-------- Original-Nachricht -------- Betreff: [AISWorld] Sysiac SI TOC – IT Artefact & practice theorizing – pragmatic perspectives Datum: Mon, 4 Nov 2013 08:01:33 +0000 Von: Göran Goldkuhl goran.goldkuhl@liu.se An: AISWorld@lists.aisnet.org AISWorld@lists.aisnet.org
*A special issue on ?**IT Artefact & practice theorizing ? pragmatic perspectives? has been published in Systems, Signs & Actions (www.sysiac.org http://www.sysiac.org/). *
Six papers are published in this special issue (three regular papers and three commentary papers):
*Kai Riemer & Robert B. Johnston:*
*What is IT in use and why does it matter for IS design?*
?This paper investigates the notion of the IT artefact and it challenges common conceptions of this. Founded in Heideggerian philosophy, the authors advocate for a holistic ontology instead of a dualist ontology that separates the subject (user) and the object (artefact). IT is seen as equipment which is co-constituted with a nexus of other equipment, user practices and social identities. The use of (ready-at-hand) equipment is done in an everyday fluent manner by the user, which makes the equipment disappear from its conscious attention. The main message of this paper is that IT as equipment is a necessary perspective for design in IS. This is grounded through discussions of the user, practice changes and IT acceptance.?
*Steven Alter:*
*Is Work System Theory a Practical Theory of Practice?*
?This paper extends Alter?s earlier works on the Work System Method and the Work System Theory. It does so by investigating different conceptions within pragmatism, such as practice theory and practical theory. Specifically the paper investigates Work System Theory in relation to UML, workpractice theory (of Goldkuhl) and other different practice theories with a sociomaterial orientation. This investigation includes also a comparison with the work of Riemer and Johnston (the first paper in this special issue). The paper discusses possible extensions and future directions of Work System Theory in relation to these different pragmatic conceptions.?
*Göran Goldkuhl:*
*From ensemble view to ensemble artefact ? An inquiry on conceptualisations of the IT artefact*
?This paper investigates the notion of an ensemble artefact as proposed by Sein et al (2011) in their description of Action Design Research. The conceptual origin of the ensemble artefact is the ensemble view by Orlikowski & Iacono (2001). The paper investigates the ?conceptual journey? from ensemble view to ensemble artefact and also other IT artefact conceptions by Orlikowski & Iacono. Based on these inquiries an alternative view is articulated: A communication tool view of IT artefacts. This view is compared with the ensemble view, especially in a design research context. The notion of ensemble artefact is contested, and so is also the suggested use of it as a main conceptual basis in design research.?
*Sandeep Purao, Ola Henfridsson, Matti Rossi & Maung Sein:*
*Ensemble Artifacts: From Viewing to Designing in Action Design Research*
?This is a response to Goldkuhl?s paper on the conceptual journeyfrom ensemble view to ensemble artefact. The authors argue that the notion of ensemble /artifact/ in ADR is appropriate because it highlights the forward-looking orientation of designing artifacts and stresses the importance of the context for the evolution and use of the resulting artifact. This is in contrast to the retrospective orientation of the ensemble /view/ nomenclature from Orlikowski & Iacono (2001) that was used as a basis for the development of ADR.?
*Mark S. Silver & M. Lynne Markus:*
*Conceptualizing the SocioTechnical (ST) Artifact*
?This is a response to Goldkuhl?s paper where he writes about different conceptions of IT artefacts. The authors claim that IT artifacts have both technical and social design features and therefore they should be better regarded as ?SocioTechnical artifacts?. They propose that the study of the ST artifact - consequences connection has potential to be a unifying force in the IS field.?
*Göran Goldkuhl:*
*The IT artefact: An ensemble of the social and the technical? ? A rejoinder*
?This is a response to the other two commentary papers in the special issue, i.e. those authored by Purao et al and Silver and Markus. As one step in a further conceptualising of the IT artefact, the notion of an artefact is investigated. This is used as a basis to further clarify the social (and technical) character of the IT artefact and the consequences of this view for the design of such artefacts and their use contexts.?
Go to www.sysiac.org http://www.sysiac.org/to download the papers!
Göran Goldkuhl & Brian Donnellan
Editors