Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

e-Infrastructures: How Do We Know and Understand Them? Strategic Ethnography and the Biography of Artefacts

  • Published:
Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW) Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In health research and services, and in many other domains, we note the emergence of large-scale information systems intended for long-term use with multiple users and uses. These e-infrastructures are becoming more widespread and pervasive and, by enabling effective sharing of information and coordination of activities between diverse, dispersed groups, are expected to transform knowledge-based work. Social scientists have sought to analyse the significance of these systems and the processes by which they are created. Much current attention has been drawn to the often-problematic experience of those attempting to establish them. By contrast, this paper is inspired by concerns about the theoretical and methodological weakness of many studies of technology and work organisation—particularly the dominance of relatively short-term, often single site studies of technology implementation. These weaknesses are particularly acute in relation to the analysis of infrastructural technologies. We explore the relevance to such analysis of recent developments in what we call the Biography of Artefacts (BoA) perspective—which emphasises the value of strategic ethnography: theoretically-informed, multi-site and longitudinal studies: We seek to draw insights here from a programme of empirical research into the long-term evolution of corporate e-infrastructures (reflected in current Enterprise Resource Planning systems) and review some new conceptual tools arising from recent research into e-Infrastructures (e-Is). These are particularly relevant to understanding the current and ongoing difficulties encountered in attempts to develop large-scale Health Infrastructures.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Though we use the term e-infrastructure we note that these various terms (cyberinfrastructure, information infrastructure etc) are used in inconsistent and overlapping ways.

  2. We find it interesting that there are very few CSCW studies of ERP implementation. (Indeed, the area of packaged software appears rather strangely to have been mostly ignored by this group of scholars). The few studies we did find, however, exemplified similar aspects of the more general information systems literature in highlighting the gap between expectations and outcomes. Taylor and Virgili (2008: 68), for instance, write: ‘...it then became possible to conceptualise the gap between current modes of working, and those that SAP envisioned. As this process transpired, however, the complexity of the SAP technology was also beginning to reveal itself. How to reconcile accepted practice and new system now became less a simple matter of identifying discrepancies and correcting them than it did of finding a way to deal with the intractable realities of practice either by modifying the technology, or abandoning the practice—or both. This was not exactly the way the development process had been envisioned. It was more complex—considerably more’.

  3. Indeed classical ethnography, which involves immersive acquaintance with what is involved with being ‘a member of the tribe’, might in many ways escape our critique of short-term, local case-studies.

  4. Our critique of the naïve empiricism of localist studies (especially those inspired by ethnomethodology) also applies to the simplistic methodological nostrums of Actor-Network Theory (ANT) as exemplified by Latour’s (1987) much cited exhortation to ‘follow the actor’. This begs the obvious question—“which actors should we follow?” (see Sørensen and Levold 1992). What is at stake here is an orientation to theory. ANT Theorists have argued against the resort to the existing body of social science findings on the grounds that these may offer misleading generalisations and presume that the world of tomorrow will simply repeat patterns entrenched in current structures. Similarly, ANT writers suggest, social science methodologies embed potentially misleading presumptions about what are the key factors at play—and in this way may unintentionally constitute reality, for example by naturalising the power imputed to existing institutions (Callon and Latour 1981; Law 2004). However their claims to be able to apply ‘naturalistic’ observation methods, unencumbered by theoretical commitments, fall foul of well-established critiques of empiricism, and not least of failing to address taken-for-granted social relations (and they have been criticised for overlooking entrenched asymmetries for example of class and gender). We argue instead that the existing research base should be treated as provisionally or partially-valid background knowledge—that we can use to inform research design choices and interpretation rather than to prejudge outcomes (Pollock and Williams 2009).

  5. See previous footnote.

  6. There will be sharp differences for example between the exigencies surrounding the development of different kinds of software development—for example between complex organisational technologies discussed here and discrete or component technologies such as personal productivity tools) (Brady et al. 1992).

  7. Arising from our work on the development of standards for inter-organisational network systems (The Networked Enterprise: The Shaping of Institutions and Standards in E-Business. UK Economic Social Research Council (ESRC) E-Society Programme), we (Ian Graham, Robin Williams, Neil Pollock) organised an international research workshop on “Information Infrastructures and Architectures” (e-Science Institute, Edinburgh 27–28 September 2006 http://www.nesc.ac.uk/esi/events/700/). By coincidence Edwards and colleagues in the USA simultaneously organised a National Science Foundation funded Workshop on “History and Theory of Infrastructure: Lessons for New Scientific Cyberinfrastructures” in Michigan (Edwards et al. 2007).

  8. Data from NHS Information Centre http://www.ic.nhs.uk/statistics-and-data-collections/workforce sampled 10 March 2010.

  9. And many current visions of health service reform envisage the extension and integration of services, and the IT systems that support them, between health and social care.

  10. The centralised architecture proposed in England for an electronic Summary Care Record that will be available to NHS staff involved in a patient’s care, anywhere in the country, has proved rather controversial, in a context in which some have expressed deep concern about the confidentiality of Electronic Patient Records. The potential sensitivity of information stored on Health e-Is, as well as the clinical importance of data integrity, underpin the strict regulation of access and exchange of health information, and has a profound influence on system design and architecture and the procurement and implementation process. The competing exigencies—for example the stringent data protection requirements for personal health data coupled with the frequent need to share such data for risk abatement and effective care (Norris 2002)—create additional contradictions to the development of health e-Is.

  11. Personal correspondence with Sampsa Hyysalo 18th March 2010.

  12. Indeed there are evident similarities between the visions and models of change between healthcare and other industrial sectors, including the notions of information integration as well as a process orientation to technology enabled restructuring (Norris 2002; Bragato and Jacobs 2003).

  13. A wide range of other factors have been advanced to help explain the particular difficulties that seem to be associated with information technology adoption in health services. As well as their complexity and large scale, these include organisational fragmentation and the difficulties integrating political reform with the often rather longer timeframes for large-scale procurement, implementation and evolution of health e-Is (Johnson 2009). As a result, despite an extremely long history of IT adoption in health services, dating back to the 1960s and before, we do not always find the cumulative development of IT capabilities and infrastructures. At the same time, our colleague Mark Hartswood has drawn our attention to an implication of our analysis (personal communication, 30th March 2010) that the emergence of Health e-Is is inevitably going to be a ‘long road’: a mixed bag of failure and partial success in the development and maturation of generic technologies and systems that support complex organisational work over a number of decades.

  14. See http://www.connectingforhealth.nhs.uk/ The description that follows addresses the unfolding of NPfIT in its major area of England. Other parts of the UK have followed somewhat differing approaches.

  15. As we have noted elsewhere (Pollock and Williams 2009: 66), market provision of complex organisational solutions frequently encounter ‘incomplete contracting’ issues. Though effective monitoring of the contract calls for strict prior specification of customer requirements which can be embedded in the contract and their fulfilment policed, in practice the user organisation only has an imperfect initial understanding of its own requirements, which invariably evolve as the system becomes implemented, partly in reaction to the capabilities of the package.

  16. For example, as Anderson et al. (2006) observe, when classification systems become embedded in organisational software solutions, deficiencies in agreeing classification systems are transposed into a categorisation problem—of getting idiosyncratic events to conform to standard categories.

  17. Personal correspondence with Mark Hartswood 30 March 2010.

  18. Indeed these tools developed for analysing the evolution of e-Is can also contribute to analyses of the biographies of other large-scale, complex and evolving technologies.

References

  • Al-Mashari, M. (2003). Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) Systems: a research agenda. Industrial Management and Data Systems, 102(3), 165–170.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ackerman, M. S. (2000). The intellectual challenge of CSCW: the gap between social requirements and technical feasibility. Human-Computer Interaction, 15(2 & 3), 179–203.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, B. J. (2000). Where the rubber hits the road: Notes on the deployment problem in workplace studies. In P. Luff, J. Hindmarsh, & C. Heath (Eds.), Workplace studies: Recovering work practice and informing system design. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, S., Hardstone, G., Procter, R., & Williams, R. (2006). Down in the (Data)base(ment): Supporting configuration in organisational information systems. Chap. 9. In:Ackerman, M. S., Halverson, C. A., Erickson, T., & Kellogg, W. A. (Eds). Resources, co-evolution and artifacts: Theory in CSCW (Computer Supported Cooperative Work). Kluwer, pp. 221–254.

  • Arrow, K. J. (1962). The economic implications of learning by doing. The Review of Economic Studies, 29, 155–173.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berg, M., & Timmermans, S. (2000). Orders and their others: on the constitution of universalities in medical work. Configurations, 8(1), 31–61. doi:10.1353/con.2000.0001.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bessant, J. (1983). Management and manufacturing innovation; the case of information technology. In G. Winch (Ed.), Information technology in manufacturing processes (pp. 14–30). London: Rossendale.

    Google Scholar 

  • Botta-Genoulaz, V., Millet, P. A., & Grabot, B. (2005). A survey on the recent literature on ERP systems. Computers in Industry, 56, 510–522.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bowker, G. C., & Star, S. L. (1999). Sorting things out: Classification and its consequences. MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brady, T., Tierney, M., & Williams, R. (1992). The commodification of industry-application software. Industrial and Corporate Change, 1(3), 489–514.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bragato, L., & Jacobs, K. (2003). Care pathways: the road to better health services? Journal of Health Organisation and Management, 17(3), 164–180.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Braudel, F. (1949). Méditerranée et le monde mediterranéen a l’époque de Philippe II Vol.1 In English translation (tr. Sian Reynolds 1972) as The Mediterranean and the Mediterranean World in the Age of Philip II, vol. I. London: Collins.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bunduchi, R., Graham, I., Smart, A., & Williams, R. (2005). The tensions shaping the emergence of standard bodies: the case of a national health informatics standard standards body. Prometheus, 23(2), 149–166.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bunduchi, R., Williams, R., Graham, I., & Smart, A. (2006). XML based clinical data standardisation in the National Health Service Scotland. Informatics in Primary Care, 14(4), 227–234.

    Google Scholar 

  • Büscher, M., Gill, S., Mogensen, P., & Shapiro, D. (2001). Landscapes of practice: bricolage as a method for situated design. Computer Supported Cooperative Work, 10(1), 1–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Button, G. (1993). Technology in working order: Studies of work, interaction, and technology. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Callon, M., & Latour, B. (1981). Unscrewing the Big Leviathan: How actors macrostructure reality and how sociologists help them to do so. In K. D. Knorr-Cetina & A. V. Cicourel (Eds.), Advances in social theory and methodology: Toward an integration of micro- and macro-sociologies. Boston: Routledge and Kegan Paul.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chae, B., & Poole, M. S. (2005). The surface of emergence in systems development: agency, institutions, and large-scale information systems. European Journal of Information Systems, 14(1), 19–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ciborra, C. U., Braa, K., Cordella, A., Dahlbom, B., Failla, A., Hanseth, O., et al. (2001). From control to drift: The dynamics of corporate information infrastructures. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clark, P., & Staunton, N. (1989). Innovation in technology and organisation. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clausen, C., & Williams, R. (Eds.) (1997), The social shaping of computer-aided production management and computer integrated manufacture, Vol. 5, Proceedings of International Conference, COST A4, ISBN 92 828 1569 2, European Commission DGXIII, Luxembourg.

  • Currie, W. L., & Guah, M. W. (2007). Conflicting institutional logics: a national programme for IT in the organisational field of healthcare. Journal of Information Technology, 22(3), 235–247.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Di Maggio, P. J., & Powell, W. W. (1983). The iron cage revisited: institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organisational fields. American Sociological Review, 48(2), 147–160.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dourish, P. (2001). Where the action is: The foundations of embodied interaction. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

  • Eason, K. E. (2007). Local sociotechnical system development in the NHS National Programme for Information Technology. Journal of Information Technology, 22(3), 257–264.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Edwards, P. N., Jackson, S. J., Bowker, G. C., & Knobel, C. P. (2007). Understanding infrastructure: Dynamics, tensions, and design. Ann Arbor: Deep Blue.

    Google Scholar 

  • Edwards, P. N., Bowker, G. C., Jackson, S. J., & Williams, R. (2009). Introduction: an agenda for infrastructure studies. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, Special Issue on e-Infrastructure, 10(5) paper 1, pp. 155–173. http://aisel.aisnet.org/jais/vol10/iss5/.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ellingsen, G., & Monteiro, E. (2003). A patchwork planet integration and cooperation in hospitals. Computer Supported Cooperative Work, 12(1), pp. 71–95. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1022469522932.

  • Ellingsen, G., & Monteiro, E. (2006) Seamless integration: standardisation across multiple settings. Computer Supported Cooperative Work, 15(5–6), 443–466.

    Google Scholar 

  • ERP Research Group (2006). ERP Systems and Related Issues Bibliography: 600 Articles’ (updated 5 May 2006), Victoria University Australia. Available online: (accessed 15 May 2007). (http://www.business.vu.edu.au/sap/Research.html#ERP_Systems_and_Related_Issues_Bibliogr).

  • Esteves, J., & Pastor, J. (2001). Enterprise resource planning systems research: an annotated bibliography. Communications of AIS, 7(8), 1–52.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fitzpatrick, G. (Ed.). (2003). The locales framework: Understanding and designing for wicked problems. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Fleck, J. (1988). Innofusion or diffusation?: the nature of technological development in robotics. Edinburgh PICT Working Paper No. 4, Research Centre for Social Sciences, The University of Edinburgh: Edinburgh.

  • Fleck, J., Webster, J., & Williams, R. (1990). The dynamics of I.T. implementation: a reassessment of paradigms and trajectories of development. Futures, 22, 618–640.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gerst, M. (2006). The socio-technical dynamics of ICT innovation: A social shaping analysis of portals. Unpublished PhD thesis. Research Centre for Social Sciences, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh.

  • Graham, I., Spinardi, G., Williams, R., & Webster, J. (1995). The dynamics of EDI standards development. Technology Analysis and Strategic Management, 7(1), 3–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Graham, I., Spinardi, G., & Williams, R. (1996). Diversity in the emergence of electronic commerce. Journal of Information Technology, 11(1), 161–172.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Graham, I., Lloyd, A., Slack, R., & Williams, R. (2003). Uptake of BPR, PRECEPT Working paper, Danish Technical University: Lyngby.

  • Hanseth, O., & Braa, K. (1998). Technology as traitor: emergent SAP infrastructure in a global organization. In: Proceedings of the international Conference on Information Systems (Helsinki, Finland). International Conference on Information Systems. Association for Information Systems, Atlanta, GA, pp. 188–196.

  • Hanseth, O., Monteiro, E., & Hatling, M. (1996). Developing information infrastructure standards: the tension between standardization and flexibility. Science Technology and Human Values, 21(4), 407–426.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hanseth, O., Jacucci, E., Grisot, M., & Aanestad, M. (2006). Reflexive standardization: side effects and complexity in standard-making. MISQ: Special Issue on Standardization, 30, 563–581.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hardstone, G., D’Adderio, L., & Williams, R. (2006). Standardization, trust and dependability. In K. Clarke, G. Hardstone, M. Rouncefield, & I. Sommerville (Eds.), Trust in technology: A socio-technical perspective (pp. 69–103). Dordrecht: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Hartswood, M., Procter, R., Slack, R., Voss, A., Büscher, M., Rouncefield, M., et al. (2002). Co-realisation: towards a principled synthesis of ethnomethodology and participatory design. Scandinavian Journal of Information Systems, 14(2), 9–30.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hepsø, V., Monteiro, E., & Rolland, K. H. (2009). Ecologies of e-Infrastructures. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, Special Issue on e-Infrastructure, 10(5) paper 5, 430–446. http://aisel.aisnet.org/jais/vol10/iss5/.

  • Hine, C. (2007). Multi-sited ethnography as a middle range methodology for contemporary STS. Science Technology and Human Values, 32(6), 652–671.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hutchins, E. (1995). Cognition in the wild. Cambridge: The MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hughes, J. A, King, V., Rodden, T., & Andersen, H. (1994). Moving out of the control room: Ethnography in system design. Proceedings of the 1994 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW 94), (pp. 429–438). Chapel Hill, North Carolina: Association of Computing Machinery.

  • Hyysalo, S. (2004). Uses of innovation: Wristcare in the practices of engineers and elderly. Academic Dissertation, University of Helsinki, Department of Education, Helsinki.

  • Hyysalo, S. (2010). Health technology development and use. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johannessen, L. K., & Ellingsen, G. (2009). Integration and generification–agile software development in the healthcare market. Computer Supported Cooperative Work, 18(5–6), 607–634.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, C. W. (2010). Case studies in the failure of healthcare information systems, available online at http://www.dcs.gla.ac.uk/~johnson/papers/AHRQ/case_study.pdf.

  • Johnson, C. W. (2009). Politics and patient safety don’t mix: Understanding the failure of large-scale software procurement for healthcare systems. In: P. Casely, & C. W. Johnson (Eds.). Proceedings, Fourth IET Systems Safety Conference. IET Conference Publications: London.

  • Jørgensen, U., & Sørensen, O. (1999). Arenas of development: a space populated by actor-worlds, artefacts, and surprises. Technology Analysis and Strategic Management, 11(3), 409–429.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kallinikos, J. (2004a). Farewell to constructivism: Technology and context-embedded action. In C. Avgerou, C. Ciborra, & F. Land (Eds.), The social study of information and communication technology: Innovation, actors, and contexts. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kallinikos, J. (2004b). Deconstructing information packages: organizational and behavioural implications of ERP systems. Information Technology & People, 17(1), 8–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koch, C. (2003). ERP-software packages: Between mass production communities and intraorganisational political processes. In D. Preece & J. Laurila (Eds.), Technological change and organizational action (pp. 56–76). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koch, C. (2007). ERP a moving target. International Journal of Business Information Systems, 2(4), 426–443.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Latour, B. (1987). Science in action. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Law, J. (2004). After method: Mess in social science research. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Luff, P., Hindmarsh, J., Heath, C., & Hinds, P. J. (Eds.). (2000). Workplace studies: Recovering work practice and informing system design. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • MacKay, H., & Gillespie, G. (1992). Extending the social shaping of technology approach: ideology and appropriation. Social Studies of Science, 22, 685–716.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MacKay, H., Carne, H., Beynon-Davies, P., & Tudhope, D. (2000). Reconfiguring the user: using rapid application development. Social Studies of Science, 30(5), 737–757.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MacKenzie, D., & Wajcman, J. (Eds.). (1985). The social shaping of technology: How the refrigerator got its hum. Milton Keynes: Open University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • McLaughlin, J., Rosen, P., Skinner, D., & Webster, A. (1999). Valuing technology: Organisations, culture and change. London: Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Mabert, V., Soni, A., & Venkataramanan, M. (2001). Enterprise resource planning: common myths versus evolving reality. Business Horizons, May–June: 69–76.

  • Marcus, G. E. (1995). Ethnography in/of the world system: the emergence of multi-sited Ethnography. Annual Review of Anthropology, 24, 95–117.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Markus, M. L., Tanis, C., and van Fenema, P. C. (2000). Enterprise resource planning: multisite ERP implementations. Commun. ACM 43(4), pp. 42–46. doi: http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/332051.332068.

    Google Scholar 

  • Martin, D., & Sommerville, I. (2006). Ethnography and the social structure of work, Chap. 9. In D. Besnard, C. Gacek, & C. B. Jones (Eds.), Structure for dependability: Computer-based systems from an interdisciplinary perspective (pp. 169–188). Springer: London.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Martin, D., Hartswood, M., Slack, M., & Voss, A. (2006). Achieving dependability in the configuration, integration and testing of healthcare technologies. Computer Supported Cooperative Work, 15(5–6), 467–499.

    Google Scholar 

  • Martin, D., Mariani, J., & Rouncefield, M. (2007). Managing integration work in an NHS electronic patient record (EPR) project. Health Informatics Journal, 13(1), 47–56.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martin, D., Procter, R., Mariani, J., & Rouncefield, M. (2007b). ‘Working the contract’ OZCHI 2007: Australian computer-human interaction conference. Adelaide, Australia, 29–30 November, 2007.

  • Monteiro, E., & Hanseth, O. (1995). Social shaping of information infrastructure: On being specific about the technology. In: W. Orlikowski, G. Walsham, M. R. Jones, & J. I. DeGross (Eds.). Information technology and changes in organisational work (pp. 325–343). Chapman & Hall.

  • National Audit Office (2008). The National Programme for IT in the NHS: Progress since 2006, National Audit Office Value for Money Report, Report by the Comptroller and Auditor General [HC 484-I Session 2007–2008: 16 May 2008] ISBN: 9780102954128.

  • Norris, A. C. (2002). Current trends and challenges in health informatics. Health Informatics Journal, 8, 205–213.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peltu, M., Eason, K., & Clegg, C. (2008). How a Sociotechnical approach can help NPfIT deliver better NHS patient care, Bayswater Institute: London. Available online at: http://www.bayswaterinst.org/downloads/Sociotech%20Group%20NPfIT%20report%20May08.pdf.

  • Pipek, V., & Wulf, V. (2009). Infrastructuring: toward an integrated perspective on the design and use of information technology. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, Special Issue on e-Infrastructure, 10(5) http://aisel.aisnet.org/jais/vol10/iss5/.

  • Plowman, L, Rogers, Y., & Ramage, M. (1995). What are workplace studies for? In: H. Marmolin, Y. Sundblad, and K. Schmidt (Eds.) ECSCW ’95. Proceedings of the Fourth European Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work, 10–14 September 1995, Stockholm, Sweden, H. Marmolin, Y. Sundblad, and K. Schmidt (eds.), Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, pp. 309–324.

  • Pollock, N. (2005). When is a work-around? Conflict and struggle in computer systems development. Science, Technology and Human Values, 30(4), 496–514.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pollock, N., & Cornford, J. (2004). ERP systems and the university as an ‘Unique’ organisation. Information Technology and People, 17(1), 31–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pollock, N., & Williams, R. (2007). Technology choice and its performance: towards a sociology of software package procurement. Information and Organization, 17(3), 131–160.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pollock, N., & Williams, R. (2009). Software and organisations: The biography of the enterprise-wide system or how SAP conquered the world? Routledge.

  • Pollock, N., Williams, R., & D’Adderio, L. (2007). Global software and its provenance: generification work in the production of organizational software packages. Social Studies of Science, 37(2), 254–280.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Randel, B. (2007). A computer scientist’s reactions to NPfIT. Journal of Information Technology, 22, 222–234.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ribes, D., & Finholt, T. A. (2009). The long now of technology infrastructure: articulating tensions in development. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, Special Issue on e-Infrastructure, 10(5), 375–398. http://aisel.aisnet.org/jais/vol10/iss5/.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sahay, S., Monteiro, E., & Aanestad, M. (2009). Configurable politics and asymmetric integration: health e-Infrastructures in India. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, Special Issue on e-Infrastructure, 10(5) http://aisel.aisnet.org/jais/vol10/iss5/ article 3, pp. 399–414.

  • Schmidt, K. (2000). The critical role of workplace studies in CSCW, Chap. 6. In P. Luff, J. Hindmarsh, C. Heath, & P. J. Hinds (Eds.), Workplace studies: Recovering work practice and informing system design (pp. 141–149). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Soh, C., Kien, S., & Tay-Yap, J. (2000). Cultural fits and misfits: is ERP a universal solution? Communications of the ACM, 43(4), 47–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Somers, T., & Nelson, K. (2004). A taxonomy of players and activities across the ERP project life cycle. Information and Management, 41, 257–78.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sørensen, K. H. (1996). ‘Learning technology, constructing culture: socio-technical change as social learning’, STS Working Paper, No 18/96. Centre for Technology and Society, Trondheim.

  • Sørensen, K., & Levold, N. (1992). Tacit networks, heterogeneous engineers, and embodied technology. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 17(1), 13–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Star, S. L., & Ruhleder, K. (1996). Steps towards an ecology of infrastructure: design and access for large information spaces. Information Systems Research, 7(1), 111–134.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stewart, J., & Williams, R. (2005). The wrong trousers? Beyond the design fallacy: Social learning and the user, Chapter 10. In D. Howcroft & E. M. Trauth (Eds.), Handbook of critical information systems research: Theory and application (pp. 195–223). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Suchman, L. A. (1987). Plans and situation actions: The problem of human-machine communication. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Suchman, L. (2002). Located accountabilities in technology production. Scandinavian Journal of Information Systems, 14(2), 91–105.

    Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, J. R., & Virgili, S. (2008). Why ERPs disappoint: The importance of getting the organisational text right, chap 5. In B. Grabot, A. Mayère, & I. Baze (Eds.), ERP systems and organisational change: A socio-technical insight (pp. 59–84). London: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Timmermans, S., & Berg, M. (1997). Standardization in action: achieving universalism and localization in medical protocols. Social Studies of Science, 27, 273–305.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tingling, P., & Parent, M. (2002). Mimetic isomorphism and technology evaluation: does imitation transcend judgement. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 3(5), 113–43.

    Google Scholar 

  • Turner, W., Bowker, G., Gasser, L., & Zacklad, M. (2006). Information infrastructures for distributed collective practices. Computer Supported Cooperative Work, 15, 93–110.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ure, J. R., Procter, N., Lin, Y., Hartswood, M., Anderson, S., Lloyd, S., et al. (2009). The development of data infrastructures for eHealth: a socio-technical perspective. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, Special Issue on e-Infrastructure, 10(5) http://aisel.aisnet.org/jais/vol10/iss5/ article 4, pp. 415–419.

  • van Fenema, P. C., Koppius, O. R., & van Baalen, P. J. (2007). Implementing packaged enterprise software in multi-site firms: intensification of organizing and learning. European Journal of Information Systems, 16, 584–598.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Voss, A. (2006) Corealisation: A radical respecification of the working division of labour in systems development. Unpublished PhD thesis, School of Informatics, The University of Edinburgh: Edinburgh.

  • Walsham, G. (2001). Making a world of difference: IT in a global context. Chichester: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Webster, J. (1990). Office automation: The labour process and women’s work in Britain. Hemel Hempstead: Harvester Wheatsheaf.

    Google Scholar 

  • Webster, J. (1991). Advanced manufacturing technologies: Work organisation and social relations crystallised. In J. Law (Ed.), A sociology of monsters: Essays on power, technology, and domination (pp. 192–222). London: Routledge. Sociological review monograph, 38.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wei, H., Li, C., Wang, E., Li, C., & Ju, P. (2005). Understanding misalignment and cascading change of ERP implementation: a stage view of process analysis. European Journal of Information Systems, 14(4), 324–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Williams, R., & Steward, F. (1985). The role of the parties concerned in the introduction of new technology—case studies on the implementation of collective agreements on new technology in Britain. Dublin: European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams, R., & Edge, D. (1996). The social shaping of technology. Research Policy, 25(6), 865–899.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Williams, R. (1997a). Universal solutions or local contingencies? Tensions and contradictions in the mutual shaping of technology and work organisation. In: I. McLoughlin, & D. Mason (Eds.). Innovation organizational change and technology (Chap. 8, pp. 170–185). London: International Thompson Business Press.

  • Williams, R. (1997b). The social shaping of a failed technology: Mismatch and tension in the supply and use of computer-aided production management. In: C. Clausen, & Williams, R. (Eds.). The social shaping of computer-aided production Management and computer integrated manufacture, Vol. 5, ISBN 92 828 1569 2, COST A4, European Commission DGXIII, Luxembourg, pp. 109–130.

  • Williams, R., Bunduchi, R., Graham, I., Pollock, N., Procter, R., & Voss, A. (2004). Understanding the evolution of standards: Alignment and reconfiguration in standards development and implementation arenas. Proceedings of the 4S/EASST Conference, Paris, 27–29 August 2004.

  • Williams, R. A., Stewart, J. K., & Slack, R. (2005). Social learning in technological innovation: Experimenting with information and communication technologies. Edward Elgar.

  • Winthereik, B. R., & Vikkelsø, S. (2005). ICT and integrated care: some dilemmas of standardising inter-organisational communication. Computer Supported Cooperative Work, 14, 43–67.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wu, J. (2008). ‘Critical Success Factors for ERP System Implementation’, Research and practical issues of enterprise information systems II Volume 1 (pp. 739–745). Boston: Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We acknowledge the support of the UK Economic and Social Research Council for various studies and especially Research Grant [Res 000 23 0466] The Biography and Evolution of Standardised Software Packages, on which this paper primarily draws. The research team was Robin Williams, Neil Pollock, Luciana D’Adderio and Robert Procter. We would particularly like to acknowledge valuable comments provided by Dr Mark Hartswood, University of Edinburgh, School of Informatics, and Dr Sampsa Hyysalo, University of Helsinki, College for Advanced Studies, as well as three anonymous CSCW referees.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. The University of Edinburgh Business School, Edinburgh, Scotland, UK

    Neil Pollock

  2. Institute for the Study of Science, Technology and Innovation, The University of Edinburgh, High School Yards, Edinburgh, EH1 1LZ, Scotland, UK

    Robin Williams

Authors
  1. Neil Pollock
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Robin Williams
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Robin Williams.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Pollock, N., Williams, R. e-Infrastructures: How Do We Know and Understand Them? Strategic Ethnography and the Biography of Artefacts. Comput Supported Coop Work 19, 521–556 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10606-010-9129-4

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10606-010-9129-4

Key words

Search

Navigation