Suchergebnisse

The guest editor's editorial speaks for itself in introducing the scope of this special issue on prototyping. As a general overview of the contribution, from a farther perspective than the authors—all system developers or prototyping practitioners—I submit the following brief comments.

Clerical workers in an office scheduled for the installation of an office information system were interviewed regarding the social and technical organization of their work. The interviews were designed to disclose some of the actual practices involved in accomplishing procedural tasks. An analysis of the interview responses focusses on three requirements of procedural work: (1) the application of general guidelines to the problems of particular cases, (2) the co‐ordination of actions and revisions with other participants in a transaction, both within the office and outside, and (3) accomodation to the practical exigencies of handling paper documents. The conclusion suggests some broad implications of these issues of procedural work in a traditional office environment for the design of office information systems.

Qualitative and Critical Research in Information Systems and Human Computer Interaction explores the history and adoption of qualitative and critical research in Information Systems (IS) and contrasts it with the growth of similar methods/theories in Human Computer Interaction (HCI) and, to a lesser, extent Computer Supported Collaborative Work (CSCW). The supposition behind the comparison was that the areas overlap in subject matter and would overlap in methods and authors. However, marked differences were observed in the structure of publications, conferences, and on social media that led to questions about the extent to which the fields shared a common framework. The authors find that the history of each discipline reflects institutional factors that affected the respective timelines for the use of these approaches. This leads them to consider a sociological epistemic framework, which explains the differences quite well. It also supports characterizations of the culture of IS made by members, as having open paradigm and high collegiality, described as an adhocracy. The authors propose that qualitative and critical research developed interdependently in IS. Aside from institutional factors, a further difference in uptake of methods and critical framework comes from the US/Europe divide in research traditions and the political/epistemic climates affecting research in the respective regions. Research from beyond the transatlantic traditions postdates the developments covered here but is touched on at the end of the monograph. The primary goal of Qualitative and Critical Research in Information Systems and Human Computer Interaction is to better understand the ways the IS research community differentiates itself into diverse constituencies, and how these constituencies interact in the field's complex processes of knowledge creation and dissemination. Another goal is to create cross-disciplinary discussion and build on related work in the fields. This is important in the era of platforms with global reach, and the concurrent development of powerful AI and analytics capabilities that both intrude on daily life and try to emulate human intelligence. ; Fulltexten är accepterad version - förlaget gett tillstånd till publicering av denna version.

Information Systems (IS) and Human Computer Interaction(HCI)–including Computer-Supported Cooperative Work(CSCW)–address the development and adoption of computingsystems by organizations, individuals, and teams. Whileeach has its own emphasis, the timelines for adopting qualitativeand critical research differ dramatically. IS used bothin the late 1980s, but critical theory appeared in HCI onlyin 2000. Using a hermeneutic literature review, the papertraces these histories; it applies academic cultures theoryas an explanatory framework. Institutional factors includeepistemic bases of source disciplines, number and centralityof publication outlets, and political and geographic contexts.Key innovations in IS are covered in detail. The rise ofplatformization drives the fields toward a common scopeof study with an imperative to address societal issues thatemerge at scale.

Presents findings from a study undertaken to identify some of the conversational issues in the production of knowledge in cross‐functional work redesign groups. Illustrates what may be key sources of miscommunication based in differing conversational relevance. Postulates that the recognition of relevance and, by extension, the recognition of a valid contribution, is influenced by the manner of discourse or speech style. Feels that the language behaviours as disclosed in the analysis can be inhibiting to the work of cross‐functional teams responsible for a variety of organizational change processes, including IS development and workflow redesign.