Management, Organisation and ICT: A Cognitive Perspective

Management, Organisation and ICT:
A Cognitive Perspective
PhD-course, 7.5hp, Spring 2014
The course is a
collaboration
between the
Department of
Business Studies at
Uppsala University
and Stockholm
University
Course instructors:
Associate Professor Jan Lindvall, Department of Business Studies,
Uppsalas University, Jan Lindvall [email protected]
Professor Jan Löwstedt, Department of Business Studies,
Stockholm University, [email protected]
Admin:
Elisabeth Hallmén [email protected]
Department of Business Studies, Uppsala University,
Ekonomikum, Kyrkogårdsg. 10C, 1 tr, Uppsala, 018-371 1369
Course start:
February, 6, 2014 at Uppsala University
Enrolment:
deadline: 15th of January; register by using the link:
http://boss.fek.uu.se/fb/form/beb4e035-f33d-4213-8744ee429caa93ce
Management, Organisation and ICT: A Cognitive Perspective
PhD-course, 7.5hp
Spring 2014.
Background and purpose
An important theoretical point of departure for this doctoral course is the importance of
cognition – how we individually, but also collectively/”socially”, think and act. During the
course, we focus this perspective on the ongoing interplay between management,
organisation and ICT. The way we think, and the tools we are using to support our thinking,
is important for how we perceive, define, analyse and act in many organisational situations.
It is therefore, also common to compare ICT with the microscope and telescope. From a
cognitive view on management we will discuss some central concepts, for example, decision
making, sense making and knowledge creation.
Our thinking in, and about, organisations is closely related to the need and use of
information. For example, we often assume that we need information for decision-making;
we often see information as important for organisational coordination and access to
information is often central for individual and collective motivation.
Traditionally our understanding of information follows a tradition from Norbert Wiener
(Cybernetics) and Claude Shannon (Communication theory). Important concepts related to
this view are, for example, signal, noise and feedback. What this well-established tradition
1
lacks is an interest in the meaning, an interpretation, of information. It is also less oriented
towards what action we can get from this information.
During the course, we also want to highlight the contribution of Herbert Simon, into the field
of management, organisation and IT. We focus especially on Simon’s influential, but also
criticised view/metaphor of “the human brain as a computer.”
Course requirements
The course is divided into a number of subthemes (see below), all with a relation to an
organisational topic and most of them connected to some important IT-tools. The course
requirements are, active participation during seminars and by writing three short papers
(about 2-pages), and one final paper.
Course language: English.
Schedule
Day 1.
Uppsala
February 6
at 10:15-16
K312
Day 2.
Stockholm
February 19
at 10:15-16
room will be announced later
Day 3.
Uppsala
March 13
at 10:15-16
K312
Day 4.
Stockholm
April 10
at 10:15-16
room will be announced later
Day 5.
Uppsala
April 29
at 10:15-16
K312
Room K312 - Uppsala, Ekonomikum, Kyrkogårdsg. 10C, 1 stairs up, left
2
Day 1. Uppsala, February 6, at 10.15-16, K312
Theme 1: A cognitive view of management, organisation and information.
• Hodgkinson, G.P & Healey. M.P., 2008, ”Cognition in Organizations”, Annual Review of
Psychology, pp. 387-417.
• Narayanan, V.K. & Zane, L.J., 2011, ”The Cognitive Perspective in Strategy: An
Integrative Review”, Journal of Management, Vol. 37, No. 1, pp. 305-351.
• McKinney, E.H. & Yoos, C.J., 2010, ”Information About Information: A Taxonomy of
Views”, MIS Quarterly, 34, 2, pp.329-344.
• Turkle, S., 2004, ”How Computers Change the Way We Think”, The Cronicle of Higher
Education.
Theme 2: Structure and Actor: A Cognitive Perspective.
• Thompson, M., 2012, ”People, practice, and technology: Restoring Giddens' broader
philosophy to the study of information systems”, Information and Organization, p. 188207.
• Heyck, H., 2008, ”Defining the Computer: Herbert Simon and the Bureaucratic Mind –
Part1”, IEEE Annals of the History of Computing, Volume 30, Number 2, pp. 42-51.
• Heyck, H., 2008, ”Defining the Computer: Herbert Simon and the Bureaucratic Mind –
Part 2”, IEEE Annals of the History of Computing, Volume 30, Number 2, pp. 52-63.
• Ensmenger, N., 2012, ”The Digital Construction of Technology”, Technology and
Culture, October, Vol. 53, pp. 753-766.
• Löwstedt, J. 1985, Contingencies or Cognitions? Two Paths for Research on
Organization and Technology. Scandinavian Journal of Management, Vol 1:207-225.
3
Day 2. Stockholm, February 19, 2014, 10.15-16 ?????
Theme 3. Communication in, and between, organisations. Example of Internet.
• Decherney, P., Ensmenger, N., & Yoo, C., 2011, ”Are Those Who Ignore History
Doomed to Repeat It?”, The University of Chicago Law Review, 78:1627.
• Hayles, K.N., 2009, ”RFID: Human Agency and Meaning in Information-Intensive
Environments”, Theory Culture & Society, 26, 2-3, pp. 47-72.
• Hanseth. O. & Lyytinen, K., 2010, ”Design theory for dynamic complexity in
information infrastructures: the case of building internet”, Journal of Information
Technology, 25, pp.1-19.
• Hendler, J., Shadbolt, N., Hall, W., Berners-Lee, T., & Weitzner, D., 2008, ”Web
Science: An Interdisciplinary Appraoch to Understanding the Web”, Communications
of the ACM, Vol. 51, No. 7., pp. 60-69.
Theme 4. Coordination and control in organisations. Example: ERP-system, Integrated
systems.
• Okhuysen, G.A., & Bechker, B.A., 2009, ”Coordination in Organizations: An Integrative
Perspective”, The Academy of Management Annals, Vol 3, No 1, pp. 463-502.
• Bailey, D. E., Leonardi, P. M. & Chong, J., 2010, ”Minding the Gaps: Understanding
Technology Interdependence and Coordination in Knowledge Work”, Organization
Science, Vol. 21, No. 3, pp. 713-730.
• Leimbach, T., 2008, ”The SAP Story: Evolution of SAP within the German Software
Industry”, IEEE Annales of the History of Computing, vol. 30, Number 4, pp. 60-76.
4
Day 3. Uppsala, March 13, 2014, 10.15-16, K312
Theme 5. Individual and collective decision-making. Example: Business Intelligence and Big
Data.
•
Griffith, T.L., Nortcraft, G.B., & Fuller, M.A., 2008, Borgs in the org? Organizational
Decision Making and Technology”, in Hodgkinson, G.P. & Starbuck, W.H., 2008, The
Oxford Handbook of Organizational Decision Making.
• Boland, R.J., 2008, ”Decision Making and Sense making”, in Burstein, F. & Holsapple,
C.W., 2008, Handbook on Decision Support Systems. Vol.1, pp. 55-63.
• Chen, H., Chiang, R.H.L & Storey, V.C., 2012, Business Intelligence and Analytcis:
From Big Data to Big Impact, MIS Quarterly, Vol. 36., No. 4, 1165-1188.
Theme 6. Organisational knowledge creation and knowledge sharing. Example: Machine
Learning, Social Media; “Watson”.
• Weick, K-E., Sutcliffe, K.M., Obstfeld, D., 2005, ”Organizing and the Process of
Sensemaking”, Organization Science, Vol. 16, No. 4, pp. 409-421.
• Leonardi, P.M. & Treem, J.W., 2012, ”Knowledge management technology as a stage
for strategic self-presentation: Implications for Knowledge Sharing in organizations”,
Information & Organization, 22, pp. 37-59.
• Domingos. P., 2012, ”A Few Useful Things to Know About Machine Learning”,
Communications of the ACM, October 2012, Vol. 55, No. 10., pp.78-87.
• Garrison, G. Kim, S, Wakefield, R.L., 2012, ”Success Factors for Deploying Cloud
Computing”, Communications of the ACM, October 2012, Vol. 55., No. 9., pp.62-68.
5
Day 4. Stockholm, April 10, 2014, 10.15-16 ?????
Theme 7. Organisational memory. Example: Data Base.
• Walsh, J.P., & Ungson, G.R., 1991, ”Organizational Memory”, Academy of Management
Review, Vol. 16, No. 1, pp.57-91.
• Bergin, T.J. & Haigh, T., 2009, ”The Commercialization of Database Management
Systems, 1969-1983”. IEEE Annals of the History of Computing, Vol. 31, 4, pp. 6-25.
• Chaudhuri, S., Dayal, U., & Ganti, V., 2001, ”Database Technology for Decision
Support Systems”, Computer, pp. 48-55.
Theme 8. Organisational routines/work and IT – embedded IT.
• D’Adderio, L., 2011, ”Artifacts at the centre of routines: performing the material turn in
routines theory”, Journal of Institutional Economics, 7, 2, pp.197-230.
• Mahoney, M.S., 2008, ”What Makes the History of Software Hard”, IEEE Annals of the
History of Computing, Vol. 30, Number 3, pp. 8-18.
• Zammuto, R.F., Griffith, T.L., Majchrzak, A., Dougherty, D., Faraj, S., 2007,
”Information Technology and the Changing Fabric of Organization”, Organization
Science, Vol. 18, No. 5., pp. 749-762.
6
Day 5. Uppsala, April 29, 10.15-16, K312
Theme 9. Organisational power and IT.
• Leonardi, P. M., & Barley, S., 2010, ”What´s Under Construction Here? Social Action,
Materiality and Power in Constructivist Studies of Technology and Organizing”, The
Academy of Management Annals, 4:1, pp. 1-51.
• Jasperson, J., Carte, T., Saunders, C.A., 2002, ”Power and Information Technology
Research: A Meta-triangulation Review”, MIS Quarterly, Vol. 26, No. 4, pp. 397-459.
• Flynn, F.J., Gruenfeld, D., Molm, L.D.& Polzer, J.T., 2011, ”Social Psychological
Perspectives on Power in Organizations”, Administrative Science Quarterly, 56, 4, pp.
495-500.
Theme 10. Organisational development and IT. New roles and responsibilities.
• Orlikowski, W., & Yates, J., 2006, ”ICT and Organizational Change: A Commentary”,
The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 42, pp. 127-134.
• Harley, B., Wright, C., & Hall, R., & Dery, K., 2006, ”Management Reactions to
Technological Change: The Example of Enterprise Resource Planning”, The Journal of
Applied Behavioral Science, 42, pp. 58-75.
• Walsham, G., 2012, ”Are we making a better world with ICTs? Reflections on a future
agenda for the IS field”, Journal of Information Technology, 27, pp. 87-93.
• Larsson, P., Löwstedt, J. & Shani, A. 2001, IT and the Learning Organization: Exploring
Myths of Change. Organization Development Journal, Vol. 19 No 1:73-91.
7

Download Report