Search

In their insightful critique of Action Design Research, Hevner and Mullarkey (this issue) proposed an enhancement of ADR by juxtaposing concepts from a well cited framework of Design Science Research (DSR) developed by Peffers et al. (2007). In this commentary, we argue that while we agree with some of their elaborations, such as unpacking the specific stages of ADR to make them more transparent and accessible and incorporating formalization of learning in every stage, we also disagree with Hevner and Mullarkey on two key areas. The first is depicting multiple different entry points to an ADR project, which goes against the essential spirit of ADR’s single entry point, problem formulation. More importantly, in juxtaposing the Peffers et al. framework of DSR on to ADR, they are combining two approaches that are epistemologically incommensurate. Peffers et al. take a deductive design approach while ADR employs principally an inductive epistemology by giving primacy to the guided emergence of the artifact. In spite of our disagreements, we conclude that both approaches are premised upon pragmatism where researchers are guided more by utility and usefulness rather than an abstract notion of truth. Our disagreements are essential characteristics of a healthy academic discourse.

Research in ICT4D is a constant search to answer the question of how ICT fosters development in underdeveloped communities. While many theories have guided research, we are yet to develop a cumulative body of knowledge to answer this question. In this paper, we argue that the elusive link between ICT and development needs to be grounded in three groups of theories: theories to understand development; theories to understand ICT; and theories to understand how ICT make development happen. We present exemplars of theories from each group, and illustrate how we have used them in our research. Through reflecting on which questions to be answered by including the three groups of theories, we propose research agendas.

Poor data and information quality (DQ/IQ) has remained a consistent problem plaguing both the practitioner and academic communities in Information Systems (IS). The consequences of poor DQ/IQ is particularly severe in Construction Engineering, and the field lacks sufficient DQ/IQ assessment frameworks and tools. To address this shortcoming, we applied an action design research (ADR) approach to develop and implement a DQ/IQ assessment tool called Information Quality System (IQS). The multi-year research project took place in a European construction engineering company, and lasted from 2007 to 2012. We drew upon insights from the literature on DQ/IQ assessment and related challenges in construction engineering, as well as practical lessons learned from managing DQ/IQ in the target organization. Through our research, we develop a set of design principles for meeting DQ/IQ challenges. Validerad; 2015; Nivå 2; 20150828 (mausei)

An investigation was in Nyi-naung-wa village, Bogalay township for Japanese encephalitis (JE) virus infection and the possibility of a JE outbreak. JE virus antibody was determined among the pigs and the people living near the pig farms in that village and at an adjacent village as a control. The known JE virus vector Culex mosquito species were also identified in both villages. Haemagglutination inhibition (HAI) methods were used for the detectioon of JE and dengue antibodies. Homotypic or monotypic JE antibodies were detected in 33% of the pigs tested. No homotypic nor monotypic JE antibodis was detected among the villagers. Although there was no JE virus infection among the people, because of the presence of JE virus infection among the pigs and the presence of Culex mosquito vector in that area, the possibility of a JE outbreak in humans in that area, if the number of pig breeding per household increase and the mosquito density become higher is discussed., 熱帯医学 Tropical medicine 42(2). p47-52, 2000

Action Design Research (ADR) is a research method for generating design knowledge through building and evaluating ensemble artifacts. In this paper, we respond to Goldkuhl’s critical review of the conceptualization of IT artifact in ADR. In particular, the review problematizes the so-called “conceptual journey” from an ensemble view to ensemble artifact, and suggests that this journey restricts the use of ADR. We recognize Goldkuhl’s critique as a valuableopportunity to clarify our thinking and elaborate the rationale behind ensemble artifact. We maintain that the notion of ensemble artifact in ADR is appropriate because it highlights the forward-looking orientation of designing artifacts and stresses the importance of the context for the evolution and use of the resulting artifact. It stands in contrast to the retrospective orientation of the ensemble view nomenclature from Orlikowski and Iacono that we borrowed and extended for ADR. Finally, we endorse Goldkuhl’s proposed communicative view as auseful addition to the toolkit of ADR researchers who can study the design of communicative tool artifacts. Validerad; 2013; 20131129 (mausei)

This teaching case presents the story of the Nepal Wireless Networking Project (NWNP) and its effort to connect villages in remote areas of Nepal to the outside world. Despite lack of access to proper equipment, the fact that it was illegal to install wireless network, lack of technical competence and the difficult terrain in the Himalayan mountains, Mahabir Pun, the initiator of NWNP, suceeded in bringing Internet access to these villages which led to improvement in education, health services and income-generating activities. The case describes the development of NWNP from inception to today, the stakeholders involved, services provided, current challenges and ideas for future improvements. It illustrates the importance of the champion, the process to get stakeholders commitments, the importance of contextual understanding, and the challenges of scaling up from pilot projects to wider implementations in the context of developing countries. Validerad; 2013; 20130312 (devtha)