DUAL INFORMATION SYSTEMS: THE INFORMATION SYSTEMS ARCHITECTURE FOR HYPERKNOWLEDGE ORGANIZATIONS. Timo Käkölä. University of Jyväskylä

Transcription

1 DUAL INFORMATION SYSTEMS: THE INFORMATION SYSTEMS ARCHITECTURE FOR HYPERKNOWLEDGE ORGANIZATIONS Timo Käkölä University of Jyväskylä ABSTRACT The conceptual design of most computer-based information systems reflects a dualism of technology. During the development phase, part of the work-domain related knowledge is encoded in the software, making it difficult for users to reflect on and use this knowledge. We propose an information systems architecture called Dual Information Systems (DIS) that helps bridge the dualism by providing a set of services that enable and reinforce both effective working and the questioning and (re)construction of routines. DIS have a three-layered conceptual structure: (1) people draw on the business layer to work, learn, and handle unexpected breakdowns; (2) project teams use the project layer to create innovative process and IS (re)designs; and (3) the knowledge sharing server stores these redesigns and makes them organizationally available to facilitate working, learning, and subsequent redesign efforts. The conceptual design of DIS is aligned with an organizational design called hyperknowledge organization. This paper presents the theoretical background, conceptual design, and generic services of DIS. Keywords Breakdowns, Dual Information Systems, Hyperknowledge Organization, interpretive flexibility, organizational creation of knowledge, organizational interfaces, process modeling and redesign 1 Dual Information Systems: the Information Systems Architecture for Hyperknowledge Organizations

2 INTRODUCTION Many organizations suffer from dualistic, institutionalized computer-based information systems (IS) that hide the constructed nature of IS from agents (Käkölä 1995). They (1) limit lateral communication, coordination and knowledge sharing; (2) provide little feedback to agents (especially in the lower organizational echelons) on work arrangements and on the coordination and communication patterns which emerge from their use; (3) limit agents ability to inquire within the socio-technical contexts in which the agents are embedded; and consequently (4) endanger the process of reinvention that complex technological artifacts should undergo when put to use (Ciborra and Lanzara 1994). For instance, changing the computer-supported processes through user-driven design is almost impossible unless agents thoroughly understand the content and organization of work (Hellman 1989). This design/use dualism of many IS is the problem to be addressed in this paper. Organizations would benefit from an information systems architecture that bridges this dualism and taps the capabilities of all agents. This paper continues the efforts of Käkölä (Käkölä 1995, Käkölä and Koota 1999a) to design such an architecture. We call the architecture Dual Information Systems (DIS). Käkölä drew on the act-oriented perspective (Eriksson and Nurminen 1991). It helps transcend the design/use dualism by interpreting the functions and memory provided by computer software as an inseparable component of the work of the people using the software (Nurminen 1988). It helps agents even on the shop floor gain a comprehensive understanding of their work, its computerized parts, and its relationship to the business as a whole. In light of the perspective, a necessary but insufficient condition for any computerized system to qualify as a component of DIS is that it helps agents develop such an understanding. Käkölä s work (Käkölä 1995) had limitations. Well-developed local understanding is necessary but insufficient for improving processes. The information systems architecture needed to align 2 Dual Information Systems: the Information Systems Architecture for Hyperknowledge Organizations

3 information systems with the perspective is also expensive to build. For example, traditional integrated IS hide their constructed nature to the extent that they often appear as acting, knowledgeable subjects rather than media and outcomes of work (Eriksson and Nurminen 1991). The redesign of these systems to reflect the perspective would unlikely be attractive to organizations if the benefits were limited to understanding better what is. DIS also need to help agents on the frontline establish and join project teams in which they collaborate with middle managers to (1) share knowledge of their processes; (2) draw on their improved knowledge to improve performance; and (3) crystallize this knowledge into processes that exceed customers expectations, realize managerial visions, and create good jobs. Käkölä (Käkölä 1996b) outlined the conceptual design of DIS to remedy these limitations. He aligned the design with the organizational design called hyperknowledge organization. These normative designs are expected to help organizations produce productive interaction or fit between organizations and DIS. The fit is productive when these interactions facilitate the effective enactment and reconstruction of processes. DIS denote the information systems architecture that provides services defined in the conceptual design of DIS for hyperknowledge organizations. The services (1) conceptually unite manual and computerized aspects of work, thus helping agents to understand their work holistically; (2) let agents zoom in on the details of work practices and check shared databases for mistakes to deepen their knowledge and fix many breakdowns locally; (3) help agents draw on their improved knowledge to enter and interact in redesign project teams that create best practices and crystallize them into process redesigns; and (4) store the created designs in the organizational knowledge base so that they can later be used to enact, reflect on, and reconstruct practices. This paper provides a holistic understanding of the concepts of DIS and hyperknowledge organizations, analyzes their benefits and weaknesses, and examines their implications on IS 3 Dual Information Systems: the Information Systems Architecture for Hyperknowledge Organizations

4 research. The Section "The Theoretical Background of the Conceptual Design of DIS" delineates the theoretical background of DIS. The Section Dual Information Systems and Hyperknowledge Organizations outlines the conceptual design of DIS and the services DIS offer hyperknowledge organizations. Conclusions and issues for future research are discussed in the last section. THE THEORETICAL BACKGROUND OF THE CONCEPTUAL DESIGN OF DIS To design DIS, a comprehensive theoretical understanding of the roles of IS in organizational practices is necessary. We draw on Orlikowski (Orlikowski 1992), Nurminen (Nurminen 1988), and Nonaka (Nonaka 1994) to provide a theoretical background of the conceptual design of DIS. Duality of Technology, Interpretive Flexibility, and Time-Space Disjuncture Orlikowski (Orlikowski 1992) introduces three concepts that are central to this paper: the duality of technology, its interpretive flexibility, and time-space disjuncture. The duality concept is derived from the duality of structure that forms a key concept in Giddens structuration theory (Giddens 1979, Giddens 1984). Giddens distinguishes between system and structure. He regards social systems as patterned social relations reproduced across time and space through the actions of human agents. Structure provides for the binding of the social relations into social systems. Social systems have structural properties that are drawn upon in social interaction. Roberts and Scapens (Roberts and Scapens 1985, p. 446) state: Through being drawn on by people, structures shape and pattern (i.e., structure) interaction. However, the structures themselves are reproduced only through interaction. This is the duality of structure ; it is in this way that structures can be seen to be both the medium and the outcome of interaction. This recursive process is what Giddens calls structuration. 4 Dual Information Systems: the Information Systems Architecture for Hyperknowledge Organizations

5 The duality of technology concept sees information technology as a structural property that is enacted by human agency and institutionalized in structure. Designers produce a technology to provide resources and rules by creating and encoding work-domain related knowledge into it. Agents socially construct a technology by assigning it different meanings and using it flexibly. But technologies usually become institutionalized over time because agents cannot continuously reinterpret or physically modify them, if the agents are to accomplish their work efficiently. The duality of technology recognizes that technologies are products of their time and institutional context, and will reflect the knowledge, materials, interests, and conditions at a given locus in history (Orlikowski 1992, p. 421). However, the dual nature of IS is masked by the time-space disjuncture in which the actions constituting the technology are separated temporally and spatially from the actions constituted by the technology. The time-space disjuncture is collapsed... by understanding that technologies have different degrees of interpretive flexibility (Orlikowski 1992, p. 421). This emphasizes that there is flexibility in how people design, interpret, and use technology, but that this flexibility is a function of the material components comprising the artifact, the institutional context in which a technology is developed and used, and the power, knowledge, and interests of human actors... as well as time (Orlikowski 1992, p. 421). The causality between the time-space disjuncture and the interpretive flexibility of technology is summarized as follows (Orlikowski 1992, p. 421): The greater the temporal and spatial distance between the construction of a technology and its application, the greater the likelihood that the technology will be interpreted and used with little flexibility. 5 Dual Information Systems: the Information Systems Architecture for Hyperknowledge Organizations

6 The Design/Use-Dualism of Information Systems: Implications and Alleviations The interpretive flexibility of IS is often poor (Bødker and Grønbæk 1991, Eriksson, et al. 1988, Orlikowski 1992, Zuboff 1988). This inflexibility results in part from agents with insufficient shared knowledge of: (1) the nature of social practices; (2) the articulation of these practices by the structural properties of organizations; (3) their own roles; and (4) the role of IS as a structural property mediating practices. One important reason for lack of awareness is that the conceptual and material structures of computer software typically reflect the design/use-dualism of technology; during the institutionalized use of an IS the constructed nature of the IS is masked by the software. Dualistic IS separate symbolic information from the material and social systems the symbols represent, hide the processing rules and retention structures in the software and database schemas, and blur the role of people as the producers and consumers of information (Nurminen 1988). The dualistic structure and poor interpretive flexibility of IS have costly implications. Agents are restricted to using functions expressed in the software (Kogut and Zander 1992, p. 390). They face considerable difficulties monitoring their actions since they cannot fully validate the meaning of information produced by the black box systems and see the outcomes of their actions (Zuboff 1988, pp ). Because of their limited ability to control all aspects of work, including computerized tasks, the agents cannot necessarily be responsible for their work. Finally, the agents ability to transform practices is limited because they cannot easily challenge the interpretations, resources and norms embedded in the IS (Lyytinen and Ngwenyama 1991, Orlikowski 1992). But agents can regain control of their jobs. Orlikowski (Orlikowski 1992, p. 418) states: 6 Dual Information Systems: the Information Systems Architecture for Hyperknowledge Organizations

7 ... knowledgeable and reflexive human agents are capable of altering the controlling influence of the technology. The extent to which individuals modify their use of technology, however, depends on whether they acknowledge its constructed nature. This is determined by the degree to which individuals can recognize the mediating role of technology, can conceive of an alternative beyond it, and are motivated to action. Zuboff (Zuboff 1988) calls the skills that make interpretation and communication of meaning possible in computer-mediated work environments intellective skills. She distinguishes these from action-centered skills because action-centered skills become inadequate when new symbolic, computerized language is introduced (Zuboff 1988, p. 59). Action-centered skills are achieved by doing and the theoretical understanding of actions and their outcomes develops almost automatically because agents can see and feel the outcomes physically. Therefore inferential linkages between actions and their consequences need not be made explicit in order for [action-centered] skill to be learned or enacted (Zuboff 1988, p. 187). However, when this shared action context is augmented or removed by IS, meaning must be constructed explicitly in order to become implicit later (Zuboff 1988, p. 192). To transcend the design-use dualism, DIS make the learning of intellective skills as transparent as is the learning of action-centered skills. We summarize the relationships between the time-space disjuncture, the design/use-dualism, and the interpretive flexibility of IS as follows: The greater the temporal and spatial distance between the construction of an IS and its application and the greater the conceptual separation of the IS from agents and their work during design, the greater the likelihood that the IS will be dualistic (i.e., it will be institutionalized and its constructed nature will be hidden from agents) and that it will be interpreted and used with little flexibility. The conceptual separation between dualistic and Dual Information Systems is necessary because it has clear implications for IS design. For example, the redesign of a dualistic software package 7 Dual Information Systems: the Information Systems Architecture for Hyperknowledge Organizations

8 to incorporate tailorable functions and sophisticated support systems will likely increase the interpretive flexibility of information systems built on the software. But if the conceptual design of the software continues to separate computerized and non-computerized aspects of work, this redesign does not necessarily result in such services of Dual Information Systems that help agents theoretically understand their work. The maximum benefits of DIS are unlikely to be realized unless the application of the conceptual design of DIS transcends the design/use dualism. DIS can bridge the dualism by providing services that help users (1) understand the constructed nature of software and (2) redesign processes in collaboration with designers and users from other areas of the organization. We outline three conceptual solutions to build these bridges: act-oriented perspective, organizational process of knowledge creation, and hypertext organization design. Act-oriented Perspective: Toward DIS on the Level of Human Agency Users often cannot see the link between their work and its computerized parts. The act-oriented perspective (Eriksson and Nurminen 1991) provides a conceptual solution to uncover this missing link (Käkölä 1995, Käkölä and Koota 1999a). It states that IS cannot be separated from agents work because no IS can serve as a conscious actor (the inseparability argument). The traditional integrated information system structure is an insufficient basis for designing DIS because it violates the inseparability argument. Therefore, software modules should be designed so that they can be interpreted as computerized tasks that have responsible agents. Conceptually, each agent has an own IS called Human-Scaled Information System (HIS) (Nurminen 1988). From an ontological perspective, HIS exist primarily on the level of human agency. But HIS also have structural properties. They can seldom be permanently tied to particular individuals because application software and databases can remain even if all agents responsible for them 8 Dual Information Systems: the Information Systems Architecture for Hyperknowledge Organizations

9 leave an organization. Therefore, we use role theory (Roos and Starke 1981) in the conceptual design of DIS to mediate between structural and individual aspects of HIS. The boundaries between two inter-connected HIS are determined by the responsibilities of agents in the respective, inter-connected roles. The resources and rules afforded by HIS can be created and eliminated only when the same operations are performed for the roles. The act-oriented perspective bridges the design/use dualism by seeing the knowledge encoded in software by designers in time-space context A as the acts of the responsible agents in time-space context B. Once this bridge is functioning, agents can see their manual and computerized tasks as a whole, thus integrating and accelerating the development of intellective and action-centered skills. IS are no longer symbol systems constituting their own reality and treating agents as passive information processors. Rather, IS become constitutive of organizational realities that can be understood, enacted, and reconstructed. From the perspective of individuals in work roles, the conceptual structure of DIS should be similar to that of HIS. But DIS cannot rely solely on a set of HIS because the act-oriented perspective emphasizes agents need to control their work and IS but does not address organizational creation of knowledge as a way to create new practices. In this sense, it favors the institutionalized character of information systems and organizations. Moreover, agents are seen as knowledge workers who control the rules and resources embedded in IS to the same extent as they control the manual aspects of their work. The assumption of the bounded nature of responsibility partly aligns the perspective with the bureaucratic view. But control over knowledge affords increased opportunities to create knowledge and skills that transcend boundaries and expand the authority of workers. Unless tied into bureaucratic rules, the perspective could yield an organization managed from the bottom-up. Coordination of work and sharing of knowledge would be difficult because the visions and norms justifying joint action would be missing or chaotic; no central authority would exist; and information would be 9 Dual Information Systems: the Information Systems Architecture for Hyperknowledge Organizations

10 dispersed and difficult to use. The perspective alone cannot help organizations resolve or use this contradiction between increased opportunities to reconstruct meanings and practices and the requirement of tightly bounded work and knowledge structures. In sum, the paradox of act orientation is that it requires a bureaucratic structure to function well but makes agents aware of the weaknesses of this structure. Functional bureaucracy or bottom-up driven groups are not the best organizational forms for DIS. DIS call for an organizational design that successfully combines the beneficial aspects of these forms and eliminates their weaknesses. Nonaka (Nonaka 1994) has developed an organizational design called hypertext organization to help organizations realize such a combination. This design will be described in the next section. Organizational Creation of Knowledge: Toward DIS on the Organizational Level How can organizations learn to create and rapidly shift between contexts of interaction where responsibility for the present and for the creation of future possibilities are equivalently sanctioned? A theoretical approach is needed that does not conflict with structuration theory and provides models that help create effective contexts of interaction for (1) enacting routines with the help of IS that follow the act-oriented structure and (2) supporting the questioning and redesign of these routines. Nonaka s (Nonaka 1994) theory of organizational creation of knowledge meets these criteria. We present its most important aspects to complete the theoretical base for the conceptual design of DIS: the model for the organizational creation of knowledge and the hypertext organization design. Nonaka presents three conditions that enable organizational creation of knowledge: commitment, redundancy, and requisite variety. He identifies three basic factors that induce individual commitment in an organizational setting: intention, autonomy, and environmental fluctuation. 10 Dual Information Systems: the Information Systems Architecture for Hyperknowledge Organizations

11 Without intention, it would be impossible to judge the value of the information or knowledge perceived or created.... Individual autonomy widens the possibility that individuals will motivate themselves to form new knowledge.... Purpose (intention) serves as the basis of conceptualization. Autonomy gives individuals freedom to absorb knowledge. (Nonaka 1994, p. 17) Environmental fluctuations often trigger breakdowns in organizational routines. Breakdowns in turn stimulate the creation of knowledge (Heidegger 1977, Winograd and Flores 1986). Redundant information, which is defined as the existence of information more than the specific information required immediately by each individual (Nonaka 1994, p. 28), makes it easier for agents to recognize their place in an organization, interact, develop a common direction, create new concepts, provide advice, and even do each other s jobs if necessary. Redundancy can be built in many ways. Internal competition in work process improvement and product development is an effective method. Overlapping work arrangements can form a key resource for organizations if they are cleverly exploited. When knowledge pertaining to these arrangements is externalized, they can be evaluated and improved. Moreover, the application of act orientation to unite computerized and noncomputerized aspects of processes contributes to process improvement because both aspects then constitute a holistic unit of analysis. Requisite variety (Ashby 1956) refers to the construction of an organization s information processing capability and internal diversity that match the variety and complexity of the environment. For this purpose, organizations tend to recruit people with demographic, experiential, preferential, and behavioural variety. A balanced design of redundancy and variety is essential because an excess focus on redundancy will reduce diversity and vice versa. Nonaka s model of organizational knowledge creation has six phases: enlarging an individual s knowledge, sharing tacit knowledge, conceptualization, crystallization, justification, and 11 Dual Information Systems: the Information Systems Architecture for Hyperknowledge Organizations

12 networking knowledge. Each phase can recursively trigger the model on either a more detailed or more abstract level of analysis. A reason to create knowledge can be the improvement of enabling conditions, which then accelerate the future creation of knowledge. The connection between structuration theory and the model is obvious. People enrich their tacit knowledge by (re)interpreting explicit knowledge. Their rational ability to combine existing explicit knowledge to create explicit knowledge is crucial for reflection. Individual knowledge is enlarged through... interaction between experience and rationality, and crystallized into a unique perspective original to an individual. (Nonaka 1994, p. 21) When these perspectives are articulated and amplified into higher-level concepts through social interaction, they form the basis of organizational creation of knowledge. Amplification and articulation require a proper field for interaction, which structural designs such as autonomous teams provide. The team defines true members of the creation of knowledge and thus clarifies the domain in which perspectives are interacted (Nonaka 1994, p. 23). Members share implicit perspectives and conceptualize them through dialogue. Knowledge is converted primarily through socialization: conversion from tacit to tacit knowledge. Socialization facilitates the creation of redundant information that reinforces mutual trust and accelerates concept formation. Mutual trust is critical if members are to share their experiences openly. Dialogue activates externalization, that is, the conversion of tacit perspectives into explicit concepts at individual levels. Externalization makes a self-organizing team different from a mere group because explicit concepts can be shared beyond team boundaries. The concepts must be crystallized into a tangible form so that various departments within the organization can assess their applicability. Agents internalize the concept, thus triggering a new process in which a concept is refined or rejected and reconstructed. 12 Dual Information Systems: the Information Systems Architecture for Hyperknowledge Organizations

13 The justification of concepts with regard to agreed-upon norms helps ensure that the creation of knowledge converges into something that is both meaningful and legitimate beyond the boundaries of the knowledge-creating unit (e.g., a project team). Finally, the justified concept is networked across the organization and its outside stakeholders. For example, a new process design concept is interpreted and drawn upon differently by various individuals and groups. In this process, they link the concept in their practices, creating partly shared, partly segmented stocks of knowledge that stimulate further the adaptation of practices. Nonaka proposes hypertext organization as an organizational prototype that helps design contexts of interaction where responsibility for the present and for the creation of future work processes are equivalently sanctioned and enacted. Hypertext organization is a dual organizational structure: it can achieve high performance in routines and simultaneously ensure long-term survival by being innovative. DIS have the same dual purpose: facilitation of routine and redesign work. Therefore, the maximum benefits of DIS would more likely be realized if the conceptual structure of DIS reflected the hypertext organization structure. Hypertext organization is formed by the dynamic combination of hierarchically organized business units and self-organizing project teams that pursue the visions of top management by drawing on and accruing an organizational knowledge base. Hypertext organizations have three layers; knowledge-base, business-system, and project-system. The knowledge-base layer embraces tacit knowledge, associated with organizational culture and procedures, as well as explicit knowledge in the form of documents,... computerized databases, etc. (Nonaka 1994, p. 33). Work routines are enacted by a bureaucratic organization in the business-system layer (hereafter business layer ). Loosely linked project teams innovate in the project-system layer (hereafter project layer ). Knowledge is created through the circular movement of agents among the layers. Members of project teams are selected from different units across the business layer. 13 Dual Information Systems: the Information Systems Architecture for Hyperknowledge Organizations

14 They interact with the knowledge-base layer and make an inventory of the knowledge created in the project layer. The hypertext design balances traditional management models that may spark organizational defenses by neglecting the contributions of middle managers. Middle managers are responsible for project management, integration of various methodologies and tools, and communication with their superiors and project members in ways that engender trust and reduce defenses. But middle managers are not the only beneficiaries. Project teams have the vision, motivation and incentives to learn how to reduce defenses: they know that otherwise the creation of knowledge legitimating their very existence may be impaired. The hypertext organization model pays little attention to technology. It views technology as a form of explicit knowledge and practices (including those where technologies are designed and deployed) as forms of organizational tacit knowledge. Nonaka does not explicitly address interactions between technologies and practices. However, hypertext organization design is implicitly in agreement with the duality of technology because it views technologies and practices as shared stocks of knowledge and their development and use as a continuous creation and exploitation of knowledge. The act-oriented perspective can also be enacted effectively. The business layer relies on a bureaucratic division of work allowing clear responsibilities for computerized pieces of knowledge in the knowledge-base layer. The project layer allows people to leverage on their improved knowledge of processes and reconstruct them when necessary. DUAL INFORMATION SYSTEMS AND HYPERKNOWLEDGE ORGANIZATIONS The primary purpose of the DIS architecture is to enable both effective, institutionalized working and the questioning and reconstruction of routines. This section examines services that might be critical for the architecture to meet this purpose. In the first subsection, we outline the conceptual 14 Dual Information Systems: the Information Systems Architecture for Hyperknowledge Organizations

15 design of DIS and use it to propose a new organizational design called hyperknowledge organization. The next three subsections describe the three structural components of the conceptual design. The Conceptual Design of DIS, the Hyperknowledge Organization Design, and the Embedded Systems Approach The conceptual design of DIS for a business unit of the hyperknowledge organization is shown in Figure 1. In accordance with the hypertext organization design, the structure of the design has three layers. (1) The business layer of DIS helps agents on the business layer work and augments their tacit knowledge with explicit, rational knowledge. With the help of this improved knowledge, agents from different functions and/or disciplines within the business unit can enter and contribute fully to self-organizing project teams. (2) The project layer of DIS helps project teams on the project layer redesign processes. Middle managers facilitate project work and communicate with top management. (3) The knowledge sharing server (KSS) of DIS is a repository of explicit work and IS design knowledge in the knowledge-base layer. Insert Figure 1. The Conceptual Design of the DIS Architecture for a Business Unit of a Hyperknowledge Organization about here. We elaborate the hypertext organization design into the hyperknowledge organization design that enables and is enabled by the conceptual design of DIS. Hyperknowledge organizations have a set of business units on the business layer. Each business unit has a functional internal division of labor. The IS architecture of each unit follows the conceptual design of DIS, and each has significant autonomy over how it conducts business and uses IS. This feature of the organizational design increases requisite variety. Business units compete internally and are rewarded for their performance, work process innovations, and the adoption and development of 15 Dual Information Systems: the Information Systems Architecture for Hyperknowledge Organizations

16 these innovations by other units. Project teams share knowledge within and between the units to redesign processes of individual units. Käkölä (Käkölä 1995) presented the Embedded Systems Approach (ESA) to instantiate the business layer of DIS into Embedded Application Systems (Eriksson and Nurminen 1991), which follow the act-oriented structure. They enable the effective enactment of routines in business units. In a continuous knowledge-creating spiral, ESA relies on and enables the project teams of the hyperknowledge organization. The teams develop concepts of computer-supported work and share them among the business units by using visual process representations. Representations serve as the building blocks of the organizational interface of each unit through which the computerized tasks and knowledge in Embedded Application Systems become inseparable components of the agents environment. We use the term organizational interface (Malone 1985) because the design of the business layer of DIS fundamentally transcends the concepts of human-computer interface and human-computer interaction by focusing on how agents act and interact by drawing upon structural resources and rules, including Embedded Application Systems, and thus sustaining and modifying their practices. The Business Layer of DIS The importance of routine use of IS cannot be over-stated. IS as a structural property of organizations remain constitutive of organizational realities that can be known, understood and acted upon. For example, Tyre and Orlikowski (Tyre and Orlikowski 1994) found (p. 111) that... routine use was... necessary for ongoing adaptation; it provided the raw data that, if utilized, could lead to improvements in the technology or the way it was applied in the local context. Furthermore, the creation of knowledge in ambiguous circumstances is rarely possible without the objective information obtained by monitoring organizational routines, because this 16 Dual Information Systems: the Information Systems Architecture for Hyperknowledge Organizations

17 information can be used to refute or legitimate more subjective interpretations (Daft, et al. 1987). For these reasons, we focus first on the business layer of DIS. We use the role concept to divide each business unit into a set of functional work groups. Each group is responsible for a clearly defined part of the work process(es) of a business unit. Each agent in a functional group enacts the same work role. Each group is led by a middle-manager. Group members report only to their manager. While the business layer is organized as a bureaucracy, functional groups relax some of the characteristics of bureaucracies. In hyperknowledge organizations agents cannot be mechanistic executors of pre-defined tasks. The groups are self-managing in the sense that they have broad authority to manage their routines (Hackman 1986). However, they do not have authority over their work context (i.e., the other groups they are interacting with) or the overall direction of their business unit. Middle management and project teams set the overall direction and periodically redesign the processes of the business unit (Section The Project Layer of DIS ). This design is justified for several reasons. First, the gap between the business and project layers of a hyperknowledge organization would be too wide if agents in the business layer had no discretion over their work and suddenly had to make informed decisions in the project layer about their business unit as a whole. The gap would likely hamper the ongoing knowledgecreating spiral of hyperknowledge organizations. Second, the act-oriented perspective is best applied to the design of Embedded Application Systems for functional work groups with clearly defined responsibilities and tasks (Käkölä 1995, Käkölä and Koota 1999a). Third, Embedded Application Systems with high interpretive flexibility would make little sense, if a large majority of tasks in the business layer were mere execution of simple tasks. The benefit of high interpretive flexibility is that agents can handle fairly complex routines and still be responsible for their work as a whole, including computerized tasks. Fourth, functional, stable groups provide a natural context to carry out routines (Susman 1990). Fifth, if the hyperknowledge organization 17 Dual Information Systems: the Information Systems Architecture for Hyperknowledge Organizations

18 design gave functional groups more authority (e.g., concerning the design of work outside their functional role), it could yield bottom-up driven organizations and endanger well-coordinated routines. In this case, the hyperknowledge organization and hypertext organization designs would contradict each other. The business layer of DIS must help agents work effectively, construct a theoretical understanding of work, and fully exploit and share knowledge gained from the routine use of DIS. To meet these requirements, we divide the business layer of DIS into role-centric work layer and inter-connected role layer. The former directly supports agents in functional groups. The latter helps agents internalize redundant information about their work context and understand processes systemically. The Role-Centric Work Layer of DIS It is vitally important to organizational short-term performance that workers learn quickly to do their core tasks efficiently. In the initial learning phase, to require workers to develop a complete theoretical understanding of work before they can begin the production mode is often too timeconsuming and costly (Cole, et al. 1997, Winslow and Bramer 1994). However, everyone in a hyperknowledge organization have the opportunity and incentives to develop intellective skills, which are crucial if agents are to redesign processes effectively in project teams and thus increase organizational long-term effectiveness. The role-centric work layer helps agents develop intellective skills and work effectively. It ensures (to the extent theoretically and practically possible) that all multi-user 1 applications with 1 Single-user applications such as word-processing packages may not benefit much from the act-oriented approach. It is clear who is the responsible actor if there is only one user using one application and one database. The highly interactive nature of such applications also makes operations (e.g., cutting a paragraph within a document) fairly small, improves feedback to users, and increases the controllability of applications. 18 Dual Information Systems: the Information Systems Architecture for Hyperknowledge Organizations

19 integrated databases in the business units are implemented as Embedded Application Systems (EAS). EAS are conceptually defined as role-centric, logical views of applications and integrated databases. The views are constructed so that the functions that agents in a functional group use to carry out a computer-supported task are logically combined into a computerized task. Computerized and manual tasks are seen as equally important parts of work in the role-centric work layer of DIS. The role-centric work layer offers at least the following services: communication and resource allocation breakdown management performance monitoring task reconfiguration learning These services are designed in the project layer. Each agent in a functional group receives the same set of services because the design of the role-centric work layer should not impose any particular division of labor on a group. Otherwise, the autonomy of groups could be compromized. However, agents can tailor their services as long as the functioning of groups is not endangered. Communication and resource allocation services Giddens (Giddens 1984) distinguishes between two types of resources: allocative resources, which arise from command over material objects, and authoritative resources, which arise from the ability to coordinate and organize the work of other people. Communication and resource allocation services of DIS help agents use allocative and authoritative resources under their control. They give agents full control of both the material objects of work and the computerized representations of those objects. They also foster the coordination and organization of work within and between functional groups. Control over resources has been negotiated in the project 19 Dual Information Systems: the Information Systems Architecture for Hyperknowledge Organizations

20 layer and inscribed into work roles and the role-centric work layer of DIS. These services are partly enabled by Embedded Application Systems. But organizational coordination and the creation and sharing of knowledge are dependent on communication through which agents negotiate and enact their roles and interactions (Winograd and Flores 1986) and thereby maintain and modify social institutions (Barley 1990). While EAS help agents interpret computerized information and communication indirectly mediated by algorithms and integrated databases, these services also enable direct communication and discourse through which agents can share and refine their interpretations independent of time and space. The services provide exceptional knowledge-creating opportunities. To develop and use them, organizations must ask questions in domains where they may not have been asked before: What are we doing? Why? Who is doing what? What could we do better? But such questions often cause embarrassment and threat. Paradoxically, most IS stop providing help in such situations (Käkölä 1996a). These services, while an important component, are unlikely to transcend the limitations of dualistic technologies alone. Other services are needed to help hyperknowledge organizations question their structural properties and constructively negotiate control over resources and rules. Without the services of the project layer and the establishment of negotiated control by project teams, the communication and resource allocation services could reinforce unilateral, prescriptive control of work, and thus endanger the hyperknowledge organization design. Breakdown management services Routines may break down unexpectedly. Breakdowns are often handled through hierarchy: if an employee cannot work because of a breakdown, he or she passes the responsibility for fixing the 20 Dual Information Systems: the Information Systems Architecture for Hyperknowledge Organizations

21 situation up the chain of command, where it is forwarded to a specialist to fix. However, in hyperknowledge organizations, this passing of responsibility occurs only in exceptionally difficult situations. Agents face two challenges in often chaotic breakdown situations (Zuboff 1988). First, they must get their routines back on track quickly. Second, they must develop and test multiple hypotheses about what went wrong to ensure a lasting solution. In essence, agents must externalize different aspects of internalized routines into explicit, testable concepts. Breakdown management services help agents meet both challenges. When routines break down, they let agents shift their focus of attention from normal objects of work to the routinized patterns of interaction and the means of work, including the rules and resources afforded by software (Käkölä 1995). Breakdown management services are coupled with communication and resource allocation services. For example, agents can roll back their computerized tasks when breakdowns occur. They can also perform audit trails to trace what happened earlier to artifacts for which they are responsible and use the learning services to understand what should have happened (Käkölä 1995, Käkölä and Koota 1999a). If they hypothesize that the problem stems from mistakes of agents in other roles, they can use the redundant information services of the interconnected-role layer of DIS to better understand how and why such mistakes are possible (Käkölä 1995, Käkölä and Koota 1999a). If the analysis reveals that the breakdown stems from problems spanning functional groups, a project team can be assembled to establish practices, planning procedures, and learning services that help eliminate in advance similar breakdowns. Learning services Intellective skill development is vital in hyperknowledge organizations. The externalization of tacit knowledge for process improvement relies on intellective skills. The organizational creation 21 Dual Information Systems: the Information Systems Architecture for Hyperknowledge Organizations

22 of knowledge also gradually increases the level of responsibility assigned to agents and embeds work routines in Embedded Application Systems and other technologies. With the help of the act-oriented conceptual design, EAS let agents construct intellective skills as easily as they internalize action-centered knowledge. Due to the complexity of work practices, learning services complement EAS with materials such as multimedia-training sessions and standard-operatingprocedures. Their further investigation is beyond the scope of this paper. Winslow and Bramer (Winslow and Bramer 1994), for example, provide examples of such services. Performance monitoring services Performance monitoring services collect performance data to help agents monitor activities and their results. They must naturally meet the functional expectations imposed on each role. After all, what gets measured, gets done (Peters 1987). The services promote internal competition and motivate agents to use other services of DIS and to figure out how to exceed expectations, thus accelerating the creation of knowledge (Nonaka 1994, Spendolini 1992). These services also give middle management (owning the business process) performance information. However, to reduce systemic control and ensure the autonomy of functional groups, this information focuses on results rather than on measurement of work steps (Hammer 1990, pp ). Dynamic task reconfiguration services Agents have the autonomy to alter their practices to the extent that the alterations do not challenge shared role expectations. In this way, agents can reduce variances between their work performance and the performance goals established in the project layer. This design ensures that role-definitions do not become straitjackets. Changes should not violate the boundaries of autonomy and responsibility. Otherwise, unexpected breakdowns could result. If violations seem necessary, processes need to be redesigned. Intellective skill development is vital in the business 22 Dual Information Systems: the Information Systems Architecture for Hyperknowledge Organizations

23 layer to ensure that agents can (1) alter their practices autonomously, (2) eliminate many breakdowns in advance, and (3) redesign the processes in project teams. The allowance of modifications places additional requirements on the role-centric work layer. The act-oriented structure of the layer helps agents know their responsibilities. But knowing is not enough. The layer allows dynamic reconfiguration of computerized tasks (Hellman and Nurminen 1991). After all, agents can experiment with new ways to do manual tasks. They must have the same capability with computerized tasks. The role-centric work layer also helps agents check whether the alterations proposed for a certain role will have undesirable side effects on other groups that are inter-connected with the role. When agents alter work practices, learning materials are also updated. Agents can annotate the materials by adding new components but the role-centric learning materials designed by project teams remain unchanged and available to others. This tailored knowledge can later be institutionalized if altered practices prove more effective than earlier ones. The Inter-Connected Role Layer of DIS. The role-centric layer focuses on individuals and functional groups. However, hyperknowledge organizations cannot operate effectively, if perspectives of agents in the business layer are too narrow. Redundant information is needed to bridge role-centric (individual) work and project (organizational) work. For example, agents can improve their practices more easily and with less risk when they know the processes of their business unit and can eliminate possible side effects in advance. The inter-connected role layer of DIS (idis) provides redundant information. Project teams apply the Embedded Systems Approach and the services of the project layer of DIS to design processes in which applications (computerized tasks) are embedded. Process representations clarify how 23 Dual Information Systems: the Information Systems Architecture for Hyperknowledge Organizations

24 tasks are coordinated, who is responsible for them, and how the applications mediate organizational coordination through integrated databases. They also serve as the organizational interface of the business layer of DIS that (1) provides access to Embedded Application Systems in the role-centric layer; (2) visualizes aspects of social structure and patterned human interactions partly structured by EAS, and thus helps agents question and evaluate their practices; (3) shares these representations between agents in functional roles, (4) allows simulated roleenactment so that agents can become familiar with their colleagues jobs, and (5) provides performance information that motivates knowledge exploration and process redesign. The interface thus networks the design knowledge created by the project teams so that this knowledge can be combined with the cost and quality benchmarks and other operational information and applied and reflected quickly and easily on the business layer. Thus ESA is a powerful basis for designing Dual Information Systems that bridge the design/use dualism. Redundant information services Redundant information services enable at least browsing and simulated enactment of interconnected roles (Käkölä 1995, Käkölä and Koota 1999a) that define the groups whose members formally interact with a user of idis. Interaction can be direct or mediated through the communication and resource allocation services of the role-centric layer. Without disrupting their co-workers in any way, agents can use these services to experiment with the jobs of co-workers and to understand possible bottlenecks in process performance. The norms and rules established in the project layer preserve the autonomy and privacy of agents by defining what information is shared. They are reinforced by partly encoding them in the services of idis. For example, redundant information services do not allow agents to update any information in the business layer and the Knowledge Sharing Server of DIS; otherwise the responsibilities between functional groups could become unclear. When norms and rules are reinforced through encoding, 24 Dual Information Systems: the Information Systems Architecture for Hyperknowledge Organizations