When Designers Are Not in Control – Experiences from Using Action Research to Improve Researcher-Developer Collaboration in Design Science Research

  • Anders Hjalmarsson
  • Daniel Rudmark
  • Mikael Lind
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 6105)


Design science research (DSR) has received much attention in the past few years from the field of information systems. This paper argues that control in researcher-developer collaboration during artefact development has not yet received enough attention in design science research even though control is necessary for successful artefact instantiation.Experiences are presented from improving researcher-developer collaboration during DSR by using action research (AR) as means. These experiences are driven from the need to achieve meta-design control throughout the development of artefacts by non-researching system developers when DSR is performed in an authentic setting. The paper shows that the use of AR to both diagnose uncertainty and actively improve building activities may lead to sustainable improvements in researcher-developer collaboration, and hence achieve meta-design control in DSR performed in authentic development environments, as well as enhance progress in DSR methodology development.


Design science research action research researcher-developer collaboration meta-design control authentic setting 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Orlikowski, W.J., Iacono, C.S.: Research commentary: desperately seeking the “IT” in IT research: A call to theorizing the IT artifact. Information Systems Research 12, 121–134 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Au, Y.A.: Design science I: The role of design science in electronic commerce research. Communications of AIS 7 (2001)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Järvinen, P.: Action research is similar to design science. Quality & Quantity 41, 37–54 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Cole, R., Purao, S., Rossi, M., Sein, M.: Being proactive: Where action research meets design research. In: Proceedings for ICIS 2005, pp. 325–336 (2005)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Iivari, J., Venable, J.: Action research and design science research: seemingly similar but decisively dissimilar. In: Proceedings for ECIS 2009, Verona, Italy, June 8-10 (2009)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Gavish, B., Gerdes, J.: Anonymous mechanisms in group decision support systems communication. Decision Support System 23(4), 297–328 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Markus, M.L., Majchrzak, A., Gasser, L.: A design theory for systems that support emergent knowledge processes. MIS Quarterly 26(3), 179–212 (2002)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Susman, G., Evered, R.: An assessment of the scientific merits of action research. Administrative Science Quarterly 23, 582–603 (1978)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Hevner, A.R., March, S.T., Park, J., Ram, S.: Design science in information systems research. MISQ 28, 75–106 (2004)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Vaishnavi, V.K., Kuechler Jr., W.: Design science research methods and patterns: innovating information and communication technology. Auerbach Pub. (2007)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Nunamaker, J., Chen, M., Purdin, T.D.M.: Systems development in information systems research. J. of Management Information Systems 7(3), 89–106 (1991)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Purao, S.: Design research in the technology of information systems: truth or dare. Pennsylvania State University (2002)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Venable, J.R.: A framework for design science research activities. In: Proceedings of the Information Resource Management Association Conference, Washington, DC, USA, May 21-24 (2006)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Gericke, A.: Problem solving patterns in design science research: learning from engineering. In: Proceedings for ECIS 2009, Verona, Italy, June 8-10 (2009)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Purao, S., Baldwin, C.Y., Hevner, A., Storey, V.C., Pries-Heje, J., Smith, B., Zhu, Y.: The sciences of design: observations on an emerging field. Harvard Business School Finance Working Paper No. 09-056 (2008)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Fischer, G., Giaccardi, E.: Meta-Design: A framework for the future of end user development. In: Lieberman, H., Paternò, F., Wulf, V. (eds.) End user development: empowering people to flexibly employ advanced information and communication technology, pp. 427–457 (2006)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Fischer, G.: Meta-design: expanding boundaries and redistributing control in design. In: Baranauskas, C., Palanque, P., Abascal, J., Barbosa, S.D.J. (eds.) INTERACT 2007, Part 1. LNCS, vol. 4662, pp. 193–206. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Lewin, K.: Frontiers in Group Dynamics. Human Relations 1(1), 5–41 (1947)CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Blum, F.: Action research: a scientific approach? Philosophy of Science 22(1), 1–7 (1955)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Baskerville, R.L., Wood-Harper, A.T.: Critical perspective on action research as a method for information systems research. J. of Information Technology 11, 235–246 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Baskerville, R.L., Wood-Harper, A.T.: Diversity in information systems research methods. European J. of Information Systems 7(2), 90–107 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Susman, G.: Action research: a sociotechnical perspective. In: Morgan, G. (ed.) Beyond method: strategies for social research, pp. 95–113. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks (1983)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Davison, R.M., Martinsons, M.G., Kock, N.: Principles of canonical action research. Information Systems Journal 14, 65–86 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Coghlan, D., Brannick, T.: Doing action research in your own organization, 3rd edn. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks (2010)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Lee, A.: Action is an artifact: what action research and design science offer to each other. In: Kock, N. (ed.) Information systems action research: an applied view of emerging concepts and methods, pp. 43–60 (2007)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    March, S.T., Smith, G.: Design and natural science research on information technology. Decision Support Systems 15(4), 251–266 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Albinsson, L., Lind, M., Forsgren, O.: Co-design: an approach to border crossing, Network Innovation. In: Cunningham, P., Cunningham, M. (eds.) Expanding the knowledge economy: issues, applications, case Studies, pp. 977–983. IOS Press, Amsterdam (2007)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Lind, M., Albinsson, L., Forsgren, O., Hedman, J.: Integrated development, use and learning in a co-design setting: experiences from the incremental deployment of e-Me. In: Cunningham, P., Cunningham, M. (eds.) Expanding the knowledge economy: issues, applications, case Studies, pp. 773–780. IOS Press, Amsterdam (2007)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Schwaber, K., Beedle, M.: Agile software development with Scrum. Prentice Hall PTR, Upper Saddle River (2001)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    von Hippel, E., Katz, R.: Shifting Innovation to users via Toolkits. Management Science 48(7), 821–833 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Kaptelinin, V., Nardi, B.A.: Acting with technology: activity theory and interaction design. The MIT Press, Cambridge (2006)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Kuutti, K.: Activity theory and its applications to information systems research and development. In: Nissen, H.-E., Klein, H., Hirschheim, R. (eds.) Information Systems Research: Contemporary Approaches and Emergent Traditions, North Holland, Amsterdam, pp. 529–549 (1991)Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Engeström, Y.: Activity theory and individual and social transformation. In: Opening address at the 2nd International Congress for Research on Activity Theory, Lahti Finland (1990)Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Conklin, J.: Dialouge mapping: building shared understanding of wicked problems. Wiley, Chichester (2006)Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Hogan, C.: Understanding facilitation: theory and principles, p. 36. Kogan Page (2002)Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Kuechler, W., Vaishnavi, V.: The emergence of design science research in information systems in North America. J. of Design Research 7(1), 1–16 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Anders Hjalmarsson
    • 1
    • 2
  • Daniel Rudmark
    • 3
  • Mikael Lind
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.School of Business & InformaticsUniversity of BoråsSweden
  2. 2.Viktoria instituteSweden
  3. 3.InnovationLabUniversity of BoråsSweden

Personalised recommendations