Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Design Science in the Management Disciplines

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Design Research in Information Systems

Part of the book series: Integrated Series in Information Systems ((ISIS,volume 22))

Abstract

Design science and natural science are complementary research paradigms in the management disciplines. Fundamentally the task of management is to develop, articulate, and achieve organizational goals and purposes. Design science research addresses that task by creating novel and effective artifacts that are demonstrated to improve managers’ capability to change “existing situations into preferred ones” (Simon (1996), p. 130). Natural science research addresses it by developing theories that provide deep, principled explanations of phenomena, justified by rigorous empirical evidence that managers can use to guide their actions. Designed artifacts have no special dispensation from the laws of nature; however, business organizations and the environments in which they operate are social constructions (Searle, J. R. (2006) Social ontology: some basic principles, Anthropological Theory 6 (1), pp. 12–29). They are themselves artifacts designed to achieve human goals, purposes, and intentions, influenced by and operating within the context of emergent and intentional human behavior. Furthermore, natural science explanations of how or why an artifact works or does not work may lag years behind the application of the artifact. If academic research is to make significant contributions to management practice it must utilize the results from each paradigm to guide the other. There is evidence that this integration is beginning to take place in several management disciplines including information systems and organizational science. This paper summarizes and assesses this emerging work.

Management is that for which there is no algorithm. Where there is an algorithm, it’s administration.

– Roger Needham.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 79.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 99.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 139.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Aboulafia, M. (1991) Philosophy, Social Theory, and the Thought of George Herbert Mead (SUNY Series in Philosophy of the Social Sciences), State University of New York Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alter, S. (October 2003)“18 Reasons Why IT-Reliant Work Systems Should Replace ‘The IT Artifact’ as the Core Subject Matter of the IS Field,” Communications of the AIS (12), October 2003, pp. 365-394.

    Google Scholar 

  • Argyris, C., R. Putnam, and S. Diana McLain (1985) Action Science, San Francisco, Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Argyris, C. and D. Schön (1974) Theory in Practice, San Francisco, Jossey Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barry, D. and C. Rerup (2006) Going mobile: aesthetic design considerations from calder and the constructivists. Organization Science 17 (2), 262–276.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bechtel, W. (1988) Philosophy of Science: An Overview for Cognitive Science, Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ.

    Google Scholar 

  • Benbasat, I. and R.W. Zmud (March 1999) Empirical research in information systems: the practice of relevance, MIS Quarterly 23 (1), pp. 3–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boland, R. J. and F. Collopy (2004) Managing as Designing, Stanford University Press, Palo Alto, CA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boland, R. J., F. Collopy, K. Lyytinen, and Y. Yoo (Winter 2008) “Managing as designing: lessons for organization leaders from the design practice of Frank O. Gehry”, Design Issues 24 (1), pp. 10–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bunge, M. (1979) Causality and Modern Science, 3rd rev. ed, Dover Publications, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burns, T. and G. M. Stalker (1960) The Management of Innovation, Oxford University Press, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carroll, T. N., Gormley, T. J., Bilardo, V. J., Burton, R. M., and K. L. Woodman (2006) Designing a new organization at NASA: an organization design process using simulation. Organization Science 17 (2), 202–214.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Daft, R. L. and A. Y. Lewin. (1990) Can organization studies begin to break out of the normal science strait jacket? An editorial essay. Organization Science, 1 (1), 1–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Denning, P. J. (February 1997) A New Social Contract for Research, Communications of the ACM 40 (2), pp. 132–134.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Denyer, D., Tranfield, D., and J. E. van Aken (2008) Developing design propositions through research synthesis, Organization Studies 29 (3), 393–413.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dougherty, D. (2008) Bridging social constraint and social action to design organizations for innovation, Organization Studies 29 (3), 415–434.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dunbar R. L. M. and W. H. Starbuck (March-April 2006) Learning to design organizations and learning from designing them, Organization Science 17 (2), pp. 171–178.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eisenhardt, K. M. and D. N. Sull (2001) Strategy as simple rules, Harvard Business Review 79 (1), 106–116.

    Google Scholar 

  • Feldman, M. S. and B. T. Pentland (2003) Reconceptualizing organizational routines as a source of flexibility and change, Administrative Science Quarterly 48 (1), 94–118.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fuller, R. B. (1992) Cosmography: A Posthumous Scenario for the Future of Humanity, Macmillan Publishing Company, New York, NY.

    Google Scholar 

  • Galbraith, J. R. (1977) Organization Design, Reading, MA, Addison-Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garud, R., Jain, S., and P. Tuertscher, (2008) Incomplete by design and designing for incompleteness, Organization Studies 29 (3), 351–371.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garud, R., Kumaraswamy, A., and Sambamurthy, V. (March-April 2006) Emergent by design: performance and transformation at infosys technologies, Organization Science 17 (2), pp. 277–286.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grandori, A. and Furnari, S. 2008. A chemistry of organization: combinatory analysis and design, Organization Studies 29 (3), 459–485.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hedberg, B. L. T., Nystrom, P. C., and W. H. Starbuck (1976) Camping on seesaws: prescriptions for a self-designing organization, Administrative Science Quarterly 21 (1), 41–65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hevner, A. (2007) A three cycle view of design science research, Scandinavian Journal of Information Systems 19 (2), pp. 87–92.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hevner, A., March, S. T., Park, J., and S. Ram (March 2004) Design science research in information systems, MIS Quarterly 28(1), pp. 75–105.

    Google Scholar 

  • Iivari (2007) A paradigmatic analysis of Information Systems as a design science, Scandinavian Journal of Information Systems 9 (2), pp. 39–64.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jacobides, M. G. and S. Billinger (2006) Designing the boundaries of the firm: from “Make, Buy, or Ally” to the dynamic benefits of vertical architecture. Organization Science 17 (2), 249–261.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Järvinen, P. (February 2007) Action research is similar to design science, Quality and Quantity 41 (1), pp. 37–54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jelinek, M. A., Romme, G. L., and R. J. Boland (2008) Introduction to the special issue: organization studies as a science for design: creating collaborative artifacts and research, Organization Studies 29 (3), 317–329.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jenkins, M. A. (1985) Research methodologies and MIS research, in E. Mumford, et al. (eds.) Research Methodologies in Information Systems, Elsevier Science Publishers B. V., North Holland, pp. 103–117.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaplan, A. (1964) The Conduct of Inquiry: Methodology for Behavioral Science, Crowell, San Francisco, CA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuhn, T. S. (1970) The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lawrence, P. R. and J. W. Lorsch (1967) Organizations and Environment, Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Madsen, P. M., Desai, V. M., Roberts, K. H., and D. Wong (2006) Mitigating hazards through continuing design: the birth and evolution of a pediatric intensive care unit, Organization Science 17 (2), 239–248.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • March, J. G. and H. A. Simon (1958) Organizations, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • March, S. T. and G. F. Smith (1995) Design and natural science research on information technology, Decision Support Systems, 15 (4), pp. 251–266.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • March, S. T. and V. Storey (Forthcoming 2008) Design science in the information systems discipline: an introduction to the special issue on design science research, MIS Quarterly. (32:4), pp. 725–730.

    Google Scholar 

  • Markus, M. L., Majchrzak, A., and L. Gasser (September 2002) A design theory for systems that support emergent knowledge processes, MIS Quarterly 26 (3), pp. 179–212.

    Google Scholar 

  • Michlewski, K. (2008) Uncovering design attitude: inside the culture of designers. Organization Studies 29 (3), 373–392.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, R. R. and S. G. Winter (1982) An Evolutionary Theory of Economic Change, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Perrow, C. (1967) A framework for the comparative analysis of organizations, American Sociological Review 32 (2), 194–208.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Quinn, R. W. (2005) Flow in knowledge work: high performance experience in the design of national security technology, Administrative Science Quarterly 50, 610–641.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rittel, H. and W. Melvin (1973) Dilemmas in a general theory of planning, pp. 155–169, Policy Sciences, Vol. 4, Elsevier Scientific Publishing Company, Inc., Amsterdam.

    Google Scholar 

  • Romme, A. G. L. (September-October 2003) Making a difference: organization as design, Organization Science 14 (5), pp. 558–573.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Romme, A. G. L. and G. Endenburg (2006) Construction principles and design rules in the case of circular design, Organization Science 17 (2), 287–297.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Searle, J. R. (2006) Social ontology: some basic principles, Anthropological Theory 6 (1), pp. 12–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Searle, J. R. (1995) The Construction of Social Reality, Free Press, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simon, H. A. (1977) New Science of Management Decision, Prentice Hall, Reading, PA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simon, H. A. (1996) The Sciences of the Artificial, 3rd ed., MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sinha, K. K., and A. H. Van de Ven (2005) Designing work within and between organizations, Organization Science 16 (4), 389–408.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vaast, E. and N. Levina (2006) Multiple faces of codification: organizational redesign in an IT organization, Organization Science 17 (2), 190–201.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vaishnavi, V. and W. Kuechler (2007) Design Science Research Methods and Patterns: Innovating Information and Communication Technology, Auerbach Publications, Taylor & Francis Group, NY.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Walls, J. G., Widmeyer, G. R., and O. A. El Sawy (March, 1992) Building an information system design theory for vigilant EIS, Information Systems Research 3 (1), pp. 36–59.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walsh, J. P., and G. R. Ungson (1991) Organizational memory, Academy of Management Review 16 (1), 57–91.

    Google Scholar 

  • Westerman, G., McFarlan, F. W., and M. Iansiti (2006) Organization design and effectiveness over the innovation life cycle, Organization Science 17 (2), 230–238.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yoo, Y., Boland, R. J., and K. Lyytinen (2006) From organization design to organization designing, Organization Science 17 (2), 215–229.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ziman, J. (2000) Real Science: What It Is, and What It Means, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.

    Book  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Owen Graduate School of Management, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN, USA

    Salvatore T. March

  2. Vanderbilt Owen Graduate School of Management, Nashville, TN, USA

    Timothy J. Vogus

Authors
  1. Salvatore T. March
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Timothy J. Vogus
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Salvatore T. March .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2010 Springer-Verlag US

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

March, S.T., Vogus, T.J. (2010). Design Science in the Management Disciplines. In: Design Research in Information Systems. Integrated Series in Information Systems, vol 22. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-5653-8_14

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation