Advertisement

Commentaries on retrospect and prospects for IS research

  • Mats Lundeberg
  • Richard L. Baskerville
  • Robert M. Davison
  • Chrisanthi Avgerou

Abstract

I have read with great interest Allen S. Lee’s content-rich and thought-provoking retrospect and prospect IS paper. The perspective I have taken in reading the paper has been as a member of the IS research community (‘a native’) especially interested in the question of how to do research. In his paper, Lee takes, as his opening premise, the necessity for reengineering the IS research enterprise. In the retrospect part, he explores the distinction between ‘theories in use’ and ‘espoused theories’ for key concepts such as ‘information’, ‘system’, ‘theory’, ‘organization’ and ‘relevance’. In the prospect part, he charts a course for the future development of the IS research discipline modeled on research disciplines found in professions such as medicine, engineering, architecture and law.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Baskerville, R. and Pries-Heje, J. (2010). Explanatory Design Theory, Business & Information Systems Engineering 2(5): 271–282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Boulding, K. (1956). General Systems Theory — The skeleton of science, Management Science 2(3): 197–208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Checkland, P. (1981). Systems Thinking, Systems Practice, Chichester: J. Wiley.Google Scholar
  4. Nagel, E. (1961). The Structure of Science: Problems in scientific explanation, London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
  5. Orlikowski, W.J. and Iacono, C.S. (2001). Research Commentary: Desperately seeking ‘IT’ in IT research — A call to theorizing the IT artifact, Information Systems Research 12(2): 121–134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Shannon, C.E. and Weaver, W. (1949). The Mathematical Theory of Communication, Urbana: University of Illinois Press.Google Scholar
  7. Simon, H.A. (1996). The Sciences of the Artificial, 3rd edn, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  8. Stamper, R. (1973). Information in Business and Administrative Systems, London: Batsford.Google Scholar
  9. Wood-Harper, T., Antill, L. and Avison, D.E. (1985). Information Systems Definition: The multiview approach, Oxford: Blackwell Scientific.Google Scholar
  10. Avison, D.E. and Myers, M.D. (1995). Information Systems and Anthropology: An anthropological perspective on IT and organizational culture, IT & People 8(3): 43–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Bacon, F. (1626/2004). The Instauratio Magna Part II: Novum Organum and Associated Texts, in G. Rees, (ed.) The Oxford Francis Bacon, Volume XI, Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
  12. Benbasat, I. and Weber, R. (1996). Research Commentary: Rethinking ‘diversity’ in information systems research, Information Systems Research 7(4): 389–399.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Benbasat, I. and Zmud, R. (1999). Empirical Research in Information Systems: The practice of relevance, Management Information Systems Quarterly 23(1): 3–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Davison, R.M. and Martinsons, M.G. (2010). Inclusive or Exclusive? Methodological Practice and Policy for Organisationally and Socially Relevant IS Research, in 16th Americas Conference on Information Systems (Lima, Peru), 12–15 August, [www document] http://aisel.aisnet.org/amcis2010/111/.
  15. Lee, A.S. (2010). Retrospect and Prospect: Information systems research in the last and next 25 years, Journal of Information Technology 25(4): 336–348.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Machiavelli, N. (1532/2004). Il Principe — The Prince, UK: Penguin.Google Scholar
  17. Robey, D. (1996). Research Commentary: Diversity in IS research, Information Systems Research 7(4): 400–408.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Robey, D. and Markus, M.L. (1998). Beyond Rigour and Relevance: Producing consumable research about information systems, Information Resources Management Journal 7(11): 7–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Tsui, A.S. (2006). Contextualisation in Chinese Management Research, Management and Organization Review 2(1): 1–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Zamyatin, Y. (1921/1972). We, UK: Penguin Books.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Journal of Information Technology (JIT) 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mats Lundeberg
    • 1
  • Richard L. Baskerville
    • 2
  • Robert M. Davison
    • 3
  • Chrisanthi Avgerou
    • 4
  1. 1.Stockholm School of EconomicsStockholmSweden
  2. 2.Department of Computer Information SystemsGeorgia State UniversityAtlantaUSA
  3. 3.Department of Information SystemsCity University of Hong KongHong Kong
  4. 4.London School of EconomicsLondonUK

Personalised recommendations