Abstract
As the production of knowledge moves from a linear innovation model in an explanations-oriented world to a networked innovation model in a solutions-oriented world, the practice of design in engineering and industry and the practice of research in academia are getting closer and closer. This proximity is calling for a renewal of the debates on the nature of academic research, on the epistemology of design, and on the relationship between research and design. This is particularly challenging as we concentrate on the specific field of information systems. It is, also, mostly enlightening as we look into the philosophical groundings of both the design disciplines and action research. This chapter attempts to escort the reader in the examination of these issues. It starts with a brief characterization of the two main modes of knowledge production, followed by a debate on the relationships between research and design. It then puts forward a simple philosophical framework that will be used to put in perspective the designerly ways of knowing, their relationship with action research, and the resulting implications on information systems research. The chapter closes with the re-examination, under this new perspective, of some recent debates on topics such as the rigor vs relevance dilemma and the ethical dimension of action research in information systems.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Alexander, C. (1964). Notes on the Synthesis of Form. Harvard: Harvard University Press.
Alexander, C. (1971). The state of the art in design methods”. DMG Newsletter. 5(3).
Alexander, C. (1979). The Timeless Way of Building. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Alvarez, I. & Kilbourn, B. (2002). Mapping the information society literature: topics, perspectives and root metaphors. First Monday. 7(1).
Archer, B. (1992). The nature of research in design and design education. B. Archer, K. Baynes & P. Roberts, eds. The Nature of Research into Design and Technology Education: Design Curriculum Matters. Loughborough: Department of Design and Technology, Loughborough University.
Baskerville, R. L. (1999). Investigating information systems with action research. Communications of the Association for Information Systems. 2(19).
Baskerville, R. L., & Wood-Harper, A. T. (1996). A critical perspective on action research as a method for information systems research. Journal of Information Technology. 3(11), 235–246.
Boland, R. J., Renkasi, R., & Te’eni, D. (1994). Designing information technology to support distributed cognition. Organization Science. 5(3), 456–475.
Brey, P. (1997). Philosophy of technology meets social constructivism. Journal of the Society for Philosophy and Technology. 2(3–4).
Checkland, P. B. (1981). Systems Thinking, Systems Practice. Chichester: Wiley.
Chua, W.F. (1986). Radical developments in accounting thought. The Accounting Review. 61, 601–632.
Cross, N. (1999). Natural intelligence in design. Design Studies. 20, 25–39.
Cross, N. (2001a). Designerly ways of knowing: design discipline versus design science. Design Issues. 17(3). Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
Cross, N. (2001b). Design/Science/Research: Developing a Discipline. Keynote Speech, 5th Asian Design Conference, Seoul, Korea. Retrieved 08/16/2005, from http://design.open.ac.uk/people/academics/cross/DesignScienceResearch.pdf
Cross, N., Naughton, J., & Walker, D. (1981). Design method and scientific method. In R. Jacques and J. Powell, eds. Design: Science: Method, Guildford: Westbury House.
Cunha, P. R., & Figueiredo, A. D. (2002). Action research and critical rationalism: a virtuous marriage. Proceedings of the 10th European Conference on Information Systems, ECIS 2002, Gdansk, Poland.
DeMarco, T. (1997). Deadline: a Novel about Project Management. New York: Dorset House Publishing.
Descartes, R. (1961). Discours de la Méthode (avec introduction et notes par Etienne Gilson). Paris: Librarie Philosophique J. Vrin.
Dewey, J. (1938). Logic: The Theory of Inquiry. New York: Henry Holt and Co.
Figueiredo, A. D., & Afonso, A. P. (2006). Context and learning: a philosophical framework. In A. D. Figueiredo & A. P. Afonso, eds. Managing Learning in Virtual Settings: The Role of Context, Hershey, PA: Idea Group Publishing, PLC, 2006.
Gadamer, H-G. (1977). Philosophical Hermeneutics. Translated by David E. Linge, Berkley: University of California Press.
Gasson, S. (2004). Organizational ‘Problem-solving’ and Theories of Social Cognition (working paper). Last updated 11/01/2004. Retrieved 08/16/05 from http://www.cis.drexel.edu/faculty/gasson/Research/Problem-Solving.html.
Gibbons, M., Limoges, C., Nowotny, H., Schwartzman, S., Scott, P. & Trow, M. (1994). The New Production of Knowledge: The Dynamics of Science and Research in Contemporary Societies. London: Sage Publications.
Gruber, T. R. (1993). A translation approach to portable ontologies. Knowledge Acquisition. 5(2), 199–220.
Gruninger, M., & Lee, J. (2002). Ontology: applications and design. Communications of the ACM. 45(2), 39–41.
Guba, E. G. & Lincoln, Y. S. (1994). Competing paradigms in qualitative research. In K. D. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln. Handbook of Qualitative Research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Highsmith, J. (2002). What is agile software development? Crosstalk. U. S. Department of Defense.
HPS (1994). Introduction to Systems Thinking and iThink — iThink Technical Reference Manual. Hanover, NH, High Performance Systems, Inc.
Iivari, J. (1991). A paradigmatic analysis of contemporary schools of IS development. European Journal of Information Systems. Houndmills, UK: Palgrave Macmillan Ltd., 249–272.
Jones, J. C. (1997) How my thoughts about design methods have changed during the years. Design Methods and Theories, 11:1.
Kant, I. (1964). The Groundwork of the Metaphysic of Morals, New York: H. Paton.
Lanzara, G.F. (1983). The design process: frames, metaphors and games”, in U. Briefs, C. Ciborra, L. Schneider, eds. Systems Design For, With and By The Users. North-Holland Publishing Company.
LeMoigne, J.-L. (1999). Les Épistémologies Constructivistes. (2nd ed.) Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.
Lewin, K. (1946). Action research and minority problems. Journal of Social Issues, II, pp. 34–46.
Lincoln, Y. (2001). Engaging sympathies: relationships between action research and social constructivism. P. Reason & H. Bradbury, eds. Action Research: Participative Enquiry and Practice. London: Sage.
Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (2000). Paradigmatic controversies, contradictions, and emerging confluences. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln, eds. Handbook of Qualiative Research, 2nd edition, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Mautner, T. (1996). The Penguin Dictionary of Philosophy. London: Penguin Books.
Mayer, R.E. (1989). Human non-adversary problem-solving. In K. J. Gilhooley, ed. Human and Machine Problem-Solving. Plenum Press, New York.
McKernan, J. (1991). Curriculum action research. A Handbook of Methods and Resources for the Reflective Practitioner, London: Kogan Page.
Monod, E. (2002). Epistémologie de la recherché en systèmes d’information. In F. Rowe, ed. Faire de la Recherche en Systèmes d’Information. Paris: Vuibert.
Mumford, E. (1981). Values, Work and Technology. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff.
Mumford, E. (1983). Designing Participatively. Manchester: Manchester Business School Publications.
Mumford, E., & Weir, M. (1979). Computer Systems in Work Design: the ETHICS Method, NY: John Wiley.
Norman, E. (1999). Action research concerning technology and associated pedagogy, Educational Action Research. 7(2), 297–308.
Pepper, S. C. (1942). World Hypothesis: A Study in Evidence. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1942.
Pickering, A. (1992). (ed.) Science as Practice and Culture. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Popper, K. (1994). Models, instruments and truth: the status of the rationality principle in the social sciences”. In The Myth of the Framework: In Defense of Science and Rationality. London: Routledge, 154–184.
Rapoport, R. N. (1970). Three dilemmas in action research. Human Relations. 23, 499–513.
Reason, P., & Bradbury, H. (2001). Preface in P. Reason & H. Bradbury, eds. Handbook of Action Research: Participative Inquiry and Practice. London: Sage.
Rittel, H., & Webber, M. (1973). Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy Sciences. 4(1973), 155–69.
Schön, D. (1983). The Reflective Practitioner: How Professionals Think in Action. New York: Basic Books.
Simon, H. A. (1969). The Sciences of the Artificial. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Simon, H. A. (1973). The structure of ill-structured problems. Artificial Intelligence. 4, 181–201.
Suchman, L. (1987). Plans and Situated Action. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
Susman, G., & Evered, R. (1978). An assessment of the scientific merits of action research. Administrative Science Quarterly, 23 (December), 582–603.
Swepson, P. (1998). Separating the ideals of research from the methodology of research, either action research or science, can lead to better research. Action Research International, Paper 1. Retrieved 08/16/2005, from http://www.scu.edu.au/schools/gcm/ar/ari/p-pswepson98.html
Varela, F. (1992). Un Know-How per l’Ética. Roma-Bari: Gius, Laterza & Figli Spa.
Whitelaw, S., Beattie, A., Balogh, R., & Watson, J. (2003). A Review of the Nature of Action Research. SHARP. Crown Copyright.
Wittgenstein, L. (1953). Philosophical Investigations. Translated by G.E.M. Ascombe. New York: Macmillan Publishing, Co., Inc.
Wood, J.R.G., & Wood-Harper, A.T. (1993). Information technology in support of individual decision-making. Journal of Information Systems. 3, 85–101.
Wood-Harper, A. T., Antill, L., & Avison, D. E. (1985). Information Systems Definition: a Multiview Approach. Oxford: Blackwell Scientific Publications.
Wood-Harper, A. T. (1985) Research methods in information systems: using action research. In Research Methods in Information Systems. E. Mumford, R. Hirschheim, G. Fitzgerald & A. T. Wood-Harper, eds. Amesterdam: North-Holland, 169–191.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2007 Springer Science+Business Media, LLC
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
de Figueiredo, A.D., da Cunha, P.R. (2007). Action Research and Design in Information Systems. In: Kock, N. (eds) Information Systems Action Research. Integrated Series in Information Systems, vol 13. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-36060-7_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-36060-7_4
Publisher Name: Springer, Boston, MA
Print ISBN: 978-0-387-36059-1
Online ISBN: 978-0-387-36060-7
eBook Packages: Business and EconomicsBusiness and Management (R0)