Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| == '''Design theory''' == | | == '''Design theory''' == |
| ---- | | ---- |
− | ''This theory is waiting to be summarized!''
| |
− |
| |
| == Acronym == | | == Acronym == |
| | | |
− | == Alternate name(s)== | + | == Alternate name(s)== |
| + | Design Research, Design Science |
| | | |
− | === Instructional Design Theory === | + | == Main dependent construct(s)/factor(s)== |
| + | == Main independent construct(s)/factor(s) == |
| + | == Concise description of theory == |
| | | |
| | | |
| + | Design theory involves examining and evaluating design as a concept. A |
| + | number of scholars in information systems research have examined and evaluated 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 == |
| + | [[File:ISR.png|border|624x624px]] |
| | | |
− | == Main dependent construct(s)/factor(s)== | + | 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. |
| | | |
− | == Main independent construct(s)/factor(s) ==
| + | 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. |
| | | |
− | == Concise description of theory ==
| + | March, S. T., & Smith, G. F. (1995). Design and natural science research on information technology. ''Decision support systems'', ''15''(4), |
| + | 251-266. |
| | | |
− | There are differing opinions about what constitutes design
| + | Simon, H. A. (1996). ''The sciences of the artificial'' (Vol. 136). MIT press. |
− | theories 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.
| |
| | | |
| + | Markus, M. L., Majchrzak, A., & Gasser, L. (2002). A design theory for systems that support emergent knowledge processes. ''Mis Quarterly'', 179-212. |
| | | |
− | == Diagram/schematic of theory ==
| + | 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) ==
| + | Gregor, S., & Jones, D. (2007). The anatomy of a design theory. ''Journal of the Association for Information Systems'', ''8''(5), 312-335. |
| | | |
− | == Seminal articles ==
| + | 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 == | | == Originating area == |
− | | + | Philosophy |
| == Level of analysis == | | == Level of analysis == |
| + | Design of an IS artifact |
| + | == IS articles that use the theory == |
| + | 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). Retrieved from http://aisel.aisnet.org/jais/vol12/iss10/2 |
| | | |
− | == IS articles that use the theory ==
| + | Germonprez, M., Kendall, J. E., Kendall, K. E., Mathiassen, L., Young, B., & Warner, B. (2016). A theory of responsive design: A field study of corporate engagement with open source communities. ''Information Systems Research'', ''28''(1), 64–83. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.2016.0662 |
| | | |
| == Links from this theory to other theories == | | == Links from this theory to other theories == |