Difference between revisions of "Design Theory"
Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
== Alternate name(s)== | == Alternate name(s)== | ||
Design Research, Design Science | Design Research, Design Science | ||
− | |||
− | |||
== Main dependent construct(s)/factor(s)== | == Main dependent construct(s)/factor(s)== |
Revision as of 23:38, 3 April 2015
Design theory
This theory is waiting to be summarized!
Acronym
Alternate name(s)
Design Research, Design Science
Main dependent construct(s)/factor(s)
Subjective measures (e.g. satisfaction, goodness)
Objective measures (e.g. percentage of improvement in efficiency, number of users)
Main independent construct(s)/factor(s)
Philosophy of design is concerned with the question “what is the purpose of design?”
Aristotle proposed four causes, four types of answers to the question “why”, and Heidegger showed that Aristotle’s four causes differed from one another (Gregor and Jones, 2007).
- Causa materialis is the material or matter.
- Causa formalis is the form or shape the material or matter enters.
- Causa finalis is the end.
- Causa efficiens is the effect that is finished.
Artifact mutability
Testable propositions
Expository instantiation
Concise description of theory
Design theory involves examining and evaluating design as a concept. A number of scholars in information systems research have examined the concept of design. The focus of design in information systems is on design of IT artifacts. There are differing opinions about what constitutes design for information technology artifacts. Walls et al. (1992) specify two major components of IT design theories: a product component and a development process component. Each draws upon kernel theories (usually taken from the natural or social sciences) in specifying prescriptive hypotheses that enable designers to evaluate whether the product and its development process satisfy the design theory. Goldkuhl (2004) specifies a need for multiple grounding of design theories in external theories, reference theories, value theories, etc. Markus et al. (2002) take a more practical view of design theories, using these theories to explain the means– ends relationship as a practical, prescriptively causal mechanism to justify design components.
Diagram/schematic of theory
Source: Hevner, A., March, S. T., Park, J., & Ram, S. (2004). Design science in information systems research. MIS quarterly, 28(1), 75-105.
Originating author(s)
Seminal articles
Weber, R. (1987). Toward a theory of artifacts: a paradigmatic base for information systems research. Journal of Information Systems, 1(2), 3-19.
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.
March, S. T., & Smith, G. F. (1995). Design and natural science research on information technology. Decision support systems, 15(4), 251-266.
Simon, H. A. (1996). The sciences of the artificial (Vol. 136). MIT press.
Markus, M. L., Majchrzak, A., & Gasser, L. (2002). A design theory for systems that support emergent knowledge processes. Mis Quarterly, 179-212.
Hevner, A., March, S. T., Park, J., & Ram, S. (2004). Design science in information systems research. MIS quarterly, 28(1), 75-105.
Gregor, S., & Jones, D. (2007). The anatomy of a design theory. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 8(5), 312-335.
Peffers, K., Tuunanen, T., Rothenberger, M. A., & Chatterjee, S. (2007). A design science research methodology for information systems research. Journal of management information systems, 24(3), 45-77.
Originating area
Philosophy
Level of analysis
Design of an IS artifact
IS articles that use the theory
Links from this theory to other theories
External links
Original Contributor(s)
Vishal Uppala
Please feel free to make modifications to this site. In order to do so, you must register.
Return to Theories Used in IS Research