Scholar
Carlton, D. (2019). Situational incompetence: The failure of governance in the management of large-scale IT projects. Journal of Modern Project Management, 7(2), 68–69.Google Scholar
Chanias, S., Myers, M. D. and Hess, T. (2019). Digital transformation strategy-making in pre-digital organizations: The case of a financial services provider. Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 28(1), 17–33.Google Scholar
Coghlan, D. (2016). Retrieving the philosophy of practical knowing for action research. International Journal of Action Research, 1(12), 84–107.Google Scholar
Coghlan, D. (2011). Action research: Exploring perspectives on a philosophy of practical knowing. Academy of Management Annals, 5(1), 53–87.Google Scholar
Coghlan, D. (2010). Seeking common ground in the diversity and diffusion of action and collaborative management research methodologies: The value of a general empirical method. In Pasmore, W. A., Shani, A. B. and Woodman, R. W. (eds), Research in Organizational Change and Development. Bingley, UK: Emerald, Vol. 18, pp. 149–181.Google Scholar
Coghlan, D. (2009). Toward a philosophy of clinical inquiry/research. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 45(1), 106–121.Google Scholar
Coghlan, D. and Shani, A. B. (Rami). (2021). Abductive reasoning as the integrating mechanism between first- second- and third-person practice in action research. Systemic Practice & Action Research, 34(4), 463–474.Google Scholar
Coghlan, D. and Shani, A. B. (Rami). (2018). Action Research for Business and Management Students. London: Sage.Google Scholar
Coghlan, D., Shani, A. B. (Rami) and Dahm, P. C. (2020). Knowledge production in organization development: An interiority-based perspective. Journal of Change Management, 20(1), 81–98.Google Scholar
Coghlan, D., Shani, A. B. (Rami) and Hay, G. W. (2019). Toward a social science philosophy of organization development and change. In Noumair, D. A. and Shani, A. B. (eds), Research in Organizational Change and Development. Bingley, UK: Emerald, Vol. 27, pp. 1–29.Google Scholar
Correani, A., De Massis, A., Frattini, F., Petruzzelli, A. M. and Natalicchio, A. (2020). Implementing a digital strategy: Learning from the experience of three digital transformation projects. California Management Review, 62(4), 37–56.Google Scholar
Crittenden, V. L. and Crittenden, W. F. (2008). Building a capable organization: The eight evers of strategy implementation. Business Horizons, 51(4), 301–309.Google Scholar
Cronin, B. (2017). Phenomenology of Human Understanding. Eugene, OR: Pickwick Publications.Google Scholar
Davenport, T. and Westerman, G. (2018). Why so many high-profile digital transformations fail. Harvard Business Review, https://hbr.org/2018/03/why-so-many-high-profile-digital-transformations-fail.Google Scholar
Department of Public Expenditure and Reform. (2017). Our public service 2020: Development and innovation. Dublin, Ireland, www.ops.gov.ie/app/uploads/2019/08/Our-Public-Service-2020-WEB.pdf.Google Scholar
Department of Public Expenditure and Reform. (2016). Code of Practice for the Governance of State Bodies. Dublin, Ireland, www.per.gov.ie/en/revised-code-of-practice-for-the-governance-of-state-bodies/.Google Scholar
Department of Public Expenditure and Reform. (2012). Organisational Review Programme: Progress Report on Implementation. Dublin, Ireland: Government Publications Sales Office.Google Scholar
Eden, C. and Huxham, C. (1996). Researching organizations using action research. British Journal of Management, 7(1), 75–86.Google Scholar
Gable, G. G. (2020). Viewpoint: Information systems research strategy. Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 29(2), 1–19.Google Scholar
Gibbons, M., Limoges, C., Nowotny, H., Schartzman, S., Scott, P. and Trow, M. (1994). The New Production of Knowledge. London: Sage.Google Scholar
Gibbons, M., Limoges, C. and Scott, P. (2011). Revisiting mode 2 at Noors Slott. Prometheus, 29(4), 361–372.Google Scholar
Greenwood, D. and Levin, M. (2007). Introduction to Action Research, 2nd edition. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Guerci, M., Radaelli, G. and Shani, A. B. (Rami). (2019). Conducting mode 2 research in HRM: A phase-based framework. Human Resource Management, 58(1), 5–20.Google Scholar
Heron, J. and Reason, P. (1997). A participatory inquiry paradigm. Qualitative Inquiry, 3(3), 274–294.Google Scholar
Kappelman, L., Johnson, V. L., Mclean, E., Torres, R., Snyder, M., Kim, K. et al. (2020). The 2019 SIM IT issues and trends study. MIS Quarterly Executive, 19(1), 69–104.Google Scholar
Lewin, K. (1997). Action research and minority problems. In Resolving Social Conflicts. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association, pp. 143–154 (original publication, 1946).Google Scholar
Lonergan, B. J. (1992). The Collected Works of Bernard Lonergan, Vol. 3: Insight: An Essay in Human Understanding, Crowe, F. and Doran, R. (eds). Toronto: University of Toronto Press.Google Scholar
Loshin, D. (2013). Big Data Analytics: From Strategic Planning to Enterprise Integration with Tools, Techniques, NoSQL, and Graphs. San Diego, CA: Elsevier.Google Scholar
MacLean, D., McIntosh, R. and Grant, S. (2002). Mode 2 management research. British Journal of Management, 13(2), 189–207.Google Scholar
Murray, J. A. (2007). Organisational capacity reviews: Building capacity. Paper presented at IPA National Conference, Delivering for the Citizen: Transforming Government Performance, pp. 1–24.Google Scholar
Nowotny, H., Scott, P. and Gibbons, M. (2003). ‘Mode 2’ revisited: The new production of knowledge. Minerva, 41(3), 179–194.Google Scholar
Nowotny, H., Scott, P. and Gibbons, M. (2001). Re-thinking Science: Knowledge and the Public in an Age of Uncertainty. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.Google Scholar
O’Riordan, J. (2011). Organisational capacity in the Irish Civil Service: An examination of the Organisation Review Programme. Research paper number 3, State of the public service series. Institute of Public Administration, Dublin.Google Scholar
Pasmore, B. (2015). Leading Continuous Change: Navigating Churn in the Real World. Oakland, CA: Berrett-Kohler.Google Scholar
Pasmore, W. A. (2011). Tipping the balance: Overcoming persistent problems in organizational change. In Shani, A. B., Woodman, R. W. and Pasmore, W. A. (eds), Research in Organizational Change and Development. Bingley, UK: Emerald, Vol. 19, pp. 259–292.Google Scholar
Pasmore, W. A. (2001). Action research in the workplace: The socio-technical perspective. In Reason, P. and Bradbury, H. (eds), Handbook of Action Research. London: Sage, pp. 38–47.Google Scholar
Pasmore, W. A., Woodman, R. and Simmons, A. L. (2008). Toward a more rigorous, reflective, and relevant science of collaborative management research. In Shani, A. B., Mohrman, S. A., Pasmore, W. A., Stymne, B. and Adler, N. (eds), Handbook of Collaborative Management Research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, pp. 259–292.Google Scholar
Reason, P. (2006). Choice and quality in action research practice. Journal of Management Inquiry, 15(2), 187–203.Google Scholar
Rosseau, D. M. (2018). Making evidence-based organisational decisions in an uncertain world. Organisational Dynamics, 47(3), 135–146.Google Scholar
Schein, E. H. (2013). Humble Inquiry: The Art of Asking Instead of Telling. Oakland, CA: Berrett-Kohler.Google Scholar
Schein, E. H. and Schein, P. A. (2017). Organizational Culture and Leadership, 5th edition. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
Shani, A. B. (Rami) and Coghlan, D. (2021). Collaborative Inquiry for Organization Development and Change. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
Shani, A. B. (Rami) and Pasmore, W. A. (1985). Organization inquiry: Towards a new model of the action research process. In Warrick, D. D. (ed.), Contemporary Organization Development: Current Thinking and Applications. Glenview, IL: Scott Foresman & Co., pp. 438–448. [Reproduced in D. Coghlan and A. B. (Rami) Shani (eds). (2010). Fundamentals of Organization Development. London: Sage, Vol. 1, pp. 249–260.]Google Scholar
Susman, G. I. and Evered, R. D. (1978). An assessment of the scientific merits of action research. Administrative Science Quarterly, 23(4), 582–601.Google Scholar
Swan, J., Bresnen, M., Robertson, M., Newell, S. and Dopson, S. (2010). When policy meets practice: Colliding logics and the challenges of ‘mode 2’ initiatives in the translation of academic knowledge. Organization Studies, 31(9–10), 1311–1340.Google Scholar
Van de Ven, A. H. and Johnson, P. E. (2006). Knowledge for theory and practice. Academy of Management Review, 31(4), 802–821.Google Scholar
Vial, G. (2019). Understanding digital transformation: A review and a research agenda. Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 28(2), 118–144.Google Scholar
Wimelius, H., Mathiassen, L., Holmstrom, J. and Keil, M. (2020). A paradoxical perspective on technology renewal in digital transformation. Information Systems Journal, 31(1), 198–225.Google Scholar
Yammarino, F. J., Salas, E., Serban, A., Shirreffs, K. and Shuffler, M. (2012). Collectivist leadership approaches: Putting the ‘we’ in leadership science and practice. Industrial & Organisational Psychology, 5(4), 382–402.Google Scholar