<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content="text/html; charset=US-ASCII" http-equiv=Content-Type>
<META name=GENERATOR content="MSHTML 9.00.8112.16446"></HEAD>
<BODY style="FONT-FAMILY: Arial; COLOR: #000000; FONT-SIZE: 10pt" id=role_body
bottomMargin=7 leftMargin=7 rightMargin=7 topMargin=7><FONT id=role_document
color=#000000 size=2 face=Arial>
<DIV>The last few months I've received comments on articles and journals that
say they aren't IS enough. This is something I hadn't heard before I have
a couple of questions:</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>What is considered IS?</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Is there a move to limit the definition of IS?</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>A little background. I am the editor in chief of the International
Journal of Knowledge Management and the International Journal of Information
Systems for Crisis Response and Management. I have received comments that
these journals are not IS enough. This perplexes me. Has the IS
field decided that knowledge management or knowledge systems are not information
systems? I do understand that information and knowledge are not the same,
but are we deciding that these are completely different disciplines? Are
we know saying that we need a AKS in additions to AIS? </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>The same for IS for crisis response and management, are we saying this is
not part of the IS discipline?</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>My view is that the IS discipline has morphed into knowledge systems and
that IS for crisis response is much like database with respect to the IS field,
it is an application of IS. Is this an incorrect assumption?</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>My last question is why now? Why after several years of IS journals
having special issues on KM and crisis response systems as well as having tracks
and minitracks at major conferences such as ICIS, HICSS, AMCIS, ECIS, and
PACIS are we all of a sudden saying these topics are no longer
IS?</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>One suspicion I have is that as faculty IS positions have been
declining the last few years there is a move to protect traditional IS and keep
the IS faculty positions traditional IS positions. Assuming that is so, is
this a wise move? I personally believe that traditional IS is moribund and
that the exciting research is in areas like social media, business intelligence,
knowledge management, crisis response, health care informatics, project
management, information security/assurance, etc. using new research approaches
such as design science and action research.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Thanks and is customary I will post a summary of responses.....murray
jennex</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Murray E. Jennex, Ph.D., P.E., CISSP, CSSLP, PMP</DIV>
<DIV>San Diego State University</DIV>
<DIV>Editor in Chief International Journal of Knowledge Management</DIV>
<DIV>Coeditor in Chief International Journal of Information Systems for Crisis
Response and Management</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV></FONT></BODY></HTML>