Against method‐ism: exploring the limits of method

Abstract

Provides a critique of method‐ism ‐ the view that methodology is necessary and sufficient for information systems’ development success; method‐ism presupposes also that systems developers understand the value of methodology and will prefer to work with it rather than without it. Argues, against method‐ism, that method flows from understanding, and not the reverse. Hence method cannot be a substitute for understanding. Discusses the way in which humans tend to interact with the world by means of ready‐to‐hand tools, using the ideas of Heidegger and Ihde. Shows that tools are used only if available (ready‐to‐hand) in the world of doing. If a methodology is not ready‐to‐hand, it will break down and be ignored in the pragmatics of getting the job done. Presents a number of arguments why methodologies by design will tend to break down (not be ready‐to‐hand) and hence be discarded.