Design Science Research Post Hevner et al.: Criteria, Standards, Guidelines, and Expectations

There is ongoing debate about how the quality (rigour and relevance) of Design Science Research (DSR) should be judged This research investigates the state of the debate by surveying the opinions of IS scholars who write, review, edit, and publish DSR papers The survey respondents rated the relative importance of the seven guidelines (often used as evaluation criteria) laid out in Hevner et al (2004) [6], more specific criteria about the evaluation activity in DSR, criteria concerning IS Design Theories, and miscellaneous other criteria, and made general open-ended comments The findings indicate a lack of consensus, with much variability in ratings The Hevner et al [6] guidelines are largely endorsed, but caution is also raised to apply them less mechanistically than at present Some criteria/guidelines are seen to be less important at earlier stages of research Caution is also urged not to expect single papers to fit all criteria/guidelines.

[1]  Jay F. Nunamaker,et al.  Systems Development in Information Systems Research , 1990, J. Manag. Inf. Syst..

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

[3]  Salvatore T. March,et al.  Design and natural science research on information technology , 1995, Decis. Support Syst..

[4]  Julie Travis,et al.  Using a Group Support System for the Distributed Application of Soft Systems Methodology , 1999 .

[5]  Michael D. Myers,et al.  A Set of Principles for Conducting and Evaluating Interpretive Field Studies in Information Systems , 1999, MIS Q..

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

[7]  Martin Bichler,et al.  Design science in information systems research , 2006, Wirtschaftsinf..

[8]  John R. Venable,et al.  The role of theory and theorising in Design Science research , 2006 .

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

[10]  John R. Venable,et al.  A framework for Design Science research activities , 2006 .

[11]  Jan Pries-Heje,et al.  Soft Design Science Research: Extending the Boundaries of Evaluation in Design Science Research , 2007 .

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

[13]  Graham Pervan,et al.  An assessment of DSS design science using the Hevner, March, Park, and Ram guidelines. , 2008 .

[14]  Jan C. Recker,et al.  Indulska, Marta and Recker, Jan C. (2008) Design Science in IS Research: A Literature Analysis. In Gregor, Shirely and Ho, Susanna, Eds. Proceedings 4th Biennial ANU Workshop on Information Systems Foundations, Canberra, Australia. , 2008 .

[15]  Marta Indulska,et al.  Design science in IS research : a literature analysis , 2008 .

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

[17]  Vijay K. Vaishnavi,et al.  Theory Development in Design Science Research: Anatomy of a Research Project , 2008 .

[18]  Jan Pries-Heje,et al.  Soft design science methodology , 2009, DESRIST.

[19]  Sandeep Purao,et al.  Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Design Science Research in Information Systems and Technology , 2009 .