The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Symbolism and Information Systems Development: Myth, Metaphor and Magic
Abstract
It is our intention to challenge the commonly held assumption that information systems development (ISD) can be conceived of as a normative process reflecting conventional economic rationality. We ask: is systems development the rational process so eloquently described in the “classic” works of DeMarco (1978), Gane and Sarson (1979), Weinberg (1980), Yourdon (1982), Jackson (1983), and Martin (1985)? Or does this orthodox view fail to explain the actual practice of systems development? It is our view that even the basic assumptions about the rationality of the actors and the social processes they engage in need to be critically appraised. We suggest that if the assumptions about economic rationality are closely analyzed, it can be seen that they do not reflect the reality of systems development. ISD tends to defy rational explanations. As an alternative to basing our understanding of systems development on economic rationality, we contend that symbolism holds more promise. Instead of focusing on data flow diagrams, structured walkthroughs, requirements specifications, and the like, we concentrate on the role of myth, metaphor, and magic. These concepts offer considerable scope in interpreting the social actions that are embodied within ISD. We feel they facilitate a much richer understanding of systems development.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
User Involvement and MIS Success: A Review of Research
Ives, B., & Olson, M. H. (1984) · Management Science · doi:10.1287/mnsc.30.5.586 · Cited by 1,318
Cited by
Orlikowski, W. J., & Barley, S. R. (2001) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.2307/3250927 · Cited by 1,255
Interpersonal Conflict and Its Management in Information System Development1
Barki, H., & Hartwick, J. (2001) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.2307/3250929 · Cited by 485
Hirschheim, R., Klein, H. K., & Lyytinen, K. (1996) · Accounting, Management and Information Technologies · doi:10.1016/0959-8022(96)00004-5 · Cited by 295
Self-citationPD and joint application design: a transatlantic comparison
Carmel, E., Whitaker, R. D., & George, J. F. (1993) · Communications of the ACM · doi:10.1145/153571.163265 · Cited by 260
Beath, C. M., & Orlikowski, W. J. (1994) · Information Systems Research · doi:10.1287/isre.5.4.350 · Cited by 255
Metadata
- Authors
- Hirschheim, R., & Newman, M.
- Venue
- Information Systems Research
- Published
- 1991-03
- Volume
- 2
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 29-62
- ISSN
- 1047-7047 (ISSN-L)
- 1526-5536
- OpenAlex
- W2091092635
- Cited by
- 347
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 27.81
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Symbolism and Information Systems Development: Myth, Metaphor and Magic. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1287/isre.2.1.29
- The paper
- Hirschheim, R., & Newman, M. (1991). Symbolism and Information Systems Development: Myth, Metaphor and Magic. Information Systems Research. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.2.1.29
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.