Advertisement

Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW)

, Volume 25, Issue 6, pp 425–475 | Cite as

Unpacking the Notion of Participation in Participatory Design

  • Tone Bratteteig
  • Ina Wagner
Article

Abstract

The paper explores what exactly it is that users participate in when being involved in participatory design (PD), relating this discussion to the CSCW perspective on collaborative design work. We argue that a focus on decision-making in design is necessary for understanding participation in design. Referring to Schön we see design as involving creating choices, selecting among them, concretizing choices and evaluating the choices. We discuss how these kinds of activities have played out in four PD projects that we have participated in. Furthermore, we show that the decisions are interlinked, and discuss the notion of decision linkages. We emphasize the design result as the most important part of PD. Finally, participation is discussed as the sharing of power, asking what the perspective of power and decision-making adds to the understanding of design practices.

Keywords

Collaborative design Participatory design Power Decision-making Choices 

References

  1. Arendt, Hannah (1970). On Violence. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt.Google Scholar
  2. Arnstein, S. R. (1969). A ladder of citizen participation. Journal of the American Institute of Planners, vol. 35, no. 4, pp. 216–224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Balka, Ellen (2010). Broadening Discussion about Participatory Design. Scandinavian Journal of Information Systems, vol. 22, no. 1, pp. 77–84.Google Scholar
  4. Balka, Ellen; Pernille Bøjrn; and Ina Wagner (2008). Steps Toward a Typology for Health Informatics. In CSCW’08. Proceedings of the 2008 ACM Conference on Computer supported cooperative work. San Diego, CA, USA, November 08–12, 2008. New York: ACM Press, pp. 515–524.Google Scholar
  5. Barbalet, Jack M. (1996). Social emotions: Confidence, trust and loyalty. The International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy, vol. 6, no. 9/10, pp. 75–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Binder, Thomas; Pelle Ehn; Giulio Jacucci; Giorgio De Michelis; Per Linde; and Ina Wagner (2011) Design Things. Cambridge MA, USA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  7. Bjerknes, Gro; and Tone Bratteteig (1987): Florence in Wonderland. System Development with Nurses. In G. Bjerknes; P. Pelle; and M. Kyng (eds): Computers and Democracy. A Scandinavian Challenge. Avebury: Aldershot, pp. 279–296.Google Scholar
  8. Bjerknes, Gro; and Tone Bratteteig (1988a). Computers—utensils or epaulets? The application perspective revisited. AI & Society, vol. 2, no. 3, pp. 258–266.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bjerknes, Gro; and Tone Bratteteig (1988b). The memoirs of two survivors – or evaluation of a computer system for cooperative work. In CSCW’88. Proceedings of the 1988 ACM conference on Computer-supported cooperative work. Portland, OR, USA, September 26–28, 1988. New York: ACM Press, pp. 167–177.Google Scholar
  10. Bjerknes, Gro; and Tone Bratteteig (1995). User participation and democracy. A discussion of Scandinavian research on systems development. Scandinavian Journal of Information Systems, vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 73–98.Google Scholar
  11. Björgvinsson, Erling; Pelle Ehn; and Per-Anders Hillgren (2012). Agonistic participatory design: working with marginalised social movements. CoDesign, vol. 8, no. 2–3, pp. 127–144.Google Scholar
  12. Blomberg, Jeanette; and Helena Karasti (2013). Reflections on 25 Years of Ethnography in CSCW. Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW), vol. 22, no. 4–6, pp. 1–51.Google Scholar
  13. Bødker, Susanne; and Pär-Ola Zander (2015). Participation in design between public sector and local communities. In C&T’15. Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Communities and Technologies. Limerick, Ireland, June 27–30, 2015. New York: ACM Press, pp. 49–58.Google Scholar
  14. Bowers, John; and James Pycock (1994). Talking through design: requirements and resistance in cooperative prototyping. In B. Adelson et al. (eds) CHI’94. Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. Boston, MA, USA, April 24–28, 1994. New York: ACM Press, pp. 299–305.Google Scholar
  15. Bratteteig, Tone (2004). Making change. Dealing with relations between design and use. Dr. Philos dissertation, University of Oslo: Dep. Of Computer Science.Google Scholar
  16. Bratteteig, Tone; and Eric Stolterman (1997). Design in groups—and all that jazz. In M. Kyng; and L. Mathiasen (eds.). Computers and Design In Context. Cambridge, MA, USA: MIT Press, pp. 289–316.Google Scholar
  17. Bratteteig, Tone; and Ina Wagner (2012). Disentangling power and decision-making in participatory design. In PDC 2012. Proceedings of the 12th Participatory Design Conference. Research Papers, vol. 1. Roskilde, Denmark, August 12–16, 2012 ACM, 2012, pp. 41–50.Google Scholar
  18. Bratteteig, Tone and Ina Wagner (2014) Disentangling Participation: Power and Decision-Making in Participatory Design. Springer International.Google Scholar
  19. Bratteteig, Tone; Kjeld Bødker; et al. (2012). Methods: organising principles and general guidelines for Participatory Design projects. In J. Simonsen; and T. Robertson (eds.): Routledge International Handbook of Participatory Design. London/New York: Routledge, pp. 177–144.Google Scholar
  20. Bratteteig, Tone; Ole Kristian Rolstad; and Ina Wagner (2016). The life and death of design ideas. In COOP 2016. Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on the Design of Cooperative Systems. Trento, Italy, May 22–27, 2016.Google Scholar
  21. Brereton, Margot; and Jacob Buur (2008). New Challenges for Design Participation in the Era of Ubiquitous Computing. CoDesign, vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 101–113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Bucciarelli, Louis E. (1988). Engineering Design Process. In F. A. Dubinskas (ed.). Making Time. Ethnographies of High-Technology Organizations. Philadelphia: Temple University Press, pp. 92–122.Google Scholar
  23. Büscher, Monika; Martin Kompast; Rüdiger Lainer; and Ina Wagner (1999). The Architect’s Wunderkammer: Aesthetic Pleasure & Engagement in Electronic Spaces. Digital Creativity, vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 1–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Button, Graham; and Wes Sharrock (1996). Project work: the organisation of collaborative design and development in software engineering. Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW), vol. 5, no. 4, pp. 369–386.Google Scholar
  25. Buxton, Bill (2007). Sketching User Experiences. New York: Morgan Kaufmann.Google Scholar
  26. Carstensen, Peter H.; and Carsten Sørensen (1996). From the social to the systematic. Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW), vol. 5, no. 4, pp. 387–413.Google Scholar
  27. Clement, Andrew; and Peter Van den Besselaar (1993). A Retrospective Look at PD Projects. Communications of the ACM, vol. 36, no. 6, pp. 29–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Clement, Andrew; and Ina Wagner. (1995). Fragmented Exchange. Disarticulation and the need for regionalized communication spaces. In H. Marmolin; Y. Sundblad; and K. Schmidt (eds): ECSCW’95. Proceedings of the Fourth European Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work. Stockholm, Sweden, September 11–15, 1995, Dordrecht: Kluwer, pp. 33–49.Google Scholar
  29. Cohen, Michael D., James G. March, et al. (1972). A garbage can model of organizational choice. Administrative Science Quarterly , vol. 17, no. 1, pp. 1–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Cornwall, A. (2008). Unpacking ‘participation’: Models, meanings and practices. Community Development Journal, vol. 43, no. 3, pp. 269–283.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Cross, Nigel (1997) Creativity in design: analyzing and modeling the creative leap. Leonardo, vol. 30 no. 4, pp. 311–317Google Scholar
  32. Crozier, Michel (1973). The problem of power. In M. Crozier (Ed.), The Stalemate Society. New York: The Viking Press.Google Scholar
  33. Dahl, Robert A. (1957). The concept of power. Behavioral science, vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 201–215.Google Scholar
  34. Dewey, John (1922). Human nature and conduct: An introduction to social psychology. New York: Carlton House.Google Scholar
  35. Dittrich, Yvonne; Dave Randall; and Janice Singer (2009). Software engineering as cooperative work. Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW), vol. 18, no. 5, pp. 393–399.Google Scholar
  36. Dittrich, Yvonne; Sara Eriksén; and Bridgette Wessels (2014). Learning through situated innovation: why the specific is crucial for Participatory Design Research. Scandinavian Journal of Information Systems, vol. 26, no. 1, pp. 29–56.Google Scholar
  37. Druin, Alison (2002). The role of children in the design of new technology. Behaviour and Information Technology, vol. 21, no. 1, pp. 1–25.Google Scholar
  38. Dunn, John (1990). Trust and political agency. In D. Gambetta (ed): Trust: making and breaking cooperative relations. Oxford: Blackwell, pp. 73–93.Google Scholar
  39. Ehn, Pelle (1989). Work-Oriented Design of Computer Artifacts. Hillsdale New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum.zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  40. Finken, Sisse (2005). Methods as technologies for producing knowledge. An encounter with cultural practices - reflections from a field study in a high-tech company. PhD Dissertation. Roskilde University.Google Scholar
  41. Foucault, Michel (1972). The Subject and Power. Critical Inquiry, vol. 8, no. 4, pp. 777–795.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Freire, Paulo; and Donaldo Macedo (1987). Literacy: Reading the word and the world. South Hadley, MA: Bergin & Garvey Publishers.Google Scholar
  43. Gärtner, Johannes; and Ina Wagner (1996). Mapping actors and agendas: political frameworks of systems design and participation. Human-Computer Interaction Journal, vol. 11, no. 3, pp. 187–214.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Gaventa, John; and Andrea Cornwall. (2006) Challenging the boundaries of the possible: participation, knowledge and power. IDS Bulletin, vol. 37, no. 6, pp. 122–128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Glasemann, Marie and Kanstrup, Anne Marie (2011). Emotions on diabetes: a design case of user mock-ups by young people living with diabetes, CoDesign, vol. 7. no. 2, pp. 123–130.Google Scholar
  46. Goldschmidt, Gloria; and Dan Tatsa (2005). How good are good ideas? Correlates of design creativity. Design Studies, vol. 26, pp. 593–611.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Goldschmidt, Gloria; Maya Weil (1998). Contents and structure in design reasoning. Design issues, vol. 14, no. 3, pp. 85–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Greenbaum, J. (1993). A design of one’s own: towards participatory design in the United States. In D. Schuler; and A. Namioka (eds.). Participatory design: Principles and practices. New York: Lawrence Erlbaum, pp. 27–37.Google Scholar
  49. Grinter, Rebecca E. (1996). Supporting articulation work using software configuration management systems. Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW), vol. 5, no. 4, pp. 447–465.Google Scholar
  50. Grisot, Miria; Polyxeni Vassilakopoulou (2015). The Work of Infrastructuring: A Study of a National eHealth Project. In ECSCW 2015. Proceedings of the 14th European Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work. Oslo, Norway, September 19–23, 2015, pp. 205–221.Google Scholar
  51. Haugaard, Mark (2012). Rethinking the four dimensions of power: domination and empowerment. Journal of Political Power, vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 33–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Henderson, Kathryn (1999): On Line and On Paper. Cambridge, MA, USA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  53. Herbsleb, James D.; Audris Mockus; Thomas A. Finholt; and Rebecca E. Grinter (2000). Distance, dependencies, and delay in a global collaboration. In CSCW’00. Proceedings of the 2000 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work, Philadelphia, PA, USA, December 2–0, 2000. New York: ACM Press, pp. 319–328Google Scholar
  54. Hyysalo, Sampsaa (2015). Redrawing the landscape of designing for, with and by users, Keynote at SCIS 2015. The 6th Scandinavian Conference on Information Systems, Oulu, Finland, August 9–12, 2015.Google Scholar
  55. Johannessen, Liv Karen; and Gunnar Ellingsen (2009). Integration and generification - agile software development in the healthcare market. Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW), vol. 18, no. 5–6, pp. 607–634.Google Scholar
  56. Kaasbøll, Jens (1983): The Research Programme SYDPOL: SYstem Development environment and Profession Oriented Languages, Nordforsk Publikationnserie 1983, no.2, Department of Informatics, University of OsloGoogle Scholar
  57. Kanstrup, Anne Marie and Christiansen, Ellen (2006). User-driven Points for Feedback Motivated Electricity savings in Private Households. Paper presented at Joint Actions on Climate Change, 8-10 June, Aalborg, Denmark.Google Scholar
  58. Kensing, Finn; and Jeanette Blomberg (1998). Participatory design: Issues and concerns. Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW), vol. 7, no. 3–4, pp. 167–185.Google Scholar
  59. Kensing, Finn; and Joan Greenbaum (2012). Heritage: have a say. In J. Simonsen; and T. Robertson (eds.): Routledge International Handbook of Participatory Design. London/New York: Routledge, pp. 21–36.Google Scholar
  60. Kyng, Morten (1991). Designing for cooperation: cooperating in design. Communications of the ACM, vol. 34, no. 12, pp. 65–73CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Langley, Ann; Henry Mintzberg; et al. (1995). Opening up decision-making. Organization Science, vol. 6, no. 3, pp, 260–279.Google Scholar
  62. Light, Ann; and Yoko Akama. (2012). The human touch: participatory practice and the role of facilitation in designing with communities. In PDC 2012. Proceedings of the 12th Participatory Design Conference: Research Papers-Volume 1. New York: ACM Press, pp. 61–70.Google Scholar
  63. Lynch, Michael (1997). Scientific Practice and Ordinary Action: Ethnomethodology and Social Studies of Science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  64. Malone, Thomas W.; and Kevin Crowston (1990). What is coordination theory and how can it help design cooperative work systems? In CSCW’90. Proceedings of the 1990 ACM Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work, Los Angeles, CA, USA, October 07–10, 1990. New York: ACM Press, pp. 357–370.Google Scholar
  65. Mansbridge, Jane (1994). Using Power/Fighting Power. Constellations, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 53–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Maquil, Valerie (2010). The ColorTable: an interdisciplinary design process. Doctoral dissertation. Vienna University of Technology, Faculty of Informatics.Google Scholar
  67. Maquil, Valerie; Thomas Psik; and Ina Wagner (2008). The ColorTable: a design story. In TEI’08. Proceedings of the 2nd international conference on Tangible and Embedded Interaction, Bonn, Germany, February 18–21, 2008. New York: ACM Press, pp. 97–104.Google Scholar
  68. Martin, David; John Mariani; and Mark Rouncefield (2009). Practicalities of participation: Stakeholder involvement in an electronic patient records project. In A. Voss; M. Hartswood; et al.: Configuring user-designer relations. Interdisciplinary perspectives. London: Springer, pp. 133–155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Morgan, Garreth (1986). Images of Organization. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  70. Newman, Susan (1998). Here, there, and nowhere at all: distribution, negotiation, and virtuality in postmodern ethnography and engineering. Knowledge and Society, vol. 11, pp. 235–267.Google Scholar
  71. Nygaard, Kristen (1986). Program Development as a Social Activity. In H.J. Kugler (ed): Information Processing. Amsterdam: Elsevier Science Publ., pp. 189–198.Google Scholar
  72. Pansardi, Pamela (2012). Power to and power over: two distinct concepts of power? Journal of Political Power, vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 73–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Pedersen, Jens (2007). Protocols of Research and Design: Reflections on a Participatory Design Project (sort Of). PhD Thesis. IT University of Copenhagen.Google Scholar
  74. Pitkin, Hanna F. (1973). Wittgenstein and justice. Berkeley/Los Angeles, USA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  75. Pretty, J. (1995). Participatory learning for sustainable agriculture. World Development, vol. 23, no. 8, pp. 1247–1263.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Reidl, Christine; Marianne Tolar; and Ina Wagner (2008). Impediments to change: the case of implementing an electronic patient record in three oncology clinics. In PDC’08. Proceedings of the Tenth Anniversary Conference on Participatory Design. Bloomington, IN, USA, September 30–October 04, 2008. New York: ACM Press, pp. 21–30.Google Scholar
  77. Rittel, Horst W.; and Melvin M. Webber (1973). Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy sciences, vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 155–169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Robertson, Toni; and Ina Wagner (2012). Ethics: Engagement, representation and politics-in-action. In J. Simonsen; and T. Robertson (eds.): Routledge International Handbook of Participatory Design. London/New York: Routledge, pp. 64–85.Google Scholar
  79. Rocha, Elizabeth M. (1967). A ladder of empowerment. Journal of Planning Education and Research, vol. 17, no. 1, pp. 31–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Rooksby, John; Mark Rouncefield; and Ian Sommerville (2009). Testing in the wild: The social and organisational dimensions of real world practice. Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW), vol. 18, no. 5–6, pp. 559–580.Google Scholar
  81. Ruland, Cornelia M.; Justin Starren; and Trun M. Vatne (2008). Participatory design with children in the development of a support system for patient-centered care in pediatric oncology. Journal of Biomedical Informatics, vol. 41, no. 4, pp. 624–635.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Said, Edward (1985). Orientalism. Harmondsworth: Penguin Books.Google Scholar
  83. Sauvagnac, Catherine; and Pierre Falzon (1996). Collaboration and underlying issues or the surprises of cooperative dialogues. Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW), vol. 5, no. 2–3, pp. 251–266.Google Scholar
  84. Schmidt, Kjeld (2002). Remarks on the complexity of cooperative work. Revue d’intelligence artificielle, vol.16, no. 4–5, pp. 443–483.Google Scholar
  85. Schmidt, Kjeld (2011). Cooperative Work and Coordinative Practices. New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. Schmidt, Kjeld (2014). The Concept of ‘Practice’: What’s the Point?. In COOP 2014: Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on the Design of Cooperative Systems. Nice, France, 27–30 May 2014. Springer International Publishing, pp. 427–444.Google Scholar
  87. Schmidt, Kjeld; and Wes Sharrock (eds.) (1996). Special issue on studies of cooperative design. Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW), vol. 5, no.4.Google Scholar
  88. Schmidt, Kjeld; and Ina Wagner (2004). Ordering systems: Coordinative practices and artifacts in architectural design and planning. Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW), vol. 13, no. 5–6, pp. 349–408.Google Scholar
  89. Schön, Donald A. (1983). The reflective practitioner. New York: Harper Collins.Google Scholar
  90. Schön, Donald A. (1987) Educating the Reflective Practitioner. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  91. Schön, Donald A. (1995). Knowing-in-action: the new scholarship requires a new epistemology. Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning, vol. 27, no. 6, pp. 27–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. Schön, Donald A.; and Glenn Wiggins (1992). Kinds of seeing and their function in designing. Design Studies, vol. 13, pp. 135–156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. Schütz, Alfred (1951). Choosing Among Projects of Action. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, vol. 12, no. 2, pp. 161–184.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  94. Schütz, Alfred (1954). Concept and theory formation in the social sciences. The Journal of Philosophy, vol. 51, no. 9, pp. 257–273.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  95. Schütz, Alfred (1962). On Multiple Realities. In A. Schütz (ed.): Collected Papers I. Den Haag, Nijhoff, pp. 207–259.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. Simon, Herbert (1960). The New Science of Managerial Decision. New York: Harper and Row.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  97. Simonsen, Jesper; and Toni Robertson (2012). International Handbook of Participatory Design. London/New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  98. Star, S. Leigh; and Anselm Strauss (1999). Layers of silence, arenas of voice: the ecology of visible and invisible work. Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW), vol. 8, no. 1–2, pp. 9–30.Google Scholar
  99. Suchman, Lucy (1995). Speech acts and voices: Response to Winograd et al. Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW), vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 85–95.Google Scholar
  100. Tellioglu, Hilda; Ina Wagner; and Rüdiger Lainer (1998). Open Design Methodologies. Exploring Architectural Practice for Systems Design. In R. Henderson Chatfield; S. Kuhn; and M. Muller (eds): PDC’98. Proceedings of the 5th Biennial Participatory Design Conference. Seattle, WA, USA, November 12–November 14, 1998. New York: ACM Press, pp. 14–23Google Scholar
  101. Thomas, Nigel; and Claire O’Kane (1998). The ethics of participatory research with children. Children & Society, vol. 12, no. 5, pp. 336–348.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  102. Vines, J. John, et al. (2013). Configuring participation: on how we involve people in design. In CHI’13. Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. Paris, France, April 27–May 02, 2013. NewYork: ACM Press, pp. 429–438.Google Scholar
  103. Voss, Alex, Mark Hartswood et al. (eds) (2009). Configuring user-designer relations. Interdisciplinary perspectives. Springer: London.Google Scholar
  104. Wagner, Ina (2000). Persuasive artefacts in architectural design and planning. In S.A.R. Scrivener; L. J. Ball; and A. Woodcock (eds.): Collaborative Design: Proceedings of CoDesigning 2000, Nottingham, September 11–13, 2000. London: Springer, pp. 379–390.Google Scholar
  105. Wagner, Ina (2004). Open Planning – A Reflection on Methods. In R. Boland; and F. Collopy (eds): Managing as Designing. Stanford, CA, USA: Stanford University Press, pp. 153–163.Google Scholar
  106. Wagner, Ina (2011). Building urban narratives: collaborative site-seeing and envisioning in the MR Tent. Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW), vol. 21, no. 1, pp. 1–42.Google Scholar
  107. Wagner, Ina; and Rüdiger Lainer (2003). Designing a Visual 3D Interface – A Reflection on Methods. ACM Interactions Magazine, vol. X, no. 6, pp. 12–19.Google Scholar
  108. Wagner, Ina; Maria Basile; et al. (2009). Supporting community engagement in the city: urban planning in the MR-tent. In C&T’09. Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Communities &Technologies. University Park, PA, USA, June 25–27, 2009. New York: ACM Press, pp. 185–194.Google Scholar
  109. Wang, Ming-Hung; and N. John Habraken (1982). Notation of the design process: the six operations. Unpublished manuscript, MIT.Google Scholar
  110. Weick, Karl E. (1985). Sources of Order in Underorganized Systems: Themes in Recent Organizational Theory. In Y. S. Lincoln (Ed.), Organizational Theory and Inquiry (pp. 106–136). Beverly Hills: Sage.Google Scholar
  111. Zündorf, Lutz (1986). Macht, Einfluß, Vertrauen und Verständigung. Zum Problem der Handlungskoordinierung in Arbeitsorganisationen. In R. Seltz; U. Mill; and E. Hildebrandt (eds.): Organisation als soziales System. Berlin: Sigma Verlag, pp. 33–56.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of InformaticsUniversity of OsloOsloNorway

Personalised recommendations