Improving the value of strategic IS research for practitioners
Topics: Information systems strategy Business – IT alignment Digital transformation Digital leadership By Leif Jarle Gressgård
An important purpose of information systems (IS) research is to understand and improve the ways people create value with information [1,2]. Yet, the question of whether IS research is relevant to practice has been subject of debate for decades [3]. Many scholars claim that academic recommendations are rarely adopted by practitioners [4], explained partly by the observation that practitioners generally do not read academic journals [5,6,7]. Straub and Ang [8] argue that the debate can be distilled into two purported gaps: The first relates to the choice of what to study (i.e. gap between the topics that researchers focus on and what practitioners deem to be central to their needs), and the second relates to whether research is made accessible to and used by practitioners. The first gap hence concerns the practical usefulness and relevance of research, while the second concerns transfer of knowledge.
Challenging the relevance gap, several studies offer strong evidence that IS scholars frequently and consistently address issues of persistent practitioner concern [3,9]. Lucas et al. [10] claim that IS research is vigorously investigating how information technologies are transforming organizations, markets, industries, societies and the lives of individuals, and by this generates insights relevant to decision makers who are confronted with major transformations in their industry or organization. Taubner [4] also emphasizes the potential practical value of the extensive research on IS strategy, the competitive impact of IS, and alignment of IS strategies and business strategies that has been conducted over the past decades. Given that these topics have been top concerns of practitioners for a long time [11], IS research can inform practitioners in areas of high strategic importance [12].
Notwithstanding the extensive and valuable knowledge source that IS research represents, it is less clear whether and to what extent research findings and academic recommendations are having an impact on organizational practice [4,10]. A challenge in this regard concerns the degree to which scholars are able to communicate practical implications of their research to external stakeholders in an effective manner. As noted, practitioners generally do not read studies published in academic journals and are largely disconnected from the academic debate [4]. Scientific articles are first and foremost written for academic audiences and are not easily accessible to practitioners [13]. Bichler et al. [14] note that this can be explained by the fact that publication rankings and citation counts seem to dominate the evaluation of research, and that “the increased importance of journal publications has elevated academic research into an ivory tower where academics initiate a discourse with academics but do not connect to the outside world” (p.87). This does not mean that academics should devalue or downgrade publishing of research in high-quality scholarly outlets, nor does it mean that their research is irrelevant to practitioners. Rather, there is a need for dedicated efforts and alternative means of transferring knowledge in order to ensure that practitioners can access and use relevant research-based insights [8,15]. “No reasonable person would or could argue that transfer of knowledge between academicians and practitioners is simple or easy, but if scientific articles have merit for praxus, then this knowledge can and should be shared” [3, p.vi].
Several initiatives have been taken to improve knowledge transfer from academia to practice. Straub and Ang [13] list 17 different (and traditional) venues of such knowledge transfer, including popular science publications, conferences, and different training programs and courses. Taking it a step further, the European Journal of Information Systems offers a new way of initiating and promoting dialog between researchers and practitioners. The Science-to-practice initiative aims to communicate research findings to and receive feedback from practitioners that may affect ensuing research [15]. Lucas et al. [10] also address the need for a dedicated outlet for discussions of practical implications of research on IT-enabled transformation to inform relevant stakeholders, and emphasize the importance of integrating academic findings to develop such implications.
Based on the belief that combining results from rigorous research can provide insights of high value to practitioners, Tonecto will review, integrate and discuss practical implications of research on strategic use of ICT in organizations, that is published in high-quality journals. Tonecto will by this contribute to improved dissemination of quality-assured (peer-reviewed) research, which is important considering that it can be difficult for non-academics to know where relevant research is published [16]. Hopefully, it will also contribute positively to the perceived usefulness and practical value of research on topics of high strategic importance to organizations.
The mission of Tonecto is hence to present research-based advice and guide practitioners on how organizations can use ICT to improve their performance.
References / sources
- Toward a broader vision for information systems.
Nunamaker, J.F. & Briggs, R.O. (2012). ACM Transactions on Management Information Systems, 2(4). - The last research mile: Achieving both rigor and relevance in information systems research.
Nunamaker, J.F., Briggs, R.O. Derrick, D. & Schwabe, G. (2015). Journal of Management Information Systems, 32(3). - Editor’s comments: Rigor and relevance in IS research. Redefining the debate and call for future research.
Straub, D. & Ang, S. (2011). Management Information Systems Quarterly, 35(1). - Information systems strategy: Theory, practice, and challenges for future research.
Teubner, R.A. (2013). Business & Information Systems Engineering, 5(4). - Usable, in‐use, and useful research: A 3U framework for demonstrating practice impact.
Pan, S.L. & Pee, L.G. (2020). Information Systems Journal, 30(2). - Creating high-value real-world impact through systematic programs of research.
Nunamaker, J.F., Twyman, N.W., Giboney, J.S. & Briggs, R.O. (2017). Management Information Systems Quarterly, 41(2). - Strategic information systems planning: A case study from the financial services industry.
Teubner, R.A. (2007). The Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 16(1). - Editor’s comments: Readability and the relevance versus rigor debate.
Straub, D.W. & Ang, S. (2008). Management Information Systems Quarterly, 32(4). - Focus and diversity in information systems research: Meeting the dual demands of a healthy applied discipline.
Taylor, H., Dillon, S. & Wingen, M.V. (2010). Management Information Systems Quarterly, 34(4). - Impactful research on transformational information technology: An opportunity to inform new audiences.
Lucas, H.C., Agarwal, R., Clemons, E., El Sawy, O.A. & Weber, B. (2013). Management Information Systems Quarterly, 37(2). - Influential IT management trends: an international study.
Luftman, J.N., Derksen, B., Dwivedi, R., Santana, M., Zadeh, H.S. & Rigoni, E.H. (2015). Journal of Information Technology, 30(3). - A review of the practical relevance of IS strategy scholarly research.
Moeini, M., Rahrovani, Y. & Chan, Y.E. (2019). The Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 28(2). - Editor’s comments: Engaged scholarship: research with practice for impact.
Rai, A. (2019). Management Information Systems Quarterly, 43(2). - Practice impact of IS research.
Bichler, M., Heinzl, A. & Winter, R. (2015). Business & Information Systems Engineering, 57. - Stimulating dialog between information systems research and practice.
Te’eni, D., Seidel, S. & Brocke, J.v. (2017). European Journal of Information Systems, 26. - The relevancy of information systems research: The practitioner’s view.
Pearson, J.M., Pearson, A. & Shim, J.P. (2005). Information Resources Management Journal, 18.