Abstract
Design science research should be relevant, valuable, purposeful and prescriptive. Its value as a relevant source of prescriptions implies the practical usefulness of its results beyond a single expository instantiation. But propagation of such design science products as design principles and theories appears to be a key challenge. In this paper we commence with a DESRIST paper from 2012 that instantiated design principles in an artifact for a bank. That paper included plans and techniques for future use of its principles (propagation), including prescriptions for a five-phase adoption process. In this paper we discuss the propagation issues around generalizing design science research across multiple contexts and propose alternative propagation concepts of projectability and entrenchment. The existing concepts around generalizability have issues that make them less suitable for design science research: context (local/possible worlds) and theoretical statements based on functional explanations. A projection is any relevant instance that supports a theory. Projectability involves defining the relationship between a base case or evidence and a projection. Entrenchment occurs when design principles or theories have stimulated many actual projections. We demonstrate these concepts in a case study of propagation: a chemical manufacturer and service provider that adopted the design principles arising from that 2012 DESRIST banking-based design science research. We conclude that generalizability is too well-oriented to descriptive research and argue that a more appropriate framing for design science research is projectability and entrenchment. The paper includes recommendations to increase the projectability of design science research.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Pries-Heje, J., Pries-Heje, L.: Designing a Framework for Virtual Management and Team Building. In: Peffers, K., Rothenberger, M., Kuechler, B. (eds.) DESRIST 2012. LNCS, vol. 7286, pp. 256–270. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)
Nagel, E.: The Structure of Science: Problems in Scientific Explanation. Routledge and Kegan Paul, London (1961)
Lee, A.S., Baskerville, R.L.: Generalizing Generalizability In Information Systems Research. Information Systems Research 14(3), 221–243 (2003)
Lee, A.S., Baskerville, R.L.: Conceptualizing Generalizability: New Contributions and a Reply. MIS Quarterly 36(3), 749–761 (2012)
Tsang, E.W.K., Williams, J.N.: Generalization and Hume’s Problem of Induction: Misconceptions and Clarifications. MIS Quarterly 36(3), 729–748 (2012)
Hevner, A.R., et al.: Design Science in Information Systems Research. MIS Quarterly 28(1), 75–105 (2004)
Simon, H.A.: The Science of the Artificial, 3rd edn. MIT Press, Cambridge (1996)
Williams, R., Pollock, N.: Moving Beyond the Single Site Implementation Study: How (and Why) We Should Study the Biography of Packaged Enterprise Solutions. Information Systems Research 23(1), 1–22 (2012)
Shadish, W.R., Cook, T.D., Campbell, D.T.: Experimental and Quasi-Experimental Designs for Generalized Causal Inference. Houghton Mifflin, Boston (2002)
Bunge, M.: Scientific Research II: The Search for Truth. Studies in the Foundations Methodology and Philosophy of Science, vol. 3. Springer, New York (1967)
Crane, T.: Possible worlds. In: Honderich, T. (ed.) The Oxford Companion to Philosophy, p. 744. Oxford University Press, Oxford (2005)
Lewis, D.: On the Plurality of Worlds. Malden Mass, Blackwell (1986)
Buchanan, R.: Rhetoric, Humanism and Design. In: Buchanan, R., Margolin, V. (eds.) Discovering Design, University of Chicagor Press, Chicago (1995)
Baskerville, R., Pries-Heje, J.: Explanatory Design Theory. Business & Information Systems Engineering 2(5), 271–282 (2010)
Guba, E.G., Lincoln, Y.S.: Epistemological and Methodological Bases of Naturalistic Inquiry. Educational Communications and Technology Journal 30(4), 233–252 (1982)
Lincoln, Y.S., Guba, E.G.: Naturalistic Inquiry. Sage, Newbury Park (1985)
Hellström, T.: Transferability and Naturalistic Generalization: New Generalizability Concepts for Social Science or Old Wine in New Bottles? Quality & Quantity 42(3), 321–337 (2008)
Goodman, N.: Fact, Fiction, & Forecast. Harvard University Press, Cambridge (1955)
Baskerville, R., Pries-Heje, J.: Design Theory Projectability. In: Doolin, B., Lamprou, E., Mitev, N., McLeod, L. (eds.) IS&O 2014. IFIP AICT, vol. 446, pp. 219–232. Springer, Heidelberg (2014)
Gregor, S., Jones, D.: The Anatomy of a Design Theory. Journal of the Association for Information Systems 8(5), 312–335 (2007)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2015 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this paper
Cite this paper
Baskerville, R., Pries-Heje, J. (2015). Projecting the Future for Design Science Research: An Action-Case Based Analysis. 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_18
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-18714-3_18
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-18713-6
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-18714-3
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)