|
Full title
Dependability as ordinary action
Keywords
production management, ethnography,
Summary
An ethnographic study of work in an industrial production
environment has highlighted the importance situated action in achieving
dependability of the production process. The same setting has afforded
an investigation of the practices of IT professionals concerned with managing
the various systems supporting production work. This latter part has highlighted
the role that a biographical familiarity with the setting can play in
systems development and ongoing management.
DEPENDABILITY AS ORDINARY ACTION
We draw on an ethnographic study of work in a production
plant that illustrates how dependability is realised in and as part of
peoples' everyday ordinary activities. The case study organisation, ENGINECO,
produces mass-customised diesel engines from 11 to 190kW. Production in
its plant is designed to work along a strict production orthodoxy and
large parts are automated. An ethnographic study of working practices
in the control room has been conducted, followed by an investigation of
the practices of IT professionals who are charged with procuring, installing,
operating and maintaining the various IT systems that control production
processes.
While production work is highly regulated and carried out
in an environment that reflects the 'production orthodoxy' in its physical
and social arrangements, we found a range of situated practices that constituted
a core part of peoples' work in the control room. An example is provided
by this extract from the shift book that is used to record important information
about the production process and to communicate this information to people
on other shifts:
As soon as crankcases for 4-cylinders are available,
schedule ~ order number 87965576 (very urgent for Company X)
In this example, workers exhibit their knowledge of the
state of production and the priorities that apply in specific situations
as well as the general rules for production management. The case described
by this shift book entry constitutes a local modification of a pre-computed
production schedule that takes into account not only the ordering of delivery
dates and bills of materials (i.e. certain engines requiring a particular
crank case) but also the relative importance of particular customers to
the company and the relations between these companies. In principle, it
would have been sufficient for the purposes of ensuring that an order
be fulfilled as soon as possible to state that it is urgent (i.e. close
to the delivery date) but the worker chose to include information about
who the customer is and thereby making available to his colleagues information
that enables to draw on a repertoire of resources to handle the situation.
Given that the order is for Company X, they can make a judgement
about, for example, what kinds of measures are appropriate to get the
job done and speed up the production process, e.g. by assigning higher
priorities relative to other orders, by having someone work extra hours
or simply by closely monitoring this order's progress in order to spot
potential problems and delays as early as possible.
The practices described above are important in that they
are crucial in establishing an orderly production process. In contrast
to a mechanistic view that would emphasise the importance of prescriptions
for action and or planning, this example shows how the prescriptions and
plans are instantiated through peoples' resourceful action. Dependability
of the production process is something that is only partially achieved
by the design of the plant and its formal arrangements but is rather crucially
dependent on ordinary, everyday, seen-but-unnoticed activities of production
workers. A last important point is that these activities are inherently
social in nature and thus need to be described in terms of the working
division of labour in the workplace and in terms of what people know and
use as they go about their business.
DESIGN as a team MEMBER
In addition to the ethnographic study of production work,
we have had the opportunity to get involved in an study the work of IT
professionals in the same setting. The local IT department is co-located
with production in the same building and its staff are intimately familiar
with the details of the production process through their day-to-day involvement
in the management of production and of the IT systems that support it.
The importance of this 'biographical familiarity' with the setting becomes
clear in the following example, where a member of IT staff and a production
worker discuss a new system designed to record production statistics as
well as information about breakdowns. Its development has been contracted
out to an external company and while this supplier has staff on-site,
they are much less familiar with the biography of the setting.
Michael: Normally, the stations should be ordered
as they are on the assembly line... ~ Barbara: Yes. That's exactly how
I've entered them but someone has changed the sorting order.
Barbara and Michael were both involved in drawing up the
requirements document for the system which was then handed over to the
supplier. The order of station identifiers in a drop-down list was implicitly
specified by Barbara giving the list in this particular order which corresponds
to the physical arrangements in the plant. Not realising the significance
of this ordering, the developer involved changed the order to an alphabetical
one. As production workers may well use different names to identify a
station, this ordering produces a problem of potential ambiguity and makes
searching for a station harder.
Biographical familiarity, i.e. knowing how things get done
in a place, is an important resource for designers. Requirements specifications
can only capture some details of how a system will fit in with working
practices. Various methods have been devised to improve the process of
'informing design' but as long as the separation between designers and
users is maintained, they will only be patches for the problem. Our investigation
of corealisation as an alternative orientation to design aims to tackle
the problem through a fundamental respecification of the practice of design
as a collaborative activity that both designers and users are routinely
involved in (as opposed to exceptionally as in many participatory design
methods).
links
Co-realisation
PUBLICATIONS
Mark Hartswood, Rob Procter, Roger Slack, Alex Voß,
Monika Buscher, Mark Rouncefield, Philippe Rouchy. Co-realisation: Towards
a Principled Synthesis of Ethnomethodology and Participatory Design. Scandinavian
Journal of Information Systems, 14(2), 2002.
Mark Hartswood, Rob Procter, Roger Slack, James Soutter,
Alex Voß, Mark Rouncefield. The Benefits of a Long Engagement: From
Contextual Design to The Co-realisation of Work Affording Artefacts. Proceedings
of NordiCHI. 2002.
Monika Büscher, Dan Shapiro, Mark Hartswood, Rob Procter,
Roger Slack, Alex Voß, Preben Mogensen. Promises, Premises and Risks:
Sharing Responsibilities, Working Up Trust and Sustaining Commitment in
Participatory Design Projects. T. Binder, J. Gregory, I. Wagner (eds.)
PDC'2002 Proceedings of the Participatory Design Conference. June, 2002.
pages 183--192.
Alexander Voß, Roger Slack, Rob Procter, Robin Williams,
Mark Hartswood, Mark Rouncefield. Dependability as Ordinary Action. Stuart
Anderson, Sandro Bologna, Massimo Felici (eds.) Computer Safety, Reliability
and Security: Proceedings of the 21st International Conference, SAFECOMP
2002. September, 2002. pages 32--43.
Alexander Voß, Rob Procter, Robin Williams. Innovation
in Use: Interleaving day-to-day operation and systems development. T.
Cherkasky, J. Greenbaum, P. Mambery (eds.) Proceedings of the Participatory
Design Conference. 28 November to 1 December, 2000.
|