Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Criteria of progress for information systems design theories

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Information Systems and e-Business Management Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

According to Kuhn, science and progress are strongly interrelated. In this paper, we define criteria of progress for design theories. A broad analysis of the literature on information systems design science reveals that there is no consensus on the criteria of progress for design theories. We therefore analyze different concepts of progress for natural science theories. Based on well-founded criteria stemming from the philosophy of science and referring to natural science theories, we develop a set of criteria of progress for design theories. In summary, our analysis results in six criteria of progress for design theories: A design theory is partially progressive compared to another if it is ceteris paribus (1) more useful, (2) internally more consistent, (3) externally more consistent, (4) more general, (5) simpler, or (6) more fruitful of further research. Although the measurement of these criteria is not the focus of this paper, the problem of measurement cannot be totally neglected. We therefore discuss different methods for measuring the criteria based on different concepts of truth: the correspondence theory of truth, the coherence theory of truth, and the consensus theory of truth. We finally show the applicability of the criteria with an example.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. The relationship between IS design science research (DSR) and IS design theory development is discussed in the following section.

  2. For a detailed discussion of the relationship between IS DSR und IS design theory, we refer to the Subsect. 2.3.

  3. Venable takes this definition from David Kroenke, but the citation is unknown.

  4. To be frank, we did not become aware of the issue of unintended side effects ourselves; one of the reviewers kindly drew our attention to this important aspect.

  5. We consider the function point method to be a design theory. Although it does not directly refer to the design of a computer system, it refers to the design of an IS artifact. At the beginning of this paper, we adopted the IS definition by Alter (2006, p. 12) who defines an information system as a specific “work system whose work practices are devoted to processing information, i.e. capturing, transmitting, storing, retrieving, manipulating, and displaying information.” Taking this definition, a method for estimating the costs of an IS project is clearly part of the information system. Ergo, the function point method is a (theoretical) approach saying how to design (a part of) an information system.

  6. Formally, a contradiction is defined as a statement of the form “a and not a.” Whilst such a formal contradiction is invalid, the formulation of concurrent goals is allowed, of course. Two concurrent goals might be costs and quality.

  7. Bucher et al. use a proprietary terminology and differentiate between context types and project types. However, this terminology can be mapped to our notion of scope (context type) and purpose (project type).

  8. Charlesworth (1956) argues that the claim for simplicity commonly ascribed to William of Ockham (“Ockham’s razor”) has already been articulated by Aristotle.

  9. Venable’s (2006a, b) definition of a problem is strongly related to Gregor and Jones’ (2007) definition purpose and scope for a design theory because the purpose of a design theory often is to address a specific problem with a given scope.

  10. We cannot discuss the different theories of truth in detail here. David (2009) gives a short overview of the variety of theories discussed under the label of a correspondence theory of truth and discusses some of its major advantages and disadvantages. Young (2008) deals with the correspondence theory of truth. For the consensus theory of truth, we directly refer to its most popular proponent: Jürgen Habermas (cf. e.g. Habermas 1984).

  11. The experiment is interesting from a methodological point of view because Sobel and Clarkson (2002) were heavily criticized by Berry and Tichy (2003) for methodological errors in the experiment design and its result. Sobel and Clarkson (2003) answer this criticism.

References

  • Albrecht A (1979) Measuring application development productivity. In: Proceedings of IBM application development symposium, IBM Press, pp 83–92

  • Alter S (2006) The work system method. Work System Press, Larkspur

    Google Scholar 

  • Becker J, Niehaves B (2007) Epistemological perspectives on IS research: a framework for analysing and systematizing epistemological assumptions. Inf Syst J 17:197–214

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berry DM, Tichy WF (2003) Comments on “Formal methods application: an empirical tale of software development”. IEEE Trans Softw Eng 29(6):567–571

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bird A (2008) Thomas Kuhn. In: Zalta EN (ed) The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy

  • Bodart F, Patel A, Sim M et al (2001) Should optional properties be used in conceptual modelling? A theory and three empirical tests. Inf Syst Res 12(4):384–405

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bucher T, Klesse M, Kurpjuweit S (2007) Situational method engineering—on the differentiation of “Context” and “Project Type”. In: Ralyté J, Brinkkemper S, Henderson-Sellers B et al (eds) Situational method engineering—fundamentals and experiences. Springer, Boston, pp 33–48

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Charlesworth MJ (1956) Aristotle’s razor. Philos Stud (Ireland) 6:105–112

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen PP-S (1976) The entity-relationship model—toward a unified view of data. ACM Trans Database Syst 1(1):9–36

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Codd EF (1970) Relational model of data for large shared data banks. Commun ACM 13(6):377–387

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Codd EF (1982) Relational database: a practical foundation for productivity. Commun ACM 25(2):109–117

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • David M (2009) The correspondence theory of truth. In: Zalta EN (ed) The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy

  • Devlin BA (1997) Data warehouse: from architecture to implementation. Addison Wesley, Reading

    Google Scholar 

  • Dilworth C (2007) Scientifiic progress. Springer, Dordrecht

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Dubin R (1978) Theory building. Free Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Feyerabend P (1962) Explanation, reduction, and empiricism. In: Feigl H, Maxwell G (eds) Minnesota studies in the philosophy of science. University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis, pp 28–79

    Google Scholar 

  • Feyerabend P (1989) Irrwege der Vernunft. Suhrkamp, Frankfurt am Main

    Google Scholar 

  • Fitzgerald B, Howcroft D (1998) Competing dichotomies in IS research and possible strategies for resolution. In: Proceedings of the international conference on information systems, pp 155–164

  • Frank U (2006) Towards a pluralistic conception of research methods in information systems research. ICB-Research Report No. 7, Dec 2006, University of Duisburg-Essen

  • Gelernter DH (1998) Machine beauty: elegance and the heart of technology. Perseus Books, LLC, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Gibson M, Arnott D (2007) The use of focus groups in design science research. In: Toleman M, Cater-Steel A, Roberts D (eds) ACIS2007 Proceedings of the 18th Australasian conference on information systems, University of Southern Queensland, Toowoomba, Australia

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Gregor S (2006) The nature of theory in information systems research. MIS Q 30(3):611–642

    Google Scholar 

  • Gregor S (2009) building theory in the sciences of the artificial. In: Proceedings of the 4th international conference on design science research in information systems and technology, ACM, New York

  • Gregor S, Jones D (2007) The anatomy of a design theory. J Assoc Inf Syst 8(5):312–335

    Google Scholar 

  • Habermas J (1984) The theory of communicative action: reason and the rationalization of society. Beacon, Boston

    Google Scholar 

  • Hempel CG (1962) Deductive-nomological vs. statistical explanation. In: Feigl H, Maxwell G (eds) Minnesota studies in the philosophy of science III. University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis, pp 98–169

    Google Scholar 

  • Hempel CG, Oppenheim P (1948) Studies in the logic of explanation. Philos Sci 15(2):135–175

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hevner AR, March ST, Park J et al (2004) Design science in information systems research. MIS Q 28(1):75–105

    Google Scholar 

  • Inmon WH, Strauss D, Neushloss G (2008) DW 2.0: the architecture for the next generation of data warehousing. Elsevier, Amsterdam

    Google Scholar 

  • Kitchenham B, Kansala K (1993) Inter-item correlations among function points. In: Proceedings of the first international software metrics symposium 1993, IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos, CA, USA, pp 477–480

  • Kuechler W, Vaishnavi VK (2008) Theory development in design science research: anatomy of a research project. In: Vaishnavi VK, Baskerville R (eds) Proceedings of the third international conference on design science research in information systems and technology, pp 1–15

  • Kuechler W, Vaishnavi VK, Kuechler Sr WL (2007) Design [science] research in IS—a work in progress. In: Proceedings of the second international conference on design science research in information systems and technology (DESRIST 2007), pp 1–17

  • Kuhn TS (1970) The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago University Press, Chicago

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuhn TS (1977) The essential tension. Selected studies in scientific tradition and change. University of Chicago Press, Chicago

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee AS (1991) Architecture as a reference discipline for MIS. In: Nissen HE, Klein HK, Hirschheim R (eds) Information systems research: contemporary approaches and emergent traditions. North-Holland, Amsterdam, pp 573–592

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee AS (1999) Inaugural editor’s comments. MIS Q 23(1):v–xi

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Losee J (2004) Theories of scientific progress. An introduction. Routledge, New York, London

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • March ST, Smith GF (1995) Design and natural science research on information technology. Decis Support Syst 15(4):251–266

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Markus ML, Majchrzak A, Gasser L (2002) A design theory for systems that support emergent knowledge processes. MIS Q 26(3):179–212

    Google Scholar 

  • Michaels AS, Mittman B, Carlson CR (1976) A comparison of the relational and codasyl approaches to data-base management. Comput Surv 8(1):125–151

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nagel E (1961) The structure of science. Harcourt, Brace & World, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Niehaves B (2007a) On epistemological diversity in design science: new vistas for a design-oriented is research? In: Proceedings of the 28th international conference on information systems (ICIS2007), December 9–12, 2007, Montréal, Québec, Canada, Association for Information Systems (AIS), pp 1–13 (electronic version)

  • Niehaves B (2007b) On epistemological pluralism in design science. Scand J Inf Syst 19(2):93–104

    Google Scholar 

  • Niiniluoto I (2007) Scientific progress. In: Zalta EN (ed) The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy

  • Norman D (1988) The design of everyday things. Currency Doubleday, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Peffers K, Tuunanen T, Gengler CE et al. (2006) The design science research process: a model for producing and presenting information systems research. In: Chatterjee S, Hevner A (eds) Proceedings of the first international conference on design science research in information systems and technology (DESRIST 2006), pp 83–106

  • Peffers K, Tuunanen T, Rothenberger MA et al (2007) A design science research methodology for information systems research. J Manag Inf Syst 24(3):45–77

    Google Scholar 

  • Popper KR (1963) Conjecture and refutations. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Popper KR (1973) The aim of science. In: Popper KR (ed) Objective knowledge (with corrections). Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Purao S (2002) Design research in the technology of information systems: truth or dare, The Pennsylvania State University, Atlanta. http://purao.ist.psu.edu/working-papers/dare-purao.pdf

  • Rossi M, Sein MK (2003) Design research workshop: a proactive research approach. http://tiesrv.hkkk.fi/iris26/presentation/workshop_designRes.pdf. Accessed 19 Sep 2008

  • Simon HA (1996) The sciences of the artificial. MIT Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Sobel KAE, Clarkson MR (2002) Formal methods application: an empirical tale of software development. IEEE Trans Softw Eng 28(3):308–320

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sobel KAE, Clarkson MR (2003) Response to “Comments on ‘formal methods application: an empirical tale of software development’”. IEEE Trans Softw Eng 29(6):572–575

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Venable J (2006a) A framework for design science research activities. In: emerging trends and challenges in information technology management. Idea Group Publishing, Hershey, pp 184–187

  • Venable J (2006b) the role of theory and theorising in design science research. In: Chatterjee S, Hevner A (eds) Proceedings of the 1st international conference on design science in information systems and technology (DESRIST 2006), Claremont Graduate University, Claremont, CA, pp 1–18

  • w/o author (1989) Simple. In: Simpson J, Weiner E (eds) Oxford English Dictionary, 2, Oxford University Press

  • Walls JG, Widmeyer GR, El Sawy OA (1992) Building an information system design theory for vigilant EIS. Inf Syst Res 3(1):36–59

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walls JG, Widmeyer GR, El Sawy OA (2004) Assessing information systems design theory in perspective: how useful was our 1992 initial rendition? J Inf Technol Theory Appl 6(2):43–58

    Google Scholar 

  • Young JO (2008) The correspondence theory of truth. In: Zalta EN (ed) The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute of Information Management, University of St. Gallen, Müller-Friedberg-Strasse 8, 9000, St. Gallen, Switzerland

    Stephan Aier & Christian Fischer

Authors
  1. Stephan Aier
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Christian Fischer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Stephan Aier.

Additional information

The authors’ names appear in alphabetical order.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Aier, S., Fischer, C. Criteria of progress for information systems design theories. Inf Syst E-Bus Manage 9, 133–172 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10257-010-0130-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10257-010-0130-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation