skip to main content
10.1145/1011870.1011896acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagespdcConference Proceedingsconference-collections
Article

Technology trouble? talk to us: findings from an ethnographic field study

Published:27 July 2004Publication History

ABSTRACT

The notion that the design of technology is only fully completed when in use [23] is shared by many who now investigate user participation in design and the domestication of new technologies. Taking this idea as our starting point, we developed a research to action project with a major Canadian hospital. Our goals were to address technology implementation issues that arose as most units in the hospital moved to a new building, in which most technology (ranging from wired beds to drug dispensing machines) was new. This paper reports our findings from this project. Emphasis is placed on how institutional arrangements influenced the range of socio-technical possibilities that could be pursued [7]. Work practice problems are discussed in relation to the meso or organizational contexts, including organizational, vendor and staff actor networks.

References

  1. Balka, E. Sometimes Texts Speak Louder than Users: Locating Invisible Work Through Textual Analysis. In A.F. Grundy, D. Kohler, V. Oechtering and U. Petersen (Eds.). Women, Work and Computerization: Spinning a Web from Past to Future. New York, Springer-Verlag, 1997, 163--176.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Berg, M. Patient care information systems and health care work: A sociotechnical approach. International Journal of Medical Informatics, 55 (1999), 87--101.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  3. Berg, M. Working with protocols: A sociological view. The Netherlands Journal of Medicine, 49 (1996), 119--125.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  4. Borel, J.M., and Rascati, K.L. Effect of an Automated Nursing Unit-Based Drug Dispensing Device on Medication Errors. American Journal of Health-System Pharmacy, 52 (1995), 1875--1879.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  5. Bowker, G., and Star, S.L. Sorting things out; Classification and its consequences. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press, 1999. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Gartner, J., and Wagner I. Mapping actors and agendas: Political frameworks of systems design and participation. Human-Computer Interaction, 11 (1996), 187--214. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Hanseth, O., Monteiro, E., and Hatling, M. Developing information infrastructure: The tension between standardization and flexibility. Science, Technology and Human Values, 21, 4(1996), 407--426.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  8. Hanseth, O. Information technology as infrastructure. Gothenburg Studies in Informatics Report #10 (Doctoral Dissertation). Department of Informatics, Göteborg, Sweden, 1996.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Hart, E. and Bond, M. Action research for health and social care: A guide to practice. Buckingham: Open University Press, 1995.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Holter, I.M., and Schwartz-Barcott, D. Action research: What is it? How has it been used and how can it be used in nursing? Journal of Advanced Nursing, 128, (1993), 298--304.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  11. Karasti, H. Increasing sensitivity towards everyday work practice in system design (Academic Dissertation). Department of Information Processing Science, University of Oulu, Finland, 2001.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Korpela, M., Mursu, A., Abimbola Soriyan, H., and Eerola, A. Information systems research and information systems practice in a network of activities. In Dittrich, Y., Floyd, C., and Klischewski, R. (Eds.) Social thinking -- software practice. Cambridge, Mass: The MIT Press, 2002, 287--308. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. Law, J. Notes on the theory of the actor network: Ordering, strategy and Heterogeneity. Centre for Science Studies Lancaster University, 1992.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  14. Lee, L.W., et al. (1992). Use of an Automated Medication Storage and Distribution System. American Journal of Hospital Pharmacy, 49, 851--55.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. Monterio E., Hanseth O. Social Shaping of Information Infrastructure: On Being Specific about the Technology. In: Orlikowski W., Walsham W.J., Jones M.R., DeGross J.I., Eds. Information Technology and Changes in Organisational Work. New York: Chapman & Hall, 1995, 325--43.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Novek, J. IT, gender and professional practice: Or, why an automated drug distribution system was sent back to the manufacturer. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 27, 3 (2002), 379--403.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Novek, J., Bettess, S., Burke, K. & Johnston, P. Nurses' perceptions of the reliability of an automated medication dispensing system. Journal of Nursing Care Quality, 14, 2(2000), 1 -- 13.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  18. Randall, D., Hughes, J., and Shapiro, D. Systems development -- The fourth dimension perspectives on the social organization of work. Paper presented at he SPRU CICT Conference, Sussex University, 1991.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. Ray, M.D., Aldrich, L.T., and Lew, P.J. Experience with an Automated Point of Use Unit-Dose Drug Distribution System. Hospital Pharmacy, 30, 1(1995), pp. 18, 20--23, 27--30.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. Robertson, T. Participatory design and participative practices in small companies. In Bloomberg, J., Kensing, F., and Dykstra-Erickson, E. (Eds.) PDC '96: Proceedings of the Participatory Design Conference. Cambridge, Mass: Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility, 1996, 35--43.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. Schwarz, H.O., and Bradowy, B.A. Implementation and Evaluation of Automated Dispensing Systems. American Journal of Health-System Pharmacy, 52, (1995), 823--828.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  22. Star, S.L. & Strauss, A. Layers of silence, arenas of voice: The ecology of visible and invisible work. Computer Supported Cooperative Work, 8, (1999), 9--30. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. Suchman, L., and Jordan, B. Computerization and women's knowledge. In Women, work and computerization: IFIP conference proceedings, Amsterdam, 1988.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. Suchman, L. Plans and situated actions: The problem of human-machine communication. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press, 1987. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. Taylor JR, Groleau C, Heaton L, Van Every E. The Computerization of Work: A Communcication Perspective. Thousand Oaks, CA.: Sage, 2001.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. Tribble, D.A. How Automated Systems Can (and Do) Fail. American Journal of Health-System Pharmacy, 53, (1996), 2622--2627. Vancouver Coastal Health Authority. Tower Move Project -- Project Charter, 2003.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  27. Vancouver General Hospital chooses Omnicell for automated pharmacy dispensing http://www.omnicell.com/News/pf_release_display.asp?page=139 Accessed Feb. 12, 2004.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. Westrup, C. On retrieving skilled practices: The contribution of ethnography to software development. In Dittrich, Y., Floyd, C., and Klischewski, R. (Eds.) Social thinking -- software practice. Cambridge, Mass: The MIT Press, 2002, 91--110. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  29. Wise, L.C., et al. Cost Benefit Analysis of an Automated Medication System. Nursing Economics, 14, 4(1996), 224--23Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Recommendations

Comments

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Sign in
  • Published in

    cover image ACM Conferences
    PDC 04: Proceedings of the eighth conference on Participatory design: Artful integration: interweaving media, materials and practices - Volume 1
    July 2004
    245 pages
    ISBN:1581138512
    DOI:10.1145/1011870

    Copyright © 2004 ACM

    Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

    Publisher

    Association for Computing Machinery

    New York, NY, United States

    Publication History

    • Published: 27 July 2004

    Permissions

    Request permissions about this article.

    Request Permissions

    Check for updates

    Qualifiers

    • Article

    Acceptance Rates

    Overall Acceptance Rate49of289submissions,17%

PDF Format

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader