2012Maynooth University ePrints and eTheses Archive (Maynooth University)Open access

The case for design science utility and quality - Evaluation of design science artifact within the sustainable ICT capability maturity framework

Markus Helfert, Brian Donnellan, Łukasz Ostrowski

Open full text 21 citations

Abstract

Despite the increasing popularity of design science research, evaluating design artefacts is still challenging. Several guidelines and suggestions have been proposed, however combining practical utility and academic rigor can be difficult, in particular when research is co-funded by industry. In this research-in-progress paper we describe a novel IT Management model, the IT Capability Maturity Framework and its design process. In order to incorporate the evaluation of design artifacts along the design process within an open innovation community, we propose to use common information quality criteria and evaluate the design artefacts using the quality model. Particular focus is given to address both practical usability as well as rigor of the evaluation criteria by using well established information quality criteria. The research emphasizes the importance of evaluation and utility in Design Science Research.

Open-access reader

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Despite the increasing popularity of design science research, evaluating design artefacts is still challenging. Several guidelines and suggestions have been proposed, however combining practical utility and academic rigor can be difficult, in particular when research is co-funded by industry. In this research-in-progress paper we describe a novel IT Management model, the IT Capability Maturity Framework and its design process. In order to incorporate the evaluation of design artifacts along the design process within an open innovation community, we propose to use common information quality criteria and evaluate the design artefacts using the quality model. Particular focus is given to address both practical usability as well as rigor of the evaluation criteria by using well established information quality criteria. The research emphasizes the importance of evaluation and utility in Design Science Research.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 21 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Despite the increasing popularity of design science research, evaluating design artefacts is still challenging. Several guidelines and suggestions have been proposed, however combining practical utility and academic rigor can be difficult, in particular when research is co-funded by industry. In this research-in-progress paper we describe a novel IT Management model, the IT Capability Maturity Framework and its design process. In order to incorporate the evaluation of design artifacts along the design process within an open innovation community, we propose to use common information quality criteria and evaluate the design artefacts using the quality model. Particular focus is given to address both practical usability as well as rigor of the evaluation criteria by using well established information quality criteria. The research emphasizes the importance of evaluation and utility in Design Science Research.

Key concepts: Design science research, Design science, Computer science, Artifact (error), Context (archaeology), Quality (philosophy), Consistency (knowledge bases), Data science

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
The case for design science utility and quality - Evaluation of design science artifact within the sustainable ICT capability maturity framework — Research Paper | ScholarLens