this IS research

As the year draws to a close, it is time for us to revisit some of the best IS scholarship that got published this year. Yes, time for the 3rd annual thisISresearch podcast awards. This year, it was particularly tough to choose so we just invented a new award! Tune in to find out who won the trailblazing research award, the innovative method award, and our brand-new elegant scholarship award! As usual, the references to readings we mention are listed on http://www.janrecker.com/this-is-research-podcast/.

What is so special about digital technology? Is digital innovation about architecture or is it about data? We talk with the enigmatic Jannis Kallinikos – truly one of the great thinkers in our field. Our conversation covers the ambivalence of digital objects, the role of data as records in organizations, the role of books in expressing broader ideas in scholarship, and whether information systems can or should delve into metaphysics at all. As usual, the references to readings we mention are listed on http://www.janrecker.com/this-is-research-podcast/.

Nick and Jan venture into new publishing territory. We talk with the fabulous D.J. Wu, one of the information systems department editors at Management Science, about journal procedures, reviewer expectations, and innovations in the review process. We discuss how our field nurtures multiple communities that all share the aim of advancing information systems knowledge and scholarship. And it's fair to say that both Nick and Jan now have Management Science more on the radar screen as an information systems outlet than before we produced this episode. As usual, the references to readings we mention are listed on http://www.janrecker.com/this-is-research-podcast/.

ChatGPT is back in our podcast one more time. Last time we talked about its impact on the academic enterprise. But ChatGPT is also the key digital technology issue of our time. It should be researched, of course, and we information systems researchers should jump on the opportunity to learn more about it. What are some of the questions that surround ChatGPT and similar forms of generative artificial intelligence? We look at a few research ideas at the individual, collective, firm, and economic level. And we conclude that whatever topic people are researching, their key challenge will be to theorize about what's different with generative artificial intelligence and what is not. As usual, the references to readings we mention are listed on http://www.janrecker.com/this-is-research-podcast/.

Or maybe it did not. Who knows? ChatGPT is here for the world to see and not even our podcast can avoid talking about it. All the firms we know have long started exploring ChatGPT and other generative AI technologies. Will generative AI also change the academic enterprise? Some suggest it already has. We think we are at the cusp of changes, both in degree and in kind. ChatGPT may help people get started and may even alleviate some of the laborious research tasks but at the end of the day, the academic profession is a person-centric profession built around individual expertise, trust, and honesty of knowledgeable academics. You cannot automate that. As usual, the references to readings we mention are listed on http://www.janrecker.com/this-is-research-podcast/.

IS as a field has the same problem that IT departments have in organizations - we think those other people should come to us with their questions about digitalization and benefit from our decades of wisdom! But we argue that this is not going to happen. It is our job (as it is the IT manager's job) to make the case for how we can help. OK, so that's a portion of what we talk about today. We actually meander a bit. We jump across a whole lot of topics, from IS' status as a reference discipline, the quarrels of IT departments with other business divisions, what our favorite conferences are, how to engage with conversations occurring in other fields, and what is so special about Taylor Swift. So it's all over the place. But the good news is we laugh a lot and future episodes will be more focused again, we promise. As usual, the references to readings we mention are listed on http://www.janrecker.com/this-is-research-podcast/.

Someone asked us to do an episode on books that shifted our thinking. So here we are and we each brought two books that changed the way we look at the world when we read them. We discuss these books and what new things they told us. And of course, it's turning into a showoff about who remembers more from these books. And suffice to say: Jan loses this battle. As usual, the references to readings we mention are listed on http://www.janrecker.com/this-is-research-podcast/.

What are the secrets to publishing qualitative papers? We have no idea but Paul Leonardi does – after all he is one of the most prolific and impactful scholars on technology and organizing of our time. We grab the opportunity and ask him for his secret tricks. Together, we reflect on fancy words, detailed method descriptions, obligatory Glaser and Strauss citations, and how many books you really need to read before doing an inductive study. As usual, the references to readings we mention are listed on http://www.janrecker.com/this-is-research-podcast/.

Summer is over, all wine is consumed, and all vegetables harvested. Time for this IS research to get back to work. We kick off the new season by talking about questionable research practices – HARKing, p-hacking, fishing for asterisks, data dredging, and so on. Nick digs out an old paper Jan wrote, and we use it to discuss the situations in which HARKing might be commonsense or outright unethical and we try to identify how best to protect against questionable research practices. As usual, the references to readings we mention are listed on http://www.janrecker.com/this-is-research-podcast/.

After talking about the big theories from the past millennium, it is time to talk about the ideas that emerged after the year 2000. From sociomaterality and two-sided markets to temporal networks, modularity, and routine dynamics – contemporary scholarship is ripe with new ideas that warrant further development, empirical exploration, and rigorous testing. It is truly a wonderful time to be an information systems scholar! And just on the side, we set a new record for material referenced on the podcast. As usual, the references to readings we mention are listed on http://www.janrecker.com/this-is-research-podcast/.

It feels like a long time ago now but one of the main reasons we started this podcast was because there was a pandemic going on that impacted our ability to manage work and private life. Is there anything we should have learned from that time? What changed since then if anything and what may still need changing? We talk about this with Wietske van Osch. She did research on the impact of the pandemic on the productivity of IS researchers, which allows us now to discuss what the broader takeaways are from that time for our field. As usual, the references to readings we mention are listed on http://www.janrecker.com/this-is-research-podcast/.

Many people do service to their community but usually one thing at a time. Today we speak with someone who is not only president of our global association and co-chair of our main conference at the same time but also the editor-in-chief of one of our top journals, Information Systems Research. Suprateek Sarker clearly cannot say no – he even agreed to talk with us on the podcast. We discuss the expanding scope of scholarship that he wants to see published in Information Systems Research, the different roles that editors must play, how the Association for Information Systems made our field truly global, and what wonderful things we can expect from ICIS2023 in Hyderabad, India. As usual, the references to readings we mention are listed on http://www.janrecker.com/this-is-research-podcast/.

We have a very special guest, Vladimir Zwass, who is both the founding and current editor-in-chief of the Journal of Management Information Systems. He founded the journal in 1984 and he has been the only editor-in-chief ever since. Also, he has no intention of handing the reins to anyone else soon. We discuss what sets JMIS apart from the other top journals in our field, what the IS world looked like at the time when the journal was founded, and whether our discipline has moved into a better space since those early days (spoiler alert: yes, it has). As usual, the references to readings we mention are listed on http://www.janrecker.com/this-is-research-podcast/.

What are the big ideas and streams of thinking from before the turn of the millennium that have shaped our field and may still be relevant today? For once, we did some homework to review some of the theories from before the year 2000 that we think everyone should know about. So whether you are studying AI or algorithmic aversion, digital transformation or digital innovation, you have no business continuing your research without knowing these gems from the past. As usual, the references to readings we mention are listed on http://www.janrecker.com/this-is-research-podcast/.

Time to tie up some loose ends. We learned so much from our guests in the previous three episodes and we touched on so many topics that we feel we need to revisit some of these. So we once again discuss what we think about the new list of eleven premier journals, we discuss what good career advice looks like in different regions of IS scholarship, and we begin to wonder whether all theories are truly equal. And of course, we are figuring out which of us is the alpha male on this podcast. As usual, the references to readings we mention are listed on http://www.janrecker.com/this-is-research-podcast/.

We continue our series of episodes in which we talk about several of the most important journals in our field. Today, we speak with Dorothy Leidner, editor-in-chief of the Journal of the Association for Information Systems. We talk about several innovations the journal has implemented and the range of genres that are welcome. We also talk about what makes truly great papers different and what distinguishes a literature review from a theoretical paper. As usual, the references to readings we mention are listed on http://www.janrecker.com/this-is-research-podcast/.

We are starting a new series of episodes in which we talk about several of the most important journals in our field. We kick things off with Andrew Burton-Jones, the editor-in-chief of the MIS Quarterly. We talk about the history and the role of the journal in our field, what initiatives are underway to move the field forward, and of course what matters when you are trying to publish in this journal. As usual, the references to readings we mention are listed on http://www.janrecker.com/this-is-research-podcast/.

The Association for Information Systems' College of Senior Scholars decided to expand their list of designated "premier journals" in our field from 8 to 11. What does this mean? How are these decisions being made? Who makes these decisions? We explore these questions with our good old friend Cathy Urquhart who has been a member of the task force that championed this decision. With her, we discuss politics in the information systems community, the governance of our community, and the question of how our journals and conferences could or should operate. As usual, the references to readings we mention are listed on http://www.janrecker.com/this-is-research-podcast/.

We can talk about impactful, joyful, and meaningful research all we want, but most of us just want to get published. Literally, our careers depend on it. So how do we do it? what are little secrets that turn good research into great papers, that get you over the line from rejection candidate to conditional acceptance? We discuss some of the techniques we use ourselves, that we see others use, and that we come across as editors. As usual, the references to readings we mention are listed on http://www.janrecker.com/this-is-research-podcast/.

Research is a collaborative effort. Most of the time, we are not writing papers alone but together with others. Sometimes we lead the effort, sometimes we are the second author, sometimes we only have a small role to play. Coauthoring papers often leads to tensions, frustrations and disappointments. Are there any rules about co-authorship? We think there are. We give you four rules about how to be the best co-author. As usual, the references to readings we mention are listed on http://www.janrecker.com/this-is-research-podcast/.

Teaching is done for many of us, we've had main our conference, our papers and revisions are submitted. What's left to do? Rewind, reflect, and celebrate the great work accomplished this year. And given that n = 2 equals a tradition, we dish out awards this year just like last year. This time, we celebrate the year's most trailblazing theories, the most innovative methods, the most timely case studies, and the best design research artifacts. Tune in and listen, make sure to read the great exemplar works, and follow us also in 2023 when we return. As usual, the references to readings we mention are listed on http://www.janrecker.com/this-is-research-podcast/.

Researchers do not care about philosophy because it adds no value to their experiment. They just go out into the world and do their work. So say some if not many scientists, but Amir Haj-Bolouri disagrees. With him we discuss whether some questions of philosophy such as ontology and epistemology even matter to information systems research, which topics and questions lend themselves to philosophical reasoning, and whether we can disassociate philosophical ideas from the people that proposed them. As usual, the references to readings we mention are listed on http://www.janrecker.com/this-is-research-podcast/.

Our top journal is called MIS Quarterly, not Causality Quarterly. Or is it? How should we go about building and testing causal explanations in our research and how do different approaches to causality complement each other? We invited Sunil Mithas, Ling Xue, Nina Huang, and Andrew Burton-Jones as our guests. They recently published an editorial on this topic and we use this opportunity to pick their brains about experiments, econometrics, counterfactual, correlational and configurational views of establishing causality. As usual, the references to readings we mention are listed on http://www.janrecker.com/this-is-research-podcast/.

Can we theorize with the best scholars sociology has to offer? Perhaps we are not quite as bad with jargon monoxide as they are. We do pay more attention to technology than they do. On the other hand, our chase of new technology and our publish or perish paradigm are stopping us from even trying to do the big, timeless stuff. So if you are interested in our lengthy rant about jargon, social theory, institutions, sociomateriality and publishing, tune in and enjoy. As usual, the references to readings we mention are listed on http://www.janrecker.com/this-is-research-podcast/.

Nick is annoyed with accepting cookies on websites and wonders if the transactional "notice and choice" approach really does anything to benefit the world. So what's the alternative? We asked the expert Kirsten Martin to join our podcast again and chat with us about this. We ask whether there really is a "privacy paradox", how fields such as information systems, engineering, law, and ethics and others approach this topic, and whether we are paternalistic elitists or not. Then Kirsten unplugs Nick's Wi-Fi so he quits interrupting her… As usual, the references to readings we mention are listed on http://www.janrecker.com/this-is-research-podcast/.

Did you know you have to search engine-optimize your papers? Makes sense now that you know it, doesn't it. We wish we would have known years ago. We sift through some of the most recent papers on how to write good papers and contrast them with our own experiences. Turns out we all wish we could change the title of our papers in hindsight. As usual, the references to readings we mention are listed on http://www.janrecker.com/this-is-research-podcast/.

It's late at night. Only because Jan has been asked to talk about something he knows very little about so we asked someone at the other side of the planet for help – the wonderful Shirley Gregor. With her on the show, it is finally time to talk about design science, clichés and stereotypes. We wonder whether more people write about doing design science than actually do design science, how scholarly design research has to be, and why Izak Benbasat might be the most successful design scientist of all time. As usual, the references to readings we mention are listed on http://www.janrecker.com/this-is-research-podcast/.

Journals are really all about their editors. So when journals are bad, it really means editors were bad. But what do we mean by that and what should editors do instead? Of course, as usual we have our own views. So tune in and listen as we share our stories of "the worst things an editor can do." As usual, the references to readings we mention are listed on http://www.janrecker.com/this-is-research-podcast/.

This IS research is back for its fourth season. We start off by discussing the journal space for information systems researchers. What are our top journals, what are differences between them and how should authors decide where to submit their work? Tune in to find out. As usual, the references to readings we mention are listed on http://www.janrecker.com/this-is-research-podcast/.

Andrew van de Ven passed away but there are other scholars out there that push the idea of engaged scholarship further. One of these is Michael Rosemann from Australia. He joins us to share his thoughts about whether papers or researchers should be relevant, why impact can be an intrinsic motivation, and why our research artifacts should not only be valid and reliable but also beautiful. As usual, the references to all readings we mention are listed on http://www.janrecker.com/this-is-research-podcast/.

We venture into unknown territories. We team up with our friends Alex and Philipp from the German podcast "Desk Reject: der PhD Cast", which comes out of the Vienna University of Economics and Business and is run by PhD students Sophie Quach, Dieter Gutschi, Philipp Benedikt Becker, and Alexander Staub. If you understand German – or aspire to learn it – you should follow their podcast. Together, we discuss what makes a great or a good PhD student, whether PhD students need to create a researcher identity for themselves, and how academics can deal with envy. As usual, the references to all readings we mention are listed on http://www.janrecker.com/this-is-research-podcast/.

June is here and a new paper is out that argues that empirical patterns are publishable in our top journals. Really? Really. In this episode, Jan plays the interviewer and Nick is the interviewee in what is essentially a Q&A session about computationally intensive theory construction, which Nick argues will be a key part of the future of information systems research. As usual, the references to all readings we mention are listed on http://www.janrecker.com/this-is-research-podcast/.

Our audiences may be full of jerks and we may fail all the time – but we still love being academics. Why is that? We feel it is time to talk about some of the good things we associate with this role in our society and why being an academic and spending your life in this profession might just be a truly wonderful thing after all. As usual, the references to all readings we mention are listed on http://www.janrecker.com/this-is-research-podcast/.

Sometimes, we simply fail. Our hypotheses may not be supported. Our ability to access data might evaporate. We may fail to convince a review panel. We may not get that grant or that job position that we were after. How do we deal with such failure when it is so regular and eminent in our work? We are trying to figure that out and also try to find some words of wisdom to pass onto others. Thankfully, we have Lauri Wessel on the show to help us out. Together, we conclude that resilience is key but different people have different ways to build resilience. As usual, the references to all readings we mention are listed on http://www.janrecker.com/this-is-research-podcast/.

Surprise! Youngjin Yoo is back on the show, our first repeat guest. But only because we continue our recent philosophy of making impromptu changes to our planned recordings. This time we end up talking about presenting research and handling questions from the audience. Jan suggests some jerkiness can be a good thing while Nick things we should all play nice. And Youngjin? He suggests both is fine. As usual, the references to all readings we mention are listed on http://www.janrecker.com/this-is-research-podcast/.

Jan is in Sweden and the audio quality is not great. Meanwhile, Nick is busy and he needs a dose of project management expertise. We discuss how we manage our time and our projects and how we engage in collaborations. After Recker's rules for humble-bragging failed to get much traction, we now give you the Berente rules for starting collaborations. As usual, the references to all readings we mention are listed on http://www.janrecker.com/this-is-research-podcast/.

We wanted to talk about something else. But regardless, what matters is that we ended up here: what is positivism and interpretivism – and does that distinction even matter anymore to information systems research in the age of digital traces and computationally-intensive methods? And so this is how you end up with a debate about philosophy without any preparation whatsoever. As usual, the references to all the articles we mention are listed on http://www.janrecker.com/this-is-research-podcast/.

Scholars read books. But to be able to read books, someone has to write them. And who does that anymore? We asked Jan Mendling, an information systems and computer science researcher who wrote several successful books, to tell us about the role of books, the value of books, the publishing of books – and how we can get more people like him to become involved in business-oriented information systems research. As usual, the references to all the articles we mention are listed on http://www.janrecker.com/this-is-research-podcast/.

This IS research is back for a new season and Jan and Nick are eager to run their mouth again. This time, they chat about how we as a community measure and communicate research outcomes and success. Have we created a culture where we pursue click-bait research to improve our standing on some self-created ranking lists that count our productivity but not our scholarly contributions? Also, Jan admits that he has learned something from Nick – for the first time. As usual, the references to all the articles we mention are listed on http://www.janrecker.com/this-is-research-podcast/.

It is award season and it is time to celebrate the highlights of 2021. We decided to hand out two awards, the Trailblazing Research Award, and the Innovative Research Approach Award, to recognize brilliant work done by our colleagues in 2021. Find out who got nominated and who won the awards in this final episode of this podcast before we take a small break. Happy new year everybody! In this episode, the intro and outro music were produced by Doctor Decade. As usual, the references to all the articles we mention are listed on http://www.janrecker.com/this-is-research-podcast/.

Jan and Nick are both fan boys of grounded theory so it is about time we talk to someone who knows more about it than we do. Thankfully, Cathy Urquhart agreed to join us. With her we talk about the procedures and outcomes of grounded theorizing, what sort of contributions we can build through this approach and whether IS scholars should build grand or substantive theories. But because Cathy has been around the block a long time, we also talk about our own community institutions and whether they need a reform. In short, we are being naughty. As usual, the readings we refer to are listed on http://www.janrecker.com/this-is-research-podcast/.

We talk about the dominant research method in information systems, survey research. Can you believe that still one in five papers in our main journals are based on surveys? We think survey research is past its prime – or is it? We discuss what is so good and what is so difficult about it. We try to find a future in which survey is one key part of our method portfolio and how it can continue to stand as a cornerstone of our IS knowledge tradition. As usual, the readings we refer to are listed on http://www.janrecker.com/this-is-research-podcast/.

Imagine there was a time where the MIS Quarterly was struggling to fill its issues. Can't believe it? Well so it was in the early 2000s says our guest, Ron Weber. With him, we continue our conversation about the history of the information systems field. Ron was around when a new digital technology called E-mail got introduced in a small cluster of U.S. universities in the 1980s. We discuss about the need for a core of the information systems field, theoretical progress in the field, how accessible or precise ideas have to be to create a following, and how academics can learn to develop passion and enjoy a balanced and sustainable career and life. Please excuse the audio issues – this conversation spanned US, Europe, and Australia. As usual, the readings we refer to are listed on http://www.janrecker.com/this-is-research-podcast/.

So says at least Kalle Lyytinen, our guest today. He is the head of the Case mafia - or so at least Jan says - and the main referent of the infamous Erdős-Bacon-Lyytinen number – or so at least Nick says. We pick Kalle's brain a little bit to learn more about the origins of the information systems field and what is was really like in the 80s and 90s. We also talk about publishing in the old days and now, the debates in our field at that time and why they stopped, and what we can learn from the past that helps us advance as scholars in the future. As usual, the readings we refer to are listed on http://www.janrecker.com/this-is-research-podcast/.

We are joined by Kirsten Martin, a technology and ethics expert. We talk about who is responsible – and who is accountable – for what algorithms do. But as usual we drift off onto tangents: we talk about how to publish on technology and ethics, why emergent scholars focus more on these topics than before, what we can do to help them, and how we engage in normative writing. As usual, the readings we refer to are listed on http://www.janrecker.com/this-is-research-podcast/.

Jan's voice is loud and clear but Nick comes up with the better phrases. Or does he? In this episode, Nick and Jan discuss the history and role of affordances theory in information systems. Are we actually contributing to this theory or are we just using it? Should we abandon it, just as we abandoned TAM? Or how can we move forward with affordances theory and what options does it allow pursuing for us as a field? Join us to find out. As usual, the readings we refer to are listed on http://www.janrecker.com/this-is-research-podcast/.

Jan received an invite to join a paper about a new technology he has no clue about. Of course, he joins the research project. Jan and Nick use the occasion to discuss a few questions: How do we actually theorize about new technologies? Why is this so important to us in comparison to other fields? And should we principally fill gaps or solve problems?

We have the brilliant Sarah Lebovitz, Hila Lifshitz-Assaf, and Natalia Levina on the show and we talk about a lot of things. We talk about how they constructed their ethnography on AI in medical decision-making, what they initially planned to do (AI in HR), how valuable digital seminars can be, and why Natalia refuses to upgrade her dropbox plan. Lebovitz, S., Levina, N., & Lifshitz-Assaf, H. (2021). Is AI Ground Truth Really "True"? The Dangers of Training and Evaluating AI Tools Based on Experts' Know-What. MIS Quarterly, 45(3), 1501-1525.

We have a truly inter-disciplinary team as guests. Mike Teodorescu is a computer scientist, Lily Morse is a business ethics expert, and Jerry Kane is a seasoned information systems researcher. They wrote a really special paper, an issues and opinions commentary about AI and fairness. We talk about their paper, how the different disciplines operate, and what it takes to publish conceptual papers. Teodorescu, M., Morse, L., Awwad, Y., & Kane, G. C. (2021). Failures of Fairness in Automation Require a Deeper Understanding of Human–ML Augmentation. MIS Quarterly, 45(3), 1483-1499.

Drug discovery is an enormously complicated and important process and artificial intelligence can be a key tool for the bio-pharma industry moving forward. We talk with Lynn Wu about her paper with Bowen Lou on "AI on Drugs: Can Artificial Intelligence Accelerate Drug Development? Evidence from a Large-scale Examination of Bio-pharma Firms." We learn a lot about this idea came about, how they collaborated and also a few things about chemistry and the bio-pharma field. Wu, L., & Lou, B. (2021). AI on Drugs: Can Artificial Intelligence Accelerate Drug Development? Evidence from a Large-scale Examination of Bio-pharma Firms. MIS Quarterly, 45(3), 1451-1482.