The Formulation of Design Theories for Information Systems

  • Shirley Gregor
  • David Jones
Conference paper


Our aim in this paper is to explore in some detail how design theories for information systems can be understood and explicated. Information Systems (IS) as a discipline is concerned with action — the design, construction and use of software and systems involving people, technology, organizations and societies. In acting in building information systems it is preferable not to approach every new development problem afresh. We would like some guiding knowledge that transfers from one situation, in which action is taken, to another. Generalized knowledge of this type can be referred to as design theory.


Information System Design Theory Design Science Information System Research Information System Development 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Alexander, C., Ishikawa, S., and Silverstein, M., 1977, A Pattern Language: Towns, Buildings, Construction,Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  2. Baskerville, R. and Wood-Harper, A.T., 1998, Diversity in information systems action research methods, European Journal of Information Systems, 7: 90–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Baskerville, R.L. and Myers, M.D., 2002, Information systems as a reference discipline, Management Information Systems Quarterly, 26 (1): 1–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Burstein, F., and Gregor, S., 1999, The Systems development or engineering approach to research in information systems: an action research perspective, in: Proceedings of the 10th Australasian Conference on Information Systems, B. Hope and P. Yoong, eds., Victoria University of Wellington, New Zealand, pp. 122–134.Google Scholar
  5. Bush, V., 1945, As we may think. The Atlantic Monthly.Google Scholar
  6. Cecez-Kecmanovic, D., 1994, Engineering type information systems research: A discussion on its position and quality, Proceedings of the 5th Australian Information Systems Conference, Monash Department of Information Systems, Caulfield, Vic., 767–770.Google Scholar
  7. David, J., Gerard, G., and McCarthy, W., 2000, Design Science: Building the Future of Accounting Information Systems,SMAP.Google Scholar
  8. Davis, G., 2000, Information systems conceptual foundations: looking backward and forward, in: Organizational and Social Perspectives on Information Technology, R. Baskerville, J. Stage, and J. DeGross, eds., Kluwer, Boston.Google Scholar
  9. De Greef, H. P., and Neerincx, M. A., 1995, Cognitive support: designing aiding to supplement human knowledge, International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 42, 531–571.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Dubin, R., 1978, Theory Building. ( Rev. ed. ), Free Press, London.Google Scholar
  11. Gregor, S., 2002a, A theory of theories in Information Systems, in Information Systems Foundations: Building the Theoretical Base, S. Gregor and D. Hart, eds., Australian National University, Canberra, pp. 1–20.Google Scholar
  12. Gregor, S., 2002b, Design theory in information systems. Australian Journal of Information Systems, Special Issue: 14–22.Google Scholar
  13. Gregor, S., 2001, Theory formulation in e-commerce: Puzzles and opportunities, in Developing a dynamic, integrative, multi-disciplinary research agenda in e-commerce/e-business, S. Elliot, K. Andersen, and P. Swatman, eds., International Federation of Information Processing, pp 3–19.Google Scholar
  14. Gregor, S., and Benbasat, I., 1999, Explanations from intelligent systems: Theoretical foundations and implications for practice, Management Information Systems Quarterly, 23 (4): 497–530.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Glass, R., 1996, The relationship between theory and practice in software engineering, Communications of the ACM, 39(11), 11–13.Google Scholar
  16. Habermas, J., 1984, Theory of communicative action, in: Vol l: Reason and the Rationalization of Society, Heinemann, London.Google Scholar
  17. Heidegger, M., 1993, The question concerning technology, in: Basic Writings, Harper, San Fransisco, pp 311–341, translated from Martine Heidegger, 1954, Vortrage and Aufsatze, Gunther Neske Verlag, Pfullingen, pp 13–44.Google Scholar
  18. Iivari, J., Hirschheim, R., and Klein, H. K., 1998, A paradigmatic analysis contrasting information systems development approaches and methodologies, Information Systems Research, June: 164–193.Google Scholar
  19. Jarvinen, P., 2001, On Research Methods. Opinpajan Kirja, Tampere, Finland.Google Scholar
  20. Kasanen, E., Lukha, K., and Siitonen, A., 1993, The constructive approach in management accounting research, Journal of Management Accounting Research: 243–264.Google Scholar
  21. Klein, H. K., and Myers, M. D., 1999, A set of principles for conducting and evaluating interpretive field studies in Information Systems, MIS Quarterly, March: 67–93.Google Scholar
  22. Kwon, T. H., and Zmud, R. W., 1987, Unifying the fragmented models of information systems implementation, in Critical Issues in Information Systems Research, R.J. Boland and R.A. Hirschheim, eds., Wiley.Google Scholar
  23. Landauer, T.K., 1987, Relations between cognitive psychology and computer system design, in Interfacing thought, J.M. Carroll, ed., MIT Press.Google Scholar
  24. Lau, F., 1997, A review on the use of action research in information systems studies, in Information Systems and Qualitative Research, L. A. Liebenau and J. DeGross, eds., Chapman & Hall, London, pp. 31–68.Google Scholar
  25. March, S.T., and Smith, G.F., 1995, Design and natural science research on information technology, Decision Support Systems, 15: 251–266.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Markus, M., Majchrzak, L.A., and Gasser, L., 2002, A design theory for systems that support emergent knowledge processes, MIS Quarterly, 26: 179–212.Google Scholar
  27. Morrison, J., and George, J.F., 1995, Exploring the software engineering component in MIS research, Communications of the ACM, 38 (7): 80–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. O’Hear, A., 1989, Introduction to the Philosophy of Science, Clarendon Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
  29. Orlikowski. W., 1992, The duality of technology: Rethinking the concept of technology in organizations, Organization Science, 3 (3): 398–427.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Popper, K., 1986, Unended Quest an Intellectual Autobiography, Fontana, Glasgow.Google Scholar
  31. Rogers, E., 1995, Diffusion of Innovations. The Free Press, New York.Google Scholar
  32. Sarker, S., and Lee, A., 2002, Using a positivist case research methodology to test three competing theories-inuse of business process reengineering, Journal of the AIS, 2 (7).Google Scholar
  33. Savelson, R., Phillips, D.C., Towne, L., and Feuer, M., 2003, On the science of education design studies, Educational Researcher, 32 (1): 25–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Schön, D., 1983, The Reflective Practitioner. Basic Books.Google Scholar
  35. Simon, H., 1996, The Sciences of the Artificial. (3“ edn.). MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
  36. Sutton, R.I., and Shaw, B.M., 1995, What theory is not, Administrative Sciences Quarterly,40(3): 371–384. Toulmin, S., 1958, The Uses of Argument. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  37. Truex, D., Baskeville, R., and Klein, H., 1999, Growing systems in emergent organizations, Communications of the ACM, 42 (8): 117–123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Walls, J. G., Widmeyer, G. R., and El Sawy, O. A., 1992, Building an information system design theory for vigilant EIS, Information Systems Research, 3 (1): 36–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Weber, R., 1987, Toward a theory of artefacts: a paradigmatic base for information systems research, Journal of Information Systems, Spring: 3–19.Google Scholar
  40. Weber, R., 1997, Ontological Foundations of Information Systems. Coopers & Lybrand, Melbourne.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • Shirley Gregor
    • 1
  • David Jones
    • 2
  1. 1.School of Business and Information ManagementAustralian National UniversityCanberraAustralia
  2. 2.Faculty of Informatics and CommunicationCentral Queensland UniversityRockhamptonAustralia

Personalised recommendations