Designing Work Oriented InfrastructuresEssay title: Designing Work Oriented InfrastructuresThe implementation of information technology in attempts to improve a work process can at times prove to be more damaging than positive in a workplace. In this article we have seen ideas on how “work oriented infrastructures” should be viewed in attempts to effect change on a particular work infrastructure. This publication is targeted not only at those persons implementing systems such as PACS and RIS, but also, to anyone who has input in designing infrastructures that will have an effect on any work tasks. The authors also want to make the distinction that they do not see “infrastructure as a purified technology, but rather in a perspective where the technology cannot be separated from social and other non-technological elements” (Hanseth, O., Lundberg, N. (2001), pg. 349). Throughout the article we have seen that anything related to, or, anything that helps accomplish a particular task be referred to as infrastructure.
The purpose of the article is to identify the problems and challenges faced when implementing new infrastructures. The authors also suggest that the best way of dealing with problems associated with new implementations is to treat them as “work oriented infrastructures” (Hanseth, O., Lundberg, N. (2001), pg. 347). Having worked in Medical Informatics, both the authors, Hanseth and Lundberg have an understanding as well as experience on implementations of PAC and RIS. It has been determined that their motivation for this article is to relate issues that were faced during their attempts to implement PACS and RIS into their current paper based infrastructure.
Through the use of ethnographic methods, the authors have determined that those users directly related to a particular work task should be included in the development of new infrastructures related to their work. It was also determined that work practices were linked indirectly in the hospital along with artifact and humans into an actor-network (Hanseth, O., Lundberg, N. (2001), pg. 359). According to Walsham, actor-network theory examines the motivations and actions of actors who form elements, linked by associations, of heterogeneous network of aligned interests (Walsham, G. (2001), pg. 46).
The article then implies that infrastructures aren’t simple in nature, but rather complex webs that have taken time and developed or co-evolve over years. This is one of the major reasons the authors consider it to be a challenging task changing and designing work oriented infrastructures. Hanseth and Lundberg also determined that another major issue can occur from the fact that not only does information technology bring forth better ways of doing a particular task, it can also lead to the duplication of some tasks as well. The article also states how difficult it is to change large networks because of their complexity and inter-dependencies with other processes. This brings me to one of the major strengths of this
The conclusion:
The fact that the information-technology community is so engaged with the evolution of networks is part of a larger problem that the information-technology community must consider and address. In order for the new technologies to emerge and to get adopted as new standards, a new paradigm needs to be identified. One need to ask why a work is being built. For example, what is the fundamental architecture of the Internet?
In order to answer this question, I’d like to go ahead and list some of the major problems with infrastructures that have sprung from different times and places as well.
A high level overview of this problem
The Internet was established in 1878 by German physicist Georg Wilhelm von Gutenberg.
In the 1800s, in response to the increasing economic and political power that the Great Depression was raising, the “first world” founded “a great civilization” that continued to have a “Great Society” with large societies, free market economics, and the pursuit of a free market. The Internet was developed under the direction of German physicist Heinrich Heydrich Heydrich. In 1902, the Dutch inventor Gertrude Akeley proposed a system of “Internet-based computers”. Akeley’s system was based partly off of the invention of the steam engine by the Dutch mathematician Dijkstra. Akeley’s system was initially based in the USA (he was the inventor of many of the most popular digital technologies, including fax, and had pioneered the printing press) and ultimately involved a number of innovations since then:
– A computer with a keyboard, a graphical user interface, and a high-speed connection to the Web.
– A complete and working machine that could be connected via USB to a computer system.
– A network without multiple devices and a network of connected internet machines.
– Internet links with social networks, via social networks, or via mobile devices.
By 1901, the Internet was one of the world’s most popular, with more than 350 million Internet users, including over 200 million people in China, Pakistan, and Thailand. Internet operators also implemented toll-free network based services when using the Internet.
While this is a great milestone, it is important to point out that to find a perfect solution, it is necessary to consider many other reasons not only for the technology but those that can provide all of the necessary conditions for such a solution. The first and foremost reason for this is that, once Internet has been adopted and established as a standard, new technologies need to be incorporated and new technologies can not be brought together, not even in simple and seamless ways. If the solution for all of these problems is achieved, there will most likely be not many other reasons why the Internet may remain the most important innovation in history.