A Proposal for using Design Science in Small-Scale
Postgraduate Research Projects in Information
Technology
Diane E. Strode
Faculty of Business and Information Technology
Whitireia, Institute of Technology
Wellington, New Zealand
diane.strode@whitireia.ac.nz
Abstract—Design science is a research paradigm where the
development and evaluation of an artefact is a key contribution.
Design science is used in many domains and this paper draws on
those domains to formulate a generic structure for design science
research suitable for small-scale postgraduate information
technology research projects. The paper includes guidelines for
writing proposals and a generic research report structure. The
paper presents ethical issues to consider in design science research
and contributes guidelines for assessment.
Keywords—IT artefact; assessment; design science; information
technology postgraduate research project.
I. INTRODUCTION
Research projects involving the design and development of
software and technology artefacts are common in the
information technology (IT) domain [1]. The motivation for this
paper is to address two issues that arise for such projects when
they are carried out in postgraduate courses where an IT artefact
makes a key research contribution. The first issue is that
information technology encompasses both the social sciences
and the artificial sciences [2], and a research project can involve
either domain. For social science focused research projects, clear
guidance on research design is readily available [3]. When a
research project involves developing an artefact such as a
software application as a proof-of-concept addressing a known
problem, then the research project belongs in the realm of
artificial science. Research design guidance is less readily
available in artificial sciences, particularly for information
technology research projects. The second issue is that research
projects creating artefacts such as software must be designed,
reported, and assessed as research projects. These projects must
be clearly distinguishable from industry-based capstone
projects, or system or application development projects as
typically performed in the IT industry.
The overall issue this paper addresses is: how can small-
scale information technology research projects, such as those in
a postgraduate course, that create an IT artefact as a key
contribution be rigorously designed, reported, and assessed?
This paper illustrates how the design science paradigm
provides a solution to this issue. The paper proposes a generic
structure based on design science for small-scale postgraduate
artifact-focused information technology research projects.
Susan M.Chard
Faculty of Business and Information Technology
Whitireia, Institute of Technology
Wellington, New Zealand
sue.chard@whitireia.ac.nz
Design science was selected as a suitable paradigm because it is
commonly used in domains closely related to information
technology such as information systems and engineering.
The paper is organised as follows. First, there is a summary
of how IT-related research domains view design science. Then
the educational context where the proposed design science
solution will be applied is described. The paper then draws on
design science literature from the domain of information
systems to propose guidelines suitable for postgraduate design
science research project proposals and reports. Ethical concerns
for such projects are described, and assessment weightings are
recommended. The paper then concludes.
II. DESIGN SCIENCE
Many domains employ design science. Two domains that
intersect with information technology are information systems
and computer science. Each has its own interpretation of design
science.
In information systems (IS), design science is the dominant
research paradigm in German speaking countries, and is
common in other European and Scandinavian countries [4].
Information systems design science literature commonly refers
to Simon’s seminal “Sciences of the Artificial” [1, 2, 5]. Hevner
and Chattergee [6] summarise the foundation papers, describing
how design science research addresses wicked problems, and the
relevancy gap between academic research and practitioner
problems in information systems and management. Baskerville
[7] proposes design science as a useful tool for information
systems professionals seeking important design breakthroughs.
He urges information systems academics to employ design
science in their research, and teach design science to graduate
and undergraduate classes to improve their capabilities. Further
research focuses on the place of theory in design science
research [8].
Several IS authors identify the need to differentiate
professional systems design from design science. Hevner and
Chatterjee [6] propose that this difference is in the nature of the
problems and their solutions, while others highlight the role of
theory and evaluation. There is agreement, however, on the need
to add to knowledge and that the knowledge should inform best
practice.
 In computer science, [11] lists 54 research methods
including design science. Research methods commonly used in
computer science include modeling, and theoretical and
experimental computer science, although a large proportion of
the computer science literature does not specify or define a
formal research method. In this domain, examples of design
science are primarily found in artificial intelligence and human
computer interaction research [12, 13].
Design science among software engineering researchers
generally seeks better ways to develop and evaluate software.
This group is motivated by practical problems and they solve
these problems by creating and evaluating new techniques and
procedures, or by developing analytical models [9]. Recent
literature proposes using design science in software engineering
to promote collaboration between researchers and industry.
Examples of collaboration successfully applying design science
in empirical software engineering are given by [10]. In this
instance, the design science is described as a constructive
research paradigm for developing innovative artifacts while
creating new knowledge through the rigorous design and
evaluation of the artifact.
Design science is also proposed in other domains that inform
information technology research. Engineering design science
was proposed by Hubka in 1976, cited by [14] who proposed
that its primary purpose is to clarify design processes and their
underlying theories through the investigation of the product.
This form of design research is conducted with scientific tools
and described in formal and general terms. In education, design
science is often referred to as design-based research or design
research. These approaches to research are based on a
philosophy of pragmatism. Pragmatists believe that “truth is
found in ‘what works’ and that truth is relative to the current
situation” [15, p. 672]. The DBR Collective [16] describes
design-based research as a coherent methodology bridging
theory and practice. In management research, project
management research, and medical research design science is
used to develop knowledge for the design and realisation of
artefacts [17, 18].
In summary, there is general agreement across many
domains that design science, under various names, focuses on
the pragmatic creation and investigation of the artificial based
on theory. This involves identifying and designing solutions to
problems through theory-based design, and creating and
positioning an artifact in a natural setting. In addition, design
science addresses design tasks faced by practitioners to develop
understandings of what works and why it works, thus providing
a useful tool for collaboration between industry and academia.
III. POSTGRADUATE RESEARCH PROJECTS IN IT
The Faculty of Business and Information Technology is
situated in a small institute in New Zealand with a student
population of 8,500. The faculty defines information technology
according to the ACM guidelines [19]. The faculty has offered a
Postgraduate Diploma in Information Technology (PGDipIT)
since 2013, and a Master of Information Technology (MIT)
since 2014. Cohorts are a mixture of local and international
students with a variety of backgrounds and many students have
IT work experience. The entry criteria include an undergraduate
degree in information technology or cognate area such as
computer science, computer engineering, information systems,
information science, or an undergraduate degree combined with
IT work experience. The PGDipIT comprises a variety of 15-
credit elective papers and two compulsory papers. One
compulsory paper introduces students to IT research and
research methods. The other compulsory paper is a 30 credit
research project. Students undertake this paper under the
guidance of a supervisor and there are no timetabled classes.
Entry to the MIT is a PGDipIT (or similar). The MIT involves a
single compulsory research proposal paper, and a research thesis
of 90 credits.
For both qualifications, research projects are based on the
supervisors’ research interests. For PGDipIT research projects,
which must be completed in 15 weeks, supervisors propose
topics. Their proposal includes an initial research project title, a
research question or problem, and a proposed research method.
A list of proposed research projects is posted and students select
a project of their choice. For MIT theses, which are completed
over one year, students locate and propose their own research
topics and are assigned two supervisors.
Currently, research projects are offered on topics in database,
programming, IT project management, HCI, IT business
analysis, networking, and software quality assurance. Examples
of research projects include 1) testing network configurations in
the New Zealand bush environment, 2) exploring the role of the
IT business analyst in New Zealand, 3) investigating the state of
testing in New Zealand organisations, and 4) developing a GPS-
based system to display local Maori history content based on
location. This range of research projects necessarily involves a
range of different research designs. Research project 1 uses an
experimental design which is clearly defined in engineering
research design texts. Research projects 2 and 3 can draw on
extensive advice and guidance offered in social science and
information systems for carrying out qualitative interview-based
research and quantitative survey-based research. Research
project 4, however, is a project involving the design, creation,
and evaluation of a software artefact built from existing
technologies to solve a novel problem. Guidance on the research
design for such a project is not so readily available in the domain
of information technology.
Another issue with a research project such as 4 is that the
student must be able to clearly differentiate between a research
project concerned with creating of an artifact and a typical
development project as it would be carried out in an industry
setting. The design science paradigm offers generic research
design guidance for this situation.
IV. DESIGN SCIENCE RESEARCH PROPOSALS AND REPORTS
March and Smith [1] compare design science in information
technology with natural science. They propose that design
science is technology-oriented and creates things with value or
utility that serve human purposes. They describe four design
science outputs: constructs, models, methods, and instantiations.
The PGDipIT and the MIT research projects are primarily
concerned with instantiations, which are “realizations of an
artifact in its environment” [1].
Recently, information systems has had a renaissance of
design science research [4, 5, 20-22]. This resurgence is founded
on a seminal article in MIS Quarterly, the highest-ranked journal
in information systems, proposing guidelines for design science
research [5]. We adapted the guidelines in [5] and [1] to guide
students in writing their design science research project
proposal. In adapting the guidelines, we broadened their
relevance because information systems is primarily concerned
with contributing to the business domain, whereas information
technology research contributes to society more generally. We
also added an additional guideline concerning ethical issues
based on discussion in [23]. These ethical issues are discussed
in the next section. These adapted guidelines enable a student to
describe all aspects of their research project and help to ensure
the research project has a sound basis that can be readily
reviewed by supervisors and other interested parties before the
student begins their research. The adapted guidelines are shown
in Table I.
Next, we propose a structure for a research report in small-
scale design science research projects. This is the report
submitted for grading at the end of the research project. The
proposed report structure is shown in Table II. This structure is
based on a publication schema for design science research
journal articles, recently published in an editorial to guide
researchers submitting design science articles [21], with
adjustments based on recommendations in [24], and [23].
TABLE I. RESEARCH GUIDELINES FOR DESIGN SCIENCE RESEARCH
PROJECT PROPOSALS ADAPTED FROM [5] , [23], AND [1]
Guidelines for design science research projects
Guideline Description
The research produces a viable artefact in the form
Design as an of a construct, model, method, or instantiation.
1 Prior work that is relevant to the study, including
artefact
What type of artefacts will be produced?
The research objective is to develop a technology-
based solution to solve a problem affecting human
Problem
2 purposes.
relevance
To whom and why is the artefact relevant?
The utility, quality, and efficacy of the design
Design artefact must be rigorously demonstrated using
3 Description of the evaluation strategy.
evaluation well-executed evaluation methods.
The research must provide clear and verifiable
Research contributions in the areas of the design artifact,
4 Main section
contributions design foundations, and/or design methodologies.
The research relies upon the application of
5 Research rigor rigorous methods in both the construction and
evaluation of the design artifact.
The search for an effective artifact requires
utilizing available means to reach desired ends
Design as a while satisfying laws in the problem environment.
6 the Introduction section.
search process How is the artefact defined to be good, useful, or
valuable? When does the iterative research
process end?
How will the research be presented to the
Communication audience for whom it is intended (e.g. business,
7 not-for-profit, governmental, social group,
of research
researchers, and technical audience).
What ethical implications does this research have
Ethical for current stakeholders and future users of the
8
considerations artefact?
We recommend this schema as a structure for organising a
student’s design science research report for three reasons.
Firstly, the schema encompasses the major sections expected in
research reports in natural and social sciences. This means that
students undertaking a design science research project can be
assessed in a similar manner to those undertaking a social-
science oriented research project. Secondly, the schema includes
additional sections describing the artefact and its evaluation, and
thirdly the schema ensures the contributions to praxis and to
generalized knowledge are clearly conveyed.
The main difference between this report structure and that of
social and natural science research reports is the description of
the artefact. This description should be substantial as the artefact
forms the centre-piece of the research project. A sound
description allows future researchers building on this research to
base their research on a solid foundation. This proposed report
structure offers the benefit of scalability. Master’s thesis
research reports of 90 credits, and smaller 30 credit research
reports can both use this structure to organise the topics in their
respective reports.
TABLE II. RESEARCH REPORT STRUCTURE FOR SMALL-SCALE DESIGN
SCIENCE RESEARCH PROJECTS IN INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY ADAPTED
FROM [21] [24] AND [23]
Research report structure for design science research projects
Section Contents
Problem definition, problem significance/motivation,
introduction to key concepts, research questions,
1 Introduction goals of the artifact developed, scope of the study,
overview of methods, theoretical and practical
significance, structure of remainder of the report.
Literature existing knowledge and theories relating to the class
2 of problems to be addressed, empirical research
review
studies, and findings and reports from practice.
The specific design science research approach that
was employed with reference to existing authorities.
3 Method A description of the process of creating the artefact.
Artefact A concise and complete description of the artefact.
description This description must be at an appropriate level of
4
abstraction so it is clear how the artefact contributes
of the report to the knowledge base.
Evidence that the artefact is useful. The results of the
evaluation must demonstrate its worth with evidence
5 Evaluation addressing pre-specified evaluation criteria such as
validity, utility, quality, and efficacy.
Interpretation of the results: what the results mean
and how they relate back to the objectives stated in
Can include; summary of what was learned,
6 Discussion
comparison with prior work, limitations, theoretical
contributions and significance, practical contributions
and significance, ethical considerations, areas
requiring further work.
Restate what was done. Restate the important findings
7 Conclusion and contributions of the research, and why they are
important.
V. ETHICS IN DESIGN SCIENCE RESEARCH
Design science research has ethical implications even though
there may be no research participants directly involved. Ethical
implications arise because IT artefacts have the potential to
contribute both positively and negatively to human society (e.g.
better medical treatments, intrusive surveillance). The student
and supervisor should be aware of these issues and address them
appropriately. Researchers in information systems provide
extensive discussion of ethical issues in design science drawing
on the rich literature in that domain [23]. They propose the
following ethical principles for design science research
(summarised from the original [23, p. 806]).
1. The public interest – explicitly identify stakeholders,
affected by the artefact. Critically evaluate benefits and
harm the artefact might cause, particularly to the public.
2. Informed consent – obtain consent from all people
involved in the research project.
3. Privacy – protect the privacy of those involved in the
research project and also those who will use the artefact
in the future.
4. Honesty and accuracy – Do no plagiarise ideas and
acknowledge inspiration from all sources. Report
research findings honestly.
5. Property – Agree on ownership of IP, ownership of
information, and rights to publish the research at the
beginning of the project.
6. Quality of the artefact – identify risk, and evaluate and
test the artifact appropriately to ensure safety in use.
We propose that postgraduate student research projects
discuss these ethical considerations in their research proposal
and their report in addition to the requirements for ethical
approval asked for by their institute. This is because institutes
traditionally consider ethical implications that directly impact
research participants, not the wider ethical implications an IT
artefact might have on society.
VI. ASSESSING DESIGN SCIENCE RESEARCH PROJECTS
Assessment is often the end point for research projects from
a student perspective. This paper proposes that assessment for
design science research projects be based on the research report
structure shown in Table II. Since the description of the artefact
is a main section of the report it should accrue a large portion of
the available marks. Therefore, assessment marks might be
allocated as follows: ¼ of the marks to the artefact; ¼ of the
marks to the evaluation and discussion; ¼ of the marks to the
method, which includes a description of the research approach
and the processes followed. The remaining ¼ marks can be
allocated to the literature review, introduction and conclusion.
VII. CONCLUSION
This paper proposes that small-scale IT research projects
where an artefact is the central research contribution should
follow the design science paradigm as it is formulated in the
information systems domain. This paper has assembled general
guidelines for proposals and a generic research report structure
suitable for such projects based on extant literature on this topic.
Ethical considerations for design science research projects are
embedded within the proposal and report guidelines, and an
indication of how to allocate marks for the final research report
is recommended.
REFERENCES
[1] S. T. March and G. F. Smith, "Design and natural science research on
information technology," Decision Support Systems, vol. 15, pp. 251-
266, 1995.
[2] H. A. Simon, The sciences of the artificial. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press,
1981.
[3] J. W. Creswell, Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed
methods approaches, 4 ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 2013.
[4] R. Winter, "Design science research in Europe," European Journal of
Information Systems, pp. 470-475, 2008.
[5] A. R. Hevner, S. T. March, J. Park, and S. Ram, "Design science in
information systems research," MIS Quarterly, vol. 28, pp. 75-105,
2004.
[6] A. R. Hevner and S. Chatterjee, "Design research in information
systems," in Integrated series in information systems 22, ed: Springer
Science+Business Media, LLC, 2010.
[7] R. Baskerville, "What design science is not," European Journal of
Information Systems, vol. 17, pp. 441-443, 2008.
[8] S. Gregor and D. Jones, "The anatomy of a design theory," Journal of
the Association for Information Systems, vol. 8, pp. 312-335, 2007.
[9] M. Shaw, "Writing good software engineering research papers:
Minitutorial," in Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on
Software Engineering, ed: IEEE Computer Society, 2003, pp. 726-736.
[10] P. Rodríguez, P. Kuvaja, and M. Oivo, "Lessons learned on applying
design science for bridging the collaboration gap between industry and
academia in empirical software engineering," in Proceedings of the 2nd
International Workshop on Conducting Empirical Studies in Industry,
[11]
ed: ACM, 2014, pp. 9-14.
H. J. Holz, A. Applin, B. Haberman, D. Joyce, H. Purchase, and C.
Reed, "Research Methods in Computing: What are they, and how
should we teach them?," in ACM SIGCSE Bulletin, 2006, pp. 96-114.
[12] M. Preston and N. Mehandjiev, "A framework for classifying intelligent
design theories," in Proceedings of the 2004 ACM workshop on
Interdisciplinary software engineering research, 2004, pp. 49-54.
[13] K. Reinecke and A. Bernstein, "Knowing What a User Likes: A Design
Science Ap-proach to Interfaces that Automatically Adapt to Culture,"
MIS Quarterly, vol. 37, pp. 427-453, 2013.
[14] W. E. Eder, "Comparison of several design theories and methods with
the legacy of Vladimir Hubka," Private publication (74 pages)
available from eder_e@ kos. net, submitted for web-site of The Design
Society, www. designsociety. org, 2012.
[15] L. M. Given, "The Sage Encyclopedia of Qualitative Research
Methods.," ed Los Angeles: Sage, 2008.
[16] DBR_Collective, "Design-based research: An emerging paradigm for
educational inquiry," Educational Researcher, vol. 32, pp. 5-5, 2003.
[17] A. Murad, B. Schooley, T. Horan, and Y. Abed, "Enabling patient
Information Handoff from Pre-hospital Transport Providers to Hospital
Emergency Departments: Design-Science Approach to Field Testing,"
in Proceedings of the 47th Hawaii International Conference on System
Sciences (HICSS), ed: IEEE, 2014, pp. 2665-2674.
[18] J. E. Van Aken and A. G. L. Romme, "A design science approach to
evidence-based management," in The Oxford Handbook of Evidence-
Based Management, ed, 2012, pp. 43-61.
[19] SIGITE, "Information technology - an academic discipline," 2008, pp.
1-5. ACM. From http://test.sigite.hosting.acm.org/wp-
content/uploads/2011/03/IT-Discipline-Summary.pdf.
[20] J. Iivari, "Distinguishing and contrasting two strategies for design
science," European Journal of Information Systems, pp. 1-9, 2014.
[21] S. Gregor and A. R. Hevner, "Positioning and presenting design science
research for maximum impact," MIS Quarterly, vol. 37, pp. 337-355,
2013.
[22] P. B. Goes, "Design science research in top information systems
journals," MIS Quarterly, vol. 38, pp. iii-viii, 2014.
[23] M. D. Meyers and J. R. Venable, "A set of ethical principles for design
science research in information systems," Information and
Management, vol. 51, pp. 801-809, 2014.
[24] J. Pries-Heje, R. Baskerville, and J. R. Venable, "Strategies for design
science research evaluation," in Proceedings of the European
Conference on Information Systems, ECIS 2008. Paper 87, ed, 2008.