Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Human Work Interaction Design for Socio-Technical Theory and Action

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Human Work Interaction Design

Part of the book series: Human–Computer Interaction Series ((HCIS))

  • 665 Accesses

Abstract

This chapter introduces and compares systematically HWID to current research knowledge about socio-technical HCI. It introduces to the existing body of HWID research, and to traditional and more recent approaches to work analysis and interaction design. Then it compares systematically HWID and Experience Design (Hassenzahl et al in Synth Lect Human-Cent Inform 3(1):1–95, 2010), HWID and Practice-Based Design (Volker Wulf et al in Socio-informatics—a practice-based perspective on the design and use of IT artifacts. Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2018), and HWID and ‘Design Tensions’ for group work (Gross in Comput Supp Cooperat Work (CSCW) 22(4):425–474, 2013). This is followed up with a summary overview and outline of what is unique and what HWID as a platform for socio-technical HCI theorizing shares with other socio-technical HCI design approaches. The chapter ends with an introduction to four types of HWID relation artefacts.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    http://ifip-tc13.org/interact/.

  2. 2.

    Currently at https://hwid.unibs.it/.

  3. 3.

    See for example https://fis.uni-bamberg.de/handle/uniba/21159, http://ifip-tc13.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/INTERACT_2017_Adjunct_v4_final_24jan.pdf.

  4. 4.

    Attachment theory is today used in HCI to explain people’s attachment to their mobile phones.

  5. 5.

    Miller wrote the famous paper about 7+-2 items in short term memory that has been used so much in HCI for menu design.

  6. 6.

    HCI today is often criticized for being too much focused on the technical parts and missing the greater picture of for example sustainable design (Abdelnour-Nocera, Clemmensen, Hertzum, Singh, & Singh, 2019; Eriksson et al., 2016).

References

  • Abdelnour-Nocera, J., & Clemmensen, T. (2019). Theorizing about socio-technical approaches to HCI. In B. R. Barricelli, V. Roto, T. Clemmensen, P. Campos, A. Lopes, F. Gonçalves, & J. Abdelnour-Nocera (Eds.), Human Work Interaction Design. Designing Engaging Automation (pp. 242–262). Cham: Springer International Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Abdelnour-Nocera, J., Clemmensen, T., Hertzum, M., Singh, D., & Singh, V. V. (2019). Socio-technical HCI for ethical value exchange: Lessons from India. International Conference on Social Implications of Computers in Developing Countries, pp. 229–240. Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Abdelnour-Nocera, J., Dunckley, L., & Hall, P. (2005). Reconfiguring producers and users through human-work interaction. In Proceedings of the workshop: Describing Users in Context—Perspectives on Human-Work Interaction, at the INTERACT 2005, Rome, Italy, pp. 27–33.

    Google Scholar 

  • Abdelnour-Nocera, J., Oussena, S., & Burns, C. (2015). Human work interaction design of the smart university. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-27048-7_9.

  • Abdelnour Nocera, J., Barricelli, B. R., Lopes, A., Campos, P., & Clemmensen, T. (Eds.). (2015). Human work interaction design. Work Analysis and Interaction Design Methods for Pervasive and Smart Workplaces. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-27048-7.

  • Akbar, F., Bayraktaroglu, A. E., Buddharaju, P., Da Cunha Silva, D. R., Gao, G., Grover, T., … & Pavlidis, I. (2019). Email makes you sweat: Examining email interruptions and stress using thermal imaging. Proceedings of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 1–14.

    Google Scholar 

  • Andersen, S. M., & Baum, A. (1994). Transference in Interpersonal Relations: Inferences and Affect Based on Significant-Other Representations. Journal of Personality, 62(4), 459–497. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.0.4.87/j.1467-6494.1994.tb00306.x.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bankins, S., & Formosa, P. (2020). When AI meets PC: exploring the implications of workplace social robots and a human-robot psychological contract. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 29(2), 215–229.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bannon, L., Bardzell, J., & Bodker, S. (2018). Reimagining participatory design. Interactions, 26(1), 26–32. https://doi.org/10.1145/3292015.

  • Bannon, L. J. (1991). From human factors to human actors. book chapter in Greenbaum, J. & Kyng, M.(Eds.) Design at Work: Cooperative Design of Computer Systems (pp. 25–44). Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bardzell, J., & Bardzell, S. (2016). Humanistic HCI. Interactions, 23(2), 20–29.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barricelli, B. R., Roto, V., Campos, P., Clemmensen, T., Karvonen, H., Gonçalves, F., … & Lopes, A. G. (Eds.). (2018). Proceedings of Human-Work Interaction Design (HWID’18)—Designing Engaging Automation. IFIP working conference in Espoo, Finland, 20.-21.8.2018. [forthcoming]. Springer Berlin Heidelberg.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bjørn-Andersen, N., & Clemmensen, T. (2017). The shaping of the Scandinavian Socio-Technical IS research tradition: Confessions of an accomplice. Scandinavian Journal of Information Systems, 29(1).

    Google Scholar 

  • Bjørn, P., & Østerlund, C. (2014). Sociomaterial-Design: Bounding technologies in practice. Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blomberg, J., & Karasti, H. (2013). Reflections on 25 years of ethnography in CSCW. Computer Supported Cooperative Work: CSCW: An International Journal, 22, 373–423. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10606-012-9183-1.

  • Blue, S., Shove, E., Carmona, C., & Kelly, M. P. (2016). Theories of practice and public health: understanding (un) healthy practices. Critical Public Health, 26(1), 36–50.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blythe, M. (2014). Research through design fiction: Narrative in real and imaginary abstracts. Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 703–712.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blythe, M., Andersen, K., Clarke, R., & Wright, P. (2016). Anti-solutionist strategies: Seriously silly design fiction. Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 4968–4978.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bretherton, I. (1992). The origins of attachment theory: John Bowlby and Mary Ainsworth. Developmental Psychology, 28(5), 759.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bretherton, I. (2003). Mary Ainsworth: Insightful observer and courageous theoretician. Portraits of Pioneers in Psychology, 5, 317–331.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buchenau, M., & Suri, J. F. (2000). Experience prototyping. Proceedings of the Conference on Designing Interactive Systems Processes, Practices, Methods, and Techniques—DIS ’00, 424–433. https://doi.org/10.1145/347642.347802.

  • Burns, C. (2013). Cognitive work analysis: New dimensions. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-41145-8_1.

  • Button, G., & Sharrock, W. (2009). Studies of Work and the Workplace in HCI: Concepts and Techniques. Synthesis Lectures on Human-Centered Informatics, 2(1), 1–96. Retrieved from http://esc-web.lib.cbs.dk/login? url = https://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/kbhnhh-ebooks/detail.action?docID=881122.

  • Cajander, Å. (2010). Usability–Who cares?: The introduction of user-centred systems design in organisations (The Faculty of Science and Technology, Uppsala.). Retrieved from http://www.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:310201/FULLTEXT01.pdf.

  • Cajander, Å., Larusdottir, M., Eriksson, E., & Nauwerck, G. (2015). Contextual personas as a method for understanding digital work environments. IFIP Advances in Information and Communication Technology, 468, 141–152. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-27048-7_10.

  • Campos, P., Clemmensen, T., Nocera, J. A., Katre, D., Lopes, A., & Ørngreen, R. (Eds.). (2013). Human work interaction design. Work Analysis and HCI. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-41145-8.

  • Campos, P., & Nunes, N. J. (2005). A human-work interaction design approach by modeling the user’s work styles. Describing Users in Context Perspectives on Human-Work Interaction Design, 44. In [40]

    Google Scholar 

  • Card, S. K., Moran, T. P., & Newell, A. (1983). The psychology of human-computer interaction. 1983. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carroll, J. M. (1997a). Human-computer interaction: Psychology as a science of design. Annual Review of Psychology, 48(1), 61. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.0.4.122/annurev.psych.48.1.61.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carroll, J. M. (1997b). Human–computer interaction: psychology as a science of design. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 46(4), 501–522. https://doi.org/10.1006/IJHC.1996.0101.

  • Clemmensen, T. (2008). Cultural Usability and Human work Interaction design-techniques that connects: Proceedings from NordiCHI 2008 Workshop Sunday October 19, 2008.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clemmensen, T. (2011a). A Human Work Interaction Design (HWID) case study in e-government and public information systems. International Journal of Public Information Systems, 7(3).

    Google Scholar 

  • Clemmensen, T. (2011b). Designing a simple folder structure for a complex domain. Human Technology: An Interdisciplinary Journal on Humans in ICT Environments.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clemmensen, T., Campos, P. F., Katre, D. S., Abdelnour-Nocera, J., Lopes, A., Orngreen, R., & Minocha, S. (2013). CHI 2013 Human Work Interaction Design (HWID) SIG: Past History and Future Challenges. Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems—Proceedings, 2013-April, 537–2540. https://doi.org/10.1145/2468356.2468824.

  • Clemmensen, T., Campos, P., Orngreen, R., Mark-Pejtersen, A., & Wong, W. (2006). Human work interaction design: Designing for human work. Springer Science+Business Media.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clemmensen, T., Iivari, N., Rajanen, D., & Sivaji, A. (2021). Organized UX professionals. HWID2021 Unpublished Proceedings, 1–25. Retrieved from https://www.hwid2021.com/.

  • Clemmensen, T., Kaptelinin, V., & Nardi, B. (2016). Making HCI theory work: An analysis of the use of activity theory in HCI research. Behaviour & Information Technology, 35(8), 608–627. https://doi.org/10.1080/0144929X.2016.1175507.

  • Clemmensen, T., & Nørbjerg, J. (2019a). (not) Working (with) Collaborative robots in a glass processing factory. Worst Case Practices Teaching Us the Bright Side.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clemmensen, T., & Nørbjerg, J. (2019b). ‘Digital Peer-Tutoring’. Early results from a field evaluation of a ‘UX at work’enhancing learning format. In P. Abdelnour Nocera, J., Parmaxi, A., Winckler, M., Loizides, F., Ardito, C., Bhutkar, G., Dannenmann (Ed.), Beyond Interactions INTERACT 2019 IFIP TC 13 Workshops, Paphos, Cyprus, September 2–6, 2019, Revised Selected Papers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clemmensen, T., Orngreen, R., & Pejtersen, A. M. (2005). Describing Users in Contexts: Perspectives on Human-Work Interaction Design. Workshop Proceedings of Workshop 4, Held in Conjunction with the 10th IFIP TC13 International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction. INTERACT 2005, Rom, Italy., 5, 60. Retrieved from http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?, doi = https://doi.org/10.1.1.123.7265&rep=rep1&type=pdf.

  • Clemmensen, T., Rajamanickam, V., Dannenmann, P., Petrie, H., & Winckler, M. (2018). Global thoughts, local designs. Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Convertino, G., Mentis, H. M., Slavkovic, A., Rosson, M. B., & Carroll, J. M. (2011). Supporting common ground and awareness in emergency management planning: A design research project. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction, 18(4), 22:1–34.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cross, N. (2001). Designerly ways of knowing: design discipline versus design science. Design Issues. https://doi.org/10.1162/074793601750357196.

  • de Castro Leal, D., Krüger, M., Misaki, K., Randall, D., & Wulf, V. (2019). Guerilla warfare and the use of new (and Some Old) technology: Lessons from FARC’s armed struggle in Colombia. Proceedings of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 1–12.

    Google Scholar 

  • Denner, V. (2019). Denner’s view Artificial Intelligence in Europe. Retrieved from https://www.bosch.com/stories/denners-view-artificial-intelligence-in-europe/.

  • Dennis, A. R. (2019). An unhealthy obsession with theory. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 20(9), 13.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dennis, A. R., Valacich, J. S., & Brown, S. A. (2018). A comment on “is information systems a science?” Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 43(1), 14.

    Google Scholar 

  • Desmet, P., & Pohlmeyer, A. (2013). Positive design: An introduction to design for subjective well-being. International Journal of Design, 7(3).

    Google Scholar 

  • Dimitriadis, Y., Asensio-Pérez, J. I., Hernández-Leo, D., Roschelle, J., Brecha, J., Tatar, D., … & DiGiano, C. (2007). From socially-mediated to technology-mediated coordination: A study of design tensions using Group Scribbles.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eisenmann, T. R., Ries, E., & Dillard, S. (2012). Hypothesis-driven entrepreneurship: The lean startup. Harvard Business School Entrepreneurial Management Case, pp. 812–095.

    Google Scholar 

  • Emery, F. E. (1959). Characteristics of socio-technical systems: The emergence of a new paradigm of work. ANU/CCE: Canberra.

    Google Scholar 

  • Engeström, Y. (1999). Expansive visibilization of work: An activity-theoretical perspective. Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW), 8(1), 63–93.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eriksson, E., Pargman, D., Bates, O., Normark, M., Gulliksen, J., Anneroth, M., & Berndtsson, J. (2016). HCI and UN’s Sustainable Development Goals: Responsibilities, barriers and opportunities. Proceedings of the 9th Nordic Conference on Human-Computer Interaction, 140. ACM.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fallman, D. (2003). Design-oriented human-computer interaction. CHI ’03 Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 225–232. Ft. Lauderdale, Florida, USA — April 05–10, 2003: ACM.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frauenberger, C. (2019). Entanglement HCI the next wave? ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction (TOCHI), 27(1), 1–27.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fuchsberger, V., Murer, M., Krischkowsky, A., & Tscheligi, M. (2016). Interaction design labels: concepts, inscriptions, and concealed intentions. Proceedings of the 2016 ACM Conference on Designing Interactive Systems, 108–120.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fuchsberger, V., Murer, M., & Tscheligi, M. (2014). Human-computer non-interaction: the activity of non-use. In Proceedings of the 2014 companion publication on Designing interactive systems (pp. 57–60).

    Google Scholar 

  • Gardien, P., Djajadiningrat, T., Hummels, C., & Brombacher, A. (2014). Changing your hammer: The implications of paradigmatic innovation for design practice. International Journal of Design, 8(2). Retrieved from http://www.ijdesign.org/index.php/IJDesign/article/view/1315.

  • Gibson, J. J. (1977). The theory of affordances. Hilldale, USA, 1(2), 67–82.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gibson, J. J., & Carmichael, L. (1966). The senses considered as perceptual systems (Vol. 2). Houghton Mifflin Boston.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gonçalves, F., Campos, P., & Clemmensen, T. (2015). Human work interaction design: An overview. IFIP Advances in Information and Communication Technology, 468, 3–19. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-27048-7_1.

  • Gregor, S. (2006). The nature of theory in information systems. MIS Quarterly, 611–642.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gross, T. (2013). Supporting Effortless Coordination: 25 Years of Awareness Research. Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW), 22(4), 425–474. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10606-013-9190-x.

  • Gross, T., Stary, C., & Totter, A. (2005). User-centered awareness in computer-supported cooperative work-systems: Structured embedding of findings from social sciences. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327590ijhc1803_5.

  • Gruber, M., De Leon, N., George, G., & Thompson, P. (2015). Managing by design. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2015.4001.

  • Grudin, J. (2012). Introduction: A moving target—the evolution of human-computer interaction. Human-Computer Interaction Handbook: Fundamentals, Evolving Technologies and Emerging Applications. https://doi.org/10.1201/b11963-1.

  • Hacker, W. (2003). Action regulation theory: A practical tool for the design of modern work processes? European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 12(2), 105–130.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hammond, J. (2003). IFIP TC.13 Handbook—Version 3.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hancock, J. T., Birnholtz, J. P., Bazarova, N., Guillory, J., Perlin, J., & Amos, B. (2009). Butler Lies: Awareness, deception, and design. Proceedings of the Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems—CHI 2009, 517–526. Boston, MA: ACM.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harbich, S., & Hassenzahl, M. (2017). User experience in the work domain: A longitudinal field study. Interacting with Computers. https://doi.org/10.1093/iwc/iww022.

  • Hassenzahl, M. (2010). Experience design: Technology for all the right reasons. Synthesis Lectures on Human-Centered Informatics, 3(1), 1–95.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hassenzahl, M., Wiklund-Engblom, A., Bengs, A., Hägglund, S., & Diefenbach, S. (2015). Experience-oriented and product-oriented evaluation: Psychological need fulfillment, positive affect, and product perception. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 31(8), 530–544.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hemmecke, J., & Stary, C. (2018). Informing work interaction design by 3rd generation activity theory. Interaction Design and Architectures, (37), 100–129.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hertzum, M., Singh, V. V., Clemmensen, T., Singh, D., Valtolina, S., Abdelnour-Nocera, J., & Qin, X. (2018). A mobile APP for supporting sustainable fishing practices in alibaug. Interactions, 25(3). https://doi.org/10.1145/3194324.

  • Hirschheim, R. (2019). Against theory: With apologies to Feyerabend. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 20(9), 8.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hirschheim, R., & Klein, H. K. (1989). Four paradigms of information systems development. Communications of the ACM, 32(10), 1199–1216.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hong, J.-W., & Williams, D. (2019). Racism, Responsibility and autonomy in HCI: Testing perceptions of an AI agent. Computers in Human Behavior.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kannabiran, G., Ahmed, A. A., Wood, M., Balaam, M., Tanenbaum, J. G., Bardzell, S., & Bardzell, J. (2018). Design for sexual wellbeing in HCI. Extended Abstracts of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, W09. ACM.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kashima, Y. (2016). Culture and psychology in the 21st century: Conceptions of culture and person for psychology revisited. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 47(1), 4–20.

    Google Scholar 

  • Katre, D., & Gupta, M. (2011). Expert usability evaluation of 28 state government web portals of India. International Journal of Public Information Systems, 7(3).

    Google Scholar 

  • Katre, D., Orngreen, R., Yammiyavar, P., Clemmensen, T. (Eds.) (2010). Human work interaction design: usability in social, cultural and organizational contexts Second IFIP WG 13.6 Conference, HWID 2009, Pune, India, October 7–8, 2009, Revised Selected Papers. https://www.springer.com/gp/book/9783642117619.

  • Kelly, J. (2018). Towards ethical principles for participatory design practice. CoDesign, 1–16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klapperich, H., Laschke, M., & Hassenzahl, M. (2018). The Positive Practice Canvas: Gathering Inspiration for Wellbeing-Driven Design. NordiCHI, 74–81. https://doi.org/10.1145/3240167.3240209.

  • Kolko, J. (2015). Design thinking comes of age. Harvard Business Review, 93(9), 66–71. Retrieved from https://hbr.org/2015/09/design-thinking-comes-of-age.

  • Kroeze, J. H. (2019). Is the Philosophy of the information systems discipline informed by the arts and humanities? Phronimon, 20, 30 p.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuijer, L., Jong, A. de, & Eijk, D. van. (2013). Practices as a unit of design: An exploration of theoretical guidelines in a study on bathing. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction (TOCHI), 20(4), 1–22.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kusunoki, D. S., Sarcevic, A., Weibel, N., Marsic, I., Zhang, Z., Tuveson, G., & Burd, R. S. (2014). Balancing design tensions: Iterative display design to support ad hoc and multidisciplinary medical teamwork. Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 3777–3786.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lanamäki, A., & Väyrynen, K. (2016). Six issues in which IS and CSCW research communities differ. COOP 2016: Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on the Design of Cooperative Systems, 23–27 May 2016, Trento, Italy, 3–19. Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Landwehr, M., Borning, A., & Wulf, V. (2019). The high cost of free services: problems with surveillance capitalism and possible alternatives for IT infrastructure. Proceedings of the Fifth Workshop on Computing within Limits, 1–10.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leontiev, A. N. (1980). The Development of Mind, including Activity and consciousness. Marxists Internet Archive Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Light, A., Powell, A., & Shklovski, I. (2017). Design for existential crisis in the anthropocene age. Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Communities and Technologies, 270–279. ACM.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ludwig, T., Kotthaus, C., Stein, M., Pipek, V., & Wulf, V. (2018). Revive Old discussions! socio-technical challenges for small and medium enterprises within industry 4.0. Proceedings of 16th European Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work. https://doi.org/10.18420/ecscw2018_15.

  • Luff, P., Heath, C., & Sanchez Svensson, M. (2008). Discriminating conduct: Deploying systems to support awareness in organisations. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction (IJHCI), 24(4), 410–436.

    Google Scholar 

  • Martin, M. W. (2006). Moral creativity in science and engineering. Science and Engineering Ethics, 12(3), 421–433.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meneweger, T., Wurhofer, D., Fuchsberger, V., & Tscheligi, M. (2018). Factory Workers’ ordinary user experiences: An overlooked perspective. Human Technology, 14(2), 209–232. https://doi.org/10.17011/ht/urn.201808103817.

  • Meschtscherjakov, A., Wilfinger, D., & Tscheligi, M. (2014). Mobile attachment causes and consequences for emotional bonding with mobile phones. Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 2317–2326. https://doi.org/10.1145/2556288.2557295.

  • Miller, G. A., Galanter, E., & Pribram, K. H. (1960). Plans and the structure of behavior.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moncur, W. (2013). The emotional wellbeing of researchers: Considerations for practice. Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 1883–1890. ACM.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mumford, E. (2000). Socio-technical design: An unfulfilled promise or a future opportunity? In Organizational and social perspectives on information technology, pp. 33–46. Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mumford, E. (2006). The story of socio-technical design: reflections on its successes, failures and potential. Information Systems Journal, 16(4), 317–342. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2575.2006.00221.x.

  • Orngreen, R., Pejtersen, A. M., & Clemmensen, T. (2008). Themes in human work interaction design. In IFIP International Federation for Information Processing (Vol. 272). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-09678-0_4.

  • Oulasvirta, A., & Hornbæk, K. (2016). HCI research as problem-solving. Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems—CHI ’16. https://doi.org/10.1145/2858036.2858283.

  • Parker, S. K., & Grote, G. (2020). Automation, algorithms, and beyond: Why work design matters more than ever in a digital world. Applied Psychology.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pejtersen, A. M., & Noirhomme, M. (2012). Guidelines for the TC13 on HCI Meeting and TC13 HCI Workshop.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rasmussen, J., Pejtersen, A. M., & Schmidt, K. (1990). Taxonomy for cognitive work analysis. Citeseer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rohde, M., Brödner, P., Stevens, G., Betz, M., & Wulf, V. (2017). Grounded Design—A Praxeological IS Research Perspective. Journal of Information Technology, Vol. 32, pp. 163–179. https://doi.org/10.1057/jit.2016.5.

  • Schlesinger, A., Edwards, W. K., & Grinter, R. E. (2017). Intersectional HCI: Engaging identity through gender, race, and class. Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 5412–5427. ACM.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schrepp, M., Held, T., & Laugwitz, B. (2006). The Influence of Hedonic Quality on the Attractiveness of User Interfaces of Business Management Software. Interacting with Computers, 18(5), 1055–1069. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intcom.2006.01.002.

  • Seaver, N. (2018). What should an anthropology of algorithms do? Cultural Anthropology, 33(3), 375–385.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sein, Henfridsson, Purao, Rossi, & Lindgren. (2011). Action Design Research. MIS Quarterly. https://doi.org/10.2307/23043488.

  • Sein, M. K., & Rossi, M. (2019). Elaborating ADR while drifting away from its essence: A commentary on Mullarkey and Hevner. European Journal of Information Systems, 28(1), 21–25.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stam, D., & Boon, B. (2018). What you gain and what it takes: a student’s reflection on a participatory design project. Proceedings of the 15th Participatory Design Conference: Short Papers, Situated Actions, Workshops and Tutorial-Volume 2, 9. ACM.

    Google Scholar 

  • Steen, M. (2013). Virtues in participatory design: Cooperation, curiosity, creativity, empowerment and reflexivity. Science and Engineering Ethics, 19(3), 945–962.

    Google Scholar 

  • Trist, E. L., & Bamforth, K. (1951). Defences of a work group in relation to the social structure and of coal-getting: An examination of the psychological situation and some social and psychological consequences of the Longwall method technological content of the work system. Human Relations, 4, 3–38.

    Google Scholar 

  • Turkle, S., Taggart, W., Kidd, C. D., & Dasté, O. (2006). Relational artifacts with children and elders: The complexities of cybercompanionship. Connection Science, 18(4), 347–361.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vicente, K., & Pawlak, W. (1994). Cognitive work analysis for the DURESS II system. Cognitive Engineering Laboratory, Department of Industrial Engineering, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada CEL, 3–94.

    Google Scholar 

  • Volker Wulf, Pipek, V., Randall, D., Rohde, M., Schmidt, K., & Stevens, G. (Eds.). (2018). Socio-Informatics—A practice-based perspective on the design and use of IT artifacts. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Von Alan, R. H., March, S. T., Park, J., & Ram, S. (2004). Design science in information systems research. MIS Quarterly, 28(1), 75–105.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang, B., Liu, Y., & Parker, S. K. (2020). How does the use of information communication technology affect individuals? A work design perspective. Academy of Management Annals, 14(2), 695–725.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wärnestål, P., Svedberg, P., & Nygren, J. (2014). Co-constructing child personas for health-promoting services with vulnerable children. Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 3767–3776.

    Google Scholar 

  • Woolgar, S. (1990). Configuring the user: the case of usability trials. The Sociological Review, 38(1_suppl), 58–99.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wrzesniewski, A., & Dutton, J. E. (2001). Crafting a job: Revisioning employees as active crafters of their work. Academy of Management Review, 26(2), 179–201. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMR.2001.4378011.

  • Wu, Y., Lyckvi, S., & Roto, V. (2019). What is Fair Shipping, Anyway: Using Design Fiction to Raise Ethical Awareness in an Industrial Context. CHI 2019, 436:1–436:13. New York, NY, USA: ACM.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wulf, V., Müller, C., Volkmar, P., Randall, D., Rohde, M., & Stevens, G. (2015). Practice-Based Computing: Empirically Grounded Conceptualizations Derived from Design Case Studies. In V. Wulf, K. Schmidt, & D. Randall (Eds.), Designing Socially Embedded Technologies in the Real-World (pp. 111–150). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-6720-4_7.

  • Wurhofer, D., Fuchsberger, V., Meneweger, T., Moser, C., & Tscheligi, M. (2015). Insights from user experience research in the factory: What to consider in interaction design. In J. A. Nocera, B. Barricelli, A. Lopes, P. Campos, & T. Clemmensen (Eds.), HWID2015 -Human Work Interaction Design. Work Analysis and Interaction Design Methods for Pervasive and Smart Workplaces. IFIP Advances in Information and Communication Technology (Vol. 468, pp. 39–56). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-27048-7_3.

  • Wynn, E., & Hult, H. V. (2019). Qualitative and Critical Research in Information Systems and Human-Computer Interaction: Divergent and Convergent Paths. Foundations and Trends® in Information Systems, 3(1–2), 1–233. https://doi.org/10.1561/2900000014.

  • Zhang, F., & Parker, S. K. (2019). Reorienting job crafting research: A hierarchical structure of job crafting concepts and integrative review. Journal of Organizational Behavior. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.2332.

  • Zimmerman, J., Forlizzi, J., & Evenson, S. (2007). Research through design as a method for interaction design research in HCI. Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems—Proceedings, 493–502. https://doi.org/10.1145/1240624.1240704.

  • Zuboff, S. (2015). Big other: surveillance capitalism and the prospects of an information civilization. Journal of Information Technology, 30(1), 75–89.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Digitalization, Copenhagen Business School, Frederiksberg, Denmark

    Prof. Torkil Clemmensen

Authors
  1. Prof. Torkil Clemmensen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Torkil Clemmensen .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2021 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Clemmensen, T. (2021). Human Work Interaction Design for Socio-Technical Theory and Action. In: Human Work Interaction Design. Human–Computer Interaction Series. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-71796-4_2

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-71796-4_2

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-71795-7

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-71796-4

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation