Leveraging Conceptual Reviews More Mindfully to Foster Greater Career Success in the Sciences of the Artificial
•
2 likes•117 views
These are the companion interactive Adobe slides for the same presentation, which is fully available in video form at my YouTube Channel: "Innovations in Interdisciplinary Research" at https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCHqgWhrbxnjadFLKR70tt8A?view_as=subscriber The purpose of this formal presentation video is to assist interdisciplinary researchers and students who would like to write more effective conceptual reviews--as opposed to the usual, boring literature review that is not publishable and no one wants to read. Coupled with this, I infuse some key techniques I've learned the hard way during my academic career that I would like to share with those who can benefit, including: practicing engaged scholarship, design thinking, good conceptual thinking, problematization, discourse thinking, finding important problems, telling good stories, creating taxonomies, leveraging metaphors and analogies, and acting the part of a scholar.
Recommended
Recommended
More Related Content
What's hot
What's hot (18)
Similar to Leveraging Conceptual Reviews More Mindfully to Foster Greater Career Success in the Sciences of the Artificial
Similar to Leveraging Conceptual Reviews More Mindfully to Foster Greater Career Success in the Sciences of the Artificial (20)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
Leveraging Conceptual Reviews More Mindfully to Foster Greater Career Success in the Sciences of the Artificial
- 1. LOWRYSLIDESTHEORY-REVIEWS-A001-VERSION1 “LEVERAGING CONCEPTUAL REVIEWS MORE MINDFULLY TO FOSTER GREATER CAREER SUCCESS IN THE SCIENCES OF THE ARTIFICIAL” June 14, 2020 Paul.Lowry.PhD@gmail.com https://sites.google.com/site/professorlowrypaulbenjamin/home COPYRIGHT 2018-2020 This may be used, distributed, or adapted for noncommercial purposes, with appropiate citation attribution. Otherwise, please contact Dr. Lowry for authorization for commercial purposes. Paul Benjamin Lowry, Ph.D.
- 2. LOWRYSLIDESTHEORY-REVIEWS-A001-VERSION1 2 PRIMARY CONTENT CREDIT Dorothy Leidner’s 2018 keynote speech at the JAIS ICIS 2018 Theory Building workshop -- Leidner, Dorothy E. (2018)“Review and Theory Symbiosis: An Introspective Retrospective,” Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 19(6), pp. 552-567 -- Nik Hassan, Lars Mathieson, and Paul Benjamin Lowry (2019).“The process of information systems theorizing as a discursive practice,”Journal of Information Technology, vol. 34(3), pp. 198-220 -- See bibliography for all source materials
- 3. LOWRYSLIDESTHEORY-REVIEWS-A001-VERSION1 3 Thoughts on review and theory smbiosis -- Dorothy Leidner, Ph.D. FERGUSON PROFESSOR OF INFORMATION SYSTEMS, BAYLOR UNIVERSITY
- 4. LOWRYSLIDESTHEORY-REVIEWS-A001-VERSION1 4 Additional thoughts and suggestions -- Paul Benjamin Lowry, Ph.D.
- 5. LOWRYSLIDESTHEORY-REVIEWS-A001-VERSION1 5 DESIGN AND THEORY ARTIFACTS BY PAUL BENJAMIN LOWRY, PH.D.
- 6. LOWRYSLIDESTHEORY-REVIEWS-A001-VERSION1LOWRYSLIDESTHEORY-REVIEWS-A001-VERSION1 6 A TAXONOMY OF REVIEW TYPES
- 7. LOWRYSLIDESTHEORY-REVIEWS-A001-VERSION1 7 OVERARCHING GOAL REVIEW TYPES SEARCH STRATEGY METHODS TO SYNTHESIZE A TAXONOMY OF REVIEW TYPES
- 8. LOWRYSLIDESTHEORY-REVIEWS-A001-VERSION1 8 OVERARCHING GOAL REVIEW TYPES SEARCH STRATEGY METHODS TO SYNTHESIZE A TAXONOMY OF REVIEW TYPES Summarize prior knowledge Narrative review Descriptive review Scoping review Selective (often top articles) Representative Full; tight scope; quality Narrative summary Content & frequency analysis Content or thematic analysis
- 9. LOWRYSLIDESTHEORY-REVIEWS-A001-VERSION1 9 OVERARCHING GOAL REVIEW TYPES SEARCH STRATEGY METHODS TO SYNTHESIZE A TAXONOMY OF REVIEW TYPES Summarize prior knowledge Data aggregation or integration Narrative review Descriptive review Scoping review Meta-analysis Systematic review Umbrella review Selective (often top articles) Representative Full; tight scope; quality All; low data quality out Full; tight scope; quality Full; broad scope; quality Narrative summary Content & frequency analysis Content or thematic analysis Meta-analysis, Meta- regression, Meta-SEM Narrative synthesis Narrative synthesis
- 10. LOWRYSLIDESTHEORY-REVIEWS-A001-VERSION1 10 OVERARCHING GOAL REVIEW TYPES SEARCH STRATEGY METHODS TO SYNTHESIZE A TAXONOMY OF REVIEW TYPES Summarize prior knowledge Data aggregation or integration Explanation building Narrative review Descriptive review Scoping review Meta-analysis Systematic review Umbrella review Theoretical review Theory building Realist review Selective (often top articles) Representative Full; tight scope; quality All; low data quality out Full; tight scope; quality Full; broad scope; quality Full; tight scope; quality Full; tight scope; quality Iterative and purposeful Narrative summary Content & frequency analysis Content or thematic analysis Meta-analysis, Meta- regression, Meta-SEM Narrative synthesis Narrative synthesis Content analysis or interpretive methods Depends on epistemology & creativity Mixed-methods approach
- 11. LOWRYSLIDESTHEORY-REVIEWS-A001-VERSION1 11 OVERARCHING GOAL REVIEW TYPES SEARCH STRATEGY METHODS TO SYNTHESIZE A TAXONOMY OF REVIEW TYPES Summarize prior knowledge Data aggregation or integration Explanation building Critical assessment Narrative review Descriptive review Scoping review Meta-analysis Systematic review Umbrella review Theoretical review Theory building Realist review Critical review Selective (often top articles) Representative Full; tight scope; quality All; low data quality out Full; tight scope; quality Full; broad scope; quality Full; tight scope; quality Full; tight scope; quality Iterative and purposeful Selective or representative Narrative summary Content & frequency analysis Content or thematic analysis Meta-analysis, Meta- regression, Meta-SEM Narrative synthesis Narrative synthesis Content analysis or interpretive methods Depends on epistemology & creativity Mixed-methods approach Content analysis or critical
- 12. A TYPOLOGY OF Theory in Review Papers Don’t be bounded by this simple illustration, as there are other kinds of review papers. But these are good factors to consider. Inspired from content in: Leidner, Dorothy E. (2018) “Review and Theory Symbiosis: An Introspective Retrospective,” Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 19(6), pp. 552-567 LOWRYSLIDESTHEORY-REVIEWS-A001-VERSION1 12
- 13. A TYPOLOGY OF Theory in Review Papers Don’t be bounded by this simple illustration, as there are other kinds of review papers. But these are good factors to consider. LOWRYSLIDESTHEORY-REVIEWS-A001-VERSION1 13 Theorize New or improved explanations of why Sythesize Make sense of existing explanations Describe Contextual differences, paradoxes, logic flaws Identity Trends and gaps Review Focus ResearchObjective
- 14. Phenomenon theory The review informs the theoryA TYPOLOGY OF Theory in Review Papers LOWRYSLIDESTHEORY-REVIEWS-A001-VERSION1 14 Theorize New or improved explanations of why Sythesize Make sense of existing explanations Describe Contextual differences, paradoxes, logic flaws Identity Trends and gaps Review Focus ResearchObjective
- 15. Phenomenon theory The review informs the theory Gap-filling theory The review informs the gap A TYPOLOGY OF Theory in Review Papers LOWRYSLIDESTHEORY-REVIEWS-A001-VERSION1 15 Theorize New or improved explanations of why Sythesize Make sense of existing explanations Describe Contextual differences, paradoxes, logic flaws Identity Trends and gaps Review Focus ResearchObjective
- 16. Phenomenon theory The review informs the theory Gap-filling theory The review informs the gap Emergent organizing framework The review describes everything in newly organized form, taxonomies, typologies A TYPOLOGY OF Theory in Review Papers LOWRYSLIDESTHEORY-REVIEWS-A001-VERSION1 16 Theorize New or improved explanations of why Sythesize Make sense of existing explanations Describe Contextual differences, paradoxes, logic flaws Identity Trends and gaps Review Focus ResearchObjective
- 17. Phenomenon theory The review informs the theory Gap-filling theory The review informs the gap Emergent organizing framework The review describes everything in newly organized form, taxonomies, typologies A-priori organizing framework The review uses known organized form to refine gaps A TYPOLOGY OF Theory in Review Papers LOWRYSLIDESTHEORY-REVIEWS-A001-VERSION1 17 Theorize New or improved explanations of why Sythesize Make sense of existing explanations Describe Contextual differences, paradoxes, logic flaws Identity Trends and gaps Review Focus ResearchObjective
- 18. Phenomenon theory The review informs the theory Gap-filling theory The review informs the gap Emergent organizing framework The review describes everything in newly organized form, taxonomies, typologies A-priori organizing framework The review uses known organized form to refine gaps A TYPOLOGY OF Theory in Review Papers LOWRYSLIDESTHEORY-REVIEWS-A001-VERSION1 18 Theorize New or improved explanations of why Sythesize Make sense of existing explanations Describe Contextual differences, paradoxes, logic flaws Identity Trends and gaps Review Focus ResearchObjective More NarrowMore Broad
- 19. Phenomenon theory The review informs the theory Gap-filling theory The review informs the gap Emergent organizing framework The review describes everything in newly organized form, taxonomies, typologies A-priori organizing framework The review uses known organized form to refine gaps A TYPOLOGY OF Theory in Review Papers LOWRYSLIDESTHEORY-REVIEWS-A001-VERSION1 19 Theorize New or improved explanations of why Sythesize Make sense of existing explanations Describe Contextual differences, paradoxes, logic flaws Identity Trends and gaps Review Focus ResearchObjective More Creative More NarrowMore Broad
- 20. Phenomenon theory The review informs the theory Gap-filling theory The review informs the gap Emergent organizing framework The review describes everything in newly organized form, taxonomies, typologies A-priori organizing framework The review uses known organized form to refine gaps A TYPOLOGY OF Theory in Review Papers LOWRYSLIDESTHEORY-REVIEWS-A001-VERSION1 20 Theorize New or improved explanations of why Sythesize Make sense of existing explanations Describe Contextual differences, paradoxes, logic flaws Identity Trends and gaps Review Focus ResearchObjective More Creative More SystematicMore Creative More NarrowMore Broad
- 21. LOWRYSLIDESTHEORY-REVIEWS-A001-VERSION1 21 Leidner, D. E. and Jarvenpaa, S. L. (1995). “The use of information technology to improve management education: The theoretical view,”MIS Quarterly, vol. 19(3), pp. 265-292. Alavi, M. and Leidner, D. (2001). “Knowledge management and knowledge management systems: Conceptual foundation and an agenda for research,” MIS Quarterly, vol. 25(1), pp. 107-136. Schultze, U. and D. Leidner (2002). “Studying knowledge management in IS research: Discourses and theoretical assumptions,”MIS Quarterly, vol. 26(3), pp. 213-242. Leidner, D.E. and T. Kayworth, (2006).“A review of culture in information systems research: Towards a theory of IT-culture conflict,”MIS Quarterly, vol. 30(2), pp. 357- 399. Balozian, P and Leidner, D. (2017)“Review of IS security policy compliance: Toward the building blocks of an IS security theory,”DATA BASE, vol. 48 (3), pp. 11-43. George, J. J., & Leidner, D. E. (2019). From clicktivism to hacktivism: Understanding digital activism. Information and Organization, vol. 29(3), Article: 100249 Chipidza, W. and D. Leidner,“ICT4D Research: Literature Review and Conflict Perspective,”working paper LET’S TYPOLOGIZE DOROTHY’S BEST REVIEWS
- 22. Chipdza & Leidner George & Leidner Leidner & Jarvenpaa Leidner & Kayworth Alavi & Leidner Schultze & Leidner A TYPOLOGY OF Dorothy’s Review Papers! Balozian & Leidner LOWRYSLIDESTHEORY-REVIEWS-A001-VERSION1 22 Theorize New or improved explanations of why Sythesize Make sense of existing explanations Describe Contextual differences, paradoxes, logic flaws Identity Trends and gaps Review Focus ResearchObjective More Creative More SystematicMore Creative More NarrowMore Broad
- 23. LOWRYSLIDESTHEORY-REVIEWS-A001-VERSION1 23 SUGGESTIONS FROM GLOBAL EXPERIENCE Anchorage Montreal Oslo London Rome Beijing Mumbai Tokyo Brisbane Cape Town Miami PRAGMATIC THOUGHTS ON things we have learned over time in creating effective conceptual papers.
- 24. LOWRYSLIDESTHEORY-REVIEWS-A001-VERSION1 24 PRACTICE PROBLEMATIZATION! You cannot find a a compelling topic by mere gap-spotting the literature.
- 25. LOWRYSLIDESTHEORY-REVIEWS-A001-VERSION1 25 REJECT THE STATUS QUO Choose a good problem where the likely answer is not“common sense” PRACTICE PROBLEMATIZATION! You cannot find a compelling topic by mere gap-spotting the literature.
- 26. LOWRYSLIDESTHEORY-REVIEWS-A001-VERSION1 26 REJECT THE STATUS QUO Choose a good problem where the likely answer is not“common sense” FREE YOURSELF FROM TECH Should involve an interesting conceptual issue that is not dependent on a specific technology, trend, or fad e.g., supply chain resilience during black swan events PRACTICE PROBLEMATIZATION! You cannot find a compelling topic by mere gap-spotting the literature.
- 27. LOWRYSLIDESTHEORY-REVIEWS-A001-VERSION1 27 REJECT THE STATUS QUO Choose a good problem where the likely answer is not“common sense” FREE YOURSELF FROM TECH Should involve an interesting conceptual issue that is not dependent on a specific technology, trend, or fad e.g., supply chain resilience during black swan events ENTER THE RIGHT CONVERSATION Choose a problem that answers a question in your research discourse Do you know which discourse you are trying to contribute to? Who are the key people? What are the controversies? PRACTICE PROBLEMATIZATION! You cannot find a compelling topic by mere gap-spotting the literature.
- 28. LOWRYSLIDESTHEORY-REVIEWS-A001-VERSION1 28 REJECT THE STATUS QUO Choose a good problem where the likely answer is not“common sense” FREE YOURSELF FROM TECH Should involve an interesting conceptual issue that is not dependent on a specific technology, trend, or fad e.g., supply chain resilience during black swan events ENTER THE RIGHT CONVERSATION Choose a problem that answers a question in your research discourse Do you know which discourse you are trying to contribute to? Who are the key people? What are the controversies? KNOW YOUR POSITIONING There are all kinds of different review, conceptual, and theory papers. Know which kind and what approach you want to use. Regardless of your positioning, it should be problem-oriented and narrative in form. Tell a story! PRACTICE PROBLEMATIZATION! You cannot find a compelling topic by mere gap-spotting the literature.
- 29. LOWRYSLIDESTHEORY-REVIEWS-A001-VERSION1 29 CHALLENGE BOUNDARY CONDITIONS! QUESTION YOUR ASSUMPTIONS! The“Great”scientists did this, and so we should be humble enough to do the same. Do not assume that what is published is“correct”or the “final word”.
- 30. LOWRYSLIDESTHEORY-REVIEWS-A001-VERSION1 30 CHALLENGE BOUNDARY CONDITIONS! BAD PRACTICE OPPOSITE? MYTHS PARADOXES QUESTION YOUR ASSUMPTIONS! The“Great”scientists did this, and so we should be humble enough to do the same. Do not assume that what is published is“correct”or the “final word”.
- 31. LOWRYSLIDESTHEORY-REVIEWS-A001-VERSION1 31 TAKE THE TIME TO DO IT RIGHT Details mattter. Good research takes time. Write everyday. The more focused on good problem and context, the less time you’ll waste in too broad of a literature review. Read and understand the best articles and best journals!
- 32. LOWRYSLIDESTHEORY-REVIEWS-A001-VERSION1 32 Haste makes waste! --everyone’s parent (and originally Benjamin Franklin)
- 33. LOWRYSLIDESTHEORY-REVIEWS-A001-VERSION1 33 Measure twice, cut once! --every carpenter
- 34. LOWRYSLIDESTHEORY-REVIEWS-A001-VERSION1 34 Practice science just like you would lead an advanced software engineering project: be engaged and be iterative! --Paul Benjamin Lowry, Ph.D.
- 35. LOWRYSLIDESTHEORY-REVIEWS-A001-VERSION1 35 Practice science just like you would lead an advanced software engineering project: be engaged and be iterative! --Paul Benjamin Lowry, Ph.D. ENGAGED SCHOLARSHIP IS FOUNDATIONAL Without engagement, you’re having a stale conversation with a literature that is already dated
- 36. LOWRYSLIDESTHEORY-REVIEWS-A001-VERSION1 36 Practice science just like you would lead an advanced software engineering project: be engaged and be iterative! --Paul Benjamin Lowry, Ph.D. ENGAGED SCHOLARSHIP IS FOUNDATIONAL Without engagement, you’re having a stale conversation with a literature that is already dated AVOID THE WATERFALL METHOD! We know that the“waterfall method”is foolish to apply to advanced software engineering tasks, so why do we apply it to science?
- 37. LOWRYSLIDESTHEORY-REVIEWS-A001-VERSION1 37 Practice science just like you would lead an advanced software engineering project: be engaged and be iterative! --Paul Benjamin Lowry, Ph.D. ENGAGED SCHOLARSHIP IS FOUNDATIONAL Without engagement, you’re having a stale conversation with a literature that is already dated AVOID THE WATERFALL METHOD! We know that the“waterfall method”is foolish to apply to advanced software engineering tasks, so why do we apply it to science? BE ITERATIVE AND TENACIOUS Theorize. Work. Share. Reflect. Revise. Go back. Theorize. Work. Share. Reflect. Revise. Go back. Theorize. Work. Share. Reflect. Revise. Go back.
- 38. LOWRYSLIDESTHEORY-REVIEWS-A001-VERSION1 38 Practice science just like you would lead an advanced software engineering project: be engaged and be iterative! --Paul Benjamin Lowry, Ph.D. ENGAGED SCHOLARSHIP IS FOUNDATIONAL Without engagement, you’re having a stale conversation with a literature that is already dated AVOID THE WATERFALL METHOD! We know that the“waterfall method”is foolish to apply to advanced software engineering tasks, so why do we apply it to science? BE ITERATIVE AND TENACIOUS Theorize. Work. Share. Reflect. Revise. Go back. Theorize. Work. Share. Reflect. Revise. Go back. Theorize. Work. Share. Reflect. Revise. Go back. LEVERAGE TOOLS OF THE MIND Be a“design thinker” Brainstorm Write prolifically Read prolifically Teach or explain to others Conduct thought experiments Practice argumentation and logic skills Create diagrams and tables; taxonmize! Metaphorize; create stories (memories are stories) Create artifacts in your discourse Prototype, build, and deploy systems
- 39. LOWRYSLIDESTHEORY-REVIEWS-A001-VERSION1 39 REMEMBER YOU ARE TELLING A STORYWhy should anyone want to read your story? What is the tension? What is the surprise or mystery? Who is the white hat and the black hat? What changes from reading your story?
- 41. LOWRYSLIDESTHEORY-REVIEWS-A001-VERSION1 41 PRACTICE ENGAGED SCHOLARSHIP! SEEK CONTEXT • Good middle-range theory is highly contextualized • Where do we find good context? • Almost always from practice
- 42. LOWRYSLIDESTHEORY-REVIEWS-A001-VERSION1 42 PRACTICE ENGAGED SCHOLARSHIP! SEEK CONTEXT • Good middle-range theory is highly contextualized • Where do we find good context? • Almost always from practice SEEK OTHERS • Talk to“others”on their take on your phenomenon of interest, problem, context... Who are these“others?” • Friends and family • Practitioners, executives • Ph.D. students • Undergraduate, master’s, executive students • Reviewers and editors!
- 43. LOWRYSLIDESTHEORY-REVIEWS-A001-VERSION1 43 PRACTICE ENGAGED SCHOLARSHIP! SEEK CONTEXT • Good middle-range theory is highly contextualized • Where do we find good context? • Almost always from practice SEEK OTHERS • Talk to“others”on their take on your phenomenon of interest, problem, context... Who are these“others?” • Friends and family • Practitioners, executives • Ph.D. students • Undergraduate, master’s, executive students • Reviewers and editors! BE OPEN TO INSPIRATION • Don’t move too quickly into the first problem you find • A good conceptual project morphs over time Sources of inspiration: • Others • Research literature • Longitudinal writing • Metaphorizing • Classic literature
- 44. LOWRYSLIDESTHEORY-REVIEWS-A001-VERSION1 44 PRACTICE ENGAGED SCHOLARSHIP! SEEK CONTEXT • Good middle-range theory is highly contextualized • Where do we find good context? • Almost always from practice SEEK OTHERS • Talk to“others”on their take on your phenomenon of interest, problem, context... Who are these“others?” • Friends and family • Practitioners, executives • Ph.D. students • Undergraduate, master’s, executive students • Reviewers and editors! BE OPEN TO INSPIRATION • Don’t move too quickly into the first problem you find • A good conceptual project morphs over time Sources of inspiration: • Others • Research literature • Longitudinal writing • Metaphorizing • Classic literature GIVE BACK •“Always gain more by sharing than by holding back” • Invite others and collaborate • Mentor someone outside your comfort zone • Teach what your learn in your seminars and classes! • Write b-school cases and practitioner articles • Present to industry consult • Review, edit, and join panels
- 45. LOWRYSLIDESTHEORY-REVIEWS-A001-VERSION1 45 You always gain more by sharing than by holding back --Jay F. Nunamaker Jr. (my advisor and first mentor)
- 46. LOWRYSLIDESTHEORY-REVIEWS-A001-VERSION1 46 IT IS NOT ENOUGH TO BE REALLY SMART! THINK AND ACT LIKE A SCHOLAR
- 47. LOWRYSLIDESTHEORY-REVIEWS-A001-VERSION1 47 Question Everything! Use logic, facts, evidence. Learn to be dispassionate. IT IS NOT ENOUGH TO BE REALLY SMART! THINK AND ACT LIKE A SCHOLAR
- 48. LOWRYSLIDESTHEORY-REVIEWS-A001-VERSION1 48 Question Create Everything! Use logic, facts, evidence. Learn to be dispassionate. Always! Writing is the core creative act of science. Produce the“artifacts of theory” IT IS NOT ENOUGH TO BE REALLY SMART! THINK AND ACT LIKE A SCHOLAR
- 49. LOWRYSLIDESTHEORY-REVIEWS-A001-VERSION1 49 Question Create Read Everything! Use logic, facts, evidence. Learn to be dispassionate. Always! Writing is the core creative act of science. Produce the“products of theory” Passionately! Your discourse Other discourses Classic literature IT IS NOT ENOUGH TO BE REALLY SMART! THINK AND ACT LIKE A SCHOLAR
- 50. LOWRYSLIDESTHEORY-REVIEWS-A001-VERSION1 50 IT IS NOT ENOUGH TO BE REALLY SMART! THINK AND ACT LIKE A SCHOLAR
- 51. LOWRYSLIDESTHEORY-REVIEWS-A001-VERSION1 51 IT IS NOT ENOUGH TO BE REALLY SMART! THINK AND ACT LIKE A SCHOLAR
- 52. LOWRYSLIDESTHEORY-REVIEWS-A001-VERSION1 52 IT IS NOT ENOUGH TO BE REALLY SMART! THINK AND ACT LIKE A SCHOLAR
- 53. LOWRYSLIDESTHEORY-REVIEWS-A001-VERSION1 53 “To succeed in science, you must adopt a natural pace for yourself, but learn to push this pace over time to jump to higher levels of quality and production. It’s no different than marathon training, but with your mind. Likewise you need to be patient and avoid comparing yourself to others: There will always be someone smarter! There will always be someone more accomplished! There will always be someone who is luckier! In science, it’s not about you. Get over yourself and lose your impatience; only then, can you contribute meaningfully to the greater scientific discourse.” --Paul Benjamin Lowry, Ph.D.
- 54. LOWRYSLIDESTHEORY-REVIEWS-A001-VERSION1 54 Or, more succinctly, in the words of Emerson... Adopt the pace of nature; her secret is patience. -- Emerson
- 55. LOWRYSLIDESTHEORY-REVIEWS-A001-VERSION1 55 We start slowly as we learn the craft. Mastery takes time, patience, dedication, and tenacity. But mastery produces exponential results.
- 56. LOWRYSLIDESTHEORY-REVIEWS-A001-VERSION1 56 Paul’s timeline 2002 A-level articles: 0 Journal articles: 0 H-index: 0 Citations: 28 2 years 7 months Ph.D. bad idea! We start slowly as we learn the craft. Mastery takes time, patience, dedication, and tenacity. But mastery produces exponential results.
- 57. LOWRYSLIDESTHEORY-REVIEWS-A001-VERSION1 57 Paul’s timeline 2002 A-level articles: 0 Journal articles: 0 H-index: 0 Citations: 28 2 years 7 months Ph.D. bad idea! 2005 A-level articles: 02 Journal articles: 08 H-index: 7 Citations: 362 We start slowly as we learn the craft. Mastery takes time, patience, dedication, and tenacity. But mastery produces exponential results.
- 58. LOWRYSLIDESTHEORY-REVIEWS-A001-VERSION1 58 Paul’s timeline 2002 A-level articles: 0 Journal articles: 0 H-index: 0 Citations: 28 2 years 7 months Ph.D. bad idea! 2010 A-level articles: 10 Journal articles: 32 H-index: 15 Citations: 1,171 2005 A-level articles: 02 Journal articles: 08 H-index: 7 Citations: 362 We start slowly as we learn the craft. Mastery takes time, patience, dedication, and tenacity. But mastery produces exponential results.
- 59. LOWRYSLIDESTHEORY-REVIEWS-A001-VERSION1 59 Paul’s timeline 2002 A-level articles: 0 Journal articles: 0 H-index: 0 Citations: 28 2 years 7 months Ph.D. bad idea! 2010 A-level articles: 10 Journal articles: 32 H-index: 15 Citations: 1,171 2005 A-level articles: 02 Journal articles: 08 H-index: 7 Citations: 362 2015 A-level articles: 31 Journal articles: 76 H-index: 24 Citations: 3,723 We start slowly as we learn the craft. Mastery takes time, patience, dedication, and tenacity. But mastery produces exponential results.
- 60. LOWRYSLIDESTHEORY-REVIEWS-A001-VERSION1 60 Paul’s timeline 2002 A-level articles: 0 Journal articles: 0 H-index: 0 Citations: 28 2 years 7 months Ph.D. bad idea! 2010 A-level articles: 10 Journal articles: 32 H-index: 15 Citations: 1,171 2005 A-level articles: 02 Journal articles: 08 H-index: 7 Citations: 362 2015 A-level articles: 31 Journal articles: 76 H-index: 24 Citations: 3,723 2020 (mid) A-level articles: 63 Journal articles: 127 H-index: 53 Citations: 11,019 We start slowly as we learn the craft. Mastery takes time, patience, dedication, and tenacity. But mastery produces exponential results.
- 61. LOWRYSLIDESTHEORY-REVIEWS-A001-VERSION1 61 20% 60% 20% MY BASIC FORMULA FOR SUCCESS Do not take“no”for answer.
- 62. LOWRYSLIDESTHEORY-REVIEWS-A001-VERSION1 62 WE CAN GO FORTH AND CHANGE THE WORLD!
- 63. LOWRYSLIDESTHEORY-REVIEWS-A001-VERSION1 63 PRIMARY SOURCES Leidner, Dorothy E. (2018)“Review and Theory Symbiosis: An Introspective Retrospective,” Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 19(6), pp. 552-567 Nik Hassan, Lars Mathieson, and Paul Benjamin Lowry (2019).“The process of information systems theorizing as a discursive practice,”Journal of Information Technology, vol. 34(3), pp. 198-220 Nik R. Hassan and Paul Benjamin Lowry (2015).“Seeking middle-range theories in information systems research,”International Conference on Information Systems (ICIS 2015), Fort Worth, TX, December 13–18 (ICIS best paper finalist) SECONDARY SOURCES Van De Ven AH (2007) Engaged Scholarship: A Guide for Organizational and Social Research, (Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK). ... BIBLIOGRAPHY
- 64. LOWRYSLIDESTHEORY-REVIEWS-A001-VERSION1 64 SECONDARY SOURCES (CONTINUED) Paré, G., M. Trudel, M. Jaana, and S. Kitsiou (2015).“Synthesizing information systems knowledge: A typology of literature reviews,” Information Management, vol. 52(2), pp. 183-199. Alvesson M, Sandberg J (2011) Generating research questions through problematization. Academy of Management Review, vol. 36(2):247-271 David Michael Hull, Paul Benjamin Lowry, James Eric Gaskin, and Kristijan Mirkovski (2019).“Research opinion: A storyteller’s guide to problem-based learning for information systems management education,”Information Systems Journal, vol. 29(5), pp. 1040–1057 James Eric Gaskin, Paul Benjamin Lowry, and David Hull (2016).“Leveraging multimedia to advance science by disseminating a greater variety of scholarly contributions in more accessible formats,”Journal of the Association for Information Systems, vol. 17(6), pp. 413–434 BIBLIOGRAPHY