Button2012
| Button2012 | |
|---|---|
| BibType | ARTICLE |
| Key | Button2012 |
| Author(s) | Graham Button |
| Title | What does ‘work’ mean in ‘ethnomethodological studies of work?’: Its ubiquitous relevance for systems design to support action and interaction |
| Editor(s) | |
| Tag(s) | EMCA, ethnomethodology, ethnography, work, methodology, Systems design |
| Publisher | |
| Year | 2012 |
| Language | |
| City | |
| Month | |
| Journal | Design Studies |
| Volume | 33 |
| Number | |
| Pages | 673-684 |
| URL | |
| DOI | |
| ISBN | |
| Organization | |
| Institution | |
| School | |
| Type | |
| Edition | |
| Series | |
| Howpublished | |
| Book title | |
| Chapter | |
Abstract
In computer systems design, ethnomethodology is seen as a form of ethnography that emphasises situated work practices and the workplace. However, designers have increasingly taken an interest in developing systems to support non-work matters such as social networking, gaming, and fun, and non-work settings such as the home. Some have, therefore, suggested that ethnography driven by interests in work practice is not relevant for these new developments because they do not involve matters of work, and that, consequently, a new form of ethnography is required. This paper critically addresses this argument and contends that ethnography can be analytically grounded in ethnomethodology as a ubiquitous method for building ‘the social’ into systems design.
Notes
