-------- Weitergeleitete Nachricht --------
Betreff: [WI] Cfp AIS SIGPRAG Pre-ICIS workshop on ”Practice-based Design and Innovation of Digital Artifacts”
Datum: Wed, 05 Aug 2015 13:13:38 +0100
Von: Markus Helfert <markus.helfert@computing.dcu.ie>
An: wi@aifb.uni-karlsruhe.de


Call for Papers

AIS SIGPRAG Pre-ICIS workshop on
”Practice-based Design and Innovation of Digital Artifacts”

December 12, 2015, Fort Worth, Texas, USA

Background – pragmatic perspectives

There have been many calls in the information systems (IS) community for 
a stronger pragmatic focus. This can be seen in a growing interest for 
research approaches and methods in IS that emphasize contribution to 
practice and collaboration between the practice and academia. Action 
research, which aims for knowledge development through collaboration and 
intervention in real settings, is achieving more and more academic 
credibility (Baskerville & Myers, 2004; Davison et al, 2004). This can 
also be said about design science research that aims for the generation 
of new and useful artifacts (Hevner et al, 2004; Gregor & Jones, 2007). 
Research through evaluation has had a long and venerable place in IS 
research (Ward et, 1996; Serafeimidis & Smithson, 2003). Several 
approaches and frameworks that combine or integrate elements from the 
above-mentioned approaches have also emerged, e.g. practice research 
(Goldkuhl, 2011), collaborative practice research (Mathiassen, 2002), 
practical science (Gregor, 2008), engaged scholarship (Mathiassen & 
Nielsen, 2008), action design research (Sein et al, 2011) and technical 
action research (Wieringa & Morali, 2012). Underlying these different 
approaches is a quest for practical relevance of the conducted research 
(Benbasat & Zmud, 1999; Van de Ven, 2007; Wieringa, 2010). It is not 
enough to only “mirror” the world through descriptions and explanations 
but a pragmatic orientation recognizes intervention and design as a way 
of knowing and a means for building knowledge about social and 
institutional phenomena (Aakhus, 2007). There is a need for knowledge of 
other epistemic kinds that contributes more clearly to the improvement 
of IS practices.
A pragmatic orientation can also be seen in the increasing interest in 
the conceptualization of practices, activities, agency and actions. 
Practice theorizing has gained an increased attention in IS studies 
(Orlikowski, 2008; Leonardi, 2011). There has been an interest for 
agency and action oriented theories in IS for quite some time; e.g. 
activity theory (Nardi, 1996), structuration theory (Orlikowski, 1992), 
social action theorizing (Hirschheim et al, 1996), human agency 
theorizing (Boudreau & Robey, 2005) and language action perspective 
(Winograd & Flores, 1986). From this follows also an interest for social 
and pragmatic views of the IT artifact (Aakhus & Jackson, 2005). This 
includes views of the IT artifact as contextually embedded and carriers 
of those social contexts (Orlikowski & Iacono, 2001) and such artifacts 
being tools for action and communication (Ågerfalk, 2003; Markus & 
Silver, 2008). Design research practice and the contributions to 
practice through appropriation of knowledge and methods and the 
contributions to academia through knowledge artifacts has been discussed 
(Donnellan, Sjöström, Helfert, 2012).This enhanced practice and action 
orientation follows a growing awareness within IS scholars towards 
pragmatism as a research foundation (e.g. Goles & Hirschheim, 2000; 
Ågerfalk, 2010; Goldkuhl, 2012). It is not the case that IS scholars 
suddenly become pragmatists in their research orientation. It is rather 
the case that there is move from an implicit pragmatism to an explicit 
one (Goldkuhl, 2012). For a long time IS scholars have addressed 
practical problems with an interest for improvement. That interest has 
led to the extensive development of methods, models and constructive 
frameworks for not only the design of IT artifacts, but also related to 
several other IS/IT phenomena like e.g. innovation management, business 
process management, project management, IT service management just to 
mention a few. These methods actually reveal an on-going search for 
knowledge of other epistemic kinds for advancing understanding of 
information technology, information systems, and practice.

Workshop focus
This AIS SIGPRAG Pre-ICIS workshop has a general orientation towards 
pragmatic perspectives on IS as described above. The focus is on 
“Practice-based Design and Innovation of Digital Artifacts”. This means 
an emphasis on digital artifacts as embedded in social practices and 
carriers of elements in such practices. It emphasizes also the 
innovative nature of designing new artifacts and new practices. The 
workshop acknowledges different sub-themes within this broad workshop theme:
·        Ways to research practice-based design and innovation of 
digital artifacts
·        Ways to conceptualize and describe practices
·        Ways to conceptualize and describe digital artifacts
·        The processes of innovation and design of digital artifacts and 
practices

Topics within these sub-themes are described below.

Workshop purpose
This workshop is arranged in the same spirit and a continuation of 
earlier successful SIGPRAG workshops on “Practice research”, “IT 
Artifact Design & Workpractice Improvement” and “Action Research & 
Design Research Integrations”.

This SIGPRAG workshop intends to bring scholars and practitioners 
together for a knowledge exchange and development on research 
foundations and practical contributions concerning the design and 
innovation of digital artifacts and practices. The SIGPRAG workshop is 
intended to be a developmental arena with thoughtful and constructive 
feedback from reviews and comments on site. The workshop should be a 
place where you can present ideas in papers and get fruitful feedback 
for further development of the papers. A developmental arena means also 
taking responsibility for pushing contributions further to high-quality 
journal publications. From earlier SIGPRAG workshops (ADWI-2012, 
ADWI-2013 and ADWI-2014) several papers have been pushed further into 
special issues in the open access journal Systems, Signs & Actions. At 
least one special issue will be arranged in Systems, Signs & Actions 
inviting promising papers from this SIGPRAG workshop. The theme will be 
decided on later. We will possibly also work with some other outlet for 
another special issue. This depends on the outcome of the workshop.

Topics

The workshop can include papers from diverse fields of IS. Topics 
following the identified workshop sub-themes are listed below.

Ways to research practice-based design and innovation of digital 
artifacts; empirical research approaches such as:
·        Practice research
·        Action research
·        Design science research
·        Action design research
·        Case study research
·        Evaluation research
·        Discourse analysis
·        Pragmatic inquiries
·        Practitioner – research collaborations
Ways to research practice-based design and innovation of digital 
artifacts; knowledge creation approaches such as:
·        Design theory development
·        Method design/refinement
·        Grounded theory development
·        Multi-grounded theory development
·        Practical theory development
Ways to conceptualize and describe practices; for example:
·        Symbolic interaction
·        Language action
·        Socio-materiality
·        Institutionalism
·        Actor-networks
·        Infrastructure evolution
·        Socio-instrumentalism
·        Distributed cognition
·        Distributed agency


Ways to conceptualize and describe digital artifacts; for example:
·        Ensemble view
·        Socio-technical view
·        Contextual view
·        Functional tool view
·        Affordance view
·        Communicative action view
The processes of innovation and design of digital artifacts and 
practices; for example aspects such as:
·        Innovation strategies
·        Openness in innovation
·        Design thinking
·        Collaborative design
·        Stakeholder interactions (power-playing vs. value balancing and 
informed consensus building)
·        Practice understanding and diagnosis
·        Wicked problems
·        Problem formulation
·        Values and goals articulation
·        Idea generation
·        Idea capture
·        Design conversations
·        Idea visualization (modeling, prototyping)
·        Strategies for testing and evaluation

Dates and submission details

Submissions: September 30, 2015
Notification: October 31, 2015
Final manuscripts: November 30, 2015
Workshop: December 12, 2015

The workshop website is http://sigprag.net/. The workshop will follow an 
ordinary scientific procedure with submission of papers and selection of 
papers through peer-review (pursued by an international program 
committee). Papers are expected to be between 5-16 pages. We welcome 
full research papers as well as shorter papers (work-in-progress or 
position papers). For submissions we use the EasyChair system 
(https://easychair.org/conferences/?conf=sigpragws2015). A format 
template can be found at the workshop website (http://sigprag.net/). 
Workshop proceedings will be electronically published and distributed. 
There will be a small workshop fee covering catering.

Workshop co-chairs

Brian Donnellan, National University of Ireland Maynooth, Ireland 
(Brian.Donnellan@nuim.ie)
Göran Goldkuhl, Linköping University, Sweden (goran.goldkuhl@liu.se)
Jonas Sjöström, Uppsala University, Sweden (jonas.sjostrom@im.uu.se)
Mark Aakhus, Rutgers University, NJ, USA (aakhus@rci.rutgers.edu)
Markus Helfert, Dublin City University, Ireland 
(Markus.Helfert@computing.dcu.ie)

Organisers

AIS Special interest group on Pragmatic IS research (AIS SIGPRAG), 
http://sigprag.net/

Programme Committee

Michel Avital, Denmark
Rodney Clarke, Australia
Stefan Cronholm, Sweden
Matt Germonprez, USA
Rob Gleasure, Ireland
Shirley Gregor, Australia
Ola Henfridsson, UK
Philip Huysman, Belgium
Matt Levy, USA
Kalle Lyytinen, USA
Matthew Mullarkey, USA
Matti Rossi, Finland
Gerhard Schwabe, Switzerland
Christian Tornack, Germany
Roel Wieringa, the Netherlands

More members to be announced.

References
Aakhus M (2007) Communication as Design. Communication Monographs, Vol 
74 (1), pp 112–117

Aakhus M, Jackson S (2005) Technology, Interaction and Design. In K. 
Fitch & B. Sanders (Eds.), Handbook of Language and Social Interaction 
(pp. 411–433). Lawrence Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ

Ågerfalk P J (2003) Information Systems Actability: Understanding 
Information Technology as a Tool for Business Action and Communication, 
Ph D diss, Department of Computer and Information Science, Linköping 
University Ågerfalk P J (2010) Getting Pragmatic, European Journal of 
Information Systems, Vol 19 (3), pp 251–256 Baskerville R, Myers M 
(2004) Special issue on action research in information systems: making 
IS research relevant to practice – foreword, MIS Quarterly, Vol 28 (3), 
p 329-335 Benbasat I, Zmud R W (1999) Empirical research in information 
system research: The practice of relevance, MIS Quarterly, Vol 23 (1), p 
3-16 Boudreau M-C, Robey D (2005) Enacting Integrated Information 
Technology: A Human Agency Perspective, Organization Science, Vol 16 
(1), p 3–18 Davison R M, Martinsons M G, Kock N (2004) Principles of 
canonical action research, Information Systems Journal, Vol 14, p 65–86 
Donnellan B, Sjöström, J, Helfert M (2012) Applying Product Semantics to 
Design Research, IFIP Working Group 8.2 Conference : Shaping the Future 
of ICT Research: Methods and Approaches, University of South Florida, 
Tampa Goles T, Hirschheim R (2000) The paradigm is dead, the paradigm is 
dead … long live the paradigm: the legacy of Burell and Morgan, Omega, 
Vol 28, p 249-268 Goldkuhl G (2011) The research practice of practice 
research: theorizing and situational inquiry, Systems, Signs & Actions, 
Vol 5 (1), p 7-29 Goldkuhl G (2012) Pragmatism vs. interpretivism in 
qualitative information systems research, European Journal of 
Information Systems, Vol 21 (2), p 135-146 Gregor S (2008) Building 
theory in a practical science, in Hart D, Gregor S (Eds, 2008) 
Information Systems Foundations: The role of design science, ANU E 
Press, Canberra Gregor S, Jones D (2007) The Anatomy of a Design Theory, 
Journal of AIS, Vol 8 (5), p 312-335 Hevner A R, March S T, Park J, Ram 
S (2004) Design science in information systems research, MIS Quarterly, 
Vol 28 (1), p 75-115 Hirschheim R, Klein H, Lyytinen K (1996) Exploring 
the intellectual structures of information systems development: a social 
action theoretic analysis, Accounting, Management & Information 
Technology, Vol 6 (1/2), pp. 1-64 Leonardi P (2011) When flexible 
routines meet flexible technologies: affordance, constraint, and the 
imbrication of human and material agencies, MIS Quarterly, Vol 35 (1), 
pp. 147-167 Markus L, Silver M (2008) A foundation for the study of IT 
effects: A new look at DeSanctis and Poole’s concepts of structural 
features and spirit, Journal of the AIS, Vol. 9 (10/11), pp 609-632 
Mathiassen L (2002) Collaborative practice research, Information 
Technology & People, Vol 15 (4), p 321-345 Mathiassen L, Nielsen P A 
(2008) Engaged Scholarship in IS Research. The Scandinavian Case, 
Scandinavian Journal of Information Systems, Vol 20 (2), p 3–20 Nardi B 
A (Ed, 1996) Context and consciousness. Activity theory and 
human-computer interaction, MIT Press, Cambridge Orlikowski W J (1992) 
The Duality of Technology: Rethinking the Concept of Technology in 
Organizations, Organization Science, Vol 3 (3), p 398-429 Orlikowski W J 
(2008) Sociomaterial Practices: Exploring Technology at Work, 
Organization Studies, Vol 28 (9), p 1435–1448 Orlikowski W J, Iacono C S 
(2001) Desperately seeking the “IT” in IT research – a call to 
theorizing the IT artifact, Information Systems Research, Vol 12 (2), pp 
121-134 Sein M, Henfridsson O, Purao S, Rossi M, Lindgren R (2011) 
Action design research, MIS Quarterly, Vol 35 (1), p 37-56 Serafeimidis 
V, Smithson S (2003) Information systems evaluation as an organizational 
institution – experience from a case study, Information Systems Journal, 
Vol 13, pp 251–274 Van de Ven A (2007) Engaged scholarship: A guide for 
organizational and social research, Oxford University Press, Oxford Ward 
J, Taylor P, Bond P (1996) Evaluation and realisation of IS/IT benefits: 
an empirical study of current practice, European Journal of Information 
Systems, Vol 4, pp 214-225 Wieringa R (2010) Relevance and problem 
choice in design science, in Winter R, Zhao J L, Aier S (Eds. 2010) 
Proceedings DESRIST 2010, LNCS 6105, Springer, Berlin Wieringa R, Morali 
A (2012) Technical action research as a validation method in information 
systems design science, Proceedings DESRIST 2012, LNCS 7286, Springer, 
Berlin Winograd T, Flores F (1986) Understanding computers and 
cognition: A new foundation for design, Ablex, Norwood 
_______________________________________________





--
Mailing-Liste: wi@lists.kit.edu
Administrator: wi-request@lists.kit.edu
Konfiguration: https://www.lists.kit.edu/wws/info/wi