The use of activity theory and actor network theory as lenses to underpin information systems studies
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/JSIT-10-2017-0098 |
| Published date | 14 May 2018 |
| Pages | 191-206 |
| Date | 14 May 2018 |
| Author | Monica Nehemia-Maletzky,Tiko Iyamu,Irja Shaanika |
| Subject Matter | Information & knowledge management,Information systems,Information & communications technology |
The use of activity theory
and actor network theory as
lenses to underpin information
systems studies
Monica Nehemia-Maletzky
Faculty of Informatics and Design, Cape Peninsula University of Technology,
Cape Town, South Africa
Tiko Iyamu
Department of Information Technology, Faculty of Informatics and Design,
Cape Peninsula University of Technology, Cape Town, South Africa, and
Irja Shaanika
Faculty of Informatics and Design, Cape Peninsula University of Technology,
Cape Town, South Africa
Abstract
Purpose –This study aims to examine how both activitytheory (AT) and actor network theory (ANT) can
be complementarilyapplied in information system (IS) studies.
Design/methodology/approach –The interpretivist approach was followed, within which the
qualitative methodswere used. Existing literature was gathered as data.The analysis was done by following
the interpretiveapproach.
Findings –Based on the analysisand discussion, a guide for complementary use of both AT and ANT in IS
studies was developed.The guide is divided into two parts, which helps to achievethe objectives of the study:
complimentaryuse of AT and ANT in an IS study and order-of-useof both theories in a study, as depicted in
the framework.
Originality/value –This study is original in that it hasnot previously been published in part or full. The
resultsof thestudy is intended to be of value to both IS postgraduate students and researchers.
Keywords Qualitative study, Data analysis, Information systems, Actor network theory,
Activity theory
Paper type Research paper
1. Introduction
Many organisations continue to encounter challenges in the areas of development,
implementation, innovation and maintenance in the field of information systems and
technologies (IS/IT) (Yujieand Xindi, 2010). Hinkelmann and Pasquini (2014) suggested that
the challenges are caused by both technical and non-technical factors. Thus, studies are
conducted to understand how these factors affect each other in terms of IS/IT effectiveness,
development and growth in some organisations. Mkhomazi and Iyamu (2013) explained
why research works are carried out on IS, primarily to understand what and why things
happened, including the influences and impacts that they have on the environments where
they are deployed. In theirquest to achieving such aims, some IS researchers use theoriesas
Activity
theory
191
Received24 October 2017
Revised18 January 2018
1March 2018
Accepted22 April 2018
Journalof Systems and
InformationTechnology
Vol.20 No. 2, 2018
pp. 191-206
© Emerald Publishing Limited
1328-7265
DOI 10.1108/JSIT-10-2017-0098
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:
www.emeraldinsight.com/1328-7265.htm
a means to guide the analysis of their data,so as to gain better understanding of why things
happen in the way that they do. Sociotechnical theories, such as activity theory (AT) and
actor network theory (ANT), are increasing, but separately used as lenses in IS studies, to
guide data analysis and interpretation beyond the norm (Iyamu, 2013). AT and ANT has
been increasingly appliedas lenses in IS studies in the past two decades. Both AT and ANT
draw on social technical contexts, but from different perspectives. However, the varying
scopes of many IS studies make it necessary to apply multiple theories to underpin them.
This is mainly to ensure a comprehensive coverage of the diverseobjectives and avoid gap
in the studies. Thus, among others, Atkinson and Brooks (2003) and Iyamu and Roode
(2010) complementarily used structuration theory (ST) and ANT in their respective studies.
The theories of AT and ANT have been applied in IS studies over the years, but separately
(Hasan et al.,2017;Wong,2016).
AT is a socio-technical theory that is concerned with the development of social
activities (Shaanika and Iyamu, 2015). Dennehy and Conboy (2017) suggested that the
theory has been used as a conceptual framework for analysing complex and human
activities within social systems. This is mainly because activity is a sum of actions that
living beings carry out to achieve their goals, as synonymous in IS studies. An activity is
a system of actions in pursuit of some socially determined object (Hasan et al., 2017). An
object is the rationale or motive why an activity is initiated. To achieve these objectives,
humans wholly depend on the technical and physiological artefacts (tools) as a mediating
means between them and the object. Tools can take various forms depending upon the
context of the study, as such, they may range from instruments, signs, procedures,
machines, languages methods, laws or forms of work organisation (Er et al., 2010). In the
process of carrying out activities, the subjects that are involved consciously plan their
actions and interact with other humans within the communities. Within each social
systems (communities), there are rules, which are implicitly or explicitly used to govern
activities, as well as manage the interactions that happen in the process of allocating
tasks and responsibilities among the actors (Karanasios and Allen, 2013). However, AT
does not cover areas, such as how interaction came to being, how an activity is
problematised and how the relationship operates, which ANT focuses on. Some
important factors are the relationship and interaction between human and non-human in
the development and implementation of IS/IT in the various environments. According to
Callon (1981),actors’interaction creates associations, and defines one another through
the intermediaries that pass between them.
ANT is considered to be a highly influential theory within the sociology of science that
seeks to explain and interpret socio-technological development and change (Iyamu, 2015).
The main tenets of ANT includeactor and network (Baiocchi et al.,2013).In ANT, actors are
both human and non-human entity,which have the capability of changing a certain state of
affairs (Müller and Schurr,2016). ANT is thus known for advocating a flat ontology between
humans and non-humans in an environment, which is called agnosticism. This refers to
examining human and non-human actors equally, without priority given to either
technology or social issues about them (Wong, 2016). People, technology and processes are
thus regarded to be of equal importanceand value in ANT. Irrespective of whether the actor
is human or non-human, theyare both weighed equally, and they are considered to offerthe
same contributionto a network (Wernick et al.,2008).
The separate use of AT and ANT in some IS studies can possibly affect the results due to
their scopes. The complementary use of both theories means bridging the gap that each
theory cannot comprehend if applied alone. Iyamu (2015) asserted that, based on study’s
objectives, a single theory may not be able to fully cover the objectives, hence the
JSIT
20,2
192
To continue reading
Request your trial