Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Method Versus Model – Two Sides of the Same Coin?

  • Conference paper
Book cover Advances in Enterprise Engineering III (CIAO! 2009, EOMAS 2009)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing ((LNBIP,volume 34))

Abstract

This article analyzes the state-of-the-art regarding the development of generic methods and reference models. The analysis shows that the related research disciplines, method engineering and reference modeling, tend to converge. Furthermore, it shows that the differentiation between generic methods and reference models should not be maintained because both artifact types feature activity-oriented elements as well as result-oriented elements. Depending on the artifact type, however, generic methods and reference models vary regarding the relative importance of the activity view and the result view. A generic problem solution (generic term for methods and reference models) can be interpreted as a sequence of activities which aim at the development of results. The insights into the commonalities among generic problem solutions provide the opportunity to define a unified design process in the field of design science research. Implications and unification challenges that are related to such a unified design process are presented at the end of the paper.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Arazy, O., Kumar, N., Shapira, B.: Social Recommendations Systems: Leveraging the Power of Social Networks in Generating Recommendations. In: Chatterjee, S., Hevner, A. (eds.) Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Design Science Research in Information Systems and Technology (DESRIST 2006), Claremont, pp. 310–328 (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Bacon, C.J., Fitzgerald, B.: A Systemic Framework for the Field of Information Systems. ACM SIGMIS Database 32, 46–67 (2001)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Becker, J., et al.: Configurable Reference Process Models for Public Administrations. In: Anttiroiko, A.-V., Malkia, M. (eds.) Encyclopedia of Digital Government, pp. 220–223. Idea Group, Hershey (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Becker, J., Janiesch, C., Pfeiffer, D.: Reuse Mechanisms in Situational Method Engineering. In: Ralyté, J., et al. (eds.) Situational Method Engineering – Fundamentals and Experiences, pp. 79–93. Springer, Boston (2007)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  5. Becker, J., et al.: Configurative Method Engineering – On the Applicability of Reference Modeling Mechanisms in Method Engineering. In: Proceedings of the 13th Americas Conference on Information Systems (AMCIS 2007), Keystone, pp. 1–12 (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Braun, C., et al.: Method Construction – A Core Approach to Organizational Engineering. In: Haddad, H., et al. (eds.) Proceedings of the 20th Annual ACM Symposium on Applied Computing (SAC 2005), Santa Fe, New Mexico, USA, pp. 1295–1299 (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Brinkkemper, S.: Method engineering: engineering of information systems development methods and tools. Information and Software Technology 38, 275–280 (1996)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Brookes, C.H.P., et al.: Information Systems Design. Prentice-Hall, Sydney (1982)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Bucher, T., et al.: Situational Method Engineering – On the Differentiation of “Context” and “Project Type”. In: Ralyté, J., et al. (eds.) Situational Method Engineering – Fundamentals and Experiences, pp. 33–48. Springer, Boston (2007)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  10. Bucher, T., Winter, R.: Dissemination and Importance of the “Method” Artifact in the Context of Design Research for Information Systems. In: Vaishnavi, V., Baskerville, R. (eds.) Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Design Science Research in Information Systems and Technology (DESRIST 2008), Atlanta, pp. 39–59 (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Chmielewicz, K.: Forschungskonzeptionen der Wirtschaftswissenschaft. Schäffer-Poeschel, Stuttgart (1994)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Fettke, P., Loos, P.: Classification of reference models: a methodology and its application. Information Systems and e-Business Management 1, 35–53 (2003)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Fettke, P., Loos, P.: Multiperspective Evaluation of Reference Models – Towards a Framework. In: Jeusfeld, M.A., Pastor, Ó. (eds.) Proceedings of the Conceptual Modeling for Novel Application Domains Workshop (ER2003 Workshops ECOMO, IWCMQ, AOIS, and XSDM), Chicago, pp. 80–91 (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Fettke, P., Loos, P.: Ontological Evaluation of Reference Models Using the Bunge-Wand-Weber Model. In: DeGross, J.I. (ed.) Proceedings of the Ninth Americas Conference on Information Systems, Tampa, pp. 2944–2955 (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Fettke, P., Loos, P.: Der Beitrag der Referenzmodellierung zum Business Engineering. HMD – Praxis der Wirtschaftsinformatik 42, 18–26 (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Gorla, N., Umanath, N.S.: On the Design of Optimal Compensation Structures for Outsourcing Software Development and Maintenance: An Agency Theory Perspective. In: Chatterjee, S., Hevner, A. (eds.) Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Design Science Research in Information Systems and Technology (DESRIST 2006), Claremont, pp. 646–662 (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Gottschalk, F., van der Aalst, W.M.P., Jansen-Vullers, M.H.: Configurable Process Models: A Foundational Approach. In: Lehner, F., et al. (eds.) Proceedings of the Multikonferenz Wirtschaftsinformatik 2006 (MKWI 2006), Passau (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  18. Grabowski, H., Lossack, R.-S., El-Mejbri, E.-F.: Towards a Universal Design Theory. In: Kals, H., van Houten, F. (eds.) Integration of Process Knowledge Into Design Support Systems: Proceedings of the 1999 CIRP International Design Seminar, University of Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands, Dordrecht, March 24-26, 1999, pp. 49–56 (1999)

    Google Scholar 

  19. Green, P., Rosemann, M.: Integrated Process Modeling: An Ontological Evaluation. Information Systems 25, 73–87 (2000)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Hevner, A.R., et al.: Design Science in Information Systems Research. MIS Quarterly 28, 75–105 (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  21. Karlsson, F., Ågerfalk, P.J.: Method configuration: adapting to situational characteristics while creating reusable assets. Information and Software Technology 46, 619–633 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Knackstedt, R.: Fachkonzeptionelle Referenzmodellierung einer Managementunterstützung mit quantitativen und qualitativen Daten – Methodische Konzepte zur Konstruktion und Anwendung, Doctoral Thesis, University of Münster, Münster (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  23. Knackstedt, R., Janiesch, C., Rieke, T.: Configuring Reference Models – An Integrated Approach for Transaction Processing and Decision Support. In: Manolopoulos, Y., et al. (eds.) Proceedings of the Eighth International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems (ICEIS 2006), Paphos, pp. 135–143 (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  24. Kornyshova, E., Deneckère, R., Salinesi, C.: Method Chunks Selection by Multicriteria Techniques: an Extension of the Assembly-based Approach. In: Ralyté, J., et al. (eds.) Situational Method Engineering – Fundamentals and Experiences, pp. 64–78. Springer, Boston (2007)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  25. Kuechler, W.L., Vaishnavi, V.K.: Theory Development in Design Science Research: Anatomy of a Research Project. In: Vaishnavi, V.K., Baskerville, R. (eds.) Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Design Science Research in Information Systems and Technology (DESRIST 2008), Atlanta, pp. 1–15 (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  26. Kunene, K.N., Weistroffer, H.R.: Design of a Method to Integrate Knowledge Discovery Techniques with Prior Domain Knowledge for Better Decision Support. In: Chatterjee, S., Hevner, A. (eds.) Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Design Science Research in Information Systems and Technology (DESRIST 2006), pp. 343–355. Claremont (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  27. Lehner, F.: Modelle und Modellierung in angewandter Informatik und Wirtschaftsinformatik oder wie ist die Wirklichkeit wirklich? Research Report No. 10, Chair of Business Information Science and Information Management, WHU – Otto Beisheim School of Management, Koblenz (1994)

    Google Scholar 

  28. Leppänen, M.: An Ontological Framework and a Methodical Skeleton for Method Engineering. Doctoral Thesis, University of Jyväskylä, Jyväskylä (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  29. Lossack, R.-S., Grabowski, H.: The Axiomatic Approach in the Universal Design Theory. In: Tate, D. (ed.) Proceedings of the First International Conference on Axiomatic Design (ICAD 2000), Cambridge, MA, pp. 203–210 (2000)

    Google Scholar 

  30. March, S.T., Smith, G.F.: Design and Natural Science Research on Information Technology. Decision Support Systems 15, 251–266 (1995)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Mirbel, I., Ralyté, J.: Situational method engineering: combining assembly-based and roadmap-driven approaches. Requirements Engineering 11, 58–78 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Peffers, K., et al.: The Design Science Research Process: A Model for Producing and Presenting Information Systems Research. In: Chatterjee, S., Hevner, A. (eds.) Proceedings of the First International Conference on Design Science Research in Information Systems and Technology (DESRIST 2006), pp. 83–106. Claremont (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  33. Pfeiffer, D., Niehaves, B.: Evaluation of Conceptual Models – A Structuralist Approach. In: Bartmann, D., et al. (eds.) Proceedings of the 13th European Conference on Information Systems (ECIS 2005), Regensburg (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  34. Ralyté, J., Rolland, C.: An Approach for Method Reengineering. In: Hideko, S.K., et al. (eds.) ER 2001. LNCS, vol. 2224, pp. 471–484. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  35. Rolland, C.: A Primer for Method Engineering. In: Proceedings of the Informatique des Organisations d’Information et de Décision (INFORSID). Toulouse (1997)

    Google Scholar 

  36. Schelp, J., Winter, R.: Method Engineering – Lessons Learned from Reference Modeling. In: Chatterjee, S., Hevner, A. (eds.) Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Design Science Research in Information Systems and Technology (DESRIST 2006), pp. 555–575. Claremont (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  37. Schütte, R., Rotthowe, T.: The Guidelines of Modeling – An Approach to Enhance the Quality in Information Models. In: Ling, T.-W., Ram, S., Li Lee, M. (eds.) ER 1998. LNCS, vol. 1507, pp. 240–254. Springer, Heidelberg (1998)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  38. Tatnall, A., Davey, B., McConville, D.: Information Systems – Design and Implementation. Data Publishing, Melbourne (1996)

    Google Scholar 

  39. Tolvanen, J.-P.: Incremental Method Engineering with Modeling Tools: Theoretical Principles and Empirical Evidence. Doctoral Thesis, University of Jyväskylä, Jyväskylä (1998)

    Google Scholar 

  40. van de Weerd, I., Brinkkemper, S.: Meta-Modeling for Situational Analysis and Design Methods. In: Syed, M.R., Syed, S.N. (eds.) Handbook of Research on Modern Systems Analysis and Design Technologies and Applications, pp. 35–54. Idea Group, Hershey (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  41. van Slooten, K., Hodes, B.: Characterizing IS development projects. In: Brinkkemper, S., et al. (eds.) IFIP TC8 Working Conference on Method Engineering, pp. 29–44. Chapman & Hall, London (1996)

    Google Scholar 

  42. Venable, J.R.: The Role of Theory and Theorising in Design Science Research. In: Chatterjee, S., Hevner, A. (eds.) Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Design Science in Information Systems and Technology (DESRIST 2006), pp. 1–18. Claremont (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  43. Vessey, I., Ramesh, V., Glass, R.L.: Research in Information Systems – An Empirical Study of Diversity in the Discipline and Its Journals. Journal of Management Information Systems 19, 129–174 (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  44. vom Brocke, J.: Referenzmodellierung: Gestaltung und Verteilung von Konstruktionsprozessen. Doctoral Thesis, University of Münster, Münster (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  45. von Brocke, J.: Design Principles for Reference Modelling. Reusing Information Models by Means of Aggregation, Specialisation, Instantiation, and Analogy. In: Fettke, P., Loos, P. (eds.) Reference Modelling for Business Systems Analysis, pp. 47–75. Idea Group, Hershey (2007)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  46. von Brocke, J., Buddendick, C.: Reusable Conceptual Models – Requirements Based on the Design Science Research Paradigm. In: Chatterjee, S., Hevner, A. (eds.) Proceedings of the First International Conference on Design Science Research in Information Systems and Technology (DESRIST 2006), pp. 576–604. Claremont (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  47. Winter, R., Schelp, J.: Reference Modeling and Method Construction – A Design Science Perspective. In: Liebrock, L.M. (ed.) Proceedings of the 21st Annual ACM Symposium on Applied Computing (SAC 2006), pp. 1561–1562 (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  48. Zhao, H.: Selective Encryption for MPEG-4 FGS Videos. In: Chatterjee, S., Hevner, A. (eds.) Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Design Science Research in Information Systems and Technology (DESRIST 2006), pp. 605–609. Claremont (2006)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute of Information Management, University of St. Gallen, Müller-Friedberg-Strasse 8, 9000 St., Gallen, Switzerland

    Robert Winter, Anke Gericke & Tobias Bucher

Authors
  1. Robert Winter
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Anke Gericke
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Tobias Bucher
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Delft University of Technology, Mekelweg 4, 2628 CD, Delft, The Netherlands

    Antonia Albani  & Jan L. G. Dietz  & 

  2. Delft Unitersity of Technology, Jaffalaan 5, 2628 BX, Delft, The Netherlands

    Joseph Barjis

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2009 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Winter, R., Gericke, A., Bucher, T. (2009). Method Versus Model – Two Sides of the Same Coin?. In: Albani, A., Barjis, J., Dietz, J.L.G. (eds) Advances in Enterprise Engineering III. CIAO! EOMAS 2009 2009. Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing, vol 34. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-01915-9_1

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-01915-9_1

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-642-01914-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-642-01915-9

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation