Guidelines for the Use of a Design Science Research Approach

In evaluation of developed artefacts, anti-positivistic epistemology is highly relevant in Design Science Research (IIvari & Venable 2009; Niehaves 2007). Interpretive methods are appropriate for naturalistic, in situ evaluation (Venable 2006a; Venable & Travis 1999). It is not necessarily evaluated by the researchers who originally designed the technology (vom Brocke, Simons & Schenk 2008). This research looks at the implementation stage of Elluminate affordance adoption and implementation by lecturers in the higher education learning and teaching environment.

This research is creating a process for change or improvement to the curriculum design construction process. In an organisation, top management allocate financial resources to the implementation of emergent technologies but there has to be a justification that evidences

improved products and services that are beneficial to the organisation (Sharma, Yetton & Zmud 2008). Since adoption and implementation benefit the organisation as a whole, staff are expected to be involved to use their operational functional knowledge to ensure success (Lies 2012).

It is very difficult to introduce change in organisations and there are instances where technology adoption fails (Lai & Ong 2010). They believe this is due to the readiness of the staff in the organisation to accept change by adopting an emerging technology.Socio-technical organisational systems that enable people at the operational level to initiate change is important to the successful change when implementing Information Systems (Richardson 2007; Bednar & Green 2011). Early adopters of web interactive multimedia affordances and associated devices provide a large pool of potential innovators. The requirement is for lecturers and students to use interactive and social networking affordances in the learning and teaching environment of the university rather than at home. In higher education organisations, change management in implementing emerging technologies is important in order to gain the benefit of improving learning and teaching (Lai & Ong 2010).

Action Research is research discussing change in an organisation (Lagsten 2011). Although there has been discussion about the similarities between Action Research and Design Science Research in terms of the research activities, there are still some differences (Attwell 2010). Action Research provides a new lens with which to explain phenomena whilst Design Science Research requires an artefact that contains an improvement to the current situation as an outcome. Design Science Research adds to Action Research as it is more than a research method; it is a research orientation (IIvari & Venable 2009). It is not bonded to any particular type of artefact, paradigm, method or technique (Levy & Hirschheim 2012).

Ilvari and Venable’s (2009) Design Science Research model contains four components: Theory Building, Naturalistic Evaluation, Artificial Evaluation and Solution Technology Invention. Action Research is a possible method within Naturalistic Evaluation as it provides an opportunity to understand an existing reality. Design Science Research constructs new and innovative methods of operating within a business Information System. Artificial Evaluation which is evaluation of purely technical problems and solutions is not part of Action Research, as Artificial Evaluation refers to laboratory-based experiments. Action Research is exclusively interested in socio-technical systems, in a context in which humans are interacting. In Design Science Research, the problems and solutions included are technical and socio-technical, as reflected in the framework containing the Artificial Evaluation and Naturalistic Evaluation components. Design Science Research is chosen for this research as the aim is to produce an artefact which in this case is a guide for subject design which will improve the lecturers’ provision of learning activities and assessments to meet learning outcomes, in a constructivist learning paradigm. Design is important before adopting emerging technology, as it is better to plan not to fail rather than fail to plan. In design, the ability to think critically and develop a sound plan are needed to assure technology adoption and implementation success (Richardson, Fairservice, Grob, Pelts, Smith & Tolson 2011).

There is some variation in the guidelines for Design Science Research in Information Systems. One set of guidelines by Hevner et al. (2004) has been widely cited. Hevner et al.’s (2004) seven guidelines for planning research using a Design Science approach require that attention be paid to:

 designing an artefact;

 design the evaluation of the current situation;  identification of the research contribution;

 ensuring a rigorous research approach to data collection and analysis;  design the research initially as a search process; and

 communicate and disseminate the research outcomes.

Following this, Peffers et al. (2007) proposed a Design Science Research methodology that provided a model for presenting and evaluating Design Science Research in Information Systems. Peffers et al.’ (2007) Design Science Research process has six steps:

 problem identification and motivation;  definition of the objectives for a solution;  design and development of an artefact;  demonstration of the solution;

 evaluation of the solution or artefact; and  communication of the research outcomes.

These guidelines for Design Science Research in Information Systems can be summarised in four main activities (Alturki, Gable& Bandara2011b):

 define the Design Science Research objective;

 determine the type of research: Design Science Research or Design Research or both;  define the theme of the research: construction, evaluation or both; and

 define the design requirements, possibly through empirical work.

Design Science Research in Information Systems is categorised into one or both of two types: design science and design research (Alturki, Gable & Bandara 2011a). The study reported in this thesis falls within the design science type of Design Science Research. The artefact

created as an output could be used to guide the adoption of any software application containing the Elluminate affordances investigated in the research. Whilst the artefact to guide affordances choice is generic it is bound by the learning and teaching context. An adaptation of the Design Science Research steps used in this research is provided in Chapter 3 Methodology.