Extending Design Science Research Through Systems Theory: A Hospital System of Systems

  • Richard J. TarpeyEmail author
  • Matthew T. Mullarkey
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 11491)


Labor planning and allocation are critical success factors for hospitals in today’s low margin, competitive healthcare environment. This research investigated the design and evaluation of an innovative labor planning and allocation system co-created with a practitioner team responsible for nursing labor management across departments in multiple hospitals within a North American hospital system. The research found a unique means to extend Design Science Research theory and practice using a Systems Theory approach to the design, build and evaluation of innovative labor allocation information and management systems within the existing hospital systems. The “system of systems” approach identified conflicting structures of management processes that prevented system balancing feedback loops from operating efficiently. An elaborated Action Design Research (eADR) method used a guided, emergent approach to redesign the structure, roles, and tasks of labor planning and allocation within this system of systems framework. The instantiated innovative nursing labor-management model was shown to benefit from its theory-ingrained approach to deliver a significantly improved labor allocation outcome for each level of the system.


Design Science Research Systems theory elaborated Action Design Research Hospital labor management 


  1. 1.
    Mark, B.A., Harless, D.W., McCue, M., Xu, Y.: A longitudinal examination of hospital registered nurse staffing and quality of care. Health Serv. Res. 39(2), 279–300 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Needleman, J., Buerhaus, P., Mattke, S., Stewart, M., Zelevinsky, K.: Nurse-staffing levels and the quality of care in hospitals. N. Engl. J. Med. 346(22), 1715–1722 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Welton, J.M.: Hospital nursing workforce costs, wages, occupational mix, and resource utilization. J. Nurs. Adm. 41(7/8), 309–314 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Ashforth, B.E., Mael, F.: Social identity theory and the organization. Acad. Manag. Rev. 14(1), 20–39 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Mullarkey, M.T., Hevner, A.R.: An elaborated action design research process model. Eur. J. Inf. Syst. 28(1), 6–20 (2019)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Castillo-Salazar, J.A., Landa-Silva, D., Qu, R.: Workforce scheduling and routing problems: literature survey and computational study. Ann. Oper. Res. 239(1), 39–67 (2016)MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Defraeye, M., Van Nieuwenhuyse, I.: Staffing and scheduling under nonstationary demand for service: a literature review. Omega (UK) 58, 4–25 (2016)zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Park, S.H., Blegen, M.A., Spetz, J., Chapman, S.A., De Groot, H.A.: Comparison of nurse staffing measurements in staffing-outcomes research. Med. Care 53(1), e1–e8 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Van Den Bergh, J., Belien, J., De Bruecker, P., Demeulemeester, E., De Boeck, L.: Personnel scheduling: a literature review. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 226(3), 367–385 (2013)MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    von Bertalanffy, L.: An outline of general systems theory. Br. J. Philos. Sci. 1(2), 134–165 (1950)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Boulding, K.: General systems theory-the skeleton of science. Manag. Sci. 2(3), 197–208 (1956)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Meyer, R.M., O’Brien-Pallas, L.L.: Nursing services delivery theory: an open system approach. J. Adv. Nurs. 66(12), 2828–2838 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Glover, W., Li, Q., Naveh, E., Gross, M.: improving quality of care through integration in a hospital setting: a human systems integration approach. IEEE Trans. Eng. Manag. 64(3), 1–12 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Marsilio, M., Torbica, A., Villa, S.: Health care multidisciplinary teams: the socio-technical approach for an integrated system-wide perspective. Health Care Manag. Rev. 42(4), 303–314 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Tay, H.L.: Examining trade-offs in hospital operations using a systems approach in an acute care setting. Int. J. Bus. Inf. 11(2), 264–284 (2016)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Pasmore, W., Shani, A., Francis, C., Haldeman, J.: Sociotechnical systems: a North American reflection on empirical studies of the seventies. Hum. Relat. 32(12), 1179–1204 (1982)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Shani, A.B., Grant, R.M., Krishnan, R., Thompson, E.: Advanced manufacturing systems and organisational choice: a sociotechnical system approach. Calif. Manag. Rev. 34(4), 91–111 (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Silva-Martinez, J.: Human systems integration: process to help minimize human errors, a systems engineering perspective for human space exploration missions. Reach 2(2–4), 8–23 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Harrison-Broninski, K.: Human Interactions: the Heart and Soul of Business Process Management, 1st edn. (2005)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Hulshof, P.J.H., Kortbeek, N., Boucherie, R.J., Hans, E.W., Bakker, P.J.M.: Taxonomic classification of planning decisions in health care: a structured review of the state of the art in OR/MS. Health Syst. 1(2), 129–175 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Ould, M.A.: Business Processes: Modeling and Analysis for Re-Engineering and Improvement. Wiley, Hoboken (1995)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Phalp, K.T., Henderson, P., Walters, R.J., Abeysinghe, G.: RolEnact: role-based enactable models of business processes. Inf. Softw. Technol. 40(3), 123–133 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Seo, W., Yoon, J., Lee, J., Kim, K.: A state-driven modeling approach to human interactions for knowledge intensive services. Expert Syst. Appl. 38(3), 1917–1930 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Management Department, Jones College of BusinessMiddle Tennessee State UniversityMurfreesboroUSA
  2. 2.Information Systems and Decision Sciences Department, MUMA College of BusinessUniversity of South FloridaTampaUSA
  3. 3.Workwell: Research Unit for Economic and Management SciencesNorth-West UniversityPotchefstroomSouth Africa

Personalised recommendations