Sven A Carlsson
email: sven.carlsson@ics.lu.se

Critical Realist Information Systems Research in Action

Keywords: Critical realism, empirical research, theory development, design science research, theory testing, evaluation research

des établissements d'enseignement et de recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires publics ou privés.

Introduction

There is a growing interest in critical realism (CR) in Information Systems (IS) research. Scholars have pointed out major weaknesses and limitations in positivism and constructivism, see, for example, Archer et al. (1998) and Lòpez and Potter (2001). CR is an alternative to the different strands of positivism and constructivism currently dominating IS research. CR argues that social reality is not simply composed of agents= meanings, but that there exist structural factors influencing agents= lived experiences. CR starts from an ontology that identifies structures and mechanisms, through which events and discourses are generated, as being fundamental to the constitution of our natural and social reality. This paper presents and discusses how critical realism can be an alternative philosophical underpinning for IS research. It briefly presents critical realism and how it can be used in IS research. Contemporary examples of how CR have been used in IS research are presented and discussed. The future use of CR in IS research is also discussed.

Critical Realism

Different philosophies of science have different ontological views. Idealists have the view that reality is not mind-independent. Idealism comes in different forms, reflecting different views on what is man-created and how it is created. Realists have the view that reality exists independently of our beliefs, thoughts, perceptions, discourses, etc. As for idealism, realism comes in different forms. Bhaskar says that it is not a question of being a realist or not, but what type of realist (Bhaskar 2000). Critical realism was developed as an alternative to traditional positivist models of social science as well as an alternative to constructivism. The most influential writer on CR is Roy Bhaskar. Good summaries of CR are available in Archer et al. (1998), [START_REF] Dean | Editorial: New Essays in Critical Realism[END_REF], [START_REF] Sayer | Realism and Social Science[END_REF], and Chapter 1 in [START_REF] Bhaskar | Reflections on Meta-Reality[END_REF]; key concepts and main developments are presented in Hartwig (2007). In Archer et al. (1998) and Lòpez and Potter (2001), chapters focus on different aspects of CR, ranging from fundamental philosophical discussions to how statistical analysis can be used in CR-based research.

CR was primarily developed as an answer to the positivist crisis. In 1975, Bhaskar=s work A Realist Theory of Science, with Atranscendental realism,@ was published. In Possibility of Naturalism (1998), Bhaskar focused on the social sciences and developed Acritical naturalism.@ These two major works present a thorough philosophy of science project and later critical realism and critical naturalism were merged to Acritical realism,@ a concept also used by Bhaskar. Through the 1980s, Bhaskar primarily developed his position through sharpening arguments. The late 1970s and early 1980s saw a number of other CR scholars publishing influential works, for example, Margaret Archer=s Social Origins of Educational Systems (1979) and Andrew Sayer=s Method in Social Science (1992). Most early critiques of CR targeted positivism, but later critique is targeting alternatives to positivism, for example, constructivism and structuration theory.

Critical realism can be seen as a specific form of realism:

To be a realist is to assert the existence of some disputed kind of entities such as gravitons, equilibria, utility, class relations and so on. To be a scientific realist is to assert that these entities exist independently of our investigation of them. Such entities, contra the post modernism of rhetoricians, are not something generated in the discourse used in their investigation. Neither are such entities, contra empiricists, restricted to the realm of the observable. To be a critical realist is to extend these views into social science (Fleetwood 2002, p. 29).

The manifesto of CR is to recognize the reality of the natural order and the events and discourses of the social world. It holds that we will only be able to understandCand so changeCthe social world if we identify the structures at work that generate those events or discoursesY. These structures are not spontaneously apparent in the observable pattern of events; they can only be identified through the practical and theoretical work of the social sciences (Bhaskar 1989, pp. 2-3). [START_REF] Bhaskar | A Realist Theory of Science[END_REF] outlines what he calls three domains: the real, the actual, and the empirical (see Table 1). [START_REF] Bhaskar | A Realist Theory of Science[END_REF]. X=s indicate the domain of reality in which mechanisms, events, and experiences, respectively reside, as well as the domains involved for such a residence to be possible).

Domain of Real Domain of Actual Domain of Empirical

Mechanism X Events X X Experiences X X X
The real domain consists of underlying structures, mechanisms, and relations; events and behavior; and experiences. The generative mechanisms residing in the real domain exist independently of, but capable of producing, patterns of events. Relations generate behaviors in the social world. The domain of the actual consists of these events and behaviors. Hence, the actual domain is the domain in which observed events or observed patterns of events occur. The domain of the empirical consists of what we experience; hence, it is the domain of experienced events. Bhaskar (1978, p. 13) argues that real structures exist independently of and are often out of phase with the actual patterns of events. Indeed it is only because of the latter we need to perform experiments and only because of the former that we can make sense of our performances of them. Similarly it can be shown to be a condition of the intelligibility of perception that events occur independently of experiences. And experiences are often (epistemically speaking) Aout of phase@ with eventsCe.g., when they are misidentified. It is partly because of this possibility that the scientist needs a scientific education or training. Thus I [Bhaskar] will argue that what I call the domains of the real, the actual and the empirical are distinct.

CR also argues that the real world is ontologically stratified and differentiated. The real world consists of a plurality of structures and generative mechanisms that generate the events that occur and do not occur. From an epistemological stance, concerning the nature of knowledge claim, the realist approach is non-positivistic, which means that values and facts are intertwined and hard to disentangle.

Critical realism is a well-developed philosophy of science, but on the methodological level, it is less well-developed. The writings of [START_REF] Kazi | Realist Evaluation in Practice[END_REF], [START_REF] Layder | New Strategies in Social Research[END_REF][START_REF] Layder | Sociological Practice: Linking Theory and Social Research[END_REF], [START_REF] Pawson | Evidence-Based Policy: A Realist Perspective[END_REF], [START_REF] Pawson | Evidence-Based Policy: A Realist Perspective[END_REF][START_REF] Pawson | Realistic Evaluation[END_REF][START_REF] Robson | Real World Research[END_REF], as well as some of the chapters in Ackroyd and Fleetwood (2000) and Fleetwood and Ackroyd (2004), can serve as guidelines for doing critical realist research. Unfortunately, from an IS perspective, the writings on CR have not focused on artifacts like IS/IT and it has been only in the behavioral science paradigm.

CR has influenced a number of disciplines and fields, for example, economics, management, and organization studies. There is a growing interest in CR in the IS field. Scholars have argued for the use of CR in IS research (Carlson 2004;[START_REF] Dobson | The Philosophy of Critical RealismCAn Opportunity for Information Systems Research[END_REF][START_REF] Mingers | Re-establishing the Real: Critical Realism and Information Systems[END_REF][START_REF] Mutch | Actors and Networks or Agents and Structures: Towards a Realist View of Information Systems[END_REF]. CR-based empirical research can be found in [START_REF] Dobson | Making the Case for Critical Realism: Examining the Implementation of Automated Performance Management Systems[END_REF]DeVaujany (2008), [START_REF] Morton | Explaining Outcomes of Strategic Information Systems Planning Using a Critical Realist Approach[END_REF], Strong andVolkoff (2010)m and[START_REF] Volkoff | Technological Embeddedness and Organizational Change[END_REF]. CR has also critical and emancipatory components (Bhaskar 2000). [START_REF] Wilson | Theory and Action for Emancipation: Elements of a Critical Realist Approach[END_REF] and [START_REF] Smith | Overcoming TheoryBPractice Inconsistencies: Critical Realism and Information Systems Research[END_REF] address how CR in IS research can work critically and be emancipatory. CR=s potential for IS design science research has been argued by [START_REF] Carlsson | Design Science Research in Information Systems: A Critical Realist Approach[END_REF] and [START_REF] Lyytinen | Design: Shaping in the Wild[END_REF]. CR-based IS design science can be found in Clarson et al. (2011) and [START_REF] Hrastinski | Design Exemplars for Synchronous e-Learning: A Design Theory Approach[END_REF]. A sign of the growing interest and importance of CR-based research is a recent call for paper for an MIS Quarterly special issue on ACritical Realism in Information Systems Research.@ Having briefly presented CR, we will now focus on how it has been used in IS research and discuss strengths and weaknesses in the presented studies.

3

Using Critical Realism in IS Research [START_REF] Gregor | The Nature of Theory in Information Systems[END_REF] argues that five interrelated types of IS theories can be distinguished:

(1) theory for analyzing, (2) theory for explaining, (3) theory for predicting, (4) theory for explaining and predicting, and (5) theory for design and action. The five types can be clustered into two main types: traditional natural/social research (first four types) and design science research (fifth type). Next, we examine how CR can be used in both main types of research. Theory developing studies (3.1), evaluation research (3.2), and design science research (3.3) are presented.

CR-Based Development of IS Theories

Two theory-generating IS studies are briefly presented. The first is the development of a CR-based theory of technology-enabled organizational change. The second study develops an explanation of the causes of the outcomes of attempts to develop and implement strategic IS plans in organizations. [START_REF] Volkoff | Technological Embeddedness and Organizational Change[END_REF] addressed the classical concern: How does technology mediate organizational change? They did this by developing a new theory based on the philosophy of CR. They longitudinally studied the implementation and use of an enterprise resource planning (ERP) system. Their specific view on technologymediated organizational change is based on Archer=s (1995) morphogenetic approach, which is conceptualized as a cycle consisting of three phases: (1) structural conditioning, (2) social interaction, and (3) structural elaboration. The Aconcept morphogenesis indicates that society has no preferred formYbut is shaped and re-shaped by the interplay between STRUCTURE and AGENCY@ (Archer 2007, p. 319). The middle phase of social interaction is the one which may appear to be where human agency has its greatest role, but this is not the case, as human agency is implicated in and embedded within all phases of the cycle. The structural conditioning phase incorporates the critical realist assumption that structure predates action(s) which transforms it. Structural elaboration postdates those actions. The structural elaboration phase of the model, which flows out of the social interactions in phase two can have one of two characteristics: structural elaboration/morphogenesis, where people and structures are transformed, and structural reproduction/morphostasis, where people and structures are largely reproduced. As Archer states, AAlthough, all three lines [phases] are in fact continuous, the analytical element consists in breaking up the flows into intervals determined by the problem in hand@ (2007, p. 319). Volkoff et al. (2007, p. 835) view ERP as a source of structural conditioning that is relatively independent and enduring, existing materially in the real domain, rather than primarily as a malleable structure, existing only in the empirical domain at the moment of instantiation. Using a critical realist perspective, we can discuss the interplay between structures and human agents, and examine the generative mechanisms or mediators through which agents affect structure and, of greater importance for this study, how structures shape agency.

Volkoff et al. based their study on [START_REF] Pentland | Organizational Routines as a Unit of Analysis[END_REF] work on organizational routines and especially their distinction between ostensive (structural) aspects of routines and the performative (agentic) aspects of routines. Volkoff et al. found that Ain addition to ostensive and performative aspects, routines also have a material aspect that is embedded in the technologyY. [and] material aspect of routines plays a critical and direct role in the change process@ (p. 833). Their study resulted in a new technology-mediated organizational change theory.

The study by Volkoff et al. illustrates how their theory overcomes some of the problems with previous theories. Previous theories can be categorized as having a deterministic view or an emergent view. They can also be classified as having an agency view or a structural view (including a technology view). In line with CR, Volkoff et al.=s study and theory focuses both on structure and agency and has an emergent view. It separates structure and agency, whereas some other theories either ignore agency (i.e., theories based on institutional theory), ignore structure (i.e., theories based on behavioral approaches), or conflate the two (i.e., theories based on structuration theory and ANT). A similar study is [START_REF] Strong | Understanding OrganizationBEnterprise System Fit: A Path to Theorizing the Information Technology Artifact[END_REF]; it is a CR-based longitudinal study of an ERP system focusing on organizationBERP system fit. Strong and Volkoff and Volkoff et al. use a qualitative approach and their analyses are based on grounded theory (their coding process generally followed a grounded theory approach). It should be noted that retroduction, which is adopted by critical realism and refers to the inference from a description of some phenomenon to a description of something that produces it or is a condition for it, is not used or mentioned.

The second CR-based theory generating study by [START_REF] Morton | Explaining Outcomes of Strategic Information Systems Planning Using a Critical Realist Approach[END_REF] addresses the research question: What are the causes of the outcomes of attempts to develop and implement strategic IS plans in organizations? Achieving the vision of the strategic IS plan is difficult and Morton=s literature review shows that both private and public sector organizations having used SISP had problematic experiences. This motivates the research question for his thesis.

Morton argues that CR is useful for establishing causal explanations of phenomenon where closed system conditions (controlled experiments) are difficult to apply, such as in organizational settings where complex interactions occur between people and technology and outcomes are not predictable. The methodology used by Morton is consistent with CR and he uses a multiple case study research design.

Morton reviewed the SISP literature and an immanent critique was undertaken to establish a conceptualization of SISP consistent with the open systems view of social reality set out by CR. An immanent critique is an examination of existing theories about the phenomenon of interest using CR as a meta-theory to critique the theories= ontological presuppositions [START_REF] Hesketh | Beyond Measuring the Human Resources Management Organizational Performance Link: Applying Critical Realist Meta-Theory[END_REF]). The two dominating models of SISP, the comprehensive, formal, and systematic model and the incremental, informal, and opportunistic model, were the targets of the immanent critique. The immanent critique finds significant theoryBpractice inconsistencies in relation to both the comprehensive and informal models of SISP. On the basis of the immanent critique, a new reconceptualization of the phenomenon was offered: SISP as an intervention into the open systems social reality of the organization with unpredictable outcomes. In this view, SISP is itself a collection of causal mechanism that activate other causal mechanisms in the setting which originate in the agency of participants, the prevailing social structures, and the use by agents of a range of ideational elements from the cultural system. Morton used the reconceptualization as a framework to analyze each of four case studies to identify a set of causal mechanisms responsible for the outcomes of SISP projects contingent on organizational conditions. Morton=s research design follows Robson=s (2002) four-part structure for CRbased research comprising (1) purpose, (2) methods, (3) theory, and (4) sampling strategy. Morton=s aim was not to test specific propositions or hypotheses about SISP; rather it was to generate theory, by a process of retroducing the form and constitution of causal mechanisms, that could have produced and hence explain the empirical effects in the case studies. The theorization of causal mechanisms was supported by reference to the literature for corroboration of their existence. Four case studies, drawn from organizations either developing or implementing a strategic IS plan, were used as the primary source of empirical data for. A multiple case study design allows for the corroboration of findings across case studies via a comparative approach [START_REF] Bergene | Towards a Critical Realist Comparative Methodology: Context-Sensitive Theoretical Comparison[END_REF], although the effects of causal mechanism are always subject to contingent conditions.

Four methods of data collection were used: (1) participant observation (case one), (2) non-participant observation (case two), ( 3) interviewing (all cases), and (4) document review (all cases).

Comparative analysis of the 4 case studies revealed a set of 13 causal mechanisms that had a significant impact on the outcomes in each case and 9 contingent factors that affected their activation and interaction. The mechanisms complete the CR-based reconceptualization of SISP and explain the varied outcomes of the SISP projects by showing how they result from the contingent interaction of these mechanisms.

Morton=s study is primarily a qualitative study. Morton=s work is interesting because of his use of immanent critique [START_REF] Hesketh | Beyond Measuring the Human Resources Management Organizational Performance Link: Applying Critical Realist Meta-Theory[END_REF]) and his use of Bergene=s (2007) comparative approach. The use of immanent critique can be viewed as one way to address that CR rejects judgmental relativism (the inability to judge the merits of theories). An alternative approach would have been to use the three theories on the four cases and compared how they were performing in terms of describing and explaining the phenomenon that are the causes of the outcomes of attempts to develop and implement SISP in organizations.

CR-Based Information Systems Evaluation Research

IS evaluation and IS evaluation research have been stressed as critical means in advancing the IS field. Generally, IS evaluation is concerned with the evaluation of different aspects of real-life interventions in the social life where information systems are critical means in achieving the anticipated goals of the intervention. IS evaluation research can be considered a special case of evaluation research.

Driving CR-based IS evaluation research, which here is called realistic IS evaluation, is the aim to produce ever more detailed answers to the question of why an IS initiativeCIS, types of IS, or IS implementationCworks for whom, in what circumstances, and why. This means that evaluation researchers attend to how and why an IS initiative has the potential to cause (desired) changes.

A realistic evaluation researcher works as an experimental scientist, but not according to the logic of the traditional experimental research. According to Bhaskar (1978, p. 53),

The experimental scientist must perform two essential functions in an experiment. First, he must trigger the mechanism under study to ensure that it is active; and secondly, he must prevent any interference with the operation of the mechanism. These activities could be designated as Aexperimental production@ and Aexperimental control.@ Realistic evaluation researchers do not conceive that IS initiatives Awork.@ It is the action of stakeholders that makes them work, and the causal potential of an IS initiative takes the form of providing reasons and resources to enable different stakeholders and participants to Amake@ changes. This means that a realistic evaluation researcher seeks to understand why an IS initiative works through an understanding of the action mechanisms. It also means that a realistic evaluation researcher seeks to understand for whom and in what circumstances (contexts) an IS initiative works through the study of contextual conditioning.

Realistic evaluation researchers orient their thinking to contextBmechanismB outcome pattern configurationsCcalled CMO configurations [START_REF] Pawson | Realistic Evaluation[END_REF]. In IS evaluation research, a CMO configuration is a proposition stating what it is about an IS initiative (IS implementation) that works for whom in what circumstances [START_REF] Carlsson | Advancing Information Systems Evaluation (Research): A Critical Realist Approach[END_REF]. A refined CMO configuration is the finding of IS evaluation researchCthe output of a realistic evaluation study.

Realistic IS evaluation based on the above may be implemented through a realistic effectiveness cycle. The starting point is theory. Theory includes propositions on how the mechanisms introduced by an IS invention into pre-existing contexts can generate outcomes. This entails theoretical analysis of mechanisms, contexts, and expected outcomes. The second step consists of generating hypotheses. Typically the following questions would be addressed in the hypotheses: (1) What changes or outcomes will be brought about by an IS intervention? (2) What contexts impinge on this? (3) What mechanisms (social, cultural, and others) would enable these changes, and which one may disable the intervention? The third step is the selection of appropriate data collection methods. In this step, it might be possible to provide evidence of the ability of the IS intervention to change reality. Based on the result from the third step, one may return to the program (the IS intervention) to make it more specific as an intervention of practice. Next, but not finally, one returns to theory. The theory may be developed, the hypotheses refined, the data collection methods enhanced, etc.

To illustrate realistic IS evaluation, two studies are presented. The first is an evaluation study of enterprise systems implementations. The second is a study of the impact of a computer-based IS on clinical practice.

The first study focused automated performance measurement systems (APMS). APMS are a fairly recent evolution within the context of enterprise information systems. APMS deliver information (values for key performance indicators) to senior managers through automatically collecting operational data from integrated information systems. APMS are a consequence of the SarbanesBOxley Act (SOX) and similar legislation. The study investigated a number of APMS implemenations with varying degree of success. In reflecting on their research, Dobson et al. (2007, p. 143) say,

In the context of the APMS research, it became evident that contextual issues were paramount in explaining the success and failure of the implementations.YThis emphasis on context impacted the underlying research focus. The critical realist focus on retroductive prepositional-type questioning led to a contextual basis for the study seeking to answer AUnder what conditions might APMS implementation prove successful?@ rather than AWhat are the (predictive) critical success factors for an APMS implementation?@ A simplistic critical success factors approach tends to deny the heavy contextuality and complexity of large-scale systems implementation.

Dobson et al.=s study had six major phases. The first phase was a literature review. The purpose of the review was to develop an APMS success model. The literature review followed Pawson=s (2006) suggestions on how to conduct systematic reviews to make sense of a heterogeneous body of literature. The review was driven by a focus on CMO and how outcomes can be Aproduced.@ Using Pawson=s approach means that it is possible to move away from the many one-off studies and instead learn from fields such as medicine and policy studies on how to develop evidence-based IS knowledge and theory. In order to guide practitioners, researchers should analyze previous research based on the assumption that one can draw more powerful conclusions from the collective wisdom of previous research.

In the second phase, the developed success model was used as the basis for generating questions for semi-structured, qualitative interviews. In the third phase, the generated questions were used in a focus group interview. The focus group was composed of IS industry experts, active in the performance measurement system area. The generated data and the first developed model were analyzed and a revised model (Model 1) was developed. In the fourth phase, this model was be tested against a case study with further refinements to the model resulting in Model 2. In the fifth phase, a number of reviews and case interviews were done. These led to the refinements of the model (Model 3 and 4). A final model was synthesized and presented by [START_REF] Myles | Discovering Critical Success Factors for Implementing an Automated Measurement System: A Case Study Approach[END_REF]. It is also possible to use a quantitative approach for CR-based IS evaluation. Oroviogoicoechea=s (2007) study is an example of a primarily quantitative CR-based evaluation study (see also [START_REF] Oroviogoicoechea | A Quantitative Analysis of the Impact of a Computerized Information System on Nurses= Clinical Practice Using a Realistic Evaluation Framework[END_REF]. The aim of Oroviogoicoechea=s study was to explore nurses= perceptions of the impact on clinical practice of the use of a hospital information system. Computer-based information systems are increasingly being introduced in clinical practice.

Oroviogoicoechea used a realistic IS evaluation design based on Pawson and Tilley 1997) and [START_REF] Carlsson | Advancing Information Systems Evaluation (Research): A Critical Realist Approach[END_REF]. It was used across all phases of the study. Oroviogoicoechea used a questionnaire containing both closed and open-ended questions. Descriptive statistics were used for an overall overview of nurses= perceptions. Inferential analysis, including both bivariate and multivariate methods (path analysis), was used for cross-tabulation of variables searching for CMO relationships. Content analysis of open-ended questions was used to identify major themes in nurses= responses. Overall satisfaction with the IS was positive. Mechanisms and outcomes are highly correlated. Comparisons with context variables show how users= characteristics, with the exception of attitude toward the introduction of technology, did not have a significant influence on perceptions while the nursing unit context had greater influence. Path analysis illustrated that the influence of unit context variables are on outcomes and not on mechanisms. Six main themes emerged from open-ended questions. Some differences in relation to the unit context were observed.

The two studies are different in that one is primarily a qualitative study and the other is primarily a quantitative study. Although most CR-based IS evaluation studies are qualitative studies, the two studies exemplify how CR is committed methodological pluralism. At the same time it should be noted that few studies have really taken advantage of CR=s methodological pluralism.

Both studies are driven by the equation context + mechanism = outcome. As pointed out by [START_REF] Houston | Prising Open the Black Box: Critical Realism, Action Research and Social Work[END_REF], time is also relevant in shaping outcome and human agency certainly can play a critical role in shaping outcome. Hence, the extended equation is context + mechanism + time + human agency = outcome. Future IS evaluation studies could explore the use of the extended equation as the driver for IS evaluation research.

CR-Based Information Systems Design Science

This section addresses Gregor=s (2006) fifth type of theory: theory for design and action. Research generating this type of theory is solution-driven and called IS design science research. Two major IS design science research schools have emerged (El Sawy 2006): (1) information systems design theory (see Walls et al. 2004), and (2) design science research [START_REF] Hevner | Design Science in Information Systems Research[END_REF]). The schools share a focus on the IT artifact. Some scholars argue for a third Aschool@ based on IS as a socio-technical discipline and that design science and the research that builds that body of knowledge must acknowledge that IS is fundamentally about human activity systems which are usually technologically enabled, implying that the context of design and use is critical, and that research paradigms, practices and activities must embrace such a worldview (McKay and Marshall 2005, p. 5).

A number of projects have been developed in the past several years on IS design knowledge for AIS use and management@ and an approach developed for sociotechnical IS design science research (STISD) [START_REF] Carlsson | Socio-technical IS Design Science Research: Developing Design Theory for IS Integration Management[END_REF][START_REF] Hrastinski | Design Exemplars for Synchronous e-Learning: A Design Theory Approach[END_REF]. The approach is underpinned by CR and has four major research activities (Figure 1): (1) identify problem situations and desired outcomes, (2) review extant theories, knowledge, and data, (3) propose/refine design theory and knowledge, and (4) test design theory and knowledge. The figure reveals that IS design science research is not only about doing or designing. An important part of this research approach is to continuously test design theories. Research Activity: Review Extant Theories, Knowledge, and Data. Design theories and design knowledge should be enhanced through grounding in previous research. A design theory should be enhanced by continuously interacting with what is currently known, that is, grounding in extant theories, knowledge, and data. [START_REF] Gregor | The Nature of Theory in Information Systems[END_REF] argues that other types of theories can inform design theory and that design theory and explanatory and predictive theories are strongly interrelated. Van Aken (2005) maintains that design knowledge in the form of design propositions can be developed through cross-case analyses of previous case studies (see also [START_REF] Carlsson | Advancing Information Systems Evaluation (Research): A Critical Realist Approach[END_REF][START_REF] Gregor | Building Theory in the Sciences of the Artificial[END_REF][START_REF] Hrastinski | Design Exemplars for Synchronous e-Learning: A Design Theory Approach[END_REF]. This means that design knowledge is abstracted from cases. Van Aken refers (2004) to this as Aextracting case studies@ and shows how it has led to a number of useful and actionable design propositions, for example, Kanban systems and just-in-time.

In general, design theories and design knowledge can be enhanced through systematic reviews of previous researchCsee, for example, Pawson=s (2006) CR-based approach for conducting systematic reviews. Such reviews should be driven by PIMCO configurations and should have a specific focus on outcome(s) and how outcome(s) can be produced or enhanced (in the next activity, PIMCO configurations are explained). Using this approach for review of relevant literature means that it is possible to move away from the many one-off studies and instead learn from fields such as medicine and policy studies on how to develop evidence-informed IS design knowledge.

Research Activity: Propose/Refine Design Theory. Researchers orient their thinking to problem situation (P), IS initiative (I), mechanisms (M), context (C), outcome (O) pattern configurations (PIMCO configurations). A PIMCO configuration is a proposition stating what it is about an IS initiative that works for whom in what circumstances. When proposing a design theory, for example, in the form of design propositions, it is important to provide thick descriptions to aid the reader in understanding the theory, which may support practitioners in translating a theory to specific contexts and situations (van Aken 2005). A design proposition can be expressed as: In problem situation (P) and context (C), to achieve outcome (O), then design and implement IS initiative (I). The Adesign and implement IS initiative I@ includes three different types of designs: (1) object-design, (2) realization design, and (3) a process design.

A field-tested and grounded design proposition has been tested empirically and is grounded in science. The latter means primarily grounding in results and theories from the behavioral science paradigm. Field-tested and grounded design propositions will in most cases be in the form of heuristics. This is consistent with critical realism=s view on causality and means that the indeterminate nature of a heuristic design proposition makes it impossible to prove its effects conclusively, but it can be tested in context, which in turn can lead to sufficient supporting evidence.

Research Activity: Test Design Theory. After having formulated an initial design theory, the next step is empirical tests, which include the selection of appropriate data collection methods [START_REF] Carlsson | Design Science Research in Information Systems: A Critical Realist Approach[END_REF]Carlson et al. 2011). In doing this, it can be examined whether the design theory may be used as support when trying to change reality. Based on the results, the outcome may be reflected on and the design theory may be refined. Through multiple studies, one can accumulate supporting evidence iteratively and continuously move toward evidence saturation. To strengthen the validity of design theories, test triangulation may be beneficial (i.e., to combine two or more complementing ways of conducting tests, such as focus groups and field experiments).

The approach has been used in a number of projects for developing sociotechnical design theory and knowledge, for example, for the development of a design theory for synchronous e-learning [START_REF] Hrastinski | Design Exemplars for Synchronous e-Learning: A Design Theory Approach[END_REF]) and a design theory for IS integration management in mergers and acquisitions [START_REF] Carlsson | Socio-technical IS Design Science Research: Developing Design Theory for IS Integration Management[END_REF]Henningsson and Carlsson forthcoming).

Discussion

Above, some CR-based IS studies have been presented. Most of CR-based IS studies identified have been done as Atraditional@ behavioral science research and there is a domination of qualitative theory generation studies and qualitative evaluation studies. Given this picture, a few areas where CR-based research can move the IS-field forward and how CR-based studies can be improved are pointed out.

As noted above, CR rejects judgmental relativism (the inability to judge the merits of theories). This means that it should be possible to compare different theories. This will also open up for possibilities for theory testing. Currently, there are few, if any, CR-based theories testing IS studies. [START_REF] Miller | Testing Management Theories: Critical Realist Philosophy and Research Methods[END_REF] present a four-step approach for theory testing. Their approach is based on CR and provides guidance for deploying established research methods to test theories. Their approach is worthwhile to explore in CR-based IS research where the aim is to test theoriesCin behavioral science as well as in design science research. Their approach calls for the use of a diversity of research methods. I agree with their call for using a diversity of research methods in CR-based studies, not only for testing theories but also in research aiming at generating theories (see also [START_REF] Downward | Retroduction as Mixed-methods Triangulation in Economic Research: Reorienting Economics into Social Science[END_REF][START_REF] Easton | Critical Realism in Case Study Research[END_REF][START_REF] Zachariadis | processes, knowledge management, enterprise systems, techno-change, enterprise 2.0, and the use of social media in business processes. He[END_REF]). Miller and Tsang=s approach would, in most cases, require collaboration between researchers trained in different fields. In terms of comparing theories, [START_REF] Mole | Entrepreneurship as the Structuration of Individual and Opportunity: A Response Using Critical Realism[END_REF] compare the use of Gidden=s (1984) structuration theory and Archers (1995) morphogenesis theory in the entrepreneurship field and conclude that a CR perspective, like Archer=s morphogenesis, may be more appropriate. Similar types of studies are needed in the IS field.

There is also a need for researchers using CR to be more cautious in their use of methods and techniques, for example, some studies use induction or deduction instead of critical realism=s retroduction.

Most CR-based IS studies focus only one or two of Layder=s (1993,1998) domains of social life (self, situated activity, setting, and context). Future CR-based IS studies could address a larger number of domains and also incorporate that the domains are interlocking and mutually dependent on each otherCon this issue, see, [START_REF] Houston | Prising Open the Black Box: Critical Realism, Action Research and Social Work[END_REF].

CR-based studies could also have critical and emancipatory aims. Bhaskar does not view the role of the social scientist as one that is value free and he views Afacts@ as having moral implications. This means that there is certainly a need for CR-based studies aimed at discovering mechanisms that led to harmful effects. If researchers find such mechanisms, then there is an obligation to expose the mechanisms and facilitate the conditions or contexts whereby emancipatory mechanisms can be activated. As Houston (2010, p. 76), states, AIt is only by understanding the deep causes of oppression that we can develop ways of dismantling it.@

Conclusion

Although CR has influenced a number of disciplines and fields, there has until recently been very little CR-based research. CR=s potential for IS research has been argued by a number of scholars. In this paper, we have seen that CR can be useful as an underpinning philosophy for behavioral IS research as well for IS design science research. The examples presented in the paper can function as exemplars for how to do different types of IS research underpinned by CR. It should be noted that doing CR-based IS research is not without problems. For example, due to its open system view and that it recognizes social systems= complexity, CR-based IS research will generate theories that are provisional, fallible, incomplete, and extendable. In other words, CR-based IS research will not produce simple theories and Aquick fix@ results. Some weaknesses in current CR-based IS research have also been pointed out and ways to move forward suggested.

  Dobson et al.=s study illustrates the realistic IS evaluation research well. The study has a focus on unpacking the mechanisms of how complex IS implementations work in particular settings and contexts. The focus is on what is it about this IS implementation that works for whom in what circumstances and why. With the study=s emphasis on deep understanding of contexts, settings, and mechanisms, it shows how realistic IS evaluation research can be a very good alternative to simplistic critical success factors studies.

Figure 1 .

 1 Figure 1. IS design knowledge development (from Carlsson et al. 2011; Hrastinski et al. 2010) Research Activity: Identify Problem Situations and Desired Outcomes. Design theories and design knowledge aim to support solving practical problems in such a way that desired outcomes are reached. Hence, such theories and knowledge are goal-and outcome-oriented, which means that, when used, they should increase the likelihood of reaching desired outcomes.

Table 1 .

 1 Ontological Assumptions of the Critical Realist View of Science (from


Kosheek Sewchurran
email: kosheek.sewchurran@uct.ac.za

Irwin Brown

Toward an Approach to Generate Forward-Looking Theories Using Systems Concepts

Keywords: Systems thinking, research, project management

The need to generate original theory about information systems phenomena and ensure that such outputs are forward looking is an important concern. The paper gives examples of how IS project management practice and theories remain underpinned by concepts which do not map to experienced realities. The paper makes the case to use systems thinking approaches to unearth new theories to offer better explanations. In the pursuit of this goal, the paper first provides insight into the as-lived condition that makes human beings prone to being imprisoned by theories of yesteryear. This is done by discussing the role of language in cognition and theory development. In the IS literature, such discussions are limited despite the considerable attention to on types of theories and anatomies of theories. The paper claims and demonstrates why debate on theory cannot take place without explicit attention to aspects of cognition and as-lived existence. In the context of these discussions, the paper puts forward the suggestion that theoretical contributions rooted in systems concepts could allow for the emergence of forward-looking theory about IS phenomena. As a means of illuminating how to go about developing such theories, the paper provides a brief overview of how soft systems methodology and work systems method concepts can be used in a theorizing framework to achieve this. The main contributions to knowledge are two-fold. First, there is the inter-contextual coherence which is established by creating coherence between as-lived human experience, embodied cognition, theory, and language. Second, within such a context, we are able to demonstrate a pragmatic approach to generate better explanations about IS phenomena using systems concepts.

Introduction and Background

Human existence is caught in a cycle that Peter Checkland described as the never-ending dance of theory and practice [START_REF] Checkland | Systems Thinking, Systems Practice[END_REF][START_REF] Checkland | Information, Systems and Information Systems: Making Sense of the Field[END_REF][START_REF] Checkland | Soft Systems Methodology in Action[END_REF]. Theory can be defined as Aa set of welldeveloped concepts related through statements of relationship, which together constitute an integrated framework that can be used to [describe], explain, predict, [and prescribe] phenomena@ (Strauss and Corbin 1998, p. 15). Concepts are the basic building blocks of theory, and are abstract representations of some reality [START_REF] Strauss | Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and Procedures for Developing[END_REF]. Phenomena refer to the central ideas or events of interest related to a substantive area of study [START_REF] Strauss | Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and Procedures for Developing[END_REF].

At a societal level the cycle of theory informing practice and vice versa can be experienced as controlling systems of knowledge as well as aspirations to evolve knowledge paradigms. The effects of controlling systems of knowledge are constantly at play, either individually or in combination, but the effects are not always known. If we consider how current research affects or can affect the future, then we may conjecture that what we know in the present sets an organizing trajectory for what we can know in the future. Human beings, therefore, cannot know anything anew; all knowledge has some connection to the past and thus does influence the future. Research plays a key role in understanding the present in order to shape the future.

As researchers in Information Systems, we are interested in explaining the interaction between information technology and human beings. Often these interactions arise as a result of background effects (culture) that cannot be directly observed. The effects of culture can be estimated by referring to theorists such as Heidegger, Bourdieu, Latour, and Giddens. Heidegger (1962) speaks of the leveling effect of culture until it evades any questioning. Similarly, Bourdieu (1975) speaks of habitus and [START_REF] Latour | On Recalling ANT[END_REF] speaks of enrolment and actor-networks. All these theorists note that cultural effects are mostly below the consciousness level. Appropriately, John Maynard Keynes suggested that people often turn out to be the intellectual prisoners of theoreticians of yesteryear [START_REF] Winter | Images of Projects[END_REF].

As information technology permeates daily existence more and more, research in the IS field is challenged to explain more complex and abstract phenomena related to human existence and human enterprise. Scholarship in IS has long been concerned with relevance and rigor to ensure that there is acculturated progress in providing better explanations [START_REF] Banville | Can=t the Field of MIS be Disciplined?[END_REF][START_REF] Benbasat | The Identity Crisis Within the IS Discipline: Defining and Communicating the Disciplines Core Properties[END_REF][START_REF] King | Reach and Grasp[END_REF][START_REF] March | Design Science in the Information Systems Discipline: An Introduction to the Special Issue on Design Science Research[END_REF][START_REF] Niederman | ICIS 2008 Panel Report: Is Has Outgrown the Need for Reference Discipline Theories, or Has It?[END_REF]. Recently there have been concerns raised by many IS scholars about the need to develop original theory about IS phenomena. One specific call by [START_REF] Grover | Contributing to Rigorous and Forward Thinking Explanatory Theory[END_REF] and others is to build better explanations and more forward-looking theories. The purpose of this paper is to respond to this call and to prescribe how systems thinking concepts can be used in developing forward-looking theory about IS phenomena. To understand the pragmatic needs that can be served with our proposed framework we look at problems being faced in IS project management.

IS Project Management: The Need for New Metaphors

An IS project is commonly understood as an orchestrated process initiated by a project manager, stakeholders, and project workers on behalf of an owner to deliver a valued outcome that is unique and needs to be achieved within predetermined constraints which can include time, scope, quality, and cost [START_REF] Hughes | Software Project Management[END_REF][START_REF] Richardson | Readings in Information Technology Project Management[END_REF][START_REF] Schwalbe | Information Technology Project Management[END_REF]. In this area, there have been sustained research efforts to improve the unacceptably high failure rates rom which IS projects tend to suffer [START_REF] Hoving | Executive Response: Project Management Process Maturity as a >Secret Weapon[END_REF]. Frequently, IS project implementation failures are explained in the IS research literature by a lack of proper project planning, poor project management, poor project leadership, or incorrect application of project management practices [START_REF] Kappelman | Early Warning Signs of IT Project Failure: The Dominant Dozen[END_REF][START_REF] Kent | The Project Management Maturity Model[END_REF][START_REF] Nelson | IT Project Management: Infamous Failures, Classic Mistakes, and Best Practices[END_REF]. [START_REF] Nelson | IT Project Management: Infamous Failures, Classic Mistakes, and Best Practices[END_REF] tried to explain failures by conducting project retrospectives on 99 projects undertaken in North America. Nelson claimed that in more than half the projects, success could have been improved if there had been more attention paid to better use of bestpractices in estimating, scheduling, stakeholder management, and risk management.

On the other hand, [START_REF] Reich | Innovative Practices for IT Projects[END_REF] state that successful IS managers learn how to bravely step away from traditional Athou-shalt@ forms of project practices to deliver value early by constantly reaffirming and reviewing the value being delivered with the sponsors. This suggestion of what seems to work in practice is different than the plan-driven, role separation, deterministic processes assumed in many textbooks used to train IS project practitioners and graduates [START_REF] Dalcher | Successful IT Projects[END_REF][START_REF] Fuller | Information Systems Project Management: A Process Team Approach[END_REF][START_REF] Richardson | Readings in Information Technology Project Management[END_REF][START_REF] Schwalbe | Information Technology Project Management[END_REF]. In these texts the project management body of knowledge (PMBOK), a popular practice, is often epitomized as the central core that comprises project management. The same assumptions are reflected in IS research literature where contributions tend to explicitly or tacitly accept that the core basis of project management is PMBOK. It seems researchers are locked into an incorrect image of what a project is by frequently explaining that a lack of proper project planning, poor project management, poor project leadership or incorrect application of project management practices [START_REF] Kappelman | Early Warning Signs of IT Project Failure: The Dominant Dozen[END_REF][START_REF] Kent | The Project Management Maturity Model[END_REF][START_REF] Nelson | IT Project Management: Infamous Failures, Classic Mistakes, and Best Practices[END_REF]) is primarily responsible for project failure.

If we look deeper, we see that the metaphorical image that gives rise to the expectations of what a project is conjures up expectations that the project has a predetermined universal form; hence it is reasonable to expect a fixed life cycle and to be diligent with application of the project life cycle [START_REF] Cicmil | Understanding Project Management Practice through Interpretive and Critical Research Perspectives[END_REF][START_REF] Cicmil | Rethinking Project Management: Researching the Actuality of Projects[END_REF]. Project participants and many researchers in Information Systems often see projects in this way and hence exclude or marginalize other explanations.

In general, what does get defined as a project is a Anon-normal@ set of unique tasks that are highly uncertain in total, but can be composed of relatively known stages. The extant research literature on IS project management does give a sense that there is considerable confusion about the true nature of IS project management, but this is where the debate has been for a few years. A project-driven culture has since emerged but better explanations are required to help understand the dynamics of IS projects. To allow for newer understandings to emerge, metaphors or analogies could be useful.

Focus and Outline of the Paper

In this paper, we argue that such abstract knowledge can be built analogically from more experience-based knowledge. We encourage an approach to develop analogical extensions from richer, more experience-based domains [START_REF] Boroditsky | The Role of the Body and Mind in Abstract Thought[END_REF]. We specifically argue that metaphorical conceptual structures that draw from systems concepts and ideas provide a means of addressing the call for forward-looking theory. Metaphorical representation, we argue, allows for the presentation of abstract knowledge through more commonly understood concepts. It is claimed by some that metaphors are pervasive in everyday life, not just in language but in thought and action as well. So there is some acceptance that the conceptual systems affecting how we think and act are metaphoric in nature [START_REF] Murphy | On Metaphoric Representation[END_REF]. We hope to awaken researchers to this reality by offering an approach to theorizing that encourages the generation of forward-looking theory about IS phenomena using systems concepts.

A discussion of how research does and could affect the present and future has to be premised on the nature of human as-lived daily existence and cognition. Only with such an understanding can an attempt to understand how the theories we develop enable or disable particular ways of knowing be realized. In this paper, we will draw on the works of Heidegger, Bourdieu, Maturana, and Varela to give a characterization of daily as-lived experience. Once such an understanding is established, we will then explore the role of theory development in enabling and disabling further understanding. Thereafter the paper will give an account of theorizing that takes cognizance of the need to develop forward-looking theory about IS phenomena using systems concepts. We will present an approach using soft systems methodology as an example of a research framework to show how to undertake the development of better forward-looking theories.

As-Lived Human Behavior

Martin Heidegger cryptically proclaimed in his letters on humanism in 1947 that language is the house of being. In the same letter, he went on to also claim that Ain its home man dwells.@ This is cryptic, but it points to the central role language plays in constructing reality and allowing for learning and evolution. As social creatures, human beings cycle through knowledge systems by representing (signification), reproducing (interacting), and legitimizing (observing) various types of knowledge systems. Since the beginning of time, human beings have been subjected to an ongoing trajectory of being constructed by controlling systems of knowledge. Heidegger, Maturana, Varela, and others claim that human beings embody understanding of their environments and this allows for human beings to undertake their daily activities without necessarily being conscious of their involvement.

Heidegger and others claim that human beings are not always reflective while they undertake daily mundane activities. These researchers also go on to qualify that, at times, human beings are reflective; in this mode of existence they can observe themselves undertaking the various tasks or look back and reflect on various interactions. Because human beings develop a pre-reflective sense or grasp of their environments, they thus bring to bear habituated expectations in their perceptions.

All perceptions are, however, formulated while being-in-the-world and the process is not rational nor does it present a view from nowhere [START_REF] Guignon | Heidegger and the Problem of Knowledge[END_REF]. There are thus no complete or all-encompassing perspectives or facts in themselves. Human beings embody their environments and contexts, and there is always the danger of knowledge systems becoming controlling systems of thought. Human beings are thus historically conditioned to provide responses they have become socialized into; often they cannot step back from these responses and rationally alter them. As a result of this, cognition is not something that is rational and engaged with consciously. The environment is observed through the retina where images are processed by the mind during a cognitive process to compute understanding of the phenomena, together with adequate behavior for the given situation. [START_REF] Maturana | The Tree of Knowledge : The Biological Roots of Human Understanding[END_REF] explain that in the area of the retina, to which the visual image is transferred, there are hundreds of neurons from other zones of the nervous system. The retina, therefore, should not be understood as a relay station that transfers visual images as retinal stimulation to the visual cortex. Instead, the transfer to the visual cortex needs to be understood as a confluence of the visual stimulation and other stimulation coming continuously from the rest of the body [START_REF] Maturana | The Tree of Knowledge : The Biological Roots of Human Understanding[END_REF].

Maturana and Varela believe that cognition is an ongoing process subservient to existential concerns. They cryptically say that Aall knowing is doing; and all doing is knowing@ (p. 27). Matrurana and Varela claim that the nervous system is the means by which human beings learn and store knowledge of their interactions with the environment. The human nervous system is said to interconnect the sensory and motor surfaces via the brain, providing a dynamic system of coordination between sensory and motor surfaces that is ongoing, and tied to existential concerns. Further, according to [START_REF] Merleau-Ponty | Phenomenology of Perception[END_REF], the human being as an organism is tied to its environment in a dialectic manner such that the recurrent interactions are stored by the nervous systems as sensory-motor coupling of particular phenomena.

Phenomena, concepts, or theories that make up the reality human beings experience are said to be brought about by an act of distinction, either promoted by researchers or by human beings themselves as they learn and cope in daily existence. For the rest of the paper, the terms phenomena, concepts, and theories will be referred to collectively as a phenomenal domain. The experience of human consciousness is considered to only be possible through such phenomenal domains made possible by language. Through the use of concepts, theories, metaphors, and analogies, human beings are able to interact with their consciousness [START_REF] Maturana | The Tree of Knowledge : The Biological Roots of Human Understanding[END_REF].

Language, therefore, provides for the definition of various states of consciousness where individual words become tokens for linguistically coordinating actions representing bodily responses that can be triggered by the nervous system.

Consequently, linguistic behavior can be seen as a form of orienting behavior. Through linguistic means a human being can orient others and/or themselves to a phenomenal domain. Accordingly, language is said to be connotative or symbolic instead of denotative of individual entities [START_REF] Maturana | Autopoiesis and Cognition : The realization of the Living[END_REF]. Because the nervous system produces coherent behavior through the generation of sets of neuronal activity that anticipate a pre-given world [START_REF] Maturana | The Tree of Knowledge : The Biological Roots of Human Understanding[END_REF]); the nervous system is said to always already be in a specific state, which presents a unique context for each human being. Reality is, therefore, a unique disclosure for each human being.

Since human beings largely exist with language, the acquisition of knowledge or mastery of a domain of interactions is achieved by expanding the nervous system through learning how to interact with various phenomenal domains. Such evolution then becomes constrained by the anatomical organization of the human being and language available to identify the states relevant for facilitating interaction with the phenomenal domain. Although the nervous system expands the domain of interactions of human beings, the nervous system remains subservient to the existential concerns of the human being. For this reason [START_REF] Maturana | The Tree of Knowledge : The Biological Roots of Human Understanding[END_REF] say the nervous system operates by structural determination because the environment triggers reactions from the human being, yet the environment cannot specify the reactions. Consciousness and mind can consequently be seen as constructions that arise from social interaction that human beings are capable of with themselves, other beings, and/or their environment.

As a result of this biological nature, cognitive structures are created and re-created in an infinite cycle through recurrent practices within a phenomenal domain. Heidegger believes that human beings are in a state of continual becoming until death. Given this context, his cryptic statement that language is the home of being within which man lives becomes more appreciable. From the above, it is also evident that language is central to learning and evolution in a cultural sense because phenomenal practices get stored and enriched in the nervous system throughout an individual=s existence [START_REF] Llewelyn | Methodological Issues: What Counts as Theory in Qualitative Management and Accounting Research? Introducing Five Levels of Theorizing[END_REF][START_REF] Raelin | Toward and Epistemology of Practice[END_REF]Varela et al. 1993). With such a view we accept that language is both the means and median of constructing the future.

Theorizing

In accordance with the above discussion on learning and cognition, this section will present a view on how knowledge claims can generally be structured, crafted, and positioned to maximize utility and learning, and to facilitate cultural evolution.

Cultural evolution occurs naturally and theoretical development should facilitate such evolution to enable human beings to mediate their changing environments with more relevant practices.

Research contributions can be defined as the development and use of theoretical concepts as a means to understand, observe, act, or bring forth a world with which to talk and interact. It is through theoretical concepts that human beings bring forth an understanding of the world. The assimilation of new concepts, therefore, depends on the ease with which they can be assimilated by the nervous system given the constraints of the existing nervous system structure. Alternatively, learning may need to dislodge conceptual phenomena already embedded in the nervous system [START_REF] Llewelyn | Methodological Issues: What Counts as Theory in Qualitative Management and Accounting Research? Introducing Five Levels of Theorizing[END_REF]. It can be inferred that there is a logical architecture to structure the phenomenal schema of the nervous system. Similarly, Varela et al. (1993) claim that a basic activity in cognition is categorization of the concepts that appear to come from the structured nature of bodily and social experiences.

In this paper, we attempt to give insight into the architecture of knowledge that human beings embody. The lens provided by [START_REF] Llewelyn | Methodological Issues: What Counts as Theory in Qualitative Management and Accounting Research? Introducing Five Levels of Theorizing[END_REF] is useful in this regard. There is also a taxonomy presented by [START_REF] Gregor | The Nature of Theory in Information Systems[END_REF] that is widely cited in the IS literature. For our purposes, Llewelyn=s work is more useful in providing a framework that gives insight into the architecture of how phenomenal domains evolve. Gregor=s work classifies theories according to purpose (i.e., analysis, explanation, prediction, explanation and prediction (EP), design, and action). These are descriptions of the utility and almost assume a rational and reflective human being. This taxonomy, while useful, does not consider the nature of human understanding from the perspective of both researchers and those being researched.

It is widely established in the IS research culture that new theories have the potential to bring new phenomena into being. In IS research, there is a rich history of using theoretical lenses to emphasize particular aspects of a research problem space. Theories also serve a more mundane and practical purpose in daily interaction. For the most part, the extent to which theories are influencing reality is not consciously known because they serve as a resource base to provide understanding of situations or provide a basis to acquire more understanding. All such as-lived experiences represent knowing, which can be unconscious or conscious. The taxonomy developed by Llewelyn provides for five different types of theories that manifest in uncovering reality for human beings, or are available to researchers as options to craft or contextualize research contributions. These are shown in Table 1.

Level 1 Metaphors

Morgan (cited in [START_REF] Llewelyn | Methodological Issues: What Counts as Theory in Qualitative Management and Accounting Research? Introducing Five Levels of Theorizing[END_REF] argues that a metaphor is a basic structural form of experience by which human beings engage, organize, and understand their world. The organizational metaphor is a well-known way in which organizational experiences are characterized. We have come to understand organizations as machines, organisms, brains, cultures, political systems, psychic prisons, instruments of domination, etc. [START_REF] Llewelyn | Methodological Issues: What Counts as Theory in Qualitative Management and Accounting Research? Introducing Five Levels of Theorizing[END_REF]. The metaphor is a basic way in which human beings ground their experiences and continue to evolve them by adding new, related concepts that carry aspects of the original metaphor. Later on in this paper, we will argue that the holon, or world view, from a systems thinking perspective is a kind of metaphor. The grounding metaphor then plays a role in initiating the conceptual framework. Much as in systems thinking, there is a served system (holon) and the serving system, which equates to the human activity system [START_REF] Checkland | Systems Thinking, Systems Practice[END_REF][START_REF] Checkland | Information, Systems and Information Systems: Making Sense of the Field[END_REF][START_REF] Checkland | Soft Systems Methodology in Action[END_REF]. Llewelyn emphasizes the manner in which metaphors allow human beings to understand and experience one kind of thing in terms of another by citing Lakoff and Johnson (1980). The first example given shows that when academic researchers experience arguments as war, some of the expressions of their experiences are given as follows:

$ AHe attacked every weak point in my argument@ $ AI demolished his argument@ $ AI=ve never won an argument with him@ $ AHe shot down all my arguments@ An important part of Lakoff and Johson=s analysis is that the metaphor influences both understanding, and also structures experience. To emphasize the point about metaphors, Llewellyn extends the discussion by showing that if argument is fused with debate instead of war, it was experienced as a give-and-take affair, the exchange of opinions, the realization that other points of view are necessary and everyone has a right to adopt a point of view. Through the discussion provided by Llewellyn it can be concluded that the power of a metaphor is that it provides foundational grounding in understanding of a phenomenon and any subsequent understanding has to either take cognisance of or negotiate the foundational understanding the metaphor has established. Additionally, it can also be inferred that people employ several metaphors to understand, theorize, and experience phenomena [START_REF] Llewelyn | Methodological Issues: What Counts as Theory in Qualitative Management and Accounting Research? Introducing Five Levels of Theorizing[END_REF]. [START_REF] Murphy | On Metaphoric Representation[END_REF], while acknowledging the pervasive effects metaphors have on imagination, also admits to the difficulty in providing a concise definition. In a structural sense Murphy claims metaphors can be used to represent abstract and complex phenomena using easier to understand domains. Therefore, there is often an attempt to present topics using various vehicles. Obviously the vehicles should not apply to the topics in straightforward or literal ways. Generally the metaphoric domain is carried by the vehicle and the concept is lit up or projected onto this domain. For example, an IS project could be understood as a temporary organization, or a language gamed instead of a life-cycle process.

Level 2 Theorization: Differentiation

Still ensconced in a world influenced by Cartesian dualism, a seemingly natural way by which human beings have come to understand is to adopt dualisms like inBout, presenceBabsence, upBdown, finiteBinfinite, mindBbody, publicBprivate, objectiveB subjective, and so on. Many of the dualisms are rooted in spatial and bodily experience. This is perhaps a basic way in which people cut up the pie of experience. As with metaphoric theorization, differentiation theorization can impede and enable new ways of thinking and doing. Differentiation theorization, therefore, aims to create meaning and significance by setting up contrasts and categories that order the world [START_REF] Llewelyn | Methodological Issues: What Counts as Theory in Qualitative Management and Accounting Research? Introducing Five Levels of Theorizing[END_REF]. In IS project management, there has been a shift from a dichotomous view of project failure and success to differentiating success for the project management process and emergent product.

Level 3 Theorization: Concept Theories

Concepts are described by Llewelyn as a basic form of theorization that is used to observe and represent the world. Concepts, therefore, give rise to practices. The example given by Llewelyn is that with the introduction of feminism, women were able to see their experiences differently. Feminism as a conceptual innovation gave rise to organizations that prioritized the ideals of feminism and challenged established norms. Conceptual innovations often replace, challenge, or change existing concepts. Level 2 differentiation theories can be used to sharpen conceptual categories. For example, feminism can be positioned as two ideals: feminism in developing countries and feminism in developed countries. Such differentiation of the concepts can draw attention to slightly different realities, which call for different sets of actions, which give rise to a phenomenal domain. Concepts, then, are a basic form of theorization that are extended and sharpened using level 1 and 2 categories. In the IS project management area, newer concepts of benefits realization have emerged to draw attention to how benefits accrue over time.

Level 4 Theorization: Theorizing Settings

Theorizing settings is defined by Llewelyn as the strategy of theorization that defines the contextual influences on specific individual, organizational, or social phenomena. The aim of this theorization is to explain or understand the wider social conditions under which practices are produced. The social settings of practices can exist at a number of levels and are not based directly on observable phenomena, and are therefore not dependent on empiricism. This implies that non-observable structural, social, and institutional phenomena may be included. Theorizing settings or context bound theories offer an understanding of the setting for the experience.

Level 5 Theorization: Grand Theorizing Structures

According to Llewelyn, grand theorizing is done in the world of ideas rather than the world of practice. In grand theories, practice on the ground is always influenced by structural conditions, and these are not necessarily observable through empirical efforts. Grand theorizing is concerned with understanding relationships of power.

How Soft Systems Thinking Treats the Effects of Language

From the works of [START_REF] Weick | Theory Construction as Disciplined Imagination[END_REF][START_REF] Weick | What Theorizing Is Not, Theorizing Is[END_REF], we know that theorizing is very much a process that is dependent on teasing out understanding and striving to make explicit hitherto implicit knowledge. Theorizing is closely linked to learning and sensemaking. Soft systems methodology (SSM) is a well-known approach to learning in and about complex IS problems. Surprisingly it has not been used widely in the process of IS theorizing [START_REF] Sewchurran | A Systemic Framework for Business Process Modeling Combining Soft Systems Methodology and UML[END_REF]. This may be due to the lack of understanding of the role of language in theorizing and creating reality. Conventional qualitative research methods pay some attention to language but do not give enough attention to the role of language in generating deeper explanations of the why, as is prescribed by SSM, through the articulation of world views and root definitions.

We argue, therefore, that the use of SSM in qualitative research presents an opportunity to deepen theorizing, because it has had success in contributing to understanding situations and concerns in various other interventions. SSM embraces a number of practices that are grounded in the assumption that language is central to learning, understanding, and behavior. First, SSM emphasizes drawing rich pictures to grasp and express the situation of concern. This emphasis on not using words is an attempt to give structure to the background conditions that give rise to the situation of concern. The value of this process is that it allows for coherent understanding of the background to emerge through symbolism. These symbols represent structural conditions that are difficult to express in words but are manifest in the situation as tacit and embodied assumptions. This first step in the expression of the situation of concern allows for learning to take place. Through discussion and participation in this exercise, stakeholder appreciation and understanding is enhanced because of the orienting effects of conversation. Perhaps the most important reason to pursue the use of SSM in research is that it makes it possible to explore and articulate world views and perspectives of why through disciplined and facilitated imagination. These world views are important because they are the analogical basis that gives rise to subsequent attitudes and reactions. Often world views are not adequately investigated or articulated in research and only characteristics of behavior are aggregated in building theories.

Efforts at empirical research often produce theoretical contributions as abstracted models that describe phenomena as concepts with predicate relationships. While these contributions have value, they are often closed off from facilitating conditions and are not connected to representations of why [START_REF] Smyth | An Epistemological Evaluation of Research into Projects and Their Management: Methodological Issues[END_REF]. We argue that these are not forward-looking enough, as they are not developed within an organizing trajectory that is guided by the relevant perspectives. This explanation would also clarify why the research framework given later in this paper provides more forward looking capability than, for example, grounded theory methods. The argument could also be made that contributions developed outside a systemic organizing trajectory will not, by design, be analogical enough to give future related findings coherence. Consequently, research efforts will more likely confound than they will aggregate and emancipate. In this paper we argue that the underlying metaphor or holons that gives rise to concepts has not been appreciated enough. There are many reasons for this. The two reasons this paper addresses are, first, there is a general lack of insight into how to structure holons as theories, and second, there is not enough emphasis placed on the value such understanding has in generating explanation. Both of these probably emerge from the general lack of appreciation for the value in using the SSM process as a research process to build theory. A suggestion of how this can be done is given in the next section.

Prescription on How to Use Soft System Thinking in Research Processes

We have been using the research framework described in this section to study IS projects and this has helped us develop this version of the method. In the context of this paper, we argue that IS project management practitioners and researchers have been constrained by unrealistic notions of projects. Practitioners and researchers are locked into a restricted paradigm of understanding and are having difficulty emerging from it, because narrow metaphors continue to shape experiences of projects in research and practice. From Nelson=s (2007) research it is evident how research results are impacted when understanding is restricted to just the observable human activities (humanBactivityBsystem). The suggestion to use SSM as a research framework puts forward the premise that world views and root definitions provide more forward-looking explanations than theories modeled at the human activity level, such as Nelson=s.

In systems thinking, especially soft systems thinking, a fundamental assumption that is made is that each person is guided by holons. An alternative way of expressing this is to say that behavior is, for the most part, perceptually guided and embodied. A holon represents the meaningful activity that is worth being pursued. It is accepted in the SSM tradition that holons are not normally readily explicable in linguistic terms as they are tacit and embodied. However, SSM promotes that holons can be teased out. SSM offers processes and devices to engage in learning to render holons explicable. It is, therefore, reasonable to expect that through SSM a linguistic realization of the concepts, analogies, and metaphors that motivate understanding or action in a particular context can be developed.

Figure 1 shows how the core abstractions of served and serving systems interrelate in the context of an information system. In systems thinking terms, the holon represents the served-system as the metaphor. This is the basic structural form which defines the essence of purposeful activity or system for a particular stakeholder, or stakeholder group. Research projects that target explanations or descriptions of served-systems could make use of SSM. [START_REF] Sewchurran | An Investigation into Successfully Managing and Sustaining the Project-Sponsor Project-Manager Relationships Using Soft Systems Methodology[END_REF], for example, attempted to do such research to unearth the world views that characterize project experiences among project managers and project sponsors. The aim of their inquiry was to understand the perspectives as well as what influences the perspectives of project managers and project sponsors about how relationships are managed and sustained during the delivery of IT projects, and how the relationships ultimately impact the project outcome. The questioning was thus at the level of the served-system rather than serving-system (see Figure 1).

The served and serving systems exist and evolve in an interdependent manner as is highlighted in Figure 1. While SSM=s strength has been the definition of the served-system the work systems method (WSM) [START_REF] Alter | The Work System Method for Understanding Information Systems and Information Systems Research[END_REF] which is a relatively new theoretical framework promises to be more rigorous and useful to describe the serving-systems. For our purposes in this paper a serving system is a work system in which human participants and/or machines perform work using IS and other resources to produce products and/or services for internal or external customers. As-lived project experiences can be described using constructs from the WSM. The WSM is both a descriptive theory and an approach (prescriptive theory) on how to think about, model and define the elements of the work systems. The approach can also be used in order to discern how serving systems relate in the context of served-systems as is highlighted in Figure 2.

The descriptions of the served and serving systems are complementary and in a research process should be undertaken together to ensure that the hermeneutic benefits materialize. If an analysis is done using WSM and SSM together, the detail of the serving system will enrich the understanding of the served systems. The understanding of the served-systems will similarly enrich the understanding of the servingsystem. This will provide learning from details to abstraction in a complementary way. The use of SSM and WSM presents an opportunity to enhance the abstracted contribution of traditional empirical qualitative research to improve the contributions= analogous value to future problems, as well as to embrace and recognize the embodied role of the researcher and those being studied. Generating forward-looking theories of IS phenomena can then be achieved using system concepts. Figure 2 shows how the two strands of research enquiry guided by the approaches of SSM and WSM can inform a research process by relating experienced reality to ideas of purposeful activity. In this manner, abstract knowledge can be built analogically from more experience-based knowledge.

The SSM technique can be used to learn about a particular situation from a group of stakeholders who have specific experience of the problem area in an instance of the more general problem. The usefulness of the findings will be dependent on careful selection of homogenous instances of the more general problem. Through focus groups or interviews, the researcher can use the SSM sense-making devices of CATWOE (customers, actors, transformation process, world view, owners, environment) analysis, root definitions (definition of systems deemed relevant to the phenomenon under investigation), and WSM concepts to make sense of the participants= ideas of what is going on, or what should go on. As the researcher progresses through interaction with selected groups of stakeholders, he/she has to relate the findings from the study back to the extant literature and feed these connections back to the study on an on-going basisCthis we see as the process of disciplined imagination as described by [START_REF] Weick | Theory Construction as Disciplined Imagination[END_REF].

The cycle can end arbitrarily or as soon as the findings begin to show saturation. Depending on the findings, the results may need to be categorized or stratified. It may even be necessary for the researcher to present his/her perspective as well if such insight is deemed useful. The emerging results are expected to constitute a systemic account of what is going on and/or what needs to happen from the perspective of those actors working in a common problem space. We argue that such contributions will constitute more holistic and coherent findings and will rival the current approaches of understanding phenomena through factors influencing a phenomenon or critical success factors. Better approximations of what is going on can be achieved. Such findings will also address the need for forward-looking theory as they would be imagined within an organizing trajectory that is analogical. The contributions that emerge from this research process can be structured using Llewelyn=s (2003) principles, but will also fall into Gregor=s (2006) taxonomy as predictive theory or explanatory-and-predictive theory.

Conclusion

In this paper, we presented an approach to using systems concepts in order to generate forward-looking theory that maximally impacts the future. We used our experience of researching IS projects to show how it is sometimes necessary to find new metaphors and analogies to underpin theory development. We first provided insight into the as-lived condition that makes human beings prone to being imprisoned by theories of yesteryear to substantiate the need for forward-looking theories. [START_REF] Heidegger | Being and Time[END_REF] identified a type of fore-having which shapes and affects understanding that sets human existence and becoming along a trajectory. In this paper, we made the case that this fore-having can be estimated using SSM and WSM concepts. We presented a research framework that includes SSM and WSM to estimate this fore-having which shapes perspective and behavior. A unique feature of the research framework presented here is the disciplined imagination process that is expected to happen within an organizing trajectory led by relevant world views. We argue that such findings will be more opulent in offering insight that is forward-looking because it is imagined along the trajectory of human becoming. The research framework presented here is being used in current research projects in South Africa. We expect that our ideas of the research framework will evolve with our experiences. While this effort is only a single attempt to imagine how we can generate theory about IS phenomena and ensure that these are forward-looking, we hope we have also contributed by demonstrating the importance language, as-lived reality, and human becoming have on the debate about forward-looking theory.

Figure 1 .

 1 Figure 1. Information System as Serving and Served Systems (from Checkland and Howell 1998)

Figure 2 .

 2 Figure 2. The Process of Disciplined Imagination Using SSM and WSM

Table 1 .

 1 Five Levels of Theorization (fromLlewelyn 2003, p. 667)

	Level	Theory	Focus
	1	Metaphor theories	As a means to ground experience. Examples of metaphors
			are software development is a game of invention and
			communication (Cockburn 2002).
	2	Differentiation	Facilitate Acutting the pie@ of experience. Examples of
		theories	differentiation theories are Maslow=s hierarchy of needs or
			the SDLC cycle.
	3	Concept theories	Examples of concept theories are feminism, business
			process change, etc. These concepts give access to a
			phenomenal world.
	4	Theories which	Explaining how contexts for practices are organized.
		focus on settings	Examples of theorizing settings are challenges in global
			software development from a South Africa industry
			perspective.
	5	Theorizing	Explaining impersonal, large-scale, and enduring aspects of
		structures	social life. Examples are modernism, post-modernism, and
			post-colonialism.

Forward-Looking Theories Using Systems Concepts

About the Authors

Kosheek Sewchurran is an associate professor of Information Systems at the University of Cape Town and a research associate with the Centre for IT and National Development in Africa (CITANDA). He currently serves on the editorial boards of International Journal of Managing Projects in Business and International Journal of IT and the Systems Approach (IJITSA).

Irwin Brown is a professor in the Department of Information Systems at the University of Cape Town where he is also deputy dean of research in the commerce faculty. In addition, he is the director of the Centre for IT and National Development in Africa (CITANDA). He holds positions as the South African national representative of IFIP TC8 (Information Systems) and the IS subeditor of South African Computer Journal.