i The decision to propose this special issue reflects a relatively long-standing and continually developing body of work that assists understanding of interactions surrounding the utilisation of ICTs in work and social environments. The papers were developed following a workshop held at Napier University , Edinburgh (UK) during June 2004. The workshop brought together academics interested in understanding sociotechnical action, either in terms of the ways in which we may — or indeed, whether we may — theorise about such action, or in relation to methods that may be appropriate for developing our empirically based knowledge. Our thinking behind the request for submissions to the special issue had been stimulated by a number of traditions, including: social shaping of technology , soft systems thinking, social informatics, and socio-technical systems, amongst others. The original workshop was stimulated by a concern that where problems arise with computerization projects it is often because those involved have failed to grasp the complexities of sociotechnical action involving ICTs. Existing approaches to design and implementation are constrained in a number of different ways. These constraints often arise as a result of the ways in which such approaches try to address (or not, as the case may be) sociotechncal aspects — or more likely, technical, and possibly some social dimensions. In some cases, action is modelled as a series of disembodied socially neutral tasks, articulated as a set of activities and goals (or as organisational processes) that are defined by a designer working with the metaphor of the 'systems life cycle'. Such approaches often assume a development that involves a 'system' being built from scratch, and yet increasingly, it is pre-developed 'packages' of technology that have to be configured in, with, and by, institutional settings. Sawyer and Crowston (2004, p. 43) argue that there has been 'too little systematic attention paid to the arrangements, interactions, and elements of ...socio-technical relation-ships'. One way of improving this situation would be to adopt a truly sociotechnical approach to understanding action — i.e., not merely looking at the 'social' and the 'tech-nical', but endeavouring perhaps to address the idea of mutual constitution in appreciat
[1]
Rob Kling,et al.
Learning About Information Technologies and Social Change: The Contribution of Social Informatics
,
2000,
Inf. Soc..
[2]
R. Kling,et al.
From Users to Social Actors: Reconceptualizing Socially Rich Interaction Through Information and Communication Technology
,
2002
.
[3]
Rob Kling,et al.
The Web of Computing: Computer Technology as Social Organization
,
1982,
Adv. Comput..
[4]
Steve Sawyer,et al.
Information Systems in Organizations and Society: Speculating on the Next 25 Years of Research
,
2004,
Relevant Theory and Informed Practice.
[5]
D. Edge,et al.
The social shaping of technology
,
1988
.
[6]
Joan C. Woodward,et al.
Industrial Organization: Behaviour and Control
,
1970
.
[7]
Peter Checkland,et al.
Systems Thinking, Systems Practice
,
1981
.
[8]
Trevor Wood-Harper,et al.
Exploring sociotechnical interaction with Rob Kling: five "big" ideas
,
2005,
Inf. Technol. People.
[9]
Rob Kling,et al.
Defining the boundaries of computing across complex organizations
,
1987
.
[10]
Barry Wilkinson,et al.
The Shopfloor Politics of New Technology
,
1983
.
[11]
J. Child.
Information Technology, Organization, and the Response to Strategic Challenges
,
1987
.