Can the field of MIS be disciplined?
Communications of the ACM
Four paradigms of information systems development
Communications of the ACM
Research methods in information systems
Research methods in information systems
Information systems research: contemporary approaches and emergent traditions
Information systems research: contemporary approaches and emergent traditions
Natural drift: what happened to operations research?
Operations Research
A set of principles for conducting and evaluating interpretive field studies in information systems
MIS Quarterly - Special issue on intensive research in information systems
Social Analyses of Computing: Theoretical Perspectives in Recent Empirical Research
ACM Computing Surveys (CSUR)
The Social Life of Information
The Social Life of Information
Interpreting Information Systems in Organizations
Interpreting Information Systems in Organizations
Information Systems: The State of the Field (John Wiley Series in Information Systems)
Information Systems: The State of the Field (John Wiley Series in Information Systems)
Design science in information systems research
MIS Quarterly
New research directions for data and knowledge engineering: A philosophy of language approach
Data & Knowledge Engineering
Communities of Practice and Its Effects on Firm Performance: A Process-Oriented Study
KES-AMSTA '09 Proceedings of the Third KES International Symposium on Agent and Multi-Agent Systems: Technologies and Applications
Doing Business with Theory: Communities of Practice in Knowledge Management
Computer Supported Cooperative Work
Hi-index | 0.04 |
The motivation of this paper is to advance the recent discussion about the identity of the Information Systems field with a social analysis of its community structures. It seeks to shed new light on the reasons why the field continues to debate its identity and to voice concerns about its recognition by other disciplines. For that purpose the paper adapts selected concepts from the community of practice literature for improving our understanding of the ways in which the IS research community differentiates itself into diverse constituencies, called communities of practice and knowing (CoP&K), and how these interact in the field's complex processes of knowledge creation and dissemination. Our second purpose is to derive some tentative, actionable recommendations for the field from applying the concepts presented in the first part of the paper. The recommendations expand three fundamental ideas: (i) why a continuously updated history of the field could be an important contribution to support boundary spanning and identity formation; (ii) what the nature and role of fundamental criticism is for the IS research community and why it is necessary for the field's future to pay more institutional attention to it; and (iii) how to improve understanding and communication within each paradigm constituency across a broad subset of different CoP&K through building a shared sense of collective historical accomplishments. The conclusions summarize the principal results which follow from our examination of the field's community structures and insist that the CoP&K perspective concomitantly helps to better appreciate the underlying conditions from where the current IS disciplinary challenges have arisen; it also helps to suggest new priorities and possible strategies for dealing with these challenges.