Dalla produzione automatizzata agli ambienti tecnologicamente densi: la dimensione sociomateriale dell’agire organizzativo

Author/s Attila Bruni, Laura Lucia Parolin
Publishing Year 2014 Issue 2014/1
Language Italian Pages 20 P. 7-26 File size 98 KB
DOI 10.3280/SO2014-001001
DOI is like a bar code for intellectual property: to have more infomation click here

Article preview

FrancoAngeli is member of Publishers International Linking Association, Inc (PILA), a not-for-profit association which run the CrossRef service enabling links to and from online scholarly content.

The relationship between work processes and technological innovations is a recurring theme of all the disciplines interested in organizational analysis. The majority of the studies focus on the introduction on new technologies to evaluate the effects of work organization while less common are the analysis of long term effects and of the stratification of technical artefacts that, over time, lead to the creation of Technologically Dense Environments. This work addresses these issues through an empirical analysis of “junction work”, the array of apparently marginal activities performed by human actors to allow information systems to be aligned. The interest in junction work stems from its being considered a undesired by-product of innovation. Junction work takes the form of copying hand notes, transcribing data from one system to another (digital or paper-based), data inputting and so on. We present the case of information management in an oncological department ten years after the deployment of an electronic medical record and is based on qualitative interviews and participant observation aimed at discovering the origin of junction work, its analysis and the changes in the professional profile of the people that perform it. Results show that innovation process, guided by medical doctors, is intertwined with a delegation to nurses of a growing role as information managers. The overall outcome is the transformation of the ward into a technologically dense environments in the nurses experience, required to perform a constant junction work to ensure the information flow within the department and with the rest of the other facilities. Results therefore confirm how the cumulative effects of technological stratification have a different impact on organizational actors. Despite being represented as transient and accidental, junction work appears a constitutive element of technologically dense environments and it can therefore be considered as a useful unit of analysis to study them.

Keywords: Technologically dense environments, junction work, nursing, information systems

  1. Gherardi, S., Lippi, A. (eds.), (2000), Tradurre le riforme in pratica, Milano, Raffaello Cortina Editore.
  2. Gibson, J. J. (1979), The ecological approach to visual perception, New York, Houghton Mifflin.
  3. Goffman, E. (1959), The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life, Garden City, NY, Doubleday (trad. it. La vita quotidiana come rappresentazione, Bologna, Il Mulino, 1979). Gursteun, B. (2011) Open data: Empowering the empowered or effective data use for everyone?, First Monday, 16, 2, DOI: 10.5210/FM.V16I2.3316
  4. Harré, R. (2002), Cognitive Science: A Philosophical Introduction, London, Sage.
  5. Heath, C., Knoblauch, H., Luff, P. (2000), “Technology and Social Interaction: the emergence of workplace studies”, British Journal of Sociology, 51: 299-320, DOI: 10.1111/J.1468-4446.2000.00299.X
  6. Heath, C., Luff, P. (2000), Technology in Action, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press,.
  7. Hughes, E.C. (1958), Men and their Work, Glencoe, The Free Press.
  8. Ingold, T. (2000), The perception of the environment: essays on livelihood, dwelling and skill, London, Routledge.
  9. Knorr-Cetina, K. Preda. A. (eds.), (2005) The Sociology of Financial Markets. Oxford University Press.
  10. Knorr-Cetina, K. (1997), “Sociality with Objects”, Theory, Culture and Society, 14: 1-30, DOI: 10.1177/026327697014004001
  11. Lash, S. (2001), “Technological Forms of Life”, Theory, Culture and Society, 18: 105-120, DOI: 10.1177/02632760122051661
  12. Latour, B. (2005), Reassembling the Social. An Introduction to Actor-Network-Theory, Oxford, Oxford University Press.
  13. Latour, B., Woolgar, S. (1986), Laboratory life: the construction of scientific facts, Princeton, Princeton University.
  14. Lave, J., Wenger, E. (1991), Situated Learning. Legitimate Peripheral Participation, Mass, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press (trad. it. L’apprendimento situato. Dall’osservazione alla partecipazione attiva nei contesti sociali, Trento, Erickson, 2006).
  15. Lave, J. (1988), Cognition in practice: Mind, mathematics and culture in everyday life, New York, Cambridge University Press.
  16. Law, J. (1994), Organizing Modernity, Oxford, Blackwell.
  17. Luff, P., Hindmarsh, J., Heath, C. (eds.), (2000), Workplace Studies: Recovering Work Practice and Informing System Design, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
  18. Lynch, M., Collins, H. M. (eds.), (1998), Humans, Animals and Machines: Special edition of Science Technology and Human Values, 23, 4: 371-490, Beverley Hills: Sage.
  19. Mantovani, G. (2004), Intercultura, Bologna, Il Mulino.
  20. March, J.G. (1988), Decisions and Organizations, New York, Basil Blackwell (trad. it. Decisioni e organizzazioni, Bologna, Il Mulino, 1993).
  21. Mattozzi, A. (2006), (eds.), Il senso degli oggetti tecnici, Roma, Meltemi. Morgan, G. (1986), Images of Organization, Beverly Hills, CA, Sage (trad. it. Images. Le metafore dell’organizzazione, Milano, Franco Angeli, 1989).
  22. Mort, M., May, C., Williams, T. (2003), “Remote Doctors and Absent Patients: Acting at a Distance in Telemedicine”, Science, Technology and Human Values, 28: 274-295.
  23. Orlikowski, W.J., Scott, S.V. (2008), “Sociomateriality: Challenging the separation of technology, work and organization”, Academy of Management Annals, 2: 433-474, DOI: 10.1080/19416520802211644
  24. Orr, J. (1996), Talking about machines: an ethnography of a modern job, Ithaca, N.Y., ILR Press.
  25. Parolin, L. (2011), Tecnologia e sapere pratico nella società della conoscenza, Milano, Franco Angeli.
  26. Perrow, C. (1984), Normal Accidents: Living with High-Risk Technologies, New York, Basic Books.
  27. Piccardo, C., Benozzo, A. (1996), Etnografia organizzativa: una proposta di metodo per l'analisi delle organizzazioni come culture, Milano, Cortina.
  28. Pinch, T. Swedberg, R. (2008), Living in a Material World: Economic Sociology Meets Science and Technology Studies, vol. 1, Ed., The MIT Press.
  29. Rifkin, J. (1995), The end of work: The decline of the global labour force and the dawn of postmarket era, New York, Putnam.
  30. Schutz, A., (1932), Der Sininnhafte Aufbau der sozialen Welt, Wien, Springer (trad. it. La fenomenologia del mondo sociale, Bologna, Il Mulino, 1974).
  31. Silverman, D. (1997), Doing Qualitative Research, Sage, London (trad. it. Come fare ricerca qualitativa, Roma, Carocci, 2002).
  32. Star, S.L., Strauss, A. (1998), “Layers of Silence, Arenas of Voice: The Ecology of Visible and Invisible Work”, Computer Supported Cooperative Work, 8: 9-30.
  33. Suchman, L. (2002), “Practice-based design of information systems: notes from the hyperdeveloped world”, The Information Society, 18 (2):139-144.
  34. Suchman, L. (1987), Plans and Situated Action: The Problem of Humanmachine Communication, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
  35. Suchman, L. (1997), “Centers of Coordination. A Case and Some Themes”, in Resnik, L., Saljo, L., Pontecorvo, C., Burge, B., (eds.), Discourse, Tools and Reasoning. Essays On Situated Cognition, Berlin, Springer-Verlag.
  36. Suchman, L., Blomberg, J., Orr, J.E., Trigg, R. (1999), “Reconstructing Technology as Social Practice”, American Behavioral Scientist, 43: 392-408.
  37. Suchman, L. (2000), “Organizing Alignment: A Case of Bridge-Building”, Organization, 7: 311-327, DOI: 10.1177/135050840072007.Suchman,L.(2007),Human-MachineReconfigurations:Plansandsituatedactions(secondedition),Cambridge,CambridgeUniversityPress
  38. Timmermans, S. (2000), “Technology and Medical Practice”, in Bird, C., Conrad, P., Fremont, A., (eds.), Handbook of Medical Sociology (5° edizione), Upper Saddle River, New Jersey, Prantice Hall, Inc.
  39. Viteritti, A. (2012), Scienza in Formazione. Corpi, materialità e scrittura in laboratorio, Milano, Guerini Scientifica.
  40. Vygotskij, L.S., (1934), Pensiero e linguaggio, Roma- Bari, Laterza. Weick, K. E. (1979), The Social Psichology of Organizing, Reading, MA, Addison-Wesley (trad. it. Organizzare, La psicologia sociale dei processi organizzativi, Torino, ISEDI, 1993).
  41. Weick, K.E. (1990), “Technology as Equivoque: Sensemaking in New Technologies”, in Goodman, P., Sproull, L.S. (eds.), Technology and Organizations, San Francisco, Jossey Bass.
  42. Whalen, J., Whalen, M., Henderson, K. (2002), “Improvisational Coreography in Teleservice Work”, British Journal of Sociology, 53: 239-258.
  43. Wiener, N. (1950), The human use of human beings: Cybernetics and society, New York, Da Capo Press.
  44. Woodward, J. (1965), Industrial organization: theory and practice, London, Oxford University Press.
  45. Zuboff, S. (1988), In The Age of the Smart Machine: The Future of Work and Power, New York, Basic Books.
  46. Zucchermaglio, C., Alby, F., Fatigante, M., Saglietti, M. (2013), Fare ricerca situata in psicologia sociale, Bologna, Il Mulino.
  47. Agar, M. (1980), The Professional Stranger, New York, Academic Press.
  48. Albolino, S., Cook, R. (2005), “Medici in terapia intensiva: sensemaking, sicurezza e lavoro quotidiano”, Studi organizzativi, 2: 7-28.
  49. Alby, F., Zucchermaglio, C. (2006), “Afterwards we can understand what went wrong, but now let's fix it: How Situated Work Practices Shape Group
  50. Decision Making in Organizations”, Organization Studies, 7: 943-966. Amalberti, R., Auroy Y., Berwick, D., Barach, P. (2005), “Five System Barriers
  51. to Achieving Ultrasafe Health Care”, Annals of Internal Medicine, 9: 756-764.
  52. Anderson, R.A., McDaniel, R.R. (2000), “Managing Healthcare Organizations: Where Professionalism Meets Complexity Science”, Health Care Manage Review, 1:83-92.
  53. Ball, M.J., Weaver, C. Abbott, P. (2003), “Enabling Technologies Promise to Revitalize the Role of Nursing in an Area of Patient Safety”, International Journal of Medical Informatics, 1: 29-38.
  54. Barley, S., Kunda, G. (2001), “Bringing Work Back In”, Organization Science, 1: 76-95.
  55. Beunza, D., Stark, D. (2003), “Tools of the Trade: The Socio-technology of Arbitrage in a Wall Street Trading Room”, Industrial and Corporate Change, 13: 369-400.
  56. Blumer, H. (1969), Symbolic Interactionism: Perspective and Method, New Jersey, Prentice-Hall.
  57. Bruni, A. (2010), La sicurezza organizzativa. Una etnografia in sala operatoria, Roma, Carocci.
  58. Bruni, A. (2003), Lo studio etnografico delle organizzazioni, Roma, Carocci.
  59. Bruni, A. (2005a), “Shadowing Software and Clinical Records: On the Ethnography of Non-Humans and Heterogeneous Contexts”, Organization, 12: 357-78.
  60. Bruni, A. (2005b), “La socialità degli oggetti e la materialità dell’organizzare: umani e non-umani nei contesti lavorativi”, Studi Organizzativi, 1: 113-129.
  61. Bruni, A. (2006), “Have You Got a Boyfriend or are You Single?: On the Importance of Being ‘Straight’ in Organizational Research”, Gender, Work and Organization, 3: 299-316.
  62. Bruni, A. (2007), “Access as Trajectory: Entering the Field in Organizational Ethnography”, M@n@gement, 3: 129-144.
  63. Bruni, A. (2008), “La medicina come ingegneria dell’eterogeneo e pratica sociomateriale”, Rassegna Italiana di Sociologia, 3: 451-476.
  64. Bruni, A., Gherardi, S. (2007), Studiare le pratiche lavorative, Bologna, Il Mulino.
  65. Bruni, A., Modé, D. (2011), 7+2: studiare le trame del lavoro in centrale operativa, Tecnoscienza, Italian Journal of Science&Technology Studies, 2, 2:3-27.
  66. Bruni, A., Viteritti, A. (2011), “Etnografia, persone e cose”, in Krippendorff, K., La Rocca, G. (eds.), Ricerca qualitativa e giovani studiosi. Atti del Convegno Internazionale RiQGioS-2011, Social Books, Palermo: 51-56. Bruni, A., Pinch, T., Schubert, C. (2013), “Technologically Dense Environments: What For? What Next?”, Tecnoscienza. Italian Journal of Science&Technology Studies, 4: 51-72.
  67. Butera, F. (2009), Il cambiamento organizzativo. Analisi e progettazione, Laterza.
  68. Cardano, M. (2003), Tecniche di ricerca qualitativa. Percorsi di ricerca nelle scienze sociali, Roma, Carocci.
  69. Casper, M.J., Berg, M. (1995), “Constructivistic Perspectives on Medical Work: Medical Practices and Science and Technology Studies”, Science, Technology, and Human Values, 20: 395-407.
  70. Cedefop, (2010), New Skills for New Jobs: Action Now, Report by the Expert Group on New Skills for New Jobs, prepared for the European Commission.
  71. Cooper, R., Law, J. (1995), “Distal and Proximal Visions of Organization”, in Bacharach, S., Gagliardi, P., Mundell, B. (eds), Studies of Organizations in the European Tradition, Greenwich, Jai Press (trad. it. “Visioni distali e prossimali dell’organizzazione”, in Bacharach S., Gagliardi, P., Mundell, B. (eds.), Il pensiero organizzativo europeo, Milano, Guerini e Associati).
  72. Corbin, J., Strauss, A. (1993), “The Articulation of Work Through Interaction”, Sociological Quarterly, 1: 71-83.
  73. Czarniawska, B., Hernes, T. (eds.), (2005), Actor-Network Theory and Organizing, Copenhagen, Liber & Copenhagen Business School Press.
  74. Danholt, P., Piras, E.M., Storni, C. Zanutto, A. (2013), “The shaping of patient 2.0.: exploring agencies, technologies and discourses in new healthcare practices”, Science & Technology Studies, 3-13.
  75. Emery, F.E., Trist, E.L. (1993), “The causal texture of organizational environments”, in Trist, E.L., Murray, H. (eds.), The Social Engagement of Social Science, Vol. II, Philadelphia, University of Pennsylvania Press.
  76. Engeström, Y., Middleton D., (eds) (1996), Cognition and Communication at Work, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
  77. Gherardi, S., Lippi, A., (eds.), (2000), Tradurre le riforme in pratica, Milano, Cortina.
  78. Gherardi, S., Strati, A. (eds.), (2004), Telemedicina: tra tecnologia e organizzazione, Roma, Carocci.

  • Tecnologie digitali e potere nelle organizzazioni: dinamiche di controllo ed effetto "contraccolpo" Lia Tirabeni, Francesco Miele, in STUDI ORGANIZZATIVI 1/2020 pp.9
    DOI: 10.3280/SO2020-001001
  • Perceived autonomy and discretion of mobile workers Roberto Albano, Ylenia Curzi, Tania Parisi, Lia Tirabeni, in STUDI ORGANIZZATIVI 2/2019 pp.31
    DOI: 10.3280/SO2018-002002
  • Real and apparent changes of organizational processes in the era of big data analytics Marcello Martinez, Primiano Di Nauta, Debora Sarno, in STUDI ORGANIZZATIVI 2/2018 pp.91
    DOI: 10.3280/SO2017-002005
  • Assessing the technological maturity of small enterprises through a collaborative approach Andrea Tomo, in STUDI ORGANIZZATIVI 2/2019 pp.147
    DOI: 10.3280/SO2018-002007
  • Coltivare creatività pratica e pensiero critico in Higher Education. Elementi di analisi per una geografia concettuale Francesca Bracci, Monica Fedeli, in EXCELLENCE AND INNOVATION IN LEARNING AND TEACHING 1/2023 pp.38
    DOI: 10.3280/exioa1-2023oa16040
  • Connectivity and human capacity in digital transformation: the exploratory hypotheses of hyper industrial Emiliana Armano, Salvatore Cominu, Kristin Carls, Marco Briziarelli, in STUDI ORGANIZZATIVI 1/2021 pp.146
    DOI: 10.3280/SO2021-001007
  • Rethinking Work: Pathways and Practices in Business and Society. Introduction to the Special Issue. Luigi Moschera, Mario Pezzillo Iacono, Giovanna Lo Nigro, Laura Lucia Parolin, in STUDI ORGANIZZATIVI 2/2019 pp.9
    DOI: 10.3280/SO2018-002001

Attila Bruni, Laura Lucia Parolin, Dalla produzione automatizzata agli ambienti tecnologicamente densi: la dimensione sociomateriale dell’agire organizzativo in "STUDI ORGANIZZATIVI " 1/2014, pp 7-26, DOI: 10.3280/SO2014-001001