DIFERENCIACIÓN POBLACIONAL.

The selection of which research approach to use in any research enquiry depends on what the research question is and from which philosophical perspective one chooses to study that question (Shepard et al, 1993; Remenyi et al., 1998). Having positioned this study in ‘Phenomenological philosophical paradigm’ the researcher

investigated the nature of research question in detail to identify the most appropriate research approach for this investigation. Simon (1996) stated that a natural science is a body of knowledge about some class of things - objects or phenomenon - in the world (nature or society) that describes and explains how they behave and interact with each other. A science of the artificial (also known as design science), on the other hand, is a body of knowledge about artificial (man- made) objects and phenomena designed to meet certain desired goals. In order to enable the developmental aspect of this research, a design science (van Aken, 2004; 2005), approach is used as the overall research approach for this investigation.

Koskela (2008 cited in Simon 1969) stated;

“a science of the artificial is closely akin to a science of engineering; it is concerned with how things ought to be, in order to attain goals and to function. The core of that science would be provided by a science of design, a body of intellectually tough, analytic, partially formalizable, partially empirical, teachable doctrine about the design process” (Koskela, 2008, p 54).

He further noted that Aristotle made a similar, sophisticated call for a science of production a long time before Simon brought his work in 1969. Drawing heavily

from Kuhn (1996; first published in 1962) and Lakatos (1978), Vaishnavi and Kuechler (2004) state that research can be very generally defined as an activity that contributes to the understanding of a phenomenon, and in the case of design research, all or part of the phenomenon may be created as opposed to naturally occurring. Järvinen (2004) explained that

“if the research question contains any of the following words, one might be doing design science research: design, build, change, improve, develop, enhance, maintain, extend, correct, adjust, introduce. However, to be different from ordinary designing, building, changing etc., the research task need to address important and unique problems, or solve problems in a more effective way, and provide contributions to the knowledge”

(Koskela, 2008, p 58 cited in Hevner et al, 2004).

Moreover, Vaishnavi and Kuechler (2004) quoting March and Smith (1995) state that constructs, models, methods and instantiations are general outputs of design science research. From the work of Rossi and Sein (2003) and Purao (2002), Vaishnavi and Kuechler (2004) also add better theories (or theory building), as another outcome of design research. The table below summarises the outputs that can be obtained from a design science research effort.

Table 4-2: The outputs of design research

Output Description

Constructs The conceptual vocabulary of a domain

Models A set of propositions or statements expressing relationships between constructs

Methods A set of steps used to perform a task – how – to knowledge

Instantiations The operationalisation of constructs, models and methods

Better theories

Artefact construction as analogous to experimental natural science

Source: (Vaishnavi and Kuechler, 2004)

With reference to Lukka (2003) design science is a research procedure for producing innovative constructions intended to solve problems faced in the real world, and, thereby make a contribution to the theory of the discipline in which it is applied. From a knowledge creation perspective, design science research is capable of developing scientific knowledge to support the design of interventions or artefacts. Design science is not concerned with action itself, but with knowledge to be used in designing solutions, to be followed by design-based action (van Aken, 2004). “Constructive research” is another term used to identify design science. The term “constructive” emphasises the developmental nature of

research, as opposed to descriptive and/or explanatory research. Preference for design science research stems firstly from the problem-solving nature of the intended research, and secondly due to the prescriptive nature of the outcome of the research.

Lukka (2003) identified the following attributes of Design Science approach:

 Focuses on real-world problems felt relevant to be solved in practice;  Produces an innovative construction meant to solve the initial real-world

problem;

 Includes an attempt for implementing the developed construction and

thereby a test for its practical applicability;

 Implies a very close involvement and co-operation between the researcher

and practitioners in a team-like manner, in which experiential learning is expected to take place;

 Is explicitly linked to prior theoretical knowledge, and

 Pays particular attention to reflecting the empirical findings back to theory.

4.4.1 Design science research cycle

Design Science research process includes a number of steps. The exact number and the terminology vary. Nevertheless, it can be safely argued that problem awareness, analysis, design of the solution, and evaluation of the solution are core aspects of a design science research process. Following model explains the key stages of design science research cycle.

Figure 4-3: Design science research cycle Source: (Hevner, 2007)

The key reasons for adopting design science approach within this investigation are;

 Design Science Research produces a critical part of the evidence to be

used in the field of management and could be easily adopted in the area of organisational learning

 This evidence is not to be used as a set of instructions or fixed protocols,

but as input to the creative and innovative process of designing structures, processes or interventions (van Aken, 2004).

 Research-informed designing is the core activity in a complex process of

changing the actual into the preferred (van Aken, 2004): Organisational learning involves acting, rather than (only) decision-making, on the basis of evidence.