This report includes three sections: an assessment of the past five years, a strategic analysis, and goals for the next five years.  Considerable effort was made to provide as much information as possible about the OCIS Division in the OCIS Health and Governance Checklist that accompanies this document; the detail provided in the Checklist is substantive.  The sources of data and information used to write the report are described in the introduction to each of the following three sections.  Where appropriate references are made to the Checklist sections that provide supporting explanations.   

Section I:  An Assessment of the Past Five Years 

Section I provides an assessment of the OCIS Division activities over the past five years.  This section is primarily based on the OCIS Division Metrics, a database maintained by the Academy including information about membership, annual meeting participation, governance, and finances.  The section is also based on the results of a self-study survey conducted in the fall of 2008 which captures perceptions of the Division’s activities and performance over the past years.  In addition, in an effort to make comparisons, and thereby provide a wider context for this assessment, this section draws on available information about other divisions.  In particular, metric data were available for the Careers, Critical Management Studies, Managerial and Organizational Cognition, Management Spirituality and Religion, Organizational Development and Change, Research Methods, and Technology and Innovation Management Divisions.  (Some of these data cover the 2003-2007 time frame rather than the 2004-2008 five year window which is the focus of this OCIS review.)  The Academy also provided survey results for the Critical Management Studies, Management Spirituality and Religion, Research Methods, and Technology and Innovation Management Divisions.  These sources were used to make select and broad comparisons with respect to OCIS performance over the past five years.    

Profile of Members 

As of July 2008 the OCIS Division had 1024 members.  Thus, approximately 5.5% of the Academy’s 18,525 members belong to the Division.  OCIS is roughly the same size as Managerial and Organizational Cognition which had 1,143 members in 2008; half the size of Research Methods with 2,055 and Technology and Innovation Management with 2,430 members both in 2007; less than half of Organizational Development and Change with 2,862 in 2008; and larger than Careers with 605 members, Critical Management Studies with 877 members, and Management Spirituality and Religion with 712 members all in 2007.  

Over the five year period from 2004-2008 the OCIS Division grew by 14.16% while the the Academy overall grew by 26.55%.  Division domestic membership increased by 8.3% and international membership increased by 28.5%.  Academy membership increased by 14% and 44.3% respectively and this trend was consistent across all the comparative divisions.  

Among the different types of memberships, the Division grew the most among executives (35.5%) during the five year period.  However, the absolute number of member types in 2008 was greatest for academics (641), followed by students (287), followed by executives (84), followed by emeritus (12), and, as expected, this order is consistent with the Academy overall.   

There are two trends in the demographic data that are cause for concern for the Division and both trends are related.  Across each year of the five year period, there has been a gradual growth in the number of members for every membership type except students.  Student membership increased each year except last year when the number shifted down from 344 (2007) to 287 (2008).  Secondly, the change in Division new members across the five year period dipped by 17.70%.  In comparing year by year statistics, the numbers have been stable (i.e., between 2004 and 2007 we gained between 226 and 231 new members each year).  However, in 2008 we gained only 186 new members and this downturn is clearly due to the decrease in student members. There are a number of possible reasons for this change.  One is the overlap in conference dates for the Academy and American Conference on Information Systems (AMCIS), which is an important conference for doctoral students because it is a major venue for MIS faculty recruitment.  Another is the decrease in MIS doctoral students related to perceived industry job opportunities.  A third is the lack of proactive encouragement of new OC members.  Each of these will be addressed in subsequent parts of this report.  By way of comparison, other divisions also had downturns in new members over the five year period (i.e., Careers was down 20.34%, Managerial and Organizational Cognition was down 11.28%, and Organizational Development and Change was down by 3.79%) whereas others had upturns in new members (i.e., Critical Management Studies was up 168.5%, Management Spirituality and Religion up by 21.39%, Research Methods was up 25.71%, and Technology and Innovation Management which was up by 60.14%).  

There were 178 members who participated in the Division survey conducted in the fall of 2008 for a response rate of a little better than 17%.  (The response rate for Critical Management Studies was 19%, 26% for Research Methods, 18% for Technology and Innovation Management, and 29% for Management Spirituality and Religion.)  The pattern of OCIS respondent types matched the pattern of division membership types:  77% were academics, 21% were students, 2% were executives, and 1% were professors emeritus.  65% of the respondents had been members of the division for seven years or less.  (This does not necessarily mean that they were all individuals in the early stage of their careers, either as doctoral students or junior faculty, since there was a fairly even distribution across the age groups of 25-35, 36-45, and 46-55.)  19% had been members for 8-11 years and the remaining 17% for 12 years or more.  Roughly 60% were male and 40% female.  A clear majority were from North America (79%), followed by Europe (12%), then Asia (8%).  There were only 3 respondents from the rest of the world (i.e., two from Oceania, and, notably only one from South America).  Thus, North Americans were disproportionately represented in the survey compared to the composition of the Division membership.  All of these respondent demographic patterns were consistent with the other survey comparative divisions with the exception that gender for Critical Management Studies was almost evenly split and that there were a much higher number of male respondents for Technology and Innovation Management.  

The mode range of ages among the OCIS respondents was 36-46 which was consistent with Research Methods and Technology and Innovation Management.  Interestingly the mode for Critical Management Studies and Management Spirituality and Religion respondents was 46-55.  

Overall, the Division has done a good job of attracting new members over time however there are concerns about the most recent year.  Since a majority (65%) of the survey respondents were with the Division for seven or less years, this might suggest that there are retention issues among members.  The membership numbers are relatively stable but do not reflect strong growth.  The membership is becoming increasingly international.  

Division Participation 

A clear majority of respondents (65%) considered OCIS to be their primary division.  While 27% identify with another division almost as much as with OCIS, only 8% identified mostly with another division.  These responses reflect strong affiliation with OCIS.  By way of comparison on the last question about primary affiliation with a different division the responses for Critical Management Studies, Technology and Innovation Management, Management Spirituality and Religion, and Research Methods were 22%, 26%, 38%, and 55% respectively. 

Survey respondents were also asked to rank order the reasons why they belonged to the Division.  The highest ranked item in the first category was to gain and share information relevant to research (65%) and the highest item in the second category was to develop and maintain social connections (36%).  The responses to the open-ended comments clearly corroborated these results.  (A summary of the answers to the open-ended questions is provided in an appendix to this report.)  In the third category the motivation to gain and share information relevant to teaching was highest (29%) and this was followed in the fourth category by the motivation to gain and share information relevant to training and management practice (38%).  In the final category to learn more about a domain that is new scored highest (40%).  There are some interesting comparisons between the OCIS respondents and those of the comparative divisions.  While all the divisions ranked research in the highest category there is a lot of variance in the priority for the second category.  Technology and Innovation Management ranked social networking highest in the second category; Research Methods ranked learning about another domain; and Critical Management Studies and Management Spirituality and Religion ranked information about teaching resources.   

Overall, the amount of time and resources the Division allocates to research in the program is consistent with the survey feedback.  However, it is somewhat surprising that learning more about another domain did not rank higher in the survey.  One of the ways OCIS distinguishes itself from other OC and IS conferences is that attendance at the Academy will provide opportunities for participants to attend sessions in a wide range of other related domains.  The fact that interest in teaching resources scored so high is something the executive committee should consider in the future.  

Annual Meeting Participation 

Over the five year period submissions to the OCIS Division grew by 59.3%.  This compares favorably with the Academy’s overall submission growth rate of 51.5%.  The following were the Division’s acceptance rate for papers (session, interactive, and visual) for each year during the period (the Academy’s rate is given in parentheses):  2004 – 69% (59%), 2005 – 66% (61%), 2006 – 79% (74%), 2007 – 60% (69%), 2008 – 60% (70%).  Overall the change over the five year period was an increase of 39.2% while the Academy’s rate increase was 78.3%.  The relatively lower acceptance rate is related to a mid-course correction of sorts during the five year period.  After the 2006 Annual Meeting the Division sought feedback from attendees which was later discussed among the executive committee.  The sense was that there were too many sessions which were not well attended and that future program chairs needed to consider scaling back the number of papers accepted for regular sessions.  In addition, in 2007 the Division initiated the use of associate editors who were helpful in determining the qualitative merit of both the papers and reviews submitted which provided an important gate-keeping role in paper acceptance and played a role in reducing the proportion of accepted papers. 

The number of symposium proposals submitted over the five year period is down by -86.7% compared to the Academy which is up by 59.3%.  At the same time the acceptance rate for the Division was 100% (in 2008) compared to the Academy’s 72% (in 2008). This suggests that OCIS gets few proposals but of high quality.  Nevertheless, the down ward submission trend is a concern that will be addressed later in this report. 

The number of PDWs supported by the Division has been fairly constant, averaging 6 to 7 per year with 11 in 2008. 

Reviewer participation is down from 377 in 2006, to 344 in 2007, to 313 in 2008.   Reviewer statistics have only recently been collected by the Academy.  Two possible explanations for the downturn could be that (a) the online system recently implemented allows reviewers to sign up to review for too many divisions and program chairs attempt to make assignments too late in the assignment process, and (b) in 2008 when the Academy added the associate editor functionality to the reviewing website, the editors were not counted as reviewers which would have eliminated approximately 25 individuals from the reviewer count.  In any case the downturn was evident for both domestic and international reviewers and is a trend to note.  Similar patterns were evident in other divisions particularly with respect to international reviewers (e.g., Critical Management Studies, Management Spirituality and Religion, Organizational Development and Change).  

The 2008 survey results indicated that 14% of the OCIS respondents presented papers or symposia every year and 55% had done so a few times or once.  38% attended these sessions every year and 49% attended a few times or once.  26% presented at PDWs every year, a few times or once, while 62% attended them every year, a few times or once.  A substantial amount of PDW participation is due to the doctoral consortia and junior faculty workshops supported by the Division each year.  34% of the respondents served as reviewers every year and 43% served a few times or once.  37% participated in social events and business meetings while 46% did so a few times or once.  And, 12% volunteered to serve in some capacity (awards committee) every year whereas 24% did so a few times or once.  

The majority of survey respondents, 40%, indicated that they gave priority to attending the Academy’s Annual Meeting even if they were not on the program whereas 30% indicated they only came to the conference when they were on the program.  If they do not attend, 62% said that one reason was funding, 45% indicated that the reason was related to time, and 12% said that they belong to the Academy for reasons other than the Annual Meeting.  

Overall, the paper submissions to OCIS continue to increase.  The number of accepted papers is within the desired range.  Whereas within recent years we attempted to reduce the number of sessions in order to increase session attendance and satisfy perceived membership preference, we did so by instituting associate editors to ensure that higher quality papers were placed in the program.  We also instituted international paper development PDWs to provide assistance to international members whose papers were not accepted in the program in a given year and encouraged them to revise and resubmit their manuscripts to the Division.  We have done this in 2006, 2007, and 2008 and plan to do the PDW for the foreseeable future.  We have not obtained feedback on the how many of these participants have resubmitted their papers, but should consider doing so.  

Satisfaction with Annual Meeting 

Among the survey items measuring satisfaction with the annual meeting, OCIS respondents rated overall access to participation on the program and social networking opportunities highest, both with 63% either very satisfied or extremely satisfied.  The responses to the open-ended comments corroborated these results.  The traditional paper sessions, professional development workshops, and symposia rated next highest with 54%, 48%, and 45% respectively indicating they were very satisfied or extremely satisfied.  The poster sessions and interactive session rated lowest with 25% and 30% respectively.  If the responses from those who were satisfied are added to these percentages, the scores range from 76% to 94%.  Overall, there is very positive satisfaction with the program.  However, the poster and interactive sessions are a concern.  As noted in the Checklist (15), the Division has experimented with poster sessions.  In 2006 and 2008 we held the poster sessions in the same room at the same time as the main social gathering for the Division on Monday afternoon following the keynote and business meeting.  This has turned out to work quite well and we will continue to do this in the future in an effort to increase the visibility of the poster papers.  

Satisfaction with Division 

The survey focused on a range of diverse items related to division satisfaction.  For descriptive purposes the following table provides a parsimonious presentation.  The results cluster around certain items.  The first column contains a label for the cluster. The numbers in the second column represent the total percentage of the combined responses for satisfied+very satisfied+extremely satisfied / very satisfied+extremely satisfied.  The third column contains the survey item.  The items are approximately clustered based on themes.  The fourth column shows an eyeball comparative rating against the Critical Management Studies, Research Methods, Technology and Innovation Management, and Management Spirituality and Religion Divisions (i.e., ***** means OCIS scored comparatively well, * means OCIS compared poorly, *** means OCIS and the other division scores were roughly equivalent, and ** and **** are between the other categories).