The politics of socio-technical intervention: An interactionist view

Technology Analysis and Strategic Management

Volumn 12, Issue 1, 2000, Pages 103-118

  Garrety, Karin ^a   Badham, Richard ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WOLLONGONG   (Australia)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

INDUSTRIAL POLICY; POLITICAL PROCESS; TECHNOLOGICAL DEVELOPMENT;

AUSTRALIA;

EID: 0034071524     PISSN: 09537325     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/095373200107265     Document Type: Article

References (45)

1. G. Morgan, Images of Organization (Newbury Park, Sage, 1986), pp. 44-48.
2. R. Badham, 'Human Factors, Politics, and Power', in: W. Kanvowski (Ed.), International Encyclopedia of Ergonomics and Human Factors (New York, Wiley, forthcoming); S. Parker & T. Wall, Job and ll'ork Design. Organizing ]\'ork to Promote ]\'ell-Being and Effectiveness (London, Sage, 1998).
3. A few examples are B. Ives & M. H. Oison, 'User Involvement and MIS Success: A Review of Research', Management Science, 30, 1984, pp. 586-603;
4. M. Lawrence & G. Low, 'Exploring Individual User Satisfaction within User-Led Development', MIS Quarterly, 17, 1993, pp. 195-208;
5. H. Barki & J. Hartwick, 'Measuring User Participation, User Involvement, and User Attitude', MIS Quarterly, 18, 1994, pp. 59-82
6. andj. E. Hunton &J. D. Beeler, 'Effects of User Participation in Systems Development: A Longitudinal Field Experiment', MIS Quarterly, 21, 1997, pp. 359-388.
7. For examples, sec J. C. Taylor, 'Designing an Organization and an Information System for "Central Stores": A Study in Participative Socio-Technical Analysis and Design', Systems, Objectives, Solutions, 2, 1982, pp. 67-76
8. and E. M. Trauth & E. Cole, 'The Organizational Interface: A Method for Supporting End Users of Packaged Software', MIS Quarlerlj, 1C, 1992, pp. 35-53.
9. S. R. Barley, 'The Alignment of Technolog)' and Structure through Roles and Networks', Administrative Science Quarterly, 35, 1990, pp. 61-103.
10. While it is impossible to draw a clear line between 'participant' and 'non-participant' observation, we can say that Karin Garrety, as a sociologist standing a little outside the action, had a less participatory role than Richard Badham, who played a major role in organizing and carrying out the intervention.
11. H. Blumer, Symbolic Inlcraclionism. Perspective and Method (Berkeley, University of California Press, 1969), p. 2.
12. W. E. Bijker, T. P. Hughes&T. J. Pinch, The Social Construction of'Technological Systems: J\'ew Directions in the Sociology and History of Technology (Cambridge, MIT Press, 1987).
13. Symbolic interactionists trace the origins of their approach to pragmatist philosophers such as William James and John Dewcy, who were active in the US late in the 19th century. For histories and summaries of the approach see D. N. Shalin, 'Pragmatism and Social Interactionism', American Sociological Review, 51, 1986, pp. 9-29;
14. S. Stryker, 'The Vitalization of Symbolic Interactionism', Social Psychology Quarterly, 50, 1987, pp. 83-94
15. and N. K. Denzin, Symbolic Interactionism and Cultural Studies. The Politics of Interpretation (Oxford, Blackwell, 1992).
16. Bijker et ai, op. cit., Ref. 8, p. 30.
17. Bijker et al, ibid., pp. 9, 50.
18. A. L. Strauss, Continuai Permutations of Action (New York, Aldine de Gruyter, 1993), p. 223.
19. T. Shibutani, 'Reference Groups as Perspectives', American Journal of Sociology, 60, 1955, p. 566.
20. For more literature on social worlds see A. Strauss, 'A Social World Perspective', Studies in Symbolic
21. Interaction, 1, 1978, pp. 119-128
22. and A. E. Clarke, 'Social Worlds/Arenas Theory as Organizational Theory' in: D. Maincs (Ed.), Social Organization and Social Piocess. Essays in Honor ofAnselm Strauss (New York, Aldine de Gruyter, 1991), pp. 119-158.
23. M. Gallon, 'Some Elements of a Sociology of Translation: Domestication of the Scallops and the Fishermen of St Bricuc Bay', in: J. I~iw (Ed.), Power, Action and Belief. A j\ew Sociology of Knowledge? (London, Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1986), pp. 196-233;
24. B. Latour, Science in Action (Cambridge, Harvard University Press, 1987).
25. J. H. Fujimura, 'Grafting Science: Standardized Packages, Boundary Objects, and "Translation"', in: A. Pickering (Ed.), Science as Practice and Culture (Chicago, Chicago University Press, 1992), pp. 168-211;
26. K. Garrety, 'Actor Networks, Social Worlds and Controversy: The Case of Cholesterol, Dietary Fat and Heart Disease', Social Studies of Science, 27, 1997, pp. 727-773;
27. V. Singleton & M. Michael, 'Actor-Networks and Ambivalence: General Practitioners in the UK Cervical Screening Programme', Social Studies of Science, 23, 1993, pp. 227-264.
28. H. Braverman, Labor andMonopoly Capital: The Degradation of\\'orkin the Twentieth Century (New York, Monthly Review Press, 1974).
29. P. Dawson, Organisational Change: A Processual Approach (London, Chapman, 1994);
30. R.J. Thomas, What Machines Can't Do. Politics and Technology in the Industrial Enterprise (Berkeley, University of California Press, 1994);
31. A. M. Pettigrew, 'What is Processual Analysis?', Scandinavian Journal of Management, {Special Issue: Reflections on Conducting Processual Research on Management and Organizations), 13, 1997, pp. 337-348.
32. The use of the term trajectory in symbolic interactionism is quite different to its use in the literature on the economics of technology. In the latter, it is used to describe patterns of technological innovation that appear to have a certain quality of inevitability. See R. R. Nelson & S. G. Winter, 'In Search of a Useful Theory of Innovation', Research Policy, 6, 1977, pp. 36-76
33. and G. Dosi, 'Technological Paradigms and Technological Trajectories: A Suggested Interpretation of the Determinants of Technical Change', Research Policy, II, 1982, pp. 147-162.
34. Strauss, oA cit., Réf. 12, pp. 53-54.
35. Strauss, ibid., p. 55.
36. Blumcr, op. cit., Ref. 7, p. 10.
37. S. L. Star & J. R. Griesemer, 'Institutional Ecology, "Translations" and Boundary Objects: Amateurs and Professionals in Berkeley's Museum of Vertebrate Zoology; 1907-39', Social Studies of Science, 19, 1989, p. 393, emphasis in original.
38. L. Bannon & S. Bodkcr, 'Constructing Common Information Spaces', in: J. Hughes, T. Rodden, W. Prinz & K. Schmidt (Eds), ECSCl\"97: Proceedings of the 5th European CSCW Conference (Dordrecht, Kluwer, 1998). http://wu-w.uI.ie/~idc/library/papersreports/LiamBannon/ECSCW.htm, downloaded 16 December 1998.
39. F. Emery, The Emergence of a Xeiv Paradigm of 11 ork (Canberra, Centre for Continuing Education, 1978).
40. R. Badham, G. Grote, C. Kirsch, T. Wäfler & K. Garrety, 'Social Science in Action: Sociotechnical Tools and the Art of Collaborative Design', Managing Innovation in Work, working paper.
41. James C. Taylor introduced some basic socio-tcchnical principles at the first workshop. At the second workshop, Pelle Ehn introduced some envisionment exercises designed to explore the more visionary aspects of possible future AMS technologies. KOMPASS, however, provided the major focus for introducing the principles of humanistic job design. In interviews after the workshops, the technology developers and the men at the test factory generally said that they found KOMPASS more useful than cnvisionmcnt.
42. For more details, see G. Grotc, S. Weik, T. Wäfler & M. Zölch, 'Criteria for the Complementary Allocation of Functions in Automated Work Systems and Their Use in Simultaneous Engineering Projects', International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 16, 1995, pp. 376-382
43. and T. Wäfler & M. T. Older, 'Comparison of Two Approaches Supporting Decisions on Function Allocation', in: F. Avallone, J. Arnold and K. d. Witte (Eds), Feelings Work in Europe. Quaderni di psicohgia del lai-aro, no. 5 (Milano, Guerini, 1997), pp. 234-242.
44. Modified from Table 1 in Grote et ai, ibid.
45. B. Gustavsen, 'Development and the Social Sciences: An Uneasy Relationship', in: S. Toulmin & B. Gustavsen (Eds), Beyond Theory. Changing Organizations Through Participation (Amsterdam, John Benjamins, 1996), pp. 11, 13.