Strategies for design science research evaluation

16th European Conference on Information Systems, ECIS 2008

Volumn , Issue , 2008, Pages

  Pries Heje, Jan ^a   Baskerville, Richard ^b   Venable, John ^c  

^a ROSKILDE UNIVERSITY   (Denmark)

^b GEORGIA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c CURTIN UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

Author keywords

Design science research; Information systems evaluation; Research criteria; Research methodology

Indexed keywords

DESIGN PROCESS; DESIGN PRODUCTS; DESIGN SCIENCE; EMPIRICAL PROCESS; EMPIRICAL RESEARCH METHOD; EVALUATION ACTIVITY; EVALUATION FRAMEWORK; EVALUATION STRATEGIES; QUALITY CRITERIA; RESEARCH METHODOLOGIES;

INFORMATION SYSTEMS; PRODUCT DESIGN; RESEARCH;

QUALITY CONTROL;

EID: 84870641676     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (30)

1. Albert, T. C., Goes, P. B., & Gupta, A. (2004). Gist: a Model for Design and Management of Content and Interactivity of Customer-Centric Web Sites. MIS Quarterly, 28(2), 161-182.
2. Arnott, D. (2006). Cognitive biases and decision support systems development: a design science approach. Information Systems Journal, 16(1), 55-78.
3. Bannister, F., & Remenyi, D. (2000). Acts of faith: instinct, value and IT investment decisions. Journal of Information Technology, 15(3), 231-241.
4. Bell, D., de Cesare, S., Iacovelli, N., Lycett, M., & Merico, A. (2007). A framework for deriving semantic web services. Information Systems Frontiers, 9(1), 69-84.
5. Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology, MIS Quarterly. 13(3). 319-339.
6. DeLone, W. H., & McLean, E. R. (1992). Information systems success: The quest for the dependent variable. Information Systems Research, 3(1), 60-95.
7. Garvin, D. (1987). Competing on the Eight Dimensions of Quality. Harvard Business Review, 65(6), 101-109.
8. Gregor, S. (2006) The Nature of Theory in Information Systems, MIS Quarterly, vol. 30(3): 611-642.
9. Gregor, S. and D. Jones (2007) The Anatomy of a Design Theory, Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 8(5) (May), article 2, pp. 312-335.
10. Hevner, A. R., March, S. T., Park, J., & Ram, S. (2004). Design Science In Information Systems Research. MIS Quarterly, 28(1), 75-105.
11. Humphrey, W. S. (1989). Managing the Software Process. Boston: Addison-Wesley.
12. Irani, Z., Love, P. E. D., Elliman, T., Jones, S., & Themistocleous, M. (2005). Evaluating e-government: learning from the experiences of two UK local authorities. Information Systems Journal, 15(1), 61-82.
13. Keast, R., & Waterhouse, J. (2006). Participatory evaluation: a missing component in the sustainable social change equation for public services. Strategic Change, 15(1), 23-35.
14. Klecun, E., & Cornford, T. (2005). A critical approach to evaluation. European Jn of IS, 14(3), 229-243.
15. March, S. T., & Smith, G. F. (1995). Design and natural science research on information technology. Decision Support Systems, 15(4), 251-266.
16. Orlikowski, W. J., & Iacono, C. S. (2001). Research commentary: Desperately seeking "IT" in IT research - A call to theorizing the IT artifact. Information Systems Research, 12(2), 121-134.
17. Purao, S. And Storey, V. C. (2008). Evaluating the adoption potential of design science efforts: The case of APSARA. Decision Support Systems. 44. 369-381.
18. Scarbrough, J. E. (1998). Measuring human life value from the courtroom to the living room. Journal of the American Society of CLU & ChFC, 52(1), 68-73.
19. Shafir, E. B., Osherson, D. N., & Smith, E. E. (1993). The Advantage Model: A comparative theory of evaluation and choice under risk. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 55(3), 325-378.
20. Simon, H. A. (1996). The Science of the Artificial (3rd ed.). Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
21. Stockdale, R., & Standing, C. (2006). An interpretive approach to evaluating information systems: A content, context, process framework. European Journal of Operational Research, 173(3), 1090-1102.
22. Sun, Y., & Kantor, P. B. (2006). Cross-Evaluation: A new model for information system evaluation. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 57(5), 614-628.
23. Symons, V. J. (1991). A review of IS systems evaluation: Content, context and process. EJIS, 1(3), 205-212.
24. Tichy, W. (1998). Should Compuer Scienteists Experiment More? IEEE Computer, 31(5), 32-40.
25. Vaishnavi, V., & Kuechler, W. (2004). Design Research in Information Systems. Retrieved October 2, 2004, from http://www.isworld.org/Researchdesign/ drisISworld.htm
26. Venable, J. (2006). A Framework for Design Science Research Activities. In Proceedings of the 2006 Information Resource Management Association Conference (pp. forthcoming). Washington, DC, USA.
27. Walls, J. G., Widmeyer, G. R., & El Sawy, O. A. (1992). Building an information system design theory for vigilant EIS. Information Systems Research, 3(1), 36-59.
28. Wynne, M. (2004). Evaluation in the Arts and Humanities Data Service. VINE, 34(4), 196-200.
29. Yang, Y., & Padmanabhan, B. (2005). Evaluation of Online Personalization Systems: A Survey of Evaluation Schemes and A Knowledge-Based Approach. Journal of Electronic Commerce Research, 6(2), 112-122.
30. Zhao, J. L., Kumar, A., & Stohr, E. A. (2000). Workflow-Centric Information Distribution Through E-Mail. Journal of Management Information Systems, 17(3), 45-72.