Writing a precis

The commentary or précis of a reading/article conveys what you learnt and how you might employ the knowledge. In addition you can employ a critical or analytical interpretation, i.e. what is the intention of the authors, who is the audience, how valid are the claims?

Patterns for a basic précis:

• Sentence 1:Name of author, genre, and title of work, date in parenthesis; a rhetorically accurate verb (such as "claims," "argues," "asserts," "suggests"); and a THAT clause containing the major assertion or thesis statement in the work. 
• Sentence 2: An explanation of HOW the author develops and supports the thesis, usually in chronological order. 
• Sentence 3: A statement of the author's apparent purpose, followed by an "in order to" phrase. 
• Sentence 4: A significant quote from the paper used in a sentence.

Focus on the article being reviewed, not so much on other readings, books, articles etc.

Please do identify key quotes from the article. These a short statements or at most a sentence or two that distill some essential aspect of the article. A key quote is used: to point to the authors' evidence or claims; to make a justification for your own arguments; to act as a foundation for your own ideas. However, there must be clear delineation between the authors' content and your use of it therefore.

• For quotes: use quotation marks followed by cite.
• For paraphrasing: follow with cite.
• For extracts and transformations like lists and tables: explain source followed by cite.
• When reviewing, do not quote the author's quotes of other authors. Instead, quote an original passage written by the author of the article you are reviewing.

Please use double quotation marks and page number to identify "the quoted text" p. 23. You could apply one of the standard citation methods if you like e.g. Harvard style:

• (Surname et al., Publication Year, p.#)
• (Surname et al., Publication Year, pp.#-range)

Something like "some text" (AuthorSurname et al, 2033, p.7), or similar according to the citation standard required for the document.

Using problem-based cases for self-directed learning

TLDR? Apply the following response structure for case analysis. The 6 points represent the milestones of the skills and developmental process for problem based learning: analytical, self-audit, self-critique, self-plan, synthesis, closure.

Process as follows:

1. Identify up to three (max) challenges/problems evident in this case.
2. State knowledge/skills you currently possess relevant to these challenges/problems.
3. Identify up to three (max) personal knowledge gaps related to any aspect of this case.
4. Provide evidence of key learning sources you identified to address your personal knowledge gaps.
5. Propose strategic/remedial actions that may address the three (max) challenges/problems evident in this case.

Structure for a learning process centred on case studies.

How do you read a case and engage with it as a problem-based learning exercise for self-directed learning?

When a learner asks "why?" Often the last thing they want or need is for the answer to be given to them. What we as teachers should enable, is not to provide answers to questions, but to facilitate learning through personal discovery. So when someone asks "why?", a good answer might be "I don't know, but I think I might know how to start the process of finding an answer".

Let's say you are reading a case study but you aren't sure how to deal with it. On the one hand perhaps the case study presents basic statements as facts, or perhaps the case presents so much rich context that it is difficult to see the underlying challenges. It is confusing. Sometimes the problems are well sign-posted, sometimes not. PBL, problem-based cases and self-directed learning offer a way to personalise your own learning, encouraging you to explore, extrapolate and investigate wider issues under your own initiative, an investigation that addresses your personal knowledge-gaps and enables you to further your own learning objectives.

One of the goals of case based learning is to have readers react, question, go out and research, and eventually recommend some change or solution. But crucially, the reader should be looking at the challenges 'in general', the wider issues affecting similar initiatives in today's environment. Furthermore recommendations will be based on research, readings, applicable theory, and evidence; usually evidence you will have gathered yourself (aka research).

Consider case analysis as a process in which the learner poses or structures the problem, explores and shapes solutions to the problem. A reflective turn on the "case as a process" raises the circumstance where the "problems" that the case raises can be construed as personal knowledge gaps. Problem solving drives the underlying personal process of learning.

In order to put some shape on this as a process consider the following "moves":

• Diagnose: Identify the problems(s)
• Discover: Independently research the problem area(s)
• Develop: Propose a response or responses, recommendations to resolve, improve etc.

Remember that recommendations and resolutions based on abstract rules will not necessarily fit actual situations therefore 'expert', rather than simply proficient, determinations will account for both the general issues and those that are context dependent.


The method: in brief.

1. Quickly 'first read' the case/paper/whatever. You will skip some sentences and words. The goal is to read the whole thing in a single sitting, without taking notes, just to get the first impression.

2. After the 'first read' write a sentence or paragraph from memory. This is your initial impression after first reading. Don't go back to re-read parts or seek clarity yet.

3. 'Second read' is also quick but you now underline/circle or write a list of concepts, jargon, terms, identities that are new or confuse, or are unknown to you. These are your personal knowledge gaps. Some of these you will resolve during homework time.

4. 'Third read' you can focus on sections or impressions; come up with a minimum of at least 3 initial diagnosis (continue during homework time). Encourage a variety of analyses, otherwise everyone focuses on perhaps one big superficial criticism like 'the business strategy is broken for these reasons and needs to change'.

5. Homework, self-directed and self-paced learning; address the personal knowledge gaps, work on diagnosis, work on prescribing more than one potential remedy to the problems.

The following are similar structured processes for reading and case analysis. You will probably have your own approach or adapt and modify the steps to suit the your own style and conditions.

Schwartz et al. (2001) outline a typical sequence of learning-centred activities for case analysis.

• First encounter a problem ‘cold’, without doing any preparatory study in the area of the problem.
• Interact with each other to explore their existing knowledge as it relates to the problem.
• Form and test hypotheses about the underlying mechanisms that might account for the problem (up to their current levels of knowledge).
• Identify further knowledge gaps or learning needs for making progress with the problem.
• Undertake self-study between group meetings group to satisfy identified learning needs.
• Return to the group to integrate the newly gained knowledge and apply it to the problem.
• Repeat steps 3 to 6 as necessary.
• Reflect on the process and on the content that has been learnt.

The Seven Jump or Maastricht process offers a similar template for structuring small-group case learning (Grave et al., 1996).

• Clarify unknown terms or concepts in the problem description.
• Define the problem(s). List the phenomena or events to be explained.
• Analyse the problem(s). Step 1. Brainstorm. Try to produce as many different explanations for the phenomena as you [can] think of. Use prior knowledge and common sense.
• Analyse the problem(s). Step 2. Discuss. Criticize the explanations proposed and try to produce a coherent description of the processes that, according to what you think, underlie the phenomena or events.
• Formulate learning issues for self-directed learning.
• Fill the gaps in your knowledge through self-study.
• Share your findings with your group and try to integrate the knowledge acquired into a comprehensive explanation for the phenomena or events. Check whether you know enough now.

The MacMaster ‘triple jump’ describes three main stages for student-driven problem investigation: initial analysis, independent research, and synthesis. Each stage consists of a series of activities (not necessarily taking place in sequence).

• Initial analysis: identify problems, explore extant knowledge, hypothesise, identify knowledge gaps
• Independent research: research knowledge gaps
• Synthesis: present findings – relating them to the problem(s), integrate learning from others, generate a synthesis, self-assessment of learning process, repeat ‘triple jump’ if needed.

You can also try one or more of the following methods to capture and order your analyses, diagnoses, recommendations etc.

Discover the issues...

• Create an Empathy Map (from a key actor's perspective: the person, what they see, say, do, feel, hear, think)
• Brainstorm
• Anti-problem (state the antithesis to the problem and resolve it)
• Context Map (depict rich context)
• History Map (depict the past)
• Low-Tech Social Network (sketch relationships between actors)
• Storycard the Problem(s)
• Draw the Problem(s) (graphical system depiction or representation)

Having identified problems...

• Stakeholder Analysis
• The 4 Cs or the 4 Ds or the 5 Whys (components, characteristics, challenges, characters; or discover, design, damage, deliver; or ask why 5 times)
• The SQUID (sequential question and insight diagram)
• Root cause analysis (cause-reason fishbone diagram)

References:

• GRAVE, W. S., BOSHUIZEN, H. P. A. & SCHMIDT, H. G. (1996) Problem based learning: Cognitive and metacognitive processes during problem analysis. Instructional Science, 24, 321-341.
• SCHWARTZ, P., MENNIN, S. & WEBB, G. (Eds.) (2001) Problem-Based Learning: Case studies, experience and practice, London, Routledge.

Reading an article and not sure how to write about it yourself?

- readings, precis, impact, application -

Prompting questions:

• What did I learn from reading this article?
• What was the intention of the authors?
• Who is the audience for the article?
• How could I use the article?

Readings are often difficult to understand or alternatively, to interpret and make sense of. I've often read a paper and said to myself "so what", "it's obvious", "what's the appeal of this stuff?" Sometimes I've been confused, overwhelmed with detail or just don't get the point. I've also read papers that have set off ideas, recalled past experiences, given an outlook that changes something I thought I knew well but now see in a different light.

Writing a precis of a paper turns the whole process back on itself somewhat; I go from being the reader of the paper to being a writer. Writing about a paper demands something of me, not just my impression of the paper and the information contained within, but how I felt about the ideas expressed, how I saw them applied, and reflected on their wider impact.

Written comments on a reading need to be succinct (if you go past a page then perhaps you should be writing a new paper?), and impact-full. Get to the point, don't just summarise, criticise! Refer to other works in a meaningful way (counter examples, supporting examples), and reflect on the bigger picture. If there are implications for practitioners and practice then state them, particularly if they are personal, affecting you.

When criticising a paper you should always attempt to be fair. Criticise it on its terms, not because it doesn't address certain areas that you think are more important; there may be good reasons for a paper's omissions: limited space, out of scope, irrelevance.

Finally, keep to the limits, word counts shouldn't be treated as "targets". If you can say less then say less; less is often more. It takes time to distill your comments and the result is often unexpected, but often in good ways.

Pointers

• Pick out some aspect of interest from the paper
• Comment on it (there are no wrong answers, it's just an opinion)
• Link it back to design processes.
• And consider linking your argument with pertinent external readings.

Try not go off on a tangent or indulge yourself in a flight of fancy. But if the paper sets off your creative side then explain your logic:

"The reading included a discussion of X which made me consider Y (not in the reading) because...".

Relate it back to the course; to continue:

"...but both X & Y are pertinent to Z which we have seen is a fundamental to the work of analysis, design and development"

The following rubric (a protocol or procedure) on assessing a written work may also be useful...
Audience: Who is the reading directed at? Is a question formulated, is it interesting and clearly put? Did the author clearly explain the purpose of the article?
Structure: Are the thoughts/arguments connected? Is there a logic to the presentation of ideas? Is theory utilised? If so is it treated critically or uncritically (just applied)? Do the authors anticipate and respond to counter-arguments?
Style of evidence: Does the work offer conjecture and possibilities based on the literature? Does the work offer empirical matter? Are assumptions stated? Is a philosophical foundation indicated?
Validity: How is the work positioned such that we understand how to test the extent of its claims, justification, rigour.
Rhetoric: Is the article persuasive? Are the findings, discussion and conclusions convincing? Does the work present implications and impacts? Are there behavioural, managerial, organisational consequences?


Further reading (about reading...no irony in that is there?)

• R. Subramanyam. Art of reading a journal article: Methodically and effectively. Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Pathology : JOMFP, 17(1):65–70, Jan-Apr 2013. (link)
• E. Pain. How to (seriously) read a scientific paper. Science, March 2016. Available online at http://www.sciencemag.org/careers/2016/03/how-seriously-read-scientific-paper (Accessed: 29 November 2017). (link)
• A. Ruben. How to read a scientific paper. Science, January 2016. Available online at http://www.sciencemag.org/careers/2016/01/how-read-scientific-paper (Accessed: 29 November 2017).

Crowd and Microsourcing, who wins, who loses?

Microsourcing, who wins, who loses? Gefen & Carmel (2008) suggest microsourcing works well for the small supplier, and Lehdonvirta's research appears to confirm it (look at slides 9 onwards). Microworkers appear to be treated more equitably.

Knowledge Map of the Virtual Economy: an Introduction

View more presentations from Vili Lehdonvirta

Gefen & Carmel (2008) show that cost is a significant driver towards microsourcing, but access to skills seems to be a strong incentive for customers to source directly from micro suppliers. Why do the most sophisticated (US) markets seek these offshore micro-suppliers? Principally to address resource shortages in their local markets and furthermore, customers return to the same supplier if initially satisfied and continue to pay a ‘fair price’. The satisfied customer returns again and again, caring less and less if the work is offshore, caring more that they have access to the specialist wherever they are. The world hasn't been 'flattened' (Friedman, 2005), but it appears to be 'flatter'.

References

• Friedman, T. L. (2005) The World Is Flat: A Brief History of the Twenty-first Century, Farrar, Straus & Giroux.
• Gefen, D. & Carmel, E. (2008) Is the World Really Flat? A Look at Offshoring at an Online Programming Marketplace. MIS Quarterly, 32, 367-384.
• Carmel's student microsourcing exercise (errancarmel.blogspot.com)

What's in a one page research idea?

After reading the proposal and talking about it we should be able to answer the following questions.

• Do we know what you propose investigating? (a one sentence statement, often the title)
• Motivation, why is it interesting? (might be something puzzling at work or a question you have)
• What sources of data do you think will you use? (speculation is ok)
• What kind of data do you expect to gather and how will the data be gathered? (speculation is ok)
• In what theory, knowledge area, discipline do you start from? (provide some references to theory)

Basic structure as follows:

TITLE (a couple of words, a phrase or a short sentence)
ABSTRACT (- around 300 words - a very short 'story' from which answers to the questions above can be inferred )
REFERENCES (3 TO 8)

1. Justify your idea using at least three academic references (not magazine articles, web posts or news items).
2. Justify the most important statements using citation (see note above).
3. Do not include spurious references in the bibliography, that is, only include a reference if you have cited it in the text.
4. For an abstract: three references is about right, more than ten is too many. None is too few.
5. An abstract should fit on a single page (including title, author's name and references).

How to do really well with this subject

Read the readings. Go to the library and read the books.

The term paper is your project, you do the field research, you analyse, interpret, write up and create!

Target your writing towards ECIS, one of the main IS conferences. Word or LaTeX templates can be downloaded from https://goo.gl/TcN31Z

The following high quality, general conferences may be good sources for searching for similar research.

• IFIP Working Group Conferences (esp. 8.2, 8.4, 8.6, 9.4) 
• Academy of Management Conference 
• ICIS 
• EGOS
• other local conferences like the Irish Academy of Management annual conference, UKAIS etc.

The following journals are potentially good quality sources for relevant related research. Register with a relevant journal to receive notifications of new publications; for example: Palgrave e-alerts (European Journal of Information Systems).

• MIS Quarterly 
• Information Systems Research 
• Communications of The ACM 
• Information & Organization 
• European Journal of Information Systems 
• Journal of Information Technology 
• Information Systems Journal 
• Journal of Strategic Information Systems 
• Journal of Management Information Systems 
• IT & People 
• Scandinavian Journal of IS 
• The Information Society 
• Communications of the AIS 
• Information and Management

Themes in Managing Global Sourcing

This site covers material for dealing with the following challenges...

• How should one manage sourcing relationships? (and how does this vary according to the mode?)
• Relationship development - Important stages of sourcing relationships.
• Formulating sourcing contracts and service level agreements.
• Relationship governance structures and practices.
• Risk management.
• Facilitating effective communication and learning in context of cultural diversity and distributed work.
• The enabling role of ICT across organisational boundaries.
• Identifying and addressing emerging relationship problems.
• What are the emergent trends in sourcing relationships that are likely to be important in the future?

How to review an article...

The following review criteria are typically applied to articles submitted for conferences.

• Is the topic relevant to the theme?
• Are the paper's objectives clear and well-described?
• Is the paper written clearly?
• Will the paper will draw an audience?
• Is the paper well organized, does it flow logically?
• If it includes a literature review is the literature appropriate and relevant to the theme?
• If it includes a methodology or research method is it appropriate?
• Are the analyses appropriate to the data presented for analysis?
• Does the evidence given support the author's arguments (if relevant)?
• Does the paper make a useful contribution or has it the potential to make a contribution?

Alternatively you might respond to the following general prompts:

• Identify the paper’s strengths
• Identify the paper’s weaknesses
• Provide suggestions for improving the paper
• Detail major issues (if any)
• Detail minor issues (if any)
• What is missing?