Positioning and Presenting Design Science Research for Maximum Impact

Abstract

Design science research (DSR) has staked its rightful ground as an important and legitimate Information Systems (IS) research paradigm. We contend that DSR has yet to attain its full potential impact on the development and use of information systems due to gaps in the understanding and application of DSR concepts and methods. This essay aims to help researchers (1) appreciate the levels of artifact abstractions that may be DSR contributions, (2) identify appropriate ways of consuming and producing knowledge when they are preparing journal articles or other scholarly works, (3) understand and position the knowledge contributions of their research projects, and (4) structure a DSR article so that it emphasizes significant contributions to the knowledge base. Our focal contribution is the DSR knowledge contribution framework with two dimensions based on the existing state of knowledge in both the problem and solution domains for the research opportunity under study. In addition, we propose a DSR communication schema with similarities to more conventional publication patterns, but which substitutes the description of the DSR artifact in place of a traditional results section. We evaluate the DSR contribution framework and the DSR communication schema via examinations of DSR exemplar publications.

Barriers to open e-learning in public administrations

“…The results presented in the table cover practical as well as theoretical artefacts, as aspired in information systems research (Gregor & Hevner, 2013;). Yet, the kind of contributions in information systems research needs to be assessed in more detail.…”

“…Categorizing these results according to the framework of Gregor and Hevner (2013) led to the identification of the components of a new frame regarding the significance of challenges, the definition of context-specific characteristics shaping the relevance of barriers as well as their contingent change processes. In this respect, both an improvement of the previous exaptation (initial contextualized barrier framework) as well as an invention was achieved, which generated new research opportunities such as, for example, quantitative research on barrier constructs and interdependencies.…”

“…According to the categories of Gregor and Hevner (2013), the mentioned results of the dissertation can be categorized as an invention given that a new, theoretically sound concept for new and context-specific barriers was created, discussed, embedded and differentiated with regard to the latest research in the public, private and educational sectors.…”

“…Yet, the kind of contributions in information systems research needs to be assessed in more detail. The ADR framework does not provide a differentiation system to classify practical or theoretical outcomes, but Gregor and Hevner (2013) have classified contributions with regard to the recipients and maturity of the results for a given domain according to the nature of artefacts (the theoretical level, abstract solutions and type of practical results). The categories are as follows (definitions adapted and shortened from Gregor and Hevner [2013, p. 345]):…”

“…Moreover, the research demonstrated that the relevance of barriers differs across contexts, just as observed in the case of social interaction, which is crucial in the public sector. Based on the criteria of Gregor and Hevner (2013), the artefact qualifies as an exaptation, as it exploits new research opportunities and takes a first step towards ensuring the maturity of an application domain of a barrier model for the public sector.…”