Design science research in enterprise information systems: Proceedings of the CONFENIS 2011 workshop

Advances in Enterprise Information Systems II - Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Research and Practical Issues of Enterprise Information Systems, CONFENIS 2011

Volumn , Issue , 2012, Pages 191-203

  Efeoglu, Arkin ^a   Gong, Jie ^b   Kristoffersen, Jakob M ^b   Juul, Søren ^b   Winter, Robert ^c   Pries Heje, Lene ^d   Møller, Charles ^b  

^a SAP RESEARCH   (Germany)

^b AALBORG UNIVERSITY   (Denmark)

^c UNIVERSITY OF ST GALLEN   (Switzerland)

^d IT University   (Denmark)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84864045520     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (44)

1. Aken, Joan E. Van. 2004. Management Research Based on the Paradigm of the Design Sciences: The Quest for Field-Tested and Grounded Technological Rules. Journal of Management Studies 41 (2):219-246.
2. Alter, S. 2006. TheWork System Method: Connecting People, Processes, and IT for Business Results. Larkspur: CA:Work System Press.
3. Baskerville, R., J. Pries-Heje, and J. Venable. 2009. Soft design science methodology.
4. Baskerville, Richard. 2008. What design science is not. European Journal of Information Systems 17 (5): 441-443.
5. Baskerville, Richard, Kalle Lyytinen, Vallabh Sambamurthy, and Detmar Straub. 2010. A response to the design-oriented information systems research memorandum. European Journal of Information Systems 20 (1):11-15.
6. Baskerville, Richard, and Jan Pries-Heje. 2010. Explanatory Design Theory. Business & Information Systems Engineering 2 (5):271-282.
7. Brinkkemper, Sjaak. 1996. Method engineering : engineering of information methods and tools. Engineering 38:275-280.
8. Brocke, Jan. 2009. Reusing Information Models by Means of Aggregation, Specialisation, Instantiation and Analogy Design Principles for Reference Modelling.
9. Carlile, P.R. 2004. Integrative Framework for Managing Knowledge Across Boundaries. Organization Science, 555-68.
10. Davenport, T.H. 1998. Putting the enterprise into the enterprise system. Harvard business review 76 (4).
11. Fettke, P., and P. Loos. 2007. Reference modeling for business systems analysis: IGI Global.
12. Fischer, Christian, RobertWinter, and FelixWortmann. 2010. Design Theory. Business&Information Systems Engineering 2 (6):387-390.
13. Goldkuhl, G. 2004. Design theories in information systems-a need for multi-grounding. Journal of Information Technology Theory and Application (JITTA) 6 (2):7.
14. Goldkuhl, G., and M. Lind. 2010. A multi-grounded design research process. Global Perspectives on Design Science Research: 45-60.
15. Hedman, J. 2003. On enterprise systems artifacts: changes in information systems development and evaluation: Univ. Dept. of Informatics.
16. Hevner, A.R. 2007. The three cycle view of design science research. Scandinavian Journal of Information Systems 19 (2):87.
17. Hevner, A.R., S.T. March, J. Park, and S. Ram. 2004. Design science in information systems research. Mis Quarterly 28 (1):75-105.
18. Holmström, Jan, Mikko Ketokivi, and Ari-Pekka Hameri. 2009. Bridging Practice and Theory: A Design Science Approach. Decision Sciences 40 (1):65-87.
19. Hooker, John. 2004. Is Design Theory Possible? Journal of Information Technology Theory and Application 6 (2):73-83.
20. Information Resources Management Association. 2010. Enterprise Information Systems: Concepts, Methodologies, Tools and Applications (3 Volumes): Igi Global.
21. Junglas, Iris, Björn Niehaves, Sarah Spiekermann, et al. 2010. The inflation of academic intellectual capital: the case for design science research in Europe. European Journal of Information Systems 20 (1):1-6.
22. Järvinen, Pertti. 2004. Research Questions Guiding Selection of an Appropriate Research Method Pertti Järvinen Research Questions Guiding Selection of an Appropriate Research Method. Tampere.
23. Järvinen, Pertti. 2007. Action Research is Similar to Design Science. Quality & Quantity 41 (1):37-54.
24. Klecun, E., and T Cornford. 2005. A Critical Approach to Evaluation. European Journal of IS, 229-243.
25. Lee, Jong Seok, Jan Pries-heje, and Richard Baskerville. 2011. Theorizing in Design Science Research, edited by H. Jain, A. P. Sinha, and P. Vitharana: Springer-Verlag.
26. March, S.T., and G.F. Smith. 1995. Design and natural science research on information technology. Decision support systems 15 (4):251-266.
27. March, SalvatoreT., and Gerald F. Smith. 1995. Design and natural science research on information technology. Decision Support Systems 15:251-266.
28. Orlikowski,Wanda J., and C. Suzanne Iacono. 2001. Research Commentary: Desperately Seeking the "IT" in IT Research - A Calll to Theorizing the IT Artifact. Information Systems research 12 (2):121-134.
29. Österle, Hubert, Jörg Becker, Ulrich Frank, et al. 2010. Memorandum on design-oriented information systems research. European Journal of Information Systems 20:7-10.
30. Ostrowski, L. 2011. Detailed Design Science Research and its Impact on the Quality of Design Artefact. Paper read at European Design Science Symposium 2011, at Leixlip.
31. Peffers, K., T.Tuunanen, C.E. Gengler, et al. 2006. The design science research process: a model for producing and presenting information systems research.
32. Peffers, Ken, Tuure Tunanen, Charles E. Gengler, et al. 2006. The Design Science Research Process: A Model for Producing and Presenting Information Systems Research. Paper read at Design Science Research in Information Systems and Technology, February 24-25, at Claremont, California.
33. Pries-Heje, J., R. Baskerville, and J. Venable. 2008. Strategies for Design Science Research Evaluation. Paper read at 16th European Conference on Information Systems.
34. Sein, Maung K., Ola Henfridsson, Sandeep Purao, Matti Rossi, and Rikard Lindgren. 2011. Action Design Research. Mis Quarterly 35 (1):37-56.
35. Silver, M.S., M.L. Markus, and C.M. Beath. 1995. The information technology interaction model: a foundation for the MBA core course. Mis Quarterly: 361-390.
36. Simon, H.A. 1996. The sciences of the artificial: the MIT Press.
37. Simon, Herbert A. 1996. The Sciences of the Artificial Third edition. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
38. Sun,Y., and P. B. Kantor. 2006. Cross-Evaluation: A New Model for Information System Evaluation. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 614-62.
39. Van de Ven, A. H. 2007. Engaged Scholarship: A Guide for Organizational and Social Research. Oxford: New York: Oxford University Press.
40. Venable, J. 2006. A Framework for Design Science Research Activities. Paper read at The 2006 Information Resource Management Association Conference, at Washington DC.
41. Venable, J. 2006. The role of theory and theorising in design science research.
42. Venable, John R. 2006. The Role of Theory and Theorising in Design Science Research. Paper read at Design Science Research in Information Systems and Technology, February 24-25, at Claremont, California.
43. Walls, J. G., and G. R. Widermeyer. 2004. Assessing information system design theory in perspective: how useful was our 1992 initial rendition? Journal of Information 6 (2):43-58.
44. Winter, Robert. 2008. Design science research in Europe. European Journal of Information Systems 17 (5):470-475.