Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Scenario-Based Design Theorizing

The Case of a Digital Idea Screening Cockpit

  • Research Paper
  • Published:
Business & Information Systems Engineering Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

As ever more companies encourage employees to innovate, a surplus of ideas has become reality in many organizations – often exceeding the available resources to execute them. Building on insights from a literature review and a 3-year collaboration with a banking software provider, the paper suggests a Digital Idea Screening Cockpit (DISC) to address this challenge. Following a design science research approach, it suggests a prescriptive design theory that provides practitioner-oriented guidance for implementing a DISC. The study shows that, in order to facilitate the assessment, selection, and tracking of ideas for different stakeholders, such a system needs to play a dual role: It needs to structure decision criteria and at the same be flexible to allow for creative expression. Moreover, the paper makes a case for scenario-based design theorizing by developing design knowledge via scenarios.

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
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Andrew JP, Manget J, Michael DC, Taylor A, Zablit H (2010) Innovation 2010: a return to prominence – and the emergence of a new world order. Boston Consulting Group, Boston

    Google Scholar 

  • Carlsson SA, Henningsson S, Hrastinski S, Keller C (2011) Socio-technical IS design science research: developing design theory for IS integration management. Inf Syst e-Bus Manag 9:109–131

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chakrabarti AK, Hauschildt J (1989) The division of labor in innovation management. R&D Manag 19(2):161–171

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chesbrough HW (2003) Open innovation: the new imperative for creating and profiting from technology. Harvard Business Press, Brighton

    Google Scholar 

  • Christensen C (1997) The innovator’s dilemma: when new technologies cause great firms to fail. Harvard Business Press, Brighton

    Google Scholar 

  • Christensen CM, Raynor ME (2003) The innovators solution: creating and sustaining successful growth. Harvard Business Press, Brighton

    Google Scholar 

  • Ciriello RF, Richter A (2015) Idea hubs as nexus of collective creativity in digital innovation. In: Proceedings of the 36th international conference on information systems, Fort Worth

  • Ciriello RF, Richter A, Schwabe G (2017) From process to practice: towards a practice-based model of digital innovation. In: Proceedings of the 38th international conference on information systems, Seoul

  • DeCuir-Gunby JT, Marshall PL, McCulloch AW (2011) Developing and using a codebook for the analysis of interview data: an example from a professional development research project. Field Methods 23(2):136–155

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Desouza KC (2011) Intrapreneurship: managing ideas within your organization. University of Toronto Press, Toronto

    Google Scholar 

  • Desouza KC, Dombrowski C, Awazu Y, Baloh P, Papagari S, Jha S, Kim JY (2009) Crafting organizational innovation processes. Innov: Manag, Policy Pract 11(1):6–33

  • Drechsler A, Hevner AR (2018) Utilizing, producing, and contributing design knowledge in DSR projects. In: Chatterjee S, Dutta K, Sundarraj R (eds) Designing for a digital and globalized world. In: Proceedings of the 13th international conference DESRIST 2018, Chennai

  • Eason KD (2005) Information technology and organizational change. CRC Press, Boca Raton

    Google Scholar 

  • Etemad H, Lee Y (2003) The knowledge network of international entrepreneurship: theory and evidence. Small Bus Econ 20(1):5–23

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ettlie JE, Bridges WP, O’keefe RD (1984) Organization strategy and structural differences for radical versus incremental innovation. Manag Sci 30(6):682–695

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fichman RG (2004) Real options and IT platform adoption: implications for theory and practice. Inf Syst Res 15(2):132–154

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fichter K (2009) Innovation communities: the role of networks of promotors in open innovation. R&D Manag 39(4):357–371

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gama N, da Silva MM, Ataíde J (2007) Innovation scorecard: a balanced scorecard for measuring the value added by innovation. In: Cunha PF, Maropoulos PG (eds) Digital enterprise technology. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 417–424

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Gregersen H, Dyer JH, Christensen CM (2011) The innovator’s DNA. Harvard Business Review Press, Brighton

    Google Scholar 

  • Gregor S, Hevner AR (2013) Positioning and presenting design science research for maximum impact. MIS Q 37:337–A6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gregor S, Hovorka DS (2011) Causality: the elephant in the room in information systems epistemology. In: Proceedings of the 19th European conference on information systems (ECIS). Helsinki, Finland

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Gregor S, Müller O, Seidel S (2013) Reflection, abstraction, and theorizing in design and development research. In: Proceedings of the 21st European conference on information systems (ECIS). Utrecht, Netherlands

  • Gressgard LJ, Amundsen O, Aasen T, Hansen K (2014) Use of information and communication technology to support employee-driven innovation in organizations: a knowledge management perspective. J Knowl Manag 18(4):633–650

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hering D, Phillips J (2005) Innovation roles: the people you need for successful innovation. White Paper. NetCentrics Corporation, Herndon

    Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Høyrup S, Hasse C, Bonnafous-Boucher M, Møller K, Lotz M (2012) Employee-driven innovation: a new approach. Palgrave Macmillan, London

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Iivari J (2015) Distinguishing and contrasting two strategies for design science research. Eur J Inf Syst 24:107–115

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kemerer CF (1992) Now the learning curve affects CASE tool adoption. IEEE Softw 9(3):23–28

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kesting P, Ulhøi J (2010) Employee-driven innovation: extending the license to foster innovation. Manag Decis 48(1):65–84. https://doi.org/10.1108/00251741011014463

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Khazanchi S, Lewis MW, Boyer KK (2007) Innovation-supportive culture: the impact of organizational values on process innovation. J Oper Manag 25(4):871–884

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krueger RA (2009) Focus groups: a practical guide for applied research. Sage, Thousand Oaks

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee JS, Pries-Heje J, Baskerville R (2011) Theorizing in design science research. In: Proceedings of the 6th international conference on design science research in information systems and technology (DESRIST). Milwaukee

  • Lindič J, Baloh P, Ribière VM, Desouza KC (2011) Deploying information technologies for organizational innovation. Int J Inf Manag 31(2):183–188

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Markus ML, Silver MS (2008) A foundation for the study of IT effects: a new look at DeSanctis and Poole’s concepts of structural features and spirit. J Assoc Inf Syst 9:609–632

    Google Scholar 

  • Meth H, Mueller B, Maedche A (2015) Designing a requirement mining system. J Assoc Inf Syst 16:799

    Google Scholar 

  • Meyer M (2000) Innovation roles: from souls of fire to devil’s advocates. J Bus Commun 37(4):328–347

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miles MB, Huberman AM (1994) Qualitative data analysis: an expanded sourcebook. Sage, Thousand Oaks

    Google Scholar 

  • Mollick E (2014) The dynamics of crowdfunding: an exploratory study. J Bus Venturing 29(1):1–16

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Neyer A-K, Bullinger AC, Moeslein KM (2009) Integrating inside and outside innovators: a sociotechnical systems perspective. R&D Manag 39(4):410–419

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Osterwalder A, Pigneur Y (2010) Business model generation: a handbook for visionaries, game changers, and challengers. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peppard J, Ward J (2004) Beyond strategic information systems: towards an IS capability. The J Strateg Inf Syst 13(2):167–194

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peppard J, Ward J, Daniel E (2007) Managing the realization of business benefits from IT investments. MIS Q Exec 6(1):1–11

    Google Scholar 

  • Richter A, Heinrich P, Stocker A, Schwabe G (2018) Digital work design. Bus Inf Syst Eng 60(3):259–264

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Riedl C, Blohm I, Leimeister JM, Krcmar H (2010) Rating scales for collective intelligence in innovation communities. In: Proceedings of the international conference on information systems, St. Louis

  • Roberts EB, Fusfeld AR (1988) Critical functions: needed roles in the innovation process. In: Katz R (ed) Managing professionals in innovative organizations. Harper Collins, New York, pp 101–120

    Google Scholar 

  • Robinson AG, Schroeder DM (2014) The idea-driven organization: unlocking the power in bottom-up ideas. Berrett-Koehler, Oakland

  • Rogers EM (2010) Diffusion of innovations. Free press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosson MB, Carroll JJM (2002) Usability engineering [electronic resource]: scenario-based development of human-computer interaction. Morgan Kaufmann, Burlington

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosson MB, Carroll JM (2009) Scenario based design. In: Sears A, Jacko JA (eds) Human-computer interaction: development process. CRC Press, Boca Raton, pp 145–162

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Sarasvathy SD (2001) Causation and effectuation: toward a theoretical shift from economic inevitability to entrepreneurial contingency. Acad Manag Rev 26(2):243–263

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schönwälder S (2013) Portfoliomanagement für betriebliche Informationssysteme. Springer, Heidelberg

    Google Scholar 

  • Schulze T, Indulska M, Geiger D, Korthaus A (2012) Idea assessment in open innovation: a state of practice. In: Proceedings of the European conference on information systems, Barcelona

  • Star SL, Griesemer JR (1989) Institutional ecology, translations and boundary objects: amateurs and professionals in Berkeley’s Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, 1907-39. Soc Stud Sci 19(3):387–420

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stringer R (2000) How to manage radical innovation. Calif Manag Rev 42(4):70–88

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Swap W, Leonard D, Mimi Shields LA (2001) Using mentoring and storytelling to transfer knowledge in the workplace. J Manag Inf Syst 18:95–114

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tidd J, Bessant J (2011) Managing innovation: integrating technological, market and organizational change. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Tortoriello M, McEvily B, Krackhardt D (2014) Being a catalyst of innovation: the role of knowledge diversity and network closure. Organ Sci 26(2):423–438. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2014.0942

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Trauffler G (2005) Strategic management of discontinuous technologies and radical innovation. ETH Zürich, Zürich

    Google Scholar 

  • van Aken JE (2004) Management research based on the paradigm of the design sciences: the quest for field-tested and grounded technological rules. J manag stud 41:219–246

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Riel AC, Semeijn J, Hammedi W, Henseler J (2011) Technology-based service proposal screening and decision-making effectiveness. Manag Decis 49(5):762–783

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vantrappen HJ, Metz PD (1996) Measuring the performance of the innovation process. Prism 1996:25–26

    Google Scholar 

  • Veugelers R, Cassiman B (1999) Make and buy in innovation strategies: evidence from Belgian manufacturing firms. Res Policy 28(1):63–80

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Voelpel SC, Leibold M, Eckhoff RA (2006) The tyranny of the balanced scorecard in the innovation economy. J Intellect Cap 7(1):43–60

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • vom Brocke J, Simons A, Niehaves B, Reimer K, Plattfaut R, Cleven A (2009) Reconstructing the giant: on the importance of rigour in documenting the literature search process. In: Proceedings of the European conference on information systems, Verona

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walker RM (2008) An empirical evaluation of innovation types and organizational and environmental characteristics: towards a configuration framework. J Publ Admin Res Theory 18(4):591–615

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walsham G (2006) Doing interpretive research. Eur J Inf Syst 15(3):320–330

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weick KE (1995) What theory is not, theorizing is. Admin Sci Q 40:385–390

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wickson F, Carew AL, Russell AW (2006) Transdisciplinary research: characteristics, quandaries and quality. Futures 38(9):1046–1059. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.futures.2006.02.011

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yoo Y, Henfridsson O, Lyytinen K (2010) Research commentary – The new organizing logic of digital innovation: an agenda for information systems research. Inf Syst Res 21(4):724–735

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yoo Y, Boland RJ Jr, Lyytinen K, Majchrzak A (2012) Organizing for innovation in the digitized world. Organ Sci 23(5):1398–1408

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank the employees of BITS for their openness and support. We also thank our ambitious students from the Department of Informatics at the University of Zurich for assisting in this study. In alphabetical order: David Bolli, Fabian Gautschi, Daniel Oettli, Luis Pena, and Annatina Vinzens. Last but not least, we thank Gerhard Schwabe for providing guidance and helpful suggestions.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. IT University of Copenhagen, Rued Langgaards Vej 7, 2300, Copenhagen, Denmark

    Raffaele Fabio Ciriello &  Alexander Richter

  2. University of Zurich, Binzmühlestrasse 14, 8050, Zurich, Switzerland

    Alexander Richter

Authors
  1. Raffaele Fabio Ciriello
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Alexander Richter
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Raffaele Fabio Ciriello.

Additional information

Accepted after three revisions by the editors of the special issue.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ciriello, R.F., Richter, A. Scenario-Based Design Theorizing. Bus Inf Syst Eng 61, 31–50 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12599-018-0572-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12599-018-0572-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation