PhD Course - IT Design Science Research
Organizers:
Jan Pries-Heje, Adjunct Professor, IT University of Copenhagen, Denmark
Lene Pries-Heje, Associate Professor, IT University of Copenhagen, Denmark
Lecturers:
Jan Pries-Heje, Adjunct Professor, IT University of Copenhagen, Denmark
Lene Pries-Heje, Associate Professor, IT University of Copenhagen, Denmark
Dates of the course:
20-21 June 2016
Time: 9 AM-5 PM both days
Location:
20th June - 3A08
21st June - 4A05
Course description: The aim of the course is to give participants an overview of the new research approach; Design Science Research (DSR). Furthermore participating PhD students will discuss the relevance of DSR to their own research problem and they will have knowledge on how to apply DSR in their PhD project.
In more detail the course consist of seven seminars/sessions:
1. Design Science Research
The seminar explores how design draws on knowledge and produces knowledge. This includes research about design and design as research. We distinguish between design science and design research. Further we explores Simon's science of the artificial, i.e., the science of design. This includes scientific research about design, designing with scientific research, and the notion of "scientific".
2. Generative and Analytic Design
The seminar discovers the basic notion of design as one form of human invention and innovation. We consider the abduction of theory from design practice, and design science as a research paradigm. We also consider generative and analytic design approaches.
3. Design Science Research and Evaluation
The seminar looks at evaluation as a core activity in IT Design Science Research. It lays out different ways of evaluation and provides a way to choose evaluation strategy.
4. Design Thinking
The seminar looks at five different ways to think about design. Furthermore we take a look at how you can apply Risk Management thinking to your Design Science Research.
5. Participatory Design
Building on the Scandinavian tradition, the seminar explores views of sociotechnical research about design, and designing with sociotechnical research.
6. Design Research: Design as Action Research
Aside from existing action research that may qualify under definitions of design research, how is design research distinguished from action research?
7. Exemplars
The seminar will explore one or more examples of published design research, IT including the 10th DESRIST Conference held in St. John, New Foundland, in May 2016, as well as current theme issues on Design Science in various journals including the Scandinavian Journal of IS and the MIS Quarterly.
Programme:
| Time | Topic | Readings |
| Monday 20 June 2016 |
| 9.00 | Introduction and overview of the PhD Course (JPH) | |
| 10.00 | Design Science Research: The seminar explores how design draws on knowledge and produces knowledge. This includes research about design and design as research. We distinguish between design science and design research. Further we explores Simon's science of the artificial, i.e., the science of design. This includes scientific research about design, designing with scientific research, and the notion of "scientific". (JPH) [Name of slides: DR01] | (Hevner et al., 2004) (Simon, 1996) (Walls et al., 1992) |
| 11:00 | Break | |
| 11.15 | Discussion: Design and Research (JPH & LPries) | (van Aken, 2004) Task#1 (Gregor & Hevner, 2013) Task#2 |
| 12.15 | Lunch | |
| 13.00 | Generative and Analytic Design: The seminar discovers the basic notion of design as one form of human invention and innovation. We consider the abduction of theory from design practice, and design science as a research paradigm. We also consider generative and analytic design approaches. (JPH) [Name of slides: DR02] | (Sutton & Staw, 1995) (Iivari, 2007) |
| 13.45 | Discussion: Generative and Analytic Design (JPH & LPries) | (Mueller-Wienbergen et al., 2011)) Task#3 Venable 2014 Task#4 |
| 14.30 | Break | |
| 14.45 | Design Science Research and Evaluation: The seminar looks at evaluation as a core activity in IT Design Science Research. It lays out different ways of evaluation and provides a way to choose evaluation strategy. (JPH) [Name of slides: DR03] | (Venable et al. 2016) |
| 16.15 | Discussion of The Object of Design: Researching The IT Artifact (JPH & LPries) | (Gregor & Jones, 2007) Task#5 (Orlikowski & Iacono, 2001) Task#6 |
| 17.00 | End of Day 1 | |
| Tuesday 21 June 2015 |
| 9.00 | Design Thinking: The seminar looks at five different ways to think about design. Furthermore we take a look at how you can apply Risk Management thinking to your Design Science Research (JPH) [Name of slides: DR04] | (Johansson-Sköldberg 2013) (Markus et al., 2002) Task#7 (Pries-Heje et al. 2014) |
| 9:45 | Participatory Design Orientation: Building on Scandinavian work, the seminar explores views of sociotechnical research about design, and designing with sociotechnical research. (LPries) [Name of slides: DR05] | (Kautz, 2011) Task#8 |
| 10.30 | Break | |
| 10.45 | Student research presentations Each of the participating students will present their research questions and will have it discussed in relation to design research (all students – 20 minutes each - two separate groups) (JPH + LPries) | |
| 12:15-13 | Lunch (in between student presentations – see above) | |
| 13.45 | Discussion (Participatory Design) (LPries) | (Germonprez et al., 2011) Task#9 |
| 14.30 | Discussion Session on Action Research as Design Research: Aside from existing action research that may qualify under definitions of design research, how is design research distinguished from action research? [Name of slides: DR06] (JPH) | (Järvinen, 2007) (Sein et al., 2011) Task#10 |
| 15.15 | Break | |
| 15.30 | DESRIST: Design Science Research in IT Exemplars (JPH) [Name of slides: DR07] | (Pries-Heje & Pries-Heje, 2012) (Kuechler & Vaishnavi, 2008) Task#11 (Pries-Heje & Baskerville, 2008) Task#12 |
| 16.45 | Summing up the PhD course (JPH) | |
| 17.00 | End of day 2 | |
Prerequisites:
Participating PhD students should have a well-formed idea of which research problem they will address in their PhD project.
Exam:
Each participant is expected to hand in a 4-6 page report no later than a month after the course. The report shall describe how DSR can be used as a research approach for the PhD students research problem. Furthermore the DSR evaluation approach should be chosen and described using the FEDS approach (Venable et al. 2016).
The reports will be graded pass or fail.
Grading will be done by Prof. Jan Pries-Heje within a month after hand-in of the report.
Credits:
3 ECTS
Amount of hours the student is expected to use on the course:
Preparation time to read material ahead of course: 40 hours
Preparation time to prepare presentation for course: 8 hours
Participation time for course: 16 hours
Expected time to write report and receive feedback after course: 20 hours
Participants:
3-4 students from the TIME research group at ITU. 1-2 students from CBS. 1-2 students from RUC. 8-12 students from other universities in Denmark, Scandinavia, or Europe.
Reading list:
Germonprez, M., Hovorka, D., & Gal, U. (2011). Secondary Design: A Case of Behavioral Design Science Research. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 12(10), 662-683.
Goldkuhl, G. (2004). Design Theories in Information Systems - a Need for Multi-Grounding. JITTA : Journal of Information Technology Theory and Application, 6(2), 59-72.
Gregor, S. & A. Hevner (2013). Positioning and presenting design science research for maximum impact. MIS quarterly 37 (2), 337-356.
Gregor, S., & Jones, D. (2007). The Anatomy of a Design Theory. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 8(5), 312-335.
Hevner, A. R., March, S. T., Park, J., & Ram, S. (2004). Design Science In Information Systems Research. MIS Quarterly, 28(1), 75-105.
Iivari, J. (2007). A paradigmatic analysis of Information Systems as a design science. Scandinavian Journal of Information Systems, 19(2), 39-63.
Järvinen, P. (2007). Action Research is Similar to Design Science Quality and Quantity 41(1), 37-54.
Johansson-Sköldberg, U., Woodilla, J., & Çetinkaya, M. (2013). Design Thinking: Past, Present and Possible Futures. . Creativity and Innovation Management, 22(2), 121-146.
Kautz, Karlheinz (2011). Investigating the design process: participatory design in agile software development. Information Technology & People, Vol. 24 No. 3, 2011, pp. 217-235.
Kuechler, B., & Vaishnavi, V. (2008). On theory development in design science research: anatomy of a research project. European Journal of Information Systems, 17(5), 489-504.
Markus, M. L., Majchrzak, A., & Gasser, L. (2002). A design theory for systems that support emergent knowledge processes. MIS Quarterly, 26(3), 179-212.
Mueller-Wienbergen, F., Mueller, O., Seidel, S., & Becker, J. (2011). Leaving the Beaten Tracks in Creative Work - A Design Theory for Systems that Support Convergent and Divergent Thinking. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 12(11), 714-740.
Orlikowski, W. J., & Iacono, C. S. (2001). Research commentary: Desperately seeking "IT" in IT research - A call to theorizing the IT artifact. Information Systems Research, 12(2), 121-134.
Pries-Heje, J., & Baskerville, R. (2008). The design theory nexus. MIS Quarterly, 32(4), 731-755.
Pries-Heje, J., Baskerville, R., & Venable, J. (2014). A Risk Management Framework for Design Science Research. In Scandinavian Journal of IS, 6(1), Article 3.
Pries-Heje, J. and L. Pries-Heje (2012), Designing a Framework for Virtual Management and Team Building, in Design Science Research in Information Systems. Advances in Theory and Practice K. Peffers, M. Rothenberger, and B. Kuechler, Editors. Springer Lecture Notes in Computer Science: Heidelberg. p. 256-270.
Sein, M. K., Henfridsson, O., Purao, S., Rossi, M., & Lindgren, R. (2011). Action Design Research. MIS Quarterly, 35(2), 37-56.
Simon, H. A. (1996). The Sciences of the Artificial (3rd ed.). Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
Sutton, R. I., & Staw, B. M. (1995). What theory is not. Administrative Science Quarterly, 40(3), 371-384.
van Aken, J. E. (2004). Management Research Based on the Paradigm of the Design Sciences: The Quest for Field-Tested and Grounded Technological Rules. The Journal of Management Studies, 41(2), 219-246.
Venable, John (2014). Using Coloured Cognitive Mapping (CCM) for Design Science Research. DESRIST 2014 Proceedings. Springer.
Venable, John, Jan Pries-Heje & Richard Baskerville (2016). FEDS: a Framework for Evaluation in Design Science research. European Journal of Information Systems 25(1): 77-89.
Walls, J. G., Widmeyer, G. R., & El Sawy, O. A. (1992). Building an information system design theory for vigilant EIS. Information Systems Research, 3(1), 36-59.