The use of Actor-Network Theory and a Practice-Based Approach to

309 Pages·2013·2.83 MB·English

by  Gibran Rivera Gonzalez

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 _______________________________________________ 51
3.3 Law’s perspective on control ___________________________________________________________ 53
3.3.1 Actors _____________________________________________________________________________________ 53
3.3.2 Actor-networks __________________________________________________________________________ 54
3.3.3 Control ___________________________________________________________________________________ 54
3.3.4 Inscriptions/envoys _____________________________________________________________________ 55
3.3.5 Envelopes ________________________________________________________________________________ 56
3.4 The sociology of translation ____________________________________________________________ 57
3.4.1 Problematisation ________________________________________________________________________ 58
3.4.2 Interessement ___________________________________________________________________________ 58
3.4.3 Enrolment ________________________________________________________________________________ 59
3.4.4 Mobilisation ______________________________________________________________________________ 60
3.5 Feasibility of ANT to this study and exploratory lines of inquiry ____________________ 60
3.6 Acknowledging challenges and limitations of ANT ___________________________________ 65
3.7 Conclusion _______________________________________________________________________________ 69
4. A PRACTICE-BASED APPROACH _______________________________________________________ 71
4.1 Introduction _____________________________________________________________________________ 71
4.2 Welcoming the practice-based approach and its multivocality ______________________ 72
4.3 Establishing the practice-based approach as an alternative to traditional
approaches _______________________________________________________________________________________ 73
4.4 Bricolage of theoretical resources from the practice-based approach ______________ 75
4.5 Relational thinking in the practice-based approach __________________________________ 78
4.6 Emergence and routinisation: Degrees of practices’ potential to change ___________ 80
4.7 Recurrence and collectiveness: becoming and being a practice _____________________ 81
4.8 Knowing-in-practice ____________________________________________________________________ 82
4.9 Differentiation among practices ________________________________________________________ 83
4.10 How a PBA can be useful for understanding online community participation _____ 85
4.11 Challenges and potential limitations of the practice-based approach _______________ 89
4.12 Conclusion _______________________________________________________________________________ 93
5. METHODOLOGY _________________________________________________________________________ 95
5.1 Introduction _____________________________________________________________________________ 95
5.2 Characterising the study: A two-stage interpretive theoretically informed
research ___________________________________________________________________________________________ 96
vii
5.2.1 Positivistic and interpretive studies: ontological, epistemological and
methodological concerns _______________________________________________________________________ 96
5.2.1.1 Ontological concerns ___________________________________________________________________ 96
5.2.1.2 Epistemological concerns ______________________________________________________________ 97
5.2.1.3 Methodological concerns ______________________________________________________________ 98
5.2.2 Stages of the research __________________________________________________________________ 99
5.2.2.1 Stage one ________________________________________________________________________________ 99
5.2.2.2 Stage two _______________________________________________________________________________ 101
5.2.3 Five key interpretive features of this study _________________________________________ 102
5.2.3.1 Emergent design _______________________________________________________________________ 103
5.2.3.2 Use of qualitative methods, and strategies for recruitment of research
participants _____________________________________________________________________________________ 103
5.2.3.3 The inductive logic followed during the processes of data collection and analysis104
5.2.3.4 Knowledge is socially constructed ___________________________________________________ 105
5.3 Practicalities of the study _____________________________________________________________ 105
5.3.1 Gaining access to the research setting _______________________________________________ 105
5.3.2 Methods for data collection ___________________________________________________________ 106
5.3.2.1 Interviews ______________________________________________________________________________ 107
5.3.2.2 Use of other complementary methods _______________________________________________ 108
5.3.3 Conducting the research ______________________________________________________________ 110
5.3.3.1 Selection of research participants ____________________________________________________ 110
5.3.3.2 Piloting interviews ____________________________________________________________________ 112
5.3.3.3 Interview schedules ___________________________________________________________________ 112
5.3.3.4 Conducting interviews ________________________________________________________________ 113
5.3.3.5 Ethical considerations _________________________________________________________________ 115
5.4 Data analysis ___________________________________________________________________________ 117
5.4.1 Analysis of interviews _________________________________________________________________ 117
5.4.1.1 Use of thematic analysis_______________________________________________________________ 117
5.4.1.2 Conducting the analysis _______________________________________________________________ 118
5.4.1.2.1 Familiarisation with the data ____________________________________________________ 119
5.4.1.2.2 Generation of initial codes _______________________________________________________ 119
5.4.1.2.3 Searching and reviewing for themes ____________________________________________ 120
5.4.1.2.4 Naming themes and reporting findings _________________________________________ 120
5.4.2 Analyses of complementary material ________________________________________________ 121
5.5 Standards of quality and research evaluation _______________________________________ 122
5.5.1 Evaluating the study ___________________________________________________________________ 123
5.6 Conclusion _____________________________________________________________________________ 126
viii
6. FINDINGS I: AN ACTOR-NETWORK THEORY INTERPRETATION _________________ 128
6.1 Introduction ___________________________________________________________________________ 128
6.2 The multi-campus University system as an actor-network ________________________ 129
6.3 Chronological narrative of the implementation _____________________________________ 132
6.3.1 The HR project implementation ______________________________________________________ 133
6.3.1.1 Antecedents of the implementation __________________________________________________ 134
6.3.2 Initiation of the implementation _____________________________________________________ 135
6.3.2.1 Establishing the implementation as OPP ____________________________________________ 136
6.3.2.2 Issues during the initial stage that shaped the rhythm of the implementation ___ 137
6.3.3 Re-launch of the HR project implementation _______________________________________ 138
6.3.3.1 Interessement and enrolment strategies ____________________________________________ 138
6.3.3.2 Disrupting actors, the abandonment of key actors, and the launch of CODECO __ 140
6.3.4 Conclusion _____________________________________________________________________________ 141
6.4 The implementation and CODECO ___________________________________________________ 142
6.4.1 Incomplete translation, and inability of CODECO to evolve ________________________ 142
6.4.2 Late enrolment of CODECO into the implementation, and existence of
competitors _____________________________________________________________________________________ 144
6.4.3 Weak envelope surrounding CODECO _______________________________________________ 145
6.4.4 Conclusion _____________________________________________________________________________ 149
6.5 How ANT was insightful in understanding online community participation _____ 150
6.5.1 Adoption and use of technologies as a process characterised by tensions
between the actors involved __________________________________________________________________ 150
6.5.2 Adoption and use of technologies entailing political processes ___________________ 151
6.5.3 Use of technologies as a process having a relational and emergent nature ______ 151
6.5.4 Diversity of actors’ interests __________________________________________________________ 152
6.5.5 Technology as an actor ________________________________________________________________ 152
6.6 Conclusion _____________________________________________________________________________ 153
7. FINDINGS II: A PRACTICE-BASED APPROACH INTERPRETATION ________________ 156
7.1 Introduction ___________________________________________________________________________ 156
7.2 Features characterising HR practices ________________________________________________ 158
7.2.1 A typical day at work for practitioners: work variation, work overload and time
constraints ______________________________________________________________________________________ 158
7.2.2 Working in a supporting area: ‘being marginalised’ ________________________________ 160
7.2.3 HR practices as source of mixed feelings and emotions ____________________________ 161
7.3 Shared knowings ______________________________________________________________________ 163
7.3.1 Introduction ___________________________________________________________________________ 163
ix
7.3.2 Shared knowing encouraging the development and maintenance of
relationships and continuous interaction ____________________________________________________ 164
7.3.3 Shared knowing how to communicate _______________________________________________ 165
7.3.4 Shared knowing promoting continuous collaboration and support _______________ 168
7.3.5 Shared knowing devotion to employees _____________________________________________ 169
7.3.6 Shared knowing engaging in continuous learning __________________________________ 171
7.3.7 Shared knowing prioritising operational continuity ________________________________ 172
7.4 Participation in the community (not) supporting the enactment of shared
knowings ________________________________________________________________________________________ 173
7.5 Availability of media and interconnectedness between practices _________________ 176
7.5.1 Introduction ____________________________________________________________________________ 176
7.5.2 Availability of existing communications media _____________________________________ 176
7.5.3 Interconnection between practices __________________________________________________ 178
7.6 Routinisation of media usage _________________________________________________________ 179
7.6.1 Introduction ____________________________________________________________________________ 179
7.6.2 Media usage before the implementation_____________________________________________ 180
7.6.3 Media usage during the implementation ____________________________________________ 181
7.7 Participation being at odds with the taste of HR practices _________________________ 182
7.8 How a practice-based approach was insightful to understanding online
community participation ______________________________________________________________________ 185
7.8.1 Participation being shaped by the context immersing the community ___________ 185
7.8.2 Participation as a historically-shaped phenomenon ________________________________ 186
7.8.3 Participation as a collective engagement ____________________________________________ 187
7.8.4 Emergent nature of participation ____________________________________________________ 188
7.9 Conclusion _____________________________________________________________________________ 189
8. DISCUSSION ____________________________________________________________________________ 192
8.1 Introduction ____________________________________________________________________________ 192
8.2 What has been learnt – through the lenses of ANT and PBA - about online
community participation ______________________________________________________________________ 192
8.2.1 Participation has a relational and collective nature ________________________________ 193
8.2.2 Participation is a continuously evolving and historically-shaped phenomenon _ 196
8.2.3 Participation is shaped by the context surrounding the community ______________ 198
8.3 Dealing with critiques and limitations of ANT and PBA ____________________________ 200
8.3.1 Responding to critiques of ANT ______________________________________________________ 201
8.3.1.1 The principle of general symmetry __________________________________________________ 201
8.3.1.2 Questioning the reflexive approach of ANT _________________________________________ 203
8.3.1.3 The Machiavellian orientation of ANT _______________________________________________ 204
x