Abstract
The problem of balancing coherence and flexibility in collaborative information system design is approached here with two pairs of concepts. Boundary objects can support communication for perspective taking between communities of practice. Conscripting devices can support communication for perspective making within a community of practice. These theoretical lenses are used to study the uses of the technical specification in paper machine projects. Our study showed that as a boundary object it provided enough flexibility to allow negotiations, and sufficient local structure, for carrying out work in both communities of practice, the customer and the manufacturer. As a conscription device in the relatively virtual manufacturer project team, however, it proved to be problematic, due to the unidirectional nature of its construction, its diminishing importance in the web of conscripting objects, and its inconvenience as a means for learning. In search for balancing coherence and flexibility, the issues identified seemed to relate to acknowledging the dialectics of perspective making and perspective taking with boundary objects and conscription devices, to the openness and modifiability of these objects, and to the bounded transparency of these processes.
The original version of this chapter was revised: The copyright line was incorrect. This has been corrected. The Erratum to this chapter is available at DOI: 10.1007/978-0-387-35566-5_20
Chapter PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Keywords
References
Altheide, D. L., and Johnson, J. M. “Criteria for Assessing Interpretive Validity in Qualitative Research,” in Handbook of Qualitative Research, N. K. Denzin and Y. S. Lincoln (ed.). London: Sage, 1994, pp. 485–499.
Boland, R. J., Jr., and Tenkasi, R. V. “Perspective Making and Perspective Taking in Communities of Knowing,” Organization Science (6: 4 ), 1995, pp. 350–372.
Bowers, J. M. “The Janus Faces of Design: Some Critical Questions for CSCW,” in Studies in Computer Supported Cooperative Work: Theory, Practice and Design, J. M. Bowers and S. D. Benford (eds.). Amsterdam: North-Holland, 1991, pp. 333–350.
Brown, J. S., and Duguid, P. “Organizing Knowledge,” California Management Review (40:3), 1998, pp. 90–111.
Callon, M. “Some Elements of a Sociology of Translation: Domestication of the Scallops and the Fishermen of St. Brieuc Bay,” in Power, Action and Belief, J. Law (ed.). London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1986, pp. 196–233.
Henderson, K. “Flexible Sketches and Inflexible Data Bases: Visual Communication, Conscription Devices, and Boundary Objects in Design Engineering,” Science, Technology and Human Values (16), 1991, pp. 448–473.
Henderson, K. On Line and on Paper: Visual Representations, Visual Culture and Computer Graphics in Design Engineering. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1998a.
Henderson, K. “The Role of Material Objects in the Design Process: A Comparison of Two Design Cultures and How They Contend with Automation,” Science, Technology, and Human Values (23:2), 1998b, pp. 139–174.
Karsten, H.; Lyytinen, K.; Heilala, V.; and Tynys, J. “The Impact of User Support in Successful Groupware Implementation: Case Tasman to Support Paper Machinery Delivery,” a paper delivered at the ECIS’97, The Fifth European Conference on Information System, Cork, Ireland June 19–21, 1997.
Lave, J. “Situated Learning in Communities of Practice,” in Perspectives on Socially Shared Cognition, L. R. Resnick, J. M. Levine, and S. D. Teasley (eds.). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association, 1991, pp. 63–82.
Lave, J., and Wenger, E. Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1991.
Mambrey, P., and Robinson, M. “Understanding the Role of Documents in a Hierarchical Flow of Work,” in GROUP’97: InternationalACMSIGGROUP Conference on Supporting Group Work: The Integration Challenge, S. C. Hayne and W. Printz (eds.). Phoenix, AZ: ACM, 1997, pp. 119–127.
Mathiassen, L., and Stage, J. “The Principle of Limited Reduction in Software Design,” Information Technology and People (6:2/3), 1992, pp. 171–186.
Nandhakumar, J., and Jones, M. R. “Too close for Comfort? Distance and Engagement in Interpretive Information Systems Research,” Information Systems Journal (7),1997, pp. 109–131.
Ngwenyama, O. “Groupware, Social action and Emergent Organizations: On the Process Dynamics of Computer Mediated Distributed Work,” Accounting, Management and Information Technology (8:4), 1998, pp. 123–143.
Robinson, M. “Computer Supported Cooperative Work: Cases and Concepts,” in Readings in Groupware and Computer Supported Cooperative Work, R. Baecker (ed.). Palo Alto, CA: Morgan Kaufman, 1991.
Star, S. L. “The Structure of Ill-structured Solutions: Boundary Objects and Heterogeneous Distributed Problem Solving,” in Distributed Artificial Intelligence, Volume 2, M. Huhns and L. Gasser (eds.). London: Pitman, 1989, pp. 37–54.
Star, S. L. “Cooperation Without Consensus in Scientific Problem Solving: Dynamics of Closure in Open Systems,” in CSCW: Cooperation or Conflict, S. M. Easterbrook (ed.). London: Springer Verlag, 1993, pp. 93–106.
Star, S. L., and Griesemer, R. J. “Institutional Ecology, `Translations’, and Boundary Objects: Amateurs and Professionals in Berkeley’s Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, 1907–39,” Social Studies of Science (19), 1989, pp. 384–420.
Taylor, S. J., and Bogdan, R. Introduction to Qualitative Research Methods: A guidebook and Resource, 3`d ed. New York: Wiley, 1998.
Wastell, D. G. “The Social Dynamics of System Development: Conflict, Change and Organizational Politics,” in CSCW: Cooperation or Conflict, S. Easterbrook (ed.). London: Springer-Verlag, 1993, pp. 69–92.
Yin, R. Case Study Research: Design and Methods. Newbury Park, CA: Sage, 1989.
Zuboff, S. In the Age of the Smart Machine. New York: Basic Books, 1988.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1999 IFIP International Federation for Information Processing
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Karsten, H., Lyytinen, K., Hurskainen, M., Koskelainen, T. (1999). Balancing Flexibility and Coherence: Information Exchange in a Paper Machinery Project. In: Ngwenyama, O., Introna, L.D., Myers, M.D., DeGross, J.I. (eds) New Information Technologies in Organizational Processes. IFIP — The International Federation for Information Processing, vol 20. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-35566-5_15
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-35566-5_15
Publisher Name: Springer, Boston, MA
Print ISBN: 978-1-4757-5994-5
Online ISBN: 978-0-387-35566-5
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive