Before introducing the articles in this issue, we would like to take a few moments to explain the review process at Data Base. An important aspect of our editorial philosophy is that papers should only go out for review if we feel that there is a high potential of eventual acceptance. Thus, we carefully read all submitted articles and make an assessment of whether or not to begin a review process on the article. In essence, rather than using the review process as a means of determining whether or not an article is accepted, we prefer to use the process to improve articles until they are ready for publication. What this suggests is that our acceptance rate for articles that undergo review should be rather high in comparison to other journals; however, the converse is that the rate of articles that get into the review process tends to be somewhat low. The burden is on us as editors, and on our outstanding editorial board, to make that initial assessment. While we are in no way infallible, we strive to be consistent and impartial. The reasoning behind this approach is that we do not wish to tie papers up in a review process where the eventual outcome is likely to be rejected nor do we wish to have reviewers spend time critiquing articles. Instead, we hope for both authors and reviewers, that the process will be about taking manuscripts with high potential and working to improve them. If you find that you have submitted a paper that is not sent out for review, please take no personal offense. We hope that you will submit again. We realize that our approach is quite a bit different from many journals. However, we hope to pride ourselves on a high, rather than low, acceptance rate of articles that go out for review.In this issue, we are pleased to bring you four articles. The first, by Vijayan Sugumaran and Veda Storey, proposes a new approach to software component retrieval. The authors present a prototype of their approach that uses Web and JavaBeans technologies. Veda was a long-time associate editor of Data Base and we appreciate her contribution both as an AE and as an author. The second paper, by David Gefen and Catherine Ridings, looks at how the social identity of the IT group versus the user group influences many outcomes including system acceptance. The less the perceived boundary between the two groups exists in the minds of users, the fewer the problems. The third article, by Edward Hartono, Albert Lederer, Vijay Sethi, and Youlong Zhuang, examines the factors that influence the implementation of strategic information systems plans. Using a survey of experienced planners, the authors find that deliberate planning for the implementation of the plan is one of the most important predictors of implementation success whereas greater analysis of organizational needs may actually impede the implementation of plans. The fourth article, by Ginny Ooi and Christina Soh, employs activity-based costing approaches to predict the man-month requirements and costs of software development projects. The authors compare the success of the ABC approach to other well-known approaches, such as COCOMO and FPA.