DSR Cycles
What are the three cycles of DSR and what does “rigor” mean?
Edited by Heidi Rinn and Xingyue Yang
The Three Cycles of the Design Science Research Paradigm
Design Science Research (DSR) is an accepted research paradigm in Information Systems that is continuously gaining importance (Gregor & Hevner, 2013). The approach is solution-oriented and connects theoretical knowledge with practical relevance. No new methods are invented; instead, it builds upon established methods and scientific foundations. Frequently mentioned in this context are systematic literature analyses and empirical methods like interviews and experiments. The rigor of the methods refers not only to the creation of the artifact but also to its evaluation (Hevner et al., 2004). The goal of applying Design Science Research is to create innovations. The framework for DSR proposed by Hevner et al. (2004) was supplemented in Hevner (2007) with three cycles that must be part of every DSR project. They influence each other and can come into play in different phases. Representing them as cycles underscores the iterative approach and is reminiscent of practical methodologies like the SCRUM framework or the Lean Startup approach.
The Relevance Cycle, with which a DSR project starts, ensures that the environment of the application domain, as well as the opportunities and risks, are sufficiently and continuously considered. In the Rigor Cycle, existing knowledge and methods (e.g., theories, expert knowledge, or meta-artifacts) are incorporated into the design process. Their application leads to innovations with better chances of success in the market or among the target audience. Both mentioned cycles influence the central Design Cycle, consisting of development and evaluation. Conversely, the Design Cycle also influences the Relevance and Rigor Cycles, for example, through new insights from the evaluation, which in turn provide new findings for research and practice. All three cycles do not run sequentially but parallel and continuously. In research planning and implementation, it is important to strike a balance between rigor and relevance, because an overweight of rigor leads to reduced relevance (Hevner et al., 2004). That is, artifacts are scientifically evaluated and iteratively further developed until the evaluation yields a satisfactory result (Hevner, 2007).
Wambsganss et al. (2020) is an application example for DSR that clearly and comprehensibly documents the concrete work steps within the three cycles, aiming at the design and evaluation of an educational agent.
The following table lists the steps of two conducted development cycles, as well as the assignment to the corresponding cycle in the DSR framework.
| Step No. | Work Step | Cycle Assignment |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Problem formulation | Relevance Cycle |
| 2 | Deriving requirements from the scientific literature | Rigor Cycle |
| 3 | Deriving requirements from user interviews | Relevance Cycle |
| 4 | Deriving design principles for the artifact | Design Cycle |
| 5 | Evaluation of the prototype | Design Cycle |
| 6 | Revision of design knowledge and adjustments to the artifact | Design Cycle |
| 7 | Evaluation of the second version | Relevance Cycle |
| 8 | Documentation of the acquired design knowledge | Rigor Cycle |
Design Science Research as a research paradigm ensures practical relevance on the one hand and scientific rigor on the other. Balancing relevance and rigor may pose a challenge, especially for inexperienced researchers. Hevner (2007) calls for pragmatism and emphasizes the synergy between relevance and rigor that makes good DSR.