The Relevance of Information Systems Research: Informing the IS Practitioner Community; Informing Ourselves

Discussion of the relevance of Information Systems research to the practitioner community began in the 1990s. Though the issue has faded from top-tier journals, the problem remains. This article provides the first comprehensive consideration of the major papers relating to IS research relevance. It also recognizes that the problem of relevance is not one that is likely to be solved at the global IS level, or even the university level. Rather, the relevance of IS research ultimately will be determined by each individual researcher. To facilitate individual researchers’ progress in moving toward greater relevance, this research provides a concise plan of specific actions that are within the control of each individual IS researcher. These actions involve both how researchers attempt to inform the practitioner community about their work, and how researchers inform themselves about the concerns of practitioners. Several specific actions for improving the relevance of individual research are detailed.

[1]  Hugh J. Watson,et al.  Innovative Ways to Connect Information Systems Programs to the Business Community , 2000, Commun. Assoc. Inf. Syst..

[2]  Allen S. Lee Rigor and relevance in MIS research: beyond the approach of positivism alone , 1999 .

[3]  Ralph Westfall,et al.  An IS Research Relevancy Manifesto , 1999, Commun. Assoc. Inf. Syst..

[4]  Alan R. Dennis Relevance in Information Systems Research , 2001, Commun. Assoc. Inf. Syst..

[5]  Mikael Söderström,et al.  Informing Science Special Series: Informing Each Other Regional Is Knowledge Networks: Elaborating the Theme of Relevance of Is Research , 2022 .

[6]  M. Lynne Markus,et al.  Beyond Rigor and Relevance: Producing Consumable Research about Information Systems , 1998 .

[7]  Brian Fitzgerald Introduction to the Special Series of Papers on Informing Each Other: Bridging the Gap between Researcher and Practitioners , 2003, Informing Sci. Int. J. an Emerg. Transdiscipl..

[8]  Daniel L. Moody,et al.  Informing Science Special Series: Informing Each Other Using the World Wide Web to Connect Research and Professional Practice: towards Evidence-based Practice , 2022 .

[9]  Robert L. Glass Rigor vs. Relevance: A Practitioner's Eye View of an Explosion of IS Opinions , 2001, Commun. Assoc. Inf. Syst..

[10]  Daniel L. Sherrell,et al.  Communications of the Association for Information Systems , 1999 .

[11]  J. Senn,et al.  The challenge of relating IS research to practice , 1998 .

[12]  Hugh J. Watson,et al.  Leaders Assess the Current State of the Academic IS Discipline , 1999, Commun. Assoc. Inf. Syst..

[13]  Ron Weber,et al.  The Journal Review Process: A Manifesto for Change , 1999, Commun. Assoc. Inf. Syst..

[14]  Michael Lang,et al.  Communicating Academic Research Findings to IS Professionals: An Analysis of Problems , 2003, Informing Sci. Int. J. an Emerg. Transdiscipl..

[15]  Paul Gray,et al.  Introduction to the Special Volume on Relevance , 2001, Commun. Assoc. Inf. Syst..

[16]  James K. Ho Bridging the Academic Research and Business Practice with the New Media , 2000, Inf. Resour. Manag. J..

[17]  Izak Benbasat,et al.  Empirical Research in Information Systems: The Practice of Relevance , 1999, MIS Q..

[18]  Peter Checkland,et al.  Soft Systems Methodology: a 30-year retrospective , 1999 .

[19]  Deepak Khazanchi,et al.  Expanding the Notion of Relevance in IS Research: A Proposal and Some Recommendations , 2001, Commun. Assoc. Inf. Syst..

[20]  Anol Bhattacherjee Understanding and Evaluating Relevance in IS Research , 2001, Commun. Assoc. Inf. Syst..

[21]  Richard Baskerville,et al.  Investigating Information Systems with Action Research , 1999, Commun. Assoc. Inf. Syst..

[22]  Thomas H. Davenport,et al.  Rigor vs. relevance revisited: response to Benbasat and Zmud , 1999 .