Keynote Address

1
Pursuing New Directions at MIS Quarterly

• Keynote Address
• Detmar Straub
• Editor-in-Chief, MIS Quarterly
• Georgia State University
• PACIS
• July, 2008

2
Agenda
Graphics available at detmarstraub.com

• The A Journal Playing Field
• What Do Citations Really Mean?
• Time for Renewal at MISQ?
• Diversity
• Type II Errors in Manuscript Reviewing
• Readability
• What Can Be Done?

3
(No Transcript)
4

• To publish or not to publish, that is the
  question.
• Publish or perish is too harsh.

5

• The A Journal Playing Field

• Most schools are still insisting that their
  junior faculty publish in the established top
  journals in the field
• From a career standpoint, this should make sense
  to you as well
• Pubs are portable teaching evals somewhat
  service to discipline somewhat service to
  institution, not, not, not

6

• The A Journal Playing Field

• Publications and tenure
• Tough to publish in very top journals
• Sources Athey and Plotnicki (2000) Chua et al.
  (2003) Dennis et al. (2006)

References

• Athey, Susan and John Plotnicki, "An Evaluation
  of Research Productivity in Academic IT,"
  Communications of the AIS, 3, 7, (2000), 1-20.
• Chua, Cecil, Lan Cao, Karlene Cousins, and Detmar
  Straub. "Assessing Researcher Production in
  Information Systems." Journal of AIS, 3, 6
  (January, 2003), 145-215.
• Dennis, A.R., Valacich, J.S., Fuller, M.A., and
  Schneider, C. "Research Standards for Promotion
  and Tenure in Information Systems," MIS Quarterly
  (301, March) 2006, 1-12.

7

• The A Journal Playing Field

• Athey and Plotnicki (2000) examined 2763 articles
  from 942 IS authors over a 5 year period
  (1992-1996)
• They argue on page 10 that

"Only 42 universities had five or more ...
articles in 5 years in the top journals
.. Unless authors at the same university decide
to write jointly authored papers, the probability
of three untenured faculty in the same department
publishing two or more top tier articles in 5
years is very low."
8

• The A Journal Playing Field

• Dennis et al. (2006) examined 475 unique IS
  authors over a 12 year period (1992-2004) who
  published within 6 years of graduation

9

• The A Journal Playing Field

• Sample 1929 IS faculty published during the
  period 1990-2000

Chua et al. (2003)
10

• The A Journal Playing Field

• Considerations in finding the right home
• Target audience of journal
• Methodologies used in journal articles
• Type of articles published in journal
• Quality of editorial board
• Quality of journal and article
• Message you want to send
• Turnaround time of journal
• Mission of the journal

11

• The A Journal Playing Field

• Considerations in finding the right home
• Target audience of journal
• Methodologies used in journal articles
• Type of articles published in journal
• Quality of editorial board
• Quality of journal and article
• Message you want to send
• Turnaround time of journal
• Mission of the journal

12

• 1. The A Journal Playing Field

• What do missions mean?
• The editorial objective of MIS Quarterly is
• the enhancement and communication of knowledge
  concerning the development of IT-based services,
  the management of information technology
  resources, and the economics and use of
  information technology with managerial and
  organizational implications.

13

• 1. The A Journal Playing Field

14
1. The A Journal Playing Field
15

• 1. The A Journal Playing Field

Dennis Galletta, President, Association for
Information Systems (AIS website at
http//aisnet.org accessed on November 27,
2007) AIS encourages members, as well as deans
and department chairs, to treat a basket of 6
journals as top journals in our field.This list
was adopted from a formal statement by the
Senior Scholars Forum as of 23 April 2007. The
six journals in the list are, in alphabetical
order
European Journal of Information Systems
Information Systems Journal Information Systems
Research Journal of AIS Journal of MIS MIS
Quarterly
16

• 2. What Do Citations Really Mean?

Background The Effect of Longevity on Quality
Considerations

• High barriers to entry into the top journal ranks
• Reputations built over a long period of time
• Once established, hard to lose
• New journals have an uphill struggle

17

• 2. What Do Citations Really Mean?

Journal Impact Factors

• The journal impact factor is the average number
  of times articles from the journal published in
  the past two years have been cited in the JCR
  year (JCR is the "Journal Citations Report" from
  Thomsons ISI Web of Knowledge).
• An impact factor of 1.0 means that, on average,
  the articles published one or two years ago have
  been cited one time.
• Citing articles may be from the same journal
  most citing articles are from different journals.

18
2. What Do Citations Really Mean?

• MISQ ranked 1 in impact factor among all the
  business and information sciences journals ISI
  lists.
• Among the other journals that appeared in the top
  ten on the list were, in order, Academy of
  Management Review, Journal of Marketing,
  Marketing Science, Administrative Science
  Quarterly, Journal of Marketing Research, Academy
  of Management Journal, and Journal of Consumer
  Research.
• Other information systems journals did well by
  placing in the second ten, including, in order,
  ISR and Journal of Information Technology.
• In the third ten were Information Management
  and JMIS, again, in order.

Table 2. ISI Impact Factors (2007 accessed June
11, 2007). Reproduced with permission from
Thomson Scientific.
19
2. What Do Citations Mean?
Table 2. ISI Impact Factors (2007 accessed June
11, 2007). Reproduced with permission from
Thomson Scientific.
20

• 2. What Do Citations Really Mean?

Table 2. Re-Analysis and Aggregation of Lowry et
al.s (2007) Citation Tables of the Period
1990-2004
Source Lowry, P.B., Karuga, G.G., and
Richardson, V.J. "Assessing Leading Institutions,
Faculty, and Articles in Premier Information
Systems Research Journals," Communications of the
Association for Information Systems (20Article
16) 2007, 142-203.
21

• 2. What Do Citations Really Mean?

Table 3. Top 50 Papers in Lowry et al.s (2007)
Analysis of Citations in Period 1990-2004
Source Lowry, P.B., Karuga, G.G., and
Richardson, V.J. "Assessing Leading Institutions,
Faculty, and Articles in Premier Information
Systems Research Journals," Communications of the
Association for Information Systems (20Article
16) 2007, 142-203.
22

• 3. Time for Renewal at MISQ?

• The Mucclasse Indians Busk
• A spring renewal ritual enacted through the
  burning of all possessions
• Starting fresh

23
Every product we make will be made obsolete. It
is our job to develop and bring to market those
products. - Mantra within 3M

• 3. Time for Renewal at MISQ?

• Innovate or Die!

24

• 3. Time for Renewal at MISQ?

25
4. Diversity

• Citing Vessey et al. (2002), Dennis et al. (2006)
  critique MISQ (in their MISQ article, ironically)
  saying that

ISR and JMIS are as diverse as, and are
representative of, the IS discipline as a whole,
but historically, MISQ has been noticeably less
diverse than, and not representative of the IS
discipline as whole (Vessey et al.
2002). Reference Vessey, I., Ramesh, V.,
and Glass, R.L. Research in Information Systems
An Empirical Study of Diversity in the Discipline
and its Journals, Journal of Management
Information Systems (192), 2002, 129-174.
26
4. Diversity

• Dennis et al. (2006) argue that this is hurting
  faculty in the excluded areas in particular

In our opinion, this lack of diversity and
representativeness in MISQ is a major structural
problem facing the IS discipline. When one of the
two (or three) elite IS journals is closed to a
body of mainstream IS research, the IS faculty in
those areas are disadvantaged in their pursuit of
promotion and tenure, and the per capita
productivity of elite journal articles of the
discipline as a whole suffers.
27

• 4. Diversity

• Policy as of December 31, 2007
• Types of Papers MISQ Does Not Publish
• Descriptions of information systems applications,
  methodologies, or practices where these
  descriptions are atheoretical or purely formal
• Replication of prior topics unless the
  replication provides important new insights about
  a topic
• Criticisms of prior research unless the
  criticisms provide important new insights about a
  topic
• Descriptions of instrument development or
  refinement (Please note this category has been
  in the policy for about 10 years.)
• Research or commentaries on professional topics
  (e.g., journal rankings, promotion and tenure
  criteria, employment practices)
• Research or commentaries on educational topics
• Definitions, frameworks, or taxonomies
• The MIS Quarterly also does not publish papers
  that address topics that are only tangentially
  relevant to the information systems field. 
  Before submitting their paper, authors should
  evaluate whether their paper contributes
  primarily to knowledge in the information systems
  field or primarily to knowledge in another
  field.  If the paper primarily contributes to
  knowledge in another field, it should be
  submitted to journals in that field because that
  is where the article will have its greatest
  impact.  Authors should clearly and persuasively
  state the contribution to the information systems
  discipline made by their paper.

28

• 4. Diversity

• Policy as of January 1, 2008
• Types of Papers MISQ Does Not Publish

29

• 4. Diversity

• New Topic Coverage
• Economics of IS and Analytical Modeling
• As new SE, Chris Kemerer heading up effort
• Supported by a solid group of leaders in this
  domain
• WISE birds-of-a-feather
• Design Science
• Alan Hevner in SE role stimulating new
  submissions
• Backed up by a group of top researchers in design
  research
• WITS birds-of-a-feather

30
4. Diversity

• Dennis et al. (2006) also critique MISQ for the
  lack of diversity in the mission statement

Since 2002, MISQ has attempted to broaden its
focus by including editors with an expertise
outside the focus identified by its mission
statement and by publishing a broader set of
articles. However, the mission statement has
remained unchanged.
31

• Done

• 4. Diversity in Mission Statement

The editorial objective of MIS Quarterly is the
enhancement and communication of knowledge
concerning the development of IT-based services,
the management of information technology
resources, and the economics and use of
information technology with managerial and
organizational implications.
32

• 5. Type II Errors in Manuscript Reviewing

• Busking the Rejection of Good Papers
• Type II Errors at all Major IS Journals

Table 4. Type II Manuscript Reviewing Errors
33
5. Type II Errors in Manuscript Reviewing

• Dennis et al. (2006) explain this as a function
  of the frames of reference that reviewers bring
  to their task when they begin a review for the
  elite journals

Many reviewers now expect papers to be
flawless to be worthy of publication in MISQ or
ISRa take-no-prisoners style of reviewing rather
than the developmental style of reviewing sought
by both MISQ and ISR (page 6)
34
5. Type II Errors in Manuscript Reviewing
Table 3. Top 50 Papers in Lowry et al.s (2007)
Analysis of Citations in Period 1990-2004
Source Lowry, P.B., Karuga, G.G., and
Richardson, V.J. "Assessing Leading Institutions,
Faculty, and Articles in Premier Information
Systems Research Journals," Communications of the
Association for Information Systems (20Article
16) 2007, 142-203.
35
5. Type II Errors in Manuscript Reviewing

• Lowry et al.s (2007) list of the top ten cited
  papers over a 14 year period

36
5. Type II Errors in Manuscript Reviewing

• Lowry et al.s (2007) list of the second ten
  cited papers over a 14 year period

37
5. Type II Errors in Manuscript Reviewing
Source Straub, D. "Type II Reviewing Errors and
the Search for Exciting Papers (Editorial)," MIS
Quarterly (322, June) 2008, pp v-x "Thirty
Years of Service to the IS Profession Time for
Renewal at MISQ? (Editorial)," MIS Quarterly
(321, March) 2008, pp iii-viii.
38
5. Type II Errors in Manuscript Reviewing

• Which would you prefer for the field?

• Modest, incremental papers that are
  methodologically clean (even a bit dull)?
• OR
• Exciting, even groundbreaking papers with
  some-to-many methodological weaknesses?

39
6. Readability

• Improve readability by moving technical material
  to appendices and online supplements

Appendices
Online Supplements
39
40

• 6. Readability

• What makes a paper a good paper?
•  
• Conceptual Significance
• Practical Significance
• Conduct of Research
• Presentation of Research
• The work adopts a professional style and tone
  and is concise. It is grammatically correct and
  clear in its use of figures and tables. The flow
  of ideas in the paper is logical and there is a
  clear tie between literature review and method
  and a clear link between method and results. The
  work is presented at a level of sophistication
  and length appropriate to the readership of the
  journal.
• Source Straub, Detmar W., Soon Ang, Roberto
  Evaristo. "Normative Standards for MIS Research,"
  DATA BASE (251, February), 1994, pp. 21-34.

41

• 7. What Else Can Be Done?

• More diversity
• Busking the hierarchical reporting system
• More top-down decisions as in Finance
• More offline exchanges with authors and between
  editors and reviewers
• Signaling

41
42

• 7. What Else Can Be Done?

SE
Authors
AE
Reviewers
Traditional Approach

42
43

• 7. What Else Can Be Done?

SE
Authors
AE
Reviewers
Traditional Approach

43
44

• 7. What Else Can Be Done?

SE
Authors
AE
Reviewers
Traditional Approach

44
45

• 7. What Else Can Be Done?

SE
Authors
AE
Reviewers
Traditional Approach

45
46

• 7. What Else Can Be Done?

SE
Authors
AE
Reviewers
Traditional Approach

46
47

• 7. What Else Can Be Done?

SE
Authors
AE
Reviewers
Digital, Signaling Approach

47
48

• 7. What Else Can Be Done?

SE
Authors
AE
Reviewers
Digital, Signaling Approach

48
49
Thank you! Any Questions?