Abstract
This paper contributes to the ongoing debate on the relationship between artefacts and organizational structuration by describing the dynamics surrounding the collaborative development of information technology artefacts. The research addresses a clear gap in the literature, as cooperation in artefact design has rarely been analyzed. To explore this issue, we analyze as a case study the various attempts, undertaken by a consortium of various economic actors, at developing an electronic metering system. The main results emerging from the field study are (1) the relevance of each actor’s interests as the main rationale for explaining the technical features of the artefact, (2) the role of negotiation and consensus in determining the final shape of the artefact in term of its features, and (3) the bundling/unbundling of features within the physical object as the cooperative effort rises/falls.
Chapter PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Albinsson, L.,Lind, M., and Forsgren, O. 2007. “Co-Design: An Approach to Border Crossing, Network Innovation,” in Expanding the Knowledge Economy: Issues, Applications, Case Studies, P. Cunningham and M. Cunningham (eds.), Amsterdam: IOS Press, pp. 977–983.
Arthur, W. B. 1989. “Competing Technologies, Increasing Returns, and Lock-In by Historical Events,” The Economic Journal (99), pp. 116–131.
Atkinson, P., and Hammersley, M. 1994. “Ethnography and Participant Observation,” in Handbook of Qualitative Research, N. Denzin and Y. Lincoln, (eds.), Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, pp. 249–261.
Beck, E. 2002. “P for Political—Participation is Not Enough,” Scandinavian Journal of Information Systems (14), pp. 77–92.
Bechky, B.A. 2003. “Sharing Meaning Across Occupational Communities: The Transformation of Understanding on a Production Floor,” Organization Science (14), pp. 312–330.
Béguin, P. 2003. “Design as a Mutual Learning Process Between Users and Designers,” Interacting with Computers (15:5), pp. 709–730.
Béguin, P., and Rabardel, P. 2000. “Designing for Instrument-Mediated Activity,” Scandinavian Journal of Information Systems (12), pp. 173–191.
Bødker, S. 1996. “Creating Conditions for Participation: Conflicts and Resources in Systems Design,” Human Computer Interaction (11:3), pp. 215–236.
Carlile, P. R. 2002. “A Pragmatic View of Knowledge and Boundaries: Boundary Objects in New Product Development,” Organization Science (13), pp. 442–455.
Chesbrough, H. 2003. Open Innovation: The New Imperative for Creating and Profiting from Technology, Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
Cusumano, M. A., Mylonadis, Y., and Rosenbloom, R. S. 1991. “Strategic Maneuvering and Mass-Market Dynamics: The Triumph of VHS over Beta,” Business History Review (66), pp. 51–94.
David,P.A. 1986. “Understanding the Economics of QWERTY: The Necessity of History,” in Economic History and the Modern Economist, W. N. Parker (ed.), Oxford, UK: Blackwell, pp. 332–337.
Denzin,N.K., and Lincoln, Y. S. 1994. Handbook of Qualitative Research, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Docherty, M. 2006. “Primer on ‘Open Innovation’: Principles and Practice. The Next ‘Big Thing’ in Innovation,” PDMA Visions (30:2), pp. 13–17 (available at http://www.venture2.net/clientuploads/Visions_April06_Docherty.pdf).
Dosi, G. 1992. “Research on Innovation Diffusion: An Assessment,” in InnovationDiffusionand Social Behaviors, A. Grubler and N. Nakicenovic (eds.), Heidelberg: Springer Verlag.
Dosi, G. 2000. Innovation, Organization and Economic Dynamics. Selected Essays, Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.
Gherardi, S., and Nicolini, D. 1999. “La circolazione delle innovazioni come processo di traslazione,” Studi Organizzativi (2), pp. 195–218.
Hutchins, E. 1995. Cognition in the Wild, Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
Laursen, K., and Salter, A. 2006. “Open for Innovation: The Role of Openness in Explaining Innovation Performance Among U.K. Manufacturing Firms,” Strategic Management Journal (27), pp. 131–150.
Masino, G., and Zamarian, M. 2003. “Information Technology Artefacts as Structuring Devices in Organizations: Design, Appropriation and Use Issues,” Interacting with Computers (15:5), pp. 693–707.
Merton, R. K., Fiske, M., and Kendall, P. L. 1990. The Focused Interview: A Manual of Problems and Procedures (2nd ed.), New York: Free Press.
Norman, D. A. 1991. “Cognitive Artefacts,” in Designing Interaction: Psychology at the Human-Computer Interface, J. M. Carroll (ed.), Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, pp. 17–38.
Norman, D. A. 1993. Things that Make us Smart, Reading, MA: Addison Wesley.
Orlikowski, W. J. 2000. “Using Technology and Constituting Structures: A Practice Lens for Studying Technology in Organizations,” Organization Science (11:4), pp. 404–428.
Perry, M., and Sanderson, D. 1998. “Coordinating Joint Design Work: The Role of Communication and Artefacts,” Design Studies (19), pp. 273–328.
Rabardel, P. 2003. “Editorial: From Artefact to Instrument,” Interacting with Computers (15:5), pp. 641–645.
Silverman, D. 2001. Interpreting Qualitative Data: Methods for Analysing Talk, Text and Interaction, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Stango, V. 2004. “The Economics of Standards Wars,” Review of Network Economics (3), pp. 1–19.
Woolgar, S. 1991. “Configuring the User, The Case of Usability Trials,” in A Sociology of Monsters. Essays on Power Technology and Domination, J. Law (ed.), London: Routledge, pp. 58–100.
Yin, R.K. 1994. Case Study Research: Design and Methods (2nd ed.), Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2008 International Federation for Information Processing
About this paper
Cite this paper
Ponte, D., Rossi, A., Zamarian, M. (2008). The Role of Competencies and Interests in Developing Complex Information Technology Artefacts: The Case of a Metering System. In: León, G., Bernardos, A.M., Casar, J.R., Kautz, K., De Gross, J.I. (eds) Open IT-Based Innovation: Moving Towards Cooperative IT Transfer and Knowledge Diffusion. TDIT 2008. IFIP – The International Federation for Information Processing, vol 287. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-87503-3_17
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-87503-3_17
Publisher Name: Springer, Boston, MA
Print ISBN: 978-0-387-87502-6
Online ISBN: 978-0-387-87503-3
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)