No full-text available
To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the author.
Misslingensbedingungen einer Plattformintegration. Rekonstruktion eines Software-Entwicklungsprozesses für das Universitätskrankenhaus
Abstract
Zusammenfassung
Die Digitalisierung findet längst auch im Gesundheitswesen und mithin in seiner herausragenden Subinstitution, dem Krankenhaus, statt. Konkrete Digitalisierungsprojekte sind dabei häufig von Mehrdeutigkeiten und Widerständen begleitet, die auf die komplexen soziotechnischen Herstellungszusammenhänge verweisen, in denen sie realisiert werden. Dieser Artikel arbeitet anhand einer empirischen Fallstudie die Ge- bzw. Misslingensbedingungen für die Integration multipler Interessen in eine digitale Überwachungsplattform heraus und geht den strukturellen Effekten des Entwicklungsprozesses für das beteiligte Universitätskrankenhaus nach. Dabei zeigt sich: Erwartungs-, Deutungs- und Konstellationsstrukturen der organisierten Krankenbehandlung können insbesondere dann verändert werden, wenn auch die mehrdimensionale Kontrolle der ökonomischen Übersetzung, die Herstellung zeitlicher Kohärenz und die Kongruenz von digitaltechnischer und sozialer Konstellationsstruktur gelingen. Diese Momente situativer Schließung lassen sich ausgehend von den empirischen Übersetzungen einer digitalen Plattform rekonstruieren und als Bedingung der Möglichkeit für strukturelle Effekte aus dem Plattformentwicklungsprozess behandeln.
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any citations for this publication.
In einem branchen- und sektorenübergreifenden "Konsortialprojekt" wird eine Software für nierentransplantierte Patient*innen hergestellt. In dieser Arena steht ein Aspekt im Zentrum der Aushandlungsprozesse: ob die Verarbeitung und Aufbereitung
der Patientendaten so weit in die Therapie eingreife, dass es sich aus regulatorischer
Sicht um ein Medizinprodukt handelt – oder nicht. Die verschiedenen
Versuche, die herzustellende Software so oder anders zu deuten, beschreibe ich aus
der Perspektive des "Black Boxing". Diese Perspektive lenkt den Blick auf diejenigen
Aktivitäten und Objekte, die aus Sicht der Akteure gerade nicht beobachtbar werden
sollen und fragt nach methodischen und konzeptionellen Möglichkeiten ihrer Erfassung.
This article examines the effects of power on sensemaking processes, bridging two major, yet traditionally separate, literatures in organization studies. Dividing power into its systemic and episodic forms, we elaborate how power shapes not only the content of sensemaking, but also the form of sensemaking processes. We explicate the distinct ways in which power works in four archetypal sensemaking processes: automatic (preconscious and committed), improvisational (preconscious and provisional), algorithmic (conscious and committed) and reflective (conscious and provisional). These ideal-type processes help us theorize how influences related to systemic and episodic power induce more or less conscious and provisional forms of sensemaking. This refined understanding of sensemaking processes enables further explication of episodic power into distinctive kinds of sensegiving and sensebreaking activities.
This article foregrounds the ways in which members of the Quantified Self ascribe value and meaning to the data they generate in self-tracking practices. We argue that the widespread idea that what draws self-trackers to numerical data is its perceived power of truth and objectivity—a so-called “data fetishism”—is limiting. Using an ethnographic approach, we describe three ways in which self-trackers attribute meaning to their data-gathering practices which escape this data fetishist critique: self-tracking as a practice of mindfulness, as a means of resistance against social norms, and as a communicative and narrative aid. In light of this active engagement with data, we suggest that it makes more sense to view these practitioners as “quantifying selves.” We also suggest that such fine-grained accounts of the appeal that data can have, beyond its allure of objectivity, are necessary if we are to achieve a fuller understanding of Big Data culture.
Es besteht eine Kluft zwischen der restriktiven Aussage der klassischen soziologischen Handlungstheorien, wonach allein Menschen zum Handeln befähigt sind, und der weicheren Redeweise über die neuen Handlungsqualitäten bestimmter avancierter Techniken, wenn gesagt wird, dass intelligente Techniken, Software-Agenten und mobile Roboter zunehmend für uns tätig werden und uns zukünftig das Planen und Handeln abnehmen werden. Ist der Begriff des Handelns sinnvollerweise nur auf das intendierte Verhalten bewusstseinsfähiger Menschen zu beschränken? Oder soll er auch auf die Interaktion mit dem PC, auf die Kooperation unter Software-Agenten und auf die Koordination zwischen Fußball spielenden Robotern ausgeweitet werden?
This paper outlines a new approach to the study of power, that of the sociology of translation. Starting from three principles, those of agnosticism (impartiality between actors engaged in controversy), generalised symmetry (the commitment to explain conflicting viewpoints in the same terms) and free association (the abandonment of all a priori distinctions between the natural and the social), the paper describes a scientific and economic controversy about the causes for the decline in the population of scallops in St. Brieuc Bay and the attempts by three marine biologists to develop a conservation strategy for that population. Four ‘moments’ of translation are discerned in the attempts by these researchers to impose themselves and their definition of the situation on others: (a) problematisation: the researchers sought to become indispensable to other actors in the drama by denning the nature and the problems of the latter and then suggesting that these would be resolved if the actors negotiated the ‘obligatory passage point’ of the researchers' programme of investigation; (b) interessement: a series of processes by which the researchers sought to lock the other actors into the roles that had been proposed for them in that programme; (c) enrolment: a set of strategies in which the researchers sought to define and interrelate the various roles they had allocated to others; (d) mobilisation: a set of methods used by the researchers to ensure that supposed spokesmen for various relevant collectivities were properly able to represent those collectivities and not betrayed by the latter. In conclusion it is noted that translation is a process, never a completed accomplishment, and it may (as in the empirical case considered) fail.
Soweit wir auch schauen in der Gesellschaft der Gegenwart, ob lokal oder global, was sich ausbreitet, ist nicht das Allgemeine, es ist das Besondere. Was immer mehr gefördert und eingefordert wird, an was sich die Hoffnungen und Sehnsüchte heften, ist nicht das Standardisierte und Regulierte, sondern das Einzigartige, das Singuläre.
Der vorliegende Band zeigt, wie man Artefakte systematisch analysieren und ihr Erkenntnispotential für ein tieferes Verständnis von Gesellschaft nutzen kann. Im Zentrum stehen die Grundfragen der Artefaktanalyse, nämlich warum und wie Gegenstände von wem und mit welchen Folgen für die Menschen und ihr Zusammenleben hergestellt wurden. Für die Sozialwissenschaften erschließt diese Methode ein in unserer Gesellschaft omnipräsentes Material und untersucht es in seiner Bedeutung für alltägliche Handlungsweisen sowie für die Konstitution unserer Umwelt.
Der Inhalt
• Artefakte in der sozialen Welt
• Zur Dimensionalität der Artefaktbedeutung
• Methodologische Grundlagen der Artefaktanalyse
• Durchführung der Artefaktanalyse
• Einige Besonderheiten von Artefakten
• Methodische Ergänzungen
Die Zielgruppen
Wissenschaftlerinnen und Wissenschaftler, Lehren
de und Studierende der Sozial- und Wirtschaftswissenschaften, der Geistes- und Kulturwissenschaften sowie der Archäologie
Die Autoren
Prof. Dr. Manfred Lueger arbeitet am Institut für Soziologie und empirische Sozialforschung und leitet das Kompetenzzentrum für empirische Forschungsmethoden an der Wirtschaftsuniversität Wien.
Prof. Dr. Ulrike Froschauer lehrt und forscht am Institut für Soziologie der Universität Wien.
Ein zentrales Problem der Soziologie ist und bleibt das empirische Verhältnis von menschlichem Handeln und Gesellschaftsstruktur und das nachfolgende analytische Verhältnis von Handlungstheorie und Gesellschaftstheorie.
A way of treating interests which differs from those of both Woolgar and Barnes is here recommended. This third `enrolment' or `networking' theory approach notes that actors attempt to enlist one another in a variety of different ways, including the transformation of imputed interests. Some of the strategies adopted in this process are considered. Overall, it is suggested that interests should not be imputed to actors as background causes of action, but rather that they should be seen as attempts to define and enforce contingent forms of social order on the part of actors themselves.
Scientific work is heterogeneous, requiring many different actors and viewpoints. It also requires cooperation. The two create tension between divergent viewpoints and the need for generalizable findings. We present a model of how one group of actors managed this tension. It draws on the work of amateurs, professionals, administrators and others connected to the Museum of Vertebrate Zoology at the University of California, Berkeley, during its early years. Extending the Latour-Callon model of interessement, two major activities are central for translating between viewpoints: standardization of methods, and the development of `boundary objects'. Boundary objects are both adaptable to different viewpoints and robust enough to maintain identity across them. We distinguish four types of boundary objects: repositories, ideal types, coincident boundaries and standardized forms.
The new discipline of cybernetics expanded exponentially in the period 1943-70. Unlike traditional scientific disciplines, its practitioners claimed (to varying degrees) that they were producing a new universal science. This paper anatomizes the claim to universality, details some rhetorical strategies used to support that claim, and examines some practical consequences for the general economy of the sciences argued by cyberneticians. It concludes by characterizing cybernetic strategies in terms of a form complementary to the obligatory passage point - the 'distributed passage point'.
This paper outlines a new approach to the study of power, that of the sociology of translation. Starting from three principles, those of agnosticism (impartiality between actors engaged in controversy), generalised symmetry (the commitment to explain conflicting viewpoints in the same terms) and free association (the abandonment of all a priori distinctions between the natural and the social), the paper describes a scientific and economic controversy about the causes for the decline in the population of scallops in St. Brieuc Bay and the attempts by three marine biologists to develop a conservation strategy for that population. Four 'moments' of translation are discerned in the attempts by these researchers to impose themselves and their definition of the situation on others: (a) problematisation: the researchers sought to become indispensable to other actors in the drama by defining the nature and the problems of the latter and then suggesting that these would be resolved if the actors negotiated the 'obligatory passage point' of the researchers' programme of investigation; (b) interessement: a series of processes by which the researchers sought to lock the other actors into the roles that had been proposed for them in that programme; (c) enrolment: a set of strategies in which the researchers sought to define and interrelate the various roles they had allocated to others; (d) mobilisation: a set of methods used by the researchers to ensure that supposed spokesmen for various relevant collectivities were properly able to represent those collectivities and not betrayed by the latter. In conclusion it is noted that translation is a process, never a completed accomplishment, and it may (as in the empirical case considered) fail.
The central role of "platform" products and services in mediating the activities of disaggregated "clusters" or "ecosystems" of firms has been widely recognized. But platforms and the systems in which they are embedded are very diverse. In particular, platforms may exist within firms as product lines, across firms as multi-product systems, and in the form of multi-sided markets. In this paper we argue that there is a fundamental unity in the architecture of platforms. Platform architectures are modularizations of complex systems in which certain components (the platform itself) remain stable, while others (the complements) are encouraged to vary in crosssection or over time. Among the most stable elements in a platform architecture are the modular interfaces that mediate between the platform and its complements. These interfaces are even more stable than the interior core of the platform, thus control over the interfaces amounts to control over the platform and its evolution. We describe three ways of representing platform architectures: network graphs, design structure matrices and layer maps. We conclude by addressing a number of fundamental strategic questions suggested by a unified view of platforms.
Summary Rules and standards are considered to be of vital importance for the functioning not only of organizations but of societies as well. The difficulties and paradoxes associated with the concept of rules and rule-following are analyzed much more frequently in the context of philosophy than of social science. In this paper, I will draw on the writings of Wittgenstein and Derrida to examine four particular characteristics of rules and standards: first, the dependence of their validity and meaning on the practice of rule-following. Second, properties that have led me to describe them as pharmaka in Derrida's (1997) sense, which means medicine or poison and possibly illicit drugs. Third, their dependence on the possibility of rule-breaking, and fourth, their being inevitably subject to drift, which is beneficial in many cases but dangerous in others. I will argue that the drift of rules and standards becomes increasingly dangerous when more processes become path dependent. This paper examines four cases as examples of dangerous drifts in the context of organizations: the drift of environmental standards, the Challenger disaster, a friendly fire case in northern Iraq, and Michael Power's "audit explosion."
Die granulare Gesellschaft. Wie das Digitale unsere Wirklichkeit auflöst
- Christoph Kucklick
Die Plattformarchitektur als Strukturmuster. Ein Plattformbegriff für die soziologische Debatte
- Dzifa Ametowobla
Eine Zeitenwende? Möglichkeiten und Grenzen der Digitalisierung
- Dirk Baecker
The Pasteurization of French Society
- Bruno Latour
Über technische Vermittlung: Philosophie, Soziologie und Genealogie in:Andréa Belliger/David J. Krieger (Hrsg.), ANThology. Ein einführendes Handbuch zur Akteur-Netzwerk-Theorie
- Bruno Latour
The Quantified Self: A Sociology of Self-Tracking
- Deborah Lupton
Die Gesellschaft der Singularitäten: zum Strukturwandel der Moderne
- Andreas Reckwitz
To Save Everything, Click Here: The Folly of Technological Solutionism
- Evgeny Morozov
Handeln und Strukturen. Einführung in die akteurtheoretische Soziologie
- Uwe Schimank