IS PHD Manual August 2019

INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY MANAGEMENT
PhD PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

AND DOCTORAL STUDENT MANUAL
MSU Major Code: 6096
Michigan State University

Eli Broad College of Business
Updated August 2019
Note: Program applicants desiring further information should contact:

ITM Doctoral Program
Michigan State University
Department of Accounting and Information Systems
632 Bogue Street N270
East Lansing, MI 48824
(517) 355-7486
[email protected]
https://broad.msu.edu/phd/information-technology-management/
IS PhD Program Manual
Page 2
CONTENTS
Topic Page
I. INTRODUCTION ...........................................................................................................4
II. ENTRANCE REQUIREMENTS.....................................................................................4
III. BASIC DEGREE REQUIREMENTS..............................................................................5

A. Overview of Requirements.......................................................................................5
B. Development of Competence in the Major Area.......................................................6
C. Development of Research Competence..................................................................7
D. Competence in Economics and/or Behavioral Analysis...........................................8
E. Competence in Business Concepts..........................................................................8
F. Second Year Research Paper..................................................................................8
G. Course Requirement Summary................................................................................9
H. Example timetable for completion............................................................................9
I. Checklist and Deadlines.............................................................................................10
IV. EXPECTATIONS, ADVICE, AND FEEDBACK..............................................................10

A. Guidelines for Integrity in Research and Scholarship..............................................10
B. Faculty Expectations for Doctoral Students ............................................................11
C. Faculty Responsibilities in Mentoring and Guidance ..............................................12
D. Guidance Committee for New Graduate Students...................................................12
E. Feedback to Graduate Students...............................................................................13
F. Review of Documents in Academic Files..................................................................14
G. Departmental Funding and Awards Policies ............................................................ 14
H. Teaching Eligibility and Requirements......................................................................16
I. Criteria for Dismissal..................................................................................................17
V. THE IS COMPREHENSIVE EXAMINATION.................................................................18

A. Structure of the Examination....................................................................................18
B. Procedures Regarding the Examination..................................................................19
VI. THE DISSERTATION....................................................................................................20

A. The Dissertation Committee.....................................................................................21
B. Dissertation Proposal Defense.................................................................................21
C. Institutional Review Board Approval for Human Subjects Research....................... 22
D. Final Dissertation Presentation.................................................................................22
E. Dissertation Project: A Word of Caution..................................................................23
VII. CRITERIA FOR NOMINATION TO CONSORTIA.........................................................23
VIII. THE FACULTY ..............................................................................................................24
IX. POLICIES ON INTEGRITY AND SAFETY IN RESEARCH AND CREATIVE ACTIVITIES.24
X. CONFLICT RESOLUTION................................................................................................... 26
XI. WORK RELATED POLICIES ............................................................................................. 26
XII. UNIVERSITY RESOURCES.............................................................................................. 26

Page 3
XIII. LIST OF APPENDICES......................................................................................................28

A. ITM Student Progress Evaluation Form...................................................................29
B. Comprehensive Examination Performance Criteria.................................................31
C. Graduate Student Academic Grievance Hearing Procedures..................................33
Page 4
I. INTRODUCTION
The Information Technology Management PhD Program at Michigan State Univer-

sity provides its students the opportunity to explore the complete breadth and depth
of the general field of information technology management. The ITM Program is lo-
cated within the Department of Accounting and Information Systems (AIS), but our
students often engage with faculty in other departments around the University. ITM
is a rapidly changing domain, and our goal is to provide our students with access to
the best and broadest range of scholarship and research opportunities.
Our doctoral program places primary emphasis on the development of scholars

who intend to pursue academic careers in research universities. We expect our
students to develop competence in the general field of information technology man-
agement as well as in a chosen field of concentrated specialization. Such scholars
should be capable of generating, communicating to others, and applying knowledge
in their disciplines.
Doctoral students in our program are encouraged to design individually meaningful

curricula within the larger context of our field. Combined with our dedication to or-
ganizational research, the variety of doctoral courses available in our program offer
opportunities to our students that are not available elsewhere. Our strong working
relationships with other university programs, for example Telecommunications (TC)
and Computer Science and Engineering (CSE), broaden the variety of courses of
study our doctoral students can pursue.
Students in the doctoral program are required to commit full-time attention to our
program. Part-time enrollment is not allowed.
II. ENTRANCE REQUIREMENTS
Application to our program is based on the following materials:
1. A completed on-line application for admission to graduate studies at MSU with

fees paid. The application can be completed at: http://grad.msu.edu/apply/
2. College transcripts showing grades received while pursuing all prior undergradu-
ate degrees as well as graduate degrees, if any. Must have a Bachelors degree
and a Masters is strongly preferred. Official copies should be sent directly to the
Department of Accounting and Information Systems (see above for address and
contact information).
3. Three letters of reference from individuals who are able to appraise your per-
sonal interests, abilities, and the likelihood that you will successfully complete
our Ph.D. program. Letters should discuss evidence of research experience, if
possible.
Page 5
4. Standardized Test Scores: The Graduate Management Admissions Test

(GMAT) is preferred, but Graduate Record Exam (GRE) scores will also be con-
sidered. Students with strong scores are preferred. Applicants whose first lan-
guage is not English must fulfill proficiency requirements as defined by the Uni-
versity (for details, see https://grad.msu.edu/tap/speak or
https://grad.msu.edu/tap/first-time-tas-international). English language require-
ments for our program are the same as those for the University, but our program
does not allow provisional admission; applicants must demonstrate proficiency
before admission.
5. A written statement of personal goals. This statement should address (a) the
area(s) of information technology management in which you are interested, (b)
why you believe the program and faculty at Michigan State University fit your in-
terests, and (c) your career objectives upon completion of your degree. This
statement should be no longer than two pages (double-spaced).
6. A pre-admission interview. Before making final decisions on admission, appli-

cants are expected to talk with at least two faculty members. Ideally, we would
bring candidates to MSU for an on-campus visit. In cases where a campus visit
is not possible, we plan to conduct interviews via telephone.
An admissions committee will screen the applications. We also examine the fit be-
tween our program and the applicant’s interests based on the applicant's goal state-
ment, letters of recommendation, and previous work and/or academic experience.
Applicants passing this initial screening are then considered for acceptance by the
complete IS faculty.
Students begin our program in the Fall. We currently plan to admit students every
other year, in order to preserve an appropriately low faculty-student ratio. Admis-
sions standards and procedures conform to the equal opportunity and affirmative
action policies of MSU.
Fellowships and funding. Since we expect full-time participation in doctoral stud-

ies, we only admit students that we have funding to support. PhD students are
funded with a combination of graduate assistantships and fellowships. Depending
on availability and student interest, the graduate assistantships include both teach-
ing and research opportunities. The details of financial support vary from year to
year, and are spelled out in writing for each candidate when they are offered admis-
sion to the program.
III. BASIC DEGREE REQUIREMENTS
A. Overview of Requirements.
The Ph.D. curriculum prepares competent research professionals through con-

centration on the following related areas of study (which will be more fully de-
Page 6
scribed later):
1. The IS major field

2. An appropriate minor field
2. Research methods
3. Economics and/or Behavioral Analysis
4. Other business fields (as required by the college of business)
Thus, students must complete the following course requirements:
1. The major (four courses: ITM911, ITM912 or ACC950, ITM914, and ITM
915)
2. The minor (course requirements will vary)
3. The research component (four courses, including MGT 906 and MKT907
or equivalent)
4. Competency in economics and behavioral analysis (as required by the
college of business)
5. Business concepts coursework (as required by the college of business)
B. Development of Competence in the Major Area.
Several elements of the IS program are directed toward developing knowledge

in the general field of organizational behavior. First, all students take a series
of four core seminars that cover basic topics in the field of information technol-
ogy management. Second, each student completes a minor in a related field,
e.g., micro-economics, computer science, etc. Third, the student completes a
research component that includes the program's seminar on information tech-
nology management research methods. The culmination of this preparation is
the written comprehensive examination in Information Technology Manage-
ment.
1. The core courses:
ITM911: Seminar in management information technology management for

new doctoral students and researchers new to the field. Provides a “macro”
perspective on information technology management research.
ITM912 or ACC950: These courses introduce and explore economic theo-

ries that are used to study information technology and the economic effects
of information technology.
ITM914: Information Systems theory from a behavioral and social science

perspective. Topics covered include the individual acceptance of technol-
ogy, individual decision making, group collaboration and decision making,
training, knowledge management, and human computer interaction.
Page 7
ITM915: Research in network theory and methods, as applied to informa-

tion systems, business and organizations.
2. The minor:
One relevant field of study outside of IS is selected by each student and the
guidance committee (see Section IV C) as a minor. Examples include re-
lated disciplines, such as economics, psychology, sociology or computer
science, or related fields of business such as accounting or supply chain
management. Ideally, the minor field provides a foundation for dissertation
research.
Depending upon each student's background and previous course work, he

or she can request that some or all course work in the minor be waived.
The decision on what is most appropriate for each student will be made in
consultation with his or her guidance committee.
Typically, however, students complete three courses (9 credit hours) to sat-

isfy the minor requirement. Regardless of whether some or all course work
is waived, all students must pass competency requirements as specified by
the department certifying the minor, if so required. Students must gain ap-
proval of the certifying department and the IS guidance committee prior to
beginning minor coursework.
C. Development of Research Competence.
Pursuant to the IS Program’s dedication to research, students must develop

and display competence in research methods and the ability to pursue indepen-
dent research. At least three interrelated activities contribute to the develop-
ment of research competence.
1. Coursework - One of these activities is the completion of Management

906, the Management group's Seminar in Organizational Research Meth-
ods. In this course, social and behavioral research methods are presented
at a level appropriate for doctoral students. Another required course is MKT
907, Statistical Models in Marketing, which covers a range of advanced
statistic models and methods. These courses serve students in several PhD
programs within the college of business.
In addition to MGT906 and MKT907, students must complete two more

courses in research-methodology. To fulfill this requirement, students nor-
mally take other statistics courses such as MGT914 (“Advanced Organiza-
tional Research Methods”), or courses in Econometrics. Courses that fulfill
Page 8
this requirement can be taken from (but are not limited to) the departments
of Psychology, Communications, Educational Psychology, Political Science,
or Sociology.
D. Competence in Economics and/or Behavioral Analysis.
Students are required by the Eli Broad Graduate School of Management to

achieve competence in economic and/or behavioral analysis by completing
graduate level course work in these areas. The IS Guidance Committee estab-
lishes specific requirements. In general, this requirements can be satisfied by
taking two 800 or 900 level courses in Economics, Sociology, Psychology, or
another core discipline.
E. Competence in Business Concepts.
Students are required by the Eli Broad Graduate School of Management to know
and be able to apply certain concepts, tools and techniques of business practice.
This requirement is automatically fulfilled by students who enter the doctoral pro-
gram with an MBA or undergraduate degree from an institution accredited by the
American Assembly of Collegiate Schools of Business (AACSB). Students with-
out such background should identify appropriate coursework in discussion with
their Guidance Committee. .
F. Second Year Research Paper.
Students are required to complete an empirical research project before they sit
for their comprehensive examination. Thus, the paper is normally completed by
the end of the second summer in the program. The paper should be written un-
der the supervision of an IS faculty member, who will judge the quality of the
work and notify the Director of the IS PhD program of its successful completion.
This paper provides an opportunity for students to work on a research project in

collaboration with faculty. It also provides the basis for what may eventually be-
come a dissertation project. Thus, students are encouraged (but not required) to
enroll in ITM999 (Dissertation research) during the summer while they are work-
ing on this paper.
A typical second year paper should involve data collection and analysis, or the
creation and evaluation of an innovative IT artifact. We encourage students to
“aim high” and plan projects that could, in principle, be presentable at a confer-
ence or publishable in a journal, but external presentation or publication is not a
requirement for successful completion and faculty approval.
If the project involves collecting data from human research subjects, students
are responsible for obtaining prior approval from an Institutional Review Board for
research involving human subjects, part of MSU’s Human Research Protection
Page 9
Program (HRPP). Guidelines are available at

https://hrpp.msu.edu/help/index.html.
G. Course Requirement Summary.
Major: ITM911, ITM912 or ACC950, ITM914, ITM915
Minor: A minimum of 3 courses (9 credit hours) in a field related

to Information Technology Management.
Research: MGT906 and MKT907 plus two additional courses includ-

ing an approved statistics sequence, such as MGT914
and MKT907. (12 hours total)
Economics and/or
Behavioral Analysis: 2 courses (6 credit hours) in economics and/or behavioral
analysis (i.e., in core disciplines such as psychology, soci-
ology, anthropology, etc.).
Business
(if required): To be determined by the student Guidance Committee.
Note: Per college requirements, to be in good standing each student must at-
tain at least a 3.25 (out of 4.0) cumulative grade point average by the end of the
second full semester of enrollment and thereafter.
H. Example timetable for completion.
The following timetable shows an example of course order and times taken. It is
not a blueprint or even “typical”. Students should consult university course timeta-
bles to determine when courses will be offered.
Current students and the Faculty Advisor are an excellent source of information re-
garding scheduling of classes. IS department seminars (900-level courses) should
be taken the first time they are offered. The exact schedule will vary depending on
faculty availability.
Fall Spring Summer

Year 1 ITM911 ITM915 Start Research Paper
MGT906 (MGT914) (ITM999)
Econ/Behav Minor field
Year 2 ITM914 ITM912 or ACC950 Finish Research Paper
MKT907 Econ/Behav (ITM999)
Minor field Statistics
Year 3 Comp Exam Research Proposal defense

Page 10
Minor field (ITM999)
Year 4 Research Research Dissertation Defense

(ITM999) (ITM999)
I. Checklist and Deadlines.

The following table outlines the normal completion dates and deadlines for key
milestones in the IS PhD program.
Program Element Normal Completion Deadline

Select guidance commit- On arrival (guidance N/A
tee committee for all stu-
dents is the IS PhD com-
mittee)
Course of Study ap- End of first year End of first year, but can
proved be revised at any time
Coursework End of second year 8th year (as required by
University)
Second year paper End of second year Before comprehensive
exams can be taken
Comprehensive Exams Fall of 3rd year Fall of 4th year
Select dissertation chair & Fall of 3rd year Fall of 3rd year (can
committee change if necessary)
Dissertation proposal Summer of 3rd year Summer of 5th year
Dissertation defense Summer of 4th year 8th year (as required by
University)
IV. EXPECTATIONS, ADVICE, AND FEEDBACK
Coursework is only part of the process of completing Ph.D. requirements in the IS

program. This section contains information about additional aspects of our curricu-
lum, our expectations, and our guidance process. Where appropriate, we refer to
policies and documents prepared by the MSU Graduate School.
A. Guidelines for Integrity in Research and Scholarship
Michigan State University and the Eli Broad College of Business uphold the high-
est standards of ethics in research and scholarship. Students are expected to
conform to MSU’s Guidelines for Integrity in Research and Creative Activities:
https://grad.msu.edu/sites/default/files/content/researchintegrity/guidelines.pdf,
pages 7-10.
Michigan State University requires that all students involved in research must
complete training in the Responsible Conduct of Research (RCR). This includes
all PhD students, as well as any other student working on a research project.
Page 11
This training is mandatory. RCR training is an on-going, annual requirement.

Each student must complete the initial certification, plus a 1-hour annual re-
fresher session every year while enrolled at MSU. This includes training in the
use of Human Subjects. The details of RCR training are described in more detail
below.
B. Faculty Expectations for Doctoral Students
1. The IS group invites speakers to MSU for faculty/student colloquia or job in-
terviews. We expect that students will attend these guest presentations and
related events. Our expectation concerning student attendance is based on
our belief that we should take advantage of every opportunity to learn about
what other researchers are currently doing in the field.
2. Students are expected to attend other informal (i.e. brownbag) meetings for
IS faculty and students. These meetings provide students the opportunity to
sharpen presentation skills and practice critical inquiry in a supportive atmos-
phere.
3. Students are strongly encouraged to attend IS dissertation defense presen-

tations. In this way, students become familiar with the nature of dissertations
as well as the process through which dissertations are completed.
4. Publications are highly desirable for all of our students. They enhance the
visibility of our group, help to insure that students will be placed in first-rate
academic jobs, and involve all of our members in the same central research
process. Therefore, we encourage them vigorously. Often, class papers and
projects can form the basis for starting the publication process. The second
year research paper is also an excellent opportunity for generating a poten-
tial publication. Professors are happy to guide students who wish to pursue
such opportunities.
5. Students are encouraged to obtain funds intended specifically for graduate

students (e.g., publishers' awards; NSF grants) for their dissertation re-
search. Learning how to identify sources of support and write proposals is
encouraged.
6. Students doing field research are expected to coordinate and/or collaborate

with faculty members. Typically, faculty members provide contacts that stu-
dents pursue. Sometimes, however, students make initial contacts and visit
organizations alone or together with a faculty member.
7. Students with assistantships (either teaching or research) must be registered

for a minimum of six credit hours per semester during the regular academic
year (minimum of three credits during summer semester). These credits
must be consistent with making progress toward the attainment of the de-
Page 12
gree, and approval to take these courses must be attained from the student’s
advisor.
8. The student’s assistantship and degree program is expected to be a full-

time commitment. Outside work for pay is considered an impediment to aca-
demic progress and must be approved by the Doctoral Program Director.
9. Students are encouraged to attend national and professional conventions.

National meetings of professional organizations (e.g., ICIS, Academy of
Management, AMCIS) enable students to meet noted scholars, and provide
job placement opportunities that can be especially useful to students when
they enter the academic job market. Subject to the availability of funds, the
program will attempt to support travel for these activities.
10. We expect that students will have successfully defended their dissertation
proposal before beginning the search for an academic job.
11. We expect that students will take Comprehensive Examinations in the fall of
their third year.
C. Faculty Responsibilities in Mentoring and Guidance
Faculty are responsible for providing guidance and mentoring to graduate stu-
dents. In the IS PhD Program, our goal is to keep the program small so that fac-
ulty can work closely with each student we admit. The role of the faculty advisor
is described in MSU’s Guidelines for Graduate Student Advising and Mentoring
Relationships: https://grad.msu.edu/sites/default/files/content/researchintegrity/
guidelines.pdf, pages 3-6.
D. Guidance Committee for New Graduate Students
During the first year, each new doctoral student works with his or her guidance
committee to develop a curriculum plan. For new students, the Guidance com-
mittee is simply the current IS PhD Program committee. By starting with an ad-
visory committee (rather than a specific advisor), we hope to encourage stu-
dents to get to know more of the faculty and to feel comfortable selecting an ap-
propriate advisor as their research interests and working relationships with other
faculty evolve. With regard to general University Guidelines, the PhD Program
Director serves as the student's Guidance Committee chair.
The role of the guidance committee is to work with the student to formulate a
plan of study that meets the student's unique interests within the constraints im-
posed by department, college, and university requirements. The membership of
this committee will probably be different than the student's dissertation commit-
tee, which is formed during the latter part of the student's graduate program (af-
ter completion of the Comprehensive Exams).
Page 13
The guidance committee is also responsible for advising and approving: (a) the
students course of study; (b) the choice of dissertation advisor; and (c) the dis-
sertation committee. Students may add or remove members from their guid-
ance committee by notifying the Chair of the guidance committee in writing.
By the end of the first year, a planned course of study must be completed by the
student in consultation with the guidance committee. The plan must be entered
into the on-line system, GradPlan: https://grad.msu.edu/gradplan. This is the of-
ficial website for all doctoral student program planning, guidance committee re-
ports and changes, comprehensive and final defense reports, submission of the
dissertation to the Graduate School, and the final University degree certifica-
tion. It provides electronic circulation for checking/approvals and generates au-
tomatic emails when needed. Once entered, the plan will be approved by the
faculty advisor, the Department Chairperson, and the College Dean (or their rep-
resentatives). The course of study can be changed, but it must be completed,
since it identifies the specific courses that must be taken to complete the de-
gree.
Once the dissertation committee is formed, the members can be entered into
GradInfo (also accessible at https://gradinfo.msu.edu/. This application allows
the Graduate School to track the formation and completion of dissertations
across the University. Members can be added or changed as necessary.
E. Feedback to Graduate Students
We strongly believe that it is important for graduate students to receive periodic

feedback about their progress in our program. The purpose of this feedback is
to help each student develop to his or her greatest potential.
1. For first year students, there will be a scheduled informal session held at the
beginning of the Spring semester with the guidance committee, and a sec-
ond, formal evaluation and feedback session held near the end of the Spring
semester. Thereafter, there will be one formal session near the end of the
Spring semester with the understanding that there will be unscheduled infor-
mal contact throughout the year.
2. For formal evaluation and feedback sessions, each student will prepare a
working document of 1-2 typed pages describing past accomplishments as a
graduate student and future goals. The student will distribute an updated
copy of this document to all Guidance Committee members prior to each
spring semester evaluation session. Starting with the second year, students
are required to begin writing professional vitae and submit them as part of
their evaluation documents. These sessions are intended to provide devel-
opmental as well as evaluative feedback .
a. Listed below are the questions students should address when preparing
Page 14
their working document:
1. List the accomplishments, activities, special projects, etc. completed

since your last feedback review that you feel are pertinent to upcom-
ing feedback sessions.
2. What current activities are you engaged in? (Research, coursework,

teaching, other)
3. What future goals have you established as a student? (Research,

coursework, teaching, other)
4. Do you have any particular weaknesses that the faculty could help
you remedy? What strengths do you have that you could share with
other graduate students and faculty?
b. Our goal in these sessions is to make sure that students stay on track for
successful completion of the program, in accordance with their career ob-
jectives. Thus, feedback will be developmental as well as evaluative.
The faculty members will:
1. Review the student's rate and qualities of progress in our program in

specific detail, by evaluating the student’s research performance,
class work, teaching performance, and preparedness for research op-
portunities. Per Graduate School of Management requirements, a
written progress evaluation document (see Appendix A) will be pro-
vided to summarize this review. A copy of this document will be pro-
vided to the student and the College Dean; one will also be placed in
the student's departmental file. Optionally, the student may also place
a written response to this progress evaluation in the departmental file.
2. Interactively set behavioral goals with the student for the coming eval-
uation period. The student may record and place a copy of these
goals in his or her departmental file.
F. Review of Documents in Academic Files
Students can access their academic records by making a request from the Pro-
gram Director. If there is an error, the program director will assist the student in
researching and resolving the problem. While unusual, typical errors include
grades that have been recorded incorrectly; credits that have been transferred or
assigned incorrectly, and so on. The program director will work with the student
to ensure the speedy resolution of such problems.
G. Departmental Funding and Awards Policies
1. Graduate Assistant Funding

Page 15
Graduate Assistant funding is generally provided for five years, contingent on the
student receiving satisfactory annual evaluations. Funding beyond five years is
contingent on resource availability and Departmental needs.
In general, external scholarships, fellowships or research grants should not re-

duce internal funding. Note: There are, however, University and contractual limi-
tations on total funding, which may apply in a given circumstance. As well, fund-
ing level is contingent upon general agreement of the faculty and the department
chairperson.
2. Other Departmental Funding
Funding to support doctoral students is provided for all approved research, travel,
tuition, copying/printing, and mailing expenditures for up to a period of five years
that students are in the doctoral program; no funding support under this category
is normally provided to students after their fifth year in the doctoral program. Ap-
proval for funding must occur before the expenditure is incurred. Students should
contact the Doctoral Program Director for approval, including providing a proposal
for any major expenditure. While the department does not have a pre-set per-stu-
dent funding limit, the availability of funds for the above expenditures depends on
the current level of university and department resources, the importance of the ex-
penditure for the student’s academic success, the student’s past history in terms
of academic productivity and the use of approved resources, etc. Students will not
be denied funding merely based on the amount of resources they have consumed
in the past. Students are expected to apply for external funding whenever possible
and prior applications for external funding will be viewed favorably when consider-
ing requests for Departmental funding.
Although the department has no pre-set funding limits, the department staff in
charge of the doctoral program will keep track of student expenditures including
the following items:
 Data Purchase: Funding to pay for access to data for research (e.g., buying
data, paying participation fees in experiments, costs of mail surveys).
 Research: Funding is available for qualified research-related expenditures for

dissertation and non-dissertation research.
 Travel: Funding for travel, hotel, and registration fees is available to present a
paper in which the student is the author or a coauthor at a scholarly meeting.
Students should contact the Doctoral Program Director or their advisors regard-
ing the suitability of the conference they are planning to attend.
In addition, the Department will pay students' travel and hotel costs (two students
per room, if possible) to attend one or more approved doctoral
consortiums/colloquia for students who are making satisfactory progress toward
Page 16
completion of their degree. Selection criteria for doctoral consortia include:

academic performance, workshop performance, and progress in developing
research projects.
In addition, funding may be available from the Graduate School for travel to
conferences. See application at:
https://grad.msu.edu/sites/default/files/content/fellowships/Travel%20funding
%20application.pdf.
 Tuition: Reimbursement for tuition not covered by a GA appointment is limited to

paying for tuition for courses in a student’s program of study or for courses ap-
proved by the Director of Doctoral Program. To be eligible for tuition reimburse-
ment, a student must: (1) have a cumulative GPA not less than 3.75 at the start
of the semester in which he or she wants the tuition covered (except when the re-
quest is made for the first semester in the program); and (2) provide the Doctoral
Program Director with a semester-by-semester listing of courses taken and pro-
posed to be taken to show why additional courses beyond that covered by GA tu-
ition waivers need to be taken.
 Copying/Printing: Student budgets will be charged (current charge is five cents

per page) for all of their copying and printing outside the Department office.
 Mailing: Students can use their funding support for the cost of mailing their dis-
sertation-related materials to other institutions for the purpose of securing job in-
terviews.
H. Teaching Eligibility and Requirements
The Graduate Employees Union has entered into a collective bargaining agree-
ment with Michigan State University. This agreement provides a broad range of
rights and responsibilities, and is renegotiated periodically. The terms of the cur-
rent contract agreement are available at:
https://www.hr.msu.edu/contracts/documents/GEU2015-2019.pdf, with current
developments at: http://geuatmsu.org/.
MSU candidates for TA appointments who were required to demonstrate English pro-
ficiency as a condition for regular admission to Michigan State University must
also demonstrate that they meet a minimum standard of proficiency in spoken
English before they can be assigned teaching work that involves oral communi-
cation with undergraduate students.
Those international teaching assistants (ITAs) may meet this requirement in one of
the following ways:
• Presenting a TOEFL iBT speaking section score of 27 or higher.
• Receiving a score of 50 or higher on the MSU Speaking Test
Page 17
• Taking AAE 451 or AAE 452 (ITA language support courses) and receiving a
score of 50 or higher on the ITA Oral Interaction Test (ITAOI).
Those ITAs who received a waiver of the TOEFL or of other accepted tests of English
proficiency for admission, must also meet the requirement of proficiency in spo-
ken English before they are assigned to teaching work that involves oral commu-
nication with undergraduate students. To meet this requirement, those ITAs may
use any of three options listed above. Individual exceptions from these require-
ments (on a case-by-case basis in rare circumstances) will be considered by the
Graduate School in consultation with the ELC upon the request of the depart-
ment and with the endorsement of the Associate Dean of the College.
Before students can teach a course on their own, they must have been a TA for a
discussion section of that course and been evaluated by the professor responsi-
ble for the course as ready to teach a section on their own. MSU's Teaching As-
sistant Program (TAP) “provides a wide variety of resources and services in sup-
port of the teaching and learning development of all MSU teaching assistants.”
See http://tap.msu.edu/ for more information.
When assigned as a discussion section TA, students’ teaching performance will

be evaluated each semester by the professor responsible for the course. When
assigned to teach a course on their own, the relevant Department Chairperson
will be responsible for evaluating students’ teaching performance for each course
taught. In addition, it is important that Teaching Assistants be aware of the Code
of Teaching Responsibility adopted by MSU. This Code enumerates the teach-
ing responsibilities of instructional staff, as well as procedures that students may
use to register complaints about instructional staff. The text of the Code is avail-
able at: https://www.hr.msu.edu/policies-procedures/faculty-academic-staff/fas-
policies-procedures/academic_responsibilities.html.
Renewal of a graduate teaching assistantship is conditional on receiving a satis-

factory evaluation with respect to current and prior graduate teaching assistant-
ship assignments. Students must also be making satisfactory progress in their
degree program, as determined by the annual evaluation. Students have the
right to appeal evaluation outcomes through the process outlined in Appendix C.
Exceptions to the above teaching policies can be made at discretion of the De-
partment Chairperson responsible for staffing the course.
I. Criteria for Dismissal
We expect that all of our students have the skills and motivation to successfully
earn a PhD, and the program is structured to help them do so. We meet with
students every term to review progress, so that we can identify potential prob-
lems and help students stay on track. We have identified key “check-points” on
student progress that must be met or students may be dismissed from the pro-
gram, unless there are extenuating circumstances. Any action for dismissal re-
quires unanimous written approval by the IS PhD Committee.
Page 18
1) Failure to remain in good standing can result in dismissal. Students are ex-
pected to maintain an adequate grade point average, as described elsewhere in
this document.
2) Failure to pass comprehensive exams will result in dismissal. If students

have not passed comprehensive examination by the end of the 4th year, they may
be asked to leave the program. Rules for passing and retaking the exam are de-
scribed in the section of this document that describes the exam process.
3) Failure to make progress towards a dissertation may result in dismissal. If

students have not formed a committee and defended a dissertation proposal by
the end of the 4th year, they may be asked to leave the program.
4) Violations of academic integrity or other university policies can be grounds

for dismissal. Throughout all stages of their career at MSU, we expect the high-
est level of academic integrity in scholarship and research. The Research In-
tegrity Office is an additional source of information (http://www.rio.msu.edu), as
well as The Graduate School research and scholarly integrity webpage:
http://grad.msu.edu/researchintegrity/. All Ph.D. students are expected to com-
plete the “Responsible Conduct of Research Training” offered by the College.
Procedures for adjudicating and appealing violations in accordance with College
and University policies are outlined in Appendix C.
V. THE IS COMPREHENSIVE EXAMINATION
The IS comprehensive examination is taken by each student upon completion of

coursework in the IS major. The Second Year Research Paper must be success-
fully completed before taking the exam. Final grades must be received in all core
courses prior to taking the examination, but other college requirements (such as
Competence in Business Concepts) can be completed after the exam, if necessary.
It is expected that students will take the exam during the fall semester of their 3 rd
year. The exam must be completed by the end of the 4th year.
The exam will be scheduled during the first eight weeks of the Fall semester. It con-
sists of two written parts, usually scheduled on two consecutive days, plus an oral
exam to be scheduled after grading of the written parts is completed. Each written
part will be six hours in length, split into two 3-hour blocks to provide a break. The
date(s) and times of the exam must be arranged in advance with the IS program di-
rector. Other specifics pertaining to the comprehensive exam are as follows:
A. Structure of the Examination.
1. In the first six-hour session, students will answer four questions. Students
will choose to answer one of two questions from each of the following areas:
Page 19
a. Behavioral science
b. Network Science
c. Macro perspectives on IT
2. In the second six-hour session, students will answer one of two questions in
the Economics of Information Technology Management. For the research
methodology and critique questions, there will be a single question (no
choices):
a. Economics of information technology management

b. Research methodology (design a study)
c. Critique of a published article
3. The oral examination provides an opportunity for faculty to discuss the re-
sults of the written exam, ask additional questions of clarification, and pro-
vide feedback to the student. It will be scheduled after the written exam is
graded.
B. Procedures Regarding the Examination.
1. In the semester of the examination, a student wishing to sit for the exam
must declare his or her intent to do so, in writing, to the IS Guidance Com-
mittee.
2. Grading
a. Students must achieve an average score of 3.5 to achieve a passing

grade on each section of the exam. Each question is weighted the same
in computing the average on each section.
b. If a student fails to achieve a passing grade on a section, he or she will be

required to retake that section. In other words, if a student fails one part,
they retake that part. If a student fails both parts, they retake both parts.
c. Faculty will grade, individually, the examination items without student

names attached to them using the scale shown in Appendix B. The ab-
sence of names associated with responses makes students’ identities less
salient in grading, although, given the small numbers of persons taking the
exam, this obviously does not mean that anonymity is assured. Each fac-
ulty grades those items which he or she feels competent to grade and
then forwards his or her grades to the faculty member selected to act as
coordinator for the exam.
d. When individual grading is complete, the faculty will meet to discuss eval-
uations of responses to items and reach a consensus grade for each item
Page 20
completed by a student.
e. The oral examination provides an opportunity for students to discuss their

written exam. In cases where the student failed to achieve a passing
score, the grade may be revised upward or it may be allowed to stand.
The examination will be coordinated by the IS Guidance Committee. However,

all regular IS faculty members have the option of contributing potential exam
questions and grading the exam.
Students are urged to consult prior exam questions, available in the IS Depart-
ment office, before taking the exam. Students should also consult with IS fac-
ulty members; especially those who have taught the core courses, prior to the
time the students begin preparing for the exam.
Students should not overlook other students who have passed comps as a
source of valuable information, since the norm in our program is that students
will help each other. Strategies for studying and writing answers, especially
helpful papers and books, and so on, are available if students pursue them.
We emphasize that the comprehensive exam is not a "big final" that covers only
material encountered in core classes. Students who take comps are assumed
to be quite knowledgeable with respect to the history and traditions, controver-
sies and accomplishments, theories and applications, methods and principles,
as well as significant books and papers in the fields of the exam.
Students normally take the exam in the fall of the 3rd year, and the exam must
be passed within four years of beginning the Ph.D. program. If a student fails
the exam on the first try, he or she may retake the exam once, the next time it is
offered. A student has 12 months to retake and pass the exam.
If a student does not pass the exam and does not or cannot take the exam
again, he or she will be unable to complete the requirements for a Ph.D. Gener-
ally, the student will be terminated from the program at the end of the semester
in which the exam was last taken. Exceptions to this may be considered with
the approval of the IS faculty and IS program director.
VI. THE DISSERTATION
The Ph.D. dissertation is the capstone of our doctoral education program. When
completed it signifies individual competence as a researcher, and, as a public docu-
ment, it represents the researcher to his or her professional peers.
Dissertation projects take many different forms. Some are based on a single large
study, while others consist of a group of smaller, related projects. The dissertation
mush be original, empirical research that makes a significant contribution to theory.
Our goal is to generate publishable results that will help launch the student on a
Page 21
successful academic career. The design of the dissertation project must be ap-
proved by the Dissertation Committee.
A. The Dissertation Committee
The dissertation process is supervised by a dissertation committee composed of

at least four members, one of whom is designated chairperson. The student’s
guidance committee must approve the Dissertation committee. The dissertation
committee chairperson and a majority of the committee members must be from
the Department of Accounting and Information Systems. We expect students to
form a dissertation committee by the end of their 3rd year. No committee mem-
ber should have a conflict of interest. For example, no voting member of the
committee who is from outside MSU may, in some fashion, be connected with
the sources of funding for the student’s project. Changes to the dissertation
committee (including changing or replacing the chairperson) can be made with
the approval of the Guidance Committee.
Selection of a chairperson is based on mutual research interests between the

student and the faculty member. Thus, it is important for each student to de-
velop concise awareness of faculty research interests so that the choice of the
dissertation chairperson is appropriate for both the student and the chairperson.
The selection of faculty members for the remainder of the student's committee
should be based on the potential contributions they might make to the final prod-
uct.
Faculty members' decisions to chair or join a dissertation committee are based

on respect for the student's ideas and competence, as demonstrated by the stu-
dent's prior performance in the IS program. We look at the formation of a dis-
sertation committee as being a recognition of merit; in no sense is a faculty
member obligated to sit on a particular student's dissertation committee.
The decision to pass a student's dissertation is our final certification of that stu-
dent's professional competence. We take this certification seriously since the
quality of the dissertation reflects back upon the personal credibility of individual
committee members as well as the quality of our program as a whole.
B. Dissertation proposal defense
The first step in the dissertation process involves the development of a proposal
indicating the research topic that a student desires to examine, and the method
that he or she will use to examine it. The development of this proposal typically
involves intensive interaction between the student and his or her dissertation
committee. When committee members are generally satisfied with a student's
proposal, the committee meets with the student to decide whether to proceed to
the next step. This next step, the oral defense of the Dissertation Proposal, re-
quires the student to defend the dissertation proposal in an open meeting. Be-
cause the purpose of this requirement is to provide faculty input for the disserta-
Page 22
tion research, it should be satisfied before the majority of the research effort is
undertaken. A successful defense of the dissertation proposal is achieved when
three-fourths of the student’s dissertation committee, including the chairperson,
approves the defense. The guidance committee will report to the Doctoral Pro-
grams Office the successful completion of this requirement.
All of the members of the students’ guidance committee should be in attendance

at the defense of the dissertation proposal. The date, time, and place for the de-
fense of the dissertation proposal will be announced to the Broad School faculty
ten days in advance of the event.
With the exception of doctoral dissertation research credits, all course work
listed on the student’s approved guidance committee report must be completed
with grades reported before the student will be permitted to defend the disserta-
tion proposal.
In a closed session following the defense, the committee formally votes to deter-
mine whether the student will be allowed to proceed to the next step, Ph.D. can-
didacy and dissertation research.
C. Institutional Review Board Approval for Human Subjects Research
Students are responsible for obtaining prior approval for their dissertation re-
search from the University Human Subjects Protection Program. Research in
the College of Business is reviewed by the Social Science Insitutional Review
Board (SIRB): https://hrpp.msu.edu/contacts/about/SIRB.html. Guidelines and
procedures are available and it is the responsibility of the student to get ap-
proval. When in doubt about the need for IRB approval, it is best to file for IRB
approval and be given an exemption. This approval is generally required any
time human research subjects are involved in data collection (including surveys,
interviews, experiments, etc.) and must be obtained before data collection be-
gins.
D. Final dissertation presentation
1. The final oral presentation of the dissertation occurs in an open meeting when
the Ph.D. candidate's dissertation committee agrees that the candidate has com-
pleted an acceptable independent research project and written it up satisfactorily.
Specific policies for the conduct of the oral defense of dissertations, the format of
the dissertation, dates for submissions of the document and other procedures
must conformd to the Graduate School's specifications.
MSU only accepts electronic theses and dissertations submitted via ProQuest.
When preparing the final dissertation document, students should consult a cur-
rent copy of the Graduate School's requirements for preparation and submission
of the final dissertation document: http://grad.msu.edu/etd/.
Page 23
The dissertation presentation must be successfully completed within three years

of passing the IS comprehensive examination and within eight years of matricu-
lation. Candidates who fail to meet these guidelines must revert to student sta-
tus, and are required, by University policy, to re-enter and pass the entire doc-
toral comprehensive examination process before proceeding further.
2. Requests for hold/embargo on publication of documents submitted to ProQuest:

Students submitting a thesis/dissertation to ProQuest now can request a hold/
embargo of publication by ProQuest by contacting the Graduate School at
[email protected] or calling 517 353 3220. In response to the re-
quest, the Graduate School will send directly to the student a form that needs to
be completed and turned to the Graduate School prior to the document submis-
sion to ProQuest. The form needs to be signed by the student's major professor
and by the Associate Dean of the student's college. The request for the hold/em-
bargo may be for six months, one year or two years. Requests for a period longer
than six months must include a brief justification for the length of the requested
hold/embargo.
3. Creating an Open Researcher and Contributor ID (ORCID) at the time of submis-

sion of electronic documents to ProQuest:
At the time of submission to ProQuest, authors now have the opportunity to cre-
ate an ORCID that provides researchers with a unique identifier for linking their
research outputs and activities. An ORCID: Improves recognition of research
contributions; reduces form-filling (enter data once, re-use it often); works with
many institutions, funders, and publishers; and is a requirement of many journal
manuscript submission systems and grant application forms.
To learn more about ORCID go to: https://vimeo.com/237730655
E. Dissertation project: A word of caution
We have found that students often underestimate the time that is needed to
form an idea for a dissertation, prepare a proposal, conduct the research and
defend it. The modal time is two years. For example, the dissertation proposal
may require three to six months to draft, then another three to six months to re-
fine and acquire committee acceptance. Two weeks to one month advanced
notice is required to schedule a proposal defense. Dissertation research and
writing usually takes about a year, although additional time is sometimes
needed. Another month or two should be allowed for revisions required by final
committee recommendations made prior to the defense. Scheduling the de-
fense requires advanced notice of about two weeks. Final editorial revisions re-
quired after a successful presentation may take another month or two. In sum, it
is unrealistic to expect to complete the entire dissertation process, from proposal
draft to accepted dissertation, in less than about a year and a half. Conse-
quently, a draft of the proposal should be under initial committee review no later
than six to ten months after passing the comprehensive examination.
Page 24
VII. CRITERIA FOR NOMINATION TO CONSORTIA
Special sessions are conducted for outstanding graduate students at national con-
ventions. The purpose of these sessions is to acquaint doctoral students, on a first-
hand basis, with newly emerging ideas being developed by recognized experts in
our field. Criteria for our selection of a student include:
A. Performance as a Student.
1. Doing well in course work.
2. Making steady progress toward degree.
3. Active involvement in research.
B. Career Stage and Interest.
1. Being nearly done with coursework (i.e., after 2-3 years).
2. Evidence of advanced student interest in consortium topic.
It is not always the case that one or more students will be sent to consortia by the
Department each year. The final decision is made by the IS faculty and is based
upon whether one or more students have met the criteria for attendance. For ex-
ample, many doctoral consortia require a viable research proposal. An individual
may be invited to participate in one consortium one year and another in another
year. However, no one will be sent to the same consortium twice.
All of these criteria are subject to budgetary constraints.
VIII. THE FACULTY
The faculty of the IS program have diverse interests which, when supplemented by
the interests of other faculty on campus, provide students with an unusually broad
educational opportunity. The core faculty consist of those individuals whose teach-
ing and research responsibilities are primarily in one of the IS programs. Please
visit their web sites at http://broad.msu.edu/facultystaff/ for more a complete list of
faculty at the college of business.
IX. Policies on Integrity and Safety in Research and Creative Activities
1. Departmental Policy
Page 25
The principles of truth and honesty are fundamental to the educational process and
the academic integrity of the University. Therefore, no student shall:
a. Claim or submit the academic work of another, as one’s own.

b. Procure, provide, accept or use any materials containing questions or
answers to any examination or assignment without proper authorization.
c. Complete or attempt to complete any assignment or examination for
another individual without proper authorization.
d. Allow any examination or assignment to be completed for oneself, in part
or in total, by another without proper authorization.
e. Alter, tamper with, appropriate, destroy or otherwise interfere with the
research resources or other academic work of another person.
f. Fabricate or falsify data or results.
2. Statement on Use of Human Subjects in Research
Students whose research relates to the use of human subjects are responsible
for obtaining prior approval for their research from the University Institutional Re-
view Board (SIRB). This approval is generally required any time human research
subjects are involved in data collection (including surveys, interviews, experi-
ments, etc.) and must be obtained before data collection begins.
3. MSU Guidelines for Responsible Conduct of Research (RCR)
Michigan State University and the Eli Broad College of Business uphold the high-
est standards of ethics in research and scholarship. Michigan State University re-
quires that all students involved in research must complete training in the Responsible
Conduct of Research (RCR) Students should use the ABILITY information management
system at http://ora.msu.edu/train/ to complete their on-line RCR training. This is the
system that must be used for proper documentation of training. This includes all PhD
students, as well as any other student working on a research project. This training is
mandatory.
RCR training is an on-going, annual requirement. Each student must complete the ini-
tial certification, plus a 1-hour annual refresher session every year while enrolled at
MSU. Doctoral students are expected to complete the initial training during their first
year.
Students who fail to comply with the RCR training requirement will be considered ineligi-
ble for TA, RA or Fellowship funding until training is completed, subject to the discretion
of the PhD program director.
To satisfy the RCR training requirement, PhD students in the College of Business must
complete the training offered by the College of Business. For your convenience, the
Page 26
College will offer two sets of training sessions each year, once during fall semester and
once during spring semester. If students cannot attend the College of Business ses-
sions, they can satisfy the RCR requirements by attending RCR training sessions of-
fered by the MSU Graduate School (subject to the written approval of their PhD pro-
gram director).
In addition to these sessions, RCR training includes certification through the MSU IRB.
Participants are expected to complete IRB training before attending the RCR training
sessions. IRB training is on-line and can be completed at any time.
X. Conflict Resolution
In accordance with the provisions of Michigan State University’s Graduate Student Rights and
Responsibilities (GSRR), The Eli Broad College of Business and Graduate School of Manage-
ment has established a procedure for the receipt and consideration of student academic com-
plaints. Your doctoral program director or coordinator can provide you with the current version of
the procedure. The procedure from February 2005 is included in Appendix C, and includes the
procedure for adjudication of grievances at the department level.
XI. Work Related Policies
Most doctoral students in the College receive a graduate assistantship, with duties that
may include teaching or research performed under the supervision of a faculty member.
Graduate assistants are expected to fulfill their assigned responsibilities at a high level
of performance. For more information regarding the rights and responsibilities of gradu-
ate students at MSU, refer to “Graduate Student Rights and Responsibilities”
[http://www.splife.studentlife.msu.edu/graduate-student-rights-and-responsibilities .].
The performance of graduate assistants involved in teaching is formally evaluated at
least once per year. Teaching assistants also are governed by the agreement between
the University and the Graduate Employees Union. Information on health insurance op-
tions for MSU students is available from Human Resources [https://www.hr.msu.edu].
International students are required to take an English-language proficiency test adminis-
tered by the English Language Center [elc.msu.edu/], which also offers language in-
struction to teaching assistants and others seeking to improve their fluency.
XII. University Resources
Student Rights and Responsibilities
For information about your academic rights and responsibilities as a graduate student,
refer to the Graduate Student Handbook
[http://www.splife.studentlife.msu.edu/graduate-student-rights-and-responsibilities ].
Library Resources
The MSU Libraries have a growing collection of over three million volumes and access
to a large collection of electronic resources including full text databases and indexes to
Page 27
journal articles. The William C. Gast Business library provides services for the MSU Col-
lege of Business. Students may call Gast Business Library reference librarians to help
plan research strategies. They will consult via telephone or e-mail. If you go to the Busi-
ness Library, call beforehand to make an appointment with a librarian, so they can bet-
ter assist you.
Equal Opportunity, Non-Discrimination & Affirmative Action

Michigan State University is committed to the principles of equal opportunity, non-dis-
crimination, and affirmative action. University programs, activities, and facilities are
available to all without regard to race, color, sex, religion, creed, national origin, political
persuasion, sexual preference, martial status, handicap, or age. The University is an af-
firmative action, equal-opportunity employer. For information on MSU’s anti-discrimina-
tion policy, refer to:
https://www.hr.msu.edu/policies-procedures/university-wide/EquOpp_NonDiscrim.html.
See also the website of the Office for Inclusion and Intercultural Initiatives
(http://www.inclusion.msu.edu).
Page 28
XIII. LIST OF APPENDICES
A. IS Student Progress Evaluation Form
B. Comprehensive Examination Performance Criteria
C. Graduate Student Academic Grievance Hearing Procedures

Page 29
APPENDIX A
ITM Student Progress Evaluation Form

Page 30
Information Technology Management Program

Student Progress Evaluation Form
Student's Name Evaluation for the Year -
Student's Signature and Date of Receipt
Acceptable Unacceptable Dimension and Comments

Marginal Not Applicable
COURSEWORK
_____ _____ _____ _____ 1. Performance in IS core courses (Years 1-2)
_____ _____ _____ _____ 2. Performance in other courses (Years 2-3)
_____ _____ _____ _____ 3. Progress toward coursework and examination

completion (including minors and business compe-
tencies; Years 1-4)
TEACHING
_____ _____ _____ _____ 1. 300-level teaching performance (Years 1-4)
_____ _____ _____ _____ 2. Ability to teach independently (Years 3-4)
RESEARCH
_____ _____ _____ _____ 1. Level of participation in ongoing research (Years 1-
4)
_____ _____ _____ _____ 2. Performance in IS Second Year Research Paper

(Years 1-3)
_____ _____ _____ _____ 3. Ability to perform independent research (Years 2-4)
OTHER
_____ _____ _____ _____ 1. Proposal/dissertation progress (Years 3-5)
_____ _____ _____ _____ 2. Attendance at IS group meetings (brownbags,

dissertation proposals and defenses, colloquia;
Years 1-4)
_____ _____ _____ _____ 3. Timely progress toward degree completion (Years
1-4)
Other comments (performance compared to previous evaluations, professional presentations,

preparation for job market, etc.)___________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
Page 31
APPENDIX B
Comprehensive Examination Performance Criteria

Page 32
Not Passing Passing
1 2 3 4 5 6
Just plain B.S. Obviously unfamiliar Omitted several Shows some attempt The included material Originality in
with area content. important references. at organization. was well expressed. bringing research
Would be better data from various
Blank. Student does not No evidence of Answered the Cites supporting sources to bear
adequately know integration of question or problem research to back up problem.
Response painfully the material. material. posed. points.
padded with A well organized
details. Misses most Shows considerable Sticks to the topic. Most of the answer that covers
important points. tendency to stray. research cited. all major points.
from the point. Answer to be
Did not understand expected from Relevant information Organized before
the question or the Organization is weak. someone with a with minimum of writing and
topic. general exposure to redundancy. supplemented with
Poorly integrated in the material. cited research.
Lack of acquaintance terms of overall Organization around
with the literature. structure. Evidence clearly some theoretical
presented but not the orientation that gives
Misses many Answer is full of most germane to internal and logical
important points. the obvious. the point. cohesion.
Did not attempt to Shows a sketchy Shows a grasp of the

plan or organize. acquaintance with the problem areas.
up-to-date studies
Little or no Meaningful
comprehension of Answered from a interpretation of
what constitutes parochial point of research results.
relevant information. view.
Page 33
Appendix C
Graduate Student Academic Grievance Hearing Procedures
For the Information Technology Management Doctoral Program
Each right of an individual places a reciprocal duty upon others: the duty to per-
mit the individual to exercise the right. The student, as a member of the academic
community, has both rights and duties. Within that community, the student’s most
essential right is the right to learn. The University has a duty to provide for the
student those privileges, opportunities, and protections which best promote the
learning process in all its aspects. The student also has duties to other members of
the academic community, the most important of which is to refrain from interfer-
ence with those rights of others which are equally essential to the purposes and
processes of the University. (GSRR Article 1.2)
________________________________________________________________________________
The Michigan State University Student Rights and Responsibilities (SRR) and the Graduate Student Rights and Re-
sponsibilities (GSRR) documents establish the rights and responsibilities of MSU students and prescribe procedures
to resolve allegations of violations of those rights through formal grievance hearings. In accordance with the SRR
and the GSRR, the Information Technology Management Doctoral Program has established the following Hear-
ing Board procedures for adjudicating graduate student academic grievances and complaints. (See GSRR 5.4.)
I. JURISDICTION OF THE INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY MANAGEMENT DOCTORAL

PROGRAM HEARING BOARD:
A. The Hearing Board serves as the initial Hearing Board for academic grievance hearings involving
graduate students who allege violations of academic rights or seek to contest an allegation of aca-
demic misconduct (academic dishonesty, violations of professional standards or falsifying admis-
sion and academic records). (See GSRR 2.3 and 5.1.1.)
B. Students may not request an academic grievance hearing based on an allegation of

incompetent instruction. (See GSRR 2.2.2)
II. COMPOSITION OF THE HEARING BOARD:
A. The Program shall constitute a Hearing Board pool no later than the end of the tenth week of the
spring semester according to established Program procedures. Hearing Board members serve one
year terms with reappointment possible. The Hearing Board pool should include both faculty and
graduate students. (See GSRR 5.1.2 and 5.1.6.)
B. The Chair of the Hearing Board shall be the faculty member with rank who shall vote only in the
event of a tie. In addition to the Chair, the Hearing Board shall include an equal number of voting
graduate students and faculty. (See GSRR 5.1.2, and 5.1.5.)
C. The Program will train hearing board members about these procedures and the applicable sections
of the GSRR. (See GSRR 5.1.3.)
III. REFERRAL TO THE HEARING BOARD:

33
Page 34
A. After consulting with the instructor and appropriate unit administrator, graduate students who re-
main dissatisfied with their attempt to resolve an allegation of a violation of student academic
rights or an allegation of academic misconduct (academic dishonesty, violations of professional
standards or falsifying admission and academic records) may request an academic grievance hear-
ing. When appropriate, the Department Chair, in consultation with the Dean, may waive jurisdic-
tion and refer the request for an initial hearing to the College Hearing Board. (See GSRR 5.3.6.2.)
B. At any time in the grievance process, either party may consult with the University Ombudsperson
at https://ombud.msu.edu/. (See GSRR 5.3.2.)
C. In cases of ambiguous jurisdiction, the Dean of The Graduate School will select the appropriate
Hearing Board for cases involving graduate students. (See GSRR 5.3.5.)
D. Generally, the deadline for submitting the written request for a hearing is the middle of the next
semester in which the student is enrolled (including Summer). In cases in which a student seeks to
contest an allegation of academic misconduct and the student’s dean has called for an academic
disciplinary hearing, the student has 10 class days to request an academic grievance to contest the
allegation. (See GSRR 5.3.6.1 and 5.5.2.2.)
E. If either the student (the complainant) or the respondent (usually, the instructor or an administra-
tor) is absent from the university during that semester, or if other appropriate reasons emerge, the
Hearing Board may grant an extension of this deadline. If the university no longer employs the re-
spondent before the grievance hearing commences, the hearing may proceed. (See GSRR 5.4.9.)
F. A written request for an academic grievance hearing must (1) specify the specific bases for the
grievance, including the alleged violation(s), (2) identify the individual against whom the griev-
ance is filed (the respondent) and (3) state the desired redress. Anonymous grievances will not be
accepted. (See GSRR 5.1 and 5.3.6.)
IV. PRE-HEARING PROCEDURES
A. After receiving a graduate student's written request for a hearing, the Chair of the Department will
promptly refer the grievance to the Chair of the Hearing Board. (See GSRR 5.3.2, 5.4.3.)
B. Within 5 class days, the Chair of the Hearing Board will:
1. forward the request for a hearing to the respondent;
2. send the names of the Hearing Board members to both parties and, to avoid conflicts of
interest between the two parties and the Hearing Board members, request written chal-
lenges, if any, within 3 class days of this notification;
3. rule promptly on any challenges, impanel a Hearing Board and send each party the names
of the Hearing Board members. If the Chair of the Hearing Board is the subject of a chal-
lenge, the challenge shall be filed with the Dean of the College, or designee. (See GSRR
5.1.7.)
4. send the Hearing Board members a copy of the request for a hearing and the written re-
sponse, and send all parties a copy of these procedures.
C. Within 5 class days of being established, the Hearing Board shall review the request, and, after
considering all requested and submitted information:
1. accept the request, in full or in part, and promptly schedule a hearing.
34
Page 35
2. reject the request and provide a written explanation to appropriate parties; e.g., lack of ju-
risdiction. (The student may appeal this decision.)
3. the GSRR allows the hearing board to invite the two parties to meet with the Hearing
Board in an informal session to try to resolve the matter. Such a meeting does not pre-
clude a later hearing. However, by the time a grievance is requested all informal methods
of conflict resolution should have been exhausted so this option is rarely used. (See
GSRR 5.4.6.)
D. If the Hearing Board calls for a hearing, the Chair of the Hearing Board shall promptly negotiate a
hearing date, schedule an additional meeting only for the Hearing Board should additional deliber-
ations on the findings become necessary, and request a written response to the grievance from the
respondent.
E. At least 5 class days before the scheduled hearing, the Chair of the Hearing Board shall notify the
respondent and the complainant in writing of the (1) time, date, and place of the hearing; (2) the
names of the parties to the grievance; (3) a copy of the hearing request and the respondent's reply;
and (4) the names of the Hearing Board members after any challenges. (See GSRR 5.4.7.)
F. At least 3 class days before the scheduled hearing, the parties must notify the Chair of the Hearing
Board the names of their witnesses and advisor, if any, and request permission for the advisor to
have voice at the hearing. The chair may grant or deny this request. The Chair will promptly for-
ward the names given by the complainant to the respondent and vice versa. (See GSRR 5.4.7.1.)
G. The Chair of the Hearing Board may accept written statements from either party's witnesses at
least 3 class days before the hearing. (See GSRR 5.4.9.)
H. In unusual circumstances and in lieu of a personal appearance, either party may request permission
to submit a written statement to the Hearing Board or request permission to participate in the hear-
ing through an electronic communication channel. Written statements must be submitted to the
Hearing Board at least 3 class days before the scheduled hearing. (See GSRR 5.4.9c.)
I. Either party to the grievance hearing may request a postponement of the hearing. The Hearing
Board may either grant or deny the request. (See GSRR 5.4.8.)
J. At its discretion, the Hearing Board may set a reasonable time limit for each party to present its
case, and the Chair of the Hearing Board must inform the parties of such a time limit in the written
notification of the hearing.
K. Hearings are closed unless the student requests an open hearing, which would be open to all mem-
bers of the MSU community. The Hearing Board may close an open hearing to protect the confi-
dentiality of information or to maintain order. (See GSRR 5.4.10.4.)
L. Members of the Hearing Board are expected to respect the confidentiality of the hearing process.
(See GSRR 5.4.10.4.and 5.4.11.)
V. HEARING PROCEDURES:
A. The Hearing will proceed as follows:
1. Introductory remarks by the Chair of the Hearing Board: The Chair of the Hearing Board
introduces hearing panel members, the complainant, the respondent and advisors, if any.
The Chair reviews the hearing procedures, including announced time restraints for pre-
sentations by each party and the witnesses, and informs the parties if their advisors may
35
Page 36
have a voice in the hearings and if the proceedings are being recorded. Witnesses shall
be excluded from the proceedings except when testifying. The Chair also explains:
 In academic grievance hearings in which a graduate student alleges a violation

of academic rights, the student bears the burden of proof.
 In hearings in which a graduate students seeks to contest allegations of academic

misconduct, the instructor bears the burden of proof.
 All Hearing Board decisions must be reached by a majority of the Hearing

Board, based on a "clear and convincing evidence." (See GSRR 8.1.18.)
(See GSRR 5.4.10.1 and 8.1.18.) For various other definitions, see GSRR Article 8.)
2. If the complainant fails to appear in person or via an electronic channel at a scheduled

hearing, the Hearing Board may either postpone the hearing or dismiss the case for
demonstrated cause. (See GSRR 5.4.9a.)
3. If the respondent fails to appear in person or via an electronic channel at a scheduled

hearing, the Hearing Board may postpone the hearing, hear the case in the respondent's
absence, or dismiss the case. (See \ GSRR 5.4.9-b.)
4. If the respondent is absent from the University during the semester of the grievance hear-
ing or no longer employed by the University before the grievance procedure concludes,
the hearing process may still proceed. (See GSRR 5.3.6.1.)
5. To assure orderly questioning, the Chair of the Hearing Board will recognize individuals
before they speak. All parties have a right to speak without interruption. Each party has
a right to question the other party and to rebut any oral or written statements submitted to
the Hearing Board. (See GSRR 5.4.10.2.)
6. Presentation by the Complainant: The Chair recognizes the complainant to present with-
out interruption any statements relevant to the complainant's case, including the redress
sought. The Chair then recognizes questions directed at the complainant by the Hearing
Board, the respondent and the respondent's advisor, if any.
7. Presentation by the Complainant's Witnesses: The Chair recognizes the complainant's

witnesses, if any, to present, without interruption, any statement directly relevant to the
complainant's case. The Chair then recognizes questions directed at the witnesses by the
Hearing Board, the respondent, and the respondent's advisor, if any.
8. Presentation by the Respondent: The Chair recognizes the respondent to present without
interruption any statements relevant to the respondent's case. The Chair then recognizes
questions directed at the respondent by the Hearing Board, the complainant, and the
complainant's advisor, if any.
9. Presentation by the Respondent's Witnesses: The Chair recognizes the respondent's wit-
nesses, if any, to present, without interruption, and statement directly relevant to the re-
spondent's case. The Chair then recognizes questions directed at the witnesses by the
Hearing Board, the complainant, and the complainant's advisor, if any.
10. Rebuttal and Closing Statement by Complainant: The complainant refutes statements by
the respondent, the respondent's witnesses and advisor, if any, and presents a final sum-
mary statement.
36
Page 37
11. Rebuttal and Closing Statement by Respondent: The respondent refutes statements by
the complainant, the complainant's witnesses and advisor, if any, and presents a final
summary statement.
12. Final questions by the Hearing Board: The Hearing Board asks questions of any of the
participants in the hearing.
VI. POST-HEARING PROCEDURES
A. Deliberation:
After all evidence has been presented, with full opportunity for explanations, questions and rebut-
tal, the Chair of the Hearing Board shall excuse all parties to the grievance and convene the Hear-
ing Board to determine its findings in executive session. When possible, deliberations should take
place directly following the hearing and/or at the previously scheduled follow-up meeting. (See
Section IV.D above.)
B. Decision:
1. In grievance (non-disciplinary) hearings involving graduate students in which a majority

of the Hearing Board finds, based on a "clear and convincing evidence," that a violation
of the student's academic rights has occurred and that redress is possible, it shall recom-
mend an appropriate remedy to the Department Chair or School Director. Upon receiving
the Hearing Board’s recommendation, the Department Chair or School Director shall im-
plement an appropriate remedy, in consultation with the Hearing Board, within 3 class
days. If the Hearing Board finds that no violation of academic rights has occurred, it shall
so inform the Chair or Director. The Chair of the Hearing Board shall promptly forward
copies of the final decision to parties and the University Ombudsperson. (See GSRR
5.4.11.)
2. In grievance (non-disciplinary) hearings involving graduate students in which the Hear-

ing Board serves as the initial hearing body to adjudicate an allegation of academic dis-
honesty and, based on a "clear and convincing evidence," the Hearing Board finds for the
student, the Hearing Board shall recommend to the Department Chair or School Director
that the penalty grade be removed, the Academic Dishonesty Report be removed from the
student's records and a "good faith judgment" of the student's academic performance in
the course take place. If the Hearing Board finds for the instructor, the penalty grade
shall stand and the Academic Dishonesty Report regarding the allegation will remain on
file, pending an appeal, if any to the College Hearing Board within 5 class days of the
Hearing Board's decision. If an academic disciplinary hearing is pending, and the Hear-
ing Board decides for the instructor, the graduate student's disciplinary hearing before ei-
ther the College Hearing Board or the Dean of The Graduate School would promptly fol-
low, pending an appeal, if any, within 5 class days. (See GSRR 5.5.2.2, 5.4.12.3, and
5.5.2.2)
C. Written Report:
The Chair of the Hearing Board shall prepare a written report of the Hearing Board’s
findings, including recommended redress or sanctions for the complainant, if applicable, and for-
ward a copy of the decision to the appropriate unit administrator within 3 class days of the hear-
ing. The report shall indicate the rationale for the decision and the major elements of evidence, or
lack thereof, that support the Hearing Board's decision. The administrator, in consultation with the
Hearing Board, shall then implement an appropriate remedy. The report also should inform the
parties of the right to appeal within 5 class days following notice of the decision, or 5 class days if
an academic disciplinary hearing is pending. The Chair shall forward copies of the Hearing
37
Page 38
Board’s report and the administrator’s redress, if applicable, to the parties involved, the responsi-
ble administrators, the University Ombudsperson and the Dean of The Graduate School. All recip-
ients must respect the confidentiality of the report and of the hearing board's deliberations result-
ing in a decision. (See GSRR 5.4.12 and 5.5.2.2)
VII. APPEAL OF THE HEARING BOARD DECISION:
A. Either party may appeal a decision by the Hearing Board to the College Hearing Board for cases
involving (1) academic grievances alleging violations of student rights and (2) alleged violations
of regulations involving academic misconduct (academic dishonesty, professional standards or fal-
sification of admission and academic records.) (See GSRR 5.4.12.)
B. All appeals must be in writing, signed and submitted to the Chair of the College Hearing Board
within 5 class days following notification of the Hearing Board's decision. While under appeal, the
original decision of the Hearing Board will be held in abeyance. (See GSRR 5.4.12, 5.4.12.2 and
5.4.12.3.)
C. A request for an appeal of a Hearing Board decision to the College Hearing Board must allege, in
sufficient particularity to justify a hearing, that the initial Hearing Board failed to follow applica-
ble procedures for adjudicating the hearing or that findings of the Hearing Board were not sup-
ported by the "clear and convincing evidence." The request also must include the redress sought.
Presentation of new evidence normally will be inappropriate. (See GSRR 5.4.12.1, 5.4.12.2 and
5.4.12.4.)
VIII. RECONSIDERATION:
If new evidence should arise, either party to a hearing may request the appropriate Hearing Board to recon-
sider the case within 30 days upon receipt of the hearing outcome. The written request for reconsideration
is to be sent to the Chair of the Hearing Board, who shall promptly convene the Hearing Board to review
the new material and render a decision on a new hearing. (See GSRR 5.4.13.)
IX. FILE COPY:
The Chair of the Department shall file a copy of these procedures with the Office of the Ombudsperson and
with the Dean of The Graduate School. (See GSRR 5.4.1.)
Approved by Faculty (February 18, 2015)
38

IS PHD Manual August 2019

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

IS PHD Manual August 2019

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

IS PHD Manual August 2019

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY MANAGEMENT

PhD PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

MSU Major Code: 6096

Michigan State University

Note: Program applicants desiring further information should contact:

II. ENTRANCE REQUIREMENTS.....................................................................................4

III. BASIC DEGREE REQUIREMENTS..............................................................................5

IV. EXPECTATIONS, ADVICE, AND FEEDBACK..............................................................10

V. THE IS COMPREHENSIVE EXAMINATION.................................................................18

VI. THE DISSERTATION....................................................................................................20

VII. CRITERIA FOR NOMINATION TO CONSORTIA.........................................................23

VIII. THE FACULTY ..............................................................................................................24

IX. POLICIES ON INTEGRITY AND SAFETY IN RESEARCH AND CREATIVE ACTIVITIES.24

XI. WORK RELATED POLICIES ............................................................................................. 26

XII. UNIVERSITY RESOURCES.............................................................................................. 26

XIII. LIST OF APPENDICES......................................................................................................28

The Information Technology Management PhD Program at Michigan State Univer-

Our doctoral program places primary emphasis on the development of scholars

Doctoral students in our program are encouraged to design individually meaningful

II. ENTRANCE REQUIREMENTS

Application to our program is based on the following materials:

1. A completed on-line application for admission to graduate studies at MSU with

4. Standardized Test Scores: The Graduate Management Admissions Test

6. A pre-admission interview. Before making final decisions on admission, appli-

Fellowships and funding. Since we expect full-time participation in doctoral stud-

III. BASIC DEGREE REQUIREMENTS

The Ph.D. curriculum prepares competent research professionals through con-

1. The IS major field

Thus, students must complete the following course requirements:

B. Development of Competence in the Major Area.

Several elements of the IS program are directed toward developing knowledge

1. The core courses:

ITM911: Seminar in management information technology management for

ITM912 or ACC950: These courses introduce and explore economic theo-

ITM914: Information Systems theory from a behavioral and social science

ITM915: Research in network theory and methods, as applied to informa-

Depending upon each student's background and previous course work, he

Typically, however, students complete three courses (9 credit hours) to sat-

C. Development of Research Competence.

Pursuant to the IS Program’s dedication to research, students must develop

1. Coursework - One of these activities is the completion of Management

In addition to MGT906 and MKT907, students must complete two more

D. Competence in Economics and/or Behavioral Analysis.

Students are required by the Eli Broad Graduate School of Management to

E. Competence in Business Concepts.

F. Second Year Research Paper.

This paper provides an opportunity for students to work on a research project in

Program (HRPP). Guidelines are available at

G. Course Requirement Summary.

Major: ITM911, ITM912 or ACC950, ITM914, ITM915

Minor: A minimum of 3 courses (9 credit hours) in a field related

Research: MGT906 and MKT907 plus two additional courses includ-

H. Example timetable for completion.

Fall Spring Summer

Year 3 Comp Exam Research Proposal defense

Minor field (ITM999)

Year 4 Research Research Dissertation Defense

I. Checklist and Deadlines.

Program Element Normal Completion Deadline