Rigor and Relevance in MIS Research: Beyond the Approach of Positivism Alone

The ramifications of Benbasat and Zmud's self-avowed positivist orientation are commented on; the model-inuse of what relevant research is (i.e., the instrumental model); and the need for the IS research community to take a broad approach to the matter of relevance.

Abstract

Benbasat and Zmud offer a diagnosis of why one tends today to observe a lack of relevance to practice in IS and a prescription of guidelines that IS academic community might follow to introduce relevance into their research efforts and articles. I will comment, first, on the ramifications of their self-avowed positivist orientation; second, on their model-inuse of what relevant research is (i.e., the instrumental model); and third, on the need for the IS research community to take a broad approach to the matter of relevance. I will also refer to the respective commentaries offered by Applegate, by Davenport and Markus, and by Lyytinen.