Information systems (ICT)
Structuration Theory
Structuration theory was developed by Anthony Giddens in 1979 and is highly influential in sociology and social sciences. This theory has received considerable attention in the Information Systems (IS) field. This theory attempts to supersede any deficiencies by presenting how social structures are both constituted by human agency and at the same time, the very medium of this constitution. This is what is referred to as the duality of structure, where the central concept of Gidden’s theory attempts to avoid a dualism of agency and structure. He stressed that in order to question the structuration of social practices means to be able to explain how the structures are created through action and at the same to determine how the action is created in such structure. It is imperative to conceive structures as not as simply putting restrictions on human agency, but one that enables it (Bryant and Jari, 2001, p. 7). The term “structuration” refers to the dynamic process that enables the structures to come into existence. The structuration theory is not the same as structuralism and philosophy of action since the modern concept of structuralism deals with the reproduction of social relations and process to be considered as mechanical result, instead of an active constituting process that is accomplished by the actions of active subjects (Bryant and Jari, 2001, p. 7).
The Structuration theory can offer a new way of looking at cross-cultural working and information systems. This Structure Theory uses the structure as memory traces in the human mind. The action draws on behavior and ability to deploy resources and by such action will produce and reproduce the structure (Leidner and Kayworth, 2012). The structure has three dimensions namely: forms of power relations, systems of meaning and sets of norms. The IS represents the systems of meaning, provide resources and encapsulates norms, and are thus deeply involved in the modalities that connects action and structure. These structural properties are those which are considered as structures of social systems that extend across time and space Leidner and Kayworth, 2012).
In several instances, there have been attempts to incorporate information systems within the theoretical framework of structuration theory. Leidner and Kayworth (2012) stated that in fact, it was Giddens who initiated an insignificant reference to information technology while he was still in the process of conceptualizing the theory that enables the Information Systems researchers to use their own devices. There is a direct connection between the theoretical view of computer-based information systems in modern-day organizations that results from the structuration theory where they represent interpretative schemes, offer coordination and control facilities and summarizes norms (Leidner and Kayworth, 2012). These information systems have a strong connection in the modalities that unites social action and structure, which draws them to interact and will reinforce the changes in social structures. Simply put, the information systems are drawn to give meaning, to exercise power and authority and to legalize actions as they are intimately related to the duality of the structure.
The Structuration theory is primarily focused on the reproduction of structure in mind and the expanded social structures within societies that will undergo the process of routinization of activity. As a result, it will strengthen the current structures (Leidner and Kayworth, 2012). It is the most controversial and influential among structures because it has the influence on phenomena that is as extensive as a systems development Whitman and Woszczynskiheorizing, 2004). The research between the overlap between information systems and organizations is that the structuration theory has been the major theoretical lens of choice for majority of scholars for the past years because it gives a major theoretical pillar even if it does not provide formal hypothesis. Its founder Giddens believed that the theory gives a philosophy of social scientific inquiry than a theory per se by giving a grand formulation as way to view the world (Whitman and Woszczynski, 2004).
In the overlap of the research between information technology and organizations, structuration theory has been the theoretical choice of instrument that is being used by majority of scholars. It is also referred to as the meta-theory as the formula on how to view the world in a different perspective. Some of its competing formulation shall cover phenomenology, functionalism, positivism and critical theory. At the same time, this theory leaves decisions with regard to the research settings, analytic tools, and measurements for the researchers themselves (Whitman and Woszczynski, 2004, p.207).
The main argument for the structuration theory is that social structure is present in the actions of human agents by using structures. This theory has connected two philosophical extremes such as functionalism and interpretivism that holds that social structure shall exist only in the minds of the people which created them. According to Whitman and Woszczynski (2004, p.210), the functionalist view believes that the consequences of structures explain their existence and persistence and causal arguments should be sustained. On the other hand, the interpretivist view believes that structures are cognitively formed and influenced by experience and social construction arguments shall be maintained.
Critical Theory
According to Dahms (2011), the Critical Theory has originated from the so-called “Frankfurt School”. This relates to the occupation of those who belong to the Institute for Social Research that was created in Frankfurt, Germany in 1923. This became the very first Marxist-influencedresearch center that is closely connected to one of the biggest German universities (Dahms, 2011). The work of the Institute during the 1920’s was directed towards the empirical and historical aspect of the problems of the European working class movement as directed by Carl Grunberg. The most important sources of the Critical Theory are the writings of Karl Marx and Max Weber since their ideas are centered on the issues pertaining to the logic of the economic process of capitalism that has significance to patterns of rationalization. Some of the works of Hegel, Kant, Habermas and Sigmund Freud conceptualized the traditional concept of the theory. This means that the explanation of this theory refers to the relationship between economy, society, culture and the political institutions in modern societies (Dahms, 2011).
This theory has placed a greater emphasis on the works of Marx and Webber by concentrating on the need to scrutinize the affinities and concurrence of the processes of capital accumulation and rationalization. This will show how both forces worked together using capital accumulation and rationalization in order to shift from a feudal to a modern society. The has incorporated new ways that were previously considered as inherently human qualities that have been encapsulated as liberal political tradition of human nature. Based on the concept of Marx and Weber, these aspects of social life represented the forms of solidarity, modes of communication and types of labor to effect societal changes from, from feudal to modern society.
The Critical theory refers to the system that shows that there is scientific-technical rationality in terms of the still-viable heritage of pre-modern, qualitative images of nature which may become an active part of service delivery, instead of static repositories for information and data (Feenberg, 2002, p.163). From the perspective of social theory, the present approach of information system a corporate strategy can be classified as functionalist and interpretivism. To distinguish one from the other, the design approaches to corporate strategy and technology-based approaches to information systems shall qualify as functionalist; while the discovery methods in corporate strategy and human-centered approach systems in the information systems shall be known as interpretist (Clarke, 2001, p.3). In sum, the critical theory offers the possibility of applying such approaches with radical intent. The work in this area has been handled in the management science domain and its work can be used to formulate a substitute framework for the IS strategy. This type of theory seeks to expose the human beings from their false consciousness to a position from which true potentiality is achievable. The alternative to this approaches of IS system can be found in the theory of Habermas who viewed that all human endeavor can be undertaken for the attainment of three cognitive interests such as technical, practical and emancipatory (Clarke, 2001, p.3).
Thus, as form of the functionalist science, which is being utilized by IS and corporate strategy can no longer be defended as an objective, neutral theory and value free to be able to maintain the existing power relations. The theory provides a philosophical underpinning to critical systems thinking which in turn is of value in to information systems development.
The theory is considered as an alternative approach in information systems (IS) development that deals with pervasive applications in information technology. Some theorists have stated that the basic concepts that are needed to be the subject of discussion, planning and implementation should focus on practical development of the initiatives for establish the correct systems for development.
Information and Communication Technology for Development (ICT4D)
During the 20th century, several changes have been developed to improve global economy for the governance of nations. To be able to achieve this, some of the improvements were made in order to enhance the connection between human development and capabilities approach to understand to potential effect of technologies on the lives of the people. A growing concern within regard to the development of the community is closely connected to the swiftly rising usage of ICT and its importance to the development of the International Telecommunications Union (ITU) during the early 1980s (Hamel, 2010, p. 5). The studies have shown that ICTs and the networks that connected them should be further reinforced all over the world to be able to share the benefits that these technologies to the health and other social services, trade and commerce, administration and to act as a stimulant to ensure economic growth for the improved quality of life for all. This later became known as information and communication technology for development or also otherwise known as “ICT4D (Hamel, 2010, p.5).
The information and communication technology for development or “ICT4D” is closely connected to human development and capabilities approach. The basic dimensions of human development shall consist of the essential dimensions of its achievements such as health, education, income, facets of participation and empowerment. This will serve as an evaluation on whether ICTs have produced positive outcomes in these areas of human development. The physical objectives of ICTs shall cover overpowering the boundaries of present procedures of information storage and sharing.
The ICT4D has been referred to as the “moral agenda" that has the function of empowering people and communities by providing answers to the tough questions that includes “what should be done” and “how it should be done” (Hamel, 2010, p.1). Human development is an evolving framework that uses ICTs as methods or techniques to carry out the recording, storing, using, distribution and access of electronic information. This is a manifestation that ICTs are regarded as devices that will facilitate communication by simplifying the process, transmission and sharing of information using electronic channels.
The ICTD offers a broad network of researchers globally and the strategy was conceptualized from the concerns of development practitioners that since it has presently evolved as the world is meeting new challenges. The different views on the approach are based on the work Amartya Sen by the global Human Development Report (HDR) which gives a deep comprehension of the purpose of human development, which is to broaden the liberty given to the public and at the same time, provide valuable capacities and to give them empowerment and boost that they need. The beneficiaries and the agents of this long term equitable human development are individuals and groups (Hamel, 2010, p. 4). The essential component of this type of condition is to give special relevance to the concept of human development, which is a mechanical process that shall have participative and empowering effects on the public. It is believed that the fundamental principles of such approach are intended to serve human development (Hamel, 2010, p.10).
The practitioners of ICT4D have realized that understanding the technology itself will not contribute to human development. The major difference in the lives of the general public is that the use of such technology with the aid of individuals and groups inside the communities had achieved their growth objectives. The primary concern aims to design and import of new technologies to substitute the traditional method of accomplishing issues in life. The policy makers and practitioners give the proper technologies that are required in development of strategies. The new technologies replaced the old methods of accomplishing tasks that will certainly serve as compromises and hidden charges that will be applicable for the analysis of ICT4D sponsors (Hamel, 2010, p.7).
It bears stressing that ICTs have the capacity to improve peoples’ lives using the ICTs as tools to gain potential benefits for human development. However, ICT4D is only a representation of the possibility of expanding the opportunities and capabilities using technology. It can also result to escalate inequality in various parts of the globe and will be beneficial to those countries that are able to profit from the new opportunities. Therefore, even if the ICTs have been applied, there is also a greater tendency that the interests of the poor will be completely neglected or disregard to the advantage of some privileged nations.
As pointed out by Whitman and Woszczynski (2004, p.210), the concept of system in this theory that makes it different from the conventional IS use of term or its use based on the concept of systems theorists. The structures can be repeatedly reproduced as the system reaches a more stable condition. As the people continuously produce new structures, there is a high probability that the systems will change. The beauty of the structuration theory to IS scholars is that it makes human agents part of the system that makes it possible for the people to interact with technology which makes lesser predictability of IT use for group consumption (Whitman and Woszczynski, 2004).
References:
Alampay, E A. (2006). Beyond access to ICTs: Measuring capabilities in the information
Society. International Journal of Education and Development using Information
and Communication Technology. 2(3): 4-22.
Alkire, S. (2002). Dimensions of Human Development in World Development. 30(2): 181-205.
Avison, D. and Mayers, M.D. (2002). Qualitative Research in Information Systems: A
Reader. California: SAGE.
Bryant, B.C. and Jary, D. (1991). Giddens' Theory of Structuration: A Critical
Appreciation. New York: Routledge.
Clarke, S. (2001). Information Systems Strategic Management: An Integrated Approach. New York:Routledge.
Dahms, H, F. (2011). The Vitality of Critical Theory. UK: Emerald Publishing.
Day, B. and Greenwood P. (2009). Information and communication technologies for
rural development in Unwin ICT4D: Information and Communication Technology
for Development. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Feenberg A. (2002). Transforming Technology: A Critical Theory Revisited: A Critical Theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Giddens, A. (1990). The Consequences of Modernity. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Giddens, A. (1991). Modernity and Self-Identity. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Giddens, A. (1994). Beyond Left and Right: The Future of Politics. Stanford: Standard
Hamel, J. Y. (2010). ICT4D and the Human Development and Capability Approach: The
Potentials of Information and Communication Technology. United Nations
Development Programme Human Development Reports Research Paper.
Web. June 15, 2013, from
http://hdr.undp.org/en/reports/global/hdr2010/papers/HDRP_2010_37.pdf.
Leidner, D.E. and Kayworth, T. (2012). Global Information Systems. New York:
Routledge.
Paivarinta, T. (1999). A genre approach to Proceedings of the 1st Critical Management
Studies Conference: Applying critical social theory to information systems
development. Web. June 16, 2013, from
http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.92.1054.
Walsham, G. (1995). Interpretive case studies in IS research: nature and method.
European Journal of Information Systems 4, p.74–81.
Whitman, M.E. and Woszczynski, A, B.(2004). The Handbook of Information Systems
Research. Philadelphia: Idea Group Inc.
