Finally, my conclusion: what about the trajectory of future research in the IS field?

Well, going back to Herbert Simon in his book The Sciences of the Artificial, he distinguishes between a “blueprint description” and a “recipe description” p.222).  One example of a "recipe" is the equation of the finance formula for what a fixed monthly mortgage payment would be for a given interest rate and given principal.  In this example, the blueprint would correspond to a huge book of numerous tables where you could look up the monthly mortgage payment by the interest rate and the principal.  Here, the monthly mortgage payment formula is a recipe that can generate the same description.

Another example of a "recipe" -- and this is one that Herbert Simon mentions -- is a computer program itself.  Consider all the different possible outputs of a computer program, depending on the different data that would be input into it.  In this analogy, all of the different outputs would be blueprint descriptions of different situations.  But, in a way, the computer program itself is a recipe that allows us to generate, if necessary, all the different blueprint descriptions.  In a way, the computer program itself is an equivalent, and more compact, description of the same thing.

As for a  trajectory for IS research in the future, I will not be so presumptuous as to recommend one or another blueprint.  However, suffice it to say that I recommend we follow three old, established lessons as a recipe in our future research: let’s enact true systems thinking, let’s enact design science, and let’s enact paradigms.