Trading off between control and autonomy: a narrative review around de-design

References

• Aanestad, M. 2012. “What if Design is Something Else: The Challenges of Dealing with Interdependencies.” In Nordic Contributions in IS Research, 95–108. Berlin: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Aanestad, M., D. Henriksen, and J. Pors. 2004. “Systems Development in the Wild: User-led Exploration and Transformation of Organizing Visions.” In Information Systems Research. Vol. 143., edited by B. Kaplan, I. D. Truex, D. Wastell, A. T. Wood-Harper, and J. DeGross, 615–630. Boston, MA: Springer US.
   Google Scholar
• Akrich, M. 1992. “The De-scription of Technical Objects.” In Shaping Technology, Building Society, 205–224. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Alexander, C. 1964. Notes on the Synthesis of Form. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Antoncic, B., and R. D. Hisrich. 2003. “Clarifying the Intrapreneurship Concept.” Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development 10 (1): 7–24.
   Google Scholar
• Atkinson, P., J. Marshall, E. Unver, and L. Dean. 2012. I Did it My Way: User Engagement in Post Industrial Manufacturing. Available at: https://paulatkinsondesign.wordpress.com/category/post-industrial-manufacturing/
   Google Scholar
• Avgerou, C., G. F. Lanzara, and L. Willcocks. 2009. Bricolage, Care and Information: Claudio Ciborra’s Legacy in Information Systems Research. Basingstoke, England: Palgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Babb, J. S., J. Nørbjerg, D. J. Yates, and L. J. Waguespack. 2017. “The Empire Strikes Back: The End of Agile as We Know it?” The 40th Information Systems Research Conference in Scandinavia, IRIS 2017, 8 vols., 44–59.
   Google Scholar
• Barad, K. 2003. “Posthumanist Performativity: Toward an Understanding of How Matter Comes to Matter.” Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society 28 (3): 801–831. doi:10.1086/345321.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baskerville, R., J. Pries-Heje, and J. Venable. 2009. “Soft Design Science Methodology.” Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Design Science Research in Information Systems and Technology, 9:1–9:11, ACM, New York, NY, USA.
   Google Scholar
• Baumer, E. P. S., and M. S. Silberman. 2011. “When the Implication is Not to Design (Technology).” CHI’11: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 2271–2274, ACM, New York, NY, USA.
   Google Scholar
• Beck, K., M. Beedle, A. Van Bennekum, A. Cockburn, W. Cunningham, M. Fowler, and J. Kern. 2001. Manifesto for Agile Software Development.
   Google Scholar
• Bednar, P. M., and C. Welch. 2012. “Critical Systemic Thinking as a Foundation for Information Systems Research Practice.” Journal of Information, Communication and Ethics in Society 10 (3): 144–155.
   Google Scholar
• Beniger, J. R. 1986. The Control Revolution: Technological and Economic Origins of the Information Society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bødker, K., F. Kensing, and J. Simonsen. 2004. Participatory IT Design: Designing for Business and Workplace Realities. Cambridge, MA, USA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Boehner, K., S. David, J. Kaye, and P. Sengers. 2005. “Critical Technical Practice as a Methodology for Values in Design.” CHI 2005 Workshop on quality, values, and choices, 2–7, April.
   Google Scholar
• Boell, S., and D. Cecez-Kecmanov. 2012. “Conceptualizing Information Systems: from ‘Input-Processing-Output’ Devices to Sociomaterial Apparatuses.” ECIS 2012 Proceedings. http://aisel.aisnet.org/ecis2012/20.
   Google Scholar
• Boisseau, É, J. F. Omhover, and C. Bouchard. 2018. “Open-design: A State of the Art Review.” Design Science 4: 1–44. doi:10.1017/dsj.2017.25.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brandes, U., S. Stich, and M. Wender. 2009. Design by Use. Basel: Birkhäuser.
   Google Scholar
• Buchanan, R. 1992. “Wicked Problems in Design Thinking.” Design Issues 8: 5–21.
   Google Scholar
• Buescher, M., S. Gill, P. Mogensen, and D. Shapiro. 2001. “Landscapes of Practice: Bricolage as a Method for Situated Design.” Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW) 10 (1): 1–28. doi:10.1023/A:1011293210539.
   Google Scholar
• Burford, G. 2015. “Collaborative Research for Sustainability: An Inside-out Design Manifesto.” CASIC Working Paper Series.
   Google Scholar
• Cabitza, F. 2011. “‘Remain Faithful to the Earth!’: Reporting Experiences of Artifact-Centered Design in Healthcare.” Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW) 20 (4): 231–263. doi:10.1007/s10606-011-9143-1.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cabitza, F., G. Ellingsen, A. Locoro, and C. Simone. 2019. “Repetita Iuvant: Exploring and Supporting Redundancy in Hospital Practices.” Computer Supported Cooperative Work 28 (1–2): 61–94.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cabitza, F., D. Fogli, and A. Piccinno. 2014. “‘Each to His Own’: Distinguishing Tasks, Roles and Artifacts in EUD Practices.” In Smart Organizations and Smart Artifacts - Fostering Interaction Between People, Technologies and Processes, edited by L. Caporarello, B. Di Martino, and M. Martinez, 7 vols., 193–206. Berlin Heidelberg: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Cabitza, F., A. Locoro, and A. Ravarini. 2019. “Reporting Some Marginal Discourses to Root a De-Design Approach in is Development.” In Exploring Digital Ecosystems, Lecture Notes in Information Systems and Organisation 33, edited by A. Lazazzara, F. Ricciardi, and S. Za, 424. Switzerland: Springer Nature.
   Google Scholar
• Cabitza, F., and C. Simone. 2012. “Affording Mechanisms: An Integrated View of Coordination and Knowledge Management.” Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW) 21 (2): 227–260. doi:10.1007/s10606-011-9153-z.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cabitza, F., and C. Simone. 2013. “‘Drops Hollowing the Stone’. Workarounds as Resources for Better Task-artifact Fit.” In ECSCW 2013: Proceedings of the 13th European Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work, Paphos, Cyprus, September 21–25, edited by L. Ciolfi, M. A. Grasso, and O. W. Bertelsen, 103–122. Springer Berlin, D.
   Google Scholar
• Cabitza, F., and C. Simone. 2014. “‘Through the Glassy Box’: Supporting Appropriation in User Communities.” In COOP 2014: Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on the Design of Cooperative Systems, edited by L. Ciolfi and D. Martin, forthcoming. Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Cabitza, F., and C. Simone. 2015. “Building Socially Embedded Technologies: Implications About Design.” In Designing Socially Embedded Technologies in the Real-World, edited by V. Wulf, K. Schmidt, and D. Randall, 217–270. Berlin: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Cabitza, F., C. Simone, and C. Storni. 2016. “Seams and Sutures in IT Artifacts: Sewing Up the Socio and the Technical Together.” International Journal of Systems and Society (IJSS) 3 (1): 18–31.
   Google Scholar
• Carlsson, S. A., S. Henningsson, S. Hrastinski, and C. Keller. 2011. “Socio-technical IS Design Science Research: Developing Design Theory for IS Integration Management.” Information Systems and E-Business Management 9 (1): 109–131. doi:10.1007/s10257-010-0140-6.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carroll, J. 2004. “Completing Design in Use: Closing the Appropriation Cycle.” In European Conference on Information Systems, paper 44, Association for Information Systems.
   Google Scholar
• Carroll, J. M., W. A. Kellogg, and M. B. Rosson. 1991. “The Task-Artifact Cycle.” In Designing Interaction: Psychology at the Human-Computer Interface, edited by J. M. Carroll, 74–102. New York, NY, USA: Cambridge University Press. http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=120352.120358.
   Google Scholar
• Cecez-Kecmanovic, D., R. D. Galliers, O. Henfridsson, S. Newell, and R. Vidgen. 2014. “The Sociomateriality of Information Systems: Current Status, Future Directions.” Mis Quarterly 38 (3): 809–830.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ceschin, F., and I. Gaziulusoy. 2016. “Evolution of Design for Sustainability: From Product Design to Design for System Innovations and Transitions.” Design Studies 47: 118–163.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Checkland, P. 1999. “Systems Thinking.” Rethinking Management Information Systems 1: 45–56.
   Google Scholar
• Ciborra, C. U. 1992. “From Thinking to Tinkering: The Grassroots of Strategic Information Systems.” The Information Society 8 (4): 297–309.
   Google Scholar
• Ciborra, C. U., K. Braa, A. Cordella, B. Dahlbom, A. Failla, and O. Hanseth. 2000. From Control to Drift: The Dynamics of Corporate Information Infrastructures. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Clegg, C. W. 2000. “Sociotechnical Principles for System Design.” Applied Ergonomics 31 (5): 463–477.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cornford, T., W. Venters, and Y. Zheng. 2007. “Agility, Improvisation, or Enacted Emergence.” ICIS 2007 Proceedings 8 vols, 1–16.
   Google Scholar
• Cross, N. 2007. “From a Design Science to a Design Discipline: Understanding Designerly Ways of Knowing and Thinking.” Design Research Now 3: 41–54.
   Google Scholar
• Cruickshank, L., and P. Atkinson. 2014. “Closing in on Open Design.” The Design Journal 17 (3): 361–377.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• de Jong, A., E. Önnevall, L. Reitsma, and S. Wessmann, 2016. “Challenging the Role of Design (ing) in the Sustainability Field: Towards a'Humble'Design Approach.” Proceedings of the 9th Nordic Conference on Human-Computer Interaction, 131, October, ACM.
   Google Scholar
• DesAutels, P. 2011. “UGIS: Understanding the Nature of User-generated Information Systems.” Business Horizons 54 (3): 185–192.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Diethelm, J. 2016. “De-colonizing Design Thinking.” She Ji: The Journal of Design, Economics, and Innovation 2 (2): 166–172.
   Google Scholar
• DiSalvo, C. 2012. Adversarial Design as Inquiry and Practice. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Dix, A. 2007. “Designing for Appropriation.” In Proceedings of the 21st British HCI Group Annual Conference on People and Computers: HCI … but not as We Know it, 27–30, British Computer Society, Swinton, UK. dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1531407.1531415.
   Google Scholar
• Dourish, P. 2004. “What We Talk About When We Talk About Context.” Personal and Ubiquitous Computing 8 (1): 19–30.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dourish, P. 2018. “The Allure and the Paucity of Design: Cultures of Design and Design in Culture.” Human–Computer Interaction 34: 1–21.
   Google Scholar
• Dunne, A., and F. Raby. 2013. Speculative Everything: Design, Fiction, and Social Dreaming. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Dwivedi, Y. K., D. Wastell, S. Laumer, H. Z. Henriksen, M. D. Myers, D. Bunker, and S. C. Srivastava. 2015. “Research on Information Systems Failures and Successes: Status Update and Future Directions.” Information Systems Frontiers 17 (1): 143–157.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eckert, J. 2017. “The Agile Artifact – an Antifragile Approach to Design and Innovation.” Universal Journal of Management 5 (5): 236–242.
   Google Scholar
• Evenson, N. 1969. Le Corbusier: The Machine and the Grand Design. Hawthorne, CA: Studio Vista.
   Google Scholar
• Fallman, D. 2007. “Why Research-oriented Design Isn’t Design-oriented Research: On the Tensions between Design and Research in an Implicit Design Discipline.” Knowledge, Technology & Policy 20 (3): 193–200. doi: 10.1007/s12130-007-9022-8
   Google Scholar
• Fischer, G. 2003. “Meta—Design: Beyond User-centered and Participatory Design.” Human-Computer Interaction: Theory and Practice 1: 88–104.
   Google Scholar
• Fischer, G., E. Giaccardi, Y. Ye, A. G. Sutcliffe, and N. Mehandjiev. 2004. “Meta-design: A Manifesto for End-user Development.” Communications of the ACM 47 (9): 33–37. doi:10.1145/1015864.1015884.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fischer, Gerhard, and T. Herrmann. 2011. “Socio-technical Systems: A Meta-design Perspective.” International Journal of Sociotechnology and Knowledge Development 3 (1): 1–33.
   Google Scholar
• Floyd, C. 1993. “Outline of a Paradigm Change in Software Engineering.” In Program Verification. Studies in Cognitive Systems. Vol. 14., edited by T. R. Colburn, J. H. Fetzer, and T. L Rankin, 239–259. Berlin: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Floyd, C. 2005. “Being Critical in, on or Around Computing?” Proceedings of the 4th Decennial Aarhus Conference, 207–211, ACM.
   Google Scholar
• Friedman, B., and D. Yoo. 2017. “Pause: A Multi-lifespan Design Mechanism.” Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 460–464, May, ACM.
   Google Scholar
• Fry, T. 2003. “Elimination by Design.” Design Philosophy Papers 3 (2): 145–147.
   Google Scholar
• Fry, T. 2009. Design Futuring: Sustainability. Ethics and New Practice. Oxford: Berg.
   Google Scholar
• Garud, R., S. Jain, and P. Tuertscher. 2009. “Incomplete by Design and Designing for Incompleteness.” In Design Requirements Engineering: A Ten-Year Perspective, 137–156. Berlin: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Gaver, W. W., J. Beaver, and S. Benford. 2003. “Ambiguity as a Resource for Design.” Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems, 233–240, ACM.
   Google Scholar
• Green, D., and D. Kirk. 2018. “Open Design, Inclusivity and the Intersections of Making.” Proceedings of the 2018 Designing Interactive Systems Conference, 173–186, June, ACM.
   Google Scholar
• Haigh, T. 2001. “Inventing Information Systems: The Systems Men and the Computer, 1950-1968.” Business History Review 75 (01): 15–61. doi:10.2307/3116556.
   Google Scholar
• Haigh, T. 2010. Crisis What Crisis? Reconsidering the Software Crisis of the 1960s and the Origins of Software Engineering. Milwaukee, USA: School of Information Studies, University of Wisconsin.
   Google Scholar
• Hallnäs, L., and J. Redström. 2001. “Slow Technology – Designing for Reflection.” Personal and Ubiquitous Computing 5 (3): 201–212.
   Google Scholar
• Harrison, M. I., R. Koppel, and S. Bar-Lev. 2007. “Unintended Consequences of Information Technologies in Health Care - An Interactive Sociotechnical Analysis.” Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association 14 (5): 542–549.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Henderson, A., and M. Kyng. 1991. “There’s No Place Like Home: Continuing Design in Use.” In Design at Work: Cooperative Design of Computer Systems, 219–240. Hillsdale, NJ, USA: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
   Google Scholar
• Hevner, A. R., S. T. March, J. Park, and S. Ram. 2004. “Design Science in Information Systems Research.” MIS Quarterly 28 (1): 75–105.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hirschheim, R., and M. Newman. 1991. “Symbolism and Information Systems Development: Myth, Metaphor and Magic.” Information Systems Research 2 (1): 29–62.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hollan, J., E. Hutchins, and D. Kirsh. 2000. “Distributed Cognition: Toward a New Foundation for Human-computer Interaction Research.” ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction 7 (2): 174–196.
   Google Scholar
• Introna, L. D., and E. A. Whitley. 1997. “Against Method-ism: Exploring the Limits of Method.” Information Technology & People 10 (1): 31–45.
   Google Scholar
• Jahnke, M. 2012. “Revisiting Design as a Hermeneutic Practice: An Investigation of Paul Ricoeur's Critical Hermeneutics.” Design Issues 28 (2): 30–40.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jasanoff, S. 2007. “Technologies of Humility.” Nature 450 (7166): 33–33.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Johansson-Sköldberg, U., J. Woodilla, and M. Çetinkaya. 2013. “Design Thinking: Past, Present and Possible Futures.” Creativity and Innovation Management 22 (2): 121–146.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kallinikos, J., A. Aaltonen, and A. Marton. 2013. “The Ambivalent Ontology of Digital Artifacts.” Mis Quarterly 37 (2): 357–370.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kappelman, L. A., R. McKeeman, and L. Zhang. 2006. “Early Warning Signs of it Project Failure: The Dominant Dozen.” Information Systems Management 23 (4): 31–36.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kensing, F., and J. Blomberg. 1998. “Participatory Design: Issues and Concerns.” Computer Supported Cooperative Work 7: 167–185.
   Google Scholar
• Kim, H., and W. Lee. 2014. “Everyday Design as a Design Resource.” International Journal of Design 8 (1): 1–13.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Klesel, M., K. Lemmer, U. Bretschneider, and B. Niehaves. 2017. “Transgressive Use of Technology.” aisel.aisnet.org.
   Google Scholar
• Knorr-Cetina, K. 1999. Epistemic Cultures: How the Sciences Make Knowledge. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kocaballi, A. B., and C. Núñez-Pacheco. 2018. Rethinking Context-aware Computing to Support Reflective Engagement Proceedings of British HCI 2018. Belfast, UK: BCS Learning and Development Ltd.
   Google Scholar
• Köffer, S., K. Ortbach, I. Junglas, B. Niehaves, and J. Harris. 2015. “Innovation Through BYOD?” Business & Information Systems Engineering 57 (6): 363–375.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kristoffersen, S. 2007. “Designing a Program. Programming the Design’.” ECIS 2007: Proceedings of the Fifteenth European Conference on Information Systems, St. Gallen, Switzerland, 901–912.
   Google Scholar
• Lakew, N., and A. Aryal. 2015. “Secondary Design-as a Supplementary Knowledge Base for HCI Design.” 21st Americas Conference on Information Systems, AMCIS.
   Google Scholar
• Leclerq, A., A. Carugati, A. Giangreco, J. V. da Cunha, and T. B. Jensen. 2009. “A Sociomaterial View of the Scaffolding of Work Practices with Information Technology.” ICIS 2009 Proceedings, 197 vols, 1–13.
   Google Scholar
• Lee, J. S. 2017. “Processless Design Extended.” International Conference of Design, User Experience, and Usability, 89–99, July, Springer, Cham.
   Google Scholar
• Lee, J.-S., S. Branham, D. Tatar, and S. Harrison. 2012. “Processlessness: Staying Open to Interactional Possibilities.” DIS’12: Proceedings of the Designing Interactive Systems Conference, 78–81, ACM.
   Google Scholar
• Leonardi, P. M. 2012. “Materiality, Sociomateriality, and Socio-technical Systems: What Do These Terms Mean? How are They Related? Do We Need Them?” In Materiality and Organizing: Social Interaction in a Technological World, edited by P. M. Leonardi, B. A. Nardi, and J. Kallinikos, 25–48. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Levi-Strauss, C. 1966. The Savage Mind. Nature of Human Society. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Lieberman, H., F. Paternò, and V. Wulf. 2006. “End User Development: an Emerging Paradigm.” In End User Development, edited by H. Lieberman, F. Paternò, and V. Wulf. Heidelberg: Springer Netherlands.
   Google Scholar
• Lyotard, J.-F. 1986. The Postmodern Condition: A Report on Knowledge. Manchester, UK: Manchester University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Mazé, R., and J. Redström. 2007. “Difficult Forms: Critical Practices of Design and Research.” IASDR 2007: Proceedings of the International Association of societies of design research, Hong Kong, 1–18, November 12.
   Google Scholar
• Mingers, J., A. Mutch, and L. Willcocks. 2013. “Critical Realism in Information Systems Research.” MIS Quarterly 37 (3): 795–802.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mørch, A. I. 2003. “Evolutionary Growth and Control in User Tailorable Systems.” In Adaptive Evolutionary Information Systems, 30–58. Hershey, PA: Idea Group Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Morgan, G. 1997. Images of Organization. London: SAGE Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Mumford, E. 2006. “The Story of Socio-technical Design: Reflections on its Successes, Failures and Potential.” Information Systems Journal 16 (4): 317–342.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nascimento, S. 2014. “Critical Notions of Technology and the Promises of Empowerment in Shared Machine Shops.” Journal of Peer Production 5: 1–4.
   Google Scholar
• Obradovich, J. H., and D. D. Woods. 1996. “Users as Designers: How People Cope with Poor HCI Design in Computer-based Medical Devices.” Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 38 (4): 574–592.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Orlikowski, W. J. 2006. “Material Knowing: The Scaffolding of Human Knowledgeability.” European Journal of Information Systems 15 (5): 460–466.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Orlikowski, W. J., and S. V. Scott. 2008. “10 Sociomateriality: Challenging the Separation of Technology, Work and Organization.” The Academy of Management Annals 2 (1): 433–474.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Oudshoorn, N., and T. Pinch. 2008. “User-technology Relationships: Some Recent Developments.” In The Handbook of Science and Technology Studies, edited by O. Amsterdamska, 543–565. Cambridge, MA, USA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Pankratz, O., and D. Basten. 2013. “Eliminating Failure by Learning from It – Systematic Review of IS Project Failure.” ICIS 2013: Proceedings of the 34th International Conference on Information Systems (ICIS) Reshaping Society Through Information Systems Design, 20, Association for Information Systems, December 15–18.
   Google Scholar
• Parsons, J., and Y. Wand. 2000. “Emancipating Instances from the Tyranny of Classes in Information Modeling.” ACM Transactions on Database Systems 25 (2): 228–268. doi:10.1145/357775.357778.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pasquale, F. 2015. The Black Box Society: The Secret Algorithms That Control Money and Information. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Pierce, J. 2012. “Undesigning Technology: Considering the Negation of Design by Design.” CHI’12: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 957–966, ACM, New York, NY, USA.
   Google Scholar
• Pierce, J. 2014. “Undesigning Interaction.” Interactions 21 (4): 36–39.
   Google Scholar
• Pierce, James. 2015. “Working by Not Quite Working: Resistance as a Technique for Alternative and Oppositional Design.” PhD diss, Carnegie Mellon University. http://reports-archive.adm.cs.cmu.edu/anon/hcii/CMU-HCII-15-109.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Pierce, J., and E. Paulos. 2014. “Counterfunctional Things: Exploring Possibilities in Designing Digital Limitations.” Proceedings of the 2014 conference on Designing interactive systems, 375–384, ACM, June.
   Google Scholar
• Reedy, P. 2014. “Impossible Organisations: Anarchism and Organisational Praxis.” Ephemera: Theory & Politics in Organization 14 (4): 639–658.
   Google Scholar
• Richardson, M. 2016. “Pre-hacked: Open Design and the Democratisation of Product Development.” New Media & Society 18 (4): 653–666.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rittel, H. W. J., and M. M. Webber. 1973. “Dilemmas in a General Theory of Planning.” Policy Sciences 4: 155–169. https://doi-org.proxy.unimib.it/10.1007/BF01405730.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Robey, D., and M. L. Markus. 1984. “Rituals in Information System Design.” MIS Quarterly 8 (1): 5–15.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Robinson, Mike. 1993. “Design for Unanticipated Use … ” In Third European Conference on Computer- Supported Cooperative Work, 187–202. Milano, Italy: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
   Google Scholar
• Robinson, M., and L. Bannon. 1991. “Questioning Representations.” ECSCW’91: Proceedings of the Second European Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
   Google Scholar
• Sambasivan, N., L. Ventä, J. Mäntyjärvi, M. Isomursu, and J. Häkkilä. 2009. “Rhythms of Non-use of Device Ensembles.” CHI ‘09 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 4531–4536, ACM, New York, NY, USA.
   Google Scholar
• Satchell, C., and P. Dourish. 2009. “Beyond the User: Use and Non-use in HCI.” Proceedings of the 21st Annual Conference of the Australian Computer-Human Interaction Special Interest Group: Design: Open 24/7, 9–16, ACM.
   Google Scholar
• Schmidt, F. A. 2015. “The Design of Creative Crowdwork–From Tools for Empowerment to Platform Capitalism.” Doctoral dissertation, Royal College of Art.
   Google Scholar
• Schön, D. 1983. The Reflective Practitioner: How Practitioners Think in Action. London: Temple Smith.
   Google Scholar
• Scupelli, P. 2015. “Designed Transitions and What Kind of Design is Transition Design?” Design Philosophy Papers 13 (1): 75–84.
   Google Scholar
• Sengers, P., and B. Gaver. 2006. “Staying Open to Interpretation: Engaging Multiple Meanings in Design and Evaluation.” Proceedings of the 6th conference on Designing Interactive systems, 99–108, ACM.
   Google Scholar
• Seok, J. M., J. B. Woo, and Y. K. Lim. 2014. “Non-finito Products: A New Design Space of User Creativity for Personal User Experience.” Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 693–702, ACM, April.
   Google Scholar
• Sheehan, N. W. 2011. “Indigenous Knowledge and Respectful Design: An Evidence-based Approach.” Design Issues 27 (4): 68–80.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Silver, M. S., and M. L. Markus. 2013. “Conceptualizing the SocioTechnical (ST) Artifact.” Systems, Signs & Actions 7 (1): 82–89.
   Google Scholar
• Simon, H. A. 1981. The Sciences of the Artificial. Cambridge, USA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Spicer, A., M. Alvesson, and D. Karreman. 2009. “Critical Performativity: The Unfinished Business of Critical Management Studies.” Human Relations 62 (4): 537–560. doi:10.1177/0018726708101984.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stewart, J., and R. Williams. 2005. “10 The Wrong Trousers? Beyond the Design Fallacy: Social Learning and the User.” Handbook of Critical Information Systems Research, 195.
   Google Scholar
• Storni, C. 2014. “The Problem of De-sign as Conjuring: Empowerment-in-use and the Politics of Seams.” Proceedings of the Participatory Design Conference, ACM.
   Google Scholar
• Suchman, L. 2007. Human-machine Reconfigurations: Plans and Situated Actions. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Surowiecki, J. 2005. The Wisdom of Crowds: Why the Many are Smarter Than the Few. London: Abacus.
   Google Scholar
• Tatar, D. 2007. “The Design Tensions Framework.” Human Computer Interaction 22 (4): 413–451.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tatar, D. 2014. “Reflecting our Better Nature.” Interactions 21 (3): 46–49.
   Google Scholar
• Telier, A. 2011. Design Things. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press. Edited by K. Friedman and E. Stolterman.
   Google Scholar
• Tonkinwise, C. 2017. “Post-Normal Design Research: The Role of Practice-based Research in the Era of Neoliberal Risk.” Practice-based Design Research, 29.
   Google Scholar
• Trist, E. 1981. “The Evolution of Socio-technical Systems - A Conceptual Framework and an Action Research Program.” Occasional Paper 2: 1–67.
   Google Scholar
• Truex, D., R. Baskerville, and J. Travis. 2000. “Amethodical Systems Development: The Deferred Meaning of Systems Development Methods.” Accounting, Management and Information Technologies 10 (1): 53–79.
   Google Scholar
• van Abel, B., L. Evers, P. Troxler, and R. Klaassen. 2014. Open Design Now: Why Design Cannot Remain Exclusive. Amsterdam: BIS Publishers.
   Google Scholar
• Vardouli, T. 2015. “Making Use: Attitudes to Human-artifact Engagements.” Design Studies 41: 137–161.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wagenknecht, S. 2017. “Beyond Non-/use: The Affected Bystander and Her Escalation.” New Media & Society 20: 2235–2251.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wakkary, R., A. Desjardins, and S. Hauser. 2016. “Unselfconscious Interaction: A Conceptual Construct.” Interacting with Computers 28 (4): 501–520.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Walsh, K., and W. Kieron. 1995. Public Services and Market Mechanisms: Competition, Contracting and the New Public Management. Basingstoke: Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Wernick, P. 1998. “Feyerabend and Information Systems Development: Against Methods.” The Systemist 20: 1–3.
   Google Scholar
• Whitney, D. E. 1990. “Designing the Design Process.” Research in Engineering Design 2 (1): 3–13.
   Google Scholar