Placeless Organizations: Collaborating for Transformation

Mind, Culture, and Activity

Volumn 14, Issue 1-2, 2007, Pages 5-22

  Nardi, Bonnie A ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^b Ringgold Standard Institution Informatics   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 61149299125     PISSN: 10749039     EISSN: 15327884     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/10749030701307663     Document Type: Article

References (44)

1. Andelman, S., Bowles, C., Willig, M., & Waide, R. (2004). Understanding environmental complexity through a distributed knowledge network. BioScience, 54, 240-246
2. Béguin, P., & Clot, Y. (2004). Situated action in the development of activity. Activités 1(2), 50-63. Retrieved May 23, 2006, from http://www.activites.org
3. Blumer, H. (1969). Symbolic interactionism. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Transition Press
4. Elliott, M. (2003, May). The virtual organizational culture of the Free Software Development Community. Proceedings of the Third Workshop on Open Source Software, Portland, OR
5. Elliott, M. (2005). Examining the success of computerization movements in the ubiquitous computing era: Free and open source software movements. Unpublished manuscript, University of California, Irvine
6. Emirbayer, M., & Mische, A. (1998). What is agency? American Journal of Sociology, 10, 962-1023
7. Engeström, Y. (1987). Learning by expanding: An activity-theoretical approach to developmental research. Helsinki, Finland: Orienta-Konsultit
8. Engeström, Y. (1990). Learning, working, and imagining: Twelve studies in activity theory. Helsinki, Finland: Orienta- Konsultit
9. Engeström, Y., Engeström, R., & Vähäaho, T. (1999). When the center doesn't hold: The importance of knotworking. In S. Chaiklin, M. Hedegaard, & U. Jensen (Eds.), Activity theory and social practice: Cultural-historical approaches(pp. 345-374). Aarhus, Denmark: Aarhus University Press
10. Engeström, Y. (2005, July). Development, movement and agency: Breaking away into mycorrhizae activities. Paper presented at the International Symposium on Artifacts and Collectives: Situated Action and Activity Theory (ARTCO), Lyon, France
11. Fichtner, B. (1984). Co-ordination, co-operation, and communication in the formation of theoretical concepts in instruction. In M. Hedegaard, P. Hakkarainen, & Y. Engeström (Eds.), Learning and teaching on a scientific basis (pp. 207-228). Aarhus, Denmark: Aarhus University
12. Foot, K. (2001). Pursuing an evolving object. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 9, 132-149
13. Gieryn, T. (2000). A space for place in sociology. Annual Review of Sociology, 26, 463-496
14. Gläser, J. (2004, December). Social movements as communities. Proceedings of the TASA 2004 Conference, Revisioning Institutions: Change in the 21st Century, La Trobe University, Beechworth Campus
15. Hedestig, U., & Kaptelinin, V. (2002, January). Re-contextualization of teaching and learning in videoconference-based environments. Proceedings of the 2002 Conference on Computer Support for Collaborative Learning. Foundations for a CSCL Community (pp. 179-188). Boulder, CO
16. Hillery, G. (1995). Definitions of community: Areas of agreement. Rural Sociology, 117, 111-123
17. Infrastructure for Biology at Regional to Continental Scales (IBRCS) Working Group. (2003). Rationale, blueprint, and expectations for the National Ecological Observatory Network (IBRCS White Paper). Washington, DC: IBRCS Working Group, American Institute of Biological Sciences. Retrieved May 23, 2006, from http://www.neoninc.org/documents
18. International Trade Canada. (2006). Retrieved May 23, 2006, from http://www.dfait-maeci.gc.ca/tna-nac/dalian-mint-en.asp
19. Jarvenpaa, S., & Leidner, D. (1999). Communication and trust in global virtual teams. Organization Science, 10, 791-815
20. Jensen, C., & Scacchi, W. (2005, May). Modeling recruitment and role migration processes in F/OSSD projects. Proceedings of the 6th International Workshop on Software Process Simulation and Modeling, St. Louis, MO
21. Kaptelinin, V., & Nardi, B. (2006). Acting with technology: Activity theory and interaction design. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press
22. Lee, G., & Cole, R. (2003). From a firm-based to a community-based model of knowledge creation: The case of the Linux kernel development. Organization Science, 14, 633-649
23. Leontiev, A. (1974). The problem of activity in psychology. Soviet Psychology, 13, 4-33
24. Lethbridge, N. (2001). An I-based taxonomy of virtual organisations and the implications for effective management. Informing Science, 4, 17-23
25. Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF). (2005). Retrieved May 23, 2006, from http://www.msf.org
26. Michener, W., Brunt, J., Helly, J., Kirchner, T., & Stafford, S. (1997). Nongeospatial metadata for the ecological sciences. Ecological Applications, 7, 330-342
27. Miettinen, R. (1998). Object construction and networks in research work. Social Studies of Science, 28, 423-463
28. Moon, J. Y., & Sproull, L. (2000). Essence of distributed work: The case of the Linux Kernel. First Monday 5(11). Retrieved May 23, 2006, from http://firstmonday.org/issues/issue5-11/moon/index.html
29. Nardi, B. (2005). Objects of desire: Power and passion in collaborative activity. Mind, Culture and Activity, 12, 37-51
30. Nardi, B., Whittaker, S., & Schwarz, H. (2002). NetWORKers and their activity in intensional networks. The Journal of Computer-Supported Cooperative Work, 11, 205-242
31. National Research Council. (2003). NEON: Addressing the Nation's environmental challenges. Washington, DC: National Academy Press
32. Olson, G., & Olson, J. (2000). Distance matters. Human-Computer Interaction, 15, 139-179
33. Raeithel, A. (1996, January). From coordinatedness to coordination via cooperation and co-construction. Paper presented at the Workshop on Work and Learning in Transition, San Diego, CA
34. Scacchi, W. (2004). Free/Open Source Software Development practices in the computer game community, IEEE Software, 21 (January/February 2004), 59-67
35. Schneider, S., & Foot, K. (2005). Web sphere analysis: An approach to studying online action. In C. Hine (Ed.), Virtual methods: Issues in social research on the Internet (pp. 157-170). Oxford, England: Berg
36. Senkowsky, S. (2003). NEON: Planning for a new frontier in biology. BioScience, 53, 456-461
37. Senkowsky, S. (2005). Planning of NEON moves ahead. BioScience, 55, 106-112
38. Stallman, R. (1999). The GNU operating system and the free software movement. In C. DiBona, S. Ockman, & M. Stone (Eds.), Open sources: Voices from the open source revolution (pp. 53-70). Sebastopol, CA: O'Reilly
39. Taylor, C. (1985). What is human agency? Philosophical Papers (Vol. I, pp. 15-44). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press
40. Thompson, M. (2004). Some proposals for strengthening organizational activity theory. Organization, 11, 579-602
41. Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press
42. Wildeman, L. (1998). Alliances and networks: The next generation. International Journal of Technology Management, 15, 96-108
43. World Trade Organization (WTO). (2005). Retrieved September 8, 2005, from http://www.wto.org/index.htm
44. Zager, D. (2002). Collaboration as an activity. Journal of Computer Supported Cooperative Work, 11, 181-204