ABSTRACT:The paper motivates, presents, demonstrates in use, and evaluates a methodology for conducting design science (DS) research in information systems. DS is of importance in a discipline oriented to the creation of successful artifacts. Several IS researchers have pioneered DS research in IS, yet over the last 15 years little DS research has been done within the discipline. The lack of a methodology to serve as a commonly accepted framework for DS research and of a template for its presentation may have contributed to its slow adoption. The design science research methodology (DSRM) presented here incorporates principles, practices, and procedures required to carry out such research and meets three objectives: it is consistent with prior literature, it provides a nominal process model for doing DS research, and it provides a mental model for presenting and evaluating DS research in IS. The DS process includes six steps: problem identification and motivation, definition of the objectives for a solution, design and development, demonstration, evaluation, and communication. We demonstrate and evaluate the methodology by presenting four case studies in terms of the DSRM, including cases that present the design of a database to support health assessment methods, a software reuse measure, an Internet video telephony application, and an IS planning method. The designed methodology effectively satisfies the three objectives and has the potential to help aid the acceptance of DS research in the IS discipline.
KEYWORDS AND PHRASES:Design science, design science research, design theory, methodology, mental model, process model, case study.
IntroductionInformation systems is an applied research discipline, in the sense that we frequently apply theory from other disciplines, such as economics, computer science, and the social sciences, to solve problems at the intersection of IT and organizations. However, the dominant research paradigms that we use to produce and publish research for our most respected research outlets largely continue to be those of traditional descriptive research borrowed from the social and natural sciences. We have recently accepted the use of interpretive research paradigms, but the resulting research output is still mostly explanatory and, it could be argued, not often applicable to the solution of problems encountered in research and practice. While design, the act of creating an explicitly applicable solution to a problem, is an accepted research paradigm in other disciplines, such as engineering, it has been employed in just a small minority of research papers published in our own best journals to produce artifacts that are applicable to research or practice.Without a strong component that produces explicitly applicable research solutions, IS research faces the potential of losing influence over research streams for which such applicability is an important value. For example, we wonder whether the preference for theory building and testing research may help to explain why the center of gravi...
