Informing as a Discipline: An Initial Proposal

Introduction In 1982, adopting Nadler's (1982) terminology of work systems in industrial engineering, Gackowski gave the following definition: "informing systems are a class of work systems whose basic output is information that affects recipients' actions" (1982, p. 108). In 1999, Eli Cohen laid down the foundations of informing science and defined it as "the field of inquiry that attempts to provide a client with information in a form, format, and schedule that maximizes its effectiveness" (p. 5). Since that time, a separate field of informing science has emerged. It was fostered by the efforts of Eli Cohen, the founder of the Informing Science Institute, who established a tradition of annual international conferences, scientific and professional journals, and other forms of publication not horded but shared immediately without charge on the Web. The informing science framework encompasses Informing Environment, Information Delivery System, and Task Completion System. Informing contributes to all realms of human endeavor. The 21st century is viewed an age of information. This paper examines: 1. Is informing is a separate field of inquiry and practical endeavors? 2. Is informing science a science? 3. Is it a separate field of scientific inquiry? 4. Is it a lasting quest or will it fade within a generation? 5. What does informing need to become a separate academic discipline? It seems that informing is a field of science, art, and practical endeavors aimed at increasing communications effectiveness. Information is recognized, at least by some, as the third essence that supplements matter and energy in viewing the universe; it describes its structural aspects represented by patterns. It is an intrinsic, thus always present and objectively observable, component of all physical systems that are ascribed to their organization or lack thereof (Stonier, 1997, p. 12). In its essence informing is spreading patterns in form among humans, robots, living entities, even inanimate matter (Gackowski, 2009). Thus, informing science is a transdisciplinary physical, life, and human science. As human science it aims at expanding one's control over reality by extension of knowledge, development, and operations within the praxiological triad: effectiveness, ethics, and/or efficiency (Gasparski, 1988). De-psychologization of information and informing facilitates articulation of their scientific foundations; however psychology should never be excluded. The term science is used here as a system of knowledge in fields of inquiry with a well-defined scope: clear distinction of replicable entities and observable phenomena, relationships among them, their taxonomy, paradigms, and theory. It entails both unbiased and purpose-focused observations, systematic experimentation in pursuit of general truth, and the operating laws. Anything that can be subject to replicability with results at a statistically significant level of confidence is part of scientific knowledge; beyond this we deal with hypotheses, speculations, etc. Some of the latter may belong to individual or commonly shared beliefs, which are part of human culture, not science. Informing will also be discussed from the perspective of taxonomies of academic disciplines presented by Favero (2003), Kuhn (1996), and Biglan (1973). Today, informing widely uses information technology (IT); nevertheless its use should always be subordinated to the purpose and circumstance of informing. IT is important, but not at the forefront, as it is in computing (Denning et al., 1989, p. 1) and computer-based management information systems (Ives, Hamilton, & Davis, 1980, p. 1), or evident in current MIS textbooks. Research at MIT (Huang, Lee, & Wang, 1999) reads, Many best-practice reports witness that information technology alone is not the driver for knowledge management in companies today. …