Grounded theory and action research as pillars for interpretive information systems research: A comparative study

2Citations
Citations of this article
66Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

In the literature survey, there is evidence “why an interpretive paradigm is more suitable for evaluating e-government systems”. However, more than one method can be used when applying interpretive paradigm for evaluating information systems (as we do not consider e-government systems as exception) such as Action Research (AR) and Grounded Theory (GT). In this regard, two problems will arise: First, there is no explicit method that clarifies how AR and GT methods can be used for evaluating information systems. The second problem is to determine which method of them will be more appropriate for evaluating information systems. Accordingly, two frameworks for evaluating e-government systems have been proposed, namely ‘Grounded Evaluation Framework’ (GEF) and ‘Action Research Evaluation Framework’ (AREF), which are based on Grounded Theory (GT) and Action Research (AR) methods respectively, to give an example how GT and AR methods can be used in evaluating information systems. The suggested GEF and AREF have been applied to the “University Enrolment Service” in Egyptian e-government, and the findings have been analyzed to conclude that GEF is more appropriate for evaluating e-government systems.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Abdel-Fattah, M. A. (2015). Grounded theory and action research as pillars for interpretive information systems research: A comparative study. Egyptian Informatics Journal, 16(3), 309–327. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eij.2015.07.002

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free