• Log In
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar

MIS Distinguished Speaker Series

Temple University

You are here: Home / Archives for georgia state

georgia state

Sept 24: Detmar Straub to speak on Is Information Systems Research Relevant?

September 6, 2010 By Sunil Wattal

Detmar Straub

A Regent’s Professor of the University System of Georgia and the J. Mack Robinson Distinguished Professor of Information Systems

Georgia State University

September 24, 2010

Speakman Hall 200, 1000am – 1130am

Abstract

One of the most common beliefs circulated among both IS academics and practitioners is that IS scholarly work, i.e., research, is not being widely disseminated in practice.  One explanation offered for this belief is that there is a natural tension between academic scholarship (rigor) and practice (relevance), the two groups not sharing knowledge as much as they might because of failings on the part of academics and academic journals, in particular, to make their work “speak” more to practice.

This presentation argues that if we understand the highly defensible goals of scholars and practitioners, the tension could fade into the background or even disappear.  In short, this perception could be badly overstated because of a widespread misunderstanding of what scholarship is trying accomplish as opposed to what practice is trying to accomplish.  It could also be overstated because we have never really studied the knowledge transfer issue.

The logic that follows argues that “rigor versus relevance” is the wrong framing; practitioners generally cannot understand nor can they directly use academics’ “methodological rigor.”  They may learn IT research findings through other avenues, but NOT thru scholarly journals.  Sadly, there has been NO literature germain to the underlying, real issue of whether IS research is relevant.

For a copy of the paper, click here.

Tagged With: detmar straub, georgia state, IS research relevance

Arun Rai to speak on Leveraging IT Capabilities and Competitive Process Capabilities for Interorganizational Relationship Portfolio Management

October 23, 2009 By Sunil Wattal

Leveraging IT Capabilities and Competitive Process Capabilities for Interorganizational Relationship Portfolio Management

Arun Rai

Regents’ Professor and the Harkins Chair in Information Systems
Robinson College of Business
Georgia State University

October 30, 2009

Alter Hall 405, 1000am – 1130am

Abstract

Firms are increasingly dependent on external resources and are establishing portfolios of interorganizational relationships (IRs) to leverage them for competitive advantage. However, the system of IT and process capabilities that firms should establish to dynamically manage IR portfolios are not well understood. We draw on the competitive dynamics perspective and resource dependency theory, and on the literatures on IT business value, interorganizational systems and interorganizational relationship management, to theorize how key IT structural capabilities (IT integration and IT reconfiguration) and competitive process capabilities (process alignment, partnering flexibility and offering flexibility) operate as a system of complements. We also theorize why a firm’s IR portfolio moderates the effects of the structural IT capabilities on the competitive process capabilities, and why a firm’s environmental turbulence moderates the effects of complementary process capabilities on competitive performance. We test our model using survey data from 318 firms in four industries. Our results provide broad support for the position that IT and process capabilities are interdependent and operate as a system of complements, that the relationship between the structural IT capabilities and the competitive process capabilities is contingent on IR portfolio concentration, and that the competitive advantage derived from the complements of competitive process capabilities is contingent on environmental turbulence. We discuss the theoretical and practical implications of how firms should develop a complementary system of IT structural capabilities and competitive process capabilities to dynamically manage IR portfolios and leverage external resources.

For a copy of the complete paper, please send an email to swattal@temple.edu

Tagged With: arun rai, competitive performance, competitive process capabilities, complementarities, georgia state, interorganizational relationships, IT business value, relationship portfolios, structural IT capabilities

Detmar Straub to speak on Specifying Formative Constructs in Empirical Research

September 11, 2009 By Sunil Wattal

Specifying Formative Constructs in Empirical Research

Detmar Straub

J. Mack Robinson Distinguished Professor of Information Systems
Computer Information Systems & Center for Process Innovation  
J. Mack Robinson College of Business
Georgia State University

September 18, 2009
Alter Hall 404, 1000 –  11:30am

Abstract

While researchers go to great lengths to justify and prove theoretical links between constructs, the relationship between measurement items and constructs is often ignored. By default, the relationship between construct and item is assumed to be reflective, meaning that the measurement items are a reflection of the construct. Many times, though, the nature of the construct is not reflective, but rather formative. Formative constructs occur when the items describe and define the construct rather than vice versa.

In this research, we examine whether formative constructs are indeed being mistaken for reflective constructs by information systems researchers. By examining complete volumes of MIS Quarterly and Information Systems Research over the last 3 years, we discovered that a significant number of articles have indeed misspecified formative constructs. For scientific results to be valid, we argue that researchers must properly specify formative constructs. This paper discusses the implications of different patterns of common misspecifications of formative constructs on both Type I and Type II errors. To avoid these errors, the paper provides a roadmap to researchers to properly specify formative constructs. We also discuss how to address formative constructs within a research model after they are specified.

Download complete paper (password: Aristotle)

Tagged With: detmar straub, formative constructs, georgia state

Primary Sidebar

RSS MIS News

  • AIS Student Chapter Leadership Conference 2025 April 17, 2025
  • Temple AIS wins at the 2024 AIS Software Innovation Challenge! January 15, 2025
  • 10 Week Summer Internship in CyberSecurity October 7, 2024
  • Volunteer for Cybersecurity Awareness Month October 7, 2024
  • MIS faculty awarded promotions June 17, 2024

Tags

AI amrit tiwana Artificial Intelligence blockchain boston college bots brian butler carnegie mellon univ crowd culture deception Deep Learning Design experiment Field Experiment financial technology georgia state georgia tech Healthcare Human vs AI information security Innovation Institutional Theory IT Outsourcing long tail Machine Learning machines Maryland media Online Communities platform privacy productivity Quasi-natural experiment recommender systems simulation Social Capital social media social network steven johnson technology adoption temple univ user generated content UT Dallas wharton

Archives

Copyright © 2025 Department of Management Information Systems · Fox School of Business · Temple University