Editorial

Abstract

EditorialThis issue is the first of ISJ's 25th volume and, as is customary on such anniversaries, this editorial reflects on the life of the ISJ and on its future.The editors-in-chiefs have periodically analysed the nature of the papers that ISJ publishes, most recently in the valedictory editorial by David Avison and Guy Fitzgerald in volume 22 (Avison & Fitzgerald, 2012). This looked at papers in the first 21 volumes. Here we update this analysis by reflecting on the content in the last three volumes and consider how we need to develop the journal further.The last three volumes, 22-24, comprised 64 papers. ISJ has moved from four issues a year to six and the number of papers published in each volume has increased from around 17.3 to 21.3. The move to six issues a year was occasioned by increases in good quality submissions and a desire to ensure that the time between acceptance and publication was shorter. In these 64 papers, we see many of the publication trends identified in earlier papers exacerbated.The 64 papers were produced by 177 authors (some authors produced more than one paper, of course) with an average of 2.77 authors per paper. Remarkably, only 4 single authored papers were published (6.25%) cementing a decreasing trend of 32.4% single authored papers in volumes 1-17 and 13.6% in volumes 18-21. Papers with four authors are now quite common, and some have five or six. While single authored papers are often preferred by tenure and promotions committees, the trend in IS, or at least in the ISJ, is for multi-authored papers.ISJ is continuing to becoming more global, with the authors of papers more geographically diverse. Avison and Fitzgerald identified the reduction in UK papers in the ISJ, the plateauing of contributions from North America and the increases from Asia-Pacific. UK contributions in the most recent volumes have fallen from 16% to 14.2%. North American contributions drop from 40.8% to 36.7%, while Asia-Pacific authors now comprise 20.3% of the total (up from 18.9%) and Europe (excluding the UK) hosts 28.2% of contributors (up from 22.3%).Taken together, the increase in author numbers and their greater geographical spread means that more papers are co-authored by people from different geographical regions. Indeed, within regions there is a sense that co-authors work in different countries, and even within countries, co-authors are seldom co-located in the same institution -and where they are, they are often not in the same academic unit. Given the global nature of IS, and the multiple perspectives upon it that need to be brought to bear, this diversity appears healthy.In a different aspect of diversity, the gender balance of authors continues to become more even. 35% of the most recent paper authors are female, compared to 14.4% in volumes 1-6, 19.8% in volumes 13-17 and 28% in the volumes 18-21.

Reflections on Information Systems Journal's thematic composition

“…In Powell's editorial that begins this 25th volume of ISJ , he reflects on the nature of the publications over the past quarter‐century (Powell, ). In doing so, he mentions some priorities that have guided the journal to this point and, presumably, will continue to direct the journal moving forward.…”

“…Powell mentions that ‘ ISJ was established to be a publication outlet for qualitative interpretive and later critical research’ (Powell, ). Here again, our study's analysis reiterates this generally accepted declaration through empirical evidence.…”

“…The resulting Philosophical / Research Approach cluster is consistent with descriptors reflecting this fact. Furthermore, an original founding goal of the ISJ was to ‘publish work that pushed out the boundaries of acceptable methodology for conducting information systems research’ (Powell, ). ISJ ' s adherence to this principle is highlighted in the cluster analysis via the Ethics / Critical Research cluster.…”

“…Lastly, Powell asserts that ISJ ‘has improved the gender balance of authors’ (Powell, ). Because the purpose of this review is to analyse the thematic structure of the IS discipline's publication output, the data do not inform us with findings such as average author counts or gender balance.…”

Research of information systems: from parochial to international, towards global or glocal?

“…Nevertheless, traditional designs and methods continue to have a privileged status among many senior and influential members of the IS community as well as their disciples. Consistent with its aims (Powell, ), ISJ has helped to extend the boundaries of top‐tier IS research, beyond positivism to interpretive and even critical methods as well as more developmental domains.…”