Understanding groupware dynamics

Transcription

1 Understanding groupware dynamics A theory of knowledge conversion applied to groupware. drs. Jeroen de Bruin ICT-consultant ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning, and the Environment. Staff bureau on Information Management and Organization. PhD. student at the University of Groningen. Faculty of Management and Organization. jdebruin@xs4all.nl Abstract This position paper is meant to propose a theoretical framework on which the dynamics of organizations and especially the dynamics of groupware can be explained. A theory of knowledge conversion as formulated within the Castor project provides for an explanation of organizational dynamics and innovation. By introducing a theory of knowledge conversion the focus is put on forms and types of knowledge and the communications of these forms and types of knowledge. The extended use of ICT within organizations has an influence on these forms, types and communication of knowledge. The use of, one of the many possible ICT tools: groupware, thus has the potential to influence the flows of knowledge within the organization. Understanding groupware dynamics with a knowledge view is therefore important when trying to understand innovative processes and the ability of an organization to survive in a more and more dynamic environment. Nowadays, organizations are confronted with a more and more dynamic environment. One of the reasons of these dynamics is the substantial impact ICT has on society as well as on organizations in that same society. Under the influence of ICT, a shift towards a network based economy is at hand. In this sense we can even speak of the existence of an information technology paradigm (Castells, 1996). Constant innovation of products as well as business processes is vital for (network)organizations willing to survive in this dynamic environment. The use

2 of knowledge within the organization however, is essential in these innovative processes. Castells (1996, p.32) underpins the importance of the use of knowledge by putting forward that what characterizes the current technological revolution is not the centrality of knowledge and information, but the application of such knowledge and information to knowledge generation and information processing/communication devices, in a cumulative feedback loop between innovation and the uses of innovation. Understanding the dynamics of ICT and more specifically groupware can thus (partly) explain the innovative potential of organizations. The Castor Project The castor project aims to explain the dynamics of the organization in terms of knowledge and communication of this knowledge. The acronym Castor stands for Conversion (of knowledge) And Semiotic Theories of Organization and Representation and is a project of the University of Groningen, faculty of management and organization. Organizations in our view can be seen as semiotic constructions used by human actors to interpreted their environment and act according to these interpretations. The organization, understood as a symbolic construction, both in its functioning as well as in its structure, becomes part of the whole of the knowledge individuals have to deal with. It becomes part of their semiosphere (Jorna and van Heusden, 1998). Knowledge can be analyzed in terms of representations and interpretations (Jorna, 1998). A representation is a construction of reality referring to that reality on which actors make interpretations of the environment and act according to that interpretation. There are different forms and types of representations. We can distinguish implicit, coded and abstract types of representations. Furthermore we distinguish forms of knowledge which depend on the medium used to convey the knowledge, such as language, images, gestures and so on. The semiotic processes or movements of knowledge seem to occur in phases (Van Heusden, 1998, Nonaka & Takeutchi, 1995, Nooteboom, 1997, 1998, 1998a). These phases are a result of the described representation processes. With regard to representation building we identify four phases: transformation, substitution, analysis and reflection (Van Heusden, 1998). Knowledge can move from one phase to the other. Movement from one phase to the other can be analyzed in term of changing representation and interpretation. Within the Castor project these movements of knowledge or in other words knowledge conversion will be theoretically grounded and tested in several empirical domains, for instance information system management within the Dutch army (Van der Voort, 1999). One of the other empirical domains is the large governmental organization (De Bruin, 1999).

3 The focus with regard to this latter empirical domain is to analyze the flow of knowledge within policy making processes and the impact of ICT, among them groupware, on the flow of knowledge in these processes. Representations, ICT and policy making Policy making can be seen as the process of making representations of a future reality, based on interpretations of the environment. These interpretations can of course differ from actor to actor. The interpretation of the policy making civil servant does not necessarily has to be in line with interpretation of politicians or communities of interest outside the governmental organization. This process has also been described as the process of sensemaking (Weick, 1979, 1995). The making of policy takes place within a policy making system. Such a system can be seen as a information processing system consisting of basic- and applied software, data sets, procedures en individuals knowing and/or managing and/or facilitating organizational processes (Looijen, 1997). Every information system can according to this information paradigm be seen as a representation of the organizational processes. The dynamics of information systems can thus be explained by analyzing these representations and interpretations. Not only the physical and social construction of information systems but also the (non intended) use of information systems has an impact on the dynamics of an organization (Orlikowski, 1992). Systems become part of the representation of the organization. This duality of technology can also be explained by the building of representations by individual actors. Every actor has an interpretation and thus a representation of the reality of an information system. By internalizing this representation is becomes part of the representation an individual has of the organization. Policy making and groupware Groupware dynamics can also explained by a theory of knowledge conversion as described above. The dynamics of groupware have to be in line with dynamics of the organization, which have to be in line with dynamics in society. If we consider the organization as the collective of shared representations on that same organization, a groupware system has to be a representation of the process within the organizations it is aimed on serving. If the human actors involved in an implementation process of groupware, the groupware system must meet the shared representations of that group of individuals in becoming successful. This has an implication for the flexibility of groupware systems. If the forms and types of representation of group members change over time, these representations must be incorporated in the system. It also implies that in different phases of a process different features of the groupware system will be necessary.

4 In the empirical study within the ministry we will explore what the impact is of groupware systems on the flow of knowledge within the policy making process. By comparing cases in which groupware has not been used in the process of policy making with cases in which groupware has been used, we hopefully will be able to tell what this impact is and how organizational dynamics can be translated in groupware dynamics. In doing so innovative processes can be stimulated. Acknowledgments This position paper is partly based on an publication in Dutch presented in an special issue on Knowledge management in Information, forthcoming in July 1999, by Jeroen de Bruin and Xander van der Voort, members of the Castor project. About the author From after completing a preliminary in political science, Jeroen de Bruin studied communication science at the University of Amsterdam, with a specialization in information science. His thesis focused on user interface design of WWW pages. After working for a large financial company in the Netherlands, the author started working at the ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning and The environment (VROM) in In collaboration with the ministry he started a PhD. research at University of Groningen, faculty of management and organization focussing on Knowledge Management. He is a member of the Castor research project of the faculty which deals with innovation, organizational dynamics and knowledge. The empirical study of his dissertation will be focussing on the use of ICT (groupware) and the impact of this use on policy making processes. References Bruin, J.V. de (1999). Knowing policy making; Knowledge flow: In search of the role of knowledge within policy making processes. Concept Ph.D. research proposal, University of Groningen, Faculty of Management and Organization. Castells, M. (1996). The Information age: Economy, society and culture. Volume I: The Rise of the network society. Malden (MA): Blackwell Publishers. Heusden, B.P. van (1998), Ongepubliceerde schets van de structuur van semiosis. Persoonlijke communicatie Castor project, 8 December Heusden, B.P. van (1999), Towards a semiotic theory of organizational dynamics, Paper presented at Colloque International; Sémiotique des Cultures et Sciences Cognitives, Institut Ferdinand de Saussure, Genève, juni Jorna, R.J. (1998), Knowledge Management really is about Representations. The Semiotic Review of Books, Vol 9.2, pp.5-8. Looijen, M. (1997), Beheer van Informatiesystemen. Kluwer, Deventer. Nonaka, I & Takeutchi, H. (1995). The knowledge creating company. Oxford: University Press

5 Nooteboom, B. (1997). Towards a cognitive theory of the firm: issues and a logic of change. Paper; Research school of Systems, Organizations and Management (SOM), Groningen University, P.O box 800, 9700 AV Groningen, The Netherlands. Nooteboom, B (1998) Innovation, Learning and Industrial Organization, Paper for the Schumpeter conference, Vienna, June Forthcoming in Cambridge Journal of Economics, Nooteboom, B. (1998a) Organizational learning: how to combine exploitation and exploration. Working Paper. Orlikowski, W.J. (1992). The Duality of technology: rethinking the concept of technology in organizations. In Organizational science. 3(3). Voort, A.G. van der (1999b). Knowledge Processes in Information Systems Management: The case of the Dutch Army. Forthcoming research report, Research Institute for Systems, Organization and Management (SOM), University of Groningen. Weick, K.E. (1979). The Social Psychology of Organizing (2nd ed.). Reading (MA): Addison- Wesley. Weick, K.E. (1995). Sensemaking in organization. Thousand Oaks: Sage publications.