Diese Präsentation wurde erfolgreich gemeldet.
Die SlideShare-Präsentation wird heruntergeladen. ×

Positioning and presenting design science research for maximum impact

Anzeige
Anzeige
Anzeige
Anzeige
Anzeige
Anzeige
Anzeige
Anzeige
Anzeige
Anzeige
Anzeige
Anzeige
Nächste SlideShare
Hevner design-science
Hevner design-science
Wird geladen in …3
×

Hier ansehen

1 von 15 Anzeige

Positioning and presenting design science research for maximum impact

Herunterladen, um offline zu lesen

Design science research (DSR) has staked its rightful ground as an important and legitimate Information
Systems (IS) research paradigm. We contend that DSR has yet to attain its full potential impact on the development
and use of information systems due to gaps in the understanding and application of DSR concepts and
methods. This essay aims to help researchers (1) appreciate the levels of artifact abstractions that may be DSR
contributions, (2) identify appropriate ways of consuming and producing knowledge when they are preparing
journal articles or other scholarly works, (3) understand and position the knowledge contributions of their
research projects, and (4) structure a DSR article so that it emphasizes significant contributions to the knowledge
base. Our focal contribution is the DSR knowledge contribution framework with two dimensions based
on the existing state of knowledge in both the problem and solution domains for the research opportunity under
study. In addition, we propose a DSR communication schema with similarities to more conventional publication
patterns, but which substitutes the description of the DSR artifact in place of a traditional results section.
We evaluate the DSR contribution framework and the DSR communication schema via examinations of DSR
exemplar publications.It is clear from the preceding that every “art” [technique] has its speculative and its practical side. Its speculation
is the theoretical knowledge of the principles of the technique; its practice is but the habitual and instinctive
application of these principles. It is difficult if not impossible to make much progress in the application
without theory; conversely, it is difficult to understand the theory without knowledge of the technique.

Design science research (DSR) has staked its rightful ground as an important and legitimate Information
Systems (IS) research paradigm. We contend that DSR has yet to attain its full potential impact on the development
and use of information systems due to gaps in the understanding and application of DSR concepts and
methods. This essay aims to help researchers (1) appreciate the levels of artifact abstractions that may be DSR
contributions, (2) identify appropriate ways of consuming and producing knowledge when they are preparing
journal articles or other scholarly works, (3) understand and position the knowledge contributions of their
research projects, and (4) structure a DSR article so that it emphasizes significant contributions to the knowledge
base. Our focal contribution is the DSR knowledge contribution framework with two dimensions based
on the existing state of knowledge in both the problem and solution domains for the research opportunity under
study. In addition, we propose a DSR communication schema with similarities to more conventional publication
patterns, but which substitutes the description of the DSR artifact in place of a traditional results section.
We evaluate the DSR contribution framework and the DSR communication schema via examinations of DSR
exemplar publications.It is clear from the preceding that every “art” [technique] has its speculative and its practical side. Its speculation
is the theoretical knowledge of the principles of the technique; its practice is but the habitual and instinctive
application of these principles. It is difficult if not impossible to make much progress in the application
without theory; conversely, it is difficult to understand the theory without knowledge of the technique.

Anzeige
Anzeige

Weitere Verwandte Inhalte

Diashows für Sie (20)

Ähnlich wie Positioning and presenting design science research for maximum impact (20)

Anzeige

Aktuellste (20)

Anzeige

Positioning and presenting design science research for maximum impact

  1. 1. POSITIONING AND PRESENTING DESIGN SCIENCE RESEARCH FOR MAXIMUM IMPACT Gregor & Hevner (2013) Presenters: 1. Muhammad Nauman Shahid 2. Zhu Cungen
  2. 2. Objectives 2  What is/are: Information Systems about? Design science research (DSR)? Research process in DSR? Types of knowledge and contributions made to DSR  Publication schema for DSR  Publication opportunities and reasons for acceptance  Conclusion
  3. 3. What is Information Systems (IS) about? 3 • “Information Systems is the study of the understandings people require so they can create new value, and of the analysis, design, development, deployment, operation, and management of systems to inform these understandings.” (Nunamaker & Briggs, 2011, p. 20:3) • “Information systems are implemented within an organization for the purpose of improving the effectiveness and efficiency of that organization.” (Hevner et al., 2004, p. 76)
  4. 4. What is design science research (DSR)? 4 • Two paradigms in IS research: (Hevner et al., 2004, p. 75) 1. Behavioral science: “Develop and verify theories that explain or predict human or organizational behavior” 2. Design science: “Extend the boundaries of human and organizational capabilities by creating new and innovative artifacts”. • “An IT artifact, implemented in an organizational context, is often the object of study in IS behavioral-science research.” (ibid., p. 77) • “Design science creates and evaluates IT artifacts intended to solve identified organizational problems.” (ibid.) • “In IS, DSR involves the construction of a wide range of socio-technical artifacts such as decision support systems, modeling tools, governance strategies, methods for IS evaluation, and IS change interventions.” (Gregor & Hevner, 2013, p. 337)
  5. 5. How does the research process in DSR look like? 6 Peffers et al. (2008), p. 54 Figure 1. DSRM Process Model
  6. 6. Types of knowledge in DSR (1/2) Gregor & Hevner (2013), p. 343 7  There are two interlinked types of knowledge in DSR, both which form the knowledge base for DSR –  - Decriptive Knowledge  behavorial science research • “is the "what" knowledge about natural phenomena and the laws and regularities among phenomena” –  - Prescriptive Knowledge  design science research • “is the "how" knowledge of human-built artifacts”  Both knowledge types are used to inform and ground the research process
  7. 7. Types of knowledge in DSR (2/2) Gregor & Hevner (2013), p. 344 8
  8. 8. How do these knowledge types work together? Gregor & Hevner (2013), p. 344 9
  9. 9. What kinds of DSR contribution types are there? 9 Gregor & Hevner (2013), p. 342
  10. 10. DSR knowledge contribution framework: maturity of artifacts versus maturity of problem context 1 0 Gregor & Hevner (2013), p. 345
  11. 11. For which knowledge contributions are there publication opportunities? 11 Goes, P. B. (2014), p.v
  12. 12. How should a DSR publication be structured? 1 2 Gregor & Hevner (2013), p. 350
  13. 13. Wrapping-up: What are overall reasons for paper acceptance in IS Journals? 1 3 Straub, D. W. (2013), p. v
  14. 14. Summary 1 4  DSR is about knowledge contributions in terms of socio- technical artifacts  DSR has a defined research process  Two interlinked types of knowledge in DSR (descriptive and prescriptive)  Knowledge contributions can be of different kinds (improvement, invention, exaptation, routine)  Defined publication schema for DSR  Required and enhancing elements for IS paper acceptance
  15. 15. References  Goes, P. B. (2014): Design Science Research in Top Information Systems Journals. In: MIS Quarterly, 38 (1), pp. iii-viii  Gregor, S.; Hevner, A. R. (2013): Positioning and Presenting Design Science Research for Maximum Impact. In: MIS Quarterly, 37 (2), pp. 337-355  Hevner, A. R.; March, S. T.; Park, J.; Ram, S. (2004): Design Science in Information Systems Research. In: MIS Quarterly, 28 (1), pp. 75-105  Nunamaker & Briggs (2011): Toward a Broader Vision for Information Systems. In: ACM Transactions on Management Information Systems, 2 (4), pp. 20:1-20:12  Peffers, K.; Tuunanen, T.; Rothenberger, M. A.; Chatterjee, S. (2008): A Design Science Research Methodology for Information Systems Research. In: Journal of Management Information Systems, 24 (3), pp. 45-77  Straub, D. W. (2009): Editor's Comments: Why Top Journals Accept Your Paper. In: MIS Quarterly, 33 (3), pp. iii-x 1 5

×