Taking care of invisible technology
- PDF / 76,079 Bytes
- 3 Pages / 595 x 794 pts Page_size
- 29 Downloads / 166 Views
Taking care of invisible technology Maddalena Sorrentino1 1 Department of Social and Political Studies, State University of Milan, Milan, Italy.
Correspondence: Maddalena Sorrentino, Department of Social and Political Studies, State University of Milan, Via Conservatorio, 7, Milan 20122, Italy. E-mail: [email protected]
European Journal of Information Systems (2005) 14, 507–509. doi:10.1057/palgrave.ejis.3000563
Received: 9 August 2005 Revised: 26 September 2005 Accepted: 28 September 2005
Scholars with any significant experience in the field of organisational change know that the subject cannot be reduced to a single chapter in an introductory book on organisation or even to an entire work on management. Moreover, those who adopt a social studies perspective in relation to information and communication technology do not see themselves as involved in the investigation of just a single aspect of the life of companies and organisations. On the contrary, they know perfectly well that their endeavours, alongside those of other scholars, consist in the elaboration of an analytical approach that extends from a description of the relevant organisational phenomena to the development of a general theory of social life. In particular, they are aware that the essential difficulty of their task stems from the fact that the expression ‘organisational change’ cannot just refer to a limited set of objectively identifiable phenomena but rather must constitute one of those notions through which one conceptualises the concrete experience of a set of meaningful actions and behaviours. Claudio Ciborra chose to adopt a phenomenological perspective in his study of the interaction of technology and organisation. In advancing this unconventional and highly courageous approach he emphasised repeatedly – passing with ease from one discipline to another – the dangers of a deterministic relationship between technology and organisation. Stressing the need to reconsider ‘the underlying assumptions of our conventional ways of studying and designing organisations’ (Ciborra, 1999, p. 87) and to abandon every artificial attempt to separate the technical and the social environment, he proposed that researchers seek possible responses ‘by following the actors’ at the moment when and in the places where the relevant artefacts are realised and used. He warned against applying formulas that were ‘structured and reassuring’ (and, hence, inevitably illusory) and advised against seeking at all costs to identify ‘success factors’ that, in point of fact, cannot be isolated by virtue of the fact that they are inextricably bound up with the organisational context with which they are associated. Claudio’s message was to put aside the haste that ‘obstructs one from viewing things more clearly from within their complexity’ (Ciborra, 1996, p. 11). It would be possible to view such a varied and rich body of work from various points of view. In this short piece, however, I would like to make a few observations in relation to just one feature of Claudio
Data Loading...
