WhatinFactIstheRoleofStylizedFacts … · in BISE (Fettke et al. 2010;Houyetal. 2009, 2011). In order to achieve a broad perspective on the issue in the course of this discussion,

BISE – DISCUSSION

What in Fact Is the Role of Stylized Factsin Fundamental Research of Businessand Information Systems Engineering?

DOI 10.1007/s12599-011-0149-5

The Authors

Prof. Dr. Peter Loos (�)Institute for Information Systemsat DFKISaarland University66123 Saarbrü[email protected]

Peter FettkeBarbara E. WeißenbergerStephan ZelewskiArmin HeinzlUlrich FrankJuhani Iivari

Published online: 2011-03-11

This article is also available in Ger-man in print and via http://www.wirtschaftsinformatik.de: Loos P,Fettke P,Weißenberger BE, Zelewski S,Heinzl A, Frank U, Iivari J (2011)Welche Rolle spielen eigentlich stili-sierte Fakten in der Grundlagen-forschung der Wirtschaftsinformatik?WIRTSCHAFTSINFORMATIK. doi: 10.1007/s11576-011-0264-4.

© Gabler Verlag 2011

1 Introduction

In the discussion initiated by Winter on“What in fact is fundamental research inbusiness and information systems engi-neering?” in issue 2/2009, Zelewski sub-mitted the interesting proposal to use theconcept of stylized facts as developed ineconomics in business and informationsystems engineering (BISE) in order topromote theory building within our dis-cipline (Winter et al. 2009). Stylized factsconstitute elements of knowledge in theform of generalized statements that de-scribe the important characteristics andrelationships in the context of a studiedphenomenon and are widely supported

empirically. For example, the empiricallyproven relationship between the long-term abstention from changing the em-ployer in Japanese companies and amuchlarger salary increase compared to U.S.companies is a typical stylized fact in eco-nomics.When using stylized facts in the context

of BISE, a number of interesting ques-tions arise:� What are the typical stylized factswithin BISE?

� How can stylized facts be obtained sys-tematically?

� What is the importance of stylized factsin design-oriented disciplines?

� Which role do stylized facts play inpractice?

� What is the difference between techno-logical rules and stylized facts? To whatextent can we consider stylized factsto be “technological” knowledge aboutcause-effect-relationships that can beutilized for the construction of arti-facts of information and communica-tion technology?

� Which role do stylized facts play in em-pirical research?

� Which contribution can stylized factsmake for building theories in BISE if amultiperspective research approach isassumed?

Currently, only scattered experience ex-ists in the application of stylized factsin BISE (Fettke et al. 2010; Houy et al.2009, 2011). In order to achieve a broadperspective on the issue in the course ofthis discussion, well-known representa-tives from the field of business admin-istration, the German-speaking BISE aswell as from Information Systems Re-search were invited to comment on thetopic. The following authors acceptedour invitation to this discussion (in al-phabetical order):� Prof. Dr. Ulrich Frank, Chair of Infor-mation Systems and Enterprise Mod-elling, University of Duisburg-Essen,Germany;

� Prof. Dr. Armin Heinzl, Chair ofGeneralManagement and InformationSystems, Mannheim University, Ger-many;

� Prof. Dr. Juhani Iivari, Department ofInformation Processing Science, OuluUniversity, Finland;

� Prof. Dr. Barbara E. Weißenberger,Chair of Controlling and Business Ac-counting, Justus-Liebig University ofGießen, Germany;

� Prof. Dr. Stephan Zelewski, Instituteof Production and Industrial Infor-mation Management, University ofDuisburg-Essen, Germany.

Within their contributions the authorshighlight different facets of the gener-ation and application of stylized factsthat appear relevant and important forBISE.

Barbara E. Weißenberger outlines theconcept and the derivation of stylizedfacts based on a case study in the field ofIT-based controlling systems. Thus, sev-eral empirical studies have shown thatthe “increasing flexibility of IT systemsin accounting and control has a positiveimpact on management accounting andcontrol”. The author argues that the con-cept contributes to aggregate and struc-ture fragmented knowledge in a researcharea, with particular emphasis on reveal-ing research gaps. At the same time shepoints out that the derivation of stylizedfacts is the result of comprehensive re-search endeavors.The contribution by Stephan Zelewski

considers the concept of stylized facts inthe tension between the more design-oriented German-speaking BISE on theone hand and the more behavioristicAnglo-Saxon Information Systems Re-search on the other. He argues that styl-ized facts are not directly but indirectlyfruitful for the design-oriented BISE: Ac-cordingly, stylized facts form a “seed ofcrystallization” for the development andtesting of theories with causal explana-tory power, making it possible to “explainand verify prognoses regarding alleged ef-fects of the recommended design mea-sures”. Despite the attractiveness of theconcept, the author also points to diffi-culties in the implementation in currentscience.

Armin Heinzl identifies application ar-eas for stylized facts in BISE, especially

Business & Information Systems Engineering 2|2011 107

BISE – DISCUSSION

for revealing cause-effect-relationshipsand for theory testing. Stylized factscan be considered as boundary ob-jects between the design-oriented re-search paradigm and empirical researchparadigm. However, he points out twoproblems which complicate a utilizationof stylized facts in our discipline. First,there is no large variety of data itemsavailable in BISE – in contrast to eco-nomics, for example. Also secondary dataare scarcely available. Second, the authordiscusses methodological challenges forthe application of stylized facts, and heemphasizes the danger of stylized factsbeing applied as an illigitimate, over-simplified alternative to rigorous empir-ical research in which case it would hin-der the integration of exisiting theoret-ical knowledge into design-oriented re-search.

Ulrich Frank argues that stylized factswithin BISE “can represent interestingpatterns – but they do not have to”. Onerisk is particularly seen in the fact that itis currently not clear what features dis-tinguish scientifically important stylizedfacts, so that ultimately any statementsmay be labeled to be legitimated stylizedfacts. Furthermore, he points out that forthe design-oriented BISE not only mod-els of actual behavior are important, butrather the design of possible worlds isnecessary.The contribution by Juhani Iivari con-

siders the potentials of stylized facts inparticular from the perspective of In-formation Systems Research. The authorhighlights the aspect of idealizing styl-ized facts and draws parallels to the for-mation of so-called ideal types accord-ing to Weber in the social sciences. More-over, he puts the presumption to discus-sion that the relationships between sim-plicity, utility, and acceptance of a tech-nique as described in the Technology Ac-ceptance Model (TAM) can be seen asstylized facts.This discussion intends to stimulate the

scientific discourse on the potentials, ap-plication, and limitations of stylized factsin fundamental BISE research. The scien-tific community is invited to participatein this discussion. If you would like tocomment on this topic or another arti-cle of the journal Business & InformationSystems Engineering (BISE), please sendyour contribution (max. 2 DINA4 pages)to the editor-in-chief, Prof. Hans Ul-

rich Buhl, University of Augsburg, [email protected].

Prof. Dr. Peter Loos, PD Dr. Peter FettkeIWi at DFKI

Saarland University, Germany

2 Stylized Facts: A SuitableApproach for FundamentalResearch?

2.1 Introduction

In issue 2/2009 of this journal, leadingrepresentatives discussed the question ofthe importance of fundamental researchwithin the business and information sys-tems engineering (BISE) discipline andthe methodological concepts that mightform its basis (Winter et al. 2009, p. 227ff.). In this context, Zelewski introducedthe method of “stylized facts” (SF) asa starting point to identify particularlypromising issues for research in the fieldof BISE. The SF method can be tracedbacked to Kaldor (1961) and increas-ingly attracted attention in economic re-search in recent years again. Essentially,the identification of SF is based on thesystematical identification of the state ofthe art of summarized expertise (Schw-erin 2001, p. 103) in empirical researchfor an object of interest and supposedto be used as a starting point for fur-ther research, e.g., in hypothesis formula-tion or as an assumption within analyti-cal models. This contribution presents anexample of how SF can be obtained sys-tematically and how relevant they maybe for both (fundamental) scientific re-search and the transfer of research knowl-edge into business practice.

2.2 Conceptual Foundations of theStylized Facts Methodology

The SF methodology is a form of litera-ture synthesis which stands between thecollection and analysis of literature ona problem (review) and the quantitativeintegration of empirical primary studiesusing statistical methods (meta-analysis).In contrast to the review methodology,SF only consider empirical findings on amatter of interest, and do so within thelimits of a clearly structured and inter-subjectively verifiable procedure. Thisalso applies to the meta-analysis in a sim-ilar way, which, however, only allows for

the evaluation of homogeneous (as re-gards content) and large quantitative sur-veys and aims at the validation of the re-spectively observed effect sizes.Thus, all types of methodologically

heterogeneous empirical primary studiescan be used to derive SF. This meets therequirement for methodological triangu-lation, which today goes far beyond ques-tions of objectification or validation ofempirical statements, but is rather un-derstood as a research strategy that helpsto achieve a comprehensive understand-ing of the phenomena of interest (Denzinand Lincoln 2000, p. 5).For the formulation of SF, first the key

messages referring to the subject of inter-est are identified and taken literally fromthe included studies. These key messagesare then grouped based on the dimen-sions that are relevant with regard tothe problem definition and are summa-rized in view of their main implications.Here, the focus is mainly on the funda-mental relationships. Aspects that referonly to details or a special context arenot considered (“stylization,” Heine et al.2007, p. 585). In a second step, the impli-cations are further consolidated, result-ing in overarching patterns, the so-called“stylized’ facts” as defined by Kaldor(1961, p. 178).In the literature, various requirements

are imposed to SF (Weißenberger andLöhr 2007, p. 341). For instance, SF mustbe relevant for the particular problem(explanatory relevance), it should be pos-sible to derive SF independent of the un-derlying methods or theories (methodsor theory neutrality), and SF should beobservable several times (indisputabilityof facts). Hence, the derivation of SFis liable to highly subjective leeway de-spite the clear structure of the underlyingprocess methodology. Thus, the develop-ment of SF within a particular field of re-search is not only done by one researcheror research group alone, but by differentexperts reaching consensus on particularSF through academic discourse.

2.3 Derivation of Stylized Facts:An Example

The process of achieving SF will be ex-plained below with an example originat-ing from research from the related disci-plines of controlling and business and in-formation systems engineering (BISE). Itis part of a wider investigation in the areaof a controller’s fields of action and role

108 Business & Information Systems Engineering 2|2011

BISE – DISCUSSION

Table 1 Exemplary derivation of SF (Löhr 2010, pp. 272 f; original key messages in German language)

Study Page Key messages Implication Stylized Fact Quality

11 279 Managers expect frommanagement informationsystems that they can be adjustedto company-specific needs bytheir own employees.

Increasing individualadaptability of managementinformation systems increasesthe quality of managementaccounting and control.

SFIT_7: Increasing flexibility of ITsystems in accounting andcontrol has a positive impact onmanagement accounting andcontrol.

B

16 665 The ability to react to changedconditions by providing suitableinformation is important forcontrolling efficiency.

Increased flexibility of IT systemsincreases the suitability ofaccounting information and theefficiency of managementaccounting and control.

114 163 The system-related qualitydimension of flexibility positivelyaffects the use of managementaccounting information andsystems for strategicdecision-making.

Increased flexibility of IT systemsincreases the use of managementaccounting information andsystems for strategicdecision-making.

139 67 The criterion of flexiblecustomization of ERP systemshas a strong effect on theindicators of processstandardization, automation, andspecialization for largeenterprises.

Increased flexibility of ERPsystems improves themanagement accounting andcontrol processes.

perception on the one hand and the suc-cess of controlling and of the enterpriseor project on the other hand (Löhr 2010,p. 266 ff.). Specifically, it deals with therelation between application and designfeatures of controlling-relevant IT sys-tems and the controlling or company orproject success. During the years 1990 to2009, 20 primary studies have been pub-lished in the German-language control-ling literature on this subject. From theseprimary studies, Löhr extracts a total of34 statements which are consolidated toa total of nine SF.As an example, Table 1 shows the

derivation of the SF “Increasing flexibilityof IT systems in accounting and controlhas a positive impact on management ac-counting and control”.For the SF discussed here, findings

from four studies on the relevant correla-tion can be extracted (Rosenhagen 1994;Becker and Benz 1997; Heidmann 2008;Forster et al. 2009). For this purpose, keymessages were identified from each of thefour studies that address the importanceof flexibility of the IT systems used. In asecond step, these statements are consoli-dated to implications in an abstract wayand, in particular, detached from spe-cific singular characteristics of the stud-ies which are aggregated into the men-tioned SF in a further step. Here, it is nec-essary to ensure that the statements and

implications are characterized by a suffi-cient degree of consistency and represen-tativeness (Weißenberger and Löhr 2007,p. 341). Löhr (2010, p. 195) categorizesthe presented example of a SF to be av-eragely supported (B-SF), in contrast toa strongly supported SF (A-SF) which isbased on implications from at least fivestudies. Overall, Fig. 1 shows the effectchains of the seven SF to controlling-relevant IT systems as derived by Löhr,which can be categorized as being av-eragely supported to strongly supported(including another SF mapping the influ-ence of controlling success on companyor project success as presented in anotherpart of his study).Based on these results, a variety of

other research steps may follow.1. First, one could try to question those

SF that are only supported on averageby means of further empirical studies,i.e. to identify SF that should be sub-ject to further research (Winter et al.2009, p. 229). At the same time, is-sues that so far could not be empiri-cally addressed to a sufficient extent,such as the influence of design featuresof ERP systems onmanagement infor-mation systems for controlling pur-poses, could be investigated in orderto identify further SF in the long term.

2. Second, the SF derived from the abovementioned field of research field could

be transferred to an adjacent area ofresearch in terms of a multi-level re-search approach (Hitt et al. 2007) inorder to substantiate first hypothesesfor specific effects in an exploratoryapproach (see also Löhr 2010 who ap-plies the derived SF to issues of riskcontrolling).

3. Finally, the assumptions for the for-mulation of objective or formal ana-lytical models as formulated in Fig. 1may be used in the field of BISE.The statements aremethodological as-sumptions which are merely capableof truth, but do not necessarily haveto be true. For the acceptability of themodeling and for the transfer of re-sults to business practice, however, it isindeed important to which extent in-dividual assumptions are empiricallysupported.

2.4 On the Importance of Stylized Factsfor (Fundamental) Research andKnowledge Transfer

The example presented in the previ-ous section initially illustrates the perfor-mance of the SFmethodology, but also itsfundamental limits. These are character-ized as such by the high subjectivity in theselection of the primary studies as well asin the consolidation of the SF, which is atleast partly absorbed by the clearly struc-tured and openly documented process


BISE – DISCUSSION

Fig. 1 SF with regard to theimpact of IT systems inmanagement accountingand control on the successof controlling and thecompany or project (Löhr2010, p. 274)

steps. However, it must still be criticallyobserved that findings from related re-search areas which may be relevant to theformulation (or discarding) of SF are notconsidered if the search pattern for theprimary studies is formulated too nar-rowly. A relatively broad search patternthat takes different research areas into ac-count, however, may lead to a degree ofcomplexity of the SF generation that canno longer be handled or quickly becomesvery resource-intensive: The example il-lustrated in the previous section showsthat the derivation of SF ultimately is theresult of comprehensive research endeav-ors.Another caveat relates to the distor-

tions arising from the use of empiricalstudies per se. Thus, e.g., implicationsfrom unpublished studies inevitably can-not be taken into account. This may leadto the fact that SF about a phenomenonare derived in a scientificmainstream thatappear stronger than they actually are inempirical reality. Finally, the problem isthat in terms of scientific methods hy-potheses as generalizations are never ver-ified, but only not falsified. For empiricalresearch, this means that the lack of re-jection of a causal relationship does notnecessarily indicate that the causal rela-tionship actually exists (Ioannidis 2005).However, this is exactly what is assumedwithin the SF methodology.Moreover, it is necessary to differen-

tiate when answering the question ofwhether the SF methodology can be an

appropriate concept for the (fundamen-tal) research in a defined area of researchas regards its performance for theory de-velopment. First, the application of theSF method assumes the presence of a suf-ficient number of primary studies withina field of research. A new developmentof theories or even the impetus for aparadigm shift is possible if implicationsof the used primary studies that are sum-marized to SF implications can be clas-sified only with difficulty into the exist-ing theoretical framework on the phe-nomenon of interest. The extent to whichthis is a promising research strategy inpractice, however, is problematic as al-ready the selection of included primarystudies needs to be based on a theoreticalframework. It appears unlikely that theSF identified then go beyond the scope ofthat framework.Therefore, the main application of the

SF method is probably less the formationof theories, such as Houy et al. (2009,p. 32) suggest, but rather the further de-velopment of existing theories by map-ping the existing knowledge and knowl-edge gaps. As a result of the methodolog-ical heterogeneity of the primary studiesused and the gradual abstraction or sum-marization of the relevant evidence, theSF method has the advantage to counter-act the often lamented fragmentation ofknowledge (Schreyögg 2007, p. 3) and tostabilize the considered theory by meansof its empirical explication.In this context, the combination of

SF methodology and multi-level research

approach is important. Through the ab-straction in the process of derivation ofthe SF, the transfer of research resultsfrom one discipline to another is facili-tated. In the context of BISE, this could bea particular advantage since here researchis integrated into the fields of computerscience and business administration.Finally, the SF methodology also facil-

itates the transfer of results from fun-damental research to more applied re-search. In the derivation of key principlesfor business practice from SF it must benoted, however, that the desired gener-alization here is even counterproductivefor a direct application in individual casesas details of the effects investigated in theprimary studies may again be relevant. Inmost cases, SF do not represent a gen-eral social “law”, but only reasonable as-sumptions about structural relationships(Houy et al. 2009, p. 32). In businesspractice, individual recommendationsthat are derived from SFmust be criticallyexamined in the light of the complex re-lationships in each specific case.

2.5 Conclusion

By means of the derivation of SF as sum-marized and condensed empirical knowl-edge concerning a given phenomenon,several objectives are achieved. Possiblyfragmented knowledge in a field of re-search is aggregated and structured. Re-search gaps become obvious. Moreover,the SF may be used as the basis of analyt-ical modeling and the related knowledge


BISE – DISCUSSION

may be applied to adjacent fields of re-search in a multi-level research approach.However, SF can only be as good as theunderlying empirical research. In that re-gard, the SF methodology is particularlyuseful for the stabilization or further de-velopment of an existing theory as wellas for the transfer of knowledge from ba-sic research to applied research. For thetransfer into practice, it is important tonote that SF are no general laws, but as-sumptions that abstract from the indi-vidual case. Therefore, it is necessary torefrain from directly using SF as a de-sign statement in individual recommen-dations without examining the relation-ships in each specific case.

Barbara E. WeißenbergerChair of Controlling

and Business AccountingJustus Liebig University Gießen

3 Stylized Facts: A contributionto Design-Oriented Business andInformation Systems Engineering?

Stylized facts are generalized descriptionsof facts that abstract from empirical de-scriptions of specific cases in so far thatthey can be observed in a number ofsituational contexts and therefore canbe widely supported empirically. Thesefacts are artifacts that express empiricallytested regularities or patterns statements.They reduce the observational data, ig-noring “insignificant” details of those as-pects that are considered “interesting”from a “general” scientific perspectiveand therefore require a convincing expla-nation.By talking about a “general” scientific

perspective, we mean that the need forexplanation is supported by the widestpossible community of scientists in thesame discipline who may represent dif-ferent theories and even may belong tovarious scientific schools or paradigms.Details of situation or context descrip-tions are considered to be insignificanton the one hand, if these details are notpart of a generalized pattern statement.On the other hand, it is proposed to ab-stract from details that run counter to thegeneralized pattern of statement as “out-liers”, but apply only in very specific situ-ational contexts.The concept of stylized facts can be

traced back to contributions by Kaldor tomacroeconomic growth theory (Kaldor1961, pp. 178–179). In the subsequent

years it was used in the field of eco-nomics in numerous economic contribu-tions (Jones and Romer 2009, pp. 2–3 and8–25; Li et al. 2010, pp. 71–74, 81 and 89).In business and information systems en-gineering (BISE), it has hardly been ap-preciated so far.To illustrate this issue, the productivity

paradox of information technology ap-pears useful (Lin and Shao 2006, pp. 494–495). While it has not yet been discussedas a stylized fact, it offers all the prerequi-sites to be reconstructed as a stylized fact.Intuitively, one expects that an increaseduse of information technology in enter-prises leads to increased business produc-tivity. Several empirical studies showed,however, that – especially when lookingat the level of macroeconomic aggregatemeasures – either no significant correla-tion between the use of information tech-nology and business productivity couldbe proven or that even a negative cor-relation between these two facts existed.This contradiction to the expectation isseen rightly as a surprise. Since these con-tradictory findings appeared in a numberof situational contexts, it can be – in ab-straction from the particular context de-tails – “stylized” to the generalized de-scription of facts that an increased use ofinformation technology in companies isoften not associated with increased busi-ness productivity.However, the data are not able to tell

whether the increased use of informationtechnology causes the business produc-tivity to be unchanged or even to be re-duced – or whether companies of lowproductivity try to eliminate this defi-ciency by increasing the use of informa-tion technology. Already this simple ex-ample shows that the same generalizedcorrelation, which has been found empir-ically and was generalized via abstraction,can be interpreted in two causally oppo-site ways without the “pure” data beingable to give information as to which ofthese two competing interpretations is tobe preferred. This ambiguity is based onthe fact that causality, strictly speaking,never can be observed from empiricaldata, but represents a concept of impu-tation. Causality is added interpretivelyby a subject based on empirical data,but is not taken “objectively” from thosedata. Therefore, stylized facts should re-main free of causal enrichment. Instead,it is recommendable to limit stylized factsto correlations between empirically ob-served situations and the generalizationof these relationships.

Against the background of the researchprogram dispute which has been simmer-ing between German-speaking BISE onthe one hand and the Anglo-AmericanInformation Systems Research (ISR) onthe other hand for several years, it seemsappealing to investigate whether the con-cept of stylized facts can be “taken over”to support either of the above mentionedtwo adversaries.As the current mainstream paradigm,

ISR dominates the international, mainlyAnglo-Saxon journals. Leaning on “sci-entistic” models from natural science re-search, ISR prefers large quantitative-empirical analyses for the verification ofhypotheses about the behavior of actorswhen using information and communi-cation systems, and of hypotheses aboutthe impact of this system use. Special em-phasis is given to the professional appli-cation of sophisticated empirical, espe-cially statistical methods for testing hy-potheses. The data, which are checkedagainst the empirical claim to validityof hypotheses, are considered as “given”and are usually not questioned critically.“Hard” data and methods (“rigor”) andthe belief that reality as it “is” can be de-scribed without distortion have becometop priorities.In turn, German-language BISE pri-

marily pursues a constructive and eval-uative, i.e. design-oriented research pro-gram. Starting from requirements ofintended information and communi-cations systems, proposals are devel-oped using “technological” goal-means-statements on how to design such systemsin order to ensure that they meet the re-quirements as best as possible. The sci-entific dignity of this research programis not based primarily on the rigidity ofthe applied research methods, but on thesocial or economic benefits (“relevance”)of the artifacts that it constructs and ofthe purposes which it is aimed at tofulfill. Just recently, the design-orientedresearch program was presented in anaccentuated way by the key representa-tives of the field in a Memorandum ondesign-oriented BISE (Österle et al. 2010,pp. 666–669).At first glance, the concept of stylized

facts appears to correspond to ISR. Bothemphasize the importance of empiricalfacts. This similarity, however, is onlysuperficial. A closer analysis shows thatboth concepts are contradictory in prin-ciple. ISR is based on the assumption ofempirical hypotheses that are to be tested.Their origin is generally not questioned.


BISE – DISCUSSION

They have no direct empirical origin, butare often only taken from vaguely articu-lated background knowledge. The “hard”empiricism starts only with the data thatare used to empirically verify the alreadyavailable hypotheses.In contrast, the concept of stylized facts

directly ties in with the empirically ob-served facts. Similar to the concept of“Grounded Theory”, the research processstarts with empirical observations thatare generalized by abstracting from de-tails that are considered to be insignif-icant. Therefore, the concept of stylizedfacts is much closer to the empirical ba-sis than the paradigm of hypothesis test-ing, which predominates in ISR. More-over, they do not share the naive real-ism that is so characteristic of ISR. Styl-ized facts do have an empirical basis, butthey “emancipate” from this since theyabstract from details which are classifiedas being insignificant.For the above mentioned reasons, the

concept of stylized facts is not suitedto support the mainstream paradigm ofISR. Instead, it seems reasonable to re-gard stylized facts as a concept in sup-port of the competitive research programof design-oriented BISE. For example, itcan be argued that stylized facts representlargely “secured” technological knowl-edge about empirically observed correla-tions. If this is correct, then this knowl-edge could be used to design artifactsof information and communication tech-nology in accordance with the particularrequirements.However, there is one major point ad-

verse to this view. Although stylized factsare generalized descriptions of the rela-tionship between several facts, these de-scriptions should be – as stated above– limited to empirically observed corre-lations and should not be “overloaded”with causal interpretations. Therefore,stylized facts are not suitable as tech-nological knowledge for the design ofinformation or communication systems.Instead, design recommendations needknowledge about causal effect relation-ships that – strictly speaking – cannot be“derived” from the pure generalization ofempirical observations, but require addi-tional causal interpretations. Such causalinterpretations have nothing in commonwith the concept of stylized facts in thestrict sense.Nonetheless, the concept of stylized

facts can be used as a contribution to sup-port design-oriented BISE in an indirectway. First, in regard to stylized facts it

is necessary to identify those explanatorymodels or theories which are best suitedto causally explain the observed and gen-eralized correlations of facts (phenom-ena). The core of these models or theoriesis represented by hypothetical statementsabout the causal relationship between ac-tions and the caused results. Then themodels or theories can be used to expressboth empirically and theoretically well-founded design recommendations for in-formation and communication technol-ogy artifacts.For the above stated reasons, not the

stylized facts themselves but the “un-derlying” explanatory models or theoriesprove attractive for design-oriented BISE.Design-oriented BISE requires models ortheories with causal explanatory powerwhich are able to give reasons andverify prognoses regarding alleged ef-fects of the recommended design mea-sures. This desideratum of justifica-tion becomes evident, for instance, inthe above-mentioned memorandum ondesign-oriented BISE (Österle et al. 2010,pp. 667–668). Although stylized facts arenot yet sufficient to provide models ortheories with causal explanatory poweron their own, they form a “seed of crys-tallization” for the construction and crit-ical review of such models or theories.Therefore, the concept of stylized factsis a research-programmatic “fruitful” ap-proach to sustainably support design-oriented BISE. Particularly promising ap-proaches to operationalize this conceptwere proposed by Heine et al. (2007,pp. 587–591) as well as by Weißenbergerand Löhr (2007, pp. 338–342).However, considerable skepticism is

appropriate as to whether the concept ofstylized facts can be implemented suc-cessfully in the real-world scientific activ-ities, despite its attractiveness. The mainchallenge is the normative claim for a sci-entific community to agree on a “lim-ited” number of phenomena that requirea convincing explanation as stylized factsfrom a “general” scientific perspective.This claim fundamentally conflicts witha liberal and pluralistic scientific com-munity. In this context, also the questionof a “power of definition” for the “gen-eral” interest for explanation of a scien-tific community arises. It may not be un-realistic to assume that a “free” discoursecannot be expected in this respect.Therefore, for the concept of stylized

facts to take shape further considerationsare required. These must focus on how

to achieve a manageable group of styl-ized facts for the field of BISE with a highpotential for approval in the concernedscientific community with regard to thepreviously mentioned tension betweennormative standards and academic free-dom. An option to implement the con-cept that is worth considering is that ofDelphi studies. These have the advantageof being future-oriented and consensus-oriented in principle. A Delphi studytries to find out which issues in a sci-entific – or also practical – communitycan achieve an approximate consensusconcerning the fact that these issues willplay a prominent role in the next decade,for example. Such Delphi studies havealready been carried out in the field ofBISE, especially by Heinzl et al. (2001,pp. 223–232). As a result of the presum-ably existing familiarity with this instru-ment in design-oriented BISE, it wouldbe natural to carry out a Delphi studyfor the implementation of the concept ofstylized facts with the objective of identi-fying those empirical phenomena whichare within the cognitive interest of BISEand which reach a broad consensus onthe fact that they still require a convinc-ing explanation.Such a Delphi study requires a most

comprehensive support within the sci-entific community concerned; hence, itshould be actively supported by at leastone working group in a relevant profes-sional association. Achieving this supportis not a trivial task. In addition, the find-ings of a Delphi study should not be over-estimated. Besides the fact that the resultof any empirical study can be doubtedwith (mostly) good reasons due to itsnecessary methodological assumptions,no empirical study may usurp normativeclaims for itself. Similarly, a Delphi studyonly represents the views of those anony-mous scientists who have participated bycontributing appropriate information. Inview of freedom of research and plural-ism – these are values that are insistentlysupported by the author, even if they areoften undermined by research bureau-cracy – it does not seem possible to deriveany kind of commitment for the mem-bers of a scientific community from thesmall number of respondents in a Delphistudy.

Prof. Dr. Stephan ZelewskiInstitute of Production and Industrial

Information ManagementUniversity of Duisburg-Essen


BISE – DISCUSSION

4 Stylized Facts as a StartingPoint of a Theory-CentricInformation Systems EngineeringDiscipline

Stylized facts are increasingly attractingattention of both management and infor-mation systems (IS) engineering (BISE)literature. They enfold complex empiri-cal findings in broad generalizations inorder to emphasize empirical regulari-ties or patterns. But like any general-ization or abstraction, stylized facts maylack precision. The first examples of styl-ized facts have been documented in theeconomic growth theory (Kaldor 1961;Solow 1969). Later, they have been ap-plied and transferred to other applica-tion contexts and disciplines (Weißen-berger and Löhr 2007;Winter et al. 2009).This is captivating since the author of thisstatement, who considers himself as anempirical IS researcher, was able to attendLord Kaldor’s inauguration as a hon-orary doctor of the University of Frank-furt, Germany, during his own gradu-ate studies. Furthermore, he had the op-portunity to meet and guide BarbaraWeißenberger as a graduate student ofthe Koblenz School of Corporate Man-agement.

4.1 How Can Stylized Facts Enrich the ISDiscipline?

Heine et al. (2007) and Houy et al. (2009)suggest a multi-stage approach for de-riving stylized facts from a set of data(sources). Based on a “sound” derivation,stylized facts have the potential to maketwo contributions: (1) They provide ev-idence for unknown or insufficiently in-terrogated phenomena that follow cause-effect-relationships and, thereby enrichthe context of discovery (Heinrich et al.2010, p. 78). Thus, they are a startingpoint for theory development by form-ing nomological hypotheses about spe-cific phenomena. These hypotheses willbe subsequently explained, refined, or re-futed. (2) They support existing theorieswhich have the power to explain the styl-ized facts. In doing so, they serve as an in-strument for theory testing. According tothe correspondence theory of truth, the-oretical statements can be confirmed orrefuted by means of observations in theobject reality (Heinrich et al. 2010, p. 57).

4.2 Where Do Data for Stylized FactsCome From?

Both cases – theory development andtheory testing – require a comprehen-sive set of empirical data as a prereq-uisite for deriving reproducible stylizedfacts. During the past decades, other dis-ciplines like economics, for instance, havetaken enormous efforts for developingwidely accessible data bases. National ac-count systems and public statistics offera large variety of data items which canbe used as a basis for deriving stylizedfacts. In addition, national science foun-dations have funded numerous projectswhich have been developing comprehen-sive panel data sets for further analy-sis. In management, panel data sets havebeen created which contain balance sheetkey figures and profit and loss statementsfrom public companies as well as a va-riety of other financial data. Researchersare offered vast opportunities to developstylized facts from widely accessible datasources.What is the situation in IS research,

however? Are there any official statisticswhich contain key data from informa-tion systems development and usage, cor-porate information resources and infras-tructures, or information usage itself? Arethere private data sources which could beused as an alternative source of data? –Unfortunately, the answer is “no”. Andthis is a key issue. How can a researcherderive stylized facts on IT productivity,if corporate software expenses cannot betracked over a larger panel of companies?Moreover, secondary data is only rarely

available in IS research. Heinrich andWiesinger (1997) conducted an elaborateliterature analysis and found that investi-gations based on primary data are muchmore common than investigations basedon secondary data. They pointed out thatthis is caused by the fact that there arevirtually no useful sources of secondarydata regarding information systems, ITinfrastructures, and the use of informa-tion in companies. Grün (1997) comesto the conclusion that missing secondarydata sources are a serious restriction ofempirical research in our discipline. Ifthere were more secondary data, morequantitative-empirical analyses could beconducted.One could counter argue that compa-

nies like Gartner, Forrester, IDC, and thelike are in possession of sufficient datato derive stylized facts. But what is the

consequence, if these market research or-ganizations are not thoroughly collectingtheir data in the field but rather extrap-olate the data sets with the help of fore-casting models like Gompertz curves andonly very few data points? And what isthe consequence, if none of these orga-nizations is applying standardized mea-surement models in order to assess theTotal-Cost-of-Ownership of Software-as-a-Service solutions? The consequencesare easy to predict. Methodological is-sues will create data of low quality whichin turn will support the derivation ofunreliable stylized facts. Moreover, themarket researchers are only offering theirdata collections for quite a bit of money,which makes the access even more diffi-cult.Consequently, our discipline requires

much time and many resources in orderto develop andmaintain widely accessibledata bases which meet the requirementsof a sound derivation of stylized facts.Stimulating progress in this matter is ofstrategic importance for our disciplineand could be rewarding for those readersof this dialogue section who are willingto take up the challenge. One key issue isthe question which objects and variablesof the IS discipline should be included insuch panels. One approach for determin-ing such variables is offered by Heinrichet al. (2010). In the chapter “goals andgoal system”, important theoretical andpractical goals of the BISE discipline arepresented. In addition, Houy et al. (2009)have indicated that stylized facts may alsobe related to structural elements of in-formation systems, like process models.This gives a rough idea of what challengesneed to be addressed in order to developand maintain widely accessible data baseswhich support the derivation of stylizedfacts.

4.3 Implications for Research Strategiesin the IS Discipline

The derivation of stylized facts is partof a theory-driven, quantitative researchstrategy. It requires a profound theoreti-cal knowledge of IS and neighboring dis-ciplines. It further requires comprehen-sive methodological know-how of quan-titative researchmethods in the social sci-ences and economics. According to theexperience of the author, who acts as adepartment editor of a German manage-ment and a German IS journal, thereis still potential for improvement. Partsof the German-speaking IS community


BISE – DISCUSSION

are criticizing the increasing influenceof theory-driven and empirical research.They act on the (questionable) assump-tion that empirically grounded theoriesare not reflecting practical needs. In otherwords, they are irrelevant and, thus, of lit-tle value for IS researchers whose researchstrategy is the design and development oftechnological artifacts. Interestingly, thisaspect is partially addressed by Houy etal. (2009). They outline that stylized facts,as an instance of a theoretical-empiricalresearch strategy, can inform the praxeo-logic1 design of IT artifacts.Stylized facts are less generalized than

theoretical statements but they must de-note regularities which are grounded onempirical data. In particular, researchersmust reach a fair consensus regardingparticular stylized facts (Houy et al. 2009,p. 25). Reaching such a consensus is onthe one hand an empirical fact itself inthe sense of the correspondence theoryof truth and, on the other hand, de-notes a convergent interpretation out-come of the researchers (coherence the-ory of truth; see Heinrich et al. 2010,p. 58). Thus, stylized facts may be moreappealing and relevant for design scien-tist than abstract theories. They may takethe role of boundary objects which of-fer design scientists the opportunity toparticipate in the interpretation of rele-vant and empirically observable findingswhich are considered to be less abstract.However, this also creates a peril re-

garding the application of stylized facts inIS research. Stylized facts could be con-sidered as an oversimplified alternative torigorous theoretical research which am-plifies existing a-theoretical streams inthe German-speaking IS community. In-stead of untangling hidden but funda-mental cause-effect-relationships behindthe phenomena observed, design scien-tists are running the risk to remain inan illustrative and phenomenological, i.e.a non-scientific state of analysis whichavoids any serious attempt to include andgeneralize the existing theoretical knowl-edge.

4.4 Epistemological Implicationsof Stylized Facts

Every researcher who utilizes stylizedfacts has to be aware that s/he is en-countering all epistemological problemsassociated with empirism, inductivism,

positivism, falsificationism, and realism(Chalmers 2007). But what are the con-sequences if the world does not obeylaws or if individual behavior in IS useis not directly observable? Solow (1969,p. 2) made an interesting point: “Thereis no doubt that they are stylized, thoughit is possible to question whether theyare facts”. Further problems can be ex-pected where cause-effect-relationshipsare framed as law-like generalizations. Asa consequence, one could expect an in-creasing number of ad-hoc modificationswhich are inevitable to immunize theselaw-like generalizations against contra-dicting observations.Moreover, the rangeof such theories is likely to be low (Heineet al. 2007). But as long as stylized factsare treated as descriptive and empiricallygrounded phenomena, they will be lessproblematic since they represent mereregularities but not laws.All problems which result from the tra-

ditional understanding of the term “the-ory” as a set of statements can probablybe circumvented if other theoretical con-cepts like structuralism or anti-realisticpositions are adopted. The role of stylizedfacts from the perspective of structural-ism is hopefully taken up in the commentfrom Stephan Zelewski.Another perspective of interest for de-

sign scientists could be the New Experi-mentalism. It demonstrates, how experi-mental effects can be achieved through avariety of strategies (like practical inter-vention, counter tests, error control anderror elimination) independent of com-plex theories (Chalmers 2007, p. 164).A well-known example is the Faraday ef-fect. Michael Faraday interpreted it in1845 as experimental evidence that lightand magnetism are interrelated. How-ever, explaining light through electro-magnetic waves has first been theoreti-cally deduced years later by James ClerkMaxwell. The stylized fact of a rotatingpolarization level of a polarized electro-magnetic wave was the decisive hint to-wards a previously unknown complextheoretic cause-effect-relationship.

4.5 Conclusion

Stylized facts represent one way of iden-tifying or refining complex cause-effect-relationships in information systems orinformation infrastructures if, and onlyif, the aforementioned problems can be

tolerated or solved. But there is one thingthat stylized facts cannot do. They arenot able to substitute theories or theoret-ical investigations which explicitly look atthese relationships. In contrast, they canhelp to isolate these relationships and totest them.If stylized facts are attributed to prop-

erties of information systems, like thetransparency of process models for in-stance, they bear the potential to serveas boundary objects for integrating the-ory and technology. In a worst case sce-nario, this would at least assure a jointbasis for communication between empir-ical researchers and design scientists in ISresearch. In a good case scenario it helpsto stimulate reciprocal interest betweenthese two types of researchers which isan important prerequisite for informingtechnology with theory.For this reason, I would like to express

my aspiration in those scholars who arewilling to invest their intellectual capitalfor the development of widely accessibledate bases. These data bases are the pre-requisite for deriving sound stylized facts.Furthermore, they could stimulate moreprofound empirical investigations in ourfield. Supporting these scholars is an im-portant mission of all members in ourscientific community.

Prof. Dr. Armin HeinzlChair of General Management

and Information SystemsMannheim University

5 An Ambivalent Concept

To discuss the possible contribution ofstylized facts to business and informa-tion systems engineering (BISE) research,it is required to clarify the meaning ofthe concept – which is not trivial regard-ing its diverse and sometimes superficialuse in literature. Stylized facts promisea generalized description of social sys-tems that is empirically grounded, butdoes not emphasize the claim for gen-eral validity like theories. Nevertheless,stylized facts are supposed to be reli-able enough to support decision making.Hence, it seems that they may serve asa suitable instrument for BISE research,too. Accounting for the historical con-text they evolved from allows for devel-oping a more elaborate appreciation of

1A praxeology describes a synthesis of empirical knowledge, analytical thinking, and systematic speculation originating from a lack of exploitablebase theories; see Heinrich et al. (2010), p. 89.


BISE – DISCUSSION

stylized facts. When Kaldor suggested theconcept in 1968, behaviorist research hadalready become the leading paradigm inNorth American economics. While moreand more researchers adopted the newparadigm – even though it was not undis-puted, its application revealed problemsin the actual practice of research thatwere regarded as dissatisfactory by some.On the one hand, they related to the em-phasis on theory testing which requiresthe existence of adequate theories. Of-ten, however, adequate theories were notavailable. As a consequence, researchersare tempted to search for knowledge onlyin the – sometimes diffuse – light of exist-ing theories. On the other hand, the needfor statistical procedures may contributeto a selection and preparation of data thatblocks the view on interesting aspects.Against this background, Kaldor recom-mended a “stylized view” when search-ing for new insights: Empirical observa-tions should be analyzed for general pat-terns without paying much attention toparticular, deviating details. The ideal-ized process to develop stylized facts rec-ommends starting with a comprehensiveliterature survey to collect results fromempirical studies that address a particu-lar research question. Subsequently, sim-ilar results are grouped into categories. Inthe final step, frequent patterns are ab-stracted to stylized facts. Only rarely, styl-ized facts have been pursued in Manage-ment Science – with different motives.On the one hand, the prevalent focus ontheory testing is regarded as inappropri-ate by some. “In a field that seeks to un-derstand the real world, it makes littlesense to always put theory before facts.We must understand at least the broadoutlines of ‘what’ a phenomenon con-sists of before we try to explain ‘why’it occurs” (Helfat 2007, p. 185). How-ever, this is not meant as a racial cri-tique. Instead, the behaviorist approachis not challenged as being the most rel-evant research method. It is regarded as aprerequisite for developing stylized facts,which in turn serve to inspire behavioriststudies. Hence, they are supposed to actas capacitor and catalyst of empirical re-search. In contrast to that, authors from“Betriebswirtschaftslehre” regard stylizedfacts also as an instrument to foster plu-ralistic use of methods. Sometimes, it isdemanded to not only use results frombehaviorist research, but to account forother types of empirical research, e.g.,hermeneutic approaches, too, in order to

enable a richer perspective on the subjectthrough triangulation.It is not easy to assess stylized facts

from a methodological point of view. Itseems that Kaldor’s proposal was rathermotivated by problems he experienced inhis actual research practice rather thanby methodological considerations. Also,only rarely, authors of subsequent publi-cations on stylized facts aim at a method-ological assessment (e.g., Heine et al.2007; Weißenberger and Löhr 2007). Onthe other hand, it seems that Philosophyof Science has not taken notice of stylizedfacts so far. A closer look reveals similar-ities to the “grounded theory” approachwhich recommends inductively gather-ing and analyzing data without account-ing for existing theories in order to avoidbias. At the same time, the patterns dis-covered in collected data should be con-fronted with existing theories later in theprocess in order to contribute to the fur-ther development of theories.How can the concept of stylized facts

be assessed? At first, it does not seemspectacular at all: analyzing a set of factsfor common patterns has been a piv-otal feature of scientific research. From amethodological perspective it is remark-able that it remains unclear how stylizedfacts are justified. Superficially, the an-swer seems obvious: by referring to theanalyzed studies. However, that wouldleave two problems. It is not part of theapproach to question the quality of theanalyzed studies. Also, stylized facts arean abstraction that needs to be justifiedas such, too. For a good reason, Heine etal. point at the danger of misuse by op-portunistic interpretations (Heine et al.2007, p. 586), which they illustrate byquoting Solow: “[t]here is no doubt thatthey are stylized, though it is possible toquestion whether they are facts.”What are examples of stylized facts in

BISE research? Since there seem to be norespective examples in the literature, thefollowing examples were constructed:� “Due to their risk aversive attitude, ITmanagers are skeptical towards inno-vations.”

� “IT managers embrace innovations,because they regard them as a chanceto strengthen their profile.”

� “Modeling improves software quality.”� “Modeling is not positively correlatedwith software quality.”

� “The majority of CIOs in Germanfirms do not have a degree in BISE.”

� “The higher the percentage of IT pro-fessionals in an organization, the lowerare the relative IT costs.”

� “The higher the percentage of ITprofessionals in an organization, thehigher are the relative IT costs.”

The examples show that stylized facts canrepresent interesting patterns – but theydo not have to. There is a clear threat thatstylized facts might be used to legitimizepropositions of little scientific value. Thisis at least the case as long it is not clarifiedwhat makes stylized facts significant froma scientific point of view. Furthermore,the examples illustrate that stylized factsmay well be contradictory, if the contin-gency of the targeted subject was not suf-ficiently accounted for.I am hesitant with a concluding judg-

ment. From a methodological point ofview I cannot see any original contri-bution. Nevertheless, stylized facts offerthe chance to develop substantial descrip-tions of the application praxis that go be-yond mere anecdotic evidence. However,as long as no sufficient number of empir-ical studies – which are a prerequisite ofdeveloping stylized facts – are available,this chance can hardly be used. With re-spect to the contingent subject, it shouldbe thoroughly evaluated whether the ef-fort to aim at stylized facts pays off. Inthis respect, it should also be accountedfor the fact that other forms of access-ing reality, such as discourses or com-mon projects, may also produce experi-ence that fosters new insights. Also, withrespect to the objective to support theconstruction of future information sys-tems focusing on patterns of factual ac-tion is not sufficient. Instead, it requiresdesigning possible worlds, which mightbe supported by the creation and analy-sis of – stylized – application scenarios.

Prof. Dr. Ulrich FrankChair of Information Systems

and Enterprise ModellingUniversity of Duisburg-Essen

6 Idealizations and Stylized Facts

Winter et al. (2009) introduces the con-cept of “stylized facts” that describes in-terdependencies relevant when designinginformation and communication tech-nology artifacts. He does not provideexamples of such facts in the Informa-tion Systems (IS) context, but notes thatthey “abstract from contingent individualcases to an extent that they can be ob-served in many situations” (p. 197).The above characterization implies that

stylized facts are empirical generaliza-tions. Yet, one can argue that generality in


BISE – DISCUSSION

science is not achieved by extracting sim-ilarities from particulars, but through ab-straction and idealization. Indeed, scien-tific idealizations are common in estab-lished disciplines such as physics and eco-nomics.The purpose of the present comment

is to argue for scientific idealizations inIS research, suggesting that they may behelpful in identifying useful stylized facts.By Information Systems I refer to the dis-cipline of computing that specifically fo-cuses on IT applications, on their devel-opment (including design), use, and im-pact at individual, group, organizational,community, society and global levels.This application focus makes it possi-ble to distinguish Information Systemsfrom its sister disciplines, Computer Sci-ence and Software Engineering, althoughthere is a considerable overlap betweenthe three – raison d’être of each lying inIT artifacts.Information Systems as a discipline is

often criticized that it, with a few excep-tions, has failed to produce its own theo-ries in the sense of “theories for explain-ing and predicting” (Gregor 2006). Themajor reason for this is that IS researchhas focused on theories from referencedisciplines. Understandably, these theo-ries are void of IT content. Therefore it isno wonder that IT artifacts are weakly ad-dressed in these reference theory-inspiredexercises. As an example, quite paradox-ically the major theoretical achievementof Information Systems – the originalTechnology Acceptance Model (TAM) –is totally empty of any IT specific sub-stance. The IT substance is just a mat-ter operationalization of perceived ease ofuse and perceived usefulness.A second reason for the above fail-

ure may be that Information Systems hasfailed to make scientific idealizations thatwould be conducive to theory building.These idealizations could help us over-come our commercial culture and ad-dress IT artifacts more deeply than hasbeen done so far. Instead of emphasiz-ing technological fashions, discontinu-ities, radical innovativeness and disrup-tiveness of every piece of new technologyintroduced in the marketplace, these ide-alizations should help us identify techno-logical continuities and invariants.But what could be these idealizations?

Weberian ideal types are instances ofscientific idealization in social sciences.They may also useful in understand-ing IT applications, too. During a fewlast years I have attempted to develop

an open-ended typology of IT applica-tions. In its current form this typology,based on the primary purpose of theIT application, distinguishes eight idealtypes: automating, augmenting, mediat-ing, informating, entertaining, artisticiz-ing, accompanying, and fantasizing ITapplications. The first four correspond toquite traditional IT applications that au-tomate some processes, serve as produc-tivity tools, provide computer mediatedcommunication, and serve as informa-tion systems in proper. Computer gamesare examples of IT applications with theprimary purpose to entertain. IT appli-cations may also attempt to arouse artis-tic experience, and one can easily imaginea new sort of art that is essentially builton the dynamic and interactive charac-ter of computer technology. IT artifactssuch as digital pets can accompany hu-man users. Finally, computers allow usersto co-construct and co-experience digitalfantasy worlds.The underlying conjecture is that each

ideal type has its characteristic – al-though not exclusive - designable qual-ities. For example, technical quality inthe case of automating applications, us-ability of augmenting applications, user-user-interactivity of mediating applica-tions, information quality in the caseof informating applications, engageabil-ity of entertaining applications, aestheticsof artisticizing applications, emotionalquality of accompanying applications,and identity constructability in the caseof fantasizing applications.The typology of IT applications broad-

ens the focus of Information Systems be-yond the utilitarian use of IT applicationsin the workplace context. That is anotherstory, but there are clear signs that thisbroadening is slowly taking place.As ideal types, the eight types do not

necessarily occur in reality in their pureforms, but most real applications arecombinations of them. In fact, based onthe eight types alone, we can identify255 different combinations. If one addsdifferent application domains (e.g., busi-ness, government, healthcare, education,etc), one could have thousands of differ-ent application types just in terms of theeight ideal types.My guess is that the major evolution

and perhaps advances in IT will takeplace at the level of IT applications. It isobvious that we should have some intel-lectual means to address the increased va-riety of IT applications. Instead of focus-ing on all thousand IT application types

or the 255 combinations separately, re-search could focus on the eight (or so)ideal types, assuming that deeper under-standing of their design and use also in-forms about the hybrid applications.So, when talking about stylized facts, I

have in mind empirically grounded in-terdependencies such as perceived easeof use (≈ usability) is positively associ-ated with perceived usefulness and per-ceived usefulness is positively associatedwith behavioral intention to use as orig-inally identified in TAM research in thecontext of augmenting tools (Davis et al.1989). Yet, I wish that we could have styl-ized facts that are much richer in tech-nology and in identifying significant des-ignable qualities of various IT applica-tions. Our search for stylized facts couldfocus on how to successfully design suc-cessful IT applications that automate,augment, mediate, informate, entertain,artisticize, accompany, and help us fanta-size. That is my vision.

Juhani IivariDepartment of Information Processing

ScienceOulu University, Finland

References

to Sect. 1:

Fettke P, Houy C, Loos P (2010) On the im-portance of design knowledge for design-oriented business and information systemsengineering – conceptual foundations, ap-plication example, and implications. Busi-ness & Information Systems Engineering2(6):347–358

Houy C, Fettke P, Loos P (2009) Stilisier-te Fakten der Ereignisgesteuerten Prozes-skette – Anwendung einer Methode zurTheoriebildung in der Wirtschaftsinforma-tik. In: Nüttgens M, Rump FJ, MendlingJ, Gehrke N (eds) EPK 2009. GI-Workshop– „Geschäftsprozessmanagement mit Er-eignisgesteuerten Prozessketten“ (WI-EPK-09), November 26–27. Gesellschaft für In-formatik, Berlin, pp 22–41

Houy C, Fettke P, Loos P (2011) StilisierteFakten in der gestaltungsorientierten Wirt-schaftsinformatik – Allgemeine Potentialeund erste Erfahrungen. In: Tagungsbandzur Konferenz Wirtschaftsinformatik 2011.Internationale Tagung Wirtschaftsinforma-tik (WI-11), February 16–18, Zürich

Winter R, KrcmarH, Sinz EJ, Zelewski S, HevnerAR (2009) What in fact is fundamental re-search in business and information systemsengineering? Business & Information Sys-tems Engineering 1(2):192–198

to Sect. 2:

Becker W, Benz K (1997) Effizienz-Verständnisund Effizienz-Instrumente des Controlling.DBW 57:655–671


BISE – DISCUSSION

Denzin N, Lincoln Y (2000) The discipline andpractice of qualitative research. In: DenzinN, Lincoln Y (eds) Handbook of qualitativeresearch. Sage, Thousand Oaks

Forster M, Benlian A, Hess T (2009) Investi-tionsentscheidung pro oder contra ERP-Systeme. In: Hess T (ed) Controlling mitERP-Systemen, ZfCM – Sonderheft 3/2009

Heidmann M (2008) The role of managementaccounting systems in strategic sensemak-ing. Gabler, Wiesbaden

Heine BO, Meyer M, Strangfeld O (2007) DasKonzept der stilisierten Fakten zur Mes-sung und Bewertung wissenschaftlichenFortschritts. Die Betriebswirtschaft67(5):583–601

Hitt M, Beamish P, Jackson S, Mathieu J (2007)Building theoretical and empirical bridgesacross levels: multilevel research in man-agement. AMJ 50:1385–1399

Houy C, Fettke P, Loos P (2009) Stilisierte Fak-ten der Ereignisgesteuerten Prozesskette –Anwendung einer Methode zur Theoriebil-dung in der Wirtschaftsinformatik. In: Nütt-gens M, Rump FJ, Mendling J, Gehrke N(eds) EPK 2009. GI-Workshop – AK „Ge-schäftsprozessmanagement mit Ereignis-gesteuerten Prozessketten“ (WI-EPK-EPK),November 26–27. Gesellschaft für Informa-tik, Berlin, pp 22–41

Ioannidis JPA (2005) Why most published re-search findings are false: In: PLoS Medicine2:124e

Kaldor N (1961) Capital accumulation andeconomic growth. In: Lutz F, Hague D (eds)The theory of capital. Macmillan, London

Löhr B (2010) Integriertes Risikocontrollingfür Industrieunternehmen. Peter Lang,Frankfurt

Rosenhagen K (1994) Informationsver-sorgung von Führungskräften. Controlling6:272–280

Schreyögg G (2007) Betriebswirtschaftslehrenur noch als Etikett. In: Gerum E, SchreyöggG (eds) Zukunft der Betriebswirtschaftsleh-re, zfbf – Sonderheft, vol 56

Schwerin J (2001) Wachstumsdynamik inTransformationsökonomien. Böhlau, Köln

Weißenberger BE, Löhr B (2007) Planungund Unternehmenserfolg: Stylized Factsaus der empirischen Controllingforschungim deutschsprachigen Raum von 1990–2007. ZP 18:335–363

Winter R, KrcmarH, Sinz EJ, Zelewski S, HevnerAR (2009) Was ist eigentlich Grundlagen-forschung in der Wirtschaftsinformatik?WIRTSCHAFTSINFORMATIK 51(2):224–231

to Sect. 3:

Heine BO, Meyer M, Strangfeld O (2007) DasKonzept der stilisierten Fakten zur Mes-

sung und Bewertung wissenschaftlichenFortschritts. Die Betriebswirtschaft67(5):583–601

Jones CI, Romer PM (2009) The new Kaldorfacts: ideas, institutions, population, andhuman capital. Paper, Version 2:0 vom2009-06-17. Stanford

Heinzl A, König W, Hack J (2001) Erkennt-nisziele der Wirtschaftsinformatik in dennächsten drei und zehn Jahren. WIRT-SCHAFTSINFORMATIK 43(3):223–233

Kaldor N (1961) Capital accumulation andeconomic growth. In: Lutz FA, Hague DC(eds) The theory of capital. MacMillan, Lon-don, pp 177–222

Li Y, Hamill PA, Opong KK (2010) Do bench-mark African equity indices exhibit the styl-ized facts? Global Finance Journal 21(1):71–97

Lin WT, Shao BBM (2006) The business valueof information technology and inputs sub-stitution: the productivity paradox revis-ited. Decision Support Systems 42(2):493–507

Österle H, Becker J, Frank U, Hess T, Kara-giannis D, Krcmar H, Loos P, Mertens P,Oberweis A, Sinz EJ (2010) Memorandumzur gestaltungsorientierten Wirtschaftsin-formatik. Schmalenbachs Zeitschrift für be-triebswirtschaftliche Forschung 62(9):662–672

Weißenberger BE, Löhr B (2007) Planungund Unternehmenserfolg: Stylized Factsaus der empirischen Controllingforschungim deutschsprachigen Raum von 1990–2007. Zeitschrift für Planung und Unter-nehmenssteuerung 18(4):335–363

to Sect. 4:

Chalmers AF (2007) Wege der Wissenschaft– Einführung in die Wissenschaftstheorie,6 edn. Springer, Berlin

Grün O (1997) Zum Stand der empirischenForschung in der Wirtschaftsinformatik ausbetriebswirtschaftlicher Sicht. In: Grün O,Heinrich LJ (eds) Wirtschaftsinformatik: Er-gebnisse empirischer Forschung. Springer,Wien, pp 51–60

Heine BO, Meyer M, Strangfeld O (2007)Das Konzept der stilisierten Fakten zurMessung und Bewertung wissenschaftli-chen Fortschritts. Die Betriebswirtschaft67(5):583–601

Heinrich LJ, Heinzl A, Riedl R (2010)Wirtschaftsinformatik: Einführung undGrundlegung, 4 edn. Springer, Heidelberg

Heinrich LJ, Wiesinger I (1997) Zur Verbrei-tung empirischer Forschung in der Wirt-schaftsinformatik. In: Grün O, HeinrichLJ (eds) Wirtschaftsinformatik: Ergebnisse

empirischer Forschung. Springer, Wien, pp37–49

Houy C, Fettke P, Loos P (2009) Stilisier-te Fakten der Ereignisgesteuerten Prozes-skette – Anwendung einer Methode zurTheoriebildung in der Wirtschaftsinforma-tik. In: Nüttgens M, Rump FJ, MendlingJ, Gehrke N (eds) EPK 2009: GI-Workshop– „Geschäftsprozessmanagement mit Er-eignisgesteuerten Prozessketten“ (WI-EPK-09), November 26–27, Berlin, pp 22–41

Kaldor N (1961) Capital accumulation andeconomic growth. In: Hague DC, Lutz FA(eds) The theory of capital. MacMillan, Lon-don, pp 177–222

Solow RM (1969) Growth theory: an exposi-tion. Clarendon, New York

Weißenberger BE, Löhr B (2007) Planungund Unternehmenserfolg: Stylized Factsaus der empirischen Controllingforschungim deutschsprachigen Raum von 1990–2007. Zeitschrift für Planung & Unterneh-menssteuerung 18(4):335–363

Winter R, Krcmar H, Sinz EJ, Zelewski S, Hev-ner AR (2009) Was ist eigentlich Grund-lagenforschung in der Wirtschaftsinforma-tik? WIRTSCHAFTSINFORMATIK 51(2):224–231

to Sect. 5:

Heine BO, Meyer M, Strangfeld O (2007)Das Konzept der stilisierten Fakten zurMessung und Bewertung wissenschaftli-chen Fortschritts. Die Betriebswirtschaft67(5):583–601

Helfat CE (2007) Stylized facts, empirical re-search and theory development in man-agement. Strategic Organization 5(2):185–192

Weißenberger BE, Löhr B (2007) Planungund Unternehmenserfolg: Stylized Factsaus der empirischen Controllingforschungim deutschsprachigen Raum von 1990–2007. Zeitschrift für Planung & Unterneh-menssteuerung 18(4):335–363

to Sect. 6:

Davis FD, Bagozzi RP, Warshaw PR (1989)User acceptance of computer technology:a comparison of two theoretical models.Management Science 35(8):982–1003

Gregor S (2006) The nature of theory in infor-mation systems. MIS Quarterly 30(3):611–642

Winter R, KrcmarH, Sinz EJ, Zelewski S, HevnerAR (2009) What in fact is fundamental re-search in business and information systemsengineering? Business & Information Sys-tems Engineering 1(2):192–198


Documents

WhatinFactIstheRoleofStylizedFacts … · in BISE (Fettke et al. 2010;Houyetal. 2009, 2011). In order to achieve a broad perspective on the issue in the course of this discussion,