Three Strategies for Information Systems Research in the Presence of an Efficient Knowledge Market

The value of research can be measured by different criteria such as their aesthetic, scholarly, and practical utility. In this conceptual paper, we argue that generating outcomes that are of utility to practitioners is a challenging task: In a fast-changing digital economy there is an efficient knowledge market where memes about technologies and methods that are of competitive value spread quickly, and where IS research is often relegated to explaining what practice already knows. Understanding how an efficient knowledge market works can help us identify research problems that can generate results of practical utility. We suggest three strategies for the IS field. First, to develop grand theory that is applicable to emergent phenomena across contexts and time and can thus transcend particular innovations. Second, to move into interesting territory by studying the impact of new memes beyond the defined boundary conditions in both intended and unintended ways. Third, to more often be a meme generator, rather than a meme analyzer or reporter.

[1]  Arun Rai,et al.  Editor's comments: avoiding type III errors: formulating IS research problems that matter , 2017 .

[2]  Alok Gupta,et al.  Editorial Thoughts: What and How ISR Publishes , 2017, Information systems research.

[3]  Mary Lacity,et al.  Review of the empirical business services sourcing literature: an update and future directions , 2016, J. Inf. Technol..

[4]  D. Dougherty,et al.  Organizing for Innovation , 1999 .

[5]  Tobias Bachmeier,et al.  Business Model Generation A Handbook For Visionaries Game Changers And Challengers , 2016 .

[6]  Varun Grover,et al.  NEW STATE OF PLAY IN INFORMATION SYSTEMS RESEARCH : THE PUSH TO THE EDGES 1 , 2015 .

[7]  Brian H. Spitzberg.  Toward a Model of Meme Diffusion (M3D) , 2014 .

[8]  Alan R. Hevner,et al.  POSITIONING AND PRESENTING DESIGN SCIENCE RESEARCH FOR MAXIMUM IMPACT 1 , 2013 .

[9]  J. Yang.  Maximizing shareholder value: The goal that changed corporate America , 2013 .

[10]  Kalle Lyytinen,et al.  Organizing for Innovation in the Digitized World , 2012, Organ. Sci..

[11]  Sandeep Purao,et al.  Action Design Research , 2011, MIS Q..

[12]  Leslie P. Willcocks,et al.  A review of the IT outsourcing empirical literature and future research directions , 2010, J. Inf. Technol..

[13]  Nigel Melville,et al.  Information Systems Innovation for Environmental Sustainability , 2010, MIS Q..

[14]  Alan R. Hevner,et al.  Design Research in Information Systems , 2010 .

[15]  W. Brian Arthur,et al.  The Nature of Technology: What it Is and How it Evolves , 2009 .

[16]  Robert O. Briggs,et al.  Collaboration Engineering: Foundations and Opportunities: Editorial to the Special Issue on the Journal of the Association of Information Systems , 2009, J. Assoc. Inf. Syst..

[17]  Oleg E. Melnik,et al.  Encyclopedia of Complexity and Systems Science , 2008 .

[18]  Ilze Zigurs,et al.  The Minnesota GDSS Research Project: Group Support Systems, Group Processes, and Outcomes , 2008, J. Assoc. Inf. Syst..

[19]  Lars Mathiassen,et al.  Engaged Scholarship in IS Research , 2008, Scand. J. Inf. Syst..

[20]  Shirley Gregor,et al.  The Anatomy of a Design Theory , 2007, J. Assoc. Inf. Syst..

[21]  Michael Rosemann,et al.  Toward Improving the Relevance of Information Systems Research to Practice: The Role of Applicability Checks , 2008, MIS Q..

[22]  P. Williams.  Practice management. , 2005, The Alpha omegan.

[23]  Bandula Jayatilaka,et al.  Information systems outsourcing: a survey and analysis of the literature , 2004, DATB.

[24]  E. Rogers,et al.  Diffusion of innovations , 1964, Encyclopedia of Sport Management.

[25]  Richard T. Watson,et al.  Analyzing the Past to Prepare for the Future: Writing a Literature Review , 2002, MIS Q..

[26]  J. Launer.  Darwin's dangerous idea. , 2002, QJM : monthly journal of the Association of Physicians.

[27]  Eric Abrahamson,et al.  Why Management Scholars Must Intervene Strategically in the Management Knowledge Market , 2001 .

[28]  K. Stiroh.  Information Technology and the U.S. Productivity Revival: What Do the Industry Data Say? , 2001 .

[29]  E. Brynjolfsson,et al.  Beyond Computation: Information Technology, Organizational Transformation and Business Performance , 2000 .

[30]  Clayton M. Christensen,et al.  Patterns of Disruption in Retailing , 2000 .

[31]  S. Blackmore.  The Meme Machine , 1999 .

[32]  K. Gallagher.  Darwin’s Dangerous Idea: Evolution and the Meanings of Life , 1996 .

[33]  Lawrence Loh,et al.  Diffusion of Information Technology Outsourcing: Influence Sources and the Kodak Effect , 1992, Inf. Syst. Res..

[34]  M. Eigen,et al.  Steps Towards Life: A Perspective on Evolution , 1992 .

[35]  L. Applegate,et al.  Digital Equipment Corp.: The Kodak Outsourcing Agreement (A) , 1990 .

[36]  M. Porter.  How Competitive Forces Shape Strategy , 1989 .

[37]  Jay F. Nunamaker,et al.  Information Technology to Support Electronic Meetings , 1988, MIS Q..

[38]  F. Warren McFarlan,et al.  Corporate information systems management : text and cases , 1988 .

[39]  Gerardine DeSanctis,et al.  A foundation for the study of group decision support systems , 1987 .

[40]  Jay F. Nunamaker,et al.  Facilitating Group Creativity: Experience with a Group Decision Support System , 1987, J. Manag. Inf. Syst..

[41]  J. Coleman.  Social Theory, Social Research, and a Theory of Action , 1986, American Journal of Sociology.

[42]  R. Freeman.  Strategic Management: A Stakeholder Approach , 2010 .

[43]  Gerardine DeSanctis,et al.  Group decision support systems: a new frontier , 1984, DATB.

[44]  R. Lewontin.  ‘The Selfish Gene’ , 1977, Nature.

[45]  M. C. Jensen,et al.  Harvard Business School; SSRN; National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER); European Corporate Governance Institute (ECGI); Harvard University - Accounting & Control Unit , 1976 .

[46]  D. Campbell.  Blind variation and selective retention in creative thought as in other knowledge processes. , 1960, Psychological review.

[47]  W. Powell,et al.  The iron cage revisited institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields , 1983 .