The rapid evolution of artificial intelligence, particularly Generative AI, has widened the gap between industrial practice and Information Systems research. To address this issue, this study investigates the industry-academia speed gap and proposes future research agendas to bridge this divide. We conceptualize this gap as a structural temporal asynchrony driven by distinct knowledge production mechanisms. Methodologically, we employ a computationally assisted Systematic Literature Review (SLR) that integrates Latent Dirichlet Allocation and embedding- based semantic similarity analysis to compare discourse patterns across industry news and IS academic papers. Our analysis reveals that industry and academia interpret identical phenomena through different lenses, even within shared thematic areas. Furthermore, we identify unique topic clusters that emerge exclusively within each domain. Based on these findings, we propose an expanded AI research framework by extending Padmanabhan et al. (2022) and present a research agenda directing scholars toward underrepresented yet industrially significant areas. This approach facilitates more timely and substantial contributions to the IS field while providing rigorous insights to assist in establishing corporate mid-to-long-term strategies.
목차
ABSTRACT Ⅰ. Introduction Ⅱ. Related Work 2.1. Sociotechnical Perspective: The Core Identity of IS 2.2. Taxonomy of AI-based Research in IS 2.3. AI Literature Review in IS Research Ⅲ. Methodology 3.1. Systematic Literature Review Framework 3.2. Planning: Scope and Review Protocol 3.3. Selection: Data Collection and Practical Screening 3.4. Extraction: Preprocessing and Topic Modeling 3.5. Execution: Topic Comparison and Research Type Mapping Ⅳ. Results 4.1. Topic Modeling Results 4.2. Comparison of Industry and Academia Topics 4.3. Mapping Topics to IS Research Types Ⅴ. Key Findings 5.1. Interpretation of the Industry-Academia Gap 5.2. Research Agenda for Future IS Research Ⅵ. Discussion and Implications 6.1. Implications for Research 6.2. Implications for Practice 6.3. Limitations and Future Research Directions Ⅶ. Conclusion Acknowledgement