Reports of key information systems issues have been published over the last two decades in many journals. Leading IS journals (e.g., MIS Quarterly, Information and Management, among others) have published key IS management issue reports every three or four years over the last 15 years, and will probably continue to provide such reports in the future. Although these reports claim to provide decisional guidance to practitioners, researchers, consultants, etc., the authors in their experience have noted concerns about their usefulness. While not questioning the validity of the methods and analysis conducted in these studies, we address two important questions in this article: the manner of reporting of the key issue results (which might be misleading), and the relevance of the results (are they providing what they intended to?). We hope that our discussion will provide new perspectives in making resource allocation decisions to both readers and authors of key issue articles.
