Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Grounded Design – a praxeological IS research perspective

  • Research Article
  • Published:
Journal of Information Technology

Abstract

In this paper, we propose Grounded Design – a particular design research (DR) approach rooted in a practice-theoretical tradition. It assesses the quality of information technology (IT) design through evaluation of emerging changes in social practices, which result from the appropriation and use of IT artifacts. The paper starts with a systematic analysis of the reasons for persistent limitations of traditional information systems DR, specifically in coping with problems of contingency and self-referentiality. Following this critique, the principles of Grounded Design are presented. Grounded Design is applied in case studies where we reconstruct the social practices observed before and during the design and appropriation of innovative IT artifacts. We call these context-specific research endeavors ‘design case studies.’ In conducting these case studies, Grounded Design builds upon well-established research methods such as ethnographical field studies, participatory design and action research. To support the transferability of its situated findings, Grounded Design suggests documenting increasing numbers of design case studies to create an extended, comparative knowledge base. Comparing cases allows for the emergence of bottom-up concepts dealing with the design and appropriation of innovative IT artifacts in social practice.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
Figure 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Ackerman, M.S. (2000). The Intellectual Challenge of CSCW: The gap between social requirements and technical feasibility, Human Computer Interaction 15(2): 179–203.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baskerville, R. and Pries-Heje, J. (1999). Grounded Action Research: A method for understanding IT in practice, Accounting, Management & Information Technology 9: 1–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baskerville, R., Pries-Heje, J. and Venable, J. (2009). Soft Design Science Methodology, in Proceedings of Design Science Research in Information Systems and Technology (DESRIST '09) (Malvern, PA, USA, 7–8 May); New York: ACM Press, Article No. 9.

  • Baskerville, R.L. and Wood-Harper, A.T. (1998). Diversity in Information Systems Action Research Methods, European Journal of Information Systems 7(2): 90–107.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Becker, J. and Niehaves, B. (2007). Epistemological Perspectives on IS Research: A framework for analysing and systematizing epistemological assumptions, Information Systems Journal 17(2): 197–214.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Betz, M. and Wulf, V. (2014). EmergencyMessenger: A text based communication concept for indoor firefighting. CHI ’14 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Toronto, ON, Canada, 27th April – 02nd May, 2014); New York: ACM Press.

  • Bourdieu, P. (1977). Outline of a Theory of Practice, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Bourdieu, P. (1992). The Logic of Practice, Cambridge: Polity Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Braa, K. and Vidgen, R. (1999). Interpretation, Intervention, and Reduction in the Organizational Laboratory: A framework for in-context information system research, accounting, Management and Information Technologies 9: 25–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brannigan, A. (2004). The Rise and Fall of Social Psychology: The use and misuse of the experimental method, Piscataway, NJ: Transaction Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brödner, P. (1998). Methods for Integrated Organisation and Software Development, in W. Karwowski and R. Goonetilleke (eds.) Manufacturing Agility and Hybrid Automation II, Santa Monica, CA: IEA Press, pp. 363–366.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brödner, P. (2009). The Misery of Digital Organizations and the Semiotic Nature of IT, AI & Society, Journal of Knowledge, Culture and Communication 23: 331–351.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cole, R., Purao, S., Rossi, M. and Sein, M.K. (2005). Being Proactive: Where action research meets design research, in D. Avison, D. Galletta and J.I. DeGross (eds.) Proceedings of 24th International Conference on Information Systems, (ICIS 2005 Proceedings), AIS Electronic Library (AISeL), Paper 27, 325–336.

  • Cross, N. (2001). Designerly Ways of Knowing: Design discipline versus design science, Design Issues 17(3): 49–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dahlbom, B. and Mathiassen, L. (1993). Computers in Context. The Philosophy and Practice of Systems Design, Oxford: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davison, R.M., Martinsons, M.G. and Kock, N. (2004). Principles of Canonical Action Research, Information Systems Journal 14: 65–86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dedrick, J., Gurbaxani, V. and Kraemer, K.L. (2003). Information Technology and Economic Performance: A critical review of the empirical evidence, ACM Computing Surveys 35(1): 1–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Denef, S., Keyson, D. and Oppermann, R. (2011). Rigid structures, Independent Units, Monitoring, in Proceedings of the 2011 Annual Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems – CHI ’11; New York: ACM Press, 1949–1958.

  • Dittrich, Y., Floyd, C. and Klischewski, R. (eds.) (2002). Social Thinking – Software practice, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Doolin, B. and McLeod, L. (2012). Sociomateriality and Boundary Objects in Information Systems Development, European Journal of Information Systems 21: 570–586.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Draxler, S., Stevens, G., Stein, M., Boden, A. and Randall, D. (2012). Supporting the Social Context of Technology Appropriation: On a synthesis of sharing tools and tool knowledge, in Proceedings of CHI ‘12 (Austin, TX); New York: ACM press, 2835–2844.

  • Engeström, Y. and Blackler, F. (2005). On the Life of the Object, Organization 12(3): 307–330.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garfinkel, H. (1984). Studies in Ethnomethodology, Cambridge: Polity Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gaver, W. (2012). What Should We Expect from Research through Design? in Proceedings of CHI ’12 (Austin, TX); New York: ACM press, 937–946.

  • Giddens, A. (1984). The Constitution of Society. Outline of the theory of structuration, Cambridge: Polity Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldkuhl, G. (2012). Pragmatism vs. Interpretivism in Qualitative Information Systems Research, European Journal of Information Systems 21(2): 135–146.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goldkuhl, G. and Lind, M. (2010). A Multi-grounded Design Research Process, in Proceedings of DESRIST ´10 Proceedings, LNCS 6105; Berlin: Springer, 45–60.

  • Goles, T. and Hirschheim, R. (2000). The Paradigm is Dead, the Paradigm is Dead … Long Live the Paradigm: The legacy of Burell and Morgan, Omega 28: 249–268.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hevner, A.R., March, S.T., Park, J. and Ram, S. (2004). Design Science in Information Systems Research, MIS Quartertly 28(1): 75–105.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hirschheim, R. and Klein, H.K. (2003). Crisis in the IS Field? A Critical Reflection on the State of the Discipline, Journal of the Association for Information Systems 4(5): 237–293.

    Google Scholar 

  • Iivari, J. and Venable, J. (2009). Action Research and Design Science Research: Seemingly similar but decidedly dissimilar, in Proceedings of 17th European Conference on Information Systems (Verona, Italy).

  • ISR (2002). Editorial Statement and Policy, Information Systems Research 13(4): 3–7.

  • King, J.L. and Lyytinen, K. (eds.) (2006). Information Systems, The State of the Field, Wiley Series in Information Systems, New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klann, M. (2009). Tactical Navigation Support for Firefighters: The lifenet ad-hoc sensor-network and wearable system, in J. Löffler and M. Klann (eds.) Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer (Lecture Notes in Computer Science), Mobile Response, Bd. 5424, pp. 41–56.

  • Kuechler, B. 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 

  • Kuutti, K. and Bannon, L.J. (2014). The Turn to Practice in HCI: Towards a research agenda, in Proceedings of CHI 2014; New York: ACM Press, 3543–3552.

  • Lee, A. (2007). Action Is an Artifact: What action research and design science offer to each other, in N. Kock (ed.) Information Systems Action Research: An applied view of emerging concepts and methods, New York: Springer, pp. 43–60.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Lyytinen, K. (1990). Computer Supported Cooperative Work – Issues and challenges: A structurational analysis. Manuscript, Department of Computer Science, University of Jyvaskyla.

  • Mathiassen, L. (2002). Collaborative Practice Research, Information Technology & People 15(4): 321–345.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mead, G.H. (1903). The Definition of the Psychical, Decennial Publications of the University of Chicago. First Series, Vol. III. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, pp. 77–112.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mead, G.H. (1934). Mind, Self and Society, Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nett, B. and Stevens, G. (2008). Business Ethnography – Aktionsforschung als Beitrag zu einer reflexiven Technikgestaltung (Business Ethnography – Action research as a contribution to a reflective technology design) Science theory and design-oriented Information Science, Report of Institut für Wirtschaftsinformatik, Münster: Westfälische Wilhelms-Universität, pp. 48-68.

  • Orlikowski, W.J. (2000). Using Technology and Constituting Structures: A practice lens for studying technology in organizations, Organization Science 11(4): 404–428.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Orlikowski, W.J. (2009). The Sociomateriality of Organisational Life: Considering technology in management research, Cambridge Journal of Economics 34: 125–141.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Orlikowski, W.J. (2007). Sociomaterial Practices: Exploring technology at work, Organization Studies 28: 1435–1448.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Orlikowski, W.J. and Iacono, C.S. (2001). Desperately Seeking the ‘IT’ in IT Research – A call to theorizing the IT artifact, Information Systems Research 12(2): 121–134.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Orlikowski, W.J. and Scott, S.V. (2008). Sociomateriality: Challenging the separation of technology, work and organization, Annals of the Academy of Management 2(1): 433–474.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peirce, C.S. (1935). Lectures on Pragmatism, in C. Hartshorne and P. Weiss (eds.) Collected Papers of Charles Sanders Peirce CP 5.141–5.212, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pipek, V. (2005). From Tailoring to Appropriation Support: Negotiating groupware usage, in: faculty of science, department of information processing science (ACTA UNIVERSITATIS OULUENSIS A 430), Oulu, Finland: University of Oulu.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pipek, V. and Wulf, V. (2009). Infrastructuring: Towards an integrated perspective on the design and use of information technology, Journal of the Association of Information Systems (JAIS) 10(5): 306–332.

    Google Scholar 

  • Poser, H. (2001). On Structural Differences between Sciences and Engineering, in H. Lenk and M. Maring (eds.) Advances and Problems in the Philosophy of Technology, Münster: LIT.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ramirez, L. (2012). Practice-centered Support for Indoor Navigation: Design of a Ubicomp platform for firefighters. Fraunhofer series in Information and Communication technology Vol. 2/2012, Aachen: Shaker Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ramirez, L., Dyrks, T., Gerwinski, J., Betz, M., Scholz, M. and Wulf, V. (2012). Landmarke: An ad hoc deployable Ubicomp infrastructure to support indoor navigation of firefighters, Personal and Ubiquitous Computing 16(8): 1025–1038.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reckwitz, A. (2002). Toward a Theory of Social Practices: A development in culturalist theorizing, European Journal of Social Theory 5(2): 243–263.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rittel, H.W.J. and Webber, M.M. (1973). Dilemmas in a General Theory of Planning, Policy Sciences 4: 155–169.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rodon, J. and Sesé, F. (2008). Towards a Framework for the Transferability of Results in IS Qualitative Research, in Proceedings of the JAIS Theory Development Workshop Sprouts Working Papers on Information Systems 8(17): 8–17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rohde, M. (2007). Integrated Organization and Technology Development (OTD) and the Impact of Socio-cultural Concepts – A CSCW Perspective. Datalogiske skrifter University of Roskilde: Denmark.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rohde, M., Stevens, G., Brödner, P. and Wulf, V. (2009). Towards a Paradigmatic Shift in IS: Designing for social practice, in Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Design Science Research in Information Systems and Technology (DESRIST 2009); New York: ACM-Press, Article 15.

  • Royal Academy of Engineering (ed.) (2004). The Challenges of Complex IT Projects, The Report from a Working Group of the Royal Academy of Engineering and the British Computer Society, London: The Royal Academy of Engineering.

  • Schmidt, K. (2011). Cooperative Work and Coordinative Practices, London: Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Schuler, D. and Namioka, A. (eds.) (1993). Participatory Design, Principles and Practices, Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schön, D. (1983). The Reflective Practitioner: How professionals think in action, London: Temple Smith.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sein, M.K., Henfridsson, O., Purao, S., Rossi, M. and Lindgren, R. (2012). Action Design Research, MIS Quarterly 35(1): 37–56.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simon, H.A. (1969). The Sciences of the Artificial, Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, G.F. and Browne, G.J. (1993). Conceptual Foundations of Design Problem Solving, IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics 22(5): 1209–1219.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stevens, G. (2009). Understanding and Designing Appropriation Infrastructures: Artifacts as boundary objects in continuous software development, PhD Thesis, University of Siegen.

  • Stevens, G. and Nett, B. (2009). Business Ethnography as a Research Method to Support Evolutionary Design, Navigationen 9(2): 18–26.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stevens, G., Pipek, V. and Wulf, V. (2012). Appropriation Infrastructure: Mediating appropriation and production work, special issue on end user development, Journal of Organizational and End User Computing 22(2): 58–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Suchman, L. (2007). Human-machine Reconfigurations: Plans and situated actions, 2nd edn. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.

  • Suh, N.P. (1990). The Principles of Design, New York, Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walsham, G. (2006). Doing Interpretive Research, European Journal of Information Systems 15: 320–330.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weiser, M. (1995). The Computer for the 21st Century, Scientific American 272(3): 78–89.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wulf, V., Müller, C., Pipek, V., Randall, D., Rohde, M. and Stevens, G. (2015). Practice-based Computing: Empirically-grounded conceptualizations derived from design case studies, in V. Wulf, K. Schmidt and D. Randall (eds.) Designing Socially Embedded Technologies in the Real-world, Springer: London, pp. 111–150.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Wulf, V., Rohde, M., Pipek, V. and Stevens, G. (2011). Engaging with Practices: Design case studies as a research framework in CSCW, In Proceedings of ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW 2011); New York: ACM-Press, 505–512.

  • Wulf, V. (1999). Evolving Cooperation when Introducing Groupware – A self-organization perspective, Cybernetics and Human Knowing 6(2): 55–75.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wulf, V. (2000). Exploration Environments: Supporting users to learn groupware functions, Interacting with Computers 13(2): 265–299.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wulf, V. and Rohde, M. (1995). Towards an Integrated Organization and Technology Development, in Proceedings of the Symposium on Designing Interactive Systems; New York: ACM Press, 55–64.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Siegen, Siegen, Germany

    Markus Rohde, Peter Brödner, Gunnar Stevens, Matthias Betz & Volker Wulf

  2. International Institute for Socio-Informatics (IISI), Bonn, Germany

    Markus Rohde, Gunnar Stevens & Volker Wulf

Authors
  1. Markus Rohde
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Peter Brödner
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Gunnar Stevens
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Matthias Betz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Volker Wulf
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Markus Rohde.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Rohde, M., Brödner, P., Stevens, G. et al. Grounded Design – a praxeological IS research perspective. J Inf Technol 32, 163–179 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1057/jit.2016.5

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/jit.2016.5

Keywords

Search

Navigation