Comparing methods for workplace studies: a theoretical and empirical analysis

Abstract

A comparative theoretical and empirical analysis of three methods for workplace studies is being conducted in this article. The aim of the study was to explore what level of theoretical depth and methodological structure is appropriate when conducting methods for workplace studies to inform design of complex socio-technical systems. As workplace studies in human–computer interaction (HCI) are a research field that has expanded in an extensive way in the past years, currently there are a wide range of theoretical approaches and methods to select from. The variety of approaches and methods makes it problematic to do relevant methodological choices both in research and system design. While there have been several studies that assess the different approaches to workplace studies, there seem to be a lack of studies that explore the theoretical and methodological differences between more structured methods within the research field. This article serves as a starting point to explore the many methods for workplace studies in HCI and contributes to the field with increased knowledge regarding the theoretical and methodological differences in workplace studies. When using the two criteria descriptive power and application power to assess Contextual Design, Determining Information Flow Breakdown, and Capturing Semi-Automated Decision-Making, lessons are learned about in which ways the methods are acceptable and useful when the purpose is to inform system design.