Abstract
The purpose of this paper is to empirically ground design science research methodology (DSR). We claim that popular DSR methodologies lack solid empirical grounding since they are based on reconstructions of studies conducted for other purposes. Thus, we have systematically collected methodology users’ empirical experiences and reflections from DSR projects. The overall findings show that the experiences are mainly positive. However, there are negative experiences such as the guidelines’ granularity, lack of rigorousness concerning evaluation of new knowledge, and support for collaboration.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Alturki, A., Bandara, W., Gable, G.G.: Design science research and the core of information systems. In: Peffers, K., Rothenberger, M., Kuechler, B. (eds.) DESRIST 2012. LNCS, vol. 7286, pp. 309–327. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)
Bodenbenner, P., Feuerriegel, S., Neumann, D.: Design science in practice: designing an electricity demand response system. In: vom Brocke, J., Hekkala, R., Ram, S., Rossi, M. (eds.) DESRIST 2013. LNCS, vol. 7939, pp. 293–307. Springer, Heidelberg (2013)
Gill, T.G., Hevner, A.R.: A fitness-utility model for design science research. ACM Transactions on Management Information Systems (TMIS) 4(2), 5 (2013)
Goldkuhl, G.: Design Theories in Information Systems - A Need for Multi-Grounding. Journal of Information Technology Theory and Application (JITTA) 6(2), 59–72 (2004)
Hevner, A.: A Three Cycle View of Design Science Research. Scandinavian Journal of Information Systems 19(2), 87–92 (2007)
Hevner, A.R., March, S.T., Park, J., Ram, S.: Design Science in Information Systems Research. MIS Quarterly 28(1), 75–105 (2004)
Hinds, P.S., Vogel, R.J., Clarke-Steffen, L.: The possibilities and pitfalls of doing a secondary analysis of a qualitative data set. Qualitative Health Research 7(3), 408–424 (1997)
Hovorka, D.S., Pries-Heje, J.: Don’t Ignore the Iceberg: Timely Revelation of Justification in DSR. In: vom Brocke, J., Hekkala, R., Ram, S., Rossi, M. (eds.) DESRIST 2013. LNCS, vol. 7939, pp. 228–241. Springer, Heidelberg (2013)
Iivari, J.: A Paradigmatic Analysis of Information Systems as a Design Science. Scandinavian Journal of Information Systems 19(2), 39–63 (2007)
Indulska, M., Recker, J.C.: Design Science in IS Research: A Literature Analysis. In: Proceedings 4th Biennial ANU Workshop on Information Systems Foundations, Canberra, Australia (2008)
Lee, J., Wyner, G.M., Pentland, B.T.: Process grammar as a tool for business process design. MIS Quarterly, 757–778 (2008)
Mayer, J.H.: Managing the Future—Six Guidelines for Designing Environmental Scanning Systems. In: Jain, H., Sinha, A.P., Vitharana, P. (eds.) DESRIST 2011. LNCS, vol. 6629, pp. 276–290. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)
Peffers, K., Rothenberger, M., Tuunanen, T., Vaezi, R.: Design science research evaluation. In: Peffers, K., Rothenberger, M., Kuechler, B. (eds.) DESRIST 2012. LNCS, vol. 7286, pp. 398–410. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)
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)
Piirainen, K.A., Briggs, R.O.: Design theory in practice – making design science research more transparent. In: Jain, H., Sinha, A.P., Vitharana, P. (eds.) DESRIST 2011. LNCS, vol. 6629, pp. 47–61. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)
Reynoso, J.M.G., Olfman, L., Ryan, T., Horan, T.: An information systems design theory for an expert system for training. Journal of Database Management (JDM) 24(3), 31–50 (2013)
Rudmark, D., Lind, M.: Design Science Research Demonstrators for Punctuation – The Establishment of a Service Ecosystem. In: Jain, H., Sinha, A.P., Vitharana, P. (eds.) DESRIST 2011. LNCS, vol. 6629, pp. 153–165. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)
Sein, M.K., Henfridsson, O., Purao, S., Rossi, M., Lindgren, R.: Action Design Research. MIS Quarterly 35(1), 37–56 (2011)
Venable, J., Pries-Heje, J., Baskerville, R.: A Comprehensive Framework for Evaluation in Design Science Research. In: Peffers, K., Rothenberger, M., Kuechler, B. (eds.) DESRIST 2012. LNCS, vol. 7286, pp. 423–438. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)
Weedman, J.: Client as designer in collaborative design science research projects: what does social science design theory tell us. European Journal of Information Systems 17(5), 476–488 (2008)
Wilson, J.: Responsible Authorship and Peer Review. Science and Engineering Ethics 8(2), 155–174 (2002)
Gregor, S., Hevner, A.R.: Positioning and presenting design science research for maximum impact. MIS Quarterly 37(2), 337–356 (2013)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2015 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this paper
Cite this paper
Cronholm, S., Göbel, H. (2015). Empirical Grounding of Design Science Research Methodology. In: Donnellan, B., Helfert, M., Kenneally, J., VanderMeer, D., Rothenberger, M., Winter, R. (eds) New Horizons in Design Science: Broadening the Research Agenda. DESRIST 2015. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 9073. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-18714-3_40
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-18714-3_40
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-18713-6
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-18714-3
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)