Working with the “smart” machine: computerization and the discourse of anthropomorphism in organizations^∗

^∗An earlier version of this paper was presented at the 11th International Meetings of SCOS (The Standing Conference on Organizational Symbolism), Calgary, July 1994. This research was made possible in part by a grant from the Alberta Energy Corporation in January 1994.

Abstract

Computers are routinely anthropomorphized in contemporary societies. Yet, few studies seriously examine the personification of computers at the workplace. This paper focuses on the discourse of anthropomorphism and work computerization. Based on the findings of an ethnographic study that looked at the computerization of administrative processes in a Health Maintenance Organization, the paper demonstrates how the discourse of anthropomorphism simultaneously reflects attitudes towards the computer, and structures relationships with the technology in the workplace. Three themes emerged within the discourse of anthropomorphism in the organization. They were (1) the intelligent & cerebral computer, (2) the human computer, and (3) the computer as superior life form. These themes also performed certain ideological functions by glamorizing the computer and thereby legitimizing it in the organization. At the same time, employees discursively resisted the ideology of the ‘smart’ machine by interpreting it in ways that were contrary to managerial expectations. Overall, the paper presents a complex picture of human-machine relationships revolving around the personification of computers at the workplace.

^∗An earlier version of this paper was presented at the 11th International Meetings of SCOS (The Standing Conference on Organizational Symbolism), Calgary, July 1994. This research was made possible in part by a grant from the Alberta Energy Corporation in January 1994.

^∗An earlier version of this paper was presented at the 11th International Meetings of SCOS (The Standing Conference on Organizational Symbolism), Calgary, July 1994. This research was made possible in part by a grant from the Alberta Energy Corporation in January 1994.

Notes

^∗An earlier version of this paper was presented at the 11th International Meetings of SCOS (The Standing Conference on Organizational Symbolism), Calgary, July 1994. This research was made possible in part by a grant from the Alberta Energy Corporation in January 1994.