On digital theorizing, clickbait research, and the cumulative tradition

The pursuit of novel and indigenous digital theories is a thought-provoking call by Grover and Lyytinen. Such a piece is direly needed, and we hope it will spark a reinvigoration of the field. However, despite its many merits and our alignment with its message, we have two comments or caveats for readers of their piece. These are—a) a need to re-emphasize the value of attending to the cumulative tradition in our pursuit of digital theorizing, and relatedly b) an unreflective reading of the paper may risk mobilizing IS scholarship towards clickbait research. We further highlight three anchors that future scholarship can consider in attending to these issues a) problematization anchor, b) implications anchor, and c) boundary-spanning anchor. With these points, we add more volume to amplify the message of G&L and offer suggestions for pursuing innovative digital theories that go beyond ephemeral theorizing.

Keeping pace with the digital age: Envisioning information systems research as a platform

In this paper, we respond to Grover and Lyytinen (2022). We agree with them that the advent of the digital age is calling for a reconsideration of the role of theory and theorizing. We also think their proposal does not go far enough. The time is ripe to question the role of theory in our field more fundamentally. We propose to instead focus on establishing IS research as a platform through which we can collect, organize, and provide access to digital trace data from various sources to analyze contemporary socio-technical phenomena. We believe that such a move allows us to more fully unleash the unique socio-technical competences of our field in the digital age.