ICIS 2008 Panel Report: Design Science in Information Systems: Hegemony, Bandwagon, or New Wave?

© 2019 Association for Information Systems. All rights reserved. This paper addresses the challenges of theory testing. Adopting the design science paradigm, we address this challenge by delimiting the line that separates theory building from theory testing by conceptually characterizing its essential aspects: the relationships between humans, organizations and technology, which led to the development of a conceptual framework for theory testing. Practically, the methods, processes, instruments, and tools needed to acquire and analyze data for theory testing is considered, leading to the development of a pattern system. Card sorting was used as an evaluation strategy for the conceptual framework and the pattern model.

Download Full-text

Towards the development of a DSS supporting the integration of crowdsourcing in theory testing: Analytical framework design

10.26686/wgtn.12616910 ◽

2020 ◽

Author(s):

I Enwereuzo ◽

Pedro Antunes ◽

David Johnstone

Keyword(s):

Information Systems ◽

Design Science ◽

Reliability And Validity ◽

Analytical Framework ◽

Research Process ◽

Theory Testing ◽

Analytic Framework ◽

Framework Design ◽

Internet Users ◽

Insight Into

© 2019 Association for Information Systems. All rights reserved. Crowdsourcing can be an adopted strategy for researchers where tasks are distributed to internet users to harness different forms of data, which adds to the reliability and validity of the research process. As theory testing is an essential part of the research process, involving activities that most times needs input from different and diverse participants, the need to consider adopting the crowdsourcing strategy for theory testing is paramount. Adopting a design science paradigm to manage this challenge, we design an analytic framework which comprises of important attributes that need to be considered if crowdsourcing is to be used for any of the theory testing activities. The framework which was justified using sample cases gives us an insight into what attributes make such activity crowdsource-able. The value of this artefact lies in its capacity to help researchers utilize crowdsourcing to their advantage.

Download Full-text

Construction of design science research questions

10.26686/wgtn.13088309.v1 ◽

2020 ◽

Author(s):

NH Thuan ◽

Andreas Drechsler ◽

Pedro Antunes

Keyword(s):

Information Systems ◽

Design Science ◽

Science Research ◽

Design Science Research ◽

Fundamental Step ◽

Research Questions

© 2019 by the Association for Information Systems. Posing research questions represents a fundamental step to guide and direct how researchers develop knowledge in research. In design science research (DSR), researchers need to pose research questions to define the scope and the modes of inquiry, characterize the artifacts, and communicate the contributions. Despite the importance of research questions, research provides few guidelines on how to construct suitable DSR research questions. We fill this gap by exploring ways of constructing DSR research questions and analyzing the research questions in a sample of 104 DSR publications. We found that about two-thirds of the analyzed DSR publications actually used research questions to link their problem statements to research approaches and that most questions focused on solving problems. Based on our analysis, we derive a typology of DSR question formulation to provide guidelines and patterns that help researchers formulate research questions when conducting their DSR projects.

Download Full-text

Design Science in the Information Systems Discipline: An Introduction to the Special Issue on Design Science Research

MIS Quarterly ◽

10.2307/25148869 ◽

2008 ◽

Vol 32 (4) ◽

pp. 725 ◽

Cited By ~ 175

Author(s):

March ◽

Storey

Keyword(s):

Information Systems ◽

Design Science ◽

Science Research ◽

Design Science Research ◽

Special Issue

Download Full-text

ACM SIGMIS CPR Panel Report: Should Information Systems Professors be More Techno-savvy than Students? (And What Would that Mean for Teaching in Times of the COVID-19 Crisis?)

Communications of the Association for Information Systems ◽

10.17705/1cais.04844 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 48 (1) ◽

pp. 562-588

Author(s):

Yaojie Li ◽

◽

Craig Van Slyke ◽

Thomas Ferratt ◽

Michael Gallivan ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Information Systems ◽

Panel Report

Download Full-text

Validation and Design Science Research in Information Systems

Research Methodologies, Innovations and Philosophies in Software Systems Engineering and Information Systems ◽

10.4018/978-1-4666-0179-6.ch021 ◽

2012 ◽

pp. 403-426 ◽

Cited By ~ 2

Author(s):

Rafael A. Gonzalez ◽

Henk G. Sol

Keyword(s):

Information Systems ◽

Design Science ◽

Science Research ◽

Design Science Research ◽

Theoretical Contribution ◽

Starting Point ◽

Relationship Of ◽

The Relationship ◽

Validation Strategy

Validation within design science research in Information Systems (DSRIS) is much debated. The relationship of validation to artifact evaluation is still not clear. This chapter aims at elucidating several components of DSRIS in relation to validation. The role of theory and theorizing are an important starting point, because there is no agreement as to what types of theory should be produced. Moreover, if there is a theoretical contribution, then there needs to be clear guidance as to how the designed artifact and its evaluation are related to the theory and its validation. The epistemological underpinnings of DSRIS are also open to different alternatives, including positivism, interpretivism, and pragmatism, which affect the way that the validation strategy is conceived, and later on, accepted or rejected. The type of reasoning guiding a DSRIS endeavor, whether deductive, inductive, or abductive, should also be considered as it determines the fundamental logic behind any research validation. Once those choices are in place, artifact evaluation may be carried out, depending on the type of artifact and the type of technique available. Finally, the theoretical contribution may be validated from a formative (process-oriented) or summative (product-oriented) perspective.

Download Full-text