Abstract
Cognitive Work Analysis (CWA) provides useful tools for analyzing and modeling work constraints that can inform the development of systems design requirements. However, it does not provide effective tools for analyzing and modeling organizational constraints that can inform the development of organizational design requirements. By integrating organizational theories with the CWA approach, we developed the Organizational Constraints Analysis framework, a formative approach to the analysis, modeling, and design of the organization of work. In this paper, we test the generalizability of the framework by using its two analytical templates—the Organizational Constraints model and Work Possibilities diagram—to analyze the hospital bed management work domain. The research findings suggest that the concepts, investigative probes, and notations from the analytical templates can be applied to complex work domains beyond those in which it was initially developed. We conclude with suggestions for how the Organizational Constraints Analysis framework can complement CWA methods by helping researchers and practitioners develop a broader organizational perspective on the constraints that drive how work can be done in organizations.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Ashby WR (1958) Requisite variety and its implications for the control of complex systems. Cybernetica 1:83–99
Ashoori M, Burns C (2012) Team cognitive work analysis: structure and control tasks. J Cogn Eng Decis Mak. Available from: http://edm.sagepub.com/content/early/2012/05/03/1555343412445577.abstract [accessed 20 Sep 2012]
Bardram J (2000) Temporal coordination: on time and coordination of collaborative activities at a surgical department. Comput Suppprt Co-op Work 9:157–187
Blandford AE, Hyde JK, Green TRG, Connell I (2008) Scoping analytical usability evaluation methods: a case study. Hum Comput Interact 23:278–327
Crowston K, Rubleske J, Howison J (2006) Coordination theory: a ten-year retrospective. In: Zhang P, Galletta D (eds) Human–computer interaction in management information systems. M. E. Sharpe, Inc, Armonk, NY, pp 120–138
Davis JP, Eisenhardt KM, Bingham CB (2009) Optimal structure, market dynamism, and the strategy of simple rules. Adm Sci Q 54:413–452
Euerby A, Burns CM (2012) Designing for social engagement in online social networks using communities-of-practice theory and cognitive work analysis: a case study. J Cogn Eng Decis Mak 6(2):194–213
Feldman MS, Pentland BT (2003) Reconceptualizing organizational routines as a source of flexibility and change. Adm Sci Q 48:94–118
Flach JM (2012) Complexity: learning to muddle through. Cogn Technol Work 14:187–197
Gersick CJG, Hackman JR (1990) Habitual routines in task-performing groups. Organ Behav Hum Dec Process 47:65–97
Hajdukiewicz JR, Vicente KJ (2004) A theoretical note on the relationship between work domain analysis and task analysis. Theor Issues Ergon Sci 5:527–538
Hajdukiewicz JR, Vicente KJ, Doyle DJ, Milgram P, Burns CM (2001) Modeling a medical environment: an ontology for integrated medical informatics design. Int J Med Inf 62:79–99
Hayes GR, Lee CP, Dourish P (2011) Organizational routines, innovation, and flexibility: the application of narrative networks to dynamic workflow. Int J Med Inform 80:161–177
Hoffman RR, Crandall B, Shadbolt N (1998) Use of the critical decision method to elicit expert knowledge: a case study in the methodology of cognitive task analysis. Hum Factors 40:254–276
Holland JH (1995) Hidden order: how adaptation builds complexity. Addison-Wesley, Reading
Katz D, Kahn RL (1966) The social psychology of organizations. Wiley, New York
Lawrence PR, Lorsch JW (1967) Differentiation and integration in complex organisations. Adm Sci Q 12:1–47
Malone TW, Crowston K (1994) The interdisciplinary study of coordination. ACM Comput Surv (CSUR) 26:87–119
Meyer JW, Rowan B (1977) Institutionalized organizations: formal structure as myth and ceremony. Am J Sociol 83:340–363
Mintzberg H (1979) The structuring of organizations. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs
Naikar N, Pearce B, Drumm D, Sanderson PM (2003) Designing teams for first-of-a-kind, complex systems using the initial phases of cognitive work analysis: case study. Hum Factors 45:202–217
Nemeth CP (2012) Adapting to change and uncertainty. Cogn Technol Work 14:183–186
Nielsen J (1994) Usability engineering. Morgan Kaufmann, San Diego
Quinn RE, Rohrbaugh J (1983) A spatial model of effectiveness criteria: towards a competing values approach to organizational analysis. Manag Sci 29:363–377
Rasmussen J, Pejtersen A, Goodstein L (1994) Cognitive systems engineering. Wiley, New York
Reddy M, Dourish P, Pratt W (2006) Temporality in medical work: time also matters. Comput Supp Co-op Work 15:29–53
Thompson JD (1967) Organizations in action. McGraw Hill, New York
Vicente KJ (1999) Cognitive work analysis: towards safe, productive, and healthy computer-based work. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah
Weick KE (1979) The social psychology of organizing. Addison-Wesley, Reading
Xiao T, Sanderson P, Neal A, Clayton S (2013) The organizational constraints analysis framework: a formative approach to the analysis, modelling and design of organizations (in preparation)
Zerubavel E (1979) Patterns of time in hospital life. University of Chicago Press, Chicago
Acknowledgments
This research was supported by Australian Research Council Grant DP0880920 to Sanderson and Venkatesh. The authors thank the staff members in the Princess Alexandra Hospital Hospital Bed Management Unit for their time and support. Finally, the authors acknowledge the help from members of the Cognitive Engineering Research Group (CERG) at The University of Queensland and National ICT Australia (NICTA) for their comments on the research.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Xiao, T., Sanderson, P. Evaluating the generalizability of the Organizational Constraints Analysis framework: a hospital bed management case study. Cogn Tech Work 16, 229–246 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10111-013-0260-0
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10111-013-0260-0