Research in Information Systems

Information Systems (IS) are complex artifacts which could be viewed as playing the role of an interface between the organizational structure and processes and the technological capabilities. IS design is influenced by—and has an influence on—its outer environment: organizational context. Much of past research in IS is of explanatory nature and has largely focused on the processes and functions of outer environment, including organizations and individuals. There is not sufficient theoretical elaboration on the organizational and technological connections of the IS artifacts. Some of the most prominent theoretical models of IS do not incorporate the very nature of information systems to a substantial extent. The information content of these models is also questionable. IS research has been criticized by some members of the research community for lack of identity and lack of relevance.

An Example of Application of Scientific Principles to Design-Type Research

This chapter aims at illustrating the application of important scientific principles using a sample design-type research project, which featured the development of a method for online shopping support. Existing schools of thought are described as potentially competing paradigms. A deductive approach is utilized to derive the required features of the artifact based on kernel theories. Falsifiability criterion is met by the development of the concrete form (in terms of structure and behavior) and the proposal of specific testable hypotheses. An example of auxiliary protective hypothesis is given. Ockham’s razor is used in order to refute a more complex version of the method.

Some Example Meta-Artifacts Inspired by Science and Nature

Science reveals the workings of the mechanisms behind the natural phenomena. If one can entertain an idea of nature exhibiting definite features of design, then, perhaps human designers could learn from it some of its structures and methods to solve problems faced by human designers. Imitating the natural may be beneficial to tackle tough problems. The chapter provides few such examples. In the first case, the workings of the nervous system, including the brain as revealed by the science have been forward engineered by researchers in artificial neural networks. In the second case, the most versatile designer, i.e. the evolutionary process, has been employed to design solutions for problems in various areas of human activity. In the third case, the “non-scientific” vagueness inherent in human judgment has been harnessed in a fascinating way to provide useful solutions.

Science as Design

The purpose of this chapter is to demonstrate that traditional science is a kind of design. Scientific research can be viewed as a type of reverse engineering. Alternatively, one could entertain a highly hypothetical thought about how an engineer would have designed the world as we experience it. The artifact nature of scientific knowledge can be seen in different sciences through examples. Mathematics is the domain of the purely abstract, where the difference between the invented and discovered disappears. History of Astronomy provides examples of how the sense of beauty led the scientists to invent early models involving celestial bodies. Creativity and inventiveness are often needed in Physics to construct artifacts involving the unobservable. Purpose and corresponding design distinguishes Biology, which focuses on living forms displaying high levels of sophistication in their organization.

Science

The purpose of this chapter is to provide insights into the nature of scientific research with the emphasis on the design perspective. Early science had started out of the practical needs of human cultures. From the modern perspective the artifactual nature of early scientific constructs is particularly manifest. The design viewpoint can be applied to the major classes of sciences both in form of reverse and forward engineering. Scientific method has been crafted by the philosophers of science throughout the millennia. There are analogies between the major aspects of the scientific method and artifact design process. Inventiveness and creativity play an essential role in the development of human knowledge. Some major scientific breakthroughs have been made thanks to the invention of thought experiments. Some philosophers of science view theories as tools—the artifacts that do not necessarily relate to real entities. Critical treatment of competing theories supports this view.

Scientific Principles Applied to Design-Type Research

If design-type research shares deep roots with the traditional scientific research, then the principles advanced by the philosophers of science should be applicable to it as well. The purpose of this chapter is to show how these principles could be interpreted through the lens of design-type research. Induction in DTR implies extracting features of the implemented particular solutions with subsequent generalization. Deduction means inferring meta-requirements and, subsequently, features of meta-systems based on kernel theories. Ockham’s razor as a criterion favors simpler designs. Popper’s falsifiability criterion means that design of meta-artifacts should be informative. Lacatos’s protective belt translates into separating the immutable core of a design theory from the part that is potentially modifiable. Kuhn’s paradigms in design establish a given core design statement for a particular kind of meta-artifact, which drives focused research in that area. Feyerabend’s anarchy encourages alternative design visions. The aesthetics criterion plays an important part in recognizing forms in meta-artifacts.

Traditional Science vs. Design-Type Research

Is science fundamentally different from the design of novel artifact concepts? This chapter aims to examine if there are essential differences between traditional science and design-type research. Human capacities allow us to perceive and understand the world as well as act on it to make changes in a purposeful fashion. As the subjects of knowledge and creation grow increasingly abstract, the differences between creating and understanding tend to fade away. While science studies natural phenomena, the focus of design is on artifacts. Could this be the definitive dividing line between design and science? Regarding the ontological status of the artifacts the opinions are split, some suggesting that they are distinct from natural objects, while others seeing continuity, the position which is defended in this chapter. Other possible differentiation criteria (e.g. design is application of science) are also discussed and it is argued that none of these makes design essentially distinct from science.

Design-Type Research in Information Systems

Information systems are socio-technical artifacts whose design should fit to serve the needs of organizations as well as the individuals who employ them. The central purpose of this chapter is to argue that design of new IS concepts can be regarded as a scientific research activity. To this end, several important questions need to be tackled, including the following ones: What is the meaning of observation in design-type research? Is there a notion of a theory in design-type research that corresponds to that in traditional science? If so, what are its building blocks? How does design-type research relate to the issues of truth and discovery? This chapter makes an attempt to provide the answers to these and other related questions.

Family of Information System Meta-Artifacts

Development of the informative classification scheme for information system artifacts would be highly useful for design researchers in focusing and organizing their research projects and identifying gaps. There have been few dated attempts at IS classification mostly focusing on intra-organizational systems. This chapter stresses the need for newer frameworks, which would accommodate for recent developments in IS from the design-type research perspective. The chapter outlines one possible approach, which incorporates individuals, groups, organizations and markets as possible components. Classification could span through the layers of the representational framework presented earlier to produce the families of meta-requirements and synthetic and technological meta-systems. Design research frontier helps in identifying possible developments from the existing meta-systems towards true future system forms. Along this path design researchers are expected to encounter phantom forms.

Design

The purpose of this chapter is to explain the meaning of such important concepts as artifact, design, and design-related research. Traditionally, the term “design research” refers to a field of study that aims at providing insights into designing. This chapter presents a general notion of design. It briefly presents the history of studies of design. The term “design” has a number of definitions, some of which are covered in the chapter. It also considers design as viewed from the perspective of problem solving. The notion of an artifact in relation to its environment and internal organization is described. General methodology of design in terms of key stages is briefly discussed. The role of representation in design is emphasized.