The thesis
describes a project where possibilities for IT-support in
work knowledge development has been investigated in an area where the
confrontation between information technology and work knowledge is highly
evident – process control work. Production disturbances of varying degree is a
continuous element in process control work and quick changes in level of risk
in the production situation is an important aspect of the complexity of the
work. Automation reduces the operators abilities to
maintain and develop the skills involved in handling production disturbances
requiring manual intervention. In the long run this might lead to an erosion of
this aspect of the operators work knowledge. The study has been carried out at an partly automated chemical plant with batch-oriented
production. The plant produces binders and adhesives in ten separate reactor
systems. A tool for collaborative learning in this setting has been developed
that uses an information format named TIPS – thin interactive problem scenarios
– for describing problem situations in production. The tool has been evaluated
with process operators in a series of video recorded meetings.
There are three major theoretical frames of reference for the thesis:
skill and technology; participatory design and social constructionism. A
research tradition referred to as »skill and technology« has evolved at the
Centre for work life studies in
My investigation of work
knowledge development and collaborative learning in process control work has
been as a researcher but also as interaction designer, setting focus on the
possible roles interactive digital systems can play in collaborative learning
in a work setting. There are two connected lines of development in informatics
that forms the second frame of reference for the thesis: the development of a
Scandinavian tradition in participatory design of computer artefacts; and the
growing interest for ethnographically inspired methods in participatory design.
The former has influenced the design process that has been part of the thesis
work, while my methodological approach in the research has been grounded in the
latter. Research in both areas have influenced my understanding of the concepts
of praxis and rule following.
Social constructionism is a
growing field of theories constituting the third frame of reference for the
thesis. The main concern is to explicate the processes by which people come to
describe, explain or in other ways account for the world in which they live
including themselves (Gergen 1995). Social constructionist theories share a
position taken against a number of underlying assumptions in a large part of
the research community: a dualist view of the world where people and the world
can be studied as separate entitities; an objectivist perspective on knowledge
where meaning and properties of the world that we can perceive are assumed to
be inherent in the world itself; an individualist perspective on knowledge
where the individual is viewed as the owner of knowledge about the world; and
the assumption that language is an objective representation of reality. In
contrast social constructionist researchers render objective descriptions of
reality impossible since such descriptions are influenced by our specific
cultural, historical and linguistic understanding (Sandberg 1999). Instead
reality is constructed in a social interchange with continuous negotiation
between people on what constitutes the world we live in. This means that knowledge
about reality also is developed in a social interchange and that meaning in the
language used to describe reality is constituted by its use in meeting reality
(Sandberg 1999).
A number of studies show that automation in
process control reduces the operators possibilities
for maintaining and developing work knowledge since the number of production
disturbances requiring operator intervention decrease (Bainbridge 1978, 1987;
Brehmer 1993; Ellström & Gustafsson 1996; de Montmollin & de Keyser
1985; Skorstad 1988). An investigation of psychological demands in process
operator work (Sandén & Johansson 1987) showed that 50% of the operators
perceived insufficient knowledge for handling production disturbances as a problem.
One suggested strategy to reduce negative effects of automation is to switch to
manual control on a regular basis during normal operation in order to maintain
manual control skills (Bainbridge 1978; de Montmollin & de Keyser 1985).
Another strategy is to work with simulations of production disturbances.
According to Bainbridge (1978) operators on automated plants need frequent
breakdown training exercises, and therefore simple test »games« might be an
alternative to complex simulation to remind operators of process structure and
relationships. However, unexpected problems cannot be simulated, so therefore
only general strategies can be trained. A third strategy is to stimulate
communication between operators. According to Sandén & Johansson (1987)
reporting and discussing incidents on a regular basis can contribute to safer
and more efficient operation, and increased operator competence. In an
ethnographic study of another domain, photo-copier repair work, Julian Orr
(1990) has described the importance of community memory for maintaining work
knowledge. By exchanging »war stories« about difficult repairs the technicians
share work knowledge and contribute in developing community memory as a basis
for developing experience in repairing copying machines.
The main reason for choosing
process control work as a domain for studying computer supported collaborative
learning has been that the confrontation between the »exact language« of
computing and the experience based knowledge of workers is particularly evident
in this domain. The main goal has been to investigate possibilities for
introducing computer supported collaborative learning in process control work
as an intervention to compensate for negative consequences of automation
regarding workers possibilities of maintaining and developing work skills. From
the perspective of the research tradition in skill and technology, there is no
general theory of knowledge. Each praxis has its own
forms for skill development and has to be studied separately. Studying new
forms for collaborative learning in a praxis therefore
requires a deep understanding of work knowledge and skill development in this
praxis. Therefore, the first research question investigated can be stated as: what characterises the practice of operator
process control work in the plant studied?
Since it is the tension between the »exact
language« of automation and work practice that has led to the need for
maintaining and developing work knowledge, the consequences of automation for
the work practice in question becomes important. Therefore the second research
question investigated can be stated as: what role does the automated process control system have in the work
practice of the process operators? However, the time available in the case study has not allowed a deeper
investigation of long term effects of computer use in line with the
methodological approach in the research tradition of skill and technology.
Instead the focus has been on identifying examples of the role of automation in
process control work, particularly in connection with production disturbances,
in order to point out what aspects of work knowledge that needs to be
developed.
The two research questions
stated provide the necessary ground for the third and main research question: what interventions are needed to create
possibilities for collaborative learning supported by computer based tools in
the work practice studied, and what role can such tools have in the learning
process? The computer based tool presented in the thesis was developed in
line with the third strategy presented above for developing process control
knowledge, allowing operators to share knowledge about how to handle production
disturbances in an automated chemical plant. The goal has been to investigate
new possibilities for collaborative learning in the work practice studied by
designing a computer based tool for the construction and use of interactive
problem scenarios in work practice, and to study such a tool in use.
When a computer based tool is
introduced the way it will be appropriated and used in a
praxis can never be anticipated and the question of whether a computer
based tool can contribute to collaborative learning in a particular setting
cannot be answered with a simple »yes« or »no«. Instead the process operators use of the tool for constructing and working with
interactive problem scenarios has been studied and documented. The
documentation has then been analysed in search for examples illustrating how
the tool might support or inhibit collaborative learning.
Finally, the use of
interactive scenarios raises the question of how a scenario should be
represented in interactive form. When Johannessen (1990, 1992) describes
development of intransitive understanding through examples and imitation in a praxis, based on the language philosophy of Ludwig
Wittgenstein, these examples are assumed to be presented by an experienced
member of that praxis. The question of the degree to which interactive examples
represented in interactive media can be understood is therefore crucial.
The epistemological perspective formulated in the thesis takes as its
starting point Johannessens development of a conceptual framework for work
knowledge based on Ludwig Wittgenstein’s notions of praxis and rule following
(Johannessen 1990, 1992, 1997, 1999a, 1999b). This perspective is compared and
combined with other theoretical perspectives on professional knowledge: Charles
Taylor’s concept of praxis (Taylor 1971), Schön’s notion of the reflective
practitioner (Schön 1987), Dreyfus’s perspective on expert knowledge
development (Dreyfus 1990), situated learning theories (e.g. Lave & Wenger
1991), and Kuhn’s notion of seeing in a metaphorical sense as an important
aspect of tacit knowledge in use (Kuhn 1962). Based on these theoretical
viewpoints an epistemological perspective has been formulated that can be
summarised as follows:
·
Knowing is inseparable from human activities and is therefore a
contextual phenomenon rooted in a specific context for action – a praxis. Having knowledge means to act in a way that, given
the particular circumstances, is perceived as appropriate by members of this
praxis.
·
The fact that knowledge is rooted in a praxis means that there can be
substantial differences between what is accepted as knowledge in different
types of praxis, e.g. in everyday human activities compared to in a scientific
discipline. There cannot be any general epistemology and every
praxis has to be investigated in itself. The knowledge developed in a praxis is based on specific situations and does not claim
to be applicable outside the praxis where it is developed and established.
·
Actions acquire their meaning through a shared understanding among
members of a praxis. This way a
praxis is built on intersubjective meaning, i.e. meaning that cannot be
the property of one individual but is necessarily rooted in a social context
which is constituted by this meaning. Individuals, as members of a practice,
constitute a language collective for whom the shared
meaning is built on a pragmatic constitutive base.
·
Knowledge is socially and historically constructed. The rule following
of members of a praxis maintain the meaning of
appropriate actions, and the field of action constituting a praxis has
developed out of a history of specific situations.
·
New situations can extend the field of action in a
praxis. Knowledge is inherently dynamic and each new situation has the
potential to shift or expand knowledge in new directions by those being members
of a praxis. Analogical thinking and judgement are
important elements in these dynamics. They function as tools for constructing
an understanding of a specific situation which opens up for new approaches and
may lead to a solution to the problem, or to the development of concepts that describes
the situation.
·
Being a member of a praxis involves developing
a full understanding of the meaning that is shared in the language collective
and the rule following comprising action in the praxis. Some aspects of
knowledge cannot be articulated. What constitutes appropriate action or
appropriate use of concepts in a praxis therefore
cannot always be articulated in language, but must be demonstrated by examples.
Developing the intransitive understanding of rule following, where rules cannot
be articulated, therefore has to be accomplished through imitation.
An explorative, qualitative research approach
has been chosen where collected data have been inductively analysed and
categories have not been preselected but rather allowed to emerge from the
analysis. The chosen epistemological perspective in the study has formed a
background for the analysis but I have tried to avoid letting this perspective
dominate the analysis. Since the research is primarily action oriented I regard
it as action science in the form described by Argyris & Schön (1996). They
differ between first order effects of interventions – »single-loop learning« –
where only strategies for handling the immediate situation are changed, and
second order effects – »double-loop learning« – where also value systems
governing a praxis are changed. Both types of effects are relevant in the study
but due to time limits I have primarily focused on first order effects of the
interventions.
In the first part of the case
study, investigating process operator work knowledge, the data collected for
analysis was interviews, observations and documents in the organisation. The
main focus in the analysis was eight group interviews on operator work and the
handling of production disturbances carried out with the three work shifts in
parallel with design of the computer based tool. Three interviews with each
shift was planned but one was cancelled. All
interviews were tape recorded. Before engaging in the design process of the
computer based tool eleven of the fourteen operators were interviewed. The goal
was to find out the knowledge needs considering the consequences of the ongoing
automation of the production. The interviews were carried out together with the
operator participating in the design process for the tool and were documented
with note taking. Observations of operator work were done at nine occasions
including two »backup drills« where production was interrupted and critical
problem situations simulated at the plant with all operator shifts.
Observations were documented with note taking. Interviews were also carried out
with two newly employed operators in order to cover their perspective on
operator work, and three members of production management to cover a management
perspective. All interviews were recorded on tape. The data collection
described above has been used in a qualitative analysis with the main goal of
investigating two of the research questions addressing characteristics of the
operator work and the role of automated process control in operator work
practice. The main part of the data collection for investigating the last
research question is nine meetings with operator work shifts where the
TIPS-tool has been studied in use. Operators have constructed and used
interactive problem scenarios as a basis for discussing and reflecting on
praxis in handling production disturbances. All meetings were recorded on video
for later analysis. This material has been the base for a qualitative analysis
with the goal of investigating the last and main research question addressing
the interventions needed to create possibilities for collaborative learning
supported by computer based tools in the work practice studied, and the role
such tools can have in continuous development of operator skills for handling
production disturbances.
Analysis of collected data has been carried out as a continuous comparative analysis based on »grounded theory« (Glaser & Strauss 1967). However, data collection has neither been iterative nor theory driven, and therefore this study could not be described as a grounded theory study. Analysis of data for the main research question, on interventions needed to create possibilities for computer supported collaborative learning, has involved interaction analysis (Jordan & Henderson 1994) with influence from conversation analysis (Atkinson 1984), since the focus has been social interaction among process operators in using the developed computer based tool.
The process control work studied is characterised by a substantial
complexity but partly with other roots than those described in other studies of
process control work. The transferability of generalisations about the
complexity of operator work between different process control contexts therefore
can be questioned. The complexity of the operator work contains factors rooted
in the dynamics of the production process – internal complexity – and factors rooted in the
dynamics of the production environment – external
complexity. The root cause for the internal complexity lies in the variations
in »temper« for the many different processes (around 100). Some processes are
particularly reactive and requires a high level of attention from the
operators. They develop an intransitive understanding, in the sense described
by Johannessen (1999b), of the variations in temper which is a necessary
requirement in operator skills for different reasons. Firstly
for being able to control the process, secondly for handling the »rhythm« of
the operator work, and finally for being able to handle production
disturbances. The »temper« of the processes influences production
planning, which operators increasingly have become responsible for as their
work tasks have been extended. The aspect of operator skills needed for handling
the complexity in production planning is described as knowledge of the »work
rhythm«. It involves creating a reasonable individual work situation as well as
creating a working rhythm in the production as a whole together with other
operators. External complexity can be divided into four factors: lacking
communication within the operator collective and between operators and other
personnel such as production management, maintenance workers, etc; errors in
process control software; malfunctions in the machinery; and environmental
factors such as weather conditions, temperature of cooling water, etc.
The apparent contrast between
the dramatic situations of production disturbances and the routines of daily
operator work at the plant that showed in the early observations soon turned
out to be a false picture. Production disturbances of varying degree is a
continuous aspect of operator work and variations in level of risk is a central
part of work complexity. Even small incidents have the potential to develop
into critical situations in short time under certain circumstances, which puts
a high demand on the operators skills to handle such
situations. The complexity of the work studied requires skills which to a large
degree are tacit. Over time operators develop a deep knowledge of the
production environment, and in particular the
variations in »temper« that characterises the many different products. They
also develop a judgement for handling problem situations in the plant as a
whole rather than for the processes that they are responsible for, in
particular for judging potential risks, possible future developments of a
situation and consequences that follow. A continuous focus on the plant
situation as a whole appears as a strategy to improve the ability to handle
production disturbances, and also to maintain this particular aspect of the
work knowledge. However, the ability to judge the level of risk in a production
situation varies strongly depending on the amount of work experience.
Automation in process control leads to changes in the mediation of
information between process and operator, but it is a change in the nature
rather than the degree of mediation. In manual process control all process
information that the operator perceives through his senses is mediated in
different ways, often by the production machinery (e.g. when the operator looks
at the characteristics of the foam produced on the surface in the reactor, or
becomes aware of unfamiliar sounds in the machinery). Therefore it is
misleading to describe the effects of automation as a layer introduced between
the operator and the process, since the operators contact with the process
might be mediated through several layers also in manual process control.
Furthermore, the expressions of the automated process, as mediated through
different sensors of the process control system, are not necessarily similar to
the expressions that the operators has become familiar
with in manual process control. Automation therefore primarily leads to a
change in the nature of mediation of information between process and operator.
The understanding of
different expressions of the process in manual control work is intransitive and
takes a long time to develop. The operators attention
can be directed towards certain expressions through examples demonstrated by an
experienced operator, but perceiving differences between variations of the same
expression demands exposure to a large number of situations. In manual process
control operators develop a »seeing«, in the metaphorical meaning of the
concept as suggested by Kuhn (1962), where properties of the process are
perceived through different stimuli and form the base for a development of an
intransitive understanding of variations in »temper« for the many different
products.
Automation of process control
forces the operator to develop a new kind of »seeing« in the metaphorical sense
used above. This does not involve development of knowledge of a more
intellectual nature as proposed by Zuboff (1988). Neither does it involve
seeing through the digital representations of the computer based control system
in order to re-establish the link to the concrete expressions of the process as
described by Perby (1995). It is a matter of finding new paths to the expressions
of the process. The operator has to develop a new intransitive understanding of
the various expressions of the automated process based on the intransitive
understanding of expressions of the process in manual control. There is no
difference in nature between the operators work knowledge before and after
automation. The central aspect of the knowledge is still an intransitive
understanding of the expressions of the process as mediated through different
representations, and a reflective judgement of the plant situation as a whole,
with level of risk and potential future developments in a particular situation,
based on this intransitive understanding.
Finally,
the study shows that automating the same type of machinery, in this case
reactor systems with similar construction in principle, has different
consequences for operator work depending on the »temper« of the process which
in turn determines the level of automation that is feasible. In reactor systems
where full automation has not been feasible automation relieves the operator of
some tasks, but still requires the operator to keep attention on what the
automated control system does. In these cases automated control cannot match
the sensitivity in control demonstrated by an experienced operator in manual
control. Therefore the automation takes the role of an »uneducatable
apprentice«. The transferability of generalisations about the effects of
automation between different process control contexts can therefore be
questioned.
The intervention in the study consists of the participatory design of a
computer based tool for collaborative learning. Inspired by John Carrolls notion of minimalist instruction (1990) an
information format for describing production disturbances was developed which
is referred to as thin interactive problem scenarios or TIPS. A strong element
of user participation has been crucial for developing representation formats
for problem scenarios that can be used in a collaborative learning setting. In
local work contexts, language and jargon is developed to be an efficient means
of communicating about work matters. By relying on the process operators highly
developed context specific work knowledge, problem scenarios can be described
using a minimum of information. The TIPS-tool allows operators to create
interactive problem scenarios, based on experienced or plausible problem situations, that are staged in a hyper linked model of the
production environment. The interactive problem scenario fixates a certain
situation and by being confronted with the scenario repeated times, different
ways of handling the situation can be explored. Suggested operations are
embedded in the scenario resulting in feedback on actions taken. However, the
practice inscribed in the scenario is not necessarily the best, but rather
invites the users to reflect on different possible ways of handling the
situation. It runs on an ordinary PC and has been introduced in the control
room environment at the plant. The goal has
been to establish the tool as a component in an environment for continuous
development of operator skills.
Computer based tools for learning based on
different forms of simulation, e.g. of science phenomena, often reduces complexity
in a knowledge domain by a reduction of the phenomena to basic causal
relationships. However, industrial production environments are characterised by
high complexity. Aspects of work knowledge that require the longest time to
develop, and which are largely tacit, cannot be separated from the practice
where they are applied. Thus, developing a computer support for developing work
knowledge seems impossible without risking a decontextualisation of the work
knowledge. At a first glance it does not seem at all fruitful to take
interactive problem scenarios, based on simplified models of situations from
the operators work practice, as a starting point.
However,
analysis of the tool in use has showed that the highly specific local language
of a praxis can be used as a resource in constructing
interactive problem scenarios for collaborative learning. It is the local language of the operators work
practice that allows a link to the context of action to be maintained in the
operators work with interactive problem scenarios. The work language is deeply
rooted in operator praxis and this creates the necessary conditions for
constructing a shared view of the problem situation based on the condensed
description of an interactive problem scenario. This shared view of the
problem stretches far beyond the actual contents of the description bringing
out details in operator praxis, and has
sufficient authenticity for elements of learning to emanate from discussion and
reflection on the situation at hand. Thus, the communicative power of the local
work language creates possibilities for sharing knowledge of work practice
through the construction and use of interactive problem scenarios. This way
operators can, at least in thought, be exposed to critical production disturbances
more often than in daily work, but without the risks of the real situation.
The value of naturalistic representations in computer supported learning, where
a shared understanding of real world situations should be constructed, can
therefore be questioned.
The interactivity in the use
of interactive problem scenarios, with direct feedback on actions performed,
gives problem scenarios an open character. Each scenario can be played several
times in order to explore different strategies in handling a problem situation.
Analysis of the tool in use shows that construction and use of problem
scenarios supports reflection and discussion with elements of collaborative
learning in two forms: inquiry into the problem situation leading to a need for
more information on how the control system or production machinery works; and
argumentative discussions where the scenario indicates differences in operator
praxis and needs for changes in the established praxis of handling production
disturbances.
The study also reveals clear
differences in the interaction between operators in working with problem
scenarios, depending on the amount of experience of the operator interacting
with the tool. Since constructing a authentic
understanding of a problem situation requires a deep intransitive understanding
of operator praxis and the language used in describing scenarios, less
experienced operators do not have the ability to work with interactive problem
scenarios on their own. They need a strong support from experienced operators.
The documented use of the tool shows that this support is weak. Inexperienced
operators are excluded from discussions on problems, not only through language,
but also through the lack of necessary support from experienced operators.
Using the language of a
work practice as a resource in designing support for collaborative learning
among experienced members of a practice seems to be a useful strategy. The
study has raised several new questions for future research and the following
areas are identified as relevant for further investigation:
·
Transfer of the concept to other contexts for
collaborative learning. Results from the study have shown the potential in
using the language of a practice as a resource in computer supported
collaborative learning. This potential could be further investigated by testing
the concept in other contexts, in particular settings where changes in work
practice, e.g. through the introduction of new technology, affects the ability
to maintain and develop work knowledge for members of the practice.
·
Obstacles in collaborative learning for less
experienced members of a practice. A problem that has evolved in the study is
that less experienced workers have not been able to take part in collaborative
learning through construction and use of interactive problem scenarios due to
their less developed work language. Further studies of factors inhibiting
computer supported collaborative learning in the form described above are
needed.
·
New forms of interventions supporting work language
development. A relevant problem connected with the one above is the need for
new forms of interventions supporting work language development as an
integrated part of computer supported collaborative learning in the form
described above. In this particular context better possibilities for less
experienced workers to engage in collaborative learning can be explored in a
number of ways: through construction of interactive problem scenarios in the
information format described above but were scenarios are adapted to different
levels of skill; through development of new information formats for interactive
problem scenarios that are more suitable for less skilled workers; or through
development of new activities where skilled workers take an active part in supporting
less skilled workers to engage in peripheral participation in construction and
use of interactive problem scenarios.
Argyris, C. & Schön, D. A. (1996) Organizational Learning II – Theory, Method and Practice. Addison-Wesley.
Atkinson, J.
M. & Heritage, J. (red.) (1984) Structures of Social Action – studies in conversational analysis.
Bainbridge
Lisanne (1978) The Process Controller. I Singleton W T (ed) The Analysis of Practical Skills. MPT Press Ltd,
Edinburgh.
Bainbridge Lisanne (1987) Ironies
of Automation.
I Rasmussen Jens, Duncan Keith & Leplat Jacques (red) New Technology and
Human Error, John Wiley & Sons, Chichester, s271-283.
Brehmer, B. (1993) Processoperatörernas arbete i moderna kontrollrum. I Lennerlöf, L. (red.) Människor Datateknik Arbetsliv, Publica, Stockholm, s 115-142.
Carroll, J.
M. (1990) The
Dreyfus, H.
L. (1990) Is Socrates to Blame for
Cognitivism? I Göranzon, B. & Florin, M. (red.) Artificial
Intelligence, Culture and Language – on education and work. Springer Verlag,
Ellström, P-E., & Gustafsson, M. (1996) Lärande produktion – erfarenheter från ett
utvecklingsprogram för processoperatörer. I Ellström, P-E., Gustavsson, B.,
& Larsson, S. (red.) Livslångt lärande. Studentlitteratur,
Gergen, K.
J. (1995) The Social Constructionist Movement in Modern
Psychology. American Psychologist. Vol. 40, No. 3,
s 266-275.
Glaser B G
& Strauss A L: The
Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research.
Johannessen,
K. S. (1990) Rule-following and
Intransitive Understanding. In Göranzon, B. and
Johannessen,
K. S. (1992) Rule-following, Intransitive
Understanding and Tacit Knowledge – an Investigation of the Wittgensteinian
Concept of Practice as Regards Tacit Knowing. In
Göranzon, B. and
Johannessen,
K. S. (1996) Tradisjoner og Skoler i Moderne Vitenskapsfilosofi. Sigma Forlag A.S,
Johannessen, K. S. (1997) Tysta inslag i kunskap och förståelse - några moment i Wittgensteins diskussion av olika former för gränserfarenhet i senfilosofin. Dialoger 43/97, s. 45-53.
Johannessen, K. S. (1999a) Det Analogiska Tänkandet. Dialoger 50-51/99, s. 61-72.
Johannessen, K. S. (1999b) Praxis och Tyst Kunnande. Dialoger,
Jordan B
&
Kuhn, T. S.
(1962) The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Tredje
upplagan. The
Lave J., & Wenger, E. (1991) Situated Learning - Legitimate Peripheral
Participation.
de
Montmollin M & De Keyser V (1985) Expert
logic vs. operator logic. I Johanssen, G., Mancini, G.
& Maartensson, L. (eds.) Analysis, design and evaluation of man-machine
systems.
Orr, J. E.
(1990) Sharing Knowledge, Celebrating
Identity: Community Memory in a Service Culture. I
Middleton, D. & Edwards, D. (eds.) Collective Remembering. SAGE
Publications Ltd,
Perby, M. (1995) Konsten att bemästra en process – om att förvalta yrkeskunnande. Gidlunds förlag, Smedjebacken.
Sandberg, J. (1999) Konstruktioner av social konstruktionism. Paper presenterat i ’Workshop om konstruktionism – att tänka, forska och skriva konstruktionistiskt’, Växjö universitet 9-10 december.
Sandén P-O., & Johansson, G. (1987) Processövervakningens arbetsinnehåll och teknikförhållanden:
konsekvenser för mental belastning och arbetsengagemang. Stockholms Universitet, Psykologiska
institutionen, Rapporter, nr 52.
Schön, D. A.
(1987) Educating the Reflective Practitioner. Jossey-Bass
Publishers, San Fransisco.
Skorstad E
(1988) Technology and overall control: an
example from the process industry. I de Keyser, V., Qvale, T., Wilpert, B., & Ruiz, S. A. (eds.) The meaning of
work and technological options.
Zuboff, S. (1988) In the Age of
the Smart Machine - the Future of Work and Power. Heinemann Professional
Publishing, Oxford.