Towards dissolution of the IS research debate: from polarization to polarity

The debate between 'hard' and 'soft' research approaches continues in the I S field, but with little prospect of resolution. The debate is typically ch aracterized by tendentious arguments as advocates from each approach offer a somewhat one-sided condemnation of the counterpart from the inimical rese arch tradition. This paper begins by relating two fictitious tales which se rve to highlight the: futility of research conducted at the extremity of ea ch research approach. The dichotomies which characterize these rival factio ns are also summarized. The debate is then framed in terms of the polarizat ion problem whereby IS researchers are divided geographically and paradigma tically into 'hard' and 'soft' camps. A variety of different strategies hav e been proposed for resolving the debate and these are discussed in detail. They are grouped into four categories, referred to as supremacism, isolati onism, integration, and pluralism. Finally, the paper contends that the deb ate cannot be resolved, and offers the metaphor of magnetic polarity as a m eans of reflecting this. The paper concludes by arguing that it would be mo re appropriate to recast the debate at a macro level in order to accommodat e different research agenda and recognize the strengths within each traditi on.