A genealogical study of boundary-spanning IS design

European Journal of Information Systems

Volumn 15, Issue 1, 2006, Pages 26-41

  Gasson, Susan ^a,b,c,d,e  

^a Drexel University   (United States)

^b DREXEL UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c ACM   (United States)

^d Advisory Board   (United States)

^e IFIP Working Group 82 (Organizational Aspects of IS)   (United States)

Author keywords

Actor network theory; Boundary objects; Information system design; Situated design

Indexed keywords

EID: 33644637286     PISSN: 0960085X     EISSN: 14769344     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1057/palgrave.ejis.3000594     Document Type: Review

References (55)

1. AGERFALK PJ and ERIKSSON O (2004) Action-oriented conceptual modelling. European Journal of Information Systems 13(1), 80-92.
2. AKRICH M (1992) The De-Scription of technical objects. In Shaping Technology/Building Society: Studies In Sociotechnical Change (Bijker WE and Law J, Eds), pp 205-224, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
3. BALL LJ and ORMEROD TC (1995) Structured and opportunistic processing in design: a critical discussion, International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction 43(1), 131-151.
4. BARLEY S (1990) Images of imaging: notes on doing longitudinal field work. Organization Science 1(3), 220-247.
5. BECK K (1999) extreme Programming Explained: Embrace Change. Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA.
6. BERGMAN M, KING J and LYYTINEN K (2002a) Large scale requirements analysis as heterogeneous engineering, Scandinavian Journal of Information Systems 14, 37-55.
7. BERGMAN M, KING J and LYYTINEN K (2002b) Large scale requirements analysis revisited: the need for understanding the political ecology of requirements engineering. Requirements Engineering Journal 7, 152-171.
8. BOLAND R and DAY WF (1989) The experience of systems design: a hermeneutic of organisational action. Scandinavian Journal of Management 52(2), 87-104.
9. BOWKER GC and STAR SL (1999) Sorting Things Out: Classification and Its Consequences. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
10. CALLON M (1986a) The sociology of an actor-network: the case of the electric vehicle. In Mapping the Dynamics of Science and Technology: Sociology of Science in the Real World (Callon M, Law J and Rip A, Eds), pp 19-34, Macmillan Press, London.
11. CALLON M (1986b) Some elements of a sociology of translation: domestication of the scallops and the fishermen of St Brieuc Bay. In Power, Action, and Belief: a New Sociology of Knowledge? Socioogical Review Monograph 32 (Law J, Ed), pp 196-233, Routledge and Kegan Paul, London.
12. CALLON M (1991) Techno-economic networks and irreversibility. In A Sociology of Monsters. Essays on Power Technology and Domination (Law J, Ed), Routledge, London, U.K.
13. CARLILE PR (2002) A pragmatic view of knowledge and boundaries: boundary objects in new product development. Organization Science 13, 442-455.
14. CARLILE PR (2004) Transferring, translating, and transforming: an integrative framework for managing knowledge across boundaries. Organization Science 15, 555-568.
15. CHECKLAND P (1994) Systems theory and management thinking. American Behavioral Scientist 38(1), 75-91.
16. CHECKLAND P and HOLWELL S (1998) Information, Systems and Information Systems: Making Sense of the Field. John Wiley & Sons, Chichester, U.K.
17. DAVIDSON EJ (2002) Technology frames and framing: a socio-cognitive investigation of requirements determination. MIS Quarterly 26(4), 329-358.
18. DORST CH and CROSS NG (2001) Creativity in the design process: co-evolution of problem-solution. Design Studies 22(5), 425-437.
19. ETZIONI A (1961) A Comparative Analysis of Complex Organizations. Free Press, New York, NY.
20. FITZGERALD B, RUSSO NL and STOLTERMAN E (2002) Information Systems Development: Methods-In-Action. McGraw Hill, Maidenhead, UK.
21. FLOYD C (1984) A systematic look at prototyping. In Approaches To Prototyping (Budde R, Kuhlenkamp K, Mathiassen L and Zullighoven H, Eds),Springer-Verlag Books, Berlin.
22. FOWLER M (2005) The new methodology. Software Development Magazine, Dec. 2000. This version last updated 13 Dec. 2005. Available online at http://www.martinfowler.com.
23. GREENBAUM J and KYNG M (1991) Introduction: situated design. In Design At Work: Cooperative Design of Computer Systems (Greenbaum J and Kyng M, Eds),Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, NJ.
24. GUINDON R (1990) Designing the design process: exploiting opportunistic thoughts. Human-Computer Interaction 5, 305-344.
25. HEVNER AR, MARCH ST, PARK J and RAM S (2004) Design science in information systems research. MIS Quarterly 28(1), 75-105.
26. HOOKER JN (2004) Is design theory possible? JITTA: Journal of Information Technology Theory and Application 6(2), 73-82.
27. HOWCROFT D and WILSON M (2003) Participation: 'Bounded freedom' or hidden constraints on user involvement. New Technology, Work, and Employment 18(1), 2-19.
28. HUCHES TP (1987) The evolution of large technical systems. In The Social Construction of Technological Systems (Bijker T, Hughes T and Pinch T, Eds), pp 51-82, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
29. JACOBSON I, BOOCH G and RUMBAUGH J (1999) The United Software Development Process (2nd edn). Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA.
30. KLING R and SCACCHI W (1982) The web of computing: computer technology as social organization. In Advances In Computers (Yovits MC, Ed.), pp 1-90, Academic Press, New York.
31. KNORR CETINA KD (1999) Epistemic Cultures: How the Sciences Make Knowledge. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.
32. LATOUR B (1987) Science in Action, Harvard University Press, Cambridge MA.
33. LATOUR B (1991) Technology is society made durable. In A Sociology of Monsters. Essays on Power Technology and Domination (Law J, Ed), Routledge, London, UK.
34. LATOUR B and WOOLGAR S (1979) Laboratory Life, The Social Construction of Scientific Facts. Sage Publications, Beverley Hills, CA.
35. LAVE J and WENGER E (1991) Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
36. LAW J and CALLON M (1992) The life and death of an aircraft: a network analysis of technical change. In Shaping Technology/Building Society: Studies In Sociotechnical Change (Bijker WE and Law J, Eds), MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
37. LEA M, O'SHEA T and FUNG P (1995) Constructing the networked organisation: content and context in the development of electronic communications. Organization Science 6(4), 462-478.
38. LINCOLN YS and GUBA EG (1985) Naturalistic Inquiry. Sage Publications, Beverly Hills, CA.
39. LYNCH T and GREGOR S (2004) User participation in decision support systems development: influencing system outcomes. European Journal of Information Systems 13(4), 286-301.
40. MACREDIE RD and SANDOM C (1999) IT-enabled change: evaluating an improvisational perspective. European Journal of Information Systems 8(4), 247-259.
41. MARKUS ML and BJORN-ANDERSEN N (1987) Power over users: its exercise by system professionals. Communications of the ACM 30(6), 498-504.
42. MARKUS ML, MAJCHRZAK A and GASSER L (2002) A design theory for systems that support emergent knowledge processes. MIS Quarterly 26(3), 179-212.
43. NEWMAN M and ROBEY D (1992) A social process model of user-analyst relationships. MIS Quarterly 16(2), 249-266.
44. ORLIKOWSKI WJ (1996) Improvising organizational transformation over time: a situated change perspective. Information Systems Research 7(1), 63-92.
45. PETTIGREW AM (1990) Longitudinal field research on change: theory and practice. Organizational Science 1(3), 267-292.
46. RITTEL HWJ (1972) Second generation design methods. Reprinted in Cross N (Ed), Developments in Design Methodology 1984, pp 317-327,
47. John Wiley & Sons, Chichester. Interview in: Design Methods Group 5th Anniversary Report, DMG Occasional Paper 1, pp. 5-10.
48. SCHWABER K (2004) Agile Project Management with Scrum. Microsoft Press, Redmond, WA.
49. SIMON HA (1981) Sciences of The Artificial (2nd edn). MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
50. SMIRCICH L and MORGAN G (1982) Leadership: the management of meaning, Journal of Applied Behavioural Science 18(3), 257-273.
51. STAR SL (1989) The structure of ill-structured solutions: boundary objects and heterogeneous distributed problem solving. In Distributed Artificial Intelligence, Vol. II (Gasser L and Huhns MN, Eds), pp 37-54, Morgan Kaufmann Publishers Inc., San Mateo, CA.
52. STAR SL (1992) The trojan door: organizations work and the open black box. Systems Practice 5(4), 395-410.
53. SUCHMAN L (1987) Plans and Situated Action. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, MA.
54. VAN MAANEN J (1988) Tales of the Field, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL.
55. WALLS JG, WIDMEYER GR and EL SAWY OA (2004) Assessing information system design theory in perspective: how useful was our 1992 initial rendition? JITTA: Journal of Information Technology Theory and Application 6(2), 43-58.