Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Enacting Research Methods in Information Systems pp 43–103Cite as

Palgrave Macmillan

A Critical Analysis of Decision Support Systems Research Revisited: The Rise of Design Science

  • Chapter

Abstract

Decision support systems (DSS) is the area of the information systems (IS) discipline that is focused on supporting and improving managerial decision making. In 2005 the Journal of Information Technology (JIT) published our paper that critically analyzed DSS research from 1990 to 2003 (Arnott and Pervan, 2005). That paper used bibliometric content analysis as its method and analyzed 1020 articles in 14 journals. The analysis illuminated a vibrant and important part of IS research. Personal DSS and group support systems (GSS) dominated DSS research and two-thirds of DSS research was empirical, a higher proportion than general IS research. Interpretive DSS research was growing from a low base while design-science research (DSR) and laboratory experiments were major research categories. Unfortunately, it was found that DSS research to 2003 was relatively poorly founded on judgment and decision-making theory and faced what was described as ‘a crisis of relevance.’

The contribution of the authors was equal

This is a preview of subscription content, 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   84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   109.99
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

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Alavi, M. and Carlson, P. (1992). A Review of MIS Research and Disciplinary Development, Journal of Management Information Systems 8(4): 45–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anthony, R.N. (1965). Planning and Control Systems: A framework for analysis, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arnott, D. and Pervan, G. (2005). A Critical Analysis of Decision Support Systems Research, Journal of Information Technology 20(2): 67–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arnott, D. and Pervan, G. (2008). Eight Key Issues for the Decision Support Systems Discipline, Decision Support Systems 44(3): 657–672.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arnott, D. and Pervan, G. (2010). How Relevant is Fieldwork to DSS Design-Science Research? in A. Respicio, F. Adam, G. Phillips-Wren, C Teixeira and J. Telhada (eds.) Bridging the Socio-Technical Gap in Decision Support Systems: Challenges for the next decade, Amsterdam: IOS Press, pp. 199–210.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arnott, D. and Pervan, G. (2012). Design Science in Decision Support Systems Research: An assessment using the Hevner, March, Park, and Ram guidelines, Journal of the Association for Information Systems 13(11): 923–949.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arnott, D., Pervan, G. and Dodson, G. (2005). Who Pays for Decision Support Systems Research? Review, Directions and Issues, Communications of the Association for Information Systems 16: 356–380.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baskerville, R. (2008). What Design Science is Not, European Journal of Information Systems 17(5): 441–443.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Benbasat, I. and Barki, H. (2007). Quo Vadis, TAM? Journal of the Association for Information Systems 8(4): 211–218.

    Google Scholar 

  • Benbasat, I. and Nault, B. (1990). An Evaluation of Empirical Research in Managerial Support Systems, Decision Support Systems 6(3): 203–226.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bragge, J., Korhonen, P., Wallenius, H. and Wallenius, J. (2012). Scholarly Communities of Research in Multiple Criteria Decision Making: A bibliometric research profiling study, International Journal of Information Technology and Decision Making 11(2): 401–426.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Briggs, R.O., de Vreede, G.-J. and Nunamaker, Jr. J.F. (2003). Collaboration engineering with ThinkLets to Pursue Sustained Success with Group Support Systems, Journal of Management Information Systems 19(4): 31–64.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, B., Court, D. and Willmott, P. (2013). Mobilizing your C-suite for Big Data Analytics, McKinsey Quarterly, November.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cavaye, A.L.M. (1996). Case Study Research: A multi-faceted research approach for IS, Information Systems Journal 6(3): 227–242.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen, H., Chiang, R. and Storey, V. (2012). Business Intelligence and Analytics: From big data to big impact, MIS Quarterly 36(4): 1165–1188.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen, W.S. and Hirschheim, R. (2004). A Paradigmatic and Methodological Examination of Information Systems Research from 1991 to 2001, Information Systems Journal 14(3): 197–235.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chiang, R.H.L., Goes, P. and Stohr, E.A. (2012). Business Intelligence and Analytics Education, and Program Development: A unique opportunity for the information systems discipline, ACM Transactions on Management Information Systems 3(3): 1–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clark, Jr T.D., Jones, M.C. and Armstrong, C.P. (2007). The Dynamic Structure of Management Support Systems: Theory development, research focus, and direction, MIS Quarterly 31(3): 579–615.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davenport, T.H. (2006). Competing on Analytics, Harvard Business Review 84(1): 98–107.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davenport, T.H. and Harris, J.G. (2007). Competing on Analytics: The new science of winning, Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davis, F.D. (1989). Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, and User Acceptance of Information Technology, MIS Quarterly 13(3): 319–339.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Delen, D. and Crossland, M.D. (2008). Seeding the Survey and Analysis of Research Literature with Text Mining, Expert Systems with Applications 34(3): 1707–1720.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DeLone, W.H. and McLean, E.R. (2003). The DeLone and McLean Model of Information Systems Success: A ten-year update, Journal of Management Information Systems 19(4): 9–30.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dennis, A.R., Carte, T.A. and Kelly, G.G. (2003). Breaking the Rules: Success and failure in groupware-supported business process reengineering, Decision Support Systems 36(1): 31–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dennis, A.R., Tyran, C.K., Vogel, D.R. and Nunamaker, Jr J.F. (1997). Group Support Systems for Strategic Planning, Journal of Management Information Systems 14(1): 155–184.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Galliers, R.D. (1991). Choosing Appropriate Information Systems Research Approaches: A revised taxonomy, in H.-E. Nissen, H.K. Klein and R. Hirschheim (eds.) Information Systems Research: Contemporary approaches and emergent traditions, Amsterdam: North-Holland, pp. 327–345.

    Google Scholar 

  • Galliers, R.D. and Meadows, M. (2003). A Discipline Divided: Globalization and parochialism in information systems research, Communications of the Association for Information Systems 11: 108–117.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gartner (2007). Creating Enterprise Leverage: The 2007 CIO agenda (Gartner EXP CIO Report), Stamford, CT: Gartner Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gartner (2008). Gartner says worldwide business intelligence platform market grew 13 percent in 2007, Gartner Newsroom, [WWW document] http://www.gartner.com/it/page.jsp?id=700410 (accessed 7 November 2012).

  • Gartner (2009). Gartner says worldwide business intelligence, analytics and performance management grew 22 percent in 2008, Gartner Newsroom, [WWW document] http://www.gartner.com/it/page.jsp?id=1017812 (accessed 7 November 2012).

  • Gartner (2010). Gartner says worldwide business intelligence, analytics and performance management software market grew 4 percent in 2009, Gartner Newsroom, [WWW document] http://www.gartner.com/it/page.jsp?id=1357514 (accessed 7 November 2012).

  • Gartner (2011). Gartner says worldwide business intelligence, analytics and performance management software market surpassed the $10 billion mark in 2010, Gartner Newsroom, [WWW document] http://www.gartner.com/it/page.jsp?id=1642714 (accessed 7 November 2012).

  • Gartner (2012a). Amplifying the Enterprise: The 2012 Gartner CIO agenda report, Stamford, CT: Gartner Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gartner (2012b). Gartner says worldwide business intelligence, analytics and performance management software market surpassed the $12 billion mark in 2011, Gartner Newsroom, [WWW document] http://www.gartner.com/it/page.jsp?id=1971516 (accessed 7 November 2012).

  • Gartner (2013a). Gartner predicts business intelligence and analytics will remain top focus for CIOs through 2017, Gartner Newsroom, [WWW document] http://www.gartner.com/newsroom/id/2637615 (accessed 18 February 2014).

  • Gartner (2013b). Gartner says worldwide business intelligence software revenue to grow 7 percent in 2013, Gartner Newsroom, [WWW document] http://www.gartner.com/newsroom/id/2340216 (accessed 18 February 2014).

  • Germonprez, M., Hovorka, D. and Gal, U. (2011). Secondary Design: A case of behavioral design science research, Journal of the Association for Information Systems 12(10): 662–683.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goodhue, D.L. and Thompson, R.L. (1995). Task-Technology Fit and Individual Performance, MIS Quarterly 19(2): 213–236.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gorry, G.A. and Scott Morton, M.S. (1971). A Framework for Management Information Systems, Sloan Management Review 13(1): 1–22.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gottschalk, P. (2000). Predictors of IT Support For Knowledge Management in the Professions: An empirical study of law firms in Norway, Journal of Information Technology 15(1): 69–78.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gregor, S. and Jones, D. (2007). The Anatomy of a Design Theory, Journal of the Association for Information Systems 8(5): 312–335.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guo, Z. and Sheffield, J. (2008). A Paradigmatic and Methodological Examination of Knowledge Management Research: 2000 to 2004, Decision Support Systems 44(3): 673–688.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hevner, A.R. (2007). The Three Cycle View of Design Science Research, Scandinavian Journal of Information Systems 19(2): 87–92.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hevner, A.R., March, S.T., Park, J. and Ram, S. (2004). Design Science in Information Systems Research, MIS Quarterly 28(1): 75–106.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hirschheim, R. (2007). Introduction to the Special Issue on ‘Quo Vadis TAM — Issues and reflections on technology acceptance research’, Journal of the Association for Information Systems 8(4): 203–205.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hosack, B., Hall, D., Paradice, D. and Courtney, J.F. (2012). A Look Toward the Future: Decision support is alive and well, Journal of the Association for Information Systems 13(5): 315–340.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hwang, H.-G., Ku, C.-Y., Yen, D. and Cheng, C.C. (2004). Critical Factors Influencing the Adoption of Data Warehouse Technology: A study of the banking industry in Taiwan, Decision Support Systems 37(1): 1–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Indulska, M. and Recker, J.C. (2008). Design Science in IS Research: A literature analysis, in S. Gregor and S. Ho (eds.) Proceedings of the 4th Biennial ANU Workshop on Information Systems Foundations, Canberra, Australia: ANU.

    Google Scholar 

  • Iivari, J. (2007). A Paradigmatic Analysis of Information Systems as a Design Science, Scandinavian Journal of Information Systems 19(2): 39–64.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jourdan, Z., Rainer, R.K. and Marshall, T.E. (2008). Business Intelligence: An analysis of the literature, Information Systems Management 25(2): 121–131.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kahneman, D. (2011). Thinking Fast and Slow, New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuechler, W. and Vaishnavi, V. (2012). A Framework for Theory Development in Design Science Research: Multiple perspectives, Journal of the Association for Information Systems 13(6): 395–423.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, A.S. (2010). Retrospect and Prospect: Information systems research in the last and next 25 years, Journal of Information Technology 25(4): 336–348.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leidner, D.E., Carlsson, S., Elam, J. and Corrales, M. (1999). Mexican and Swedish Managers’ Perceptions of the Impact of EIS on Organizational Intelligence, Decision Making, and Structure, Decision Sciences 30(3): 633–658.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lewin, K. (1943). Defining the ‘Field at a Given Time’, Psychological Review 50(3): 292–310.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lipshitz, R. and Bar-Ilan, O. (1996). How Problems are Solved: Reconsidering the phase theorem, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 65(1): 48–60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • March, S. and Smith, G.F. (1995). Design and Natural Science Research on Information Technology, Decision Support Systems 15(4): 251–266.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marginson, D., King, M. and McAulay, L. (2000). Executives’ Use of Information Technology: Comparison of electronic mail and an accounting information system, Journal of Information Technology 15(2): 149–164.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McAfee, A. and Brynjolfsson, E. (2012). Big Data: The management revolution, Harvard Business Review (October): 61–68.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nandhakumar, J. (1996). Design for Success?: Critical success factors in executive information systems development, European Journal of Information Systems 5(1): 62–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Neuman, W.L. (2000). Social Research Methods: Qualitative and quantitative approaches, 4th edn, Needham Heights, MA: Allyn and Bacon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Osareh, F. (1996). Bibliometrics, Citation Analysis and Co-Citation Analysis: A review of literature I, Libri 46(3): 149–158.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Power, D.J. (2012). A brief history of decision support systems (version 4.1). [www document] http://dssresources.com/history/dsshistory.html, accessed 3 July 2012.

  • Ross, J.W., Beath, C.M. and Quaadgras, A. (2013). You May Not Need Big Data After All, Harvard Business Review (December): 90–98.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rouibah, K. and Ould-ali, S. (2002). PUZZLE: A concept and prototype for linking business intelligence to business strategy, Journal of Strategic Information Systems 11(2): 133–152.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Salo, A. and Kakola, T.K. (2005). Groupware Support for Requirements Management in New Product Development, Journal of Organizational Computing and Electronic Commerce 15(4): 253–284.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shander, B. (2013). Does your company actually need data visualization? HBR blog network [www document] http://blogs.hbr.org (accessed 14 November 2013).

  • Shanks, G., Jagielska, I. and Jayaganesh, M. (2009). A Framework for Understanding Customer Relationship Management Systems Benefits, Communications of the Association for Information Systems 25: 263–288.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simon, H.A. (1960). The New Science of Management Decision, New York: Harper.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, H., Dillon, S. and Van Wingen, M. (2010). Focus and Diversity in Information Systems Research: Meeting the dual demands of a healthy applied discipline, MIS Quarterly 34(4): 647–667.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tversky, A. and Kahneman, D. (1981). The Framing of Decisions and the Psychology of Choice, Science 211(4487): 453–458.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vaishnavi, V.K. and Kuechler, Jnr W. (2008). Design Science Research Methods and Patterns: Innovating information and communication technology, Boca Raton, FL: Auerbach Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Venable, J., Pries-Heje, J. and Baskerville, R. (2012). A Comprehensive Framework for Evaluation in Design Science Research, in K. Peffers, M. Rothenberger and B Kuechler (eds.) Proceedings of the 7th Conference on Design Science in Information Systems (DESRIST’12) Berlin: Springer-Verlag, pp. 423–438.

    Google Scholar 

  • Watson, H.J., Fuller, C. and Ariyachandra, T. (2004). Data Warehouse Governance: Best practices at blue cross and blue shield of North Carolina, Decision Support Systems 38(3): 435–450.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Watson, H.J., Goodhue, D.L. and Wixom, B.H. (2002). The Benefits of Data Warehousing: Why some organizations realize exceptional payoffs, Information & Management 39(6): 491–502.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walls, J.G., Widmeyer, G.R. and El Sawy, O.A. (1992). Building an Information Systems Design Theory for Vigilant EIS, Information Systems Research 3(1): 36–59.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weber, R.P. (1990). Basic Content Analysis, 2nd edn, Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Webster, J. and Watson, R.T. (2002). Analyzing the Past to Prepare for the Future: Writing a literature review, MIS Quarterly 26(2): xiii–xxiii.

    Google Scholar 

  • Winter, R. (2008). Design Science Research in Europe, European Journal of Information Systems 17(5): 470–475.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yin, R.K. (1994). Case Study Research: Design and methods, 2nd edn, Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zikmund, W.G., Babin, B.J., Carr, J.C. and Griffin, M. (2010). Business Research Methods, 8th edn, Mason, OH: South-Western, Cengage Learning.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Monash University, Australia

    David Arnott

  2. School of Information Systems, Curtin Business School, Curtin University, Australia

    Graham Pervan

Authors
  1. David Arnott
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Graham Pervan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. London School of Economics and Political Science, London, UK

    Leslie P. Willcocks

  2. Oxford University, Oxford, UK

    Chris Sauer

  3. University of Missouri-St Louis, St Louis, Missouri, USA

    Mary C. Lacity

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Association for Information Technology Trust

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Arnott, D., Pervan, G. (2016). A Critical Analysis of Decision Support Systems Research Revisited: The Rise of Design Science. In: Willcocks, L.P., Sauer, C., Lacity, M.C. (eds) Enacting Research Methods in Information Systems. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-29272-4_3

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation