Challenges of Critical and Emancipatory Design Science Research - The Design of `Possible Worlds' as Response

J. Marcel Heusinger

2013

Abstract

Popper’s (1967) `piecemeal social change' is an approach manifesting itself in science as critical and eman-cipatory (C&E) research. It is concerned with incrementally removing manifested inequalities to achieve a `better' world. Although design science research in information systems seems to be a prime candidate for such endeavors, respective projects are clearly underrepresented. This position paper argues that this is due to the demand of justifying research ex post by an evaluation in practical settings. From the perspective of C&E research it is questionable if powerful actors grant access to their organization and support projects which ultimately challenge their position. It is suggested that theory development based on a synthesis of justificatory knowledge is a complementary approach that allows designing realizable responses to C&E issues–the design of `possible worlds' (Lewis, 1986) as basis for C&E design science research.

References

  1. Albert, H. (1972). Konstruktion und Kritik. Hamburg, DE: Hoffmann and Campe.
  2. Becker, J. (2010). Prozess der gestaltungsorientierten Wirtschaftsinformatik. In H. Österle, R. Winter & W. Brenner (Eds.), Gestaltungsorientierte Wirtschaftsinformatik (pp. 13-17). Nuremberg, DE: Infowerk.
  3. Bhaskar, R. (2008). A Realist Theory of Science (2nd). Abingdon, OX, UK: Routledge.
  4. Bunge, M. (1966). Technology as Applied Science. Technology and Culture, 7(3), 329-347.
  5. Carlsson, S. A. (2007). Through IS Design Science Research: For Whom, What Type of Knowledge, and How. SJIS, 19(2), 75-86.
  6. Carlsson, S. A. (2009). Critical Realist Information Systems Research. In M. Khosrow-Pour (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Information Science and Technology (pp. 811-817). Hershey, PA, USA: IGI Global.
  7. Carlsson, S. A. (2010). Design Science in IS: A Critical Realist Approach. In A. R. Hevner & S. Chatterjee (Eds.), Design Research in Informat-ion Systems (pp. 209-233). New York, NY, USA: Springer.
  8. Carlsson, S. A., Henningsson, S., Hrastinski, S., & Keller, C. (2011). Socio-technical IS Design Science Research: Developing Design Theory for IS Integration Management. Information Systems and EBusiness Management, 9(1), 109-131.
  9. Chmielewicz, K. (1994). Forschungskonzeption der Wirtschaftswissenschaft. Stuttgart, DE: Poeschel.
  10. David, P. (1985). Clio and the Economics of QWERTY. The American Economic Review, 75(2), 332-337.
  11. Fountain, J. E. (2001). Building the Virtual State: Information Technology and Institutional Change. Washington, DC, USA: Brookings Institution Press.
  12. Frank, U. (2006). Towards a Pluralistic Conception of Research Methods in Information Systems Research. ICB Research Report (No. 7).Essen, DE.
  13. Frank, U. (2009). Die Konstruktion möglicher Welten als Chance und Herausforderung der Wirtschaftsinformatik. In J. Becker, H. Krcmar & B. Niehaves (Eds.), Wissenschaftstheorie und gestaltungsorientierte WI (pp. 161-173). Heidelberg: Physica.
  14. Frank, U. (2010). Zur methodischen Fundierung der Forschung in der Wirtschaftsinformatik. In H.Österle, R. Winter & W. Brenner (Eds) Gestaltungsorientierte Wirtschaftsinformatik (pp. 35-44). Nuermberg, DE: Infowerk.
  15. Gregor, S. (2009). Building Theory in the Sciences of the Artifical. In Proceedings of DESRIST'09 (pp. 1-10). New York, NY, USA: ACM Press.
  16. Gregor, S. & Jones, D. (2007). The Anatomy of a Design Theory. JAIS, 8(5), 312-335.
  17. Habermas, J. (1987). Reason and the Rationalization of Society: Theory of Communicative Action. Frankfurt am Main, DE: Suhrkamp (German).
  18. Hevner, A. R. (2007). The Three-Cycle View of Design Science Research. SJIS, 19(2), 87-92.
  19. Hevner, A. R., & Chatterjee, S. (2010). Design Research in Information Systems: Theory and Practice. New York, NY, USA: Springer.
  20. Hevner, A. R., March, S. T., Park, J., & Ram, S. (2004). Design Science in Information System Research. MIS Quarterly, 28(1), 75-105.
  21. Iivari, J. (2007). A Paradigmatic Analysis of Information Systems as a Design Science. SJIS, 19(2), 39-64.
  22. Iivari, J. (2010). Twelve Theses on Design Science Research in Information Systems. In A. R. Hevner & S. Chatterjee (Eds.), Design Research in Information Systems (pp. 43-62). New York, NY, USA: Springer.
  23. Kuechler, W. L., & Vaishnavi, V. (2012a). A Framework for Theory Development in Design Science Research: Multiple Perspectives. JAIS, 13(6), 395-423.
  24. Kuechler, W. L., & Vaishnavi, V. (2012b). Characterizing Design Science Theories by Level of Constraint on Design Decisions. In K. Peffers, M. A. Rothenberger & B. Kuechler (Eds.), Proceedings DESRIST'12, Las Vegas, NV, USA, May 14-15, 2012. (pp. 345-353). Berlin, DE: Springer.
  25. Ladyman, J. (2007). Ontological, Epistemological and Methodological Positions. In T. Kuipers (Ed.), Handbook of Philosophy of Science (pp. 303-376). Oxford, UK: North Holland.
  26. Lewis, D. K. (1986). On the Plurality of Worlds. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
  27. March, S. T., & Vogus, T. J. (2010). Design Science in the Management Discipline. In A. R. Hevner & S. Chatterjee (Eds.), Design Research in Information Systems (pp. 195-208). New York: Springer.
  28. Mertens, P. (2010). Anspruchsgruppen der gestaltungsorientierten WI. In H.Österle, R. Winter & W. Brenner (Eds.) Gestaltungsorientierte Wirtschaftsinformatik (pp. 19-25). Nuremberg: Infowerk.
  29. Myers, M. D. & Klein, H. K. (2011). A Set of Principles for Conducting Critical Research in Information Systems. MIS Quarterly, 35(1), 17-36.
  30. Niehaves, B. (2007). On Epistemological Pluralism in Design Science. SJIS, 19(2), 93-104.
  31. Niiniluoto, I. (1993). The Aim and Structure of Applied Research. Erkenntnis, 38(1), 1-21.
  32. North, D. C. (1990). Institutions, Institutional Change and Economic Performance. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
  33. Nunamaker, J. F., Chen, M., & Purdin, T. D. M. (1991). Systems Development in Information Systems Research. JMIS, 7(3), 89-106.
  34. Österle, H., Winter, R., & Brenner, W. (Eds.). (2010). Nuernberg, DE: Inforwerk,
  35. Österle, H., Becker, J., Frank, U., Hess, T., ... Sinz, E. J. (2011). Memorandum on Design-oriented Information Systems Research. EJIS, 20(1), 7-10.
  36. Pawson, R. (2006). Evidence-Based Policy: A Realist Perspective. London, UK: Sage.
  37. Pawson, R., & Tilley, N. (1997). Realistic Evaluation. London, UK: Sage.
  38. Peffers, K., Tuunanen, T., Rothenberger, M. A., & Chatterjee, S. (2008). A Design Science Research Methodology for Information Systems Research. JMIS, 24(3), 45-77.
  39. Popper, K. P. (1967). The Spell of Plato: The Open Society and Its Enemies. London, UK: Routledge.
  40. Purao, S., Rossi, M., & Sein, M. K. (2010). On Integrating Action Research and Design Research. In A. R. Hevner & S. Chatterjee (Eds.), Design Research in Information Systems (pp. 179-194). New York, NY, USA: Springer.
  41. Riege, C., Saat, J., & Bucher, T. (2009). Systematisierung von Evaluationsmethoden in der gestaltungsorientierten Wirtschaftsinformatik. In J. Becker, H. Krcmar & B. Niehaves (Eds.), Wissenschaftstheorie und gestaltungsorientierte Wirtschaftsinformatik (pp. 69-86). Heidelberg, DE: Physica.
  42. Robson, C. (2002). Real World Research: A Resource for Social Scientists and Practitioner Researchers. Malden, MA, USA: Blackwell.
  43. Rossi, M., & Sein, M. K. (2003). Design Research Workshop: A Proactive Research Approach. 26th Information Systems Research Seminar in Scandinavia, August 9-12, 2003, Haikko, FI.
  44. Sein, M., Rossi, M., & Purao, S. (2007). Exploring the Limits of the Possible. SJIS, 19(2), 105-110.
  45. Stahl, B. C. (2009). The Ideology of Design: A Critical Appreciation of the Design Science Discourse in Information Systems and Wirtschaftsinformatik. In J. Becker, H. Krcmar & B. Niehaves (Eds.), Wissenschaftstheorie und gestaltungsorientierte Wirtschaftsinformatik (pp. 111-132). Heidelberg, DE: Physica.
  46. Tilley, N. (2000). Realistic Evaluation: An Overview. Retrieved from http://evidence-based management.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/ nick_tilley.pdf (last access: 2013-04-03).
  47. Venable, J. R. (2006). A Framework for Design Science Research Activities. In M. Khosrow-Pour (Ed.), Emerging Trends and Challenges in Information Technology Management (pp. 184-187). Hershey: Idea Group.
  48. Walls, G. J., Widmeyer, G. R., & El Sawy, O. A. (2004). Assessing Information System Design Theory in Perspective: How Useful was our 1992 Initial Rendition? JITTA, 6(2), 43-58.
  49. Walls, J., Widmeyer, G. R., & El Sawy, O. A. (1992). Building an Information System Design Theory for Vigilant EIS. ISR, 3(1), 36-59.
  50. Zelewski, S. (2007). Kann Wissenschaftstheorie behilflich für die Publikationspraxis sein? Eine kritische Auseinandersetzung mit den ”Guidelines” von Hevner et al. In F. Lehner & S. Zelewski (Eds.), Wissenschaftstheoretische Fundierung und wissenschaftliche Orientierung der WI (pp. 71-120). Berlin: Gito.
Download


Paper Citation


in Harvard Style

Marcel Heusinger J. (2013). Challenges of Critical and Emancipatory Design Science Research - The Design of `Possible Worlds' as Response . In Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems - Volume 2: ICEIS, ISBN 978-989-8565-60-0, pages 339-345. DOI: 10.5220/0004568403390345


in Bibtex Style

@conference{iceis13,
author={J. Marcel Heusinger},
title={Challenges of Critical and Emancipatory Design Science Research - The Design of `Possible Worlds' as Response},
booktitle={Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems - Volume 2: ICEIS,},
year={2013},
pages={339-345},
publisher={SciTePress},
organization={INSTICC},
doi={10.5220/0004568403390345},
isbn={978-989-8565-60-0},
}


in EndNote Style

TY - CONF
JO - Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems - Volume 2: ICEIS,
TI - Challenges of Critical and Emancipatory Design Science Research - The Design of `Possible Worlds' as Response
SN - 978-989-8565-60-0
AU - Marcel Heusinger J.
PY - 2013
SP - 339
EP - 345
DO - 10.5220/0004568403390345