Does it describe a new discovery, methodology, or synthesis of knowledge?
As previously described, our goal in the paper is to position design science research in the IS field as an equal, complementary partner to the more prevalent behavioral science research paradigm. The key contribution is a new way of thinking about what makes IS research relevant to its various audiences of managers, practitioners, and peer researchers in related fields. Design must be informed by appropriate theories that explain or predict human behavior; however, these may be insufficient to enable the development and adaptation of effective organizational artifacts. Scientific theories may explain existing or emergent organizational phenomena related to extant organizational forms and artifacts but they cannot account for the qualitative novelty achieved by human intention, creativity, and innovation in the design and appropriation of such artifacts. That is, science, the process of understanding “what is,” may be insufficient for design, the process of understanding “what can be.”
