Abstract
This essay discusses 12 theses for guiding design science research. They are aimed at strengthening the design science orientation of Information Systems, clarifying future discourses on design science research aspects of the discipline, and giving some further guidelines for design science research in Information Systems.
Some problems have such complex social, economic, or organizational interactions that they can’t be solved fully. They’ve become popularly known as “wicked problems”.
Robert W. Lucky, IEEE Spectrum, July 2009
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
Referring to the first reason, the “anxiety discourse” (King and Lyytinen 2004) regarding the academic legitimacy and credibility of the discipline has been an amazingly significant issue in information systems, guiding far too much of the evolution of the discipline.
- 2.
Hassan (2006) points out that it is more appropriate to speak about Information Systems as a field than as a discipline. The reasons are its lack of theory development and its weak boundaries. Despite this inaccuracy, I will speak below about the “IS discipline”.
- 3.
Figure 5.1 drops the normative level of the original framework of Chmielewicz (1970) and Lehtovuori (1973). The normative level is interested in “how ought things to be?” Normative statements express “You ought to want A and to achieve this you should do X if you believe that you are in a situation B.” The reason for the exclusion is that it is still a controversial question whether one can reach “ought-to” conclusions based on ”what is.”
- 4.
Interestingly, Winter (2008) applies the tenets of a 1990 edition of Chmielewicz’s book (underlying Fig. 5.1) to structure DSR. His mapping of models, methods, constructs, and theories is quite consistent with Fig. 5.1, but he associates instantiations with the normative level. This differs from my interpretation of Chmielewicz (1970) based on Lehtovuori (1974).
- 5.
Lyytinen and King (2004) also touch upon this issue when criticizing the linear science -> technology -> society model. One should note, however, that they do not go very far in their criticism when discussing the cyclical society -> science -> technology -> society model as an alternative.
- 6.
van Aken is referring here to technological rules (Bunge 1967b) of the following type: in order to achieve A do acts 1–n in a given order. One can interpret technological rules in the sense of Bunge (1967b) as expressing design process knowledge, but van Aken interprets them as technical norms in the sense of Niiniluoto (1993).
- 7.
In fact, I think that Walls et al. (1992) fall into this trap when they suggest that the information systems development life cycle is a design theory. I am not aware of any kernel theory on which it is based.
- 8.
Note that well-known classifications of IS research methods such as those of Benbasat (1985), Jenkins (1985), and Galliers and Land (1987) do not recognize anything resembling constructive research methods nor, even, does a recent review of research methods in the IS literature (Chen and Hirschheim, 2004).
- 9.
- 10.
Despite of these critical comments, I see problem solving as a useful heuristic metaphor to be used when considering alternative solutions, especially for different components of the artifact.
- 11.
Gyro Gearloose is a fictional character created by Carl Barks for the Walt Disney Company. The purpose of using this figure to symbolize inventors in the field is not to ridicule them, but quite the contrary.
- 12.
Could Berners-Lee, for example, have published his ideas on WWW in a top IS journal?
- 13.
One can, of course, observe a similar phenomenon in descriptive research, as illustrated by the extensions of the Technology Acceptance Model (Davis et al. 1989).
- 14.
Note that Iivari (1991) applied the above distinction as an ethical dimension, whereas Orlikowski and Baroudi (1991) applied a very similar distinction as an epistemological dimension. The critical perspective clearly illustrates the problem with the epistemological dimension. Critical research may apply either a positivistic or an anti-positivistic epistemology.
- 15.
Hevner et al. (2004) characterize the difference between design activities by stating that design in IS practice is routine and design as part of DSR is more innovative. This is a slightly unfortunate characterization, since design in IS practice is frequently anything but routine.
References
Avison, D. E. and A. T. Wood-Harper (1991) Information systems development research: an exploration of ideas in practice, The Computer Journal 34 (2), pp. 98–112.
Baskerville, R. (2008) What design science is not, European Journal of Information Systems 17, pp. 441–443.
Bazerman, M. H. (2005) Conducting influential research: the need for prescriptive implications, Academy of Management Review 30 (1), pp. 25–31.
Beckman, S. (2002) The nature of artifacts, in Dahlbom, B., Beckman, S. and Nilsson, G. B., Artifacts and Artificial Science, Almqvist & Wiksell International, Stockholm, pp. 45–92.
Benbasat, I. (1985) An analysis of research methodologies, in The Information Systems Research Challenge, McFarlan, F. W. ed., Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA, pp. 47–85.
Benbasat, I. and R. Weber (1996) Rethinking diversity in information systems research, Information Systems Research 7 (4), pp. 389–399.
Benbasat, I. and R. W. Zmud (2003) The identity crisis within the discipline: defining and communicating the discipline’s core properties, MIS Quarterly 27 (2), pp. 183–194.
Berger, P. and T. Luckman (1967) The Social Construction of Reality: A Treatise on Sociology of Knowledge, Doubleday, New York, NY.
Bjerknes, G., P. Ehn, and M. Kyng (eds.) (1987) Computers and Democracy, Avebury, Aldershot.
Bunge, M. (1967a) Scientific Research I, The Search for System, Springer-Verlag, New York.
Bunge, M. (1967b) Scientific Research II. The Search for Truth, Springer-Verlag, New York.
Chen, W. and R. Hirschheim (2004) A paradigmatic and methodological examination of information systems research from 1991 to 2001, Information Systems Journal 14 (3), pp. 197–235.
Chmielewicz, K. (1970) Forschungskonzeptionen der Wirtschaftswissenschaft, Stuttgart.
Chua, W. F. (1986) Radical developments in accounting thought, The Accounting Review, LXI (5), pp. 583–598.
Clemmensen, T. (2006) Whatever happened to the psychology of human–computer interaction? A biography of the life of a psychological framework within a HCI journal, Information Technology & People 19 (2), pp. 121–151.
Couger, J. D., L. F. Higgins, and S. C. Mcintyre (1993) (Un)structured creativity in information systems organizations, MIS Quarterly 17 (4), pp. 375–397.
Cross, N. (1993) Science and design methodology, Research in Engineering Design 5, pp. 63–69.
Cross, N. (2001) Designerly ways of knowing: design discipline versus design science, Design Issues 17 (3), pp. 49–55.
Davis, F. D., R. P. Bagozzi, and P. R. Warshaw (1989) User acceptance of computer technology: a comparison of two theoretical models, Management Science 35 (8), pp. 982–1003.
Dubin, R. (1969) Theory Building, The Free Press, New York.
Galliers, R. D. and F. F. Land (1987) Choosing appropriate information systems research methodologies, Communications of the ACM 30 (11), pp. 900–902.
Gardner, P. L. (1994) The relationship between technology and science: some historical and philosophical reflections. Part I, International Journal of Technology and Design Education 4 (2), pp. 123–153.
Gardner, P. L. (1995) The relationship between technology and science: some historical and philosophical reflections. Part II, International Journal of Technology and Design Education 5 (1), pp. 1–33.
Gregor, S. (2006) The nature of theory in information systems, MIS Quarterly 30 (3), pp. 611–642.
Gregor, S. (2008) Building theory in a practical science, in Information Systems Foundations: Answering the Unanswered Questions About Design Research, The 4 th ANU Workshop on Information Systems Foundations, Australian National University, Canberra, Australia.
Gregor, S. and D. Jones (2007) The anatomy of a design theory, Journal of the AIS 8 (5), pp. 312–335.
Hassan, N. R. (2006) Is information systems a discipline? A Foucauldian and Toulminian analysis, in Proceedings of the Twenty-Seventh International Conference on Information Systems, Milwaukee, pp. 425–440.
Hevner, A. R., S. T. March, J. Park, and S. Ram (2004) Design science in information systems research, MIS Quarterly 28 (1), pp. 75–105.
Iivari, J. (1991) A paradigmatic analysis of contemporary schools of IS development, European Journal of Information Systems 1 (4), pp. 249–272.
Iivari, J. (2007) Paradigmatic analysis of information systems as a design science, Scandinavian Journal of Information Systems 19 (2), pp. 39–63.
Jenkins, A. M. (1985) Research methodologies and MIS research, in Mumford, E., Hirschheim, R., Fitzgerald, G. and Wood-Harper, A.T. (eds.), Research Methods in Information Systems, North-Holland, Amsterdam, pp. 103–117.
King, J. L. and K. Lyytinen (2004) Reach and grasp, MIS Quarterly 28 (4), pp. 539–551.
Kuechler, W. and V. Viashnavi (2008) The emergence of design research in information systems in North America, Journal of Design Research 7 (1), pp. 1–16.
Layton, E. T. Jr. (1974) Technology as knowledge, Technology and Culture 15, pp. 31–41.
Lehtovuori, J. (1973) Liiketaloustieteen metodologista taustaa, Turun kauppakorkeakoulun julkaisuja, AI-6.
Lyytinen K. and J. L. King (2004) Nothing at the center? Academic legitimacy in the information systems field, Journal of the AIS 5 (6), pp. 220–246.
Lyytinen, K. and G. M. Rose (2003) The disruptive nature of information technology innovations: the case of Internet computing in systems development organizations, MIS Quarterly 27 (4), pp. 557–595.
March, S. T. and G. F. Smith (1995) Design and natural science research on information technology, Decision Support Systems 15, pp. 251–266.
Markus, M. L., A. Majchrzak, and L. Gasser (2002) A design theory for systems that support emergent knowledge processes, MIS Quarterly 26 (3), pp. 179–212.
McKay, J. and P. Marshall, P. (2007) Science, design, and design science: seeking clarity to move design science research forward in information systems, in Proceedings of the Eighteenth Autsralasian Conference on Information Systems, pp. 604–614.
McKay, J., P. Marshall, and G. Heath (2008) An exploration of the concept of design in information systems, in Information Systems Foundations: Answering the Unanswered Questions About Design Research, The 4 th ANU Workshop on Information Systems Foundations, Australian National University, Canberra, Australia.
Niiniluoto, I. (1993) The aim and structure of applied research, Erkenntnis 38, pp. 1–21.
Niiniluoto, I. (1999) Critical Scientific Realism, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
Nunamaker, J. F., M. Chen, and T. D. M. Purdin (1990–1991) System development in information systems research, Journal of Management Information Systems 7 (3), pp. 99–106.
Orlikowski, W. J. and C. S. Iacono (2001) Research commentary: desperately seeking the “IT” in IT research – a call theorizing the IT artifact, Information Systems Research 12 (2), pp. 121–134.
Pitt, J. C. (2000) Thinking about Technology, Foundations of the Philosophy of Technology, Seven Bridges Press, New York, NY.
Popper, K. (1978) Three Worlds, The Tanner Lectures on Human Values, Delivered at the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI.
Rogers, E. M. (1995) Diffusion of Innovations, 4th edn., The Free Press, New York.
Simon, H. (1969/1981/1996) The Sciences of Artificial, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
Strasser, S. (1985) Understanding and Explanation Basic Ideas Concerning the Humanity of the Human Sciences, Duquesne University Press, Pittsburg, PA.
Swanson, B. (1994) Information systems innovation among organizations, Management Science 40 (9), pp. 1069–1092.
van Aken, J. E. (2004) Management research based on the paradigm of design sciences: the quest for field-tested and grounded technological rules, Journal of Management Studies 41 (2), pp. 219–246.
van Aken, J. E. (2005) Valid knowledge for the professional design of of large and complex design processes, Design Studies 26, pp. 379–404.
Venkatesh, V., M. G. Morris, G. B. Davis, and F. D. Davis (2003) User acceptance of information technology: toward a unified view, MIS Quarterly, 27 (3), pp. 425–478.
Verschuren, P. and R. Hartog (2005) Evaluation in design-oriented research, Quality & Quantity 39, pp. 733–762.
von Hippel, E. (1988) The Sources of Innovation, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
von Hippel, E. (2005) Democratizing Innovation, The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
Walls, J., G. R. Widmeyer, and O. A. El Sawy (1992) Building an information system design theory for vigilant EIS, Information Systems Research 3 (1), pp. 36–59.
Winter, R. (2008) Design science research in Europe, European Journal of Information Systems 17, pp. 470–475.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2010 Springer-Verlag US
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Iivari, J. (2010). Twelve Theses on Design Science Research in Information Systems. 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_5
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-5653-8_5
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Boston, MA
Print ISBN: 978-1-4419-5652-1
Online ISBN: 978-1-4419-5653-8
eBook Packages: Business and EconomicsBusiness and Management (R0)