Start Date

11-8-2016

Description

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.

Share

COinS
 
Aug 11th, 12:00 AM

Evaluating Tenure Cases for Scholars Active in Emergent or Non-mainstream IS research topics

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.