| 1. |
- Karlsson, Fredrik, et al.
(författare)
-
Multi-grounded action research in method engineering : the MMC case
- 2007
-
Ingår i: Situational method engineering. - Berlin : Springer. - 9780387739465 ; , s. 19-32
-
Konferensbidrag (refereegranskat)abstract
- There appears to be two schools of information systems development methods research that largely pursue their own agendas without many cross-references. On the one hand there is the method engineering research and on the other hand there is the method-in-action research. There seems to be much to be gained from integrating these two schools, developing knowledge that both has the formality (rigor) and reflects its enactment in practice. To achieve this, the research approach adopted has to embrace this duality. In this paper we explore how Multi-Grounded Action Research (MGAR) can contribute to achieving this aim. MGAR has been used in the development of a Method for Method Configuration, a research product that integrates the strengths of both schools.
|
|
| 2. |
- Ågerfalk, Pär, et al.
(författare)
-
Modularization constructs in method engineering : towards common ground?
- 2007
-
Ingår i: Situational method engineering. - Berlin : Springer. - 9780387739465 ; , s. 359-368
-
Konferensbidrag (refereegranskat)abstract
- Although the Method Engineering (ME) research community has reached considerable maturity, it has not yet been able to agree on the granularity and definition of the configurable parts of methods. This state of affairs is causing unnecessary confusion, especially with an ever increasing number of people contributing to ME research. There are several competing notions around, most significantly ‘method fragments’ and ‘method chunks’, but also ‘method components’ and ‘process components’ are used in some quarters and have also been widely published. Sometimes these terms are used interchangeably, but there appears to be important semantic and pragmatic differences. If the differences are unimportant, we should be able to come to an agreement on what construct to promote. Alternatively, the different constructs may serve different purposes and there is a need for them to coexist. If this is the case, it should be possible to pinpoint exactly how they are related and which are useful in what contexts. This panel is a step towards finding common ground in this area, which arguably is at the very core of ME.
|
|
