Rigor and Relevance in Information Systems Research rigor and relevance and maximize the creation of business value from the application of IS research to solve critical business problems. It is hoped that the three step process and supporting models would help guide an IS researcher on a right path and would result in a leading IS research. Such research, if done right, should fully meet the inter- ests of both academic and business stakeholders, and create positive academic and business value by advancing knowledge and solving current and future critical business problems. The IS Rigor and Relevance Model helps reposition the IS knowledge based on desired rigor and relevance characteristics, IS Research Triangulation Model identifies the critical dimensions for alignment, and IS Research Process Model lays out various steps to guide an ongoing research. While the three step process and supporting models provide guidance for conducting rigorous and relevant IS research, these models have not been tried out for their usefulness and applicability. They do not provide specific criteria for determining the IS research relevance and prescriptive research methodologies for achieving right level of rigor that can be undertaken as part of future research effort. Benbasat, I., Goldstein, D. K., & Mead, M. (1987). The case research strategy in studies of Informa- tion Systems. Management Information Systems Quarterly, 11(3), 369­385. doi:10.2307/248684 Benbasat, I., & Zmud, R. W. (1999). Empirical research in Information Systems: The practice of relevance. Management Information Systems Quarterly, 23(1), 3­16. doi:10.2307/249403 Bhattacherjee, A. (2001). Understanding and eval- uating relevance in IS research. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 6(1). Borchers, A. S. (2001). Adding practitioner scholars to our faculties. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 6(1). Brown, S. F. (2009). Naivety in systems engineer- ing research: Are we putting the methodological cart before the philosophical horse? 7th Annual Conference on Systems Engineering Research, Loughborough University, UK. Cresswell, A. M. (2001). Thoughts on relevance of IS research. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 6(1). Davenport, T. (1997, April 15). Think tank ­ Storming the ivory tower. CIO Magazine. Davenport, T. H., & Markus, M. L. (1999). Rigor vs. relevance revisited: Response to Benbasat and Zmud. Management Information Systems Quar- terly, 23(1), 19­24. doi:10.2307/249405 Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1991). A motivational approach to self: Integration in personality. In R. Dienstbier (Ed.), Nebraska Symposium on Moti- vation: Vol. 38. Perspectives on motivation (pp. 237-288). Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press. Dennis, A. R. (2001). Relevance in Information Systems research. Communications of the Asso- ciation for Information Systems, 6(1). REFERENCES Alter, S. (2001). Recognizing the relevance of IS research and broadening the appeal and applica- bility of future publications. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 6(1). Amaravadi, C. S. (2001). Improving consumption. Communications of the Association for Informa- tion Systems, 6(1). Applegate, L. M., & King, J. L. (1999). Rigor and relevance: Careers on the line. Manage- ment Information Systems Quarterly, 23(1), 17. doi:10.2307/249404 39