Agile Research in Information Systems Field: Analysis from Knowledge Transformation Perspective

1DSV SU + IbisSoft

Agile Research in Information Systems Field

Analysis from Knowledge Transformation Perspective

Ilia Bider

8th IADIS International Conference onInformation Systems 2015

DSV SU + IbisSoft 2

Motivation – personal perspective• Personal background – relevant practice

– Software development - (requirements engineering, programming, management, introducing IT in organizations)

– Business process & BPS support systems development (process modeling, system development, introduction in practice)

• Personal background – relevant research– Analysis of Traditional vs Agile from knowledge transformation

perspective for both software development and business process development

DSV SU + IbisSoft 3

Motivation – personal perspective• A seminar on agile research at our department -

Autumn 2014 by Michael Twidale

• An idea to try the same approach to analysis of the notion of agile research as we used for agile system and business process development

• The results of application of this idea is what I want to present today

DSV SU + IbisSoft 4

GoalAnswer the questions

1. Is it possible to define a notion of “agile research”, more specifically a notion of “agile research project”?

2. If yes how it differs from non-agile research (project)?

3. Is there any existing types of research projects that can be called agile?

DSV SU + IbisSoft 5

Plan of presentation1. Showing how knowledge transformation perspective

can be used for analysis agile vs non-agile project in other domains.

2. Analysis of previous attempts to define agile research

3. Defining analogous of working software for research

4. Applying approach from 1 to the research world

5. Discussing already existing types of research projects that can be considered as agile

DSV SU + IbisSoft 6

Background: SECI ModelSECI model of knowledge transformation of Nonaka:

Nonaka, I., 1994. A dynamic theory of organizational knowledge creation. Organization science, 5(1), pp.14-37..

Two types of knowledge:– Explicit– Tacit

Tacit

Exp

licit

Externalization

Exp

licit

CombinationInternalization

Socialization

Taci

t

Explicit Explicit

Taci

t

Tacit

Tacit

Taci

t

Externalization Taci

t

Combination

Internalization Socialization

Exp

licit

Explicit Explicit

Exp

licit

Tacit

DSV SU + IbisSoft 7

Knowledge transformation: TSDECEA - a model of Traditional Software Development (TSD)

Additional type of knowledge:

Embedded knowledge

Each model is a simplification

Tacit

Exp

licit

Externalization

Exp

licit


Socialization

Taci

t

Explicit Explicit

Taci

t

Tacit

DSV SU + IbisSoft 8

Knowledge transformation: ASDSEA - a model of Agile Software Development (ASD):

Avoiding explication of knowledge

Difference:1. Requirements: engineering ->

discovery

2. Design + Coding = Embedment

3. One big cycle -> many smallTacit

Taci

t


t

Combination


Exp

licit

Explicit Explicit

Exp

licit

Tacit

DSV SU + IbisSoft 9

Usability of the Models• Analysis of advantages, drawbacks, and risks for each

type of SD• Areas of applicability for ASD (and TSD)

Both without going into details, e.g. XP, SCRUM, etc.

References:Bider I. Analysis of Agile Software Development from the Knowledge Transformation Perspective. In: Proceedings of BIR 2014, LNBIP 194, Springer 2014, pp. 143-157.

Extended version as a chapter in a coming book: Software Engineering in the Systems Context. Edited by Ivar Jacobson and Harold “Bud” Lawson. College Publishing, Systems series, 2015

DSV SU + IbisSoft 10








Analysis of previous attempts• Rewriting agile manifesto http://agilemanifesto.org,

examples:– http://xavier.amatriain.net/AgileResearch/– http://www.infoq.com/articles/agile-academic-research

• Superficial and fail to define “working software” in

Value working software over comprehensive documentation

Examples: “real-world working solutions over comprehensive theories”

document, such as research project report, a paper, or a PhD thesis









Defining “working software”• In software world:

1. The software is functioning and is free from the major bugs

2. The software is actually used in the context for which it was intended

• In IS research world: – Software = scientific knowledge, e.g. a theory, that exists in

an explicit form– Usage: to explain, to describe, to predict, to analyze and to

design or take action, … (Gregor, S., 2006. The Nature of Theory in

Information Systems. MIS Quarterly, 30(3), pp.611-42.)


Defining “working software”• Working scientific knowledge:

1. The knowledge in its explicit form has no contradictions

2. There is at least one individual for whom this knowledge became tacit and he/she has successfully used it for some purpose

• Based on– In the end all knowledge needs to become personal and tacit

(Polanyi, M.S., 1969. Knowing and Being. Chicago: University of Chicago.)

– Essentially all models are wrong, but some of them are useful (Box, G. E. P., and Draper, N. R., (1987), Empirical Model Building and Response Surfaces, John Wiley & Sons, New York, NY)









Knowledge transformation: TRECCI - a model of Traditional Research (TR)

Embedded knowledge:1. Systems artifacts, e.g. documents, IT systems

2. Tacit knowledge of human participants

Tacit

Exp

licit

Externalization

Exp

licit


Socialization

Taci

t

Explicit Explicit

Taci

t

Tacit


Advantages & Risks with TR

+ Higher status: rigor- Long cycle, sensitive to the right

decision taken at the first stages: instability

- Formulated in a way that prevents adoption: lack of relevance

- Could be applied only to existing Information System: limitation


Knowledge transformation: ARAEI - a model of Agile Research (AR):Postponing explication of knowledge

Involvement:1. Socialization

2. Being part of the system

3. Being part of the intervention project

Tacit

Taci

t


t

Combination


Exp

licit

Explicit Explicit

Exp

licit

Tacit


Advantages & drawbacks of ARMitigating the TR risks+ Instability & Lack of relevance are mitigated by

smaller cycles+ Could be applied to innovative Information System

through disruptive intervention projects

Drawbacks- Lack of rigor on the first cycles

Requirements on researcher (limitations)• Capability to be involved • Capability to reflect

Different skills set than for a traditional research









Agile research projects type

1. Action research (Lewin, K., 1952. Field theory in social science: Selected theoretical papers by Kurt Lewin. London: Tavistock)

2. Design science (Hevner, A.R., March, S.T. & and, P.J., 2004. Design Science in Information Systems Research. MIS Quarterly, 28(1), pp.75-105)

3. Reflective theory building (Mott, V., 1996. Knowledge comes from practice: Reflective theory building in practice. In R.W. Rowden, ed. Workplace learning: Debating five critical questions of theory and practice. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. pp.57-63)


Action researchKolb’s cycle of experimental learning – researcher is part of the system


Goal reachedAnswer the questions

1. Is it possible to define a notion of “agile research”?Yes, through a model of knowledge transformation

2. If yes how it differs from non-agile research?Yes, through comparing the agile model with the traditional one

3. Is there any existing types of research projects that can be called agile?Yes, action research, design science, reflective theory building


Potential usabilityOf the presented agile research (reflections on my research experience)

1. Analysis of successful and unsuccessful past research projects (learning from success and failures)

2. Decision making (to use TR or AR)

3. Project planning for AR

4. Research education.

Needs testing


Q & A

Thank you for your patience

Questions and comments

Please

Contact: ilia@{dsv.su|ibissoft}.se

Agile Research in Information Systems Field: Analysis from Knowledge Transformation Perspective

Science

agile system

nonagile research project

dsv su ibissoft background

types of knowledge

dsv su ibissoft usability

dsv su ibissoft goal

embedded knowledge

explication of knowledge