Ethical implications of social stratification in information systems research Nicholas Berente,* Uri Gal † & Sean Hansen ‡ *University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia, USA, email: berente@uga.edu, † Copenhagen Business School, Copenhagen, Denmark, email: ug.caict@cbs.dk, and ‡ Rochester Institute of Technology, Rochester, New York, USA, email: shansen@saunders.rit.edu Abstract. When investigating the use of information systems within organiza- tions, researchers inevitably make decisions relating to the classification, or ‘strati- fication’, of information technology users. Most commonly, users are stratified along functional boundaries or by their membership in various communities of practice. It is important to note, however, that any such method of social stratifi- cation necessarily focuses the attention of a researcher on certain issues while unavoidably downplaying or neglecting other concerns. Individuals whose inter- ests, values or identification align with these neglected issues may be inadvert- ently marginalized by the research approach. This observation suggests a range of ethical concerns related to the methods of social stratification used by research- ers. In this paper, we argue that the method by which information systems researchers stratify organizational actors in their research has significant ethical implications. We propose a framework that maps stratification strategies that researchers bring to their analyses using Weber’s theory of stratification and the dimensions of class, status and party, in conjunction with his distinction between heterogeneous and homogenous forms of work. We offer illustrative theoretical lenses for each category in the framework and demonstrate how each lens favours certain issues and potentially neglects others. Keywords: social stratification, IT users, critical social theory, information ethics INTRODUCTION The issue of rigour in information systems (IS) research has received ample attention over the years from researchers within the field. To acquire academic and institutional legitimacy, IS researchers and journal editors have tended to emphasize methodological precision in con- ducting research and as a key criterion in selecting manuscripts for publication (Benbasat & Zmud, 2003). This has led to a growing refinement of methodological principles to which both quantitative and qualitative researchers are expected to adhere. However, despite the focus on methodological rigour, one methodological issue seems to have evaded an explicit discussion in IS academic discourse – classification of research participants. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2575.2010.00353.x Info Systems J (2011) 21, 357–382 357 © 2010 Blackwell Publishing Ltd