Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Emerging Technological Risk pp 31–51Cite as

Unbounded Technology

  • Chapter
  • First Online:

  • 921 Accesses

Abstract

Classifications as Boundary Objects provide a means for analysing the subtle interactions between communities of practice and technologies. This chapter uses the concept of boundary objects in order to analyse specific hazards , namely, Boundary Hazards , which expose organisations to system vulnerabilities . This chapter reviews different case studies. It highlights boundary objects and their mechanisms with respect to communities of practice and technological systems. Lack of understanding of boundary objects and failure to take subtle processes and interaction mechanisms into account in designing and deploying new technology represent potential hazards for technological systems. Technologies expose organisations to hazards across their boundaries. Analysing technological risk then requires an understanding how hazards spread through organisational boundaries . It is necessary to deal with ‘unbounded’ technologies. The analysis enhances our ability to understand boundary objects in technological systems and their related risk .

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    The urge for statistical evidence or knowledge underpins the “modern state” [7] as well as the “risk society” [5] , even though they are related accounts of the developments of the modern information society .

  2. 2.

    Processes of organisational memory highlight how process trajectories involve “many small memories” [2] , or artefacts, capturing the various representational states. Distributed cognition allows the analysis of diverse artefacts, or boundary objects , used in practice in order to accomplish a specific task. For instance, the study in [2] analyses the work practices of a telephone hotline group. Work practices use various artefacts forming the process trajectory—“that representational states take through various memories as an individual process, there are actually multiple group and organizational processes occurring.” [2]

References

  1. Ackerman MS, Halverson CA (2000) Reexamining organizational memory. Commun ACM 43(1):59–64. doi:10.1145/323830.323845

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Ackerman MS, Halverson CA (2004) Organizational memory as objects, processes, and trajectories: an examination of organizational memory in use. Comput Support Coop Work 13(2):155–189. doi:10.1023/B:COSU.0000045805.77534.2a

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Anderson S, Hardstone G, Procter R, Williams R (2008) Down in the (data)base(ment): supporting configuration in organisational information systems. In: Ackerman MS, Halverson CA, Erickson T, Kellogg WA (eds) Resources, co-evolution, and artifacts: theory in CSCW, computer supported cooperative work. Springer, London, pp 221–253. doi:10.1007/978-1-84628-901-9_9

  4. Avižienis A, Laprie J-C, Randell B, Landwehr C (2004) Basic concepts and taxonomy of dependable and secure computing. IEEE Trans Dependable Secur Comput 1(1):11–33. doi:10.1109/TDSC.2004.2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Beck U (1992) Risk society: towards a new modernity. SAGE Publications, London

    Google Scholar 

  6. Bloomfield R, Littlewood B (2003) Multi-legged arguments: the impact of diversity upon confidence in dependability arguments. In: Proceedings of the 2003 international conference on dependable systems and networks, DSN’03, IEEE Computer Society, pp 25–34. doi:10.1109/DSN.2003.1209913

  7. Bowker GC (1996) The history of information infrastructures: the case of the international classification of diseases. Inf Process Manag 32(1):49–61. doi:10.1016/0306-4573(95)00049-M

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Bowker GC, Star SL (1999) Sorting things out: classification and its consequences. The MIT Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  9. Coulter N (1997) ACM’s computing classification system reflects changing times. Commun ACM 40(12):111–112. doi:10.1145/265563.265579

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. D’Adderio L (2001) Crafting the virtual prototype: how firms integrate knowledge and capabilities across organisational boundaries. Res Policy 30(9):1409–1424. doi:10.1016/S0048-7333(01)00159-7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. D’Adderio L (2002) Configuring software, reconfiguring memories: the influence of integrated systems on knowledge storage, retrieval and reuse. In: Proceedings of the 2002 ACM symposium on applied computing, SAC 2002, ACM, pp 726–731. doi:10.1145/508791.508932

  12. D’Adderio L (2003) Configuring software, reconfiguring memories: the influence of integrated systems on the reproduction of knowledge and routines. Ind Corp Chang 12(2):321–350

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. D’Adderio L (2003) Inside the virtual product: how organisations create knowledge through software. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham

    Google Scholar 

  14. Douglas M, Wildavsky A (1982) Risk and culture: an essay on the selection of technological and environmental dangers. University of California Press, Berkeley

    Google Scholar 

  15. Gurr C, Hardstone G (2001) Implementing configurable information systems: a combined social science and cognitive science approach. In: Beynon M, Nehaniv CL, Dautenhahn K (eds) Proceedings of CT 2001, no. 2117 in LNAI. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 391–404. doi:10.1007/3-540-44617-635

  16. Hardstone G, D’Adderio L, Williams R (2006) Standardization, trust and dependability. In: Clarke K, Hardstone G, Rouncefield M, Sommerville I (eds) Trust in technology: a socio-technical perspective, computer supported cooperative work, vol 36, chap 4. Springer, London pp 69–103. doi:10.1007/1-4020-4258-2_4

  17. Hardstone G, Hartswood M, Procter R, Slack R, Voss A, Rees G (2004) Supporting informality: team working and integrated care records. In: Proceedings of the 2004 ACM conference on computer supported cooperative work, CSCW’04, ACM, pp 142–151. doi:10.1145/1031607.1031632

  18. Hughes, AC, Hughes, TP (eds) (2000) Systems, experts, and computers: the systems approach in management and engineering, world war II and after. The MIT Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  19. Johnson CW (2003) Failure in safety-critical systems: a handbook of accident and incident reporting. University of Glasgow Press, Scotland

    Google Scholar 

  20. Littlewood B, Popov P, Strigini L (2001) Modeling software design diversity: a review. ACM Comput Surv 33(2):177–208. doi:10.1145/384192.384195

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Littlewood B, Wright D (2007) The use of multi-legged arguments to increase confidence in safety claims for software-based systems: a study based on a BBN analysis of an idealised example. IEEE Trans on Softw Eng 33(5):347–365. doi:10.1109/TSE.2007.1002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Lutters WG, Ackerman MS (2002) Achieving safety: a field study of boundary objects in aircraft technical support. In: Proceedings of the 2002 ACM conference on computer supported cooperative work, CSCW ’02, ACM Press, pp 266–275. doi:10.1145/587078.587116

  23. Neumann PG (1995) Computer related risks. The ACM Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  24. Perrow C (1999) Normal accidents: living with high-risk technologies. Princeton University Press, New Jersey

    Google Scholar 

  25. Petroski H (1982) To engineer is human: the role of failure in successful design. Vintage Books, New York

    Google Scholar 

  26. Petroski H (1994) Design paradigms: case histories of error and judgment in engineering. Cambridge University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  27. Robertson B, Sribar V (2002) The adaptive enterprise: IT infrastructure strategies to manage change and enable growth. IT best practice series. Addison-Wesley, Boston

    Google Scholar 

  28. Rogers Y, Scaife M, Rizzo A (2005) Interdisciplinarity: an emergent or engineered process? In: Derry SJ, Schunn CD, Gernsbacher MA (eds) Interdisciplinary collaboration: an emerging cognitive science, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah

    Google Scholar 

  29. Vincenti WG (1990) What engineers know and how they know it: analytical studies from aeronautical history. The Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore

    Google Scholar 

  30. WHO (2004) Report for the consultation meeting on the WHO business plan for classifications, final report edn. World Health Organization (WHO)

    Google Scholar 

  31. WHO (2004) World Health Organization—family of international classifications. World Heath Organization (WHO)

    Google Scholar 

  32. WHO (2005) WHO business plan for classifications, version 1.0 edn. World Heath Organization (WHO)

    Google Scholar 

  33. WHO (2011) History of the development of the ICD. World Health Organization (WHO)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Informatics, The University of Edinburgh, Crichton Street 10, EH8 9AB, Edinburgh, UK

    Stuart Anderson & Massimo Felici

Authors
  1. Stuart Anderson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Massimo Felici
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Massimo Felici .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2012 Springer-Verlag London Limited

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Anderson, S., Felici, M. (2012). Unbounded Technology . In: Emerging Technological Risk. Springer, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-2143-5_2

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-2143-5_2

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, London

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-4471-2142-8

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-4471-2143-5

  • eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation