Introduction to Design Science Erik Perjons

slide1. Introduction to Design Science Erik Perjons
Department of Computer and Systems Sciences (DSV), Stockholm University<br>
slide2. What is Design Science?<br>
slide3. Positioning design science Natural Science Social Science Design Science Empirical science - aims at describing and explaining the actual world in the present (as-is) or the past (has been) Design science - aims at improve and change the world in the future (to-be) - by developing and introducing artefacts in practice<br>
slide4. Defining design science Design science is the scientific study and creation of artefacts as they are developed and used by people with the goal of solving practical problems of general interest<br>
slide5. Defining artefact An artefact is an object made by humans with the intention to be used to address a practical problem in a practice<br>
slide6. Artefact types in information systems IT system
Prototype of an IT system
Method
Model
Guidelines
Requirements Algorithm
Notation
Metric
Pattern
Socio-Technical system
…<br>
slide7. Usually, four types of artefacts are presented when introduce design science (March & Smith, 1995):
Construct – is a term, notation, concept needed for formulate problems and their possible solutions
Model – is a representation of possible solution, that is, a model can be used for supporting construction of other artefact
Method – defined guidelines and processes of how to solve problems and achieve goals
Instantiation – is a working system that can be used in practice Artefact types in information systems<br>
slide8. Artefact and practice An artefact is an object made by humans with the intention to be used to address a practical problem in a practice<br>
slide9. Defining practice A practice is a set of human activities performed regularly and seen as meaningfully related to each other by the people participating in them.<br>
slide10. An example of a practice The practice of dentists is an example a practice
Dentist are engaging in cleaning teeth, drilling teeth, taking X-rays, and many other activities.
To carry out the practice, dentists make use of artefacts, such as pliers, drills, X-ray machines, and other tools<br>
slide11. What characterize design science? The artefact developed in a design science project needs to be novel, something new and original, not previously developed<br>
slide12. What characterize design science? The artefact is the solution that needs to be developed to address the problem The artefact developed in a design science initiative needs to be novel, something new and original, not previously developed<br>
slide13. What characterize design science? The artefact needs to be used in a practice The artefact is the solution that needs to be developed to address the problem The artefact developed in a design science initiative needs to be novel, something new and original, not previously developed<br>
slide14. What characterize design science? The artefact needs to be used in a practice The problem needs to be a problem in a practice The artefact is the solution that needs to be developed to address the problem The artefact developed in a design science initiative needs to be novel, something new and original, not previously developed<br>
slide15. What characterize design science? The artefact needs to be used in a practice The problem needs to be a problem in a practice The problem needs to be generic, that is, a solution not only for one organization The artefact is the solution that needs to be developed to address the problem The artefact developed in a design science initiative needs to be novel, something new and original, not previously developed<br>
slide16. Design science and Practice research Design science is often seen as part of what is called practical research
Practice research is research that addresses problems in practices<br>
slide17. Design science and Practice research Design Science
Project [Inspired by Goldkuhl, 2012]<br>
slide18. A Design Science Framework<br>
slide19. Define require-
ments on artefact Explicate
problem Design and develop artefact Demon-
strate artefact Evaluate artefact Initial problem Explicated problem Requirements Artefact Demonstrated artefact Evaluated artefact [Inspired by Peffer, et al, 2007] A design science framework<br>
slide20. Define require-
ments on artefact Explicate
problem Design and develop artefact Demon-
strate artefact Evaluate artefact Initial problem Explicated problem Requirements Artefact Demonstrated artefact Evaluated artefact A design science framework In this activity, the problem needs to be precisely formulated and justified by showing that it is significant for some practice<br>
slide21. Explicate problem Two categories of problems, and both need to be stated:
Practical problem – is an issue for practitioners in the practice that they want to be addressed
Knowledge problem – is often a knowledge gap in research Example of practical problem:
The difficulty of finding and selecting appropriate best practices (BPs) in large collections of BPs impedes the use of BPs. Example of knowledge problem:
There is a lack of knowledge/research of how to find and select appropriate best practices (BPs) in BP repositories.<br>
slide22. Define require-
ments on artefact Explicate
problem Design and develop artefact Demon-
strate artefact Evaluate artefact Initial problem Explicated problem Requirements Artefact Demonstrated artefact Evaluated artefact A design science framework Defining requirements can be seen as a transformation of the problem into demands on the proposed artefact. In this activity, the problem needs to be precisely formulated and justified by showing that it is significant for some practice<br>
slide23. Define requirement Two categories of requirements:
Features/Functions – for example, the artefact should support communcation between decision makers
Generic qualities – for example, the artefact should be should be easy to use for the users<br>
slide24. Define requirements Example of requirements in form of generic qualities:
Understandability: The artefact should be easy to comprehend for the users, since they need use it in an effective way
Efficient: The artefact should make it possible to carry out improvement of business processes in a time and resource efficient ways, since business process improvement is a cost and resource intensive endeavor, where cost may easily exceed the benefit
Completeness …. Specify the generic quality for the artefact<br>
slide25. Define requirements Example of requirements in form of generic qualities:
Understandability: The artefact should be easy to comprehend for the users, since they need use it in an effective way
Efficient: The artefact should make it possible to carry out improvement of business processes in a time and resource efficient ways, since business process improvement is a cost and resource intensive endeavor, where cost may easily exceed the benefit
Completeness …. Justify the generic quality for the artefact<br>
slide26. Define require-
ments on artefact Explicate
problem Design and develop artefact Demon-
strate artefact Evaluate artefact Initial problem Explicated problem Requirements Artefact Demonstrated artefact Evaluated artefact A design science framework Defining requirements can be seen as a transformation of the problem into demands on the proposed artefact. In this activity, the problem needs to be precisely formulated and justified by showing that it is significant for some practice This activity creates an artefact that addresses the explicated problem and fulfils the defined requirements.<br>
slide27. Design and devlop artefact This part usually contains:
A description of the artefact and its components
A description of how the artefact was designed and developed<br>
slide28. Define require-
ments on artefact Explicate
problem Design and develop artefact Demon-
strate artefact Evaluate artefact Initial problem Explicated problem Requirements Artefact Demonstrated artefact Evaluated artefact A design science framework Defining requirements can be seen as a transformation of the problem into demands on the proposed artefact. In this activity, the problem needs to be precisely formulated and justified by showing that it is significant for some practice This activity creates an artefact that addresses the explicated problem and fulfils the defined requirements. This activity uses the developed artefact in an illustrative or real-life case, sometimes called a “proof of concept”, thereby proving the feasibility of the artefact.<br>
slide29. Define require-
ments on artefact Explicate
problem Design and develop artefact Demon-
strate artefact Evaluate artefact Initial problem Explicated problem Requirements Artefact Demonstrated artefact Evaluated artefact A design science framework Defining requirements can be seen as a transformation of the problem into demands on the proposed artefact. In this activity, the problem needs to be precisely formulated and justified by showing that it is significant for some practice This activity creates an artefact that addresses the explicated problem and fulfils the defined requirements. This activity uses the developed artefact in an illustrative or real-life case, sometimes called a “proof of concept”, thereby proving the feasibility of the artefact. This activity determines how well the artefact fulfils the requirements and to what extent it can solve, or alleviate, the practical problem that motivated the research.<br>
slide30. Evaluate artefact Ex ante evaluation - means that the artefact is evaluated without being used or even being fully developed
For example, an ex ante evaluation of a new collaborative editor software (like Google docs) can be carried out by interviewing a number of experts on word processing and social software, based on a specification and early prototype of the editor.
Ex post evaluation - requires the artefact to be employed.
An ex post evaluation can be done by implementing the collaborative editor software in an organization and observing the use of it. (Pries-Heje et al, 2008)<br>
slide31. Evaluate artefact Evaluate how the artefact fulfills each requirement, for example in form of strengths/benefits, weaknesses/drawbacks, and also suggested improvement
Evaluate how the artefact addresses the overall practical problems, for example in form of strengths/benefits, weaknesses/drawbacks and suggested improvement<br>
slide32. Evaluate artefact: Informed argument Informed argument - is an evaluation “method” presented in Hevner et al. (2004).
Informed argument - is a lightweight evaluation method where the researchers who developed an artefact discuss its benefits and drawbacks, and by this argumentation show that it does (or does not) fulfil the defined requirements.<br>
slide33. Define require-
ments on artefact Explicate
problem Design and develop artefact Demon-
strate artefact Evaluate artefact Initial problem Explicated problem Requirements Artefact Demonstrated artefact Evaluated artefact A design science framework<br>
slide34. The design science framework IMPORTANT: The design science framework supports presentations of the research methodology: it presents the result of each activity.
However, the design science framework is NOT a description of how the research has been carried out.<br>
slide35. The design science framework The actual design science research can be carried out in different ways, for example:
often a design science research project is carried out using several iterations of design and evaluation (as in agile software development methods). This is not explicitly showed in the framework. The framework just present the result of each activity when the research project has been finished
the developed artefact may solve another problem than the first expected, therefore the original problem statement (and probably also the requirements) need to be changed<br>
slide36. Peffer et al (2007)<br>
slide37. Define require-
ments on artefact Explicate
problem Design and develop artefact Demon-
strate artefact Evaluate artefact Initial problem Explicated problem Requirements Artefact Demonstrated artefact Evaluated artefact Research strategies and methods<br>
slide38. Research methods Research strategy Research Method Data collection method Data analysis method Qualitative analysis method Quantitative analysis method Case Study
Survey
Action research
Experiment
… Questionnaire
Interview
Observation
… Content analysis
Discource analysis
… Statistical methods
… govern (Denscombe, 2014)<br>
slide39. Define require-
ments on artefact Explicate
problem Design and develop artefact Demon-
strate artefact Evaluate artefact Literature survey Survey using expert interviews
Literature survey based on Grounded Theory Case study using interviews Survey using expert interviews
Quantitative analysis using descriptive statistics
Qualitative analysis using content analysis Initial problem Explicated problem Requirements Artefact Demonstrated artefact Evaluated artefact Literature survey Research strategies and methods<br>
slide40. Define require-
ments on artefact Explicate
problem Design and develop artefact Demon-
strate artefact Evaluate artefact Literature survey Survey using expert interviews
Literature survey based on Grounded Theory Case study using interviews Survey using expert interviews
Quantitative analysis using descriptive statistics
Qualitative analysis using content analysis Initial problem Explicated problem Requirements Artefact Demonstrated artefact Evaluated artefact Literature survey Research strategies and methods Knowledge base<br>
slide41. Define require-
ments on artefact Explicate
problem Design and develop artefact Demon-
strate artefact Evaluate artefact Literature survey Survey using expert interviews
Literature survey based on Grounded Theory Case study using interviews Survey using expert interviews
Quantitative analysis using descriptive statistics
Qualitative analysis using content analysis Initial problem Explicated problem Requirements Artefact Demonstrated artefact Evaluated artefact Literature survey Existing solutions for documenting best practices Research strategies and methods Knowledge base Literature on Best Practices and on documentations on best practices Literature on Best Practices and on documentations on best practices<br>
slide42. Knowledge base Design Science
Project<br>
slide43. Cases of Design Science Many design science projects do not undertake all of the five activities of the method framework in depth.
Instead, they may focus on one or two of the activities, while the others are treated more lightly.
Typical cases of design science research:
Problem-focused Design Science Research
Requirements-focused Design Science Research
Requirements- and development-focused Design Science Research
Development- and evaluation-focused Design Science Research
Evaluation-focused Design Science Research<br>
slide44. What is the science part of Design Science? Design science needs to develop artefacts that are:
generic, in that they are solutions for generic problems
new, novel, original
based on the knowledge base/scientific body of knowledge
contributing to the knowledge base/scientific body of knowledge
well described, so it is possible to critically discuss and evalute the artefact using rigouros scientific strategies and methods
evaluated/tested
communicated to both researchers
and practitioners<br>
slide45. An master thesis example of Design Science Research<br>
slide46. Background An insurance company have carried out a business process improvement project where an insurance claim process (also called regulate damage process) has been improved
However, the insurance company wanted to know if these business process improvement could be further improved.
The insurance company did not know which business process improvement methods to use for this (Skoglund, 2016)<br>
slide47. Research problem The research problem that the thesis addresses is that it is difficult for an organization to find a business improvement method (BPI) that best suites the organization at hand, either by choosing an existing BPI method or selecting a combination of different existing BPI methods.<br>
slide48. Research goal The goal of this thesis is to design and evaluate a BPI framework that supports practitioners to find an appropriate BPI method, either by choosing an existing BPI method or select a combination of parts from existing BPI methods<br>
slide49. Requirements Understandability: The BPI framework should be easy to comprehend for the users, which are mainly business managers, business analysts, business process designers, IT managers, and requirement engineers. The reason for this requirement is that the BPI framework will be used by employees in these roles in an organization.
Reflection and sense making: The BPI framework should support reflection and sense making of doing BPI, including alternative ways of carrying out BPI. The reason for this requirement is that BPI is a complex endeavor that requires that the employees involved in the BPI project mange different issues that may arise<br>
slide50. The artefact The artefact was a BPI framework consists of various BPI tasks from different BPI methods, more precisely Six Sigma and Lean, and from a method called manage duplicate systems.
The framework also consists of goal and problem statements related to the BPI tasks, and these goal and problem statements are represented as goal and problem models.
These goals and problem models aim to support the selection, combination, and application of the BPI tasks given a situation at hand.<br>
slide51. The artefact<br>
slide52. Define require-
ments on artefact Explicate
problem Design and develop artefact Demon-
strate artefact Evaluate artefact Case study
Informal interviews
Literature study Initial problem Explicated problem Requirements Artefact Demonstrated artefact Evaluated artefact Case study
Informal argument Research strategies and methods Knowledge base Literature on Business Improvement Case study
Interviews
Literature study
Document study Case study
Interviews
Document study Case study
Interviews
Data analysis Literature on Business Improvment methods: Lean, Six Sigma<br>
slide53. Demonstration The demonstration showed in which respects the artefact, the BPI framework, could improve the existing process descriptions further
The BPI framework were applied on the existing process descriptions in order to find the improvement possibilities<br>
slide54. Evaluation The BPI framework has also been evaluated based on interviews with practitioners and academic experts
The evaluation indicates that the BPI framework was understandable, and support reflection and sense making of doing BPI, although the evaluation also shows some drawbacks and suggestions of improvements<br>
slide55. Positioning Design Science<br>
slide56. What is design science? Which of the following statements are OK to use
Design science is a methodology
Design science is a research approach
Design science is a branch of science, such as natural, social and formal science
Design science is a paradigm, such as positivism and interpretivism
Design science is a research strategy, such as case study and survey<br>
slide57. What is design science? Which of the following statements are OK to use
Design science is a methodology
Design science is a research approach
Design science is a branch of science, such as natural, social and formal science
Design science is a paradigm, such as positivism and interpretivism
Design science is a research strategy, such as case study and survey These statement are OK to use according to me<br>
slide58. DS vs DSR Design science research creates solutions to specific classes of relevant problems by using a rigorous design process
Design science investigates the design science research process and creates standards for its rigour. (Winter, 2008)<br>
slide59. What is design science? The core of design science is based of prescriptive knowledge:
Definitional knowledge - consists of concepts, constructs, terms, definitions, classifications
Descriptive knowledge - describes an existing or past reality
Explanatory knowledge - provides answers to questions of why
Predictive knowledge - offers black-box predictions, i.e. it predicts outcomes based on underlying factors but without explaining causal or other relationships between them.
Explanatory and predictive knowledge
Prescriptive knowledge (Gregor, 2006)<br>
slide60. Presciptive knowledge Prescriptive knowledge consists of prescriptive models and methods that help solve practical problems
Prescriptive methods are guidelines and procedures that help people to work in systematic ways when solving problems.
Prescriptive models can be seen as blueprints for developing, for example, business processes or IT systems<br>
slide61. Presciptive knowledge Typical examples of prescriptive methods are systems and software development methods, such as the Rational Unified Process (RUP) (Kroll et al. 2003), or agile methods, such as XP and SCRUM (Cohn 2009).
Typical examples of prescriptive models are conceptual reference models, such as SCOR (Bolstorff and Rosenbaum 2007), or architectural models, such as OSI (Day and Zimmerman 1983).<br>
slide62. Presciptive knowledge Prescriptive models and methods can be viewed as comprising two parts.
The first part - is the model or method itself
The second part - is a statement about some desirable effect of using the model or method.
This statement (the second part) implies that if a prescriptive model or method is used in a certain practice, this will contribute to effects desired by some stakeholders.
In this sense, prescription can be seen as a special case of prediction.<br>
slide63. Presciptive knowledge Examples of prescriptive knowledge:
Apply sun lotion before sun bathing!
Develop your software system iteratively!<br>
slide64. Seminal Research Papers about Design Science<br>
slide65. Some seminal research papers Hevner AR, March ST, Park J, Ram S (2004) Design science in information systems research. MIS Quarterly 28:75–105
Peffers K, Tuunanen T, Rothenberger MA, Chatterjee S (2007) A Design Science Research Methodology for Information Systems Research. Journal of Management Information Systems 24:45–77
Sein M, Henfridsson O, Purao S, et al. (2011) Action Design Research. Management Information Systems Quarterly 35:37–56
Gregor S, Jones D (2007) The Anatomy of a Design Science Theory. Journal of the Association for Information Systems 8:312–335<br>
slide66. Hevner et al (2004) Make a distinction between two paradigm that characterize much of the research in the information systems discipline: behavioural science and design science
Introduce seven guidelines for understanding, executing, and evaluating design science research
These seven guidelines can be used for summarizing the design science research<br>
slide67. Peffer et al (2007)<br>
slide68. Sein et al (2011) They introduce Action Design Research, inspired by action research
They argue that design science research methods have focused too much on building an artefact and have relegated evaluation to a separate phase.
In order to address this shortcoming, they propose action design research as an alternative method of design science research, in which building, organisational intervention, and evaluation are intertwined<br>
slide69. Gregor and Jones (2007) They have introduced design theory
Design science results can be expressed knowledge about the artefact – especially when this knowledge is mature and comprehensive
The purpose of expressing design knowledge as a theory is to make the knowledge explicit and systematic so that it can be used and extended in a process of cumulative knowledge development [Gregor and Jones, 2007]<br>
slide70. Gregor and Jones (2007) Design theory – the artefact is described using a set of components:
Purpose and Scope of the artefact
Constructs
Principles of form and functions
Artefact mutability
Testable proposition
Justificatory knowledge
Principle of implemantation
Expository instantiation [Gregor and Jones, 2007]<br>
slide71. Book and presentations Johannesson, P., & Perjons, E. (2014). An introduction to design science. Springer.

Presentation of the major chapters:
https://introtodesignscience.wordpress.com/<br>