Rooke-Seymour2005
| Rooke-Seymour2005 | |
|---|---|
| BibType | ARTICLE |
| Key | Rooke-Seymour2005 |
| Author(s) | John Rooke, David Seymour |
| Title | Studies of work: achieving hybrid disciplines in IT design and management studies |
| Editor(s) | |
| Tag(s) | EMCA, ethnomethodology, studies of work, hybrid disciplines, unique adequacy, ethnomethodological indifference, technomethodology |
| Publisher | |
| Year | 2005 |
| Language | English |
| City | |
| Month | |
| Journal | Human Studies |
| Volume | 28 |
| Number | 2 |
| Pages | 205–221 |
| URL | Link |
| DOI | 10.1007/s10746-005-4192-4 |
| ISBN | |
| Organization | |
| Institution | |
| School | |
| Type | |
| Edition | |
| Series | |
| Howpublished | |
| Book title | |
| Chapter | |
Abstract
We explore the relationship between ethnomethodology (EM), ethnography and the needs of managers and designers in industry, considering both ethnomethodological and industrial criteria of adequacy and explicating their relationship through the concept of “audience.” We examine a range of studies in this light, with a view to their possible candidacy as hybrid studies and identify three types of application of EM studies of work: market research, design, and business improvement. Application in the first of these fields we dub “anthropological,” in that it consists in studying and reporting back on the ways of exotic people (customers). This is the application most commonly found in studies of computer supported co-operative work (CSCW). A second CSCW application, “technomethodology,” involves the introduction of EM concepts into the design process. A further application, dubbed “holding-up-a-mirror,” involves reporting back to members of a setting upon their own activities. We argue that technomethodology and holding-up-a-mirror both offer the possibility of creating hybrid disciplines. We consider the objection that improvement and design involve the introduction of value judgements that threaten the practice of EM indifference, arguing that action research can serve as a guarantee of unique adequacy (UA) by testing the researcher’s understanding as analysis in action in the setting. Furthermore, the standard of reporting required by the UA criterion contributes to the effectiveness of proposed solutions.
Notes
