[AISWorld] Special Issue on “Activity Theory and Information Systems research” in Information Systems Journal

[Stan Karanasios]

CFP: Special Issue on “Activity Theory and Information Systems research” in Information Systems Journal

Over the last three decades Activity Theory has become increasingly internationalised and emerged as a founding theory for understanding change and development in work and social activity. In the fields of organisation (Engeström, 2000), management (Jarzabkowski, 2003), social psychology (Blunden, 2010), education (Roth & Lee, 2007) and Human Computer Interaction and IS design (Kuutti, 1999) it has become particularly accepted as a contemporary social theory for framing studies and generating insights. Mirroring its use and acceptance in other social science fields, there has been some development and exploration of Activity Theory in IS (Karanasios & Allen, 2013; Ryu et al., 2005). The context of its use has transcended public sector organisations, complex organisational contexts, disaster response, education, health and ICT for development. Scholars have also aligned Activity Theory alongside other philosophical perspectives and theories such as critical realism (Allen et al., 2013), institutional theory (Ogawa et al., 2008), complexity theory (Hasan et al. 2010) and structuration theory (Canary & McPhee, 2009) in order to generate novel insights.

This Special Issue aims to act as a compendium of outstanding research, focusing on the use, development and contribution of Activity Theory in IS research. It also aims to stimulate discourse and advance the use of Activity Theory in IS research. We seek relevant and rigorous submissions which address a combination of the following criterion.

1.      Apply and develop Activity Theory in IS research, by demonstrating the empirical and theoretical contributions it offers.

2.      Offer new contributions to Activity Theory, for instance extending Activity Theory or signalling how the IS field can offer a fertile landscape for expanding Activity Theory.

3.      Offer in depth comparison of Activity Theory with other contemporary social frameworks.

4.      Blend Activity Theory with complimentary contemporary social theories.

5.      Expand research design to include mixed and multi-method studies.

6.      Critical studies on Activity Theory and papers that illuminate on the difficulties of applying Activity Theory.

7.      Consider the origins of Activity Theory and the interpretation and misinterpretations of it in current research.

8.      The application of Activity Theory in novel contexts, such as online and digital environments.

Submissions should broadly address or relate to the aforementioned aspects in their contribution to theory and practice. Submissions which merely employ Activity Theory for descriptive analysis and offer no contribution will be not be considered for review. Ideally, submissions will provide new understandings of IS in work and social settings. Submissions will be evaluated using rigorous criteria associated with high quality academic research.

IMPORTANT DATES
Submission of extended abstract (optional): April 30, 2015
Full initial paper submission deadline: September 1, 2015
First review deadline: December 1, 2015
Revised paper submission deadline: June 1, 2016
Second review deadline: September 1, 2016


For full Special Issue submission details please see:

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/10.1111/(ISSN)1365-2575/homepage/special_issues.htm


SPECIAL ISSUE EDITORS
Stan Karanasios, AIMTech Research Centre, Leeds University Business School, UK
s.karanasios at leeds.ac.uk<mailto:s.karanasios at leeds.ac.uk>
David Allen, AIMTech Research Centre, Leeds University Business School, UK
da2 at lubs.leeds.ac.uk<mailto:da2 at lubs.leeds.ac.uk>
Patrick Finnegan, UNSW Australia Business School, Australia
p.finnegan at unsw.edu.au<mailto:p.finnegan at unsw.edu.au>

SPECIAL ISSUE ASSOCIATE EDITORS:
Professor Yrjo Engestrom, University of Helsinki, Finland
Professor Mathew Jones, Cambridge, UK
Professor Rui Chen, Ball State University, USA
Professor Clay Spinuzzi, University of Texas, USA
Dr Alistair Norman, University of Leeds, UK
Dr Natalie Pang, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore
Associate Professor Sabine Matook, University of Queensland, Australia
Professor Mary Watson, University of Illinois at Chicago, USA
Associate Professor Joseph Feller, University College, Ireland

REFERENCES
Allen, D. K., Brown, A., Karanasios, S., & Norman, A. (2013). How should technology-mediated organizational change be explained? A comparison of the contributions of critical realism and activity theory. MIS Quarterly, 37(3), 835-854.
Blunden, A. (2010). An Interdisciplinary Theory of Activity. Leiden: Brill.
Canary, H. E., & McPhee, R. D. (2009). The Mediation of Policy Knowledge: An Interpretive Analysis of Intersecting Activity Systems. Management Communication Quarterly, 23(2), 147-187.
Engeström, Y. (2000). Activity Theory and the Social Construction of Knowledge: A Story of Four Umpires. Organization, 7(2), 301-310.
Hasan, H, Kazlauskas, A. & Crawford, K (2010) Blending Complexity and Activity Frameworks for a Broader and Deeper Understanding of IS. Proceedings of the International Conference on Information Systems, St Louis, Missouri Dec 13-15th.
Jarzabkowski, P. (2003). Strategic practices: An activity theory perspective on continuity and change. Journal of Management Studies, 40(1), 23-56.
Karanasios, S., & Allen, D. (2013). ICT for development in the context of the closure of Chernobyl nuclear power plant: an activity theory perspective. Information Systems Journal, 23(4), 287-306. doi: 10.1111/isj.12011
Kuutti, K. (1999). Activity theory, transformation of work, and information systems design. In Y. Engeström, R. Miettinen & R.-L. Punamäki-Gitai (Eds.), Perspectives on activity theory. Learning in doing : social, cognitive and computational perspectives (pp. 360-376). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Ogawa, R. T., Crain, R., Loomis, M., & Ball, T. (2008). CHAT-IT: Toward Conceptualizing Learning in the Context of Formal Organizations. Educational Researcher, 37(2), 83-95.
Roth, W.-M., & Lee, Y.-J. (2007). “Vygotsky’s Neglected Legacy”: Cultural-Historical Activity Theory. Review of Educational Research, 77(2), 186-232.
Ryu, C., Yong Jin, K., Chaudhury, A., & Rao, H. R. (2005). Knowledge acquisition via three learning processes in enterprise information portals: learning-by-investment, learning-by-doing, and learning-from-others. MIS Quarterly, 29(2), 245-278.