Evaluating tenure cases for scholars active in emergent or non-mainstream is research topics

Jason Thatcher; Alok Gupta; Paulo Goes; Arun Rai; Monica Chiarini Tremblay

Evaluating tenure cases for scholars active in emergent or non-mainstream is research topics

Jason Thatcher, Alok Gupta, Paulo Goes, Arun Rai, Monica Chiarini Tremblay

Administration (CSOM)

Research output: Contribution to conference › Paper › peer-review

Abstract

The number of topics and methods that our field is embracing is growing rapidly. This includes methodologies such as design science, analytics, neuro-IS and contextual areas such as healthcare IT or the public sector. This rapid expansion poses challenges for junior faculty engaged in this research, because external letter writers may struggle to understand how to evaluate their work. The outcomes of inquiry for these new methods or growing topics often vary from the "normal" metrics for productivity, such as journal publications, manifest in the broader IS discipline. How can we, as a field, develop a broader understanding of how to evaluate the tenure cases of individuals that use new methods or who investigate emerging topics? In this panel, we foster a conversation on how to, and if there is a need to, develop new metrics for evaluating tenure cases for scholars active in emergent or non-mainstream IS research topics.

Original language	English (US)
State	Published - Jan 1 2016
Event	22nd Americas Conference on Information Systems: Surfing the IT Innovation Wave, AMCIS 2016 - San Diego, United States Duration: Aug 11 2016 → Aug 14 2016

Other

Other	22nd Americas Conference on Information Systems: Surfing the IT Innovation Wave, AMCIS 2016
Country/Territory	United States
City	San Diego
Period	8/11/16 → 8/14/16

Keywords

Emergent fields
IS discipline
Tenure and promotion

Find It

Find It at U of M Libraries

Cite this

@conference{eb55477d032a470d9f95f663d922be55,

title = "Evaluating tenure cases for scholars active in emergent or non-mainstream is research topics",

abstract = "The number of topics and methods that our field is embracing is growing rapidly. This includes methodologies such as design science, analytics, neuro-IS and contextual areas such as healthcare IT or the public sector. This rapid expansion poses challenges for junior faculty engaged in this research, because external letter writers may struggle to understand how to evaluate their work. The outcomes of inquiry for these new methods or growing topics often vary from the {"}normal{"} metrics for productivity, such as journal publications, manifest in the broader IS discipline. How can we, as a field, develop a broader understanding of how to evaluate the tenure cases of individuals that use new methods or who investigate emerging topics? In this panel, we foster a conversation on how to, and if there is a need to, develop new metrics for evaluating tenure cases for scholars active in emergent or non-mainstream IS research topics.",

keywords = "Emergent fields, IS discipline, Tenure and promotion",

author = "Jason Thatcher and Alok Gupta and Paulo Goes and Arun Rai and Tremblay, {Monica Chiarini}",

year = "2016",

month = jan,

day = "1",

language = "English (US)",

note = "22nd Americas Conference on Information Systems: Surfing the IT Innovation Wave, AMCIS 2016 ; Conference date: 11-08-2016 Through 14-08-2016",

}

TY - CONF

T1 - Evaluating tenure cases for scholars active in emergent or non-mainstream is research topics

AU - Thatcher, Jason

AU - Gupta, Alok

AU - Goes, Paulo

AU - Rai, Arun

AU - Tremblay, Monica Chiarini

PY - 2016/1/1

Y1 - 2016/1/1

N2 - The number of topics and methods that our field is embracing is growing rapidly. This includes methodologies such as design science, analytics, neuro-IS and contextual areas such as healthcare IT or the public sector. This rapid expansion poses challenges for junior faculty engaged in this research, because external letter writers may struggle to understand how to evaluate their work. The outcomes of inquiry for these new methods or growing topics often vary from the "normal" metrics for productivity, such as journal publications, manifest in the broader IS discipline. How can we, as a field, develop a broader understanding of how to evaluate the tenure cases of individuals that use new methods or who investigate emerging topics? In this panel, we foster a conversation on how to, and if there is a need to, develop new metrics for evaluating tenure cases for scholars active in emergent or non-mainstream IS research topics.

AB - The number of topics and methods that our field is embracing is growing rapidly. This includes methodologies such as design science, analytics, neuro-IS and contextual areas such as healthcare IT or the public sector. This rapid expansion poses challenges for junior faculty engaged in this research, because external letter writers may struggle to understand how to evaluate their work. The outcomes of inquiry for these new methods or growing topics often vary from the "normal" metrics for productivity, such as journal publications, manifest in the broader IS discipline. How can we, as a field, develop a broader understanding of how to evaluate the tenure cases of individuals that use new methods or who investigate emerging topics? In this panel, we foster a conversation on how to, and if there is a need to, develop new metrics for evaluating tenure cases for scholars active in emergent or non-mainstream IS research topics.

KW - Emergent fields

KW - IS discipline

KW - Tenure and promotion

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84987673660&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84987673660&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Paper

AN - SCOPUS:84987673660

T2 - 22nd Americas Conference on Information Systems: Surfing the IT Innovation Wave, AMCIS 2016

Y2 - 11 August 2016 through 14 August 2016

ER -

Evaluating tenure cases for scholars active in emergent or non-mainstream is research topics

Abstract

Other

Keywords

Find It

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this