This article explores the work-arounds through which an Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) software system is implemented within an Australian University. We argue that while resistance is significant, the process of working around a technology can have ambiguous effects in terms of how users—in this case academics—are governed and govern themselves. Drawing upon Andrew Barry’s Foucauldian-inspired work on ‘‘technological zones,’’ we show how attempts to work-around the ERP contributed to the creation of an alternative technological zone based on cultural discourses of academic freedom aimed at resisting the standardized programs of action inscribed within the university-wide ERP. However, we demonstrate also that these work-arounds resulted in a partial convergence with the university’s advanced liberal objectives of going online to become a globally competitive university. We conclude that more research needs to be conducted into the multiple and ambiguous effects of work-arounds in the practice of governing.
Akrich, Madeline.1992. The description of technical objects. In Shaping technology/building society: Studies in sociocultural change , ed. W. E. Bijker, and J. Law.Cambridge: The MIT Press .
2.
Barry, Andrew.2001. Political machines: Governing a technological society . New York: The Athlone Press .
3.
Berg, Marc.1997a. Of forms, containers, and the electronic medical record: Some tools for a sociology of the formal. Science, Technology & Human Values22 (4):403-33.
4.
---. 1997b. Rationalizing medical work: Decision-support techniques and medical practices. Cambridge: MIT Press.
5.
Bonaccorsi, Andrea, and Cristina Rossi.2004. Altruistic individuals, selfish firms? The structure of motivation in open source software. First Monday9 (1):1-9.
6.
Bowker, Geoffery C., and Susan Leigh Star .2002. Sorting things out: Classification and its consequences. In Inside technology, ed. W. E. Bijker, W. B. Carlson , and T. Pinch.Cambridge: The MIT Press.
7.
Burawoy, M.1998. The extended case method. Sociological Theory16 (1):4-33.
8.
Büscher, M., and P. Mogensen.1997. Mediating change: Translation and mediation in the context of bricolage. In Facilitating technology transfer through partnership: Learning from practice and research, ed. T. McMaster, E. Mumford, E. B. Swanson, B. Warboys , and D. Wastell.London: Chapman & Hall .
9.
Ciborra, C.1999. Notes on improvisation and time in organisations. Accounting , Management and Information Technologies9 (2):77-94.
10.
Cornford, James, and Neil Pollock.2003. Putting the university online: Information, technology and organisational change. Buckingham: SHRE and Open University Press.
11.
Davis, J.1998. Scooping up vanilla ERP: Off-the-shelf versus customised software. InfoWorld20 (47):1-4.
12.
Dean, Mitchell.1999. Governmentality: Power and rule in modern society . London/Thousand Oaks: Sage.
13.
Denzin, N.1989. Interpretive interactionism. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.
14.
Gasser, L.1986. The integration of computing and routine work. ACM Transactions on Office Information Systems4 (3):205-25.
15.
Green, J., and N. Thorogood.2004. Qualitative methods for health research . London: Sage.
16.
Hanseth, O., and K. Braa.2005. Technology as traitor: Emergent SAP infrastructure in a global organisation. Available from Working Paper at http://www.ifi.uio.no/oleha/Publications. Accessed December 20, 2008.
17.
Healy, Kieran, and A. Schussman.2004. The ecology of open-source software development. MIT Sloan2003 (Unpublished). Accessed December 20, 2008, from http://www.kieranhealy.org/files/drafts/oss-activity.pdf.
18.
Hodder, Ian.2000. The interpretation of documents and material culture . In Handbook of qualitative research, ed. N. K. Denzin and Y. S. Lincoln.Thousand Oaks/ London/New Delhi: SAGE Publications .
19.
Latour, Bruno.1991. Technology is society made durable. In A sociology of monsters: Essays on power, technology and domination , ed. J. Law.New York and London: Routledge .
20.
Lyotard, J.-F.1984. The postmodern condition: A report on knowledge . Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
21.
Marginson, Simon, and Mark Considine.2000. The enterprise university: Power, governance and reinvention in Australia. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
22.
Martland, David.2003. Building effective open source communities using software tools. Paper read at International Conference on Communities and Technologies, Amsterdam.
23.
McLaughlin, Janice, Paul Rosen, David Skinner, and Andrew Webster.1999. Valuing technology: Organisations, culture and change. In The management of technology and innovation , ed. D. Preece,. London and New York: Routledge .
24.
Minichiello, V., R. Aroni, E. Timewell, and L. Alexander.2000. In-depth interviewing. Sydney: Longman.
25.
Mol, Annemarie.1999. Ontological questions: A word and some questions . In Actor network theory and after, ed. J. Law and J. Hassard.Oxford: Blackwell and the Sociological Review.
26.
Oudshoorn, N., and T. Pinch, eds. 2003. How users matter: The co-construction of users and technologies. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
27.
Peters, Rob.2003. Open (source) application development: Open communities involved in E-service engineering. Paper read at International Conference on Communities and Technologies, Amsterdam.
28.
Pfaffenberger, Bryan.1992. Technological dramas. Science, Technology & Human Values17 (3):282-312.
29.
Pollock, Neil.2000. The virtual university as ‘‘timely and accurate information.’’ Information, Communication & Society3 (3):349-65.
30.
---. 2002. The informational view of the university. In Digital Academe. The new media and institutions of higher education and learning , ed. W. H. Dutton and B. D. Loader.London: Routledge.
31.
---. 2003. The ‘‘self-service’’ student: Building enterprise-wide systems into universities. Prometheus21 (1):101-19.
32.
---. 2005. When is a work-around? Conflict & negotiation in computer systems development. Science, Technology & Human Values30 (4):1-19.
33.
Pollock, Neil, Robin Williams, and Rob Proctor .2003. Fitting standard software packages to non-standard organizations: The ‘‘biography’’ of an enterprise-wide system. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management15 (3):317-32.
34.
Raymond, Eric S.1998. The cathedral and the bazaar. First Monday3 (3):1-24.
35.
---. 1998. Homesteading the noosphere. First Monday3 (10):1-28.
36.
Readings, Bill.1996. The university in ruins. Cambridge and London: Harvard University Press.
37.
Regis University.1999. Review of distance education and flexible learning: Foresight saga, a Green Paper prepared for the vice chancellor and president. Queensland , Australia: Regis University.
38.
---. 2003. RegisNews Weekly. Regis University , 266;1999 [cited 2003].
39.
Robins, Kevin, and Frank Webster.2002. The virtual university: Knowledge, markets and management. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
40.
Rose, Nikolas.1999. Powers of freedom: Reframing political thought . Cambridge/New York: Cambridge University Press.
41.
Saetnan, Ann R.1991. Rigid politics and technological flexibility: The anatomy of a failed hospital innovation. Science, Technology & Human Values16 (4):419-47.
42.
Scott, S., and E. Wagner.2003. Networks, negotiations, and new times: The implementation of enterprise resource planning into an academic administration . Information and Organization13 (4):285-313.
43.
Slaughter, Sheila, and L. Leslie.1997. Academic capitalism: Politics, policies, and the entrepreneurial university. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
44.
Vidich, Arthur J., and Stanford M. Lyman .2000. Qualitative methods: Their history in sociology and anthropolgy. In Handbook of qualitative research, ed. N. K. Denzin and Y. S. Lincoln.Thousand Oaks/ London/New Delhi: SAGE Publications .
45.
Wagner, E., and S. Newell.2004. ‘‘Best’’ for whom? The tension between ‘‘best practice’’ ERP packages and diverse epistemic cultures in a university context. Journal of Strategic Information Systems13 (4):305-28.
46.
Walsham, G.2001. Making a world of difference: IT in a global context . Chichester: Wiley.
47.
Webster, Frank.2002. Theories of the information society. 2nd ed. London and New York: Routledge.
48.
West, R.1998. Learning for life-final report, review of higher education financing and policy. Canberra: Department of Employment, Education, Training and Youth Affairs, Australian Government Publishing Services.
