Design Science na administração de empresas
a estrutura intelectual do paradigma
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5585/2024.25650Palavras-chave:
design science, administração de empresas, bibliometria, artefatos, maturidadeResumo
Objetivo do estudo: Este artigo tem como objetivo analisar a estrutura intelectual da Design Science (DS) na Administração de Empresas. Ele identifica as obras e periódicos mais influentes, as abordagens teóricas para a geração de artefatos e discute a estrutura intelectual da literatura emergente sobre Design Science.
Metodologia: A pesquisa utilizou o pareamento bibliográfico e análises de citação nas bases de dados Scopus e Web of Science.
Originalidade/relevância: Esta pesquisa contribui para uma melhor compreensão da Design Science na Administração de Empresas.
Principais resultados: Os artigos são, em sua maioria, teóricos, demonstrando que a Design Science ainda está em uma fase inicial de maturidade. Quanto aos artigos empíricos e teóricos (ilustrados), seus respectivos autores indicam como artefatos: frameworks, método e instanciação, além de Design Propositions, Design Principles e Technological Rules. Os artigos que constituem a estrutura intelectual da DS estão predominantemente na área de Sistemas de Informação e, em menor grau, em Service Design e Gestão de Operações.
Contribuições teóricas/metodológicas: O artigo contribui para a discussão científica sobre Design Science, identificando as principais áreas que utilizam o paradigma para conduzir pesquisas em Administração de Empresas.
Downloads
Referências
Abbasi, A., Zhang, Z., Zimbra, D., & Chen, H. (2010). Detecting Fake Websites: The Contribution of Statistical Learning Theory. MIS Quarterly, 34(3), 435–461, doi: https://doi.org/10.2307/25750686
Aier, S., & Fischer, C. (2011). Criteria of Progress for Information Systems Design Theories. Information Systems and EBusiness Management, 9(1), 133–172, doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10257-010-0130-8
Arnott, D., & Pervan, G. (2005). A Critical Analysis of Decision Support Systems Research. Journal of Information Technology, 20(2), 67–87, doi: https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.jit.2000035
Avenier, M. J. (2010). Shaping a Constructivist View of Organizational Design Science. Organization Studies, 31(9-10), 1229–1255, doi: https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840610374395
Baskerville, R. L., Kaul, M., & Storey, V. C. (2015). Genres of Inquiry in Design Science Research: Justification and Evaluation. MIS Quarterly, 39(3), 541–564.
Borgatti, S. P., Everett, M. G., & Freeman, L. C. (2002). Ucinet for Windows: Software for Social Network Analysis. Harvard, MA: Analytic Technologies.
Buchanan, R. A. (2006). Accuracy of Cited References: The Role of Citation Databases. College & Research Libraries, 67(4), 292-303.
Burgoyne, J., & James, K. T. (2006). Towards Best or Better Practice in Corporate Leadership Development: Operational Issues in Mode 2 and Design Science Research. British Journal of Management, 17(4), 303–316, doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8551.2005.00468.x
Carcary, M. (2011). Design Science Research: The Case of the It Capability Maturity Framework (IT CMF). Electronic Journal of Business Research Methods, 9(2), 109–118.
Carlsson, S. A., Henningsson, S., Hrastinski, S., & Keller, C. (2011). Socio-Technical is Design Science Research: Developing Design Theory for is Integration Management. Information Systems and E-Business Management, 9(1), 109–131, doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10257-010-0140-6
Carton, G., & Mouricou, P. (2017). Is Management Research Relevant? A Systematic Analysis of the Rigor-Relevance Debate in Top-Tier Journals (1994-2013). Management (France), 20(2), 166–203, doi: https://doi.org/10.3917/mana.202.0166
Dellermann, D., Lipusch, N., Ebel, P., & Leimeister, J. M. (2019). Design Principles for a Hybrid Intelligence Decision Support System for Business Model Validation. Electronic Markets, 29(3), 423–441, doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12525-018-0309-2
Denyer, D., Tranfield, D., & van Aken, J. E. (2008). Developing Design Propositions Through Research Synthesis. Organization Studies, 29(3), 393–413, doi: https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840607088020
Donaldson, L. (2002). Damned by Our Own Theories: Contradictions Between Theories and Management Education. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 1(1), 96–106, doi: https://doi.org/10.5465/amle.2002.7373701
Dresch, A., Lacerda, D. P., & Miguel, P. A. C. (2015). Uma Análise Distintiva Entre o Estudo de Caso, a Pesquisa-Ação e a Design Science Research. Revista Brasileira de Gestão de Negócios, 17(56), 1116–1133, doi: https://doi.org/10.7819/rbgn.v17i56.2069
Fendt, J., & Kaminska-Labbé, R. (2011). Relevance and Creativity Through Design-Driven Action Research: Introducing Pragmatic Adequacy. European Management Journal, 29(3), 217–233, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.emj.2010.10.004
Garfield, E. (1979). Is Citation Analysis a Legitimate Evaluation Tool? Scientometrics,1(4), 359-375.
Glänzel, W., & Thijs, B. (2012). Using ‘Core Documents’ for Detecting and Labelling New Emerging Topics. Scientometrics, 91(2), 399-416.
Gregor, S. (2006). The Nature of Theory in Information Systems. MIS Quarterly, 30(3), 611–642, doi: https://doi.org/10.2307/25148742
Gregor, S., & Hevner, A. R. (2013). Positioning and Presenting Design Science Research for Maximum Impact. MIS Quarterly, 37(2), 337-355.
Gregor, S., & Jones, D. (2007). The Anatomy of a Design Theory. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 8(5), 312–335, doi: https://doi.org/10.17705/1jais.00129
Gregory, R. W., & Muntermann, J. (2014). Heuristic Theorizing: Proactively Generating Design Theories. Information Systems Research, 25(3), 639–653, doi: https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.2014.0533
Guerci, M., Radaelli, G., & Shani, A. B. (2019). Conducting Mode 2 Research in HRM: A Phase-based Framework. Human Resource Management, 58(1), 5–20, doi: https://doi.org/10.1002/hrm.21919
Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., Anderson, R. E., & Tatham, R. L. (2009). Multivariate data analysis, Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ.
Hamlin, R. G., & Bassi, N. (2008). Behavioural Indicators of Manager and Managerial Leader Effectiveness: An Example of Mode 2 Knowledge Production in Management to Support Evidence-Based Practice. International Journal of Management Practice, 3(2), 115–130, doi: https://doi.org/10.1504/IJMP.2008.018366
Hevner, A. R. (2007). A Three Cycle View of Design Science Research. Scandinavian Journal of Information Systems, 19(2), 87–92. https://aisel.aisnet.org/sjis/vol19/iss2/4
Hevner, A. R., March, S. T., Park, J., & Ram, S. (2004). Design Science in Information System Research. MIS Quarterly, 28(1), 75–105.
Hevner, A., Brocke, J. vom, & Maedche, A. (2019). Roles of Digital Innovation in Design Science Research. Business & Information Systems Engineering, 61, 3–8, doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12599-018-0571-z
Hodgkinson, G. P., & Starkey, K. (2011). Not Simply Returning to the Same Answer Over and Over Again: Reframing Relevance. British Journal of Management, 22(3), 355–369, doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8551.2011.00757.x
Hodgkinson, G. P., & Starkey, K. (2012). Extending the Foundations and Reach of Design Science: Further Reflections on the Role of Critical Realism. British Journal of Management, 23(4), 605–610, doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8551.12001
Holmström, J., Främling, K., & Ala-Risku, T. (2010). The Uses of Tracking in Operations Management: Synthesis of a Research Program. International Journal of Production Economics, 126(2), 267–275, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2010.03.017
Holmström, J., Ketokivi, M., & Hameri, A. P. (2009). Bridging Practice and Theory: A Design Science Approach. Decision Sciences, 40(1), 65–87, doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5915.2008.00221.x
Huff, A., Tranfield, D., & van Aken, J. E. (2006). Management as a Design Science Mindful of Art and Surprise - A Conversation Between Anne Huff, David Tranfield, and Joan Ernst van Aken. Journal of Management Inquiry, 15(4), 413–424, doi: https://doi.org/10.1177/1056492606295900
Jelinek, M., Romme, A. G. L., & Boland, R. J. (2008). Introduction to The Special Issue Organization Studies as a Science for Design: Creating Collaborative Artifacts and Research. Organization Studies, 29(3), 317–329, doi: https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840607088016
Kaparthi, S. (2012). A bibliometric analysis. Journal of Decision Systems, 14(1-2), 157-177.
Kieser, A., Nicolai, A. T., & Seidl, D. (2015). The Practical Relevance of Management Research. The Academy of Management Annals, 9(1), 143–233.
Kuechler, W.L., & Vaishnavi, V.K. (2008). The emergence of design research in information systems in North America. Journal Design Research, 7(1), 1–16.
Lacerda, D. P., Dresch, A. (2020). Impact beyond Impact Factor: The Design-Science Way. BAR – Brazilian Administration Review, 17(1): doi: https://doi.org/10.1590/1807-7692bar2020200054
Lacerda, D. P., Dresch, A., Proença, A., & Antunes Júnior, J. A. V. (2013). Design Science Research: Método De Pesquisa para a Engenharia de Produção. Gestão e Produção, 20(4), 741–761, doi: https://doi.org/10.1590/S0104-530X2013005000014
Löhe, J., & Legner, C. (2014). Overcoming Implementation Challenges in Enterprise Architecture Management: A Design Theory for Architecture-Driven It Management (ADRIMA). Information Systems and E-Business Management, 12(1), 101–137, doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10257-012-0211-y
MacRoberts, M., & MacRoberts, B. (1996). Problems of Citation Analysis. Scientometrics, 36(3), 435-444.
March, S. T., & Smith, G. F. (1995). Design and natural science research on information technology. Decision Support Systems, 15, 251-266.
Marcos, J., & Denyer, D. (2012). Crossing the Sea from They to we? The Unfolding of Knowing and Practising in Collaborative Research. Management Learning, 43(4), 443–459, doi: https://doi.org/10.1177/1350507612440232
Marshall, C., & Rossman, G. B. (2006). Design qualitative research, 4th ed., Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.
Martin, B. (1996). The Use of Multiple Indicators in The Assessment of Basic Research. Scientometrics, 36(3), 343-362.
Mesny, A., & Mailhot, C. (2012). Control and Traceability of Research Impact on Practice: Reframing The ‘Relevance Gap’ Debate in Management. Management (France), 15(2), 180–207.
Miah, S. J., & Gammack, J. G. (2014). Ensemble Artifact Design for Context Sensitive Decision Support. Australasian Journal of Information Systems, 18(3), 5–20.
Miah, S. J., Debuse, J., & Kerr, D. (2012). A Development-Oriented DSS Evaluation Approach: A Case Demonstration for Conceptual Assessment. Australasian Journal of Information Systems, 17(2), 43–55, doi: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107415324.004
Pandza, K., & Thorpe, R. (2010). Management as Design, But What Kind of Design? An Appraisal of the Design Science Analogy for Management. British Journal of Management, 21(1), 171–186, doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8551.2008.00623.x
Peffers, K., Tuunanen, T., Rothenberger, M. A., & Chatterjee, S. (2007). A Design Science Research Methodology for Information Systems Research. Journal of Management Information Systems, 24(3), 45–77, doi: https://doi.org/10.2753/MIS0742-1222240302
Pislyakov, V. (2009). Comparing Two ‘Thermometers’: Impact Factors of 20 Leading Economic Journals According to Journal Citation Reports and Scopus. Scientometrics, 79(3), 541-550.
Raan, A. van (1996). Advanced Bibliometric Methods as Quantitative Core of Peer Review Based Evaluation and Foresight Exercises. Scientometrics, 36(3), 397-420.
Romme, A. G. L. (2003). Making a Difference: Organization as Design. Organization Science, 14(5), 558–573, doi: https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.14.5.558.16769
Romme, A. G. L., Avenier, M. J., Denyer, D., Hodgkinson, G. P., Pandza, K., Starkey, K., & Worren, N. (2015). Towards Common Ground and Trading Zones in Management Research and Practice. British Journal of Management, 26(3), 544–559, doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8551.12110
Sealy, R., Doldor, E., Vinnicombe, S., Terjesen, S., Anderson, D., & Atewologun, D. (2017). Expanding the Notion of Dialogic Trading Zones for Impactful Research: The Case of Women on Boards Research. British Journal of Management, 28(1), 64–83, doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8551.12203
Shiau, W. L., Dwivedi, Y. K., & Yang, H. S. (2017). Co-citation and Cluster Analyses of Extant Literature on Social Networks. International Journal of Information Management, 37(5), 390-399.
Simon, H. A. (1996). The science of design: creating the artificial, MIT Press, London.
Singh, V., Verma, S., & Chaurasia, S. S. (2020). Mapping the Themes and Intellectual Structure of Corporate University: Co-citation and Cluster Analyses. Scientometrics, 122(3), 1275-1302.
Sudbury-Riley, L., Hunter-Jones, P., Al-Abdin, A., Lewin, D., & Naraine, M. V. (2019). The Trajectory Touchpoint Technique: A Deep Dive Methodology for Service Innovation. Journal of Service Research, 23(2), 229-251, doi: https://doi.org/10.1177/1094670519894642
Teixeira, J. G., Patrício, L., & Tuunanen, T. (2019). Advancing Service Design Research with Design Science Research. Journal of Service Management, 30(5), 577–592, doi: https://doi.org/10.1108/JOSM-05-2019-0131
van Aken, J. E. (2005). Management Research as a Design Science: Articulating the Research Products of Mode 2 Knowledge Production in Management. British Journal of Management, 16(1), 19–36, doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8551.2005.00437.x
van Aken, J. E. (2004). Management Research Based on the Paradigm of the Design Sciences: The Quest for Field-Tested and Grounded Technological Rules. Journal of Management Studies, 41(2), 219–246, doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6486.2004.00430.x
van Aken, J. E., & Romme, A. G. L. (2009). Reinventing the Future: Adding Design Science to the Repertoire of Organization and Management Studies. Organisation Management Journal, 6(1), 5–12, doi: https://doi.org/10.1057/omj.2009.1
Venable, J. (2011). Incorporating Design Science Research and Critical Research into an Introductory Business Research Methods Course. Electronic Journal of Business Research Methods, 9(2), 119–129.
Venable, J., & Baskerville, R. (2012). Eating our own Cooking: Toward a More Rigorous Design Science of Research Methods. Electronic Journal of Business Research Methods, 10(2), 141–153.
Vo, L. C., & Kelemen, M. (2017). Collaborating Across the Researcher-Practitioner Divide: Introducing John Dewey’s Democratic Experimentalism. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 30 (6), 858–871, doi: https://doi.org/10.1108/JOCM-03-2016-0054
Walls, J. G., Widmeyer, G. R., & El Sawy, O. A. (1992). Building an information system design theory for vigilant EIS. Information Systems Research, 3, 36-59.
Wells, P., & Nieuwenhuis, P. (2017). Operationalizing Deep Structural Sustainability in Business: Longitudinal Immersion as Extensive Engaged Scholarship. British Journal of Management, 28(1), 45–63, doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8551.12201
Yassaee, M., Mettler, T., & Winter, R. (2019). Principles for the Design of Digital Occupational Health Systems. Information and Organization, 29(2), 77–90, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infoandorg.2019.04.005
Zupic, I., & Čater, T. (2015). Bibliometric Methods in Management and Organization. Organizational Research Methods, 18(3), 429-472.
Downloads
Publicado
Como Citar
Edição
Seção
Licença
Copyright (c) 2024 Autores
Este trabalho está licenciado sob uma licença Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
