For anyone embarking on a research journey, especially in the complex and evolving field of emerging technologies, a solid understanding of research design is paramount. This crucial topic was expertly covered during ENSURE-6G Event #4: Workshop on Research Methods and Open Science Skills Development – Day #1, in a session led by Prof. Mark de Reuver from Delft University of Technology, Netherlands.
Prof. de Reuver’s discussion provided invaluable insights into what constitutes scientific research, with a particular focus on design science research – a methodology highly relevant for engineering and technology-oriented fields.
What Makes Research Scientific?
The session began by addressing a fundamental question: What is scientific research? According to Prof. de Reuver, scientific research is [14:38]:
- Organized and Systematic: It follows a structured approach.
- Data-Driven: It relies on empirical evidence.
- Critical and Objective: It involves rigorous evaluation and minimizes bias.
- Problem-Specific: It aims to solve a particular problem rather than just general exploration.
A key distinction was also made between basic/fundamental research and applied research [15:05]. While applied research focuses on solving specific, real-world problems (often for a business client), fundamental research aims to solve a whole class of problems, contributing new knowledge to science. Prof. de Reuver emphasized that these are not mutually exclusive, and researchers should strive for work that is both applied and contributes to scientific knowledge [16:14].
Understanding Research Questions
A well-formulated research question is the cornerstone of any successful research project. Prof. de Reuver categorized research questions into different types [07:39]:
- Descriptive: “What is X?” or “In what classes can X be distinguished?” (e.g., “What is the business model of digital wallets?”)
- Exploratory/Explanatory: “Why does X happen?” or “How can X be explained?” (e.g., “What are the drivers for X?”)
- Design Questions: “How to construct an artifact?” or “How do I achieve a certain objective?” This type of question is particularly relevant for engineering and technology, where the goal is to create or improve something [08:25].
A critical piece of advice was to ensure a research question is aimed at creating knowledge and is typically articulated in one clear sentence [05:50]. Using conjunctions like “and” in a single research question might indicate that it’s attempting to cover too much and could potentially lead to two separate PhDs [06:41].
The Design Science Research Method
Prof. de Reuver delved into the design science research (DSR) cycle, a widely recognized method in fields like information systems, which typically involves the following steps [17:30]:
- Identifying a Problem: Clearly defining the problem that the research aims to address.
- Defining Objectives for a Solution: Setting clear goals for what the solution should achieve.
- Designing the Artifact: Creating the actual solution, which could be a technology, tool, product, service, or even a business model [08:32].
- Demonstrating the Artifact: Showing how the designed artifact works in practice.
- Evaluating it Against Objectives: Assessing whether the artifact meets the predefined objectives.
- Communicating the Research: Sharing the findings and contributions with the wider scientific community.
The discussion also touched upon positioning the scientific contribution of DSR, distinguishing between:
- Applying known solutions to known problems: Useful but with minimal knowledge contribution [23:14].
- Inventing new solutions for new problems: High risk, high gain, and a major knowledge contribution [23:28].
- Improving/Extending: Developing new solutions for known problems or extending known solutions to new problems (e.g., using smart contracts for data sovereignty in data spaces) [23:41].
PhD Research in a Project-Driven World
An engaging part of the session revolved around the practicalities of PhD research, especially in project-driven academic environments like ENSURE-6G. The consensus was that while there’s a desire for “pure” or “groundbreaking” research, the reality often involves aligning PhD topics with project objectives and KPIs (Key Performance Indicators) [35:12]. This often translates to a strategy of [36:54]:
- Low-risk development for the initial years to meet project deliverables and publication requirements.
- Allocating time for more novel, experimental research once these foundational requirements are met.
This pragmatic approach, while sometimes limiting pure exploration, ensures that research remains relevant, funded, and impactful, directly addressing the challenges and goals of projects like ENSURE-6G.
Key Takeaways for Junior Researchers
Prof. de Reuver concluded with valuable advice for junior researchers [42:51]:
- Continuously revisit and improve your research question.
- Reflect on the fundamental contribution your work makes.
- Consider the transferability of your solutions to other contexts or problems.
- Justify why existing solutions cannot address your specific problem, highlighting the novelty of your approach.
By iterating between problem areas and solution areas, researchers can effectively position their identity and make significant contributions to their fields.
Watch the full session here:
