Cultural Bias in Information Systems Research and Practice: Are You Coming From the Same Place I Am?

This article summarises an ICIS panel discussion held on December 2005 in Las Vegas on the influence of national (or ethnic) culture on IS research and practice. Based on the views of the panel members and the question and answer time with the wider audience, it was generally agreed that culture has a tremendously significant influence on IS research and practice. This influence is expressed in a bias in how research is conducted and published and how practice is conducted. The bias is usually in favour of the dominant cultural perspective. The effects of these biases, both positive and negative, are discussed and possible solutions discussed

An endemic and endangered new species of the lizard liolaemus montanus group from southwestern peru (Iguania: Liolaemidae), with a key for the species of the l. reichei clade

The southwestern Andes of Peru harbor a hidden taxonomic diversity of reptiles. We describe a new species of Liolaemus Wiegmann (Iguania: Liolaemidae) from xerophytic environments of the southwestern slopes of the Andes of Peru, 2,400– 2,900 m asl. The new species, previously considered to be a population of L. insolitus Cei, exhibits unique diagnostic characters of morphology, scalation and color pattern, and molecular evidence that suggest that it belongs in the Liolaemus montanus species group and the L. reichei clade. Moreover, the species is endemic to the eastern slopes of La Caldera batholith in the Department of Arequipa, southern Peru. We also provide information on the conservation status of the species and suggest it be included in the IUCN red list of the threatened species as endangered (EN). A key for the species of the L. reichei clade is provided.Fil: Quiroz, Aarón J.. Universidad Nacional de San Agustin de Arequipa; PerúFil: Huamaní Valderrama, Ling. Universidad Nacional de San Agustin de Arequipa; PerúFil: Gutiérrez, Roberto C.. Universidad Nacional de San Agustin de Arequipa, Museo de Historia Natural; PerúFil: Aguilar Kirigin, Alvaro Juan. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; ArgentinaFil: López Tejeda, Evaristo Luciano. Universidad Nacional de San Agustin de Arequipa; PerúFil: Lazo Rivera, Ana. Universidad Nacional de San Agustin de Arequipa; PerúFil: Huanca Mamani, Wilson. Universidad de Tarapacá; ChileFil: Valladares Faúndez, Pablo. Universidad de Tarapacá; ChileFil: Morrone, Juan José. Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México; MéxicoFil: Cerdeña, José. No especifíca;Fil: Chaparro, Juan C.. No especifíca;Fil: Abdala, Cristian Simón. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico - Tucumán. Unidad Ejecutora Lillo; Argentin

AN EMPIRICAL INVESTIGATION OF DIFFERENCES BETWEEN NORTH AMERICAN AND EUROPEAN MIS RESEARCH

The information age has facilitated knowledge sharing among different parts of the world. Research ideas and methodologies are shared through conferences and publications by MIS researchers in Europe and in North America. However, there has been little movement toward a more uniform research paradigm on the two continents. One reason may be the difference in research tradition, which is strongly influenced by the analytic tradition of logical positivism in North America and by interpretivism in Europe. Diversity, whether in terms of research methodologies or reference disciplines, enriches and benefits a field of research. If, however, this diversity inhibits sharing of research and knowledge between communities with different intellectual heritages, loss of synergy and research opportunities for both communities may result. The implications of these differences can be examined by referring to sociological paradigms, Kuhn (1970) defines sociological paradigm as the entire constellation of beliefs, values, techniques and so on shared by the members of a given community (p. 175). These shared values are used to judge theories, predictions, and methodologies. Given the predominantly positivist research tradition in North America and interpretive research tradition in Europe, it seems reasonable to presume two different sociological paradigms. If indeed North American and European researchers belong to two different sociological paradigms, this could pose problems in terms of reviewing and publishing in MIS journals and conferences as well as in sharing knowledge across research traditions. Publishing, for instance, is influenced by the accumulated paradigms, values, standards, and biases typically reflected in the editorial policies and practices of leading journals Uenkins 1984, p. 107). For example, North American reviewers differed from non-North Americans in their evaluation of MIS research, ranking criteria such as logical rigor and replicability of research more highly, whereas non-North Americans valued contribution to knowledge and topic selection more highly (Evaristo, Ang and Straub 1992). The objective of this paper is to identify differences between North American and European research in terms of reference disciplines and research methodologies. To achieve this objective, this research empirically classifies and compares doctoral dissertation research in the two continents for 1985 and 1990. In addition, the five-year interval between allows for trend comparisons both within continents over time and between continents. Preliminary results for 1985 indicate the predominance of non-empirical research in Europe and empirical research in North America. Significant differences were also found in reference disciplines. Computer science underlies proportionally more research in Europe than in North America, whereas decision science, psychology, and infonnation theory are proportionally more common in North America than in Europe

Global knowledge management strategies

In this paper we address the issue of managing knowledge within firms that span multiple countries. Through a series of semi-structured interviews with 29 senior managers, spanning three continents and 11 firms, we present insights on knowledge management approaches and strategies being undertaken. In the organizations we interviewed we found presence of three strategies for knowledge management: Headquarter Commissioned and Executed, Headquarter Commissioned and Regionally Executed, and Regionally Commissioned and Locally Executed. We also discuss challenges faced in executing global knowledge management initiatives.</p

Managing knowledge in distributed projects

A hybrid approach to knowledge management helps maximize the benefits of the centralized and P2P approaches. In today’s organizations the common unit of work is the project. Turner defines a project as “an endeavor in which human, material, and financial resources are organized in a novel way, to undertake a unique scope of work, for a given specification, within constraints of cost and time, so as to achieve beneficial changes defined by quantitative and qualitative objectives” [6]. Projects have moved from being simple phenomena to manage to more complex entities spanning geographical locations, multiple occurrences, and different organizational affiliations, with IT being the key enabler for the transformation. For instance, a co-located program involves multiple projects running at one location, whereas a distributed project is a single endeavor conducted from multiple locations. Finally, the most complicated scenario is multiple projects conducted at multiple locations. Complexities can be attributed to managing multiple interdependencies across time, space, and project

Project management offices: A case of knowledge-based archetypes

While Project Management Offices (PMOs) have become a mainstay in organizations, systematic research has not yet been undertaken to study their intricacies. In this paper, we conduct an exploratory and descriptive case study of PMOs, based on our interviews with senior managers and directors of PMOs in 32 IT organizations. The objectives are to: (1) outline the nature and characteristics of PMOs; (2) classify and derive archetypes of PMOs; and (3) enumerate critical success factors of PMOs. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first paper to systematically investigate PMOs from a knowledge archetype perspective. A novel and significant contribution of this paper is the case description of four PMO archetypes, which clearly delineate PMOs based on their knowledge management functions and capabilities

Collaborative Infrastructure Formation in Virtual Projects

In this paper, we discuss the concept of collaborative IT infrastructure. Based on data from our own research plus case studies from the literature we propose a framework for the implementation of such infrastructure at the level of hardware, software, and protocols or guidelines on how to manage such projects. This framework is applied to a typology of projects including four dimensions: number of sites, number of projects, locus of project (intra versus interorganizational), and level of cultural homogeneity versus heterogeneity. The resulting insights allow us to present considerations on the successful implementation of a collaborative IT infrastructure for different types of virtual projects. A summary of insights obtained and future research suggestions are also offered. I