From System Development toward Work Improvement: Developmental Work Research as a Potential Partner Method for EUD

The dominant strategy within the field of EUD has been to improve end-user activities within a single software system. This approach has some limitations. First, the work environment often consists of a number of different systems and tools that form an information ecology with which users must cope. Second, the use of computers is embedded in organizational practices that may also need to be changed. Thus, there is a need to combine EUD with a parallel development of work practices. However, common work-development approaches, for example, process improvement, usually adopt a top-down managerial point of view that relies on expert modeling, and are therefore incompatible with EUD ideas. This paper suggests that a work improvement method developed in Finland since the 1980s, developmental work research, is a good candidate for partnering with EUD, because it takes the potential of local grassroots innovation and the development of work practices seriously.

[1]  Susanne Bødker,et al.  Staging a professional participatory design practice: moving PD beyond the initial fascination of user involvement , 2002, NordiCHI '02.

[2]  Volker Wulf,et al.  Component-Based Approaches to Tailorable Systems , 2006, End User Development.

[3]  Bonnie A. Nardi,et al.  A Small Matter of Programming: Perspectives on End User Computing , 1993 .

[4]  Juhani Iivari,et al.  Determinants of user participation: A Finnish survey , 1997, Behav. Inf. Technol..

[5]  Susanne Bødker,et al.  Designing for ephemerality and prototypicality , 2004, DIS '04.

[6]  Bonnie A. Nardi,et al.  Information Ecologies: Using Technology with Heart , 1999 .

[7]  Bruce I. Blum,et al.  Beyond programming - to a new era of design , 1996 .

[8]  Jaakko Virkkunen,et al.  Understanding organizational learning by focusing on “activity systems” , 2000 .

[9]  Ola Henfridsson,et al.  Beyond the container-view of context in IS research , 1998, ECIS.

[10]  Michael B. Twidale,et al.  Learning Design from Emergent Co-Design: Observed Practices and Future Directions , 2008 .

[11]  Yrjö Engeström,et al.  Putting Vygotsky to Work: The Change Laboratory as an Application of Double Stimulation , 2007 .

[12]  Martin Beirne,et al.  Participating informally: Opportunities and dilemmas in user-driven design , 1998, Behav. Inf. Technol..

[13]  Jodi Forlizzi,et al.  The Product Ecology: Understanding Social Product Use and Supporting Design Culture , 2008 .

[14]  Hannele Kerosuo,et al.  Promoting Innovation and Learning Through Change Laboratory : An Example from Finnish Health Care , 2010 .

[15]  Kari Kuutti,et al.  Analysing it and communities of practice , 2006, ECIS.

[16]  Henry Lieberman,et al.  Watch what I do: programming by demonstration , 1993 .

[17]  Mark W. Newman,et al.  Designing for serendipity: supporting end-user configuration of ubiquitous computing environments , 2002, DIS '02.

[18]  M. Cole,et al.  The Cambridge Companion to Vygotsky , 2007 .

[19]  Dan Shapiro,et al.  Book preview: The design of computer supported cooperative work and groupware systems , 1996, INTR.

[20]  N. Oudshoorn,et al.  How Users Matter: The Co-Construction of Users and Technology (Inside Technology) , 2003 .

[21]  Gerhard Fischer,et al.  Meta-design: A Framework for the Future of End-User Development , 2006, End User Development.

[22]  Bjørn Gustavsen,et al.  Beyond Theory: Changing organizations through participation , 1996 .

[23]  Andrew Clement,et al.  Computing at work: empowering action by “low-level users” , 1994, CACM.

[24]  Netta Iivari,et al.  Mediation between Design and Use: Revisiting Five Empirical Studies , 2009 .

[25]  Juhani Iivari,et al.  Varieties of user‐centredness: an analysis of four systems development methods , 2011, Inf. Syst. J..

[26]  S. L. Star,et al.  Ecologies of knowledge : work and politics in science and technology , 1996 .

[27]  Douglas Schuler,et al.  Participatory Design: Principles and Practices , 1993 .

[28]  Karen Holtzblatt,et al.  Contextual design , 1997, INTR.

[29]  Y. Engeström,et al.  Perspectives on activity theory: Play, learning, and instruction , 1999 .

[30]  Yrjö Engeström,et al.  Activity theory and social capital , 2001 .

[31]  Yvonne Rogers,et al.  Reconfiguring the social scientist: shifting from prescription to proactive research. , 1997 .

[32]  Torkil Clemmensen,et al.  Community knowledge in an emerging online professional community: the case of Sigchi.dk , 2005 .

[33]  K. Kuutti.  Perspectives on activity theory: Activity theory, transformation of work, and information systems design , 1999 .

[34]  James Martin,et al.  Application Development Without Programmers , 1981 .

[35]  Brigitte Jordan,et al.  Chapter 3 Ethnographic workplace studies and CSCW , 1996 .

[36]  Bonnie A. Nardi,et al.  A Web on the Wind: The Structure of Invisible Work , 1999, Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW).

[37]  Erik Stolterman,et al.  Toward a framework for ecologies of artifacts: how are digital artifacts interconnected within a personal life? , 2008, NordiCHI.

[38]  Trevor Pinch,et al.  How users matter : The co-construction of users and technologies , 2003 .

[39]  Y. Engeström,et al.  The change laboratory as a tool for transforming work , 1996 .