Hassan The Right Paradigms Proceedings of the Nineteenth Americas Conference on Information Systems, Chicago, Illinois, August 15-17, 2013. 1 Are We Using the Right "Paradigms?" Comparing Metaphysical, Sociological and Conceptual Paradigms    Nik Rushdi Hassan University of Minnesota Duluth nhassan@d.umn.edu ABSTRACT This essay proposes an alternative to how paradigms are viewed in the information systems (IS) field. Tracing the development of the paradigm concept from Kuhn's classic Structure of Scientific Revolutions to the educational sciences and the organizational sciences, it finds the IS field adopting metaphysical paradigms over sociological and conceptual paradigms to the detriment of the progress of the field. The appropriation of metaphysical paradigms ignited unnecessary and time consuming "paradigm wars" in these fields as well as in the IS field. This essay describes how the metaphysical paradigm differs from the sociological and conceptual paradigm and the problems the field will face if it continues adopting the same view. Finally the essay explains the advantages of adopting the primary meaning of Kuhn's paradigm concept and proposes how this approach to research may be undertaken. Keywords Information systems (IS) research methods, disciplinarity, IS theory, paradigms, Kuhn, normal science, epistemology INTRODUCTION The goal of this essay is to propose an alternative to how the paradigm concept is applied in the IS field. It argues that the IS field has essentially adopted an organization science view of paradigms that takes the field away from what Kuhn (1970) had originally envisioned. The organization science view of paradigms favors an abstract metaphysical version of paradigms, which often obscures the primary goals of the research, over the more concrete sociological and conceptual views of paradigms. The essay proceeds in the following manner. First, the essay traces the development of the paradigm concept and how it was appropriated within the educational and organization sciences. Examples of how this metaphysical view of the paradigm differs from the other forms of the paradigm concept are provided. Second, the essay will show how the IS field adopts this view of paradigms from the organization science via various classical works. Finally, the essay will propose why and how the IS field should and can reclaim the original paradigm concept to its advantage. KUHN'S MODEL AND THE METAPHYSICAL, SOCIAL AND CONCEPTUAL PARADIGM For Kuhn, scientists perform and evaluate research in reference to rules, exemplars and models that are acquired during their training. This conduct of “normal science” reflected the social practice of scientific work, which although carried the progress of science forward, often obscured the scientists from seeing beyond their existing world-views. This state of "normal science" continues until it faces crisis as a result of anomalies encountered in its practice, requiring the community to question or revise their shared assumptions, beliefs, values and rules and to adopt different vocabulary, concepts and assumptions that will allow them to progress further. This conceptual shift and assimilation involves the best-known part of Kuhn's theory—the paradigm. It is this paradigm shift, resembling a revolution, that takes place when the field is overtaken by a growing sense that the existing paradigm or set of paradigms have ceased to function adequately for the exploration of the core concerns of the field. It is the nature of that paradigm, especially for the IS field, that is the focus of this study. Right from the start, the nature of the paradigm became a contested issue. But as Kuhn had repeatedly emphasized in Structure and in his later writings, the difficulty of pinning down the exact meaning of the paradigm term should not diminish its usefulness as it is applied in different fields. The social sciences were the among the earliest to welcome the ideas propounded by Structure, and even though they were unable to agree on many fronts within their own fields, quickly declared respectability under the protection of their own unique paradigms. In spite of the generally accepted opinion, Masterman (1970) was among the earliest to acknowledge the usefulness of the paradigm concept, especially as a guide by which scientists are still able to perform their research in the period in which theories are absent (the pre-paradigm period). Kuhn’s critics who selectively choose parts of evidence that only support their contention often omit Masterman’s (1970) positive evaluations of the paradigm concept that form the bulk of her commentary on Kuhn's work. Masterman (1970) elaborates favourably on the "originality of Kuhn's sociological notion of a paradigm … paradigms as a puzzle-solving