Transparency is a term common to distributed computing, communications studies and other fields that information science draws upon. Its everyday uses and connotations are carried over into these domains, coalescing around some common issues relevant to knowledge management. Transparency is also a common term in political theory and practice and one that has been associated with teledemocracy: the application of information and communication technologies (ICTs) to support democratic processes. For example, ‘greater transparency’ is commonly used to justify the use of ICT by governments to consult with the governed; the topic of the work in progress reported here.
Transparency is an abstract benefit, perhaps more so than ‘knowledge management’ itself. It promises gain for all, but risks being lost between expectations first raised by political and managerial ‘spin’ and then deflated by the same corporate forgetting what it is meant to address. The paper explores some of this dangerous territory, reflecting on how everyday notions of ‘transparency’ relate to two current issues in knowledge management and social informatics: firstly, the design of systems to promote shared awareness of activity and identity; secondly, the study of ICTs to illuminate the invisibility of the ‘social infrastructure’ that they depend upon.
The paper briefly reviews uses of the term ‘transparency’, drawing on literature from the fields mentioned above. The aim is to delineate dimensions of transparency that may help designers, policy makers or citizens to evaluate what can or should be made transparent in the interplay between technology and due political process. Ethnographic methods were used to document outcomes of an ‘electronic consultation’ project that contributed to a Government consultation of eleven to eighteen year olds in Scotland. A website ‘econsultant’ was developed and its usage monitored online and offline, including in events leading up to a ‘Scottish Youth Summit’. Using brief extracts from field notes, the website itself and audio and video transcripts of the site in use, the paper will show how those participating in the consultation collaboratively shared and managed awareness of their activities and identities. Reflecting on what was made visible through the e-consultant site, and wha was hidden by it, the realised and potential ‘transparencyenhancing’ effects of this and similar prototypes will be discussed. The discussion focuses on the roles of intermediaries and social infrastructure in the project, illustrating the trade-offs between transparently simple design and transparency of information in the collaboration between consultants(those doing the consulting) and consultees (those consulted). Finally, indications are given of the direction the authors’ ongoing research.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
[1] D. Curtin , Transparency and political participation in EU governance: a role for civil society?Cultural Values3 (1999) 445-471 .
2.
[2] Y. Rogers , Reconfiguring the social scientist: shifting from telling designers what to do to getting more involved. In: G.C. Bowker , S.L. Star , W. Turner and L. Gasser (eds), Social Science, Technical Systems, and Cooperative Work ( Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, London , 1997).
3.
[3] D. Shapiro , The limits of ethnography: combining social sciences for CSCW . In: Proceedings of CSCW ‘94, Chapel Hill, NC, October 1994 (ACM Press, New York, 1994), pp. 417-428 .
4.
[4] L. Suchman and R. Trigg , Understanding practice: video as a medium for reflection and design. In: J. Greenbaum and M. Kyng (eds), Design at Work: Cooperative Design of Computer Systems ( Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hove , 1991).
5.
[5] C. Hine , Virtual Ethnography ( Sage, London , 2000).
6.
[6] D. Mackenzie and J. Wajcman (eds), The Social Shaping of Technology ( Open University Press, Milton Keynes , 1985).
7.
[7] R. Kling , Organizational analysis in computer science , The Information Society9 (1993) 71-87 .
8.
[8] J. Hughes , V. King , T. Todden and H. Andersen , Moving out from the control room: ethnography in system design . In: Proceedings of CSCW ‘94, Chapel Hill, NC, October 1994 (ACM Press, New York, 1994), pp. 429-439 .
9.
[9] P. Checkland and J. Scholes , Soft Systems Methodology in Action ( Wiley, Chichester , 1990).
10.
[10] A. Whyte , Serving up social research as soft systems methodology . In: K. Buckner (ed.), Esprit i3 Workshop on Ethnographic Studies in Real and Virtual Environments: Inhabited Information Spaces and Connected Communities, Edinburgh, 24-26 January 1999, Department of Information Management, Queen Margaret University College.
11.
[11] G. Bader and J.M. Nyce , Theory and practice in the development community: is there room for cultural analysis?ACM Journal of Computer Documentation (1998).
12.
[12] A. Whyte , E. Laurier and K. Buckner , Living Memory Methodological Archive (LiMe Esprit 25621 D2.4). Available at: http://lime.qmuc.ac.uk/metharch/
13.
[13] R.J. Anderson , Work, ethnography and systems design , Encyclopaedia of Micro Computing20 (1997) 159-183 .
14.
[14] R.H.R. Harper , The Fund Within: An Ethnography of Documents, Technology and Organisational Action ( Academic Press, London , 1998).
15.
[15] Report of the Consultative Steering Group on the Scottish Parliament ( HMSO, Edinburgh , 1999). Available at: http://www.scottish-devolution.org.uk
16.
[16] C. Bryan , R. Tsagarousianou and D. Tambini , Electronic democracy and civic networking movement in context. In: R. Tsagarousianou , D. Tambini and C. Bryan (eds), Cyberdemocracy: Technology, Cities and Civic Networks ( Routledge, London , 1998).
17.
[17] R.E. Sclove , Democracy and Technology ( Guildford Press, New York , 1995).
18.
[18] B. Barber , Strong Democracy: Participatory Politics for a New Age ( University of California Press, Berkeley, CA , 1984).
19.
[19] S. Arnstein , A ladder of citizen participation , Journal of the American Institute of Planners35 (1969) 216-224 .
20.
[20] O. Nixon and H. Johansson , Transparency through technology: the Internet and political parties. In: B. Hague and B. Loader (eds), Digital Democracy: Discourse and Decision Making in the Information Age ( Routledge, London , 1999).
21.
[21] S. Coleman , Cutting out the middleman: from virtual representation to direct deliberation. In: B. Hague and B. Loader (eds), Digital Democracy: Discourse and Decision Making in the Information Age ( Routledge, London , 1999).
22.
[22] S. Coleman , E-democracy: A Hansard Society Lecture given by Alex Allan [transcript of lecture given 22 May 2000] ( Hansard Society, London , 2000).
23.
[23] E. Goffman , Behaviour in Public Places: Notes on the Social Organisation of Gatherings ( Free Press, New York , 1963).
24.
[24] R. Orfali , D. Harkey and J. Edwards , Client/Server computing , Byte (April 1995) 108-122 .
25.
[25] T. Rodden and G. Blair , CSCW and distributed systems: the problem of control . In: L. Bannon , M. Robinson and K. Schmidt (eds), Proceedings of the Second European Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work: ECSCW ’91 (Kluwer, London, 1991).
26.
[26] Z. Bankowski , Transparency and the particular , Cultural Values4 (1999) 427-444 .
27.
[27] E. Wenger , Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning, and Identity ( Cambridge University Press , 1998).
28.
[28] S.L. Star and K. Ruhleder , Steps toward and ecology of infrastructure: design and access for large information spaces , Information Systems Research7 (1996) 111-134 .
29.
[29] Scottish Executive , Making It Work Together: A Programme For Government (1999). Available at: http://www.scotland.gov.uk/library2/doc03/miwt-00.htm
30.
[30] The Scottish Youth Summit application of e-consultant is available at: http://itc.napier.ac.uk/e-consultant/ScottishYouth
31.
[31] W. Sharrock and G. Button , Engineering investigations: practical sociological reasoning in the work of engineers. In: G.C. Bowker , S.L. Star , W. Turner and L. Glasser (eds), Social Science, Technical Systems, and Cooperative Work ( Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, London , 1997), pp. 79-104.
32.
[32] T. Erikson , Social interaction on the net: virtual community as participatory genre . In: R.H. Sprague (ed.), Proceedings of the Thirtieth Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences: Vol. VI (IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos, 1997).
33.
[33] J. Yates and W. Orlikowski , Genres of organizational communication: a structurational approach to studying communication and media , Academy of Management Review17 (1992) 299-326 .
34.
[34] L. Sproull and S. Kiesler , Reducing social context cues: electronic mail in organizational communication , Management Science32 (1986) 1492-1512 .
35.
[35] S. Turkle , Life on the Screen: Identity in the Age of the Internet ( Weidenfield and Nicolson, London , 1995).
36.
[36] S. Herring , Interactional coherence in CMC , Journal of Computer Mediated Communication4 (1999). Available at: http://www.ascusc.org/jcmc/vol4/issue4/herring.html
37.
[37] M. Turoff and S.R. Hiltz , Computer-based Delphi processes. In: M. Adler and E. Ziglio (eds), Gazing Into the Oracle: The Delphi Method and Its Application to Social Policy and Public Health ( Kingsley Publishers, London , 1996).
38.
[38] M. Uscholdet al. , The enterprise ontology , The Knowledge Engineering Review13 (1998).
39.
[39] L. Erskine , R. David , R. Carter-Todd and J. Burton , Dialogical techniques for the design of web sites , International Journal of Human-Computer Studies47 (1997) 169-195 .
40.
[40] I. Andersen and B. Jaeger , Scenario workshops and consensus conferences: towards more democratic decision-making , Science and Public Policy26 (1999) 331-340 .
