A Conceptual Framework for Design Science Research

  • Łukasz Ostrowski
  • Markus Helfert
  • Fakir Hossain
Part of the Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing book series (LNBIP, volume 90)


Based on reviewing foremost literature, the paper discusses design science research methodology with strategies for design science evaluation. We have identified an interesting problem that, for certain artefacts, this methodology leads to a recursion effect. Therefore, we propose a conceptual framework for these artefacts, which, once developed, will detail facets of design science methodology for producing abstract design knowledge. The framework aims to fill out the lack of details in design science methodology for development of abstract design knowledge.


Design Science Research Methodology Design Science Evaluation Abstract Design Knowledge 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Aker, J.F., Chen, M., Purdin, T.D.M.: Systems Development in Information Systems Research. Journal of Management IS 7(3), 89–106 (1991)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Van Aken, J.: Management Research Based on the Paradigm of the Design Sciences: the Quest for Tested and Grounded Technological Rules. Journal of Management Studies 41(2), 219–246 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Simon, H.: The Sciences of the Artificial, 1st edn. MIT Press, Cambridge (1970)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Van Aken, J.E.: Management Research as a Design Science: Articulating the Research Products of Mode 2 Knowledge Production in Management. British Journal of Management 16(1), 19–36 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Benbasat, I., Zmud, R.W.: Empirical Research in Information Systems- The Practice of Relevance. MIS Quarterly 23(1), 3–36 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Hevner, A.R., March, S.T., Park, J., Ram, S.: Design Science in Information Systems Research. MIS Quarterly 28, 75–106 (2004)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Rosemann, M., Vessey, I.: Toward Improving the Relevance of Information Systems Research to Practice: The Role of Applicability Checks. MIS Quarterly 32(1), 1–22 (2008)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Archer, L.B.: Systematic Method for Designers. In: Developments in Design Methodology, London, pp. 57–82 (1984)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Eekels, J., Roozenburg, N.F.M.: A Methodological Comparison of the Structures of Scientific Research and Engineering Design-Their Similarities and Differences. Design Studies 12(4), 197–203 (1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Fulcher, A.J., Hills, P.: Towards a Strategic Framework for Design Research. Journal of Engineering Design 7(1), 183–193 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Reich, Y.: The Study of Design Methodology. Journal of Mechanical Design 117(2), 211–214 (1994)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Preston, M., Mehandjiev, N.: A Framework for Classifying Intelligent Design Theories. In: Mehandjiev, N., Brereton, B. (eds.) The 2004 ACM Workshop on Interdisciplinary Software Engineering Research, New York, pp. 49–54 (2004)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Takeda, H., Veerkamp, P., Tomiyama, T., Yoshikawam, H.: Modelling Design Processes. AI Magazine 11(4), 37–48 (1990)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Adams, L., Courtney, J.: Achieving Relevance in IS Research via the DAGS Framework. In: 37th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (2004)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Cole, R., Purao, S., Rossi, M., Sein, M.K.: Being proactive- Where Action Research Meets Design Research. In: 26th International Conference on Information Systems, Atlanta, pp. 325–336 (2005)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    March, S., Smith, G.: Design and Natural Science Research on Information Technology. Decision Support Systems 15(4), 251–266 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Rossi, M., Sein, M.K.: Design Research Workshop: A Proactive Research Approach. In: 26th Information Systems Research Seminar in Scandinavia, Haikko, pp. 9–12 (2003)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Walls, J., Widmeyer, G., El Sawy, O.: Building an Information System Design Theory for Vigilant EIS. Information Systems Research 3(1), 36–59 (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Venable, J.R., Travis, J.: Using a Group Support System for the Distributed Application of Soft Systems Methodology. In: Hope, B., Yoong, P. (eds.) 10th Australasian Conference on Information Systems, Wellington, New Zealand, pp. 1105–1117 (1999)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Vaishnavi, V., Kuechler, B.: Design Research in Information Systems. Association for Information Systems (2005)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Peffers, K., Tuunanen, T., Rothenberger, M.: A Design Science Research Methodology. Journal of Management Information Systems 24(3), 45–77 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Offermann, P., Levina, O., Schonherr, M., Bub, U.: Outline of a Design Science Research Process. In: Design Science Research in Information Systems and Technology (2009)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Goldkuhl, G.: Design Theories in Information Systems – A Need for Multi-Grounding. Journal of Information Technology and Application 6(2), 59–72 (2004)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    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)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Klecun, E., Cornford, T.: A Critical Approach to Evaluation. European Journal of IS 14(3), 229–243 (2005)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Venable, J.: A Framework for Design Science Research Activities. In: The 2006 Information Resource Management Association Conference, Washington DC (2006)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Sun, Y., Kantor, P.: Cross-Evaluation: A New Model for Information System Evaluation. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 57(5), 614–662 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Pries-Heje, J., Baskerville, R., Venable, J.: Strategies for Design Science Research Evaluation. In: 16th European Conference on Information Systems, pp. 255–266 (2008)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Van de Ven, A.: Engaged Scholarship: A Guide for Organizational and Social Research. Oxford University Press, New York (2007)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Azevedo, J.: Mapping Reality: An Evolutionary Realist Methodology for the Natural and Social Sciences. Albany (1997)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Łukasz Ostrowski
    • 1
  • Markus Helfert
    • 1
  • Fakir Hossain
    • 1
  1. 1.School of ComputingDublin City UniversityDublin 9Ireland

Personalised recommendations