Abstract
This study presents insights from a systematic literature review of design science in IS. A lack of agreement on how to classify and demarcate design science from behavioral science research led to the iterative development of a theoretically-grounded, encompassing framework of knowledge contributions in the larger context of general scientific inquiry as well as associated coding schemata. The results of the systematic literature review support our framework and the idea that paradigmatic boundaries (e.g., design science versus behavioral science research) are difficult to uphold for contemporary information systems research.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
- 1.
We group these related frameworks under the label of dualities of goals and scope frameworks.
- 2.
Knowledge concerned with the bringing into being of something based on the ancient greek notion of technê.
- 3.
Universally discoverable knowledge of how things are based on the ancient greek notion of epistêmê.
- 4.
The exact date of the search was the 2nd of November, 2017.
- 5.
We decided to use idiographic/nomothetic rather than situational/abstract to describe the different scopes of knowledge as it seems plausible to have abstract representations of situational knowledge, which might lead to unnecessary confusion.
- 6.
We chose the label behavior rather than science as we argue that design also applies to science.
- 7.
Here we build on and extend Iivari's [40] notion of research strategies in DSR. The basic idea is to identify research strategies by examining in what order idiographic or nomothetic inquiries are executed. For example, research developing a nomothetic methodology and then testing it in a case study would be classified as Top-Down; design action research engaging in a practical problem and distilling nomothetic insights from it would be classified as Bottom-Up; Mixed is used to classify research which exhibits elements of both strategies.
References
Hevner, A.R., March, S.T., Park, J., Ram, S.: Design science in information systems research. MIS Q. 28, 75–105 (2004)
Gregor, S., Hevner, A.R.: Positioning and presenting design science research for maximum impact. MIS Q. 32, 337–355 (2013)
Rai, A.: Diversity of design science research. Manag. Inf. Syst. Q. 41, iii–xviii (2017)
vom Brocke, J., Hevner, A., Maedche, A.: Call for papers, issue 1/2019 - design science research and digital innovation. Bus. Inf. Syst. Eng. 59, 309–310 (2017)
Goes, P.B.: Editor’s comments: design science research in top information systems journals. MIS Q. 38, iii–viii (2014)
McKay, J., Marshall, P., Hirschheim, R.: The design construct in information systems design science. J. Inf. Technol. 27, 125–139 (2012)
Fischer, C., Winter, R., Wortmann, F.: Design theory. Bus. Inf. Syst. Eng. 2, 387–390 (2010)
Niederman, F., March, S.T.: Design science and the accumulation of knowledge in the information systems discipline. ACM Trans. Manage. Inf. Syst. 3, 1–15 (2012)
Iivari, J.: A paradigmatic analysis of information systems as a design science. Scand. J. Inf. Syst. 19, 5 (2007)
Baiyere, A., Hevner, A., Gregor, S., Rossi, M.: Artifact and/or theory? Publishing design science research in IS. In: ICIS 2015 Proceedings (2015)
Lee, A.S., Chiasson, M., Alter, S., Kremar, H.: Long live design science research! …. and remind me again about whether it is a new research paradigm or a rationale of last resort for worthwhile research that doesn’t fit under any other umbrella. In: ICIS 2012 Proceedings (2012)
Purao, S., Baldwin, C., Hevner, A.R., Storey, V.C., Pries-Heje, J., Smith, B., Zhu, Y.: The sciences of design: observations on an emerging field. Commun. AIS 23, 523–546 (2008)
Hevner, A.R.: A three cycle view of design science research. Scand. J. Inf. Syst. 19, 4 (2007)
Baskerville, R., Kaul, M., Storey, V.C.: Genres of inquiry in design-science research: justification and evaluation of knowledge production. MIS Q. 39, 541–564 (2015)
Iivari, J.: Information system artefact or information system application: that is the question. Inf. Syst. J. 27, 753–774 (2017)
Qiu, L., Benbasat, I.: Evaluating anthropomorphic product recommendation agents: a social relationship perspective to designing information systems. J. Manag. Inf. Syst. 25, 145–181 (2009)
Germonprez, M., Hovorka, D., Gal, U.: Secondary design: a case of behavioral design science research. J. Assoc. Inf. Syst. 12, 662 (2011)
Goldkuhl, G.: The empirics of design research: activities, outcomes and functions. In: International Conference on Information Systems (ICIS 2013), 15–18 Dec 2013, Milan, Italy. AIS eLibrary (2013)
Goldkuhl, G., Lind, M.: A multi-grounded design research process. In: Winter, R., Zhao, J.L., Aier, S. (eds.) DESRIST 2010. LNCS, vol. 6105, pp. 45–60. Springer, Heidelberg (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-13335-0_4
Akoka, J., Comyn-Wattiau, I., Prat, N., Storey, V.C.: Evaluating knowledge types in design science research: an integrated framework. In: Maedche, A., vom Brocke, J., Hevner, A. (eds.) DESRIST 2017. LNCS, vol. 10243, pp. 201–217. Springer, Cham (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-59144-5_12
Barquet, A.P., Wessel, L., Rothe, H.: Knowledge accumulation in design-oriented research. In: Maedche, A., vom Brocke, J., Hevner, A. (eds.) DESRIST 2017. LNCS, vol. 10243, pp. 398–413. Springer, Cham (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-59144-5_24
Popper, K.: The Logic of Scientific Discovery. Routledge, Abingdon (2005)
Walls, J.G., Widmeyer, G.R., El Sawy, O.A.: Building an information system design theory for vigilant EIS. Inf. Syst. Res. 3, 36–59 (1992)
Gregor, S., Jones, D.: The anatomy of a design theory. J. AIS 8, 312–335 (2007)
Gregor, S.: The nature of theory in information systems. MIS Q. 30, 611–642 (2006)
Sein, M.K., Henfridsson, O., Purao, S., Rossi, M., Lindgren, R.: Action design research. MIS Q. 35, 37–56 (2011)
Prat, N., Comyn-Wattiau, I., Akoka, J.: A taxonomy of evaluation methods for information systems artifacts. J. Manag. Information Syst. 32, 229–267 (2015)
Bandara, W., Furtmueller, E., Gorbacheva, E., Miskon, S., Beekhuyzen, J.: Achieving rigor in literature reviews: insights from qualitative data analysis and tool-support. Commun. Assoc. Inf. Syst. 34, 154–204 (2015)
Baskerville, R., Lyytinen, K., Sambamurthy, V., Straub, D.: A response to the design-oriented information systems research memorandum. Eur. J. Inf. Syst. 20, 11–15 (2011)
Österle, H., Becker, J., Frank, U., Hess, T., Karagiannis, D., Krcmar, H., Loos, P., Mertens, P., Oberweis, A., Sinz, E.J.: Memorandum on design-oriented information systems research. Eur. J. Inf. Syst. 20, 7–10 (2011)
vom Brocke, J., Simons, A., Niehaves, B.: Reconstructing the giant: on the importance of rigour in documenting the literature search process, pp. 1–13 (2009)
Sturm, B., Schneider, S., Sunyaev, A.: Leave no stone unturned: introducing a revolutionary meta-search tool for rigorous and efficient systematic literature searches. In: ECIS (2015)
Fischer, C.: The information systems design science research body of knowledge–a citation analysis in recent top-journal publications. In: PACIS 2011 Proceedings (2011)
Simon, H.A.: Sciences of the Artificial. MIT Press, Cambridge (1996)
Gauch, H.G.: Scientific Method in Practice. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2003)
Box, G.E., Hunter, W.G., Hunter, J.S.: Statistics for Experimenters (1978)
Venable, J., Baskerville, R.: Eating our own cooking: towards a design science of research methods. In: Proceedings of the 11th European Conference on Research Methods in Business and management, University of Bolton, Bolton, UK, pp. 399–407 (2012)
March, S.T., Smith, G.F.: Design and natural science research on information technology. Decis. Supp. Syst. 15, 251–266 (1995)
Iivari, J.: Distinguishing and contrasting two strategies for design science research. Eur. J. Inf. Syst. 24, 107–115 (2015)
Kolfschoten, G.L., de Vreede, G.-J.: A design approach for collaboration processes: a multimethod design science study in collaboration engineering. J. Manag. Inf. Syst. 26, 225–256 (2009)
Nissen, M.E.: Dynamic knowledge patterns to inform design: a field study of knowledge stocks and flows in an extreme organization. J. Manag. Inf. Syst. 22, 225–263 (2005)
Germonprez, M., Kendall, J.E., Kendall, K.E., Mathiassen, L., Young, B., Warner, B.: A theory of responsive design: a field study of corporate engagement with open source communities. Inf. Syst. Res. 28, 64–83 (2017)
Grover, V., Lyytinen, K.: New state of play in information systems research: the push to the edges. MIS Q. 39, 271–275 (2015)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature
About this paper
Cite this paper
Herwix, A., Rosenkranz, C. (2018). Making Sense of Design Science in Information Systems Research: Insights from a Systematic Literature Review. In: Chatterjee, S., Dutta, K., Sundarraj, R. (eds) Designing for a Digital and Globalized World. DESRIST 2018. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 10844. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-91800-6_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-91800-6_4
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-91799-3
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-91800-6
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)