Just Finished a Cycle of a Design Science Research Project: What’s Next?

Abstract

The article is devoted to developing a methodological support for planning Design Science (DS) research projects. More exactly, it is aimed at developing a classification of a particular kind of cycles, inherent to DS research projects, and guidelines on how to choose the next cycle in a specific project. The classification and guidelines are based on results from an analysis of DS literature and a reflective analysis of our own research practice. As far as own research practice is concerned, two DS projects have been analyzed in detail. The analysis revealed that though both projects included cycles, the nature of these cycles was different. In the first project, cycles concerned finding a better problem to solve, while in the second project, cycles concerned finding a better solution for more or less the same problem. Both projects concern developing methodologies in the area of socio-technical systems, and the guidelines on how to choose the next cycle have special provisions related to such systems. In conclusion, the article presents examples of other projects that followed the suggested guidelines and discusses the difference of the suggested approach from other approaches to conduct DS research projects.

The Development and Evaluation of an Animated Video for Pre- and Postoperative Instructions for Patients with Osteoarthritis—A Design Science Research Approach

“…The first cycle, the relevance cycle, provided requirements for the application from the very beginning. During this cycle, the research team investigated the problems and opportunities in organizational practice where the resulting artifact should be implemented [18]. In this cycle, our team consulted OA surgeons and other healthcare professionals such as nurses, assistance nurses, and physiotherapists.…”

“…The rigor cycle has been used to ensure that the designed application could contribute to research and that the application could achieve an innovative character. The design of the application was grounded in the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) knowledge base, as well as knowledge collected in other DSR projects [18]. The users' attitude toward using a digital artifact is dependent on the intention to use it and if the digital artifact is informative and relevant for the intended user group.…”

Integrating Models of Observing and Observed Activities Based on an Example of Empirical Research in Information Systems Discipline

“…Instead, a new problem can be discovered for which the artifact is a solution. A new, more interesting, problem can be found even if the artifact does solve the original problem, see the discussion on the topic in [13]. Therefore, it is quite acceptable for a DS project to reverse the usual order by creating an artifact that seems to be interesting first, and then trying to find what problem(s) it can solve, which constitutes finding a solution to an unknown problem.…”

Identity Management in an Institution of Higher Education: A Case Study Using Structural Coupling and Fractal Enterprise Model

“…The current work can be considered as a second cycle in the project. This cycle, according to the classification from [16], concerns Improvement of the solution/artefact developed in the previous cycle. The second project is related to finding new applications areas for FEM.…”

“…The second project is related to finding new applications areas for FEM. This project has already had a number of cycles of the Problem seeking type in the classification from [16], where FEM was tested for solving various problems. In respect to the FEM project, the current article continues the works started by [12] and [13], which have extended FEM in a way that it becomes possible to use it in combination with the concept of structural coupling.…”