Minding the Gaps: Understanding Technology Interdependence and Coordination in Knowledge Work

  • Authors:

  • Diane E. Bailey;Paul M. Leonardi;Jan Chong

  • Affiliations:

  • School of Information, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, Texas 78701;Department of Communication Studies, Department of Industrial Engineering and Management Sciences, Northwestern University, Evanston, Illinois 60208;Center for Work, Technology and Organization, Department of Management Science and Engineering, Stanford University, Stanford, California 94305

  • Venue:
  • Organization Science
  • Year:
  • 2010

Quantified Score

Hi-index 0.00

Visualization

Abstract

In this paper, we broaden the concept of interdependence beyond its focus on task to include technology, defining technology interdependence as technologies' interaction with and dependence on one another in the course of carrying out work. With technologies increasingly aiding knowledge work, understanding technology interdependence may be as important as understanding task interdependence for theories of organizing, but the literature has yet to develop ways of thinking about technology interdependence or its impact on the social dynamics of work. We define a technology gap as the space in a workflow between two technologies wherein the output of the first technology is meant to be the input to the second one. Using data from an inductive study of two engineering occupations (hardware engineering and structural engineering), we analyzed engineers' gap encounters (episodes in which a technology gap appeared in the course of action) and found striking differences in how engineers minded the gaps. Hardware engineers minded the gaps by coordinating technologies via “bridges” that automated data transfers between technologies. Structural engineers, in contrast, allowed technology gaps to persist even though traversing gaps consumed significant time and effort. Our findings highlight a difference between task and technology in the degree of coordination necessary for success. Managers in our study designed policies around technology interdependence and coordination not to manage technology most efficiently, but to manage work and workers in a manner consistent with occupational structures and industry constraints. We discuss the implications of our findings for theories of organizing work.