Methodological Capabilities for Emergent Design

  • Carl M. Olsson
  • Jeanette Eriksson
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 8510)


In this paper we revisit emergent design and review five design oriented methodologies; action research, design research, controlled experiments, participatory design and ethnographic based approaches. Based on this review, we outline implications for the use of these methodologies in conjunction with an emergent design stance. Adopting such a stance is in line with both the exploratory way in which users embrace technology and the strong acceptance that agile software development approaches have had. It is therefore, we argue, appropriate that our research methodologies are adapted to embrace this change.


Emergent design opportunism methodological review abduction 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Gasson, S.: Co-operative information system design how multi-domain information system design takes place in UK organisations. PhD thesis, University of Warwick, Warwick Business School (1997)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Guindon, R.: Knowledge exploited by experts during software system design. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies 33, 279–304 (1990)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Khushalani, A., Smith, R., Howard, S.: What happens when designers don’t play by the rules: Towards a model of opportunistic behaviour in design. Australasian Journal of Information Systems 1(2), 13–31 (1994)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Mintzberg, H., Waters, J.H.: Of strategies, deliberate and emergent. Strategic Management Journal 6, 257–272 (1985)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Hutchins, E.: Cognition in the wild. MIT Press, Bradford (1995)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Orlikowski, W.J.: Evolving with Notes: Organizational change around groupware technology. Working paper 186, MIT Center for Coordination Science (1995)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Olsson, C.M.: Developing a mediation framework for context-aware applications: An exploratory action research approach. PhD thesis. Department of Computer Science and Information Systems, University of Limerick, Limerick, Ireland (2011)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Poppendiek, M., Poppendiek, T.: Lean software development: An agile toolkit. Addison-Wesley Professional, Boston (2007)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Schwaber, K., Beedle, M.: Agile software development with Scrum. Prentice Hall, NJ (2002)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Suscheck, C.A., Ford, R.: Jazz improvisation as a learning metaphor for the Scrum software development methodology. Software Process Improvement and Practice 13, 439–450 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Susman, G., Evered, R.: An assessment of the scientific merits of action research. Administrative Science Quarterly 23, 582–603 (1978)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hevner, A.R., March, S.T., Park, J., Ram, S.: Design science in information systems research. MIS Quarterly 28(1), 75–105 (2004)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Wohlin, C.: An Evidence Profile for Software Engineering Research and Practice. In: Münch, J., Schmid, K. (eds.) Perspectives on the Future of Software Engineering - Essays in Honor of Dieter Rombach, pp. 145–158. Springer (2013)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Simonsen, J., Robertson, T.: Handbook of participatory design. Routledge Ltd., NY (2012)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Blomberg, J., Burrell, M., Guest, G.: An ethnographic approach to design. In: Jacko, J.A., Sears, A. (eds.) The Human-Computer Interaction Handbook, Mahwah, New, pp. 964–986 (2002)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Dittrich, Y., Eriksèn, S., Hansson, C.: PD in the wild; Evolving practices of design in use. In: Proceedings of PDC 2002, Malmo, Sweden, pp. 124–134. CPSR (2002)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Lanzara, G.F.: The design process: Frames, metaphors and games. In: Briefs, U., Ciborra, C., Schneider, L. (eds.) Proceedings of IFIP WG 9.1: Systems Design For, With and By The Users. North-Holland Publishing Company, Italy (1983)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Suchman, L.A.: Plans and situated actions: The problem of human-machine communication. Cambridge University Press, New York (1987)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Jeffries, R., Turner, A.A., Polson, P.G., Atwood, M.E.: The processes involved in designing software. In: Anderson, J.R. (ed.) Cognitive Skills and Their Acquisition. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale (1981)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Schön, D.A.: The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. Basic Books, New York (1983)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Bannon, L.: Reimagining HCI Towards a more human-centered perspective. Interactions 18(4), 50–57 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Bødker, S.: When second wave HCI meets third wave challenges. In: Proceedings of the 4th Nordic Conference on Human-Computer Interaction: Changing Roles, Oslo (2006)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Yoo, Y.: Computing in everyday life: A call for research on experiential computing. MIS Quarterly 34(2), 213–231 (2010)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Dourish, P.: Where the action is: The foundations of embodied interaction. MIT Press, Cambridge (2001)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Rapoport, R.: Three dilemmas in action research. Human Relations 23(3), 499–513 (1970)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Lewin, K.: Action research and minority problems. Journal of Social Issues 2, 34–46 (1946)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Kock, N.: Information systems action research: an applied view of emerging concepts and methods. Springer, New York (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Baskerville, R., Wood-Harper, T.: Diversity in information systems action research methods. European Journal of Information Systems 7(2), 90–107 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Nunamaker, J., Chen, M., Purdin, T.: System Development in Information Systems Research. Journal of Management Information Systems 7(3), 89–106 (1991)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    March, S.T., Smith, G.F.: Design and natural science research on information technology. Decision Support Systems 15(1), 251–266 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Peffers, K., Tuunanen, T., Rothenberger, M.A., Chatterjee, S.: A design science research methodology for information systems research. Journal of Management Information Systems 24(3), 45–77 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Basili, V.R.: The role of experimentation in software engineering: past, current, and future. In: Proceedings of the 18th International Conference on Software Engineering, Berlin, pp. 442–449 (1996)Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Basili, V.R., Reiter Jr., R.: A controlled experiment quantitatively comparing software development approaches. IEEE Trans. Software Eng. SE-7(5), 299–320 (1981)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Ko, A., LaToza, T., Burnett, M.: A practical guide to controlled experiments of software engineering tools with human participants. Empirical Software Engineering, 1–32 (September 2013)Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Blandford, A., Cox, A.L., Cairns, P.A.: Controlled Experiments. In: Cairns, P.A., Cox, A.L. (eds.) Research Methods for Human Computer Interaction, pp, 1–16. CUP (2008)Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Sjøberg, D.I.K., Hannay, J.E., Hansen, O., Kampenes, V.B.: A survey of controlled experiments in software engineering. IEEE Trans. Software Engineering 31(9), 733–753 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Shadish, W.R., Cook, T.D., Campbell, D.T.: Experimental and Quasi-Experimental Designs for Generalized Causal Inference. HoughtonMifflin (2002)Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Juristo, N., Moreno, A.M.: Basics of Software Engineering Experimentation. Springer Publishing Company, Incorporated (2010)Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Kensing, F.: Methods and Practices in Participatory Design, Doctoral Thesis. ITU University, ITU Press, Copenhagen (2003)Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Sanoff, H.: Editorial - special issue on participatory design. Design Studies 28(3), 213–215 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Muller, M.J., Wildman, D.M., White, E.A.: Participatory Design. Communication of ACM 36(4), 23–28 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Kensing, F., Blomberg, J.: Participatory Design - issues and concerns. Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW) 7, 167–185 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Kuniacsky, M.: Observing the User Experience - A Practitioner’s Guide to User Research, 1st edn. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, San Fransisco (2003)Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Löwgren, J., Stolterman, E.: Design av Informationsteknik, 2nd edn., Studentlitteratur, Lund (2004) (in Swedish)Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Ehn, P., Kyng, M.: Cardboard computers: mocking-it-up or hands on the future. In: Greenbaum, J., Kyng, M. (eds.) Design at Work - Cooperative Design of Computer System, 1st edn., pp. 139–154. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale (1991)Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Rönkkö, K.: Ethnography. In: Laplante, P. (ed.), Engineering. Taylor and Francis Group, New York (2010)Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    McKay, J., Marshall, P.: Driven by two masters, serving both: The interplay of problem solving and research in information systems action research projects. In: Kock, N. (ed.) Information Systems Action Research: An Applied View of Emerging Concepts and Methods, pp. 131–158. Springer, New York (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Björgvinsson, E., Ehn, P., Hillgren, P.-A.: Participatory design and “democratizing innovation”. In: Proceedings of the 11th Biennial Participatory Design Conference, Sydney, Australia, November 29-December 03 (2010)Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Marcolin, M., D’Andrea, V., Hakken, D.: Participatory maintenance-in-use: users’ role in keeping systems alive. In: Proceedings of the 12th Participatory Design Conference, vol. 2, pp. 57–60 (2012)Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    Peirce, C.S.: Harvard lectures on pragmatism. In: Hartshorne, C., Weiss, P. (eds.) Collected Papers of Charles Saunders Peirce, vol. 5(of 8). Harvard University Press, Cambridge (1903)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Carl M. Olsson
    • 1
  • Jeanette Eriksson
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Computer ScienceMalmo UniversitySweden

Personalised recommendations