Evaluating Knowledge Types in Design Science Research: An Integrated Framework

Akoka, Jacky; Comyn-Wattiau, Isabelle; Prat, Nicolas

doi:10.1007/978-3-319-59144-5_12

Cited by 4 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Consistency, completeness and understandability (Req6 and Req7) acted as structure criteria for formative evaluation. Those are compatible with the IS artifact evaluation framework and taxonomy of 60,61 …”

Section: Design Science Research Approachmentioning

confidence: 75%

“…Because our study aimed to design a practical tool (i.e., idiographic design [ID] prescriptive knowledge) through developing constructs (i.e., nomothetic knowledge, definitional), a model and method (i.e., nomothetic design, prescriptive), the focus of our evaluation is on an ID prescriptive contribution. 59,60 Thus, the above-mentioned requirements embody our evaluation criteria for the final artifact: our POAR tool. We employed utility (Req1), effectiveness (Req2), efficiency (Req3), quality (Req4), and intention to use (Req5) as goal and environment criteria 61 for our summative evaluation.…”

Section: Defining the Solution Objectives And Requirementsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Those are compatible with the IS artifact evaluation framework and taxonomy of. 60,61 In sum, we included the following characteristics of our evaluation method 55,55,61 :…”

Section: Defining the Solution Objectives And Requirementsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Developing a tool for process‐oriented appraisals and rewards: Design science research

Shafagatova

Looy

2020

J Software Evolu Process

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

While business process management (BPM) has become a recognized discipline, managers are still challenged to achieve an appropriate alignment between BPM their BPM needs and other management practices in the organization. Specifically, the aligned behavior and performance of employees and teams are crucial to reap the full benefits of BPM. To help managers face such alignment challenges, we have developed a qualitative decision support tool, called “process‐oriented appraisals and rewards” (POAR), by combining design‐science research with a strong qualitative approach. Our study contributes to the BPM and human resource management (HRM) disciplines by extending multifaceted knowledge, while also offering a practical tool for managers to support their decision making regarding a BPM‐HRM alignment.

show abstract

Section: Design Science Research Approachmentioning

confidence: 75%