I had a VERY interesting meeting today with Ernest who have some interesting perspectives on how to de implement change in organisations. The conversation was also interesting because he gave me some highly recommendable perspectives on design – he ran briefly trough the concept of Activity Theory as part of an overall design approach.
Please take a look at it - I think that you also will find some interesting perspectives for further investigation….
… Activity theory begins with the notion of activity. An activity is seen as a system of human "doing" whereby a subject works on an object in order to obtain a desired outcome. In order to do this, the subject employs tools, which may be external (eg an axe, a computer) or internal (eg a plan). As an illustration, an activity might be the operation of an automated call centre.
As we shall
see later, many subjects may be involved in the activity and each
subject may have one or more motives (e.g. improved supply management,
career advancement or gaining control over a vital organisational power
source). A simple example of an activity within a call centre might be
a telephone operator (subject) who is modifying a customer’s billing
record (object) so that the billing data is correct (outcome) using a
graphical front end to a database (tool).
Kuutti formulates activity theory in terms of the structure of an
activity. “An activity is a form of doing directed to an object, and
activities are distinguished from each other according to their
objects.
Transforming
the object into an outcome motivates the existence of an activity. An
object can be a material thing, but it can also be less tangible.”
Kuutti then adds a third term, the tool, which ‘mediates’ between the
activity and the object. “The tool is at the same time both enabling
and limiting: it empowers the subject in the transformation process
with the historically collected experience and skill ‘crystallised’ to
it, but it also restricts the interaction to be from the perspective of
that particular tool or instrument; other potential features of an
object remain invisible to the subject…”.
As Verenikina
remarks, tools are “social objects with certain modes of operation
developed socially in the course of labour and are only possible
because they correspond to the objectives of a practical action.”…
Leave a Reply