Abstract
Contemporary issues such as increases in operational scope, connectivity, and dynamism in organizations have meant also a corresponding increase of complexity in producing everyday interaction. A simple task on the individual level can be approached as a part of complicated whole or even as adding to complexity on the organizational level. In this paper, we compare two strong metaphors for studying complex nonlinear interaction in heterogeneous networks: complexity theory and actor-network theory. Both examine sociotechnical phenomena as evolving in on going negotiations of participants within complex networks. Understanding complex networks can add to our understanding of relationships between social actors and technical artefacts, that is, of information systems in use. As an example, we introduce a study of work practices in intensive care. We argue that this work is carried out as multiple and interdependent interactions further generating complexity in a network of humans, technical artefacts, and other materials. In such socio-technical networks, work practices, new technology, and work processes are negotiated or made irreversible through the actions ofparticipants.
Chapter PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Akrich, M. “The De-Scription of Technical Objects,” in W. E. Bijker and J. Law (eds.), Shaping Technology/Building Society. Studies in Socio-technical Change, Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, 1992, pp. 205–224.
Alter, S. “A General, Yet Useful Theory of Information Systems,” Communications of AIS (1:13), 1999.
Anderson, P. “Complexity Theory and Organization Science,” Organization Science (10:3), 1999, pp. 216–232.
Berg, M. Health Information Management: Integrating Information Technology in Health Care Work, London: Routledge, 2004.
Bijker, W. E. Of Bicycles, Bakelites, and Bulbs. Toward a Theory of Sociotechnical Change, Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, 1995.
Callon, M. “Techno-Economic Networks and Irreversibility,” in J. Law (ed.), A Sociology of Monsters: Essays on Power, Technology and Domination, London: Routledge, 1991, pp. 132–161.
Castells, M. “Toward a Sociology of the Network Society,” Contemporary Sociology (29:5), 2000, pp. 693–699.
Chae, B., and Lanzara, G. F. “Self-Destructive Dynamics in Large-Scale Technochange and Some Ways of Counteracting It,” Information, Technology & People (19:1), 2006, pp. 74–97.
Cilliers, P. Complexity and Postmodernism: Understanding Complex Systems, London: Routledge, 1998.
Cohen, M. “Commentary on the Organization Science,” Organization Science (10:3), Special Issue on Complexity, 1999, pp. 373–376.
Desai, A. “Adaptive Complex Enterprises,” Communications of the ACM (48:5), 2000, pp. 33–35.
Doolin, B., and Lowe, A. “To Reveal Is to Critique: Actor-Network Theory and Critical Information Systems Research,” Journal of Information Technology (17), 2002, pp. 69–78.
Fenton, W. G., McGinnity, T. M., and Maguire, L. P. “Fault Diagnosis of Electronic Systems Using Intelligent Techniques: A Review,” IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics (31:3), 2001, pp. 269–281.
Gallivan, M. J. “Organizational Adoption and Assimilation of Complex Technological Innovations: Development and Application of a New Framework,” Data Base for Advances in Information Systems (32:3), 2001, pp. 51–85.
Giddens, A. The Constitution of Society, Cambridge, UK: Polity Press, 1984.
Howcroft, D., Mitev, N., and Wilson, M. “What We May Learn from the Social Shaping of Technology Approach,” in J. Mingers L. Willcocks (eds.), Social Theory and Philosophy for Information Systems, Chichester, UK: Wiley, 2004, pp. 329–371.
Jacucci, E., Hanseth, O., and Lyytinen, K. “Introduction. Taking Complexity Seriously in IS Research. Information,” Technology and People (19:1), 2006, pp. 5–11.
Kaghan, W. N., and Bowker, G. C. “Out of Machine Age? Complexity, Socio-Technical Systems and Actor-Network Theory,” Journal of Engineering and Technology Management (18:3–4), 2001, pp. 253–269.
Karsten, H. “Constructing Interdependencies with Collaborative Information Technology,” Computer Supported Cooperative Work (12:4), 2003, pp. 437–464.
Kim, R. M., and Kaplan, S. M. “Interpreting Socio-Technical Co-Evolution: Applying Complex Adaptive Systems to IS Engagement,” Information, Technology & People (19:1), 2006, pp. 35–54.
Kling, R., and Scacchi, W. “The Web of Computing: Computer Technology as Social Organization,” Advances in Computers (21), 1982, pp. 1–90.
Knights, D., and Murray, F. Managers Divided: Organization Politics and Information Technology Management, Chichester, UK: Wiley, 1994.
Knox, H., Savage, M., and Harvey, P. “Social Networks and the Study of Relations: Networks as Method, Metaphor and Form,” Economy and Society (35:1), 2006, pp. 113–140.
Lamb, R., King, J. L., and Kling, R. “Informational Environments: Organizational Contexts of Online Information Use,” Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology (54:2), 2003, pp. 97–114.
Latour, B. Reassembling the Social. An Introduction to Actor-Network Theory, Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, 2005.
Latour, B. “Technology is Society Made Durable,” in J. Law (ed.), A Sociology of Monsters: Essays on Power, Technology and Domination, London: Routledge, 1991, pp. 103–131.
Latour, B. “Where Are the Missing Masses? The Sociology of a Few Mundane Artifacts,” in W. E. Bijker and J. Law (eds.), Shaping Technology/Building Society. Studies in Socio-Technical Change, Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, 1992, pp. 225–258.
Law, J. “Notes on the Theory of the Actor Network: Ordering, Strategy, and Heterogeneity,” Systems Practice (5:4), 1992.
Law, J., and Callon, M. “Engineering and Sociology in a Military Aircraft Project: A Network Analysis of Technological Change,” in S. L. Star (ed.), Ecologies of Knowledge: Work and Politics in Science and Technology, Albany, NY: State University of New York Press, 1995, pp. 281–301.
Merali, Y. “Complexity and Information Systems,” in J. Mingers and L. Willcocks (eds.), Social Theory and Philosophy for Information Systems, Chichester, UK: John Wiley and Sons, Ltd., 2004, pp. 407–446.
Merali, Y. “The Role of Boundaries in Knowledge Processes,” European Journal of Information Systems (11:1), 2002, pp. 47–60.
Mol, A., and Law, J. “Complexities: An Introduction,” in J. Law and A. Mol (eds.), Complexities. Social Studies of Knowledge Practices, Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 2002.
Moser, I., and Law, J. “Fluids or Flows? Information and Qualculation in Medical Practice,” Information, Technology & People (19:1), 2006, pp. 55–73.
Orlikowski, W. J. “Improvising Organizational Transformation Over Time: A Situated Change Perspective,” Information Systems Research (7:1), 1996, pp. 63–92.
Orlikowski, W. J. “Using Technology and Constituting Structures: A Practice Lens for Studying Technology in Organizations,” Organization Science (3:3), 2000, pp. 398–427.
Rose, J., and Jones, M. “The Double Dance of Agency: A Socio-Theoretic Account of How Machines and Humans Interact,” Systems, Signs & Actions, (1:1), 2005, pp. 19–37.
Scott, S. V., and Wagner, E. L. “Networks, Negotiations, and New Times: The Implementation of Enterprise Resource Planning into an Academic Administration,” Information and Organization (13), 2003, pp. 285–313.
Star, S.L. “Power, Technology and the Phenomenology of Conventions: On Being Allergic to Onions,” in J. Law (ed.), A Sociology of Monsters: Essays on Power, Technology and Domination, London: Routledge, 1991, pp. 26–56.
Star, S. L. “The Trojan Door: Organizations, Work, and the ‘Open Black Box,’” Systems Practice (5:4), 1992, pp. 395–410.
Star, S. L., and Ruhleder, K. “Steps Towards an Ecology of Infrastructure: Design and Access for Large Scale Information Spaces,” Information Systems Research (7:1), 1996, pp. 111–134.
Strauss, A., and Corbin, J. Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory, Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, 1998.
Suominen, H. J., Lehtikunnas, T., Hiissa, M., Back, B., Karsten, H., Salakoski, T., and Salanterä, S. “Natural Language Processing for Nursing Documentation,” paper presented at the Second International Conference on Computational Intelligence in Medicine and Health Care (CIMED), Lissabon, Portugal, June 29–July 1, 2005.
Suominen, H. J., Lehtikunnas, T., Hiissa, M., Back, B., Karsten, H., Salakoski, T., and Salanterä, S. “Theoretical Considerations of Ethics in Text Mining of Nursing Documents,” paper presented at Nursing Informatics 2006, Seoul, South-Korea, June 11–14, 2006.
Tan, J., Wen, J., and Awad, N. “Health Care and Services Delivery Systems as Complex Adaptive Systems,” Communications of the ACM (48:5), 2005, pp. 36–44.
Walsham, G., and Sahay, S. “GIS for District-Level Administration in India: Problems and Opportunities,” MIS Quarterly (23:1), 1999, pp. 39–65.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2007 International Federation for Information Processing
About this paper
Cite this paper
Vuokko, R., Karsten, H. (2007). Working with Technology in Complex Networks of Interaction. In: McMaster, T., Wastell, D., Ferneley, E., DeGross, J.I. (eds) Organizational Dynamics of Technology-Based Innovation: Diversifying the Research Agenda. TDIT 2007. IFIP International Federation for Information Processing, vol 235. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-72804-9_22
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-72804-9_22
Publisher Name: Springer, Boston, MA
Print ISBN: 978-0-387-72803-2
Online ISBN: 978-0-387-72804-9
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)