An Analytic Framework for Design-Oriented Research Concepts

Over the last few decades, the field of information systems has shown a steadily increasing interest in design-oriented research. This is manifested through the emergence of different ontological and epistemological positions among IS researchers. Some challenges arise from this development, such as (a) a need to understand design-oriented IS research in relation to design-oriented approaches in other disciplines, and (b) a need for design theory representation that targets and is useful to stakeholders in both research and practice. This paper proposes a conceptual framework for understanding designoriented research, and its implications for research with a focus on meeting the two challenges mentioned above

The Inter-Organizationa; System (IOS) Artifact: an Interpretaticce Discourse

A need for theory-based research covering IOS artifact has been cited by IS academics and researchers, wherein the subject of the research is the IOS itself, as opposed to the contexts within which the IOS gets acceptance. This paper attempts to define a simple proposition pertinent to the IOS artifact and in doing so identifies areas of research interest, which if pursued could potentially lead to theories for IOS that are explanatory, instructive and stand the test of IOS evolution

Pragmatizing the Normative Artifact: Design Science Research in Scandinavia and Beyond

In this panel report, we analyze the discussion that unfolded during the “Design Science Research: A Scandinavian Approach?” panel held at the third Scandinavian Conference on Information Systems in Sigtuna, Sweden, in August, 2012. The second author of this paper chaired the panel, which also included Tone Bratteteig, Shirley Gregor, Ola Henfridsson, Alan Hevner, Jan Pries-Heje, and Tuure Tuunanen as panelists. Three themes that highlight how the design of artifacts contributes to knowledge production emerged during the panel. The first theme addresses our responsibility, as a research community, to come up not only with descriptions of the world but also to try to change things into preferable states. The second theme emphasizes that knowledge production also happens through the design of artifacts. The third theme identifies an apparent pragmatic turn in our discipline

Design Science Epistemology. A pragmatist inquiry

This paper contributes to the clarification of a design science epistemology. It presents different epistemic types related to three stages of the design science process: 1) Evaluative and explanatory background knowledge (pre-design knowledge), 2) prospective knowledge with design hypotheses (in-design knowledge) and 3) prescriptive knowledge with design principles (post-design knowledge). The epistemological inquiry adopts a pragmatist approach and is pursued through a review of design science literature and informed by an empirical design case on digital support for social welfare allowances. The clarified design science epistemology shows a diversified epistemological landscape with several epistemic types: evaluative, critical, appreciative, normative, explanatory, prospective, prescriptive, categorial and attributive knowledge. Ways to express these epistemic types have been proposed in principal clauses. Ways of grounding have been clarified for each epistemic type. Proposals are given on how to utilize the design science epistemology in relation to design science process models and publication schemas