Advertisement

Exploring Expertise: Issues and Perspectives

  • Wendy Faulkner
  • James Fleck
  • Robin Williams

Abstract

We live in an age where the number and range of specialist fields of knowledge is burgeoning, and where ‘experts’ from these fields are called on to solve problems and advise in ever more areas of social and economic life. Time and again, however, our reliance on experts and expertise creates dilemmas which strike at the root of modern society — from the practice of democracy and political change to how companies decide on, and implement strategies for, economic growth. Accordingly, the subject of expertise is becoming a recognized ‘issue’ in a range of scholarly disciplines: not least, science and technology studies, including technology assessment and science and technology policy; gender studies, especially feminist critiques of science and medicine; organizational sociology and behaviour; management, especially strategic management, technology management, and human resource management; and in the various disciplines associated with the development of expert systems and artificial intelligence.

Keywords

Expert Knowledge Tacit Knowledge Social Study Technology Study Knowledge Claim 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Bibliography

  1. ANDERSEN, H. W. and SØRENSEN, K. H. Frankenstein’s Dilema: En Bok om Teknologi Miljø of Verdier (Oslo: Ad Notam Glydendal, 1994).Google Scholar
  2. ARDITTI, R., BRENNAN, P. and CAVRAK, S. Science and Liberation (Boston MA: South End Press, 1980).Google Scholar
  3. BARKER, A. and PETERS, B. G. (eds), The Politics of Expert Advice: Creating, Using and Manipulating Scientific Knowledge for Public Policy (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 1993).Google Scholar
  4. BARNES, B. Scientific Knowledge and Sociological Theory (London and Boston MA: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1974).Google Scholar
  5. BECK, U. Ecological Politics in an Age of Risk (Cambridge: Polity, 1995).Google Scholar
  6. BERNAL, J. D. The Social Function of Science (London: Routledge, 1939).Google Scholar
  7. BIJKER, W. ‘Do Not Despair: There is Life after Constructivism’, Science, Technology, & Human Values, 18: 4 (Winter 1993) pp. 113–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. BLEIER, R. Feminist Approaches to Science (New York: Pergamon Press, 1986).Google Scholar
  9. BLOOR, D. ‘Wittgenstein and Mannheim on the Sociology of Mathematics’ Studies in History and Philosophy of Science, 4 (1973) pp. 173–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. BLOOR, D. Knowledge and Social Imagery (London and Boston MA, Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1976).Google Scholar
  11. BRAVERMAN, H. Labor and Monopoly Capital (NY: Monthly Review Press, 1974).Google Scholar
  12. Brighton Women and Science Group, Alice Through the Microscope: The Power of Science over Women’s Lives (London: Virago, 1980).Google Scholar
  13. CARSON, R. Silent Spring (Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1962).Google Scholar
  14. COCKBURN, C. Brothers: Male Dominance and Technological Change (London: Pluto Press, 1983).Google Scholar
  15. CODE, L. What Can She Know? Feminist Theory and the Construction of Knowledge (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1991).Google Scholar
  16. COHEN, D. and LEVINTHAL, W. ‘Innovation and Learning: The Two Faces of R&D’, Economic Journal, 99 (1989) pp. 569–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. COLLINGRIDGE, D. The Social Control of Technology (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1980).Google Scholar
  18. COLLINGRIDGE, D. and REEVE, C. Science Speaks to Power: The Role of Experts in Policymaking (London: Pinter, 1986).Google Scholar
  19. COLLINS, H. M. ‘Captives and Victims: Comment on Scott, Richards and Martin’, Science, Technology, & Human Values, 16: 2 (Spring 1991), pp. 249–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. COLLINS, H. M. and YEARLEY, S. ‘Journey into Space’ Chapter 13, pp. 369–81, in A. Pickering (ed.) Science as Practice and Culture (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1992).Google Scholar
  21. COOMBS, R., SAVIOTTI, P. and WALSH, V. (eds), Technological Change and Company Strategies (London: Academic Press, 1992).Google Scholar
  22. CRESSEY, P. and McINNES, J. ‘Voting for Ford: Industrial Democracy and the Control of Labour’, Capital and Class, 11 (1980), pp. 5–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. CRONBERG, T. and SØRENSEN, K. (eds), Similar Concerns, Different Styles Technology Studies in Western Europe, Proceedings of the COST A4 workshop, Ruvaslahti, Finland 13–14 January 1994, volume 4 (Luxembourg: European Commission, Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, 1995).Google Scholar
  24. DOSI, G. ‘Technological Paradigms and Technological Trajectories: A Suggested Interpretation of the Determinants and Direction of Technical Change’, Research Policy, 11 (1982) pp. 147–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. EASLEA, B. Liberation and the Aims of Science: An Essay on Obstacles to the Building of a Beautiful World (London: Chatto & Windus, 1973).Google Scholar
  26. ELSON, D. and PEARSON, R. ‘Nimble fingers make cheap workers’, Feminist Review, 7 (1981) pp. 87–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. FAULKNER, W. ‘Conceptualising Knowledge Used in Innovation: A Second Look at the Science-Technology Distinction and Industrial Innovation’, Science, Technology, & Human Values, 19: 4 (1994) pp. 425–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. FAULKNER, W. and KERR, E. A. ‘On Seeing Broken Spectres: Sex and Gender in Twentieth Century Science’, in J. Krige and D. Pestre (eds), Science in the Twentieth Century (Reading: Gordon and Breach Science Publishers, 1997) pp. 43–60.Google Scholar
  29. FINCHAM, R., FLECK, J., PROCTER, R., SCARBROUGH, H., TIERNEY, M. and WILLIAMS, R. Expertise and Innovation: Information Technology Strategies in the Financial Services Sector (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1994).Google Scholar
  30. FISCHER, F. Technocracy and the Politics of Expertise (London, New Delhi: Sage Publications, 1990).Google Scholar
  31. FRIEDMAN, A. L. Industry and Labour: Class Struggle at Work and Monopoly Capitalism (London: Macmillan, 1977).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. FUKUYAMA, F. The End of History and the Last Man (London: Hamish Hamilton, 1992).Google Scholar
  33. GILLESPIE, B., DAVE, E. and JONSTON, R. ‘Carcinogenic Risk Assessment in the USA & UK: The Case of Aldrin/Dieldrin’ in B. Barnes and D. Edge (eds), Science in Context (Milton Keynes: Open University Press, 1982) pp. 303–35.Google Scholar
  34. GROSS, P. R. and LEVITT, N. The Higher Superstition: The Academic Left and its Quarrels with Science (Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1994).Google Scholar
  35. HARDING, S. The Science Question in Feminism (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1986).Google Scholar
  36. HARAWAY, D. ‘Situated Knowledges: The Science Question in Feminism and the Privilege of Partial Perspective’, Feminist Studies, 14 (1988) pp. 575–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. HAMLIN, C. ‘Reflexivity in Technology Studies: Towards a Technology of Technology (and Science)?’, Social Studies of Science, 22: 3 (August 1992) pp. 511–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. HUBBARD, R., HENIFIN, S. and FRIED, B. (eds), Women Looking at Biology Looking at Women (Cambridge, MA: Schenkman, 1979).Google Scholar
  39. IRVINE, J. Foresight in Science: Picking the Winners (London: Frances Pinter, 1984).Google Scholar
  40. IRWIN, A. Citizen Science: A Study of People, Expertise and Sustainable Development (London: Routledge, 1995).Google Scholar
  41. IRWIN, A. and WYNNE, B. Misunderstanding Science: Making Sense of Science and Technology in Everyday Life (Cambridge University Press, 1995).Google Scholar
  42. JASANOFF, S. The Fifth Branch: Science Advisers as Policymakers (Cambridge MA, London: Harvard University Press, 1990).Google Scholar
  43. KERR, E. A. ‘Feminising Science: Linking Theory and Practice’ (unpublished PhD Thesis, University of Edinburgh, 1995.Google Scholar
  44. LAW, J. ‘The Anatomy of a Socio-Technical Struggle: The Design of the TSR 2’ in Ellistt, B. (ed) Technology and Social Process (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 1988) pp. 44–69.Google Scholar
  45. LEWONTIN, R., LEVIN, R. and LEVIN, R. “The Problems of Lysenkoism” in H. Rose and S. Rose (eds), The Radicalisation of Science: Ideology of/in the Natural Sciences (London and Basingstoke: Macmillan, 1976) pp. 32–64.Google Scholar
  46. LONGINO, H. Science as Social Knowledge (Princeton University Press, 1989).Google Scholar
  47. LOWRANCE, W. W. Of Acceptable Risk: Science and the Determination of Safety (Los Altos, Calif: Kaufmann, 1976).Google Scholar
  48. MADEUF, B. ‘International technology transfers and international technology payments: Definitions, measurement and firms’ behaviour’, Research Policy, 13 (1984) pp. 125–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. METCALFE, J. S. and GIBBONS, M. ‘Technology, variety and organisation: a systematic perspective on the competitive process’ in Rosenbloom and Bergelman (eds) Research on Technological Innovation, Management and Policy, vol. 4 (JAI Press, 1989).Google Scholar
  50. MORGALL, J. M. Developing Technology Assessment: A Critical Feminist Approach (Lund: University of Lund Department of Sociology, 1991).Google Scholar
  51. MULKAY, M. ‘Knowledge and Utility: Implications for the Sociology of Knowledge’, Social Studies of Science, 9: 1 (February 1979) pp. 63–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. NELKIN, D. Technological Decisions and Democracy (Beverly Hills: Sage, 1977).Google Scholar
  53. NELKIN, D. (ed.), Controversy: Politics of Technical Decisions (Beverley Hills, London, New Delhi: Sage Publications, 1979, 1984 2nd edn).Google Scholar
  54. NELSON, L. H. Who Knows: From Quine to Feminist Empiricism (Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1990).Google Scholar
  55. NELSON, R. and WINTER S. (1974) ‘Neoclassical vs Evolutionary Theories of Economic Growth’, Economic Journal, 84 pp. 886–905.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. PICKERING, A. (ed.) Science as Practice and Culture (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1992).Google Scholar
  57. PINCH, T. and BIJKER, W ‘The Social Construction of Facts and Artefacts: Or How the Sociology of Science and the Sociology of Technology might Benefit Each other’, Social Studies of Science, 14: 3 (August 1984) 399–441.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. RADDER, H. ‘Normative Reflexions on Constructivist Approaches to Science and Technology’ Social Studies of Science, 22: 1 (February 1992) pp. 141–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. RAVETZ, J. R. Scientific Knowledge and its Social Problems (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1971).Google Scholar
  60. RIP, A. MISA, T. J. and SCHOT, J. (eds), Managing Technology in Society: The Approach of Constructive Technology Assessment (London: Pinter, 1995).Google Scholar
  61. ROSE, H. Love, Power and Knowledge (Cambridge: Polity Press, 1994).Google Scholar
  62. ROSE, H. and ROSE, S. The Radicalisation of Science: Ideology of/in the Natural Sciences (London and Basingstoke: Macmillan, 1976a).Google Scholar
  63. ROSE, H. and ROSE, S. The Political Economy of Science: Ideology of/in the Natural Sciences (London and Basingstoke: Macmillan, 1976b).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. ROSE, S. (1976)’ scientific Racism and Ideology: The IQ Racket from Galton to Jensen’ in Rose and Rose (1976) Chapter 7, pp. 112–41.Google Scholar
  65. ROSENBERG, N. Perspectives on Technology (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1976).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. SCOTT, P., RICHARDS, E. and MARTIN, B. ‘Captives of Controversy: The Myth of the Neutral Social Researcher in Contemporary Scientific controversies’, Science, Technology, & Human Values, 15, 4 (Autumn 1990) pp. 474–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. SIMON, H. A. Models of Bounded Rationality (2 Vols.) (Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press, 1982).Google Scholar
  68. SISMONDO, S. ‘Some Social Constructions’, Social Studies of Science, 23: 3 (August 1993) pp. 515–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. SKYRME, D. J. and EARL, M. J. ‘Hybrid Managers: What should you do?’ Computer Bulletin, (May 1990) pp. 19–21.Google Scholar
  70. SØRENSEN, K. and LEVOLD, N. ‘Tacit Networks, Heterogeneous Engineers and Embodied Technology’, Science, Technology, & Human Values, 17: 1 (Winter 1992) pp. 13–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. TECHNOLOGY FORESIGHT STEERING GROUP, Progress through Partnership: The Report of the Technology Foresight Steering Group (London: Office of Science and Technology, 1995).Google Scholar
  72. THOMPSON, P. The Nature of Work: An Introduction to Debates on the Labour Process (London: Macmillan, 1983).Google Scholar
  73. VINCENTI, W. What Engineers Know and How They Know It: Analytical Studies From Aeronautical History (Baltimore: John Hopkins University Press, 1991).Google Scholar
  74. WEINBERG, S. Dreams of a Final Theory: The Search for the Fundamental Laws of Nature (New York: Pantheon, 1992).Google Scholar
  75. WILKINSON, B. The Shop Floor Politics of New Technology (London: Heinemann Educational, 1983).Google Scholar
  76. WILLIAMS, R. and EDGE, D. ‘The Social Shaping of Technology’, Research Policy, 25 (1996) pp. 865–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. WILLIAMSON, O. E. Markets and Hierarchies: Analysis and Antitrust Implications (New York: The Free Press, 1975).Google Scholar
  78. WINNER, L. ‘Upon Opening the Black Box and Finding It Empty: Social Constructivism and the Philosophy of Technology’, Science, Technology, & Human Values, 18: 3 (Summer 1993) pp. 362–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. WINTER, S. ‘Knowledge and Competence as Strategic Assets’ in D. Teece (ed.) The Competitive Challenge: Strategies for Industrial Innovation and Renewal (Cambridge Mass: Ballinger, 1987) pp. 159–83.Google Scholar
  80. WOLPERT, L. The Unnatural Nature of Science: Why Science Does Not Make (Common) Sense (London: Faber & Faber, 1992).Google Scholar
  81. WOOLGAR, S. ‘The Turn to Technology in Social Studies of Science’, Science, Technology, & Human Values, 16: 1 (Winter 1991) pp. 20–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. WYNNE, B. ‘Misunderstood Misunderstandings: Social Identities and Public Uptake of Knowledge’, Public Understanding of Science, 1 (1992) pp. 281–304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. YOUNG, R. M. ‘Science is Social Relations’, Radical Science Journal, 5 (1977) pp. 65–129.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Robin Williams, Wendy Faulkner and James Fleck 1998

Authors and Affiliations

  • Wendy Faulkner
  • James Fleck
  • Robin Williams

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations