Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Design Science in the Field: Practice Design Research

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Designing for a Digital and Globalized World (DESRIST 2018)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNISA,volume 10844))

Abstract

There exist different types or genres of design science research (DSR) in information systems, like laboratory-oriented and practice-oriented DSR. This paper investigates arguments for a practice-oriented approach to DSR. It uses the research approach of practice research as a starting point to elaborate on a practice-oriented DSR approach we label Practice Design Research (PDR). In doing so, we address two unresolved issues in IS DSR: Theorizing and evaluation. PDR consists of two inter-related sub-activities: theorizing and situational design inquiry. The conduct of situational design inquiry is described as iterative cycles of (1) pre-evaluate, (2) plan & design, (3) test & intervene and (4) post-evaluate. We justify the foundations of these iterative sub-activities/cycles through a theoretically informed argument based on pragmatist philosophy and practice theory.

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 EPUB and 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

References

  1. Baskerville, R., Myers, M.: Design ethnography in information systems. Inf. Syst. J. 25, 23–46 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Dewey, J.: How We Think. D.C. Heath & Co., Boston (1910)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  3. Dewey, J.: The development of American pragmatism. In: Dewey, J. (ed.) Philosophy and Civilization. Minton, Balch & Co., New York (1931)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Dewey, J.: Logic: The Theory of Inquiry. Henry Holt, New York (1938)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Feldman, M., Orlikowski, W.: Theorizing practice and practicing theory. Organ. Sci. 22, 1240–1253 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Gibbons, M., Limoges, C., Nowotny, H., Schwartzman, S., Scott, P., Trow, P.: The New Production of Knowledge. The Dynamics of Science and Research in Contemporary Societies. Sage, London (1994)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Goldkuhl, G.: The research practice of practice research: theorizing and situational inquiry. Syst. Signs Actions 5(1), 7–29 (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Goldkuhl, G.: From action research to practice research. Australas. J. Inf. Syst. 17(2), 57–78 (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Goldkuhl, G.: Pragmatism vs. interpretivism in qualitative information systems research. Eur. J. Inf. Syst. 21(2), 135–146 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Goldkuhl, G., Lind, M.: A multi-grounded design research process. In: Winter, R., Zhao, J.L., Aier, S. (eds.) DESRIST 2010. LNCS, vol. 6105, pp. 45–60. Springer, Heidelberg (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-13335-0_4

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  11. Gregor, S., Hevner, A.: Positioning and presenting design science research for maximum impact. MIS Q. 37(2), 337–355 (2013)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Gregor, S., Jones, D.: The anatomy of a design theory. J. AIS 8(5), 312–335 (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Hevner, A.R.: A three cycle view of design science research. Scand. J. Inf. Syst. 19(2), 87–92 (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Hevner, A.R., March, S.T., Park, J., Ram, S.: Design science in information systems research. MIS Q. 28(1), 75–105 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Iivari, J.: Distinguishing and contrasting two strategies for design science research. Eur. J. Inf. Syst. 24, 107–115 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. James, W.: Pragmatism. A New Name for Some Old Ways of Thinking. Longmans, Green & Co., New York (1907)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  17. Koskinen, I., Zimmerman, J., Binder, T., Redström, J., Wensween, S.: Design Research Through Practice. From the Lab, Field, and Showroom. Morgan Kaufmann, Amsterdam (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  18. Kuechler, B., Vaishnavi, V.: A framework for theory development in design science research: multiple perspectives. J. AIS 13(6), 395–423 (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  19. Kuutti, K., Bannon, L.: The turn to practice in HCI: towards a research agenda. In: Proceedings CHI-2014, Toronto (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  20. Lee, J.S., Pries-Heje, J., Baskerville, R.: Theorizing in design science research. In: Jain, H., Sinha, A.P., Vitharana, P. (eds.) DESRIST 2011. LNCS, vol. 6629, pp. 1–16. Springer, Heidelberg (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-20633-7_1

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  21. Leonardi, P.: When flexible routines meet flexible technologies: affordance, constraint, and the imbrication of human and material agencies. MIS Q. 35(1), 147–167 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Ludema, J., Cooperrider, D., Barrett, F.: Appreciative inquiry: the power of the unconditional positive question. In: Reason, P., Bradbury, H. (eds.) Handbook of Action Research. Sage, London (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  23. Mathiassen, L.: Collaborative practice research. Inf. Technol. People 15(4), 321–345 (2002)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. McKay, J., Marshall, P., Hirschheim, R.: The design construct in information systems design science. J. Inf. Technol. 27, 125–139 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Nicolini, D.: Practice Theory, Work, & Organization. Oxford University Press, Oxford (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  26. Nilsen, P., Nordström, G., Ellström, P.-E.: Integrating research-based and practice-based knowledge through workplace reflection. J. Workplace Learn. 24(6), 403–415 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Orlikowski, W.J., Iacono, C.S.: Desperately seeking the “IT” in IT research – a call to theorizing the IT artifact. Inf. Syst. Res. 12(2), 121–134 (2001)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Pain, H.: Practice research: what it is and its place in the social work profession. Eur. J. Soc. Work 14(4), 545–562 (2010)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Peffers, K., Tuunanen, T., Rothenberger, M.A., Chatterjee, S.: A design science research methodology for information systems research. J. Manag. Inf. Syst. 24(3), 45–77 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Rohde, M., Stevens, G., Brödner, P., Wulf, V.: Towards a paradigmatic shift in IS: designing for social practice. In: Proceedings DESRIST-2009, Malvern (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  31. Rohde, M., Brödner, P., Stevens, G., Betz, M., Wulf, V.: Grounded design – a praxeological IS research perspective. J. Inf. Technol. 32, 163–179 (2016)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Salisbury Forum Group. The Salisbury Statement. Social Work & Society, vol. 9 (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  33. Schön, D.: The Reflective Practitioner - How Professionals Think in Action. Basic Books, New York (1983)

    Google Scholar 

  34. Scott, S., Orlikowski, W.: Entanglements in practice: performing anonymity through social media. MIS Q. 38(3), 873–893 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Sein, M., Henfridsson, O., Purao, S., Rossi, M., Lindgren, R.: Action design research. MIS Q. 35(1), 37–56 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Sjöström, J., Ågerfalk, P.J.: An analytic framework for design-oriented research concepts. In: Proceedings of AMCIS-2009, San Francisco (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  37. Sonnenberg, C., vom Brocke, J.: Evaluation patterns for design science research artefacts. In: Helfert, M., Donnellan, B. (eds.) EDSS 2011. CCIS, vol. 286, pp. 71–83. Springer, Heidelberg (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-33681-2_7

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  38. Stevenson, C.: Practical inquiry/theory in nursing. J. Adv. Nurs. 50(2), 196–203 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Susman, G.I., Evered, R.D.: An assessment of the scientific merits of action research. Adm. Sci. Q. 23(4), 582–603 (1978)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Uggerhøj, L.: What is practice research in social work - definitions, barriers and possibilities. Soc. Work Soc. 9(1), 45–59 (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  41. Van de Ven, A.: Engaged Scholarship: A Guide for Organizational and Social Research. Oxford University Press, Oxford (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  42. Venable, J.: The role of theory and theorising in design science research. In: Proceedings of DESRIST 2006, Claremont (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  43. Venable, J., Pries-Heje, J., Baskerville, R.: FEDS: a framework for evaluation in design science research. Eur. J. Inf. Syst. 25, 77–89 (2016)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Watson, V.: Do we learn from planning practice?: the contribution of the practice movement to planning theory. J. Plann. Educ. Res. 22, 178–187 (2002)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Whittington, R.: Completing the practice turn in strategy research. Organ. Stud. 27(5), 613–634 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Winter, R.: Towards a framework for evidence-based and inductive design in information systems research. In: Helfert, M., Donnellan, B., Kenneally, J. (eds.) EDSS 2013. CCIS, vol. 447, pp. 1–20. Springer, Cham (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-13936-4_1

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  47. Zimmerman, J., Forlizzi, J.: Research through design in HCI. In: Olson, J., Kellogg, W. (eds.) Ways of Knowing in HCI. Springer, New York (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-0378-8_8

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  48. Mead, G.H.: Philosophy of the Act. University of Chicago Press, Chicago (1938)

    Google Scholar 

  49. Lee, A., Nickerson, J.: Theory as a case of design: lessons for design from the philosophy of science. In: Proceedings of the 43rd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  50. Goldkuhl, G.: Design research in search for a paradigm: pragmatism is the answer. In: Helfert, M., Donnellan, B. (eds.) EDSS 2011. CCIS, vol. 286, pp. 84–95. Springer, Heidelberg (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-33681-2_8

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Informatics and Media, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden

    Göran Goldkuhl & Jonas Sjöström

  2. Department of Management and Engineering, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden

    Göran Goldkuhl

Authors
  1. Göran Goldkuhl
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jonas Sjöström
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Göran Goldkuhl .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. School of Information Systems and Technology, Claremont Graduate University, Claremont, California, USA

    Samir Chatterjee

  2. Muma College of Business, University of South Florida, Tampa, Florida, USA

    Kaushik Dutta

  3. Department of Management Studies, IIT Madras, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India

    Rangaraja P. Sundarraj

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Goldkuhl, G., Sjöström, J. (2018). Design Science in the Field: Practice Design Research. In: Chatterjee, S., Dutta, K., Sundarraj, R. (eds) Designing for a Digital and Globalized World. DESRIST 2018. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 10844. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-91800-6_5

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-91800-6_5

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-91799-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-91800-6

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation