1. Design Science Research as a core approach for IRPs
Jan-Hendrik Viljoen
NWU Strategic Intelligence

2. What is your academic background?

3. Strategic Intelligence
Actuarial Sciences
Electronic Engineering
Business Mathematics and Informatics
Business
Tourism
Information Technology

4. How do these IRPs work together?
The question is:
How do these IRPs work together?
Especially when taking into account their “toolsets”?

5. Story of an age old struggle…
Academic VS
Support

6. Breaking down the conversation
There was an expectation surrounding the deliverables
Expectation was based on an academic (research) viewpoint
Rigor and reliability
Another short story
Staff’s children’s names, birthdays and achievements
Risk of doing work that was not relevant (or ethical)

7. Needs: Common understanding of how we go about work
Should not stifle inputs due to academic backgrounds
Reliable
Robust
Relevant
Satisfies scope/business needs

8. Design Science Research
From the Information Systems field
Moved into the Engineering and Business fields
Focus on solving problems
Design towards creating/improving artefacts

9. Artefacts
Models
Constructs
Theories
Methods or processes

10. DSR Framework

11. DSR Framework Environment Describes the As-Is
Not just the problem/need in isolation
Interaction between stakeholders, systems and organisations are key.
Gives the business needs that the Design artefact needs to address

12. DSR Framework Knowledge base
The knowledge that informs the design of the artefact
Gives evaluation criteria/methods/processes for Design Cycle

13. DSR Framework Design - Build
Creation of artefacts (includes processes)
Design - Evaluate
Evaluate Design based on criteria from Knowledge base

14. DSR Framework Relevance Cycle
Does the design speak to the business needs?
Field testing will determine if further design iterations are needed.

15. DSR Framework Rigor Cycle Grounded in existing theories and ideas
Ensures that DSR leads to research contribution
Creates new knowledge

16. DSR Framework Artefact Physical – models, reports, software
Meta – Theories, processes

17. DSR Guidelines 1. Design as an Artefact:
The DSR process should lead to an artefact that could be a theory, method, construct, model or instantiation.
2. Problem Relevance:
DSR aims to address relevant business needs.
3. Design Evaluation:
The artefact needs to be critically evaluated to ensure rigor.
4. Research Contributions:
A clear and verifiable contribution must be made in design- artefacts, foundations and methodologies.
5. Research Rigor:
Rigorous methods need to be applied to the construction and evaluation of the artefact.
6. Design as a Search Process:
DSR is inherently a search for a solution or artefacts that address business needs. Thus multiple solutions might be found but only one will be a best fit.
7. Communication of Research:
DSR needs to be accessible to all stakeholders whether they are management, operational, technical or otherwise.

18. DSR for IRP Issues in transferring DSR to the IRP environment
IRP artefacts are not always research outputs
Can be as simple as an ad-hoc dataset
Suggested adjustments:
Cluster artefacts in levels based on needs and evaluation required

19. Level Need Evaluation No research contribution Simple Data sets
No research contribution
Simple Data sets
Software solution validation 1
No research contribution
Simple Dataset
Ad-hoc
Report
Low level modelling
Verification by Colleagues
Software solution validation 2
Research that is relevant in institution
Modelling/Mining
Interventions
Investigative Reports
Verification by Colleagues
Software solution validation
Sample Stakeholder Feedback
Literature studies 3
Research Contribution
Knowledge Contribution
Verification by Colleagues
Software solution validation
Literature studies
Stakeholder feedback and consultation
Field Testing
Research Publication
Sector Standards
Sector Collab

20. DSR IRP Guidelines 1. Design as an Artefact:
The DSR process should lead to an artefact that could be a theory, method, construct, model or instantiation.
2. Problem Relevance:
DSR aims to address relevant business needs.
3. Design Evaluation:
The artefact needs to be critically evaluated to ensure rigor.
4. Research Contributions:
A clear and verifiable contribution must be made to the IRP knowledge base based up the level of the business needs.
5. Research Rigor:
Rigorous methods need to be applied to the construction and evaluation of the artefact.
6. Design as a Search Process:
DSR is inherently a search for a solution or artefacts that address business needs. Thus multiple solutions might be found but only one will be a best fit.
7. Communication of Research:
DSR needs to be accessible to all stakeholders whether they are management, operational, technical or otherwise.

21. BUT…. Peer-Review Evaluating DSR for IRP
Common understanding of how we go about work
Does not stifle inputs from various academic backgrounds
Ensures Reliability
Robust artefacts
Relevant artefacts
Ensures scope/business needs are met
BUT….
Peer-Review

22. Questions, Comments and Criticism