[AISWorld] A small revolution in the IS field

Mon Jan 7 14:20:37 EST 2013

Dear Professor Nik Hassan and AIS colleagues:
It is true that MIS/IT research has produced very useful and theoretically
well-found knowledge (in the early and middle stages 60's, and 70'-80s) but
my general impression is that we have lost the humility of recognizing the
contributions of our colleagues from the 50-100 MIS available journals. The
impact factor over 4.5 to 5.0 from the MIS/IT top-5 journals is not normal
when it is compared with other disciplines.For instance please consider two
interesting cases: *Management Science or IEEE Intelligent Systems journals*

   - *2011 Impact Factor: 1.733 - 5-Year Impact: 3.304 for Management
   Science*<http://www.informs.org/Find-Research-Publications/Journals/Management-Science>

   - *According to the new Journal Citation Report released by Thomson
   Reuters in June, IEEE Intelligent Systems' impact factor (IF) was 3.144 in
   2009, making it the number one publication in the AI
field.*<http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpls/abs_all.jsp?arnumber=5552584&tag=1>

So, the quality gap between top-5 MIS journals and the remainder 45 it
seems more artificially created! than really gained in the
last 20 years. It generates strong implications for MIS Faculty regarding
tenure promotions, acknowledgements and academic status
for promote some MIS research topics and methods and blocking other outside
of such a power circle. More on the problem: as Latin
American academic, we are totally excluded to publish in such journals.
Even Latin colleagues working in USA or Europe
with some exceptions (a search in Google scholar could produce not more
than 15-30 papers in the last 30 years in MIS discipline)
but the academic surprise is that in other disciplines: Computer
Sciences,Biology, Mathematics, Latin academics and Latin Institutions are
totally recognized and are published in top worldwide journals! In summary,
our discipline has lost the humility to recognize the
value of MIS research realized in small business, and outside countries of
the main top five. As a final comment, research realized
in Computer Sciences, Medicine, and Biology -as examples- is conducted with
a high motivation and involvement of the researchers
on such specific research problem: it implies that they want really to get
a better applied solution, theoretical knowledge or
research tool; they live the real problem and maybe suffers with users the
real problematic! In MIS discipline such human values
were always present in the early 60'-80s period, but it seems we have
changed to value other human pseudo-values.

MIS discipline is not wrong, maybe we -the MIS people- are wrong! Well,
anyway, have an excellent 2013 !
Professor Manuel Mora
Mexico

On Fri, Jan 4, 2013 at 3:24 PM, Nik R Hassan <nhassan at d.umn.edu> wrote:

> Dear Colleagues,
>
> I have to admit, when I posted the "small revolution" I was literally
> holding my breath because it wasn't exactly the PC thing to do. It's
> gratifying to know that many are concerned about it in their own (silent)
> way as I also received quite a few direct to my email off-the-list replies
> too. Please don't get me wrong, I personally believe as a field, we've done
> some great work but somehow they are not well known outside the field. As
> Davenport and Lynne Markus (1999) once wrote "we must eat our own dog
> food," and I think if we don't, we can't expect anyone else to. I believe
> we've delivered value and I am working with friends on extracting some of
> the valuable work done in our field which we can one day call "canons."
>
> Back to John, Robert, Arto and Ilia's point about the "usefulness" or
> practicality/utility of theories/knowledge, I think there is something to
> be said about different intellectual structures - blue sky theorizing vs.
> applied theorizing vs problem solving. They must be all useful but I don't
> know enough to say anything about the linkages between each one. Obviously
> when Einstein was doing his research, he wasn't exactly counting the number
> of ways his ideas would be practically applied anywhere but it was no doubt
> valuable to him and to his peers. So utility and value is not necessarily
> synonymous but at the same time, pure theory and applied science cannot be
> separated either. As Kant argued in his Theory and Practice (1793) , it's
> incoherent to say what may be true in theory doesn’t apply in practice,
> instead, the problem is most likely because the theory is incomplete. So
> back to what my other friend wisely said to me "You need less guru-talk and
> more research" - I humbly accept but what should I research on that I can
> honestly say is really valuable? Surely the value is not because it gets
> published.
>
> Nik
>
>
> Manuel Mora <dr.manuel.mora.uaa at gmail.com>
> 1:30 PM (1 hour ago)
>
>  to Robert, me, AISWorld
> Dear colleagues in AIS,
> This topic is maybe the most important for AIS and IT research in the last
> years.
>
> On Fri, Jan 4, 2013 at 10:55 AM, John Artz <jartz at gwu.edu> wrote:
>
>> While I agree with Arto's sentiments, as a dyed-in-the-wool pragmatist I
>> would point out that if a theory does not have practical value, it is not a
>> "good" theory.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> John
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Jan 4, 2013 at 9:12 AM, Arto Lanamäki <arto.lanamaki at uia.no>wrote:
>>
>>>  Hi,
>>>
>>>  I think this discussion is very interesting and useful. I'd just like
>>> to comment on the Kurt Lewin quote. It seems to be a regular anecdote among
>>> scholars, but rarely are these claims backed with evidence. I'd like to see
>>> some theory-testing that that there really is _nothing_ more practical than
>>> good theory, particularly when talking about contributions from IS scholars
>>> to IS practitioners. On the contrary, Sandelands (1990) argues that "there
>>> is nothing so practical about theory (but it is good to have around)" (p.
>>> 259).
>>>
>>>
>>> http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1468-5914.1990.tb00185.x/abstract
>>>
>>>  with kind regards,
>>> Arto Lanamäki
>>>
>>>
>>>  ------------------------------
>>> *Lähettäjä:* AISWorld [aisworld-bounces at lists.aisnet.org] käyttäjän
>>> Ilia Bider [ilia at ibissoft.se] puolesta
>>> *Lähetetty:* 3. tammikuuta 2013 17:30
>>> *Vastaanottaja:* aisworld at lists.aisnet.org
>>> *Aihe:* Re: [AISWorld] A small revolution in the IS field
>>>
>>>   Nick,
>>>
>>> On your question:
>>>
>>> "What kind of IS research is valuable anyway?"
>>>
>>> The following citation from Kurt Levin gives a good hint:
>>>
>>> “There is nothing more practical than a good theory”
>>>
>>> It is not only a statement about what is good for practice, but also a
>>> definition of what a good theory is,  i.e. a theory that can be useful in
>>> practice.
>>>
>>> The next logical step is "in  order to be useful in practice" the theory
>>> should be understood by those who do work in practice, which in turn
>>> requires radical change in the style of scientific publications in IS. It
>>> was nice to discover that even this problem got some attention during ICIS
>>> 2012.
>>>
>>> Cheers
>>>
>>> Ilia
>>>
>>> On 2012-12-30 20:32, Nik R Hassan wrote:
>>>
>>
> At 2:38 +0000 4/1/13, Dalal, Nik wrote:
> "Wisdom sits atop the knowledge pyramid ..."
>
> I've spent two decades arguing that the presumption that data,
> information, knowledge and wisdom can be mapped onto a single dimension is
> dangerously wrong.
>
> Details here:
> http://www.rogerclarke.com/SOS/ISFundas.html
> http://www.rogerclarke.com/SOS/Know.html
>
> Summary of useful working defintions:
>
> 'Data' is any symbol, sign or measure which is in a form which can be
> directly captured by a person or a machine.
>
> 'Real-world data' is data which represents or purports to represent a fact
> in the real world; whereas 'synthetic data' is data which does not.
>
> 'Information' is data that has value. Informational value depends upon
> context. Until it is placed in an appropriate context, data is not
> information, and once it ceases to be in that context it ceases to be
> information.
>
> 'Knowledge' is the matrix of impressions within which an individual
> situates newly acquired information.
>
> 'Wisdom' is on an entirely different plane from data, from information and
> from knowledge, because it has to do with judgement exercised by applying
> decision criteria to knowledge combined with new information.
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
>
> At 2:38 +0000 4/1/13, Dalal, Nik wrote:
> Thanks Nik H. for the wisdom in your posting and to all others for raising
> key questions and issues relating to the broader and deeper impact of IS
> research. In terms of foci of IS research that can have a significant
> impact in the world,  can we look at "wisdom", which is emerging as an
> academic area of research?
>
>
>
> I would point out that physics was around for 2,000 years, fromAristotle
> to Newton, before it began to produce really impressive results. If we are
> willing to wait for another 2,000 years for the research in Information
> Systems to eventually lead to something, I am confident that the field
> willproduce some really impressive results as well. However, if we do not
> wish to wait that long we might ask what we can do to speed things up a bit.
>
> We can just keep stumbling around and eventually enough research will
> accumulate for a pattern to appear which will make sense out of what we are
> doing. I have every confidence that this will eventually happen and I have
> every confidence that by the time it does, we (and several subsequent
> generations) will all be long past the point of caring.
>
> I would like to offer a few fairly simple questions, the answers to which
> would greatly speed up progress in the field.
>
> What are the constituents of the field? That is, what is the field about?
> What are we studying?
>
> For that matter, what is an information system? (The text book definition
> is almost worthless for research purposes)
>
> What would we like to know about the constituents of the field?
>
> How are we likely to find out the things we would like to know?
>
> These are largely philosophical questions. And instead of asking if
> philosophy is relevant to IS, as is a current mantra, we should be asking
> if the field is going to make any reasonable progress in any reasonable
> amount of time if the philosophers of IS don't get busy and try to answer
> them.
>
> Just a few thought,
>
>
>
> John
>
>>  *A small revolution in the IS field*
>>>
>>>
>>> As we approach the end of yet another year in the history of the IS
>>> field, I'd like to say how glad I was to have attended ICIS this year. It
>>> may just be me, but I think I just witnessed a small revolution taking
>>> place (at least in North America) in the field. I heard IS scholars making
>>> unconventional remarks I have not heard before. I enclose some quotes, and
>>> what went through my mind in parenthesis [I am just reporting - please
>>> don't shoot the messenger :-) ].
>>>
>>> [Varun*] "We can do very good research, but that doesn't mean we are
>>> producing good knowledge … can we create 'better' knowledge?… exciting,
>>> innovative and addressing important questions of our time"
>>>
>>> (wha… [my jaw dropping] did Varun just say what I thought he said?? He's
>>> admitting we're not producing good knowledge?)
>>>
>>> [Varun] "are we scripting the way we do research....requiring us to
>>> select a theory and apply it to our phenomena, create a mid-level model and
>>> then refine it ... add mediators and moderators to it … Does this script
>>> work for good knowledge?"
>>>
>>> (Wow … I kinda think everyone knew that was the game, the standard
>>> publishing script, and I was taught exactly that in school, but to hear a
>>> scholar say it in public and analyze it … cool!)
>>>
>>> [Bernard**] "I've been looking back at all the work that I've done… I
>>> don't think I've done enough ... We really should be doing research to
>>> resolve significant global problems...
>>>
>>> (if Bernard feels he hasn't contributed much, how much have the rest of
>>> us done?)
>>>
>>> [Bernard] ... at NUS, we've put together an inter-disciplinary team and
>>> received a big grant using social media to reduce pests ... and increase
>>> food production ... Let's not be too fixated about whether MISQ or ISR
>>> would publish such research ... let's target our work at Nature or Science
>>> .... to earn the respect of others outside our community
>>>
>>> (that's easy for him to say, he's already published tons in MISQ and
>>> ISR. But isn't there something wrong with the picture? Isn't research
>>> that's frequently published in the top journals of the field that's
>>> supposed to make their way to journals like Science and Nature? What does
>>> that say about our "normal" research?)
>>>
>>> [Manju**]  "After we have had the satisfaction of publishing in MISQ or
>>> ISR, and at least after making tenure and Full, it is time to start
>>> thinking about researching big ideas that make a difference "
>>>
>>> (Publishing 2-3 papers in MISQ and ISR, and getting full professor is
>>> going to take at least 10-20 years out of the most productive years of
>>> anyone's life, if they're fortunate enough to get there. Shouldn't those
>>> most productive years already be spent in researching big ideas? Shouldn't
>>> big ideas be some part of getting a full professorship in IS?)
>>>
>>> [Steven Alter in a follow up email]
>>> Our ICIS panel "DSR … remind me again about whether it is a new research
>>> paradigm or a rationale of last resort …" chaired by Allen Lee, with Steven
>>> Alter, Helmut Krcmar, and Mike Chiasson … remarks similar to Varun … that
>>> DSR is increasingly governed by a script that makes papers easier to review
>>> but … becoming an obstacle to genuine innovation … script encourages DSR
>>> researchers to do design-related work in a way in which few if any
>>> designers actually design things in the real world, which is especially
>>> unfortunate for a type of research that is called design SCIENCE research."
>>>
>>> All of these remarks are making me rethink about the notion of "value"
>>> in our work (not to be confused with "usefulness" or "utility"). It's close
>>> to "relevance" but since relevance has so much baggage attached to it,
>>> perhaps we should be taking a closer look at what valuable research really
>>> means.
>>>
>>> What kind of IS research is valuable anyway?
>>>
>>>
>>> Nik Rushdi Hassan
>>> Univ of Minnesota Duluth
>>> Chair SIG Philosophy
>>>
>>> *Varun Grover and Kalle Lyytinen presented at the SIG Philosophy
>>> Workshop at ICIS on "IS Theory-State of the Art" - available soon on the
>>> SIG Philosophy homepage
>>>
>>> **Bernard Tan and Manju Ahuja presented at the Senior Scholars Panel at
>>> ICIS 2012 chaired by Fred Niederman
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Nik R. Hassan, PhD
>>> Assoc. Professor, Finance & MIS Dept.
>>> Labovitz School of Business and Economics
>>> University of Minnesota Duluth
>>> 1318 Kirby Drive, LSBE 335Q
>>> Duluth MN 55812
>>> Office Phone: (218) 726-7453
>>> Fax: (218) 726-7516
>>> Home Page: www.d.umn.edu/~nhassan <http://www.d.umn.edu/%7Enhassan>
>>> LinkedIn http://www.linkedin.com/pub/nik-rushdi-hassan/33/591/a9b
>>> Email: nhassan at d.umn.edu
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> AISWorld mailing listAISWorld at lists.aisnet.org
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> ===============================================
>>> Dr. Ilia Bider
>>> Process- och systemutvecklingskonsult at ibissoft.se
>>> Lektor & Forskare at DSV.su.seilia at ibissoft.se        +46 (0)8 164998
>>> Design science in action ... http://slidesha.re/Uq3RTC
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> AISWorld mailing list
>>> AISWorld at lists.aisnet.org
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> *John M. Artz, PhD
>> Webpages: http://home.gwu.edu/~jartz
>> Email: jartz at gwu.edu
>> *
>> Men are not influenced by things but by their thoughts about things
>> -Epictetus
>>
>> *********************************************************
>> *  The geometry of innocent flesh on the bone
>> *  Causes Galileo's math book to get thrown
>> *  At Delilah who's sitting worthlessly alone
>> *  But the tears on her cheeks are from laughter.
>> **********************************************************
>> This delightful piece of post modern poetry is from
>> Tombstone Blues by Bob Dylan (Highway 61 Revisited)
>>
>> *<http://www.bestmotivationalposters.com/images/curiosity-funny-motivational-poster.jpg>
>>
>> *
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> AISWorld mailing list
>> AISWorld at lists.aisnet.org
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Nik R. Hassan, PhD
> Assoc. Professor, Finance & MIS Dept.
> Labovitz School of Business and Economics
> University of Minnesota Duluth
> 1318 Kirby Drive, LSBE 335Q
> Duluth MN 55812
> Office Phone: (218) 726-7453
> Fax: (218) 726-7516
> Home Page: www.d.umn.edu/~nhassan
> Email: nhassan at d.umn.edu
>
> _______________________________________________
> AISWorld mailing list
> AISWorld at lists.aisnet.org
>

-- 
Dr. Manuel Mora
Information Systems
Autonomous University of Aguascalientes
Mexico, 20131
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aisnet.org/pipermail/aisworld_lists.aisnet.org/attachments/20130107/490fb59d/attachment.html>