Information technology as boundary object for transformational learning
Forgues, D, Koskela, LJ and Lejeune, A 2009, 'Information technology as boundary object for transformational learning' , Journal of Information Technology in Construction, 14 , pp. 48-58.
- Published Version
Available under License Creative Commons Attribution.
Download (496kB) | Preview
Collaborative work is considered as a way to improve productivity and value generation in construction. However, recent research demonstrates that socio-cognitive factors related to fragmentation of specialized knowledge may hinder team performance. New methods based on theories of practice are emerging in Computer Supported Collaborative Work and organisational learning to break these knowledge boundaries, facilitating knowledge sharing and the generation of new knowledge through transformational learning. According to these theories, objects used in professional practice play a key role in mediating interactions. Rules and methods related to these practices are also embedded in these objects. Therefore changing collaborative patterns demand reconfiguring objects that are at the boundary between specialized practices, namely boundary objects. This research is unique in presenting an IT strategy in which technology is used as a boundary object to facilitate transformational learning in collaborative design work.
|Uncontrolled Keywords:||information technology, integrated design, boundary objects, innovation, social learning|
|Themes:||Subjects / Themes > T Technology > TH Building construction
Built and Human Environment
|Schools:||Schools > School of the Built Environment
Schools > School of the Built Environment > Centre for Built Environment Sustainability and Transformation (BEST)
|Journal or Publication Title:||Journal of Information Technology in Construction|
|Publisher:||International Council for Research and Innovation in Building and Construction|
|Depositing User:||LJ Koskela|
|Date Deposited:||10 Jun 2010 10:16|
|Last Modified:||29 Oct 2015 01:14|
|References:||Ancona, D. G., Kochan, T. A., Scully, M. & J.V., M. (2004) Managing for the future: organizational behavior & processes, Cincinnati, Ohio, South-Western College Publishing. Begin, B. & Forgues, D. (2003) Concept of Operations - Streamlining Data Tracking and Control Processes in RPS-Type Construction Projects. Ottawa, PWGSC. Blackler, F., Crump, N. & McDonald, S. (1999) Managing experts and competing through innovation: an activity theoretical analysis. Organization, 6, 5-31. Blackler, F., Crump, N. & McDonald, S. (2000) Organizing Processes in Complex Activity Networks. Organization, 7, 277-300. Blanchard, B. S. (2004) System engineering management, Hoboken, N.J., John Wiley. Brown, J. S. & Duguid, P. (2001) Knowledge and Organization: A Social-Practice Perspective. Organization Science, 12, 198-213. Carlisle, P. (2004) Transferring, Translating, and Transforming: an Integrative Framework for Managing Knowledge Across Boundaries. Organization Science, 15, 555-568. Carlisle, P. R. (2002) A Pragmatic View of Knowledge and Boundaries: Boundary Objects in New Product Development. Organization Science, 13, 442-455. Dupagne, A. (1991) Computer Integrated Building. Strategic final Report. Exploratory action NO 5604. ESPRIT II. Eastman, C., Teicholtz, P., Sacks, R. & Liston, K. (2008) BIM Handbook: A Guide to Building Information Modeling for Owners, Managers, Designers, Engineers and Contractors, Hoboken, NJ, Wiley & Sons. Egan, J. (1998) Rethinking Construction: The Report of the Construction Task Force. London, HMSO. Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989) Building Theories From Case Study Research. Academy of Management Review, 14, 532-550. Engeström, Y. (1987) Learning by expanding: An activity-theoretical approach to developmental research, Helsinki, Orienta-Konsultit. Engeström, Y. (2000) Activity theory as a framework for analyzing and redesigning work. Ergonomics, 43, 960- 974. Engeström, Y. (2001) Expansive Learning at Work: toward an activity theoretical reconceptualization. Journal of Education and Work, 14, 133-156. Engeström, Y. (2004) New forms of learning in co-configuration work. Journal of Workplace Learning, 16, 2- 10. Fernie, S., Green, S. D. & Weller, S. J. (2003) Dilettantes, discipline and discourse: requirements management for construction. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 10, 354-367. Fleck, J. (1994) Learning by trying: the implementation of configurational technology. Research Policy, 23, 637- 652. Fowler, C. A. (1994) The defense acquisition system too late for the scalpel; bring out the meat axe! Aerospace and Electronic Systems Magazine, 9, 3-6. Hobday, M. (1998) Product complexity, innovation and industrial organisation. Research Policy, 26, 689-710. Institute of electrical and electronics engineers (1990) IEEE standard for software configuration management plans, New York, Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers. Janis, I. L. (1982) Groupthink, Boston, MA, Houghton-Mifflin Koskela, L., Howell, G. & Lichtig, W. (2006) Contracts and production. Symposium on Sustainability and Value through Construction Procurement. Salford , UK, CIBW92 Procurement Systems. Koskinen, K., Makinen S. (2009) Role of boundary objects in negotiations of project contracts. International Journal of Project Management 27,31-38. Latham, S. M. (1994) Constructing the Team, Final Report of the Government / Industry Review of Procurement and Contractual Arrangements In The UK Construction Industry London, HMSO. Lave, J. & Wenger, E. (1991) Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation, Cambridge Cambridge University Press. Lorell, M., Drezner, J. A. & Lowell, J. (1999) Completing U.S. Navy Military Specifications & Standards Reform (MSSR): Issues and Problems. Santa Monica, CA RAND Corporation. Mathieu, J. E., Heffner, T. S., Goodwin, G. F., Salas, E. & Cannon-Bowers, J. A. (2000) The Influence of Shared Mental Models on Team Process and Performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85, 273-283. Patton, M. Q. (2002) Qualitative Research and Evaluation Methods, Thousand Oaks, Sage Publications. Star, S. L. & Griesemer, J. R. (1989) Institutional Ecology,Translations' and Boundary Objects: Amateurs and Professionals in Berkeley's Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, 1907-39. Social Studies of Science, 19, 387- 420.v Strauss, A. & Corbin, J. (1998) Basics of Qualitative Research, International Educational and Professional Publisher. Suchman, L. A. (1987) Plans and Situated Actions: The Problem of Human-Machine Communication, Cambridge University Press. Tory, M., Staub-French, S., PO, B. A. & WU, F. (2008) Physical and Digital Artifact-Mediated Coordination in Building Design. 17, 311-351. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978) Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes, Cambridge, Harvard University Press. Zager, D. (2002) Collaboration as an Activity Coordinating with Pseudo-Collective Objects. Computer Supported Cooperative Work 11, 181-204.|
Actions (login required)
|Edit record (repository staff only)|