IN5210 Seminar 6 11.10.2017 Kappelman et al. To whom is the - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

in5210
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

IN5210 Seminar 6 11.10.2017 Kappelman et al. To whom is the - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

IN5210 Seminar 6 11.10.2017 Kappelman et al. To whom is the article addressed? Kappelman et al. Alex and Troels asks: What makes this research? Kappelman et al. How come there were no team members related to the research


slide-1
SLIDE 1

IN5210

Seminar 6 11.10.2017

slide-2
SLIDE 2
slide-3
SLIDE 3

Kappelman et al.

  • “To whom is the article addressed?​”
slide-4
SLIDE 4

Kappelman et al.

  • Alex and Troels asks: What makes this research?
slide-5
SLIDE 5

Kappelman et al.

  • “How come there were no team members related to the research

method?”

slide-6
SLIDE 6
slide-7
SLIDE 7

Ives et al.

  • “The article is written by 40 scholars. Why so many authors?”
slide-8
SLIDE 8

Ives et al.

  • “Is the focus of the article exclusively for business school or could the

same also be said for IT schools?”

  • “Will this not affect every graduating student, not only business

students?”

slide-9
SLIDE 9

Agenda of the rest of the seminar

Work in groups until 11.40 on Ives et al.

  • Step 1: Discuss the arguments and evidence of the paper. What are the strengths

and limitations? (max 10 minutes)

  • Step 2: Go through table 1 in the article.
  • Step 3: Pick one of the core concepts that you wish to discuss in-depth and read the

learning objectives proposed in the right column.

  • Step 4: Relate the learning objectives to 1-2 articles from the course syllabus:
  • How can the articles add to our understanding of the topics proposed in

the learning objectives?

  • Compare the papers: Are they saying the same thing? Are they

contradicting each other? Are there significant differences in the theoretical underpinnings and/or evidence that supports the arguments?

  • Do you find any important learning objectives missing in Ives et al? Which
  • ne(s)?
  • Repeat from step 1, if you have more time.
  • Group discussion will end with a short plenum round – pick a group speaker
slide-10
SLIDE 10

Coming Assignments: Information Infrastructures

  • October 16
  • Hanseth, O. and Lyytinen, K. (2010). "Design theory for dynamic complexity in information

infrastructures: the case of building internet". Journal of Information Technology, 25, pp. 1- 19.

  • Hanseth, O. (2000). "The Economics of Standards". In Ciborra, C. U. (Ed), From Control to

Drift: The Dynamics of Corporate Information Infrastructures, pp. 56-70, Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

  • October 23
  • Bygstad, B. and Hanseth, O. (2017). "Transforming Corporate Infrastructures through
  • Platformization. A Norwegian e-Health Case". Submitted to ISR.
  • October 30
  • Rodon, J. and Hanseth, O. (2017). "Understanding the Dynamics of Architecture-Governance

Configurations". Unpublished Manuscript.

  • November 13
  • Mock exam!
slide-11
SLIDE 11

Last assignment: mock exam (31.10 – 13.11)