Design science methodology: principles and practice

Roelf J. Wieringa

doi:10.1145/1810295.1810446

Design science methodology: principles and practice

Roelf J. Wieringa

Research output: Contribution to conference › Paper › peer-review

48 Citations (Scopus)

1306 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Design scientists have to balance the demands of methodological rigor that they share with purely curiosity-driven scientists, with the demands of practical utility that they share with utility-driven engineers. Balancing these conflicting demands can be conceptually complex and may lead to methodological mistakes. For example, treating a design question as an empirical research question may lead to researcher to omit the identification of the practical problem to solve, to omit the identification of stakeholder-motivated evaluation criteria, or to omit trade-off and sensitivity analysis. This tutorial aims to clear up this methodological mist in the case of software engineering (SE) research.

Original language	Undefined
Pages	493-494
Number of pages	2
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1145/1810295.1810446
Publication status	Published - May 2010
Event	32nd ACM/IEEE International Conference on Software Engineering, ICSE 2010 - Cape Town, South Africa Duration: 2 May 2010 → 8 May 2010 Conference number: 32

Conference

Conference	32nd ACM/IEEE International Conference on Software Engineering, ICSE 2010
Abbreviated title	ICSE
Country/Territory	South Africa
City	Cape Town
Period	2/05/10 → 8/05/10

Keywords

SCS-Services
IS-Design science methodology
IR-83379
EWI-22392

Access to Document

10.1145/1810295.1810446

Wieringa_2010_Design_science_methodology;_principles_and_practice

Cite this

@conference{b5addb6a74424a55aa35b24ee6d5a848,

title = "Design science methodology: principles and practice",

abstract = "Design scientists have to balance the demands of methodological rigor that they share with purely curiosity-driven scientists, with the demands of practical utility that they share with utility-driven engineers. Balancing these conflicting demands can be conceptually complex and may lead to methodological mistakes. For example, treating a design question as an empirical research question may lead to researcher to omit the identification of the practical problem to solve, to omit the identification of stakeholder-motivated evaluation criteria, or to omit trade-off and sensitivity analysis. This tutorial aims to clear up this methodological mist in the case of software engineering (SE) research.",

keywords = "SCS-Services, IS-Design science methodology, IR-83379, EWI-22392",

author = "Wieringa, {Roelf J.}",

year = "2010",

month = may,

doi = "10.1145/1810295.1810446",

language = "Undefined",

pages = "493--494",

note = "32nd ACM/IEEE International Conference on Software Engineering, ICSE 2010 ; Conference date: 02-05-2010 Through 08-05-2010",

}

TY - CONF

T1 - Design science methodology: principles and practice

AU - Wieringa, Roelf J.

N1 - Conference code: 32

PY - 2010/5

Y1 - 2010/5

N2 - Design scientists have to balance the demands of methodological rigor that they share with purely curiosity-driven scientists, with the demands of practical utility that they share with utility-driven engineers. Balancing these conflicting demands can be conceptually complex and may lead to methodological mistakes. For example, treating a design question as an empirical research question may lead to researcher to omit the identification of the practical problem to solve, to omit the identification of stakeholder-motivated evaluation criteria, or to omit trade-off and sensitivity analysis. This tutorial aims to clear up this methodological mist in the case of software engineering (SE) research.

AB - Design scientists have to balance the demands of methodological rigor that they share with purely curiosity-driven scientists, with the demands of practical utility that they share with utility-driven engineers. Balancing these conflicting demands can be conceptually complex and may lead to methodological mistakes. For example, treating a design question as an empirical research question may lead to researcher to omit the identification of the practical problem to solve, to omit the identification of stakeholder-motivated evaluation criteria, or to omit trade-off and sensitivity analysis. This tutorial aims to clear up this methodological mist in the case of software engineering (SE) research.

KW - SCS-Services

KW - IS-Design science methodology

KW - IR-83379

KW - EWI-22392

U2 - 10.1145/1810295.1810446

DO - 10.1145/1810295.1810446

M3 - Paper

SP - 493

EP - 494

T2 - 32nd ACM/IEEE International Conference on Software Engineering, ICSE 2010

Y2 - 2 May 2010 through 8 May 2010

ER -