Epistemological Perspectives on Multi-Method Information Systems Research

There is a continuing discussion on methodological pluralism in IS research. Several claims have been made both for and against methodological pluralism. The debate focuses mainly on discussing the relationship between research methods and IS research paradigms, especially positivism and interpretivism. Also, the literature analyzes the epistemological assumptions of research paradigms, but pays little attention to a direct association of research methods with epistemology. We argue that the potential for methodological pluralism depends heavily on the epistemological characteristics of the research methods themselves. After analyzing various arguments pro and contra methodological pluralism, we then provide an epistemological framework addressing the relevant aspects in this context. Summary of Arguments Information Systems (IS) research can be described as a rich tapestry of diverse research methods, research paradigms, and research approaches (Section 1). Multi-method research is useful and favourable for IS research. Combining different research methods in the context of multi-method research designs can provide different perspectives on a particular phenomenon (Section 2). Calls against multi-method research designs applying epistemological and ontological arguments, the discussion focuses on the indirect relationship: epistemology-paradigms-methods. We advocate that in discussing the potential for multi-method research designs it is essential to consider the direct relationship: epistemology-methods (Section 3). A disciplined methodological pluralism must discuss epistemological assumptions of the various research methods to be combined in the context of a multi-method research design. An epistemological framework can help to structure and systematize epistemological issues relevant in this field (Section 4).