Background: Communicating software engineering research to industry practitioners and to other researchers can be challenging due to its context dependent nature. Design science is recognized as a pragmatic research paradigm, addressing this and other characteristics of applied and prescriptive research. Applying the design science lens to software engineering research may improve the communication of research contributions. Aim: The aim of this study is to 1) evaluate how well the design science lens helps frame software engineering research contributions, and 2) identify and characterize different types of design science contributions in the software engineering literature. Method: In previous research we developed a visual abstract template, summarizing the core constructs of the design science paradigm. In this study, we use this template in a review of a selected set of 38 top software engineering publications to extract and analyze their design science contributions. Results: We identified five clusters of papers, classified based on their alignment to the design science paradigm. Conclusions: The design science lens helps to pinpoint the theoretical contribution of a research output, which in turn is the core for assessing the practical relevance and novelty of the prescribed rule as well as the rigor of applied empirical methods in support of the rule.
Design science has been conceptualized by several researchers in software engineering @cite_24 and other disciplines, such as information systems @cite_37 , @cite_14 , @cite_39 and organization and management @cite_9 . Wieringa describes design science as an act of producing knowledge by designing useful things @cite_24 and makes a distinction between knowledge problems and practical problems. Similarly, Gregor and Hevner emphasize the dual focus on the artifact and its design @cite_14 in information systems, and argue for an iterative design process where evaluation of the artifact provides feedback to improve both the design process and the artifact.
@cite_37 @cite_14 @cite_9 @cite_39 @cite_24
1686689482 1999898351 431380525 2136451344
The publication of the work on design science by Alan Hevner and his colleagues has fostered much discussion on what is and what is not considered to be design science in Information Systems (IS) research. Anecdotal evidence suggests that some authors claim design science as a methodology in their work, without much consideration of theoretical or methodological aspects, or the appropriateness of their artefact. Also it would appear that design science papers have been proliferating rapidly of late. Accordingly, we were interested to identify the proliferation, nature and quality of design science research in Information Systems conference publications since the publication of ’s work in 2004. We examine design science articles published at five major IS conferences over the last three years. We subject 83 articles, identified as relevant via a rigorous analysis process, to three types of analysis - statistical, thematic and methodological. The results of these analyses indicate that design science appears to be a growing stream of research in IS. We also found design science research to be strongly prevalent in the research domains of process, knowledge and information management. The most interesting results stem out of our methodological analysis, which suggests that only a small percentage of the papers discuss a concise and consistent implementation of the design science methodology suggested by Design science emphasizes the connection between knowledge and practice by showing that we can produce scientific knowledge by designing useful things. However, without further guidelines, aspiring design science researchers tend to identify practical problems with knowledge questions, which may lead to methodologically unsound research designs. To solve a practical problem, the real world is changed to suit human purposes, but to solve a knowledge problem, we acquire knowledge about the world without necessarily changing it. In design science, these two kinds of problems are mutually nested, but this nesting should not blind us for the fact that their problem-solving and solution justification methods are different. This paper analyzes the mutual nesting of practical problems and knowledge problems, derives some methodological guidelines from this for design science researchers, and gives an example of a design science project following this problem nesting. This book is an introductory text on design science, intended to support both graduate students and researchers in structuring, undertaking and presenting design science work. It builds on established design science methods as well as recent work on presenting design science studies and ethical principles for design science, and also offers novel instruments for visualizing the results, both in the form of process diagrams and through a canvas format. While the book does not presume any prior knowledge of design science, it provides readers with a thorough understanding of the subject and enables them to delve into much deeper detail, thanks to extensive sections on further reading. Design science in information systems and technology aims to create novel artifacts in the form of models, methods, and systems that support people in developing, using and maintaining IT solutions. This work focuses on design science as applied to information systems and technology, but it also includes examples from, and perspectives of, other fields of human practice. Chapter 1 provides an overview of design science and outlines its ties with empirical research. Chapter 2 discusses the various types and forms of knowledge that can be used and produced by design science research, while Chapter 3 presents a brief overview of common empirical research strategies and methods. Chapter 4 introduces a methodological framework for supporting researchers in doing design science research as well as in presenting their results. This framework includes five core activities, which are described in detail in Chapters 5 to 9. Chapter 10 discusses how to communicate design science results, while Chapter 11 compares the proposed methodological framework with methods for systems development and shows how they can be combined. Chapter 12 discusses how design science relates to research paradigms, in particular to positivism and interpretivism. Lastly, Chapter 13 discusses ethical issues and principles for design science research. Two paradigms characterize much of the research in the Information Systems discipline: behavioral science and design science. The behavioral-science paradigm seeks to develop and verify theories that explain or predict human or organizational behavior. The design-science paradigm seeks to extend the boundaries of human and organizational capabilities by creating new and innovative artifacts. Both paradigms are foundational to the IS discipline, positioned as it is at the confluence of people, organizations, and technology. Our objective is to describe the performance of design-science research in Information Systems via a concise conceptual framework and clear guidelines for understanding, executing, and evaluating the research. In the design-science paradigm, knowledge and understanding of a problem domain and its solution are achieved in the building and application of the designed artifact. Three recent exemplars in the research literature are used to demonstrate the application of these guidelines. We conclude with an analysis of the challenges of performing high-quality design-science research in the context of the broader IS community.