Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Dealing with Critical IS Research: Artifacts, Drifts, Electronic Panopticon and Illusions of Empowerment

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Designing Organizational Systems

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Information Systems and Organisation ((LNISO,volume 1))

Abstract

The chapter explores the diversity of topics, views and perspectives focused on the relationship between information systems (IS) and control, from a critical perspective. The work reflects upon the framework of Critical IS Research and its relation to Foucaultian approach and IS practice, informing the discussion on the ways IS and managerial Discourses framing the organizational reality. For this purpose, a case study of call centre outsourced industry is presented. We have explained how the overlapping between “electronic panopticon” and “commitment practices” used by management becomes a powerful tool for exerting influence and control in the sense of self-discipline and self-regulation. From this point of view, these tools are merely illusions of empowerment, representing only an apparent departure from traditional form of control, reiterating the idea of technological Discourse as a means of manipulation.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Emancipation was a central thrust of the early Frankfurt School, partly explainable by its Marxist lineage. The concept of emancipation developed by Alvesson and Wilmott [28] describes the process through which “individuals and groups become freed from repressive social and ideological conditions, in particular those that place socially unnecessary restrictions upon the development and articulation of human consciousness” (p. 432). In Habermas view, emancipation requires what he calls “communicative action”. One of the key themes in his writings is the need for mutual understanding through undistorted communication/language. In relation to IS the concept of emancipation leads to “emancipator IS development” and to “participatory design”, including the organizational use of IS. The concern is how the development and use of IS entrench social structures that oppress organizational actors. From this point of view, IS should be designed, not just for organizational effectiveness, but also to emancipate people from undesirable social and physical constraints.

  2. 2.

    The name used is fictitious.

  3. 3.

    The author of this paragraph is Alessia Berni, alessia.berni@uniparthenope.it.

References

  1. Ezzamel, M., Willmott, H., & Worthington, F. (2001). Power, control and resistance in the factory that time forgot. Journal of Management Studies, 38(8), 1053–1080.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Contu, A. (2007). Groups and teams at work. In: H. Willmott, D. Knights (Eds.), Introducing organizational behaviour and management. London: Thomson Learning.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Willmott, H. (2005). Theorizing contemporary control: Some postructuralist responses to some critical realist questions. Organization, 12(5), 747–780.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Doolin, B., & McLeod, L. (2005). Towards critical interpretivism in IS research. In: D. Howcroft, E. M. Trauth (Eds.), Handbook of critical information systems research: Theory and application (pp. 244–271). Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Cecez-Kecmanovic, D., Klein, H. K., & Brooke, C. (2008). Exploring the critical research agenda in information systems research. Information Systems Journal, 18(2), 123–135.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Adler, P. S., Forbes, L. C., & Willmott, H. (2007). Critical management studies. Academy of Management Annals, 1, 119–179.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Avgerou, C., Mansell, R., Quah, D., & Silverstone, R. (2007). The Oxford handbook of information and communication technologies. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Braverman, H. (1974). Labour and monopoly capital. New York: Monthly Review Press.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Alvesson, M., & Deetz, S. (2000). Doing critical management research. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Ashcraft, K. L. (2009). Gender and diversity: Other ways to make a difference. In M. Alvesson, T. Bridgman, & H. Willmott (Eds.), Oxford handbook of critical management studies. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Spicer, A., Alvesson, M., & Kärreman, D. (2009). Critical performativity: The unfinished business of critical management studies. Human Relations, 62(4), 537–560.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Alvesson, M., & Willmott, H. (1992). Critical management studies. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Pezzillo Iacono, M., Toraldo, M. L. (2011). Handbook dei critical management studies review: Prospettive critiche agli studi manageriali. Performance & Management, 2, 49–54.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Alvesson, M., Bridgman, T., & Willmott, H. (Eds.). (2009). Oxford handbook of critical management studies. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Pezzillo Iacono, M., Esposito, V., Mercurio, R. (2012) Controllo manageriale e regolazione dell’identità organizzativa: la prospettiva dei Critical Management Studies. Management Control, 1, 7–26.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Howcroft, D. (2009). Information System. In M. Alvesson, T. Bridgman, & H. Willmott (Eds.), Oxford handbook of critical management studies. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Doolin, B. (2002). Enterprise discourse, professional identity and the organizational control of hospital clinicians. Organization Studies, 23(3), 369–390.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. McLoughlin, I., & Harris, M. (1997). Innovation, organizational change and technology. London: International Thompson Business Paper.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Orlikowski, W. J., & Baroudi, J. J. (1991). Studying information technology in organizations: research approaches and assumptions. Information Systems Research, 2(1), 1–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Cecez-Kecmanovic, D. (2005). Basic assumptions of the critical research perspectives in information systems. In D. Howcroft & E. Trauth (Eds.), Handbook of critical information systems research: Theory and application (pp. 19–46). UK, Edward Elgar: Aldershot.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Brocklesby, J., & Cummings, S. (1996). Foucault plays Habermas: An alternative philosophical underpinning for critical systems thinking. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 47(6), 741–754.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Myers, M. D., & Klein, H. (2011). A set of principles for conducting critical research in information systems. MIS Quarterly, 35(1), 17–36.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Brooke, C. (2002). Critical research in information systems. Journal of Information Technology, 17(2), 45–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Jones, G. (2009). Poststructuralism. In M. Alvesson, T. Bridgman, & H. Willmott (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of critical management studies. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Fournier, V., & Grey, C. (2000). At the critical moment: Conditions and prospects for critical management studies. Human Relations, 53(1), 7–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Sveningsson, S., & Alvesson, M. (2003). Managing managerial identities: Organizational fragmentation, discourse and Identity Struggle. Human Relations, 56(10), 1141–1193.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Alvesson, M., & Willmott, H. (2002). Identity regulation as organizational control: Producing the appropriate individual. Journal of Management Studies, 39, 619–644.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Alvesson, M., & Willmott, H. (1992). On the idea of emancipation in management and organization studies. Academy of Management Review, 17(3), 432–464.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Consiglio, S., Moschera, L., Berni, A., Cicellin, M. (2010) Institutional logics and the rise of a new organisational field, 6th New Institutionalism Workshop, Lyon.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Alvesson, M., & Karreman, D. (2000). Varieties of discourse: On the study of organizations through discourse analysis. Human Relations, 53(9), 1125–1149.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Foucault, M. (1977). Discipline and punish. New York: Vintage.

    Google Scholar 

  32. du Gay, P., & Salaman, G. (1992). The cult[ure] of the consumer. Journal of Management Studies, 29, 615–633.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Barker, R. J. (1993). Tightening the iron cage: Concertive control in self-managing teams. Administrative Science Quarterly, 38, 408–437.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Foucault, M. (1980). Power/knowledge. New York: Pantheon.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Franco, M., & Mariano, S. (2007). Information technology repositories and knowledge management processes: A qualitative analysis. Vine, 37(4), 440–451.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Doolin, B. (2009). Information systems and power: A Foucauldian perspective. In C. Brooke (Ed.), Critical management perspectives on information systems (pp. 211–230). Oxford: Butterworth Heinemann.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Bauman, Z. (2001). Community: Seeking safety in an insecure world. Cambridge: Polity Press.

    Google Scholar 

  38. Bauman, Z. (2002). Society under siege. Cambridge : Polity Press.

    Google Scholar 

  39. Bauman, Z. (1998). Globalization. The human consequences. New York: Columbia University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  40. Zuboff, S. (1988). In the age of the smart machine: The future of work and power. New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  41. Cooper, R. (1991). Formal organization as representation: Remote control, displacement, abbreviation. In M. Reed & M. Hughes (Eds.), Rethinking organization. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  42. Alvesson, M. (2010). Self-doubters, strugglers, storytellers, surfers and others: Images of self-identities in organization studies. Human Relations, 63(2), 193–217.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Sewell, G., & Wilkinson, B. (1992). “Someone to watch over me”: Surveillance, discipline and the just-in-time labour process. Sociology, 26(2), 271–289.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Ciborra, C. U. (2000). A critical review of the literature on the management of corporate information infrastructure. In C. U. Ciborra (Ed.), From control to drift: The dynamics of corporate information infrastructures (pp. 15–40). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  45. Klecun, E. (2011) Information and communication technologies as control mechanisms. Proceeding VII CMS International Conference, Naples.

    Google Scholar 

  46. Ciborra, C. U. (2002). The labyrinths of information: Challenging the wisdom of systems. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  47. Rajao, R., & Hayes, N. (2009). Conceptions of control and IT artefacts: An institutional account of the Amazon rainforest monitoring system. Journal of Information Technology, 24(4), 320–331.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Fligstein, N. (1990). The transformation of corporate control. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  49. Martinez, M. (2011). ICT, productivity and organizational complementarity. In: C. Rossignoli, A. Carugati (Eds.), Emerging themes in information systems and organization studies (pp. 271–281). Heidelberg: Physica-Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  50. Orlikowski, W. J. (2000). Using technology and constituting structures: a practice lens for studying technology in organizations. Organization Science, 11(4), 404–428.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Bloomfield, B., & Coombs, R. (1992). Information technology, control And power: The centralization and decentralization debate revisited. Journal of Management Studies, 29(4), 459–470.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Weick, K. E., Sutcliffe, K. M., & Obstfeld, D. (2005). Organizing and the process of sensemaking. Organizations Science, 16(4), 409–421.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Orlikowski, W. J. (2002). Knowing in practices: Enacting a collective capability in distributed organizing. Organization Science, 13(3), 249–273.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Knights, D., & Murrey, F. (1994). Managers divided: Organizational politics and IT management. London: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  55. Introna, L. D. (1997). Management, information and power. London: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  56. Bloomfield, B., & Danieli, A. (1995). The role of management consultants in the devleopment of information technology: The indissoluble nature of socio-political and technical skills. Journal of Management Studies, 33(1), 27–46.

    Google Scholar 

  57. Brooke, C. (2009). Critical perspective on information systems. Oxford: Elsevier.

    Google Scholar 

  58. Mulholland, K. (2002). Gender, emotional labour and team working in a call centre. Team Working in a Call Centre, Personnel Review, 31(3), 283–303.

    Google Scholar 

  59. Berni, A. Pezzillo Iacono, M., Martinez, M. (2012) Organizational change and dynamics of control: An analysis of Italian Call Center Workplace. Chinese Business Review, 11(4), 402–410.

    Google Scholar 

  60. Callaghan, G., & Thompson, P. (2002). (2002), “We recruit attitude”: The selection and shaping of routine call centre labour. Journal of Management Studies, 39(2), 233–254.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  61. Fernie, S., & Metcalf, D. (1998). (Not) hanging on the telephone: Payment systems in the new sweatshops. CEP Discussion paper, 390, 1–41.

    Google Scholar 

  62. Yin, R. K. (2003). Case study research: Design and methods (3rd ed.). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  63. Jabar, M. A., Sidi, F., Selamat, M. H., Ghani, A. A. A., & Ibrahim, H. (2009). An Investigation into methods and concepts of qualitative research in information system research. Computer and information Science, 2(4), 47–54.

    Google Scholar 

  64. Orlikowski, W. J. (1993). CASE tools as organizational change: Investigating incremental and radical changes in systems development. MIS Quarterly, 17(3), 309–340.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  65. Macdonald, C. L., Sirianni C. (Eds.) (1996) Working in the service society. Temple University Press. Philadelphia.

    Google Scholar 

  66. Bain, P., Taylor, P. (2000) Entrapped by the “electronic panopticon” Worker.resistance in the call centre, New Technology. Work and Employment, 15(1), 2–18.

    Google Scholar 

  67. Canonico, P., De Nito, E., Mangia, G., Mercurio, R., & Esposito, V. (2009). Interpreting projects: Bureaucratical mechanisms to enforce control or lever for change. Organizacja I Zarzadanie, 3(7), 5–16.

    Google Scholar 

  68. Kunda, G. (1992). Engineering culture: Control and commitment in a high-tech corporation. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  69. Bauman, Z. (2000). Liquid modernity. Cambridge: Polity Press.

    Google Scholar 

  70. Knight, D., Willmott, H. (2011) Organizational analysis. Essential readings, Cengage learning EMEA.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Economics, Second University of Naples, Capua, Italy

    Marcello Martinez & Mario Pezzillo Iacono

Authors
  1. Marcello Martinez
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Mario Pezzillo Iacono
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Marcello Martinez .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Dept. Computer Information Systems, Georgia State University, Broad Street 35, Atlanta, 30302, Georgia, USA

    Richard Baskerville

  2. Università Cattolica, Milano, 20123, Italy

    Marco De Marco

  3. , CeRSI, LUISS Guido Carli, via Alberoni 7, Roma, 00198, Italy

    Paolo Spagnoletti

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2013 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Martinez, M., Iacono, M.P. (2013). Dealing with Critical IS Research: Artifacts, Drifts, Electronic Panopticon and Illusions of Empowerment. In: Baskerville, R., De Marco, M., Spagnoletti, P. (eds) Designing Organizational Systems. Lecture Notes in Information Systems and Organisation, vol 1. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-33371-2_5

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation