Talk:Management information system
Mirror of English Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
Conflation of SSIS, MIS and IS.... an error?
I don't think MIS is a subset of Information Systems. For example the Wiki article on Orlikowski describes her as a Professor of Information Systems but I believe this is a shorthand for "The Social Study of Information Systems" (SSIS) which is a Social Studies field and not a business/technology/"science" field. I have added a new article for Social Study of Information Systems. Hope this is OK and a useful clarification. Could we change the article on Orlikowski to point at SSIS rather than MIS?? I have also added/updated some new articles on Claudio Ciborra and on Formative Context which are relevant to SSIS. ISmad 17:00, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
There are two other Wiki pages which could (arguaby) be addressing the same thing: Science studies and Social informatics
ISmad 17:21, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
I think this is going to be an ongoing problem. SSIS and MIS are evolving in part out of Information Systems and thus are arguably a subset (in the same way that Information Systems was itself a subset of Computer Science for many years). Can anyone more familiar with the history of IS and MIS do some cross referencing and try for a definitive statement on the origins of SSIS, MIS and IS (which may then make it easier to decide how they should be organised). GKS 00:14, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
Information Systems versus MIS
On the matter of the Information Systems redirect to this topic, it should be mentioned by someone that MIS is a generally accepted subset of Information Systems and not the other way around. There are several top-level categories of information systems (transactiion processing systems, expert systems, decision support systems, etc) and countless thousands of information systems that are not MIS. Admittedly, I have not read the entire article, so it could be that this article is inappropriately named or that the IS topic needs to be reestablished as its own standalone topic. It is my opinion that one or the other should be a future course of action, and am airing my thoughts here for feedback. Thanks. -- Dx 00:59, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
PS - I found a couple of stubs that I think will do, and I'll start with them and work my way back here. Thanks. -- Dx 01:03, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
Prestigious schools?
I don't see the point in the list of prestigious schools. Is there a sort of evaluation system when it comes to who's listed or is it just to add whatever? Maybe we should just change the topic of section to "Schools offering MIS" or something?
- I agree with you. It's all opinion based. I would like more opinion before making a change and offending individuals though. How do the rest of you out there feel? - Grassferry49
- To list all the schools that offer a programme in MIS would create a very long list, most major universities offer such a programme now. To list only "prestigious" schools would be highly subjective. Maybe we can link to a web site that acts as a directory of MIS programmes instead. mydogategodshat 2 July 2005 01:37 (UTC)
- "Well-known" works just fine, almost all the ones listed are very well established programs and respected by their peers, employers, and professors. There is a ranking for these programs such as US News 2006 Best Graduate Schools has rankings of MBA programs with concentrations in MIS.
- Does anyone object to me re-organising the list of schools/depts/faculties by country? If this list gets much longer, it really should be organised into groups of some sort. Rather than get into a debate about which schools are more prestigious than others (since this will have some geographic variation), I suggest we group by country and then either list alphabetically or have within country listings by prestige. GKS 00:06, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
Title
This title should probably be Management information systemS. I think every major text book in this area has an "S" on the end. It's not a big issue.
Punctuation
"Management Information Systems (MIS), are information systems ..."
The comma here, is it correct English?
- Nope. Good catch. —Simon 21:24, 17 August 2005 (UTC)
MIS and Information Technology
I disagree with the Walmart example. An extranet is an example of information technology used with an information system. An explanation of what Walmart is doing with its suppliers on the extranet would be a better definition of a management information system.
computer engineering/computer science
"The area of study should not be confused with Computer Science which is more theoretical and mathematical in nature or with Computer Engineering which is more engineering."
can this be clrified a little further?
"The area of study should not be confused with Computer science which is more theoretical in nature and deals mainly with software creation, or computer engineering, which focuses more on the design of computer hardware."
--Ab2kgj 04:33, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
test
== Elastic Anomoly ==Ã
The edit of 16 Movember 2005 changed "MIS as a barrier to entry" to "MIS as an elastic anomoly". I think this should be reverted, but I'm not certain enough to make the change myself.
Mq@maq.org 19:52, 24 January 2006 (UTC) <nowiki>Insert non-formatted text here</nowiki>
Please rewrite this article
Most of the entries I find in Wikipedia are significantly better written than this one. Please consider re-writing it.
Very confusing article
I really can't make heads or tails out of this article. The article starts off by defining "Management Information Systems" (plural) as an area of study, largely based on business. The article then abandons the academic/business aspect of it can talks about the evolution of technology, such as databases and the like. Its like MIS (the academic study) has been mixed with a completely different article talking about the technical management of information systems. Because this article is currently so schitzophrenic, I'm putting a cleanup tag on it. -- ShinmaWa(talk) 15:49, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
conclusion
you should provide conclusion
