In this paper, we explore some of Claudio Ciborra's ideas about the technological object. We do this in contrast to recent analysis by Law and Singleton (L&S) that advocates a methodological radicalism that moves beyond epistemological uncertainties about the technological object to ontological concerns. L&S present a series of stages in this analysis that include fluid objects that change relatively gently and fire objects that have more radical discontinuities. This approach is applied to empirical work studying the engagement practices of a large, sophisticated information infrastructure research project, the Digital Business Ecosystem (DBE). At the start of the DBE engagement process, the DBE was an invisible technology that did not exist and this made the process of engagement with it particularly challenging. Drawing on the analysis presented by, however, the DBE appears to have the ontological characteristics of both the fluid and the fire object. In order to address this dilemma, we draw upon Ciborra's thinking, particularly around the information infrastructure and Gestell as a means that allows us to consider technologies like the DBE as being both fluid and fire objects. The paper ends with a discussion of the implications of this work on Claudio Ciborra's legacy for the study of information and communications technologies.
AngellI. (2005). No More Leaning on Lampposts: Management the Nick Charles way, London: Villa Publishing.
2.
CadiliS., and WhitleyE.A. (2005). On the Interpretative Flexibility of Hosted ERP Systems, Journal of Strategic Information Systems14(2): 167–195.
3.
CiborraC.U. (1991). From Thinking to Tinkering: The grassroots of strategic information systems, in DeGrossJ.I., BenbasatI., DeSanctisG., and BeathC.M. (eds). International Conference on Information Systems, New York, pp. 283–291.
4.
CiborraC.U. (1996a). Improvisation and Information Technology in Organizations, in JarvenpaaS.L., SrinivasanA., and DeGrossJ.I. (eds). International Conference on Information Systems, Cleveland, OH, pp. 369–380.
5.
CiborraC.U. (1996b). Introduction: What does groupware mean for the organization hosting it?, in CiborraC. U. (ed.) Groupware & teamwork: Invisible aid or technical hindrance, Chichester: Wiley, pp. 1–22.
6.
CiborraC.U. (1996c). The Platform Organization: Recombining strategies, structures and surprises, Organization Science7(2): 103–118.
7.
CiborraC.U. (1998). Crisis and Foundations: An inquiry into the nature and limits of models and methods in the information systems discipline, Journal of Strategic Information Systems7(1): 5–16.
8.
CiborraC.U. (1999). Hospitality and Information Technology, A Birthday Offering for Bo Dahlbom, subsequently published in updated form in Ciborra, C. (2001). The Labyrinths of Information, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
9.
CiborraC.U. (2002). The Labyrinths of Information: Challenging the Wisdom of Systems, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
10.
CiborraC.U., and associates (2000). From Control to Drift: The Dynamics of Corporate Information Infrastructures, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
11.
CiborraC.U., and HansethO. (1998). From Tool to Gestell Agendas for Managing the Information Infrastructure, Information Technology and People11(4): 305–327.
12.
CiborraC.U., and LanzaraG.F. (1994). Formative Contexts and Information Technology: Understanding the dynamics of innovation in organizations, Accounting, Management and Information Technologies4(2): 61–86.
13.
DarkingM., and WhitleyE.A. (2005). Project Report 27.2 – Studying SME Engagement Practices Archived at http://www.digital-ecosystem.org/.
de LaetM., and MolA. (2000). The Zimbabwe Bush Pump: Mechanics of a fluid technology, Social studies of science30(2): 225–263.
17.
DreyfusH.L., and DreyfusS.E. (1986). Mind Over Machine: The Power of Human Intuition and Expertise in the Era of the Computer, New York: The Free Press.
18.
GrintK., and WoolgarS. (1997). The Machine at Work: Technology, Work and Organization., Cambridge: Polity Press.
19.
HeideggerM. (1993). The Question Concerning Technology, in KrellD.F. (ed.) Basic Writings, London: Routledge.
20.
KallinikosJ. (2002). Reopening the Black Box of Technology Artefacts and Human Agency, in ApplegateL., GalliersR., and DeGrossJ.I. (eds). International Conference on Information Systems, Barcelona, pp. 287–294.
21.
LabingerJ.A., and CollinsH. (2001). The One Culture? A Conversation About Science, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
22.
LatourB. (1999). Pandora's Hope: Essays on the Reality of Science Studies, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
23.
LatourB. (2005). Reassembling the Social: An Introduction to Actor-Network-Theory, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
24.
LawJ., and SingletonV. (2005). Object Lessons, Organization12(3): 331–355.
25.
LawrenceC. (2005). From Milan to Mann Gulch: Reflections on the intellectual contributions of Professor Claudio Ciborra, European Journal of Information Systems14(5): 484–486.
26.
LeeN., and BrownS. (1994). Otherness and the Actor Network: The undiscovered continent, American Behavioural Scientist37(6): 772–790.
27.
MoserI., and LawJ. (2006). Fluids or Flows? Information and qualculation in medical practice, IT and People19(1): 55–73.
OrlikowskiW.J. (1992). The Duality of Technology: Rethinking the concept of technology in organizations, Organizational Science3(3): 398–427.
30.
OrlikowskiW.J., and IaconoC.S. (2001). Research Commentary: Desperately seeking the ‘IT’ in IT research: A call to theorizing the IT artifact, Information Systems Research12(2): 121–134.
31.
PinchT.J., and BijkerW.E. (1987). The Social Construction of Facts and Artifacts: Or How the Sociology of Science and the Sociology of Technology Might Benefit Each Other, in BijkerW.E., HughesT.P., and PinchT.J. (eds.) The Social Construction of Technological Systems: New Directions in the Sociology and History of Technology, Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, pp. 17–50.
32.
PozzebonM. (2001). Demystifying the Rhetorical Closure of ERP Packages, in StoreyV., SarkarS., and DeGrossJ.I. (eds). International Conference on Information Systems, New Orleans: New Orleans, pp. 329–337.
33.
SilverstoneR., and HaddonL. (1996) Design and Domestication of Information and Communication Technologies: Technical Change and Everyday Life, in MansellR., and SilverstoneR. (eds.) Communication by Design: The Politics of Information and Communication Technologies, Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 44–74.
34.
SnowC.P. (1959). The Two Cultures and the Scientific Revolution, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
35.
StahlB.C. (2005). The Obituary as Bricolage: The Mann Gulch disaster and the problem of heroic rationality, European Journal of Information Systems14(5): 487–491.
36.
StarS.L. (1991). Power, Technologies and the Phenomenology of Standards: On Being Allergic to Onions, in LawJ. (ed.) A Sociology of Monsters, Oxford: Basil Blackwell, pp. 27–57.
37.
StrandD.L. (2005). Let's be Baroque, European Journal of Information Systems14(5): 500–503.
38.
WeickK.E. (1993). The Collapse of Sensemaking in Organizations: The Mann Gulch disaster, Administrative Science Quarterly38(4): 628–652.
39.
WhitleyE.A. (2005). Visiting the Red-Light Zones with Claudio, European Journal of Information Systems14(5): 477–479.
