Nissen's Contextualist Theory

2307 Words10 Pages
Nissen has introduced the debate without propagating any specific methodology to be adopted. He is one of the few scholars who realize that there are negative effects of technology as well but Nissen makes no attempt to elaborate on the point. The stress caused by technology leads to failure in implementations. He introduces the points well and arguments in favor of why study of humans as subjects rather than objects is drawn out well. The most important question that he is able to ask is, “Whom are we creating and systemizing the knowledge for?” When he poses the question he leaves it open to interpretation by the reader and Cooper has responded to it in his comment. Pettigrew’s concerns are also reflected in the question. The nature of this…show more content…
Cooper points out the same issue. His reference to figure and ground has been elaborated in detail in Phenomenology. What he refers to as spending great deal of time in the research setting and doing a longitudinal study has been widely used in anthropological studies using ethnography, where researcher is supposed to immerse himself in the field. Yin has argued that evidence for case studies can come from documents, archival records, interviews, direct observation, participant observation and physical artifacts. What he suggests is the need to study the content, context and process of organizational change and has also based all his arguments on studies in the field of organizational change. Pettigrew suggest that researchers be open to and be sensitive to back talk by the situation. This has been one of the strongest arguments of his paper. He postulates that back talk is what keeps the reflective conversation character of the inquiry alive. The process of getting this back talk aligns with what Sandberg refers to as dialogue in his action research. With reference to the initial theories that researcher uses to make sense of their research setting the back talk helps researcher to refine, refute or abandon them totally. With back talk and multilevel analysis triangulation is also very important to verify what researcher has…show more content…
He believes some analysis is always better than purely descriptive work. With the pace with which technology changes and people have to learn-unlearn-relearn these thick descriptions could help scholars find patterns in acceptance and avoidance of technology and find differences and similarities in situations. As much as theories are important, where they come from is equally important. Only after knowing the roots of the theory it can be connected to the data and applied to other such situations and it also leads to incremental addition to knowledge. During longitudinal studies these thick descriptions could help researchers to build the correct picture of organization back in

More about Nissen's Contextualist Theory

Open Document