Design Archaeology: Generating Design Knowledge from Real-World Artifact Design

When formulating prescriptive design knowledge in design science research (DSR), we usually reflect on our vision of created artifacts, relevant design decisions, and what we have learned throughout the design process. Seldom do we attempt to extract prescriptive knowledge from existing and widely acknowledged artifacts in the manner of ex-post facto or in situ. But what can we learn from decades of designing digital artifacts that have fundamentally revamped work processes across industries, allowed for the emergence of new business models, and even spurred entirely new industries? This essay is inspired by the way archaeologists make sense of the past and represent the resulting knowledge. We propose a novel approach to the analysis of digital artifacts based on the archaeological approaches to context reconstruction and artifact analysis. We explain how a design archaeologist can shift among the perspectives of designers, users, and the generated artifact to make inferences about the artifact (i.e., design artifact), how it has been designed (i.e., design process), the context in which it has been designed (i.e., the design context), and the situations in which it has been used (i.e., the use contexts).

[1]  Paul M. Leonardi,et al.  When Flexible Routines Meet Flexible Technologies: Affordance, Constraint, and the Imbrication of Human and Material Agencies , 2011, MIS Q..

[2]  S. Barley Technology as an occasion for structuring: evidence from observations of CT scanners and the social order of radiology departments. , 1986, Administrative science quarterly.

[3]  Anat Rafaeli,et al.  Emotion as a Connection of Physical Artifacts and Organizations , 2004, Organ. Sci..

[4]  Juhani Iivari,et al.  Distinguishing and contrasting two strategies for design science research , 2015, Eur. J. Inf. Syst..

[5]  Jannis Kallinikos,et al.  The Ambivalent Ontology of Digital Artifacts , 2013, MIS Q..

[6]  Yao-Ting Sung,et al.  Development and behavioral pattern analysis of a mobile guide system with augmented reality for painting appreciation instruction in an art museum , 2014, Comput. Educ..

[7]  Shirley Gregor,et al.  Prescriptive Knowledge in IS Research: Conceptualizing Design Principles in Terms of Materiality, Action, and Boundary Conditions , 2015, 2015 48th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.

[8]  Colleen Morgan,et al.  DIY and digital archaeology: what are you doing to participate? , 2012 .

[9]  Shirley Gregor,et al.  The Nature of Theory in Information Systems , 2006, MIS Q..

[10]  Göran Goldkuhl,et al.  Design Science in the Field: Practice Design Research , 2018, DESRIST.

[11]  Wanda J. Orlikowski,et al.  Entanglements in Practice: Performing Anonymity Through Social Media , 2014, MIS Q..

[12]  Jochen Runde,et al.  Technological Objects, Social Positions, and the Transformational Model of Social Activity , 2013, MIS Q..

[13]  Terri L. Griffith,et al.  Information Technology and the Changing Fabric of Organization , 2007, Organ. Sci..

[14]  Omar El Sawy,et al.  Building an Information System Design Theory for Vigilant EIS , 1992, Inf. Syst. Res..

[15]  Alexander Bauer,et al.  Is what you see all you get? , 2002 .

[16]  Matt Germonprez,et al.  Secondary Design: A Case of Behavioral Design Science Research , 2011, J. Assoc. Inf. Syst..

[17]  J. Aken Management Research Based on the Paradigm of the Design Sciences: The Quest for Field-Tested and Grounded Technological Rules , 2004 .

[18]  Ken Friedman,et al.  Creating design knowledge: from research into practice , 2000 .

[19]  Richard Baskerville,et al.  Going back to basics in design science: from the information technology artifact to the information systems artifact , 2015, Inf. Syst. J..

[20]  Quentin Jones,et al.  Virtual-Communities, Virtual Settlements & Cyber-Archaeology: A Theoretical Outline , 2006, J. Comput. Mediat. Commun..

[21]  Emmanuel Monod,et al.  Cultural Heritage Systems Evaluation and Design: The Virtual Heritage Center of the city of Rome , 2006, AMCIS.

[22]  Emmanuel Monod,et al.  From E-Heritage to Interpretive Archaeology Systems (IAS): A Research Framework for Evaluating Cultural Heritage Communication in the Digital Age , 2005, ECIS.

[23]  Daniel Robey,et al.  Information Technology, Materiality, and Organizational Change: A Professional Odyssey , 2013, J. Assoc. Inf. Syst..

[24]  Gerardine DeSanctis,et al.  Capturing the Complexity in Advanced Technology Use: Adaptive Structuration Theory , 1994 .

[25]  Kalle Lyytinen,et al.  Research Commentary - The New Organizing Logic of Digital Innovation: An Agenda for Information Systems Research , 2010, Inf. Syst. Res..

[26]  Suprateek Sarker,et al.  How "Sociotechnical" is our IS Research? An Assessment and Possible Ways Forward , 2013, ICIS.

[27]  Veda C. Storey,et al.  Aesthetics in design science research , 2018, Eur. J. Inf. Syst..

[28]  Herbert A. Simon,et al.  The Sciences of the Artificial , 1970 .

[29]  Juhani Iivari,et al.  Information system artefact or information system application: that is the question , 2017, Inf. Syst. J..

[30]  Alan R. Hevner,et al.  Design Research in Information Systems , 2010 .

[31]  Jan Pries-Heje,et al.  Explanatory Design Theory , 2010, Bus. Inf. Syst. Eng..

[32]  M. Lynne Markus,et al.  A Foundation for the Study of IT Effects: A New Look at DeSanctis and Poole's Concepts of Structural Features and Spirit , 2008, J. Assoc. Inf. Syst..

[33]  Pär J. Ågerfalk Going through changes , 2018, Eur. J. Inf. Syst..

[34]  Wanda J. Orlikowski,et al.  Research Commentary: Desperately Seeking the "IT" in IT Research - A Call to Theorizing the IT Artifact , 2001, Inf. Syst. Res..

[35]  Leona Chandra Kruse,et al.  Design principles for sensemaking support systems in environmental sustainability transformations , 2018, Eur. J. Inf. Syst..

[36]  Andre Costopoulos,et al.  Digital Archeology Is Here (and Has Been for a While) , 2016, Front. Digit. Humanit..

[37]  Jan Recker,et al.  Toward a Design Theory for Green Information Systems , 2016, 2016 49th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS).

[38]  Thomas Evan Digital Archaeology: Bridging Method and Theory , 2004 .

[39]  Omar A. El Sawy,et al.  Assessing Information System Design Theory in Perspective: How Useful Was our 1992 Initial Rendition? , 2004 .

[40]  Alan R. Hevner,et al.  Design Science in Information Systems Research , 2004, MIS Q..

[41]  W. Brian Arthur,et al.  The Nature of Technology: What it Is and How it Evolves , 2009 .

[42]  Steven L. Alter The concept of ‘IT artifact’ has outlived its usefulness and should be retired now , 2015, Inf. Syst. J..

[43]  Shirley Gregor,et al.  The Anatomy of a Design Theory , 2007, J. Assoc. Inf. Syst..

[44]  Sandeep Purao,et al.  Action Design Research , 2011, MIS Q..

[45]  Webb Keane,et al.  Semiotics and the social analysis of material things , 2003 .

[46]  Oliver Müller,et al.  Augmented reality in informal learning environments: A field experiment in a mathematics exhibition , 2014, Comput. Educ..

[47]  Alan R. Hevner,et al.  POSITIONING AND PRESENTING DESIGN SCIENCE RESEARCH FOR MAXIMUM IMPACT 1 , 2013 .

[48]  Richard Baskerville,et al.  A Design Theory for Secure Information Systems Design Methods , 2006, J. Assoc. Inf. Syst..

[49]  Erik Stolterman,et al.  Material probe: exploring materiality of digital artifacts , 2010, TEI.

[50]  Shirley Gregor,et al.  Reflection, Abstraction And Theorizing In Design And Development Research , 2013, ECIS.

[51]  James Howison,et al.  Beyond the organizational 'container': Conceptualizing 21st century sociotechnical work , 2014, Inf. Organ..

[52]  Les Gasser,et al.  A Design Theory for Systems That Support Emergent Knowledge Processes , 2002, MIS Q..

[53]  Richard T. Watson,et al.  Three Strategies for Information Systems Research in the Presence of an Efficient Knowledge Market , 2018, ICIS.

[54]  Samir Chatterjee,et al.  A Design Science Research Methodology for Information Systems Research , 2008 .