IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/tjisxx/v32y2023i4p623-633.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Using argument analysis to understand the efficacy of written communication for disseminating academic findings to practitioners

Author

Listed:
  • Nan Liang
  • Rudy Hirschheim
  • Danli Chen

Abstract

While the IS field has devoted significant effort to improving written communication to disseminate academic research findings, little attention has been given to the issue of soliciting feedback from practitioners about these communications. This paper explores the question of how to engage practitioners with written communication that aims to disseminate academic findings. Three empirical studies are undertaken, each analysing various types of written communication using the lens of argument. Our results suggest two archetypes for supporting arguments: a warrant-using approach and a warrant-establishing approach, each of which offers different ways to conceive of engaging with practitioner readers. Several proposals are offered as potential avenues for better engaging practitioners via written communication.

Suggested Citation

  • Nan Liang & Rudy Hirschheim & Danli Chen, 2023. "Using argument analysis to understand the efficacy of written communication for disseminating academic findings to practitioners," European Journal of Information Systems, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 32(4), pages 623-633, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:tjisxx:v:32:y:2023:i:4:p:623-633
    DOI: 10.1080/0960085X.2021.2018366
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/0960085X.2021.2018366
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/0960085X.2021.2018366?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:tjisxx:v:32:y:2023:i:4:p:623-633. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/tjis .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.