Although mentioned frequently in the organization, management, public administration, and technology literatures, workarounds are understudied and undertheorized. This article provides an integrated theory of workarounds that describes how and why workarounds are created. The theory covers most types of workarounds and most situations in which workarounds occur in operational systems. This theory is based on a broad but useful definition of workaround that clarifies the preconditions for the occurrence of a workaround. The literature review is organized around a diagram that combines the five "voices" in the literature of workarounds. That diagram is modeled after the diagram summarizing Orton and Weick's [1990] loose coupling theory, which identified and combined five similar voices in the literature about loose coupling. Building on that basis, the theory of workarounds is a process theory driven by the interaction of key factors that determine whether possible workarounds are considered and how they are executed. This theory is useful for classifying workarounds and analyzing how they occur, for understanding compliance and noncompliance to methods and management mandates, for incorporating consideration of possible workarounds into systems analysis and design, and for studying how workarounds and other adaptations sometimes lead to larger planned changes in systems.

This paper presents a current, accessible, and overarching view of work system theory. WST is the core of an integrated body of theory that emerged from a long-term research project to develop a systems analysis and design method for business professionals called the work system method (WSM). After discussing WST's basic premises and its two central frameworks, this paper summarizes the relationship between WST and WSM. It shows how experience with early versions of WSM led to three extensions of WST that addressed limitations-inuse in one of the central frameworks in WST. After comparisons with related theories, this paper closes with an evaluation of progress to date, new directions for research related to WST, and implications for the IS discipline. The two appendices summarize the long term research from which WST emerged and use a positioning map to show how WST is related to other topics in the IS discipline.

The lack of an agreed upon definition of information system (IS) is one of many obstacles troubling the academic IS discipline. After listing a number of definitions of IS, this paper defines IS as a special case of work system as defined in Alter (1999a). This definition has many desirable characteristics: it is easy to understand; differentiates IS from information technology (IT); covers totally manual, partially automated, and totally automated ISs; links to a life cycle model that generates many insights about development and implementation problems; provides a simple guideline that helps in interpreting common IS/IT jargon; and has other useful implications related to IS concepts, IS terminology, and the analysis and design of ISs. The paper presents the proposed IS definition and evaluates the definition in terms of simplicity, clarity, scope, systematic power, explanatory power, validity, reliability, and fruitfulness. An Appendix summarizes previously published concepts and two frameworks that flow from the proposed definition and are useful for appreciating many points in the evaluation section.In an EJIS editorial, Ray Paul (2007) identified five challenges related to the state of the information system (IS) discipline. One of those challenges was to produce a definition of the term IS. Many definitions have been proposed over the years by researchers and textbook authors, but most are viewed as unsatisfactory for one reason or another.One of the reasons for the dissatisfaction is that the term IS is used to refer to different types of objects that have many aspects in common. Carvalho (2000) identifies four types of objects that can be viewed as ISs: IS1: Organizations (autonomous systems) whose business (purpose) is to provide information to their clients. IS2: A subsystem that exists in any system that is capable of governing itself (autonomous system). The information system (IS2) assures the communication between the managerial and operational subsystems of an organization -that is its purpose. When this communication is asynchronous, a memory to store the messages is necessary. IS2 includes such memory. IS3: Any combination of active objects (processors) that deal only with symbolic objects (information) and whose agents are computers or computer-based devices -a computer-based system. IS4: Any combination of active objects (processors) that deal only with symbolic objects (information).

No abstract

In an important ISR research commentary, Orlikowski and Iacono [2001] argue that the IS field does not deeply engage in its core subject matter, "the IT artifact." Although agreeing with their analysis and their conclusions concerning the unfortunate lack of engagement with the IT artifact, this article questions their premise that the IT artifact should be viewed as the core of the IS field. After defining the term "work system" and summarizing previously published frameworks for understanding a work system in operation and a work system life cycle, this article presents 18 reasons why IT-reliant work systems should replace "the IT artifact" as the core of the IS field. Taken in combination, the 18 reasons express a belief that today's IS field is inherently work system-centric, rather than IT-centric even though IT artifacts are present wherever the IS discipline is genuinely relevant. The specific reasons involve important topics including IS success, IS costs, IS risks, IS life cycles, methods for analyzing systems, communication with business professionals, organizing and codifying knowledge about systems in organizations, and maximizing the value of IS research.