Skip to main content

Dialectical Tensions in Design Theorizing: Exploring the Selection, Use, and Development of Kernel Theory

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Design Science Research for a Resilient Future (DESRIST 2024)

Abstract

Theory is a pivotal component in Information Systems (IS) research and no less so in Design Science Research (DSR) projects, which are typically expected to select and use kernel theories to develop theoretical contributions. However, the actual application and utilization of kernel theories remain challenging and heterogeneous – from producing theoretical outcomes in each project to using theory for the justification of design activities. This is problematic since academic journals have high expectations for selecting, using, and contributing to (kernel) theory. As a consequence, DSR researchers, especially novice ones, face challenges in navigating the high expectations of journals with a blurry research component. In this paper, we explore a set of tensions prevalent in the selection, use, and development of kernel theory to then elaborate on possible pathways to respond to them.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Lehnhoff, S., Staudt, P., Watson, R.T.: Changing the climate in information systems research. Bus. Inf. Syst. Eng. 63(3), 219–222 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12599-021-00695-y

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Iivari, J.: A critical look at theories in design science research. J. Assoc. Inf. Syst. 21(3), 502–519 (2020). https://doi.org/10.17705/1jais.00610

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Möller, F., Schoormann, T., Strobel, G., Hansen, M.: Unveiling the cloak: kernel theory use in design science research. In: Proceedings of the 43rd International Conference on Information Systems, Kopenhagen, Denmark (2022)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Avison, D., Malaurent, J.: Is theory king?: Questioning the theory fetish in information systems. J. Inf. Technol. 29(4), 327–336 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1057/jit.2014.8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Markus, M.L.: Maybe not the king, but an invaluable subordinate: a commentary on avison and malaurent’s advocacy of ‘theory light’ is research. J. Inf. Technol. 29(4), 341–345 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1057/jit.2014.19

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Mandviwalla, M.: Generating and justifying design theory. J. Assoc. Inf. Syst. 16, 314–344 (2015). https://doi.org/10.17705/1jais.00397

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Rowe, F., Markus, M.L.: Against theoretical constraint: a commentary on Hirschheim’s “against theory—with apologies to Feyerabend”. In: Hovorka, D. (ed.) Scholarly Commentaries on Hirschheim’s “Against Theory” (2019). Journal of the Association for Information Systems

    Google Scholar 

  8. Hirschheim, R.: Against theory: with apologies to Feyerabend. J. Assoc. Inf. Syst. 20(9), 1340–1357 (2019). https://doi.org/10.17705/1jais.00569

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Baskerville, R., Baiyere, A., Gregor, S., Hevner, A., Rossi, M.: Design science research contributions: finding a balance between artifact and theory. J. Assoc. Inf. Syst. 19(5), 358–376 (2018). https://doi.org/10.17705/1jais.00495

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Peffers, K., Tuunanen, T., Niehaves, B.: Design science research genres: introduction to the special issue on exemplars and criteria for applicable design science research. Eur. J. Inf. Syst. 27(2), 129–139 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1080/0960085X.2018.1458066

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Ciriello, R.F., Mathiassen, L.: Dialectical inquiry in information systems research: a synthesis of principles. In: Proceedings of the 43rd International Conference on Information Systems, Kopenhagen, Denmark (2022)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Farjoun, M.: Beyond dualism: stability and change as a duality. Acad. Manag. Rev. 35(2), 202–225 (2010)

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  13. Straub, D.W.: Editor’s comments: why top journals accept your paper. MIS Q. Manag. Inf. Syst. 33(3), iii–x (2009). https://doi.org/10.2307/20650302

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Fink, L.: The philosopher’s corner: the role of theory in information systems research. SIGMIS Database 52(3), 96–103 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1145/3481629.3481636

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Ågerfalk, P.J., Karlsson, F.: Artefactual and empirical contributions in information systems research. Eur. J. Inf. Syst. 29(2), 109–113 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1080/0960085X.2020.1743051

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Chatterjee, S.: Writing my next design science research master-piece: but how do i make a theoretical contribution to DSR? In: Proceedings of the 23rd European Conference on Information Systems, Münster, Germany (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Ciriello, R.F., Thatcher, J.: Six inversion strategies for avoiding rejection in academic publishing: lessons from the IS discipline. Commun. Assoc. Inf. Syst. 53, 458–474 (2023)

    Google Scholar 

  18. Wiener, M., et al.: Information systems research: making an impact in a publish-or-perish world. Commun. Assoc. Inf. Syst. 43, 466–481 (2018). https://doi.org/10.17705/1CAIS.04326

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Sutton, R.I., Staw, B.M.: What theory is not. Adm. Sci. Q. 40(3), 371–384 (1995). https://doi.org/10.2307/2393788

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Iivari, J.: Theory fetish, theory building and ideal types. In: Information Systems, Development Approaches and Qualitative Research: A Tribute to David Alison, pp. 115–129 (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  21. Oxford University Press: Definition of Tension (2022). https://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/definition/english/tension_1?q=Tension. Accessed 11 Nov 2022

  22. Smith, W., Lewis, M.: Toward a theory of paradox: a dynamic equilibrium model of organizing. Acad. Manag. Rev. 36(2), 381–403 (2011). https://doi.org/10.5465/AMR.2011.59330958

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Paré, G., Trudel, M.-C., Jaana, M., Kitsiou, S.: Synthesizing information systems knowledge: a typology of literature reviews. Inf. Manag. 52(2), 183–199 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2014.08.008

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Walls, J.G., Widmeyer, G.R., El Sawy, O.A.: Building an information system design theory for vigilant EIS. Inf. Syst. Res. 3(1), 36–59 (1992). https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.3.1.36

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Goldkuhl, G.: Design theories in information systems-a need for multi-grounding. JITTA: J. Inf. Technol. Theory Appl. 6(2), 59–72 (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  26. Gregor, S., Jones, D.: The anatomy of a design theory. J. Assoc. Inf. Syst. 8(5), 312–335 (2007). https://doi.org/10.17705/1JAIS.00129

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Gregor, S., Hevner, A.R.: Positioning and presenting design science research for maximum impact. MIS Q. Manag. Inf. Syst. 37(2), 337–355 (2013). https://doi.org/10.25300/MISQ/2013/37.2.01

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Gregor, S., Imran, A., Turner, T.: A ‘sweet spot’ change strategy for a least developed country: leveraging e-Government in Bangladesh. Eur. J. Inf. Syst. 23(6), 655–671 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1057/ejis.2013.14

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Rogers, E.M.: Diffusion of innovations: modifications of a model for telecommunications. In: Stoetzer, M.-W., Mahler, A. (eds.) Die Diffusion von Innovationen in der Telekommunikation, vol. 17, pp. 25–38. Springer, Heidelberg (1995). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-79868-9_2

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  30. Fischer, C., Winter, R., Wortmann, F.: Design theory. Bus. Inf. Syst. Eng. 2(6), 387–390 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12599-010-0128-2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Hevner, A.: A three cycle view of design science research. Scand. J. Inf. Syst. 19(2), 87–92 (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  32. Kuechler, B., Vaishnavi, V.: On theory development in design science research: anatomy of a research project. Eur. J. Inf. Syst. 17(5), 489–504 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1057/ejis.2008.40

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Iivari, J.: A paradigmatic analysis of information systems as a design science. Scand. J. Inf. Syst. 19(2), 39–64 (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  34. Simon, H.A.: The Sciences of the Artificial. MIT Press, Cambridge (1996)

    Google Scholar 

  35. Viljoen, A., Hein, A., Przybilla, L., Krcmar, H.: Striving for global optima in digital transformation: a paradox theory approach. In: Proceedings of the 43rd International Conference on Information Systems, Kopenhagen, Denmark (2022)

    Google Scholar 

  36. Hick, W.E.: On the rate of gain of information. Q. J. Exp. Psychol. 4(1), 11–26 (1952). https://doi.org/10.1080/17470215208416600

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Schwartz, B.: The paradox of choice. In: Positive Psychology in Practice, pp. 121–138 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118996874.ch8

  38. Lim, S., Saldanha, T., Malladi, S., Melville, N.: Theories used in information systems research: insights from complex network analysis. J. Inf. Technol. Theory Appl. 14, 5–46 (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  39. Dennis, A.: An unhealthy obsession with theory. J. Assoc. Inf. Syst. 20(9), 1406–1411 (2019). https://doi.org/10.17705/1jais.00572

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Arazy, O., Kumar, N., Shapira, B.: A theory-driven design framework for social recommender systems. J. Assoc. Inf. Syst. 11(9), 455–490 (2010). https://doi.org/10.17705/1jais.00237

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Markus, M.L., Rowe, F.: Guest editorial: theories of digital transformation: a progress report. J. Assoc. Inf. Syst. 22(2), 273–280 (2021)

    Google Scholar 

  42. Kurien, R., Paila, A.R., Nagendra, A.: Application of paralysis analysis syndrome in customer decision making. Procedia Econ. Finance 11, 323–334 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1016/S2212-5671(14)00200-7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Callon, M., Latour, B.: Unscrewing the big Leviathan: how actors macro-structure reality and how sociologists help them to do so. In: Advances in Social Theory and Methodology, pp. 277–303. Routledge, Kegan Paul, Londres (1981)

    Google Scholar 

  44. Teece, D., Pisano, G., Shuen, A.: Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strateg. Manag. J. 18(7), 509–533 (1997)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Laufer, R.S., Wolfe, M.: Privacy as a concept and a social issue: a multidimensional developmental theory. J. Soc. Issues 33(3), 22–42 (1977). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4560.1977.tb01880.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Schön, D.: The Reflective Practitioner: How Professionals Think in Action. Basic Books (1983)

    Google Scholar 

  47. Kuechler, W., Vaishnavi, V.: A framework for theory development in design science research: multiple perspectives. J. Assoc. Inf. Syst. 13(6), 395–423 (2012). https://doi.org/10.17705/1jais.00300

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Sein, M.K., Henfridsson, O., Purao, S., Rossi, M., Lindgren, R.: Action design research. MIS Q. Manag. Inf. Syst. 35(1), 37–56 (2011). https://doi.org/10.2307/23043488

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Peffers, K., Tuunanen, T., Rothenberger, M.A., Chatterjee, S.: A design science research methodology for information systems research. J. Manag. Inf. Syst. 24(3), 45–77 (2007). https://doi.org/10.2753/MIS0742-1222240302

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Field, B.: Self-Sabotaging: Why Does It Happen (2023). https://www.verywellmind.com/why-people-self-sabotage-and-how-to-stop-it-5207635

  51. Hevner, A., March, S.T., Park, J., Ram, S.: Design science in information systems research. MIS Q. Manag. Inf. Syst. 28(1), 75–105 (2004). https://doi.org/10.2307/25148625

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Goldkuhl, G., Sjöström, J.: Design science theorizing: the contribution of practical theory. In: Hassan, N.R., Willcocks, L.P. (eds.) Advancing Information Systems Theories. TWG, pp. 239–273. Springer, Cham (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-64884-8_7

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  53. Simon, H.A.: Problem forming, problem finding and problem solving in design. Des. Syst. 3, 245–257 (1995)

    Google Scholar 

  54. Ågerfalk, P.J.: Insufficient theoretical contribution: a conclusive rationale for rejection? Eur. J. Inf. Syst. 23(6), 593–599 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1057/ejis.2014.35

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Ågerfalk, P.J., Conboy, K., Myers, M.D.: Information systems in the age of pandemics: COVID-19 and beyond. Eur. J. Inf. Syst. 29(3), 203–207 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1080/0960085X.2020.1771968

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Adalian, J.: Inside netflix’s quest to end scrolling how the company is working to solve one of its biggest threats: decision fatigue (2021). https://www.vulture.com/article/netflix-play-something-decision-fatigue.html. Accessed 02 Feb 2024

  57. Laurent, S.: Netflix vs. decision fatigue: how to solve the paradox of choice (2021). https://uxdesign.cc/netflix-vs-decision-fatigue-how-to-solve-the-paradox-of-choice-888ca56db4b. Accessed 02 Feb 2024

  58. Meilich, O., de Pillis, E.: “But it’s so random!”: a versatile constrained creativity exercise for application of business topics. Manag. Teach. Rev. 8(1), 8–21 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1177/23792981211032565

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. Gawade, A.: Netflix syndrome—a UX/UI case study on the paradox of choice (2023). https://medium.com/@aryagawade2001/netflix-syndrome-a-ux-ui-case-study-on-the-paradox-of-choice-410a062cc403. Accessed 02 Feb 2024

    Google Scholar 

  60. Eppalapally, S.: Netflix: the paradox of choice (2015). https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/netflix-paradox-choice-santosh-eppalapally. Accessed 02 Feb 2024

  61. MISQE: MISQE - Mission Statement (2023). https://aisel.aisnet.org/misqe/aimsandscope.html. Accessed 08 Jan 2024

  62. Schoormann, T., Möller, F., Chandra Kruse, L., Otto, B.: BAUSTEIN—a design tool for configuring and representing design research. Inf. Syst. J. (2024). https://doi.org/10.1111/isj.12516

  63. Sandberg, J., Alvesson, M.: Meanings of theory: clarifying theory through typification. J. Manag. Stud. 58(2), 487–516 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1111/joms.12587

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Frederik Möller .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Ethics declarations

The authors have no competing interests to declare that are relevant to the content of this article.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2024 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Möller, F., Schoormann, T., Ciriello, R., Hansen, M.R.P. (2024). Dialectical Tensions in Design Theorizing: Exploring the Selection, Use, and Development of Kernel Theory. In: Mandviwalla, M., Söllner, M., Tuunanen, T. (eds) Design Science Research for a Resilient Future. DESRIST 2024. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 14621. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-61175-9_14

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-61175-9_14

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-031-61174-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-031-61175-9

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics