I'm originally from India and I have had the opportunity to live in a number of states within the United States; number of cities within the US. I have also had the chance to spend time in number of other countries... in China, Hong Kong, Australia, and other countries in Europe. I've lived for the longest now in Atlanta, I've been here for 20 years and Atlanta is home to me. In terms of things I enjoy: I enjoy a number of different things! Ofcourse I enjoy my work but in terms of other activities I enjoy sports, enjoy watching sports! Maybe playing a little less these days but watching definitely continues to be something I enjoy. I love movies, mystery novels, I enjoy sampling and repeating cuisines from all over the world. And I am an avid animal lover! Infact I have two dogs and I'm extremely fond of animals!

In terms of research interests, today when I look at it I would charachterize my _ research interests to be in the space of digital innovations to create business value and address _ problems. And looking at problems in these spaces, both in terms of business values side as well as the thorny societal problems, using an inter-disciplinary lens with a focus on role of IS alongwith the _ of the other disciplines. I've also overtime become much much more plural in the terms of use of different types of research methods. You asked a really interesting question in terms of where do the ideas come from and how does one decide whether the project is worth pursuing: Many of my projects have been in close collaboration with industry, and I would charachterize them as broadly based on an engaged scholarship approach where I work pretty closely with the industry in different stages in the process- from problem formulation to trying to think about the problem in different ways, evaluating the alternative research designs be it _ data, primary data, experiments! And often my best ideas come from _ engagement, through interactions with people who are experiencing problems, those having very different viewpoints than the ones I may have. And ofcourse the _ in the literature or in conversations with those that have exposure to the deep inside the literature. I've also found that combining three practises- writing, thinking and presenting, to be a very powerful minics in... when you write it clarifies what you think, when you present it clarifies and challenges the way you may be thinking about a problem. And I found this to be an extremely powerful set of practices. And to be very candid, earlier in my career I might have underestimated the utility of engaging in all three simultaneously but I found them to be extremely important and effective to me. To assess whether the project is worth pursuing: I think I would typically consider 4 things. The first would be the research question _. I think tremendous emphasis on this I tend to place. Second one is: Am I passionate about the problem in question! Am I gonna have the same power and the interest to keep going at this for an extended period of time! The third aspect is the _ of the dimension the research _ feasible. And he last one I would say: often times the researches are a team process and for me it's really important to see if I'm gonna enjoy working with the collaborators on the team. So those would be the 4 things I tend to bring to _ when I think about a research project and whether it's worth pursuing.

well great question our role here thing people often think about the stream all part of or support careers along you know when I think about it as an altar or as an editor or a key criterion for the acceptance of work as contribution so when you come back to it you know the question comes down to what is contribution and Herbert Simon put it very well that the value of work can be characterized along we can be of three types the Forresters of or scholarly in terms of how the work outs to knowledge in a domain and influences spiritual work in that area the second of course is practical utility and showrooms all the work changes are the matter fares in business and society and the third of which I really liked the way Simon captures that is this notion of Hispanics the human mind is very drawn to beauty and there's something about powerful simplicity in in characterizing complex problems and characterizing complex software nominal so from the from the standpoint of right here contribution I think it's important for us to think about where are we trying to make a contribution is not may have implications for the type of all lets one chooses to work hard at work all more recently when I stepped into my role as unbiased you editor in chief of owning your sole goal and order an editorial on on like three hours and three others are typically are defined as those occurring when the answer to the research question is is a size ten Oct matter so you know the research maybe body wild baan but the question itself may be underwhelming and then it'll real like identified just sort of based on casual observation number eight burst out or are trooping through review processes and so on so forth about six main six sixty risks that people may want to be sensitive to in thinking about research question formulation and managing against like three others very briefly the first one is what I would just characterize the street lined up you may I put this story of somebody dropping the client and start someplace and focusing the search for the coin under a bright street light and when asked where did you drop the calling the calling was actually dropped elsewhere but it was easy to search for the point under the bright street light so often not standpoint you know today of course we had easy access to data sets and what have you important thing for us to check of course is what is the research question how does this matter please note I'm not saying that data sets need to be complex still being but rather that we need to safeguard against the street light up the nomination in in how we set up our own research the second of course is all well discussed again is this notion of being solution mind almond meaning that somebody's collar hammer everything looks like a nail hammer may be a method it may be a theory and and then the question really comes through whether whether that's appropriate for the problem at hand for the question another major risks to be sensitive to was this notion of gaps arctic and you know oftentimes and review processes and so on so forth the question that's asked is what is the gap but sometimes the gap itself me identifying the gap is the nuns insufficient motivation because it got me out being there at all just because it wasn't something important or trust so not advocating against got sporting but sort of coming back and saying that gap sporting and got batching all by itself saying that nobody has done this piece of work that Sarah become saw nobody compelling motivation for the work the for the issue that identified that editorial is this idea of being my opaque and problems relation that and and and this really comes down to when somebody looks at a problem from a very narrow bandaged point that's image yet in one very very narrow context the question is what's the broader prototypical the more fundamental problem structure within which districts because it may be that is very relevant work that could potentially be challenged that could potentially in for a body of work so just a very quick example you know think of somebody that's interested in the role all intelligent wearable devices to achieve all behavioral modification let's say of diet or exercise all of type two diabetic patients and one may conclude that there's no work that's been done in this space and from all the system should be designed but indeed one steps back there's a lot of fundamental work that's being done mission all in the space aboard diabetes as well as chronic diseases and the design of various interventions information systems another and there's an opportunity here to connect with it doing Gage would contribute to a more fundamental problem structure so total looking at the novel Clinton textual aspects but using that as an opportunity to link to a more fundamental prototypical problem structure challenging back and making a more fundamental contribution I think tends to serve all the research process well when I and then apply in diabetic or list and with school right I mean you can sort of come up with it all too much of excessive school where somebody is trying to answer everything about every everything about a phenomenon and that's just too much or all trying to sort of a goal after everything about nothing so this notion about nothing about everything or everything about nothing sort of getting the appropriate middle child to school and the last point I make in that editorial this this motion off on reforming gravity works in my kitchen doesn't stroke also swell and this typically occurs when people come back and say you know here's a model it's been tested again and again I'm going to go to a new context and a more distant again of course maybe there's some utility and there could be a political or replication standpoint but you know that sort of coming back and saying what type of outlets is this appropriate for a mind gauging and reforming gravity works in my kitchen and where or is that an opportunity here to take the distinctive aspects of the context and challenge our existing understanding so all of that to say are you know being a pension mitigating three hours can be extraordinarily valuable or scholar says they engaged in the research process reflection I would make us to just a couple of other one would be all over okay any feedback our products in the paper of making sure the lighting is your all before submitting work and I think it's extraordinarily helpful to look at the editorial missions of journals as well as exemplars for submitting the work and my final observation would be doing it very systematically version process many journals when there's a provision that comes forward stupidity risky at the end strong and sort of taking that provision also is extraordinarily seriously to come up with original strategy we're not trying to say quite necessary every game alright but rather a making Asians coming up with a strategy to make the paper better addressed on issues so you know mitigating against like three hours of making sure that the work is nicely the ball up shore and feedback as being in line to submitting to work selecting outlets appropriately and then systematic vision also us would be a set of practices that I maybe help scholars that's true for all of us all and I think I've done on me committed a number of others or so I would have seen this happen through paper so your point is well made and and hopefully this gives us a chance to collectively reflect a list you know I might ask you in all offers of financial alter development workshops and in our conferences and things like that and we use this as a framework to sensitize authors in in in in who are these issues and how they may be able to improve and develop that war boarding