Activity Theory as a Tool for Understanding Complexities in Extended Organizations

Paul Peter Bata; Norman Alistair; Allen David

doi:doi:10.11648/j.sjbm.20221001.17

| Peer-Reviewed

Activity Theory as a Tool for Understanding Complexities in Extended Organizations

Paul Peter Bata, Norman Alistair, Allen David

Published in Science Journal of Business and Management (Volume 10, Issue 1)

Received: 4 February 2022 Accepted: 23 February 2022 Published: 18 March 2022

Views: Downloads:

Download PDF

Share This Article

Twitter
Linked In
Facebook

Abstract

The paper compares third generation activity theory (3GAT) and fourth-generation activity theory (4GAT) in extended organisations with multiple relationships that can be characterised as complex. The complexities are associated with the modern work environment with its complicated business processes and potentials for information sharing failures. 3GAT is a proven way of looking at multiple relationships in general but not sufficient in explaining the types of complexities associated with such complex and extended organisational settings possessing potential for lack of congruence of both physical and non-physical tools with which stakeholders engaged. Therefore, fourth generation activity theory was adopted in this study as a positive means of dealing with changes that support the new ways of working found in modern working environments which are increasingly concerned with shared objects. The types of complexities and extension in the setting drives contradictions which points to actual, or potential are as of failure, and in responding to these complexities (caused due to the lack of congruence in the different activity systems) knots form in a different way from the majority of other settings which have been researched. Understanding why the knots behaves in that way can be illuminated using 3GAT but does not necessarily resolve all the issues and nuances of the setting. Hence, 4GAT is seen as 1) a way of understanding the setting or problem issues. 2) understanding the needs and abilities of collaborating partners in understanding complexities and how to manage them and 3) understanding different elements that enhanced the achievement of relationship goals.

Published in	Science Journal of Business and Management (Volume 10, Issue 1)
DOI	10.11648/j.sjbm.20221001.17
Page(s)	47-54
Creative Commons	This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, provided the original work is properly cited.
Copyright	Copyright © The Author(s), 2024. Published by Science Publishing Group

Keywords

Complex and Extended Settings, Complexities, Extension, Activity Theory, Organisational Goals

References

[1]	Allen, D., Karanasios, S., and Slavova, M. (2011). "Working with Activity Theory: Context, Technology, and Information Behavior," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology (62: 4), pp. 776-788.
[2]	Allen, D. K., Brown, A., Karanasios, S., and Norman, A. (2013). "How Should Technology-Mediated Organizational Change Be Explained? A Comparison of the Contributions of Critical Realism and Activity Theory," Mis Quarterly (37: 3), pp. 835-854.
[3]	Ardichvili, A. (2008). Learning and knowledge sharing in virtual communities of practice: Motivators, barriers, and enablers. Advances in developing human resources, 10 (4), 541-554.
[4]	Bata, P. P., Norman, A., and Allen, D. (2020). Information Sharing Behaviour of Complex and Extended Organisations. International Journal of Business and Management, 15 (11), p 41.
[5]	Bata, P. P. (2020). New Knots and their behaviours in complex and extended organizations. Journal of Business and Management Volume 22, Issue 7. Ser. VI (July 2020), PP 47-54.
[6]	Bedny and Bedny, G., & Karwowski, W. (2003). A systemic-structural activity approach to the design of human-computer interaction tasks. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 16 (2), 235-260.
[7]	Belkin, N. J., Oddy, R. N., & Brooks, H. M. (1982). ASK for information retrieval: Part I. Background and theory. Journal of documentation, 38 (2), 61-71.
[8]	Benkler, Y. (2006). The wealth of networks: How social production transforms markets and freedom. Yale University Press. Bradner & Mark.
[9]	Bleakley, A., (2013). Working in “teams” in an era of “liquid” healthcare: What is the use of theory? Journal of interprofessional care, 27 (1), pp. 18-26.
[10]	Burton-Jones, A. (2001). Knowledge capitalism: Business, work, and learning in the new economy. OUP Catalogue.
[11]	Dietz, J., Proper, E., Tribolet, J., Halpin, T., Hoogervorst, J., Op’t Land, M., & Winter, R. (2009). The Enterprise Engineering Series.
[12]	Dietz, T., Rosa, E. A., & York, R. (2009). Environmentally efficient well-being: Rethinking sustainability as the relationship between human well-being and environmental impacts. Human Ecology Review, 16 (1), 114-123.
[13]	Engeström, Y., Engeström, R., & Vähäaho, T. (1999). When the center does not hold: The importance of knotworking (Vol. 381).
[14]	Engestrom, Y. (1989). Developing Expertise at the Changing Workplace; Towards a Redefinition of Expertise'. Technical Report 130. La Jolla, California. Centre for Information Processing, University of San Diego.
[15]	Engeström, Y. (2001). Expansive learning at work: Toward an activity theoretical reconceptualization. Journal of education and work, 14 (1), 133-156.
[16]	Holman, D., Wall, T. D., Clegg, C. W., Sparrow, P., & Howard, A. (Eds.). (2003). The new workplace: a guide to the human impact of modern working practices. John Wiley & Sons.
[17]	Huo, B., Han, Z., Zhao, X., Zhou, H., Wood, C. H., & Zhai, X. (2013). The impact of institutional pressures on supplier integration and financial performance: Evidence from China. International Journal of Production Economics, 146 (1), 82-94.
[18]	Institute of risk management IRM, (2014) Extended Enterprise: Managing risk in complex 21st century organizations. Executive summary [online] at https://www.theirm.org/media/1155369/IRM-Extended-Enterprise_A5_AW.pdf
[19]	Kaatrakoski, H., & Lahikainen, J. (2016). “What We Do Every Day Is Impossible”: Managing Change by Developing a Knotworking Culture in an Academic Library. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 42 (5), 515-521.
[20]	Khayyat, M. (2016). A Proposed Model for the Fourth Generation of Activity Theory to be applied on the Smart City Research.
[21]	Korpela, J. and Kerosuo, H., (2014), September. Working together in a knot: The simultaneity and pulsation of collaboration in an early phase of building design. In Procs 30th Annual ARCOM Conference (pp. 865-874).
[22]	Landy, F. J., & Conte, J. M. (2016). Work in the 21st Century, Binder Ready Version: An Introduction to Industrial and Organizational Psychology. John Wiley & Sons.
[23]	Lawson, B., Petersen, K. J., Cousins, P. D., & Handfield, R. B. (2009). Knowledge sharing in interorganizational product development teams: The effect of formal and informal socialization mechanisms. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 26 (2), 156-172.
[24]	Liu, J., Huang, X., & Liu, J. K. (2015). Secure sharing of personal health records in cloud computing: ciphertext-policy attribute-based signcryption. Future Generation Computer Systems, 52, 67-76.
[25]	Maletič, M., Maletič, D., Dahlgaard, J. J., Dahlgaard-Park, S. M., & Gomišček, B. (2016). Effect of sustainability-oriented innovation practices on the overall organisational performance: An empirical examination. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence, 27 (9-10), 1171-1190.
[26]	Mihm, J., Loch, C. H., Wilkinson, D., & Huberman, B. A. (2010). Hierarchical structure and search in complex organizations. Management science, 56 (5), 831-848.
[27]	Mishra, J. L., Allen, D. K., & Pearman, A. D. (2011). Information sharing during multi-agency major incidents. Proceedings of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 48 (1), 1-10.
[28]	Montoro, C., & Hampel, R. (2011). Investigating language learning activity using a CALL task in the self-access centre. Reading.
[29]	Nardi, B. A. (Ed.). (1996). Context and consciousness: activity theory and human-computer interaction. Mit Press.
[30]	Provan, K. G., & Lemaire, R. H. (2012). Core concepts and key ideas for understanding public sector organizational networks: Using research to inform scholarship and practice. Public Administration Review, 72 (5), 638-648.
[31]	Provan, K. G., Fish, A., & Sydow, J. (2007). Inter-organizational networks at the network level: A review of the empirical literature on whole networks. Journal of management, 33 (3), 479-516.
[32]	Roth, W. M., & Lee, Y. J. (2007). “Vygotsky’s neglected legacy”: Cultural-historical activity theory. Review of educational research, 77 (2), 186-232.
[33]	Rouse, M. (2012). Extended Enterprise [Online]. Tech Target. Available: http://searchcio.techtarget.com/definition/Extended-enterprise [Accessed June 23 2014].
[34]	Spinuzzi, C. (2014). How Nonemployer Firms Stage-Manage Ad Hoc Collaboration: An Activity Theory Analysis. Technical Communication Quarterly, 23 (2), 88-114.
[35]	Spinuzzi, C. (2007). Guest editor's introduction: Technical communication in the age of distributed work. Technical Communication Quarterly, 16 (3), 265-277.
[36]	Spinuzzi, C. (2015). All edge: Inside the new workplace networks. University of Chicago Press.
[37]	Tracy, S. J., (2019). Qualitative research methods: Collecting evidence, crafting analysis, communicating impact. John Wiley & Sons.
[38]	Van Der Vegt, G. S., & Bunderson, J. S. (2005). Learning and performance in multidisciplinary teams: The importance of collective team identification. Academy of Management journal, 48 (3), 532-547.
[39]	Vakkayil, J. D. (2010) Activity Theory: A useful framework for analysing project-based organisation. Journal of decision makers, 35 (3), pp 1-18.
[40]	Wong, C. W., Lai, K. H., Cheng, T. C. E., & Lun, Y. V. (2015). The role of IT-enabled collaborative decision making in inter-organizational information integration to improve customer service performance. International Journal of Production Economics, 159, 56-65.
[41]	Yamagata-Lynch, L. C. (2010). Understanding cultural historical activity theory. In Activity systems analysis methods (pp. 13-26). Springer US.
[42]	Yang, T. M., & Maxwell, T. A. (2011). Information-sharing in public organizations: A literature review of interpersonal, intra-organizational and inter-organizational success factors. Government Information Quarterly, 28 (2), 164-175.

Cite This Article

Plain Text BibTeX RIS

APA Style

Paul Peter Bata, Norman Alistair, Allen David. (2022). Activity Theory as a Tool for Understanding Complexities in Extended Organizations. Science Journal of Business and Management, 10(1), 47-54. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.sjbm.20221001.17

Copy | Download

ACS Style

Paul Peter Bata; Norman Alistair; Allen David. Activity Theory as a Tool for Understanding Complexities in Extended Organizations. Sci. J. Bus. Manag. 2022, 10(1), 47-54. doi: 10.11648/j.sjbm.20221001.17

Copy | Download

AMA Style

Paul Peter Bata, Norman Alistair, Allen David. Activity Theory as a Tool for Understanding Complexities in Extended Organizations. Sci J Bus Manag. 2022;10(1):47-54. doi: 10.11648/j.sjbm.20221001.17

Copy | Download

@article{10.11648/j.sjbm.20221001.17,
  author = {Paul Peter Bata and Norman Alistair and Allen David},
  title = {Activity Theory as a Tool for Understanding Complexities in Extended Organizations},
  journal = {Science Journal of Business and Management},
  volume = {10},
  number = {1},
  pages = {47-54},
  doi = {10.11648/j.sjbm.20221001.17},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.sjbm.20221001.17},
  eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.sjbm.20221001.17},
  abstract = {The paper compares third generation activity theory (3GAT) and fourth-generation activity theory (4GAT) in extended organisations with multiple relationships that can be characterised as complex. The complexities are associated with the modern work environment with its complicated business processes and potentials for information sharing failures. 3GAT is a proven way of looking at multiple relationships in general but not sufficient in explaining the types of complexities associated with such complex and extended organisational settings possessing potential for lack of congruence of both physical and non-physical tools with which stakeholders engaged. Therefore, fourth generation activity theory was adopted in this study as a positive means of dealing with changes that support the new ways of working found in modern working environments which are increasingly concerned with shared objects. The types of complexities and extension in the setting drives contradictions which points to actual, or potential are as of failure, and in responding to these complexities (caused due to the lack of congruence in the different activity systems) knots form in a different way from the majority of other settings which have been researched. Understanding why the knots behaves in that way can be illuminated using 3GAT but does not necessarily resolve all the issues and nuances of the setting. Hence, 4GAT is seen as 1) a way of understanding the setting or problem issues. 2) understanding the needs and abilities of collaborating partners in understanding complexities and how to manage them and 3) understanding different elements that enhanced the achievement of relationship goals.},
 year = {2022}
}

Copy | Download

TY  - JOUR
T1  - Activity Theory as a Tool for Understanding Complexities in Extended Organizations
AU  - Paul Peter Bata
AU  - Norman Alistair
AU  - Allen David
Y1  - 2022/03/18
PY  - 2022
N1  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.sjbm.20221001.17
DO  - 10.11648/j.sjbm.20221001.17
T2  - Science Journal of Business and Management
JF  - Science Journal of Business and Management
JO  - Science Journal of Business and Management
SP  - 47
EP  - 54
PB  - Science Publishing Group
SN  - 2331-0634
UR  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.sjbm.20221001.17
AB  - The paper compares third generation activity theory (3GAT) and fourth-generation activity theory (4GAT) in extended organisations with multiple relationships that can be characterised as complex. The complexities are associated with the modern work environment with its complicated business processes and potentials for information sharing failures. 3GAT is a proven way of looking at multiple relationships in general but not sufficient in explaining the types of complexities associated with such complex and extended organisational settings possessing potential for lack of congruence of both physical and non-physical tools with which stakeholders engaged. Therefore, fourth generation activity theory was adopted in this study as a positive means of dealing with changes that support the new ways of working found in modern working environments which are increasingly concerned with shared objects. The types of complexities and extension in the setting drives contradictions which points to actual, or potential are as of failure, and in responding to these complexities (caused due to the lack of congruence in the different activity systems) knots form in a different way from the majority of other settings which have been researched. Understanding why the knots behaves in that way can be illuminated using 3GAT but does not necessarily resolve all the issues and nuances of the setting. Hence, 4GAT is seen as 1) a way of understanding the setting or problem issues. 2) understanding the needs and abilities of collaborating partners in understanding complexities and how to manage them and 3) understanding different elements that enhanced the achievement of relationship goals.
VL  - 10
IS  - 1
ER  -

Copy | Download

Author Information

Paul Peter Bata

Division of Management, Leeds University Business School, University of Leeds, Leeds, United Kingdom
Norman Alistair

Division of Management, Leeds University Business School, University of Leeds, Leeds, United Kingdom
Allen David

Division of Management, Leeds University Business School, University of Leeds, Leeds, United Kingdom

Download PDF

Sections

Plain Text BibTeX RIS

APA Style

Paul Peter Bata, Norman Alistair, Allen David. (2022). Activity Theory as a Tool for Understanding Complexities in Extended Organizations. Science Journal of Business and Management, 10(1), 47-54. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.sjbm.20221001.17

Copy | Download

ACS Style

Paul Peter Bata; Norman Alistair; Allen David. Activity Theory as a Tool for Understanding Complexities in Extended Organizations. Sci. J. Bus. Manag. 2022, 10(1), 47-54. doi: 10.11648/j.sjbm.20221001.17

Copy | Download

AMA Style

Paul Peter Bata, Norman Alistair, Allen David. Activity Theory as a Tool for Understanding Complexities in Extended Organizations. Sci J Bus Manag. 2022;10(1):47-54. doi: 10.11648/j.sjbm.20221001.17

Copy | Download

@article{10.11648/j.sjbm.20221001.17,
  author = {Paul Peter Bata and Norman Alistair and Allen David},
  title = {Activity Theory as a Tool for Understanding Complexities in Extended Organizations},
  journal = {Science Journal of Business and Management},
  volume = {10},
  number = {1},
  pages = {47-54},
  doi = {10.11648/j.sjbm.20221001.17},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.sjbm.20221001.17},
  eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.sjbm.20221001.17},
  abstract = {The paper compares third generation activity theory (3GAT) and fourth-generation activity theory (4GAT) in extended organisations with multiple relationships that can be characterised as complex. The complexities are associated with the modern work environment with its complicated business processes and potentials for information sharing failures. 3GAT is a proven way of looking at multiple relationships in general but not sufficient in explaining the types of complexities associated with such complex and extended organisational settings possessing potential for lack of congruence of both physical and non-physical tools with which stakeholders engaged. Therefore, fourth generation activity theory was adopted in this study as a positive means of dealing with changes that support the new ways of working found in modern working environments which are increasingly concerned with shared objects. The types of complexities and extension in the setting drives contradictions which points to actual, or potential are as of failure, and in responding to these complexities (caused due to the lack of congruence in the different activity systems) knots form in a different way from the majority of other settings which have been researched. Understanding why the knots behaves in that way can be illuminated using 3GAT but does not necessarily resolve all the issues and nuances of the setting. Hence, 4GAT is seen as 1) a way of understanding the setting or problem issues. 2) understanding the needs and abilities of collaborating partners in understanding complexities and how to manage them and 3) understanding different elements that enhanced the achievement of relationship goals.},
 year = {2022}
}

Copy | Download

TY  - JOUR
T1  - Activity Theory as a Tool for Understanding Complexities in Extended Organizations
AU  - Paul Peter Bata
AU  - Norman Alistair
AU  - Allen David
Y1  - 2022/03/18
PY  - 2022
N1  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.sjbm.20221001.17
DO  - 10.11648/j.sjbm.20221001.17
T2  - Science Journal of Business and Management
JF  - Science Journal of Business and Management
JO  - Science Journal of Business and Management
SP  - 47
EP  - 54
PB  - Science Publishing Group
SN  - 2331-0634
UR  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.sjbm.20221001.17
AB  - The paper compares third generation activity theory (3GAT) and fourth-generation activity theory (4GAT) in extended organisations with multiple relationships that can be characterised as complex. The complexities are associated with the modern work environment with its complicated business processes and potentials for information sharing failures. 3GAT is a proven way of looking at multiple relationships in general but not sufficient in explaining the types of complexities associated with such complex and extended organisational settings possessing potential for lack of congruence of both physical and non-physical tools with which stakeholders engaged. Therefore, fourth generation activity theory was adopted in this study as a positive means of dealing with changes that support the new ways of working found in modern working environments which are increasingly concerned with shared objects. The types of complexities and extension in the setting drives contradictions which points to actual, or potential are as of failure, and in responding to these complexities (caused due to the lack of congruence in the different activity systems) knots form in a different way from the majority of other settings which have been researched. Understanding why the knots behaves in that way can be illuminated using 3GAT but does not necessarily resolve all the issues and nuances of the setting. Hence, 4GAT is seen as 1) a way of understanding the setting or problem issues. 2) understanding the needs and abilities of collaborating partners in understanding complexities and how to manage them and 3) understanding different elements that enhanced the achievement of relationship goals.
VL  - 10
IS  - 1
ER  -

Copy | Download