ISSN: 2222-6990
Open access
This paper provides a bird's eye view of action research methodology and its usage in the management information system field. In the review of literature, we pool paper from 8 prominent journals in the information systems domain. We started our literature review through a keyword search on various academic database, such as Science Direct, ProQuest, ACM Digital Library and Business Source Premier, the date range 2001-2019. We finalized a total of 42 empirical articles to review after we remove a number of theoretical papers. Through a designed meta-analysis, we found that there is no common framework to conduct research due to the variety of the research phenomena. Also, the change and reflection is the most dominant AR type in MIS papers. Further, we also found that majority of studies not follow the AR guidelines and, more importantly, fail to apply any validation to improve the rigor of the research. Keywords: Action Research, Meta-Analysis, Action Research Types, Action Research Guidelines, Action Research Validation
Alavi, M., & Carlson, P. (1992). A review of MIS research and disciplinary development. Journal of management information systems, 8(4), 45-62.
Avison, D. E., Lau, F., Myers, M. D., & Nielsen, P. A. (1999). Action research. Communications of the ACM, 42(1), 94-97.
Avison, D., Baskerville, R., & Myers, M. (2001). Controlling action research projects. Information technology & people.
Babüroglu, O. N., & Ravn, I. (1992). Normative action research. Organization Studies, 13(1), 019-34.
Baskerville, R., & Myers, M. D. (2004). Special issue on action research in information systems: Making IS research relevant to practice: Foreword. MIS quarterly, 329-335.
Baskerville, R. L., & Stage, J. (1996). Controlling prototype development through risk analysis. Mis Quarterly, 481-504.
Baskerville, R. L., & Wood-Harper, A. T. (1996). A critical perspective on action research as a method for information systems research. Journal of information Technology, 11(3), 235-246.
Baskerville, R. L. (1999). Investigating information systems with action research. Communications of the association for information systems, 2(1), 19.
Brydon-Miller, M., Greenwood, D., & Maguire, P. (2003). Why action research?. Action research, 1(1), 9-28.
Chiasson, M., Germonprez, M., & Mathiassen, L. (2009). Pluralist action research: a review of the information systems literature. Information systems journal, 19(1), 31-54.
Davison, R., & Vogel, D. (2000). Group support systems in Hong Kong: an action research project. Information Systems Journal, 10(1), 3-20.
Davison, R. (2001). GSS and action research in the Hong Kong police. Information Technology & People.
Davison, R., Martinsons, M. G., & Kock, N. (2004). Principles of canonical action research. Information systems journal, 14(1), 65-86.
Kock, N. (2004). The three threats of action research: a discussion of methodological antidotes in the context of an information systems study. Decision support systems, 37(2), 265-286.
Krippendorff, K. (2018). Content analysis: An introduction to its methodology. Sage publications.
Levy, Y., & Ellis, T. J. (2006). A systems approach to conduct an effective literature review in support of information systems research. Informing Science, 9, 181-212.
Lindgren, R., Stenmark, D., & Ljungberg, J. (2003). Rethinking competence systems for knowledge-based organizations. European Journal of Information Systems, 12(1), 18-29.
Mathiassen, L. (2002). Collaborative practice research. Information Technology & People. 15(4), 321-345.
Mathiassen, S. E., Burdorf, A., & Van Der Beek, A. J. (2002). Statistical power and measurement allocation in ergonomic intervention studies assessing upper trapezius EMG amplitude: A case study of assembly work. Journal of Electromyography and Kinesiology, 12(1), 45-57.
McKay, J., & Marshall, P. (2001). The dual imperatives of action research. Information Technology & People. 14(1), 46-59.
Palvia, P., Leary, D., Mao, E., Midha, V., Pinjani, P., & Salam, A. F. (2004). Research methodologies in MIS: an update. The Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 14(1), 58.
Palvia, P., Daneshvar Kakhki, M., Ghoshal, T., Uppala, V., & Wang, W. (2015). Methodological and topic trends in information systems research: A meta-analysis of IS journals. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 37(1), 30.
Peffers, K., & Ya, T. (2003). Identifying and evaluating the universe of outlets for information systems research: Ranking the journals. Journal of Information Technology Theory and Application (JITTA), 5(1), 6.
Rapoport, R. N. (1970). Three dilemmas in action research: with special reference to the Tavistock experience. Human relations, 23(6), 499-513.
Stemler, S. (2000). An overview of content analysis. Practical Assessment, Research, and Evaluation, 7(1), 17.
Susman, G. I., & Evered, R. D. (1978). An assessment of the scientific merits of action research. Administrative science quarterly, 582-603.
Vessey, I., Ramesh, V., & G
In-Text Citation: (Wang & Luo, 2020)
To Cite this Article: Wang, W., & Luo, L. (2020). Systematic Review of Action Research in Management Information Systems Field. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 10(6), 104–117.
Copyright: © 2020 The Author(s)
Published by Human Resource Management Academic Research Society (www.hrmars.com)
This article is published under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) license. Anyone may reproduce, distribute, translate and create derivative works of this article (for both commercial and non-commercial purposes), subject to full attribution to the original publication and authors. The full terms of this license may be seen at: http://creativecommons.org/licences/by/4.0/legalcode