Search results

Problems with the use of office computer systems may often be traced back to the designers' narrow view or understanding of off ice work. Neither office work nor design of office systems should be done solely according to formulas. Precedent and comparison play just as important a role. Accordingly, we do not present a set of guidelines for design but five pieces, or exercises, which stimulate seeing the design issues differently. We use metaphors to interpret computer use. Using the dichotomous ideas of description and interpretation, similarity and difference, planned action and situated action, group discussion and individual problem‐solving, and authoritative knowledge and shared knowledge, we hope to set in motion a dialectical reframing process.

Illustrates a case story detailing the customer‐vendor co‐operation in a project concerning the beta test of hardware and software at a radiology department. A qualitative analysis of the project has unveiled that contextual conditions like the nature of the technology, the organizational structure at both the customer and the vendor side, the development strategy, and the project organization were very important forces during the project. Technologically, the project was more complex than usually was seen at the hospital because it concerned both biomedical and administrative aspects. Conflicting interests in particular on the part of the customer side as well as between the customer and the vendor affected the course of the project. Methodologically, the project lacked a proper strategy for the co‐operative process. There was no formalized project organization which otherwise could have provided different conditions for the project.