Start Date
14-12-2012 12:00 AM
Description
This panel discusses how to take the ontological paradigm of Sociomateriality to the field using alternative theoretical lenses that embody sociomaterial ideas. Based on exemplary papers, Samer Faraj, Karlheinz Kautz, Daniel Robey, and Ulrike Schultze present the advantages of the lens they have drawn on to inform their empirical re-search. Through their discussion the panelists illustrate how they designed their studies accordingly and defend why their approach allows them to make empirical observations of the Sociomaterial. Informed by this comparative debate, the audience gains insights into the panelists’ experiences with conducting, writing, and editing Sociomaterial research. The audi-ence will thus understand the methodological differences of the alternative lenses as well as important commonalities that make a study sociomaterial. As a key takea-way, the panel provides guidance on how to contribute to sociomaterial theorizing, thus supporting the recent trend towards Sociomateriality in the IS research com-munity.
Recommended Citation
Mueller, Benjamin; Raeth, Philip; Faraj, Samer; Kautz, Karlheinz; Robey, Daniel; and Schultze, Ulrike, "On the Methodological and Philosophical Challenges of Sociomaterial Theorizing: An Overview of Competing Conceptualizations" (2012). ICIS 2012 Proceedings. 3.
https://aisel.aisnet.org/icis2012/proceedings/Panels/3
On the Methodological and Philosophical Challenges of Sociomaterial Theorizing: An Overview of Competing Conceptualizations
This panel discusses how to take the ontological paradigm of Sociomateriality to the field using alternative theoretical lenses that embody sociomaterial ideas. Based on exemplary papers, Samer Faraj, Karlheinz Kautz, Daniel Robey, and Ulrike Schultze present the advantages of the lens they have drawn on to inform their empirical re-search. Through their discussion the panelists illustrate how they designed their studies accordingly and defend why their approach allows them to make empirical observations of the Sociomaterial. Informed by this comparative debate, the audience gains insights into the panelists’ experiences with conducting, writing, and editing Sociomaterial research. The audi-ence will thus understand the methodological differences of the alternative lenses as well as important commonalities that make a study sociomaterial. As a key takea-way, the panel provides guidance on how to contribute to sociomaterial theorizing, thus supporting the recent trend towards Sociomateriality in the IS research com-munity.