Value of IS Research: Let’s Not Talk Crisis – but We Can Do Better

I argue that the Information Systems (IS) field is at a crossroads, not a crisis. Across a variety of metrics, the field has progressed fabulously. The quality of our journals and the research they embody is on par with other business disciplines. However, our course of drawing from reference disciplines, creating different instantiations of models, having everyone engage in theory and empirics, and limiting our actionable implications – might be creating an impediment for us. We need to expend more energy in dealing with bigger questions that characterize contemporary digital environments. This will require some thoughtful discussion and introspection – so that we can fight against the institutional forces that limit our value proposition

The Information Systems Field: Making a Case for Maturity and Contribution

In this paper, I explore the question of whether the field is progressing well. In doing so, I base my opinion on anchors from four independent studies that I have conducted over the years. These studies treat the field in different ways: as an aggregator of terms, a complex adaptive system, part of a knowledge market, and an evolving biological system. The four perspectives offer different ways of framing the question of progress. I describe these perspectives and make the case based on the conclusions formed from logic and data that the field has indeed progressed splendidly. I argue that the field is maturing and making a contribution, and we should be proud of what we have accomplished. However, through each perspective, I also identify some vicious circles to avoid if we are to continue to progress. The portrait is one of optimism and hope, along with the need for sound stewardship going forward

Diversify Performance Metrics in Research: Thinking Within and Outside the Journal

This essay provides a response to Fitzgerald, B., Dennis, A. R., An, J., Tsutsui, S., & Muchala, R. C. (2019). Information systems research: Thinking outside the basket and beyond the journal. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 45, 110-133

Muddling Along to Moving Beyond in IS Research: Getting from Good to Great

In this article, I argue that the IS field seems to be doing well when evaluated with sociometric techniques. However, while the progress of our field is commendable, we might have reached diminishing returns in the way we conduct research with our current modus operandi. Given that we are dealing with the most important phenomena of our time, I believe that it is time to become more ambitious and expand our impact to other domains and disciplines by creating more enduring and impactful research. I argue that four key dimensions on which we should place emphasis include: our institutionalization of a certain genre of research, monistic theorizing of our phenomena, the focus on questions for which data is easier to access, and our unwillingness to deeply engage with reference discipline theories. Addressing these through individual and collective efforts can help us expand the frontiers of our knowledge product and create broader value

The Nerd Effect: Communication and Managerial Self-Image

A fundamental aspect of IT-Business alignment rests on good communication between business managers and IT personnel. Managers need to obtain useful technical information to support strategic IT decisions and must communicate with IT workers to do so. However, we argue that managers’ preconceived perspectives of IT experts (as “nerds”) can have an effect on communication between managers and IT workers. This research examines business-IT communication between managers and IT workers. The nerd effect causes managers to surrender control over a business-IT communication to an individual perceived as a nerd. Under these circumstances, the traditionally positive relationship between control over a communication and the success of that communication is inverted. Results from a quasi-experiment provide evidence that the nerd effect has the power to affect and possibly undermine the communication upon which business-IT strategic alignment relies

The Societal Impacts of Generative Artificial Intelligence: A Balanced Perspective

The discourse surrounding the societal impacts of generative artificial intelligence (GAI), exemplified by technologies like ChatGPT, often oscillates between extremes: utopian visions of unprecedented productivity and dystopian fears of humanity’s demise. This polarized perspective neglects the nuanced, pragmatic manifestation of GAI. In general, extreme views oversimplify the technology itself or its potential to address societal issues. The authors suggest a more balanced analysis, acknowledging that GAI’s impacts will unfold dynamically over time as diverse implementations interact with human stakeholders and contextual factors. While Big Tech firms dominate GAI’s supply, its demand is expected to evolve through experimentation and use cases. The authors argue that GAI’s societal impact depends on identifiable contingencies, emphasizing three broad factors: the balance between automation and augmentation, the congruence of physical and digital realities, and the retention of human bounded rationality. These contingencies represent trade-offs arising from GAI instantiations, shaped by technological advancements, stakeholder dynamics, and contextual factors, including societal responses and regulations. Predicting long-term societal effects remains challenging due to unforeseeable discontinuities in the technology’s trajectory. The authors anticipate a continuous interplay between GAI initiatives, technological advances, learning experiences, and societal responses, with outcomes depending on the above contingencies

Business Value of IT: An Essay on Expanding Research Directions to Keep up with the Times

Much of the work on the business value of IT has examined relationships between IT inputs and economic outcomes of the firm. Yet, business executives and researchers continue to question the value of IT investments. We argue that while the current trajectory of research in this important area is useful, it is limited. In order to address the evolving nature of IT and the novel contexts in which it is being exploited, we must create a discontinuity in our thinking of how IT value should be studied. After summarizing what we have learned thus far, we discuss key new research themes that must be addressed if IT is to be demonstrably relevant. Further, we identify specific research thrusts, areas for theoretical development, and research questions on IT-based value that must be included in our research agenda for the future. We conclude by challenging IT researchers to consider the consequences of status quo research themes versus an expanded set of research questions

Management Misinformation Systems: A Time to Revisit?

In this essay, we revisit Ackoff’s (1967) classic “Management Misinformation Systems” and its five myths. The paper appeared at the dawn of the information systems (IS) field and shattered popular assumptions about designing and using IS. The paper shaped the direction and scope of scholarly discourse around information systems; in contrast to dominant claims at that time, he argued that managers swam in the abundance of irrelevant information, were victims of poor modeling and, consequently, poor understanding of their own decisions, participated in destructive communication due to conflicting goals, and had a poor understanding of how systems worked. Despite the passage of 50 years (and many revolutions in information technology), researchers in the IS field still regard Ackoff’s arguments as valid and rarely debate them. Yet, given the new information-rich environments and our nearly limitless capability to collect and analyze data, we may need to reexamine these arguments to correctly frame information systems’ contemporary effects on managerial decision making. We scrutinize Ackoff’s five assumptions in light of today’s IT and data-rich environments and identify key tenets that will reframe the disciplinary discourse concerning the effects of information systems. We identify significant shifts in research on decision making including the role of abduction, data layering and options, and intelligence augmentation. We honor the extraordinary legacy of Ackoff’s remarkable paper as an IS scholar by shaping the field’s future inquiries in the spirit of the original paper

The Effect of an IS Article’s Structure on Its Impact

Information Systems research often uses article citation counts to judge the impact of articles, journals, and authors, and even to assess the maturity of the discipline. Yet little is known about the drivers of article impact. Motivated by the continued debate on the importance of theory development, methodological rigor, and tradeoffs between rigor and relevance, the authors of this paper examine the structure of theory-based empirical IS articles as a potential determinant of their scientific impact. Using the straightforward measure of page counts, the authors assess the structure of these articles at the macro level and develop hypotheses on article impact. Results indicated that, as hypothesized, the structure of IS articles does determine their impact. Conceptualization and theory development in articles tends to payoff in citation counts, while emphasis on methodology and implications does not. They discuss recommendations for review systems and for authors, as well as for the field as a whole. Supplemental analyses show that highly-influential IS research tends to be theory-based empirical and that, consistent with the evolution of the field, concept to method ratio has been going up in IS articles over time; a synchronization that has paid off in terms of impact