, Volume 5, Issue 4, pp 263–276 | Cite as

Technology, work and culture

  • Richard J. Badham
Guest editorial


There has been no attempt in this introduction to put forward a particular method for dealing with these challenges nor to assess the full contribution of the articles in this issue. This outline and discussion has been intended merely to stimulate interdisciplinary debate and provide some of the background to assist in making this possible. A full account would at least have involved a broader review of the background of McLoughlin and Aicholzer and Schienstock in developments within the industrial sociology or industrial relations discipline. Their contributions do, however, provide a good introduction to the traditions within which they are working and so it is not necessary to provide more information here. It is nevertheless important to note in McLoughlin's case that his analysis of “technological systems” and “system architectures” is based on earlier work by McLoughlin and his colleagues, cited in the article, on the complex nature of “engineering systems” and the importance of taking this complexity into account in any discussion of “the impact” of “technology” on organisation. If the result of this issue is the stimulation of system designers to read further in such areas or the encouragement of industrial sociologists to become more involved in research directed towards human-oriented system design then it will have served its purpose.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Badham, R. and Schallock, B. (1991 forthcoming). The human shaping of CIM.Engineering Management Journal, December.Google Scholar
  2. Badham, R. and Naschold, F. (1991 forthcoming). New technology policy concepts. In Aicholzer, G. Schienstock, G. (eds.),Technology Policy: Towards and Integration of Social and Ecological Concerns, De Gruyters, Berlin.Google Scholar
  3. Bauman, Z. (1973).Culture as Praxis, Routledge and Kegan Paul, London.Google Scholar
  4. Berg, M. (1980).The Machinery Question and the Making of Political Economy 1815–1848, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  5. Braverman, H. (1974).Labour and Monopoly Capital, Monthly Review Press, New York.Google Scholar
  6. Brödner, P. (1900).The Shape of Future Technology, Springer-Verlag, London.Google Scholar
  7. Brödner, P. (1989). ‘In Search of the Computer Aided Craftsman”,AI and Society,3, 39–46.Google Scholar
  8. Brödner, P. (1988). Options for CIM: “unmanned factory” versus skill-based manufacturing.Computer Integrated Manufacturing Systems, 1(2).Google Scholar
  9. Brödner, P. (ed.) (1987).Strategic Options for “New Production Systems”: CHIM: Computer and Human Integrated Manufacturing. FAST Occasional Papers No. 150, Brussels.Google Scholar
  10. Claeys, (1987).Machinery, Money and the Millenium: From Moral Economy to Socialism, 1815–1860, Polity Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  11. Cooley, M. (1986).Architect or Bee?, Abacus, London.Google Scholar
  12. Corbett, J. (1987). Human Work Design Criteria and the Design Process: The Devil in the Detail. In P. Brödner (ed.)Skill-Based Automated Manufacturing, Pergamon, Oxford.Google Scholar
  13. Corbett, J., Rasmussen, L and Rauner, F., (1991).Crossing the Border: The Social and Engineering Design of Computer Integrated Manufacturing Systems, Springer-Verlag, London.Google Scholar
  14. Dankbaar, B and den Hertog, F., (1991). Labour Process Analysis and Socio-Technical Design: Living Apart Together?,New Technology, Work and Employment, 122–134.Google Scholar
  15. Ehn, P., (1988).Work Oriented Design of Computer Artefacts. Arbetslivcentrum, Stockholm.Google Scholar
  16. Grootings, P. (ed.) (1990). New Forms of Work Organisation. De Gruyters, Berlin.Google Scholar
  17. Gustavsen, B. (1987). Report on the LOM Programme,Ontario Centre for the Quality of Working Life, Toronto.Google Scholar
  18. Hertog, J. F. den and Schoeder, P. (1989).Social Research for Technological Change: Lessons from National Programmes in Europe and North America, MERIT, Maastricht.Google Scholar
  19. Kaplinsly, R. (1984).Automation, the technology and society, Longman Group, HarlowGoogle Scholar
  20. Kelly, J. E. (1982).Scientific Management, Job Redesign and Work Performance, Academic Press, New York.Google Scholar
  21. Kidd, P. (1990).Telephone Interview, Fraunhofer IPK, Berlin.Google Scholar
  22. Kidd, P. (Ed.) (1990).Organisation, People and Technology in European Manufacturing: Interdisciplinary Research for the 1990s. CEC/FAST Consultancy Report, Brussels.Google Scholar
  23. Knights, D., Willmott, H., and Collinson, D. (eds.) (1985).Job Redesign: Critical Perspectives on the Labour Process, London: Gower.Google Scholar
  24. Leydesdorff and P. Van den Besselaar (1987). Squeezed between Capital and Technology: On the Participation of Labour in the Knowledge SocietyActa Sociologica,30, 3/4.Google Scholar
  25. Rosenbrock, H. (ed.) (1990).Designing Human Centred Technology, Springer-Verlag, London.Google Scholar
  26. Rosenbrock, H. (1991).Machines with a Purpose, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  27. Salzman, H. (1991). Skill Based Design: Technology, Productivity and the Quality of Working Life. In P. Adler (ed.) (forthcoming)Technology Design for Usability.Google Scholar
  28. Sorge, A. and W. Streeck, (1988). Industrial Relations and Technical Change: the case for an extended perspective. In R. Hyman and W. Streeck (eds.),New Technology and Industrial Relations, Blacwell, Oxford.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London Limited 1991

Authors and Affiliations

  • Richard J. Badham
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Science and Technology StudiesUniversity of WollongongWollongongAustralia

Personalised recommendations