Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Is Action Design Research Indeed Necessary? Analysis and Synergies Between Action Research and Design Science Research

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Systemic Practice and Action Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Action research is one of the research methods that seeks to develop scientific knowledge while simultaneously acting to solve real problems. Design science and design science research are approaches that address problem-solving oriented researches, converging in this aspect with the objectives of action research. A significant part of the literature discusses action research and design science research separately. However, there are some early discussions regarding the similarities and the differences between these research methods. The objective of this study is to deepen an analysis that distinguishes action research, design science and design science research as research methods considering their convergences and divergences. This leads to the discussion of the need for a third method: action design research. This study was conducted based on a configurative systematic literature review. The analysis and the synthesis of literature took into account themes and content analyses. Some results could be observed. First, there is a significant number of similarities among these research methods; second, there are complementary and positive synergies in their use; and third, the concepts of artifact and classes of problems seem to contribute both to the proposition and to the evaluation of the results obtained by action research. Finally, it was possible to establish a set of possibilities for the use of action research and design science research in a combined manner. The limitations of this study have a theoretical nature. There is a need for a comparative analysis of the use of action research and design science research and the use of action research under the paradigm of design science.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Adler MJ, Van Doren C (1972) How to Read a Book. A Touchstone Book Published by Simon & Schuster, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Alles MG, Kogan A, Vasarhelyi MA (2013) Collaborative design research: Lessons from continuous auditing. Int J Account Inf Syst 14:104–112. doi:10.1016/j.accinf.2011.06.004

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bayazit N (2004) Investigating Design : A Review of Forty Years of Design Research. Massachusetts Institute of Technology: Design Issues 20:16–29

    Google Scholar 

  • Bilandzic M, Venable J (2011) Towards Participatory Action Design Research: Adapting Action Research and Design Science Research Methods for Urban Informatics. The Journal of Community Informatics 7:1–17

    Google Scholar 

  • Borrego M, Douglas EP, Amelink CT (2009) Quantitative , Qualitative , and Mixed Research Methods in Engineering Education. J Eng Educ:53–66. doi:10.1002/j.2168-9830.2009.tb01005.x

  • Çağdaş V, Stubkjær E (2011) Design research for cadastral systems. Comput Environ Urban Syst 35:77–87. doi:10.1016/j.compenvurbsys.2010.07.003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cauchick Miguel PA (2011) Metodologia de Pesquisa em Engenharia ee Produção e Gestão de Operações, 2nd edn. Elsevier, Rio de Janeiro

    Google Scholar 

  • Checkland P, Holwell S (1998) Action Research: its nature and validity. Syst Pract Action Res 11:9–21

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coghlan D, Brannick T (2001) Doing Action research in our own organization. Sage Publications, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Coghlan D, Shani ABR (2005) Roles, Politics, and Ethics in Action Research Design. Syst Pract Action Res 18:533–546. doi:10.1007/s11213-005-9465-3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cole R, Purao S, Rossi M, Sein MK (2005) Being proactive : Where action research meets design research. Proceedings of the Twenty- Sixth International Conference on Information Systems, pp 325–336

  • Coughlan P, Coghlan D (2002) Action research for operations management. Int J Oper Prod Manag 22:220–240. doi:10.1108/01443570210417515

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Creswell JW, Clark VLP (2013) Pesquisa de Métodos Mistos. Penso, Porto Alegre

    Google Scholar 

  • Dresch A, Lacerda DP, Antunes Jr. JAV (2015a) Design science research: a method for science and technology advancement. Springer, New York

  • Dresch A, Lacerda DP, Cauchick Miguel PA (2015b) A Distinctive Analysis of Case Study, Action Research and Design Science Research. RBGN-Revista Brasileira De Gestao De Negocios 17:1116–1133. doi:10.7819/rbgn.v17i56.2069

    Google Scholar 

  • Fendt J, Kaminska-Labbe, R. (2011) Relevance and creativity through design-driven action research: Introducing pragmatic adequacy. Eur Manag J 29:217–233

  • Gough D, Oliver S, Thomas J (2012) An Introduction to Systematic Reviews. Sage Publications Ltd, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Hevner AR (2007) A Three Cycle View of Design Science Research. Scandinavian Journal of Information Systems 19:87–92. http://aisel.aisnet.org/sjis/vol19/iss2/4

  • Hevner AR, March ST, Park J, Ram S (2004) Design Science in information systems research. MIS Quaterly 28:75–105

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holmström J, Hameri AP, Ketokivi M (2006) Operations management as a problem-solving discipline. Academy of Management Best Conference Paper, Atlanta, 11–16 August 2006, pp 1–6

  • Holmström J, Ketokivi M, Hameri AP (2009) Bridging practice and theory: a design science approach. Decis Sci 40(2):65–88

  • Hüner KM, Ofner M, Otto B (2009) Towards a maturity model for corporate data quality management. Proceedings of the 2009 ACM symposium on Applied Computing - SAC ‘09 231. doi: 10.1145/1529282.1529334

  • Iivari J, Venable J (2009) Action Research and Design Science Research - Seemingly similar but decisively dissimilar. In: 17th European Conference in Information Systems. ECIS, Verona, pp 1–13

    Google Scholar 

  • Järvinen P (2007) Action Research is Similar to Design Science. Quality & Quantity 41:37–54. doi:10.1007/s11135-005-5427-1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lacerda DP, Dresch A, Proença A, Antunes JAV Jr (2013) Design Science Research: A research method to production engineering. Gestão & Produção 20:741–761

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Loebbecke C, Berthod O, Huyskens C (2007) Diversity in Collaborative Information Systems ( IS ) Research Methods: Academic Breadth or ' Re-Inventing the Wheel '? Americas Conference on Information Systems (AMCIS), 1–9

  • Loebbecke C, Powell P (2009) Furthering Distributed Participative Design. Scand J Inf Syst 21:77–106

    Google Scholar 

  • Manson NJ (2006) Is operations research really research? Orion 22:155–180

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • March ST, Smith GF (1995) Design and natural science research on information technology. Decis Support Syst 15:251–266. doi:10.1016/0167-9236(94)00041-2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • March ST, Storey VC (2008) Design Science in the Information Systems Discipline: An Introduction to the Special Issue on Design Science Research. MIS Quaterly 32:725–730

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morandi MIWM, Camargo LFR (2015) Revisão sistemática da literatura. In: Design science research: método de pesquisa para avanço da ciência e tecnologia. Bookman, Porto Alegre, pp 141–172

    Google Scholar 

  • Papas N, O’Keefe RM, Seltsikas P (2012) The action research vs design science debate: reflections from an intervention in eGovernment. Eur J Inf Syst 21:147–159. doi:10.1057/ejis.2011.50

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peffers K, Tuunanen T, Rothenberger MA, Chatterjee S (2007) A Design Science Research Methodology for Information Systems Research. J Manag Inf Syst 24:45–77. doi:10.2753/MIS0742-1222240302

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pries-Heje BJ, Baskerville R (2008) The Design Theory Nexus. MIS Q 32:731–755. doi:10.1016/S0006-3223(15)00926-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ractham P, Kaewkitipong L, Firpo D (2012) The Use of Facebook in an Introductory MIS Course: Social Constructivist Learning Environment. Decis Sci J Innov Educ 10:165–188. doi:10.1111/j.1540-4609.2011.00337.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Romme AGL (2004) Commentary Action Research, Emancipation and Design Thinking. J. Community Appl. Soc. Psychol 499:495–499

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rose J, Saifullah M (2012) Bridging Worlds: Information Systems Development Through Cross-Cultural Comparison. Syst Pract Action Res 25:511–536. doi:10.1007/s11213-012-9239-7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sein M, Henfridsson O, Purao S, Rossi MLR (2011) Action Design Research. MIS Q 35:37–56

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simon HA (1996) The Sciences of the Artificial, 3rd edn. MIT Press, USA

    Google Scholar 

  • Takeda H, Takeda H, Veerkamp P et al (1990) Modeling Design Processes. AI Mag 11:37–48. doi:10.1609/aimag.v11i4.855

    Google Scholar 

  • Thiollent M (2009) Metodologia da Pesquisa-Ação, 17th edn. Cortez, São Paulo

    Google Scholar 

  • Vaishnavi V, Kuechler W (2009) Design research in information systems association for information systems, January, pp 1–16

  • Van Aken JE (2004) Management Research Based on the Paradigm of the Design Sciences: The Quest for Field-Tested and Grounded Technological Rules. J Manag Stud 41:219–246

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Venable JR (2006) The Role of Theory and Theorising in Design Science Research. Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Design Science in Information Systems and Technology (Desrist 2006) 1–18. doi: 10.1.1.110.2475

  • Weeding S, Dawson L (2012) Laptops on trolleys: lessons from a mobile-wireless hospital ward. J Med Syst 36:3933–3943. doi:10.1007/s10916-012-9865-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Insituto Federal Sul-Riograndense (IFSUL), Av. Copacabana, 100 – Bairro Piratini, CEP: 93.216-120, Sapucaia do Sul, RS, Brazil

    Dalila Cisco Collatto

  2. Universidade do Vale do Rio dos Sinos – UNISINOS, Av. Unisinos, 950 – Bairro Cristo Rei, CEP: 93.022-000, São Leopoldo, RS, Brazil

    Aline Dresch, Daniel Pacheco Lacerda & Ione Ghislene Bentz

Authors
  1. Dalila Cisco Collatto
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Aline Dresch
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Daniel Pacheco Lacerda
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Ione Ghislene Bentz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Aline Dresch.

Appendix 1

Appendix 1

Appendix 1

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Collatto, D.C., Dresch, A., Lacerda, D.P. et al. Is Action Design Research Indeed Necessary? Analysis and Synergies Between Action Research and Design Science Research. Syst Pract Action Res 31, 239–267 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11213-017-9424-9

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11213-017-9424-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation