Design Science in Action ...

DSV - Stockholm University1

Design Science in Action: Developing a Framework for Introducing IT

Systems into Operational Practice

Ilia Bider - DSV SUPaul Johannesson – DSV SU

Erik Perjons – DSV SULena Johansson – DSV SU

problem

situation as-is

situation to-be

s

s’

P

generic problem

generic situation to-be

t’

GP

?

generic situation as-is

?

1

2a

2b

3

4

test case

hypothesist

Presentation at ICIS 2012, Orlando, Florida December 18, 2012Pre-proceedings: http://bit.ly/YXp47rProceedings: http://aisel.aisnet.org/icis2012/proceedings/EngagedScholarship/4/

http://bit.ly/YXp47r

http://aisel.aisnet.org/icis2012/proceedings/EngagedScholarship/4/


Dual Goal with the presentation

1. Present our view on Design Science Research (DSR) as a process of generating and testing hypothesis for adoption in practice.

This process can be driven in numerous ways beside the traditional cycle of problem->requirements->solution->demonstration->evaluation

Bider, I., Johannesson, P., and Perjons, E. 2012. "Design science research as movement between individual and generic situation-problem-solution spaces," (to appear) in Baskerville R., De Marco, M., and Spagnoletti, P. (eds.) Organizational Systems. An Interdisciplinary Discourse, Springer.

2. Present an example that serves to illustrate and be a test case for the above view


Difference between DSR and empirically-based research (EMR)

EMR DSR

Timeline Past & Present Future

Aimed at Explaining the world as it was or as it is

Suggesting a new world that does not yet exist

Process Establishing facts and developing theories that explains these facts

Generating and testing hypothesis for adoption

Relation to practice

Follow practice Lead practice

Example: communism as designed by K. Marx and his followers


DS process as movement between the two worlds

problem

situation as-is

situation to-be

+1 s

s’

P

generic problem


t’

GP

0


hypothesis

test case

t

http://bit.ly/YXp47r


Example to be discussed - Generic innovation

problem

situation as-is

situation to-be

s

s’

P

generic problem


t’

GP

?


?

1

2a

2b

3

4

test case

hypothesist

DSV - Stockholm University

Organization• Non-for-profit (interest) organization

• Association of tenants in West region of Sweden

• Central office – about 60-70 employees

• Democratic management style with a strong CEO

trying to become process oriented• With the help of an IT system

Situation at hands


Structure of the process case/instance

System – a BPS system based on the shared spaces & collaborative

planning


Plans for a particular user

System - continuing


• General comment – It might be a good system, but I do not understand what I should use it for?

• Specific problem - Collaborative planning not intuitive

• New processes introduced at the same time (customer feedback) – no experience of dealing with them

• Previously totally ad-hoc processes (lobbying) are to be structured – requires adaptation

Problem – the users do not use the system


Generic situation:

• Introduction in organizational practice of an IT systems that aim at changing the work and communication practices of an organization = organizational change

• The introduction process = ad hoc and already started

Generic problem

• The process stammer – nothing happens

Generic solution required

• Introduction process model – methodology of driving an introduction process

• That can be used in the middle of an unsuccessful introduction process

Generalization


• State-oriented view of business processes

• Kotter’s [1996] eight stages for change management

• Sharma and Yetton [2003]

• The Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT)

Developing a solution – theoretical background


State-oriented view on business processes

• For each item Ordered = Delivered

• To pay = Total + Freight + Tax• Ordered > Delivered

shipment

• To pay > Invoiced invoicing

• Invoiced = To pay• Paid = Invoiced


1. Establishing a sense of urgency

2. Creating the guiding coalition

3. Developing a vision and strategy

4. Communicating the change vision

5. Empowering broad-based action

6. Generating short-term wins

7. Consolidating gains and producing more change

8. Anchoring new approaches in the culture

Kotter’s eight stages for change management


1. New structures, e.g. create a training group, or introduce a help-desk.

2. New performance control systems -the ones that favour system usage, e.g. introduce a system that rewards active users.

3. New coordination mechanisms. New IT systems often require changes in existing work processes, which have to be redesigned in order to ensure benefits from the system.

4. Changes to performance goals. An introduction process is often characterized by a period of decline in performance, which should be planned in advanced.

Sharma and Yetton suggestions on institutional context changes


Factors that define users’ behaviour:

1. Performance expectancy – how much I will gain

2. Effort expectancy - how hard I need to work

3. Social influence – what happened if I don’t do it.

4. Facilitated conditions – how much help I will get from the organization

The Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT)


Solution – the A3 frameworkGeneral Scheme


Solution – the A3 frameworkProcess model


• DS is difficult to plan in advance

• Tight deadlines so that not to miss an opportunity for testing a solution in the current case

• Even when a known problem have known solutions there could be an opportunity for DS if the context is different

• The demonstration phase requires tight cooperation between researchers and practitioner to implement the solution

Reflections from the project


9

Thank you for your attention!

Main ContactIlia Bider, SU/IbisSoft

Email: ilia@{dsv.su,ibissoft}.se