Prof. Dr. Wolfgang König, Prof. Dr.-Ing. Ralf ... - E-Finance Lab

theoretical sampling, slices of data, and the constant comparison
method researchers may be able to explore the
problem and the phenomenon more precisely and analyze
potential failures in the development in advance. A tentative
design and the requirements of the IT artefact are more
detailed through this refined step in theory-generating
DSR. In addition, the extension of theory-generation after
the evaluation of the IT artefact enables researchers to create
an additional theoretical insight, e.g., from the application of
the IT artefact in the appropriate environment, applicable
knowledge from existing literature, or results from the IT
artefact evaluation. This additional theoretical component
offers another research outcome, but it also complements
the underlying DSR approach and thereby meets the
requirements for a IS design theory, as specified by Gregor
and Jones (2007). As an exemplary case from extant literature,
we used Weedman (2008) who used different behavioural
science elements to analyze their developed IT
artefact in more detail.
From a scientific point of view, theory-generating DSR
focuses on the IT artefact and its improvement, as well as
offering additional theoretical insights based on the use of the
IT artefact. Thus, its reusable contribution adds to existing
knowledge bases. Furthermore, it designs and creates IT artefacts
as means to discover new knowledge (Baskerville et al.
2009), which distinguishes theory-generating DSR from, e.g.,
action research, which aims to create change in an organizational
setting and studies the subsequent effects (Baskerville et
al. 2009). Moreover, action researchers take an action and
apply extant theories within the course of the research project
(Coglan and Coughlan 2002; McKay and Marshall 2001). It
thus explores the research project from an internal perspective;
the action researcher works with the people directly affected
by the action or who have the potential to influence the action
in their environment (Avison et al. 1999). In contrast, a theorygenerating
DSR researcher observes phenomena and interacts
only within the scientific environment. Accordingly, theorygenerating
DSR provides findings about the potential
improvements to an IT artefact, and the researcher simply
observes.
8 Conclusion
We have developed and presented a conceptual approach
for a complementary use of DSR and behavioural
science research elements, on the basis of Kuechler
and Vaishnavi’s (2008a, b) model and comparison with
components necessary for IS design theories. For our initial
theory development, we used interrelations to combine previously
unconnected bodies of knowledge (DSR and GTM). In
the course of this combination, we identified gaps in their
conceptualizations and added missing components to an
already existing DSR model from Kuechler and Vaishnavi’s
(2008a, b). However, the proposed approach is a general
process model, rather than a strict recipe, and has not yet been
challenged or tested through application to actual DSR
projects.
According to Hevner et al. (2004), theoretical contributions
to the knowledge base represent an important and
necessary part of DSR. We therefore propose the combination
of DSR and GTM to unite design and behavioural
aspects. In particular, we illustrate how design and behavioural
research elements combine effectively in a pluralistic
research design, which responds to calls to find potential
research improvements (e.g., Mingers 2001).
Future research in this direction should evaluate whether
such a combined research method is applicable or not in
DSR projects. The used behavioural science method in this
paper uses elements from GTM which is only one out of
many methods in the field. Hence, this paper presents a new
attempt to combine design with behavioural research. Future
research should evaluate further the simultaneous use of
behavioural and DSR methods into a pluralistic research
design.
In summary, for a scientific discipline, generating contributions
to its knowledge base is at least as important as
solving real-world problems. We strongly believe that the
proposed theory-generating DSR approach as one possible
combination of design and behavioural science can support
this goal by providing a process model for researchers who
strive to follow and accomplish this aim in a research
setting. From a theoretical perspective, this model can provide
a fruitful contribution to the DSR community and
expect to be very interesting to researchers focusing on
DSR from a methodological point of view. From a practical
perspective, managers could use the developed model for
their DSR projects and thereby improve the development of
prototypes in a structured way to avoid failure or repair
loops.
Appendix: Review of DSR Articles
Inf Syst Front
In the course of our literature research, we found several
articles beside Weedman (2008) that offer support for various
steps of our theory-generating DSR approach. Each
article depicts a usage of DSR methods. Many articles
present the IT artefact as an instantiation, though as Hevner
et al. (2004) state: “IT artefacts can also be represented by
constructs, models, methods, instantiations, or a combination
thereof” (see also, March and Smith 1995). In Table 3,
we list articles that discuss typical examples of DSR and that
provided some basic ideas for our theory-generating DSR
approach.