The Use of Actor-Network Theory and a Practice-Based Approach to Understand Online Community Participation
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
The use of Actor-Network Theory and a Practice-Based Approach to understand online community participation A thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Information School The University of Sheffield By Gibrán Rivera González May 2013 Abstract Participation in online communities is problematic. Take up of community technologies is often patchy and subject to resistance, particularly in organisational settings. Previous literature, mainly influenced by a cognitive tradition, tends to explain this either through features of the technology such as interface design or through individual motivational structures. This study explores the insights Actor-Network Theory (Callon, 1986; Latour, 1986; Law, 1986c; Law, 1986b; Law, 1992) and a practice-based approach (Gherardi, 2000; Orlikowski, 2002; Reckwitz, 2002; Schatzki, 2002; Nicolini et al., 2003; Schatzki, 2005; Gherardi, 2009b; Feldman and Orlikowski, 2011; Nicolini, 2011; Cox, 2012) provide to more fully explain participation in online communities. The study focuses on the failure to establish an online community supported by a collaborative technology as part of a Human Resources project within a multi-campus University in Mexico. A range of methods for data collection were used, however semi- structured interviews were the main basis for analysis. Initially, analysing communication activity in the community showed low levels of participation, leading to conduct 30 interviews with actors playing different roles during the project; 17 interviews were conducted in the initial stage of the study and 13 interviews in the final stage. Work- related documentation and observation in online meetings were also used as sources of data. Actor-Network Theory (ANT) and a practice-based approach (PBA), both members of the praxeological family of theories (Reckwitz, 2002), were used in sequential order to inform the analyses. During the first stage of the research, ANT was used to explore how a group of actors aimed to promote participation in the online community by developing different strategies to enrol the collaborative technology supporting participation into their network. By strengthening the relations between the collaborative technology and other relevant actors within the network participation was expected to occur. The analysis reveals that lack of participation arose from an inability of the technology to develop strong relations with key actors; processes of betrayal from human actors to the technology; failure of strategies and lack of political power from the actors sponsoring the community; incomplete internal translation of the technology; and existence of competing actors. iii In the second stage of the research, insights from PBA were used to further explore how pre-existing practices shaped participation in the online community. This analysis showed that factors shaping participation included the interconnection of HR practices to other practices of the University; the existence of habits and the sense of routinisation and habituation reflected in HR practitioners´ patterns of interaction and media use; the concern of practitioners that participation in the online community did not support the enactment of shared knowings critical in the performance of HR practices; and the features of HR practices being at odds with participation at the online community. Although offering distinct accounts, the findings of ANT and PBA offered two perspectives that deepen our current understanding of participation by foregrounding the relational and collective, historical and emergent, and highly contextualised character of participation. On the basis of the findings, the study provides a series of considerations that might be of relevance when conducing praxeological research to study organisational phenomena. Bringing power issues to the fore of the analysis, the use of alternative approaches to better deal with power concerns, the use of ethnographic methods, the adoption of different angles from observation, acknowledging the emergent and historically-shaped character of phenomena, and the need to foreground the socio- material character of phenomena are highlighted as relevant considerations. iv Acknowledgement There are many people to whom I would like to express my gratitude for supporting me throughout my research. Among those, I would like to thank: My supervisor, Dr. Andrew Cox, for his patient guidance and continuous encouragement, throughout my doctoral study. Thank you Andrew for all the friendly and invaluable conversations we had. The many employees of INSTEC, who were willing to be interviewed and without whom this thesis would never have been possible. The administrative and technical staff of the iSchool for their support throughout my research. The National Council on Science and Technology of Mexico (CONACYT), and The Secretary of Public Education of Mexico (SEP) through the General Direction of International Affairs, for providing the necessary financial support to undertake this research; their support is gratefully acknowledged. My friends and colleagues in Sheffield for all the good moments spent together and the helpful conversations; you all helped make my dissertation process a pleasant and valuable experience. I would especially like to thank Dr. Blanca Garcia, who motivated me to study abroad. My family in Mexico, my mom and dad, my brothers and sisters in law, my nieces and nephews for their love which always has given me strength to face the challenges of life. Ingrid and Tuuli. Thanks my lovely wife for your care, love, and passion; and for giving me the time and space to work in the ‘lab’. Tuuli, my dear daughter, though you are ‘on your way’, your forthcoming birth itself was a major impetus for the completion of my thesis. v Table of Contents Abstract ___________________________________________________________________________________________ iii Acknowledgement ________________________________________________________________________________ v List of tables ______________________________________________________________________________________ xii List of figures _____________________________________________________________________________________ xii 1. INTRODUCTION __________________________________________________________________________ 1 1.1 Background and significance ____________________________________________________________ 1 1.2 Theoretical resources ____________________________________________________________________ 5 1.3 Research site ______________________________________________________________________________ 9 1.4 Research aim and research questions ________________________________________________ 10 1.5 Introductory note to methodology ____________________________________________________ 11 1.6 Personal motivation ____________________________________________________________________ 15 1.7 Outline of the thesis ____________________________________________________________________ 16 2. LITERATURE REVIEW: ONLINE COMMUNITIES _____________________________________ 19 2.1 Introduction _____________________________________________________________________________ 19 2.2 Key features of online communities ___________________________________________________ 20 2.3 Online communities in organisational settings ______________________________________ 21 2.4 Participation in online communities __________________________________________________ 22 2.5 Factors shaping online community participation ____________________________________ 24 2.5.1 Individual-related motivation studies ________________________________________________ 24 2.5.1.1 Extrinsic rewards as motivation for participation ___________________________________ 24 2.5.1.2 Intrinsic rewards influencing participation __________________________________________ 25 2.5.2 Community-related motivation studies _______________________________________________ 27 2.5.2.1 Trust _____________________________________________________________________________________ 27 2.5.2.2 Reciprocity ______________________________________________________________________________ 28 2.5.2.3 Commitment and attachment__________________________________________________________ 30 2.5.3 Studies focusing on online community’s structural characteristics ________________ 30 2.5.3.1 Membership size ________________________________________________________________________ 31 2.5.3.2 Communication activity ________________________________________________________________ 32 2.5.3.3 Participants’ roles and levels of engagement in their communities ________________ 33 2.5.4 Technology-oriented studies __________________________________________________________ 35 2.5.5 External environment of online communities ________________________________________ 38 2.5.5.1 Competition between communities and multi-memberships of participants _____ 39 2.5.5.2 Online/offline interactions and online communities ________________________________ 40 2.5.5.3 Social context and work environment in which online communities reside _______ 41 2.6 Relevance of, and critique to previous online community literature _______________ 43 vi 2.7 Conclusion _______________________________________________________________________________ 48 3. ACTOR-NETWORK THEORY ____________________________________________________________ 50 3.1 Introduction _____________________________________________________________________________ 50 3.2 Core proposition and principles of ANT _______________________________________________