Abstract

The notion of sociomaterial practices speaks to a view of routine work in which people and materials are always already entangled. This implies that the commonsense tendency to treat concrete materials and social activity as separate analytical categories may actually muddy more than illuminate our understanding of practices. Engaging work from science and technology studies, this broad view of materiality refers not only to the physical properties of machines but also to software and algorithms, electrical grids and other infrastructure, buildings, human bodies, ecological systems etc. Despite remarkable enthusiasm, the conversation about sociomaterial practices occasionally has devolved into philosophical turf wars, engendering pleas for pluralism. All too often, such lofty conceptual debates lose sight of pragmatic concerns such as technology design work or humanitarian action. This essay traces both issues to a tension between adopting a grand philosophical Ontology, versus undertaking detailed empirical studies of particular concrete work practices. I argue that studies exploring the practical specifics of particular sociomaterial practices should be granted room for silence with respect to some theoretical commitments, on the grounds that this will afford a more lively pluralism. For ethnomethodologists, this re-orientation to grand theory is a matter of methodological rigor and theoretical sophistication. For pragmatists, room for silence has to do with the dilemma of rigor or practical relevance. This is not to say that key concepts are unnecessary—they can provoke us to look beyond narrow disciplinary confines and standard assumptions about the scope of field studies. Through an account of the 2013–2016 Ebola outbreak in West Africa, I show how these conceptual debates matter for empirical research and for design practice. In this case, complex technical and biosocial processes made a concrete difference in the course of the outbreak and the humanitarian response to it. For practitioners no less than for researchers, this case throws into sharp relief the real human stakes of grasping how the material world gets caught up in workaday human activity.

Highlights

  • In the varied topography of professional practice, there is a high, hard ground where practitioners can make effective use of research-based theory and technique, and there is a swampy lowland where situations are confusing Bmesses^ incapable of technical solution

  • Shall the practitioner stay on the high, hard ground where he can practice rigorously, as he understands rigor, but where he is constrained to deal with problems of relatively little social importance? Or shall he descend to the swamp where he can engage the most important and challenging problems if he is willing to forsake technical rigor? Donald Schön, The Reflective Practitioner (1983)

  • In the second half of the paper, I offer an account of the 2013–2016 Ebola outbreak in West Africa, synthesizing a range of secondary sources. While such an analysis clearly falls short of the concrete detail that an extended field study might offer, I hope to show by example how these conceptual debates matter for empirical research and for design practice

Read more

Summary

Introduction

In the varied topography of professional practice, there is a high, hard ground where practitioners can make effective use of research-based theory and technique, and there is a swampy lowland where situations are confusing Bmesses^ incapable of technical solution. While such an analysis clearly falls short of the concrete detail that an extended field study might offer, I hope to show by example how these conceptual debates matter for empirical research and for design practice In this case, biophysical and material processes made a concrete difference in the course of the outbreak and the humanitarian and technical response to it. In recognizing that Schön’s vision of design as reflective practice bears an unmistakable family resemblance to Suchman’s notion of situated action and other practice scholarship, we have located an important stream of design research in relation to the sociomaterial practice discourse that I review

Sociomaterial practices
Sociomateriality: a fashionable buzzword?
Clarifying and elaborating the concept of sociomaterial practices
Turf wars
Does sociomaterial invoke an ontology or ontologies?
Ethnomethodology and room for silence
The 2013–2016 Ebola outbreak in West Africa
Failure to imagine the limits of technical fixes
Immodest claims of social causality
Recognizing biosocial and sociomaterial complexities
Discussion of the empirical case
Using this case to inform a more human-centered design practice
Using the concept of sociomaterial practices
Findings
Reserving room for silence
Conclusion

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.