Amsterdam (2005) `Call for Papers for Workshop on `Practices of Assessment and Intervention in Action-Oriented Science and Technology Studies,' 25-26 April, organized by T. Zuiderent-Jerak and C. Bronn Jensen.
2.
Araujo, L., Kjellberg, H. and Spencer R., eds ( 2008) `Market Practices and Forms', Marketing Theory (special issue) 8(1).
3.
Ashmore, M. (1989) The Reflexive Thesis: Wrighting Sociology of Scientific Knowledge. London: University of Chicago Press.
4.
Ashmore, M. (1996) `Ending up on the Wrong Side: Must the Two Forms of Radicalism Always be at War? Social Studies of Science26(2): 305-22.
5.
Ashmore, M., Mulkay, M. and Pinch, T. (1989) `Fury Over Prof's Kidney Call', in Health and Efficiency: A Sociology of Health Economics, chapter 4. Milton Keynes: Open University Press.
6.
Bechky, B.A. (2003a) `Object Lessons: Workplace Artifacts as Representations of Occupational Jurisdiction', American Journal of Sociology109(3): 720-52.
7.
Bechky, B.A. (2003b) `Sharing Meaning Across Occupational Communities: The Transformation of Understanding on a Production Floor', Organization Science14(3): 312-30.
8.
Berg, M. (1998) `The Politics of Technology: On Bringing Social Theory into Technological Design', Science,Technology, and Human Values23(4): 456-90.
9.
Berg, M. and Goorman, E. (1999) `The Contextual Nature of Medical Information' , International Journal of Medical Informatics56: 51-60.
10.
Beunza, D., Hardie, I. and MacKenzie, D. (2006) `A Price is a Social Thing: Towards a Material Sociology of Arbitrage', Organization Studies27(5): 721-45.
11.
Bloomfield, B. and Vurdubakis, T. (1999) `The Outer Limits: Monsters, Actor Networks and the Writing of Displacement', Organization6: 625-48.
12.
Boczkowski, P. and Lievrouw, L.A. (2008) `Bridging STS and Communication Studies: Scholarship on Media and Information Technologies', in E. J. Hackett, O. Amsterdamska, M. Lynch and J. Wajcman (eds)The Handbook of Science and Technology Studies, 3rd edn, pp. 949-77. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
13.
Bridgman, T. (2007) `Reconstituting Relevance: Exploring Possibilities for Management Educators' Critical Engagement with the Public', Management Learning38(4): 425-39.
14.
Brown, S. and Lightfoot, G. (2002) `Presence, Absence and Accountability: E-mail and the Mediation of Organisational Memory', in S. Woolgar (ed.) Virtual Society? Technology, Cyberbole, Reality, pp. 209-29. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
15.
Bruni, A. (2005) `Shadowing Software and Clinical Records: On the Ethnography of Non-Humans and Heterogeneous Contexts', Organization12(3): 357-78.
16.
Button, G. and Dourish, P. (1996) `Technomethodology: Paradoxes and Possibilities' . Available at: www.dourish.com/publications/1996/chi96-technomethodology.pdf
17.
Callon, M., ed. (1998) The Laws of the Markets. London: Blackwell .
18.
Callon, M. and Muniesa, F. (2005) `Economic Markets as Calculative Collective Devices' , Organization Studies26(8): 1229-50.
19.
Callon, M., Millo, Y. and Muniesa, F., eds ( 2007) Market Devices. London: Blackwell.
20.
Carlile, P.R. (2002) `A Pragmatic View of Knowledge and Boundaries: Boundary Objects in New Product Development', Organization Science13(4): 442-55.
21.
Collins, H.M. and Evans, R. (2002) `The Third Wave of Science Studies: Studies of Expertise and Experience', Social Studies of Science32(2): 235-96.
22.
Contu, A. and Willmott, H. (2005) `"You Spin Me Round": The Realist Turn in Organization and Management Studies', Journal of Management Studies42(8): 1645-62.
23.
Cooke, B. (2004) `The Managing of the Third World', Organization11(5): 603-29.
24.
Cooper, G., Hine, C., Low, J. and Woolgar, S. (1995) `Ethnography and HCI', in P. J.Thomas (ed.) The Social and Interactional Dimensions of Human-Computer Interfaces, pp. 11-36. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
25.
Cooper, G. and Woolgar, S. (1996) `The Research Process: Context, Autonomy and Audience' , in E. S. Lyon and J. Busfield (eds) Methodological Imaginations . London: Macmillan.
26.
Coopmans, C., Neyland, D. and Woolgar, S. (2004) `Does STS Mean Business?-Some Issues and Questions' , position paper presented at Does STS Mean Business, workshop (30 June) at Saïd Business School, Oxford. Available at http://www.sbs.ox.ac.uk/news/archives/Main/Does+STS+Mean+Business.htm
27.
Cornell (2003) `Call for Papers for Conference on `Connecting S&TS: the Academy, the Polity and the World' 26-28 September 2003. Department of Science and Technology Studies, Cornell University.
28.
Czarniawska, B. (2004) `On Time, Space, and Action Nets',Organization11(6): 773-91.
29.
Czarniawska, B. (2008) Personal communication.
30.
Dale, K. (2005) `Building a Social Materiality: Spatial and Embodied Politics in Organizational Control', Organization12(5): 649-78.
31.
Dear, P. (2001) `Science Studies as Epistemography', in J. A. Labinger and H. Collins (eds) The One Culture? A Conversation About Science, pp.128-42. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press .
32.
De Cock, C. and Bohm, S. (2007) `Liberalist Fantasies: Zižek and the Impossibility of the Open Society', Organization14(6): 815-36.
33.
Du Gay, P. and Salaman, G. (1992), `The Cult(ure) of the Customer', Journal of Management Studies29(5): 615-33.
34.
Engeström, Y. and Blackler, F. (2005) `On the Life of the Object', Organization12: 307-30.
35.
Fitzgerald, M. (2005) `Corporate Ethnography', MIT Technology Review17 November 2005.
36.
Galison, P. (1996) `Computer Simulation and the Trading Zone', in P. Galison and D. J. Stump (eds) The Disunity of Science: Boundaries, Contexts, and Power, pp. 118-57. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
37.
Gherardi, S. and Nicolini, D. (2000) `To Transfer is to Transform: The Circulation of Safety Knowledge', Organization7(2): 329-48.
38.
Gibbons, M. (2000), `Mode 2 Society and the Emergence of Context Sensitive Science', Science and Public Policy, Special Issue on Interactive Social Science27(3): 159-63.
39.
Gibbons, M., Limoges, C., Nowotny, H., Schwartzman, S., Scott, P. and Trow, M. (1994) The New Production of Knowledge: The Dynamics of Science and Research in Contemporary Societies. London : Sage.
40.
Gilbert, G. Nigel and Mulkay, M. (1982) `Warranting Scientific Belief', Social Studies of Science12(3): 383-408.
41.
Gill, R. (2004) `Response to "Business as Usual or New Domains for Pressing Cases?" (Claes-Fredrik Helgesson and Hans Kjellberg) and "Matter-ing: Or How Might STS Contribute?" (John Law)', presented at Does STS Mean Business, workshop (30 June) at Saïd Business School, Oxford. Available at http://www.sbs.ox.ac.uk/news/archives/Main/Does+STS+Mean+Business.htm
42.
Guggenheim, M. and Nowotny, H. (2003) `Joy in Repetition Makes the Future Disappear: A Critical Assessment of the Present State of STS', in B. Joerges and H. Nowotny (eds) Social Studies of Science and Technology: Looking Back, Ahead, pp. 229-58. Dordrecht : Kluwer .
43.
Hackett, E.J., Amsterdamska, O., Lynch, M. and Wajcman, J. (2008) `Introduction', in E. J. Hackett, O. Amsterdamska, M. Lynch and J. Wajcman (eds) The Handbook of Science and Technology Studies, 3rd edn, pp. 1-7. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
44.
Harris, J. (2005) `The Ordering of Things: Organization in Bruno Latour', The Sociological Review53(s1): 163-77.
45.
Helgesson, C.F. and Kjellberg, H. (2002) `Monsters, Inc. Some Implications When Applying an Actor Network Approach to the Study of Markets and Industries', Workshop on ANT, Umea, 3 June.
46.
Hermida, A. (2004) `Bus Ride to the Future', BBC News Online, Monday, 3 December, 2001, 09:06 GMT. Available at: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/1684773.stm
47.
Ito, K. (2003) Personal communication.
48.
Joerges, B. and Czarniawska, B. (1998) `The Question of Technology, or How Organizations Inscribe the World', Organization Studies19(3): 363-85.
49.
Jones, C. and Munro, R. (2005) `Organization Theory, 1985-2005', The Sociological Review53(s1): 1-15.
50.
Kellogg, K.C., Orlikowski, W.J. and Yates, J. (2006) `Life in the Trading Zone: Structuring Coordination Across Boundaries in Post-Bureaucratic Organizations', Organization Science17(1): 22-44.
51.
Kjellberg, H. and Helgesson, C.-F. (2007) `On the Nature of Markets and Their Practices', Marketing Theory7(2): 137-62.
52.
Klein, N. (2000) No Logo: Taking Aim at the Brand Bullies. London: Flamingo.
53.
Knorr Cetina, K. and Brugger, U. (2002) `Traders' Engagement with Markets: A Postsocial Relationship', Theory, Culture and Society19(5-6): 161-85.
54.
Latour, B. (2004) `Why has Critique Run Out of Steam? From Matters of Fact to Matters of Concern', Critical Inquiry30(2): 225-48.
55.
Law, J. (1994) Organizing Modernity. Oxford , Blackwell.
56.
Law, J. (1996) `Organizing Accountabilities: Ontology and the Mode of Accounting', in R. Munro and J. Mouritsen (eds) Accountability: Power, Ethos and the Technologies of Managing, pp. 283-306. London : International Thomson Business Press.
57.
Lee, N. and Hassard, J. (1999) `Organization Unbound: Actor-Network Theory, Research Strategy and Institutional Flexibility', Organization6(3): 391-404.
58.
Lien, M. (1997) Marketing and Modernity. Oxford : Berg.
59.
Lynch, M. (2008) `Ontography: Investigating Things, Deflating Ontologies'presented at Oxford Ontologies Workshop, 25 June, Saïd Business School, University of Oxford. See http://www.sbs.ox.ac.uk/events/ontology/
60.
Lynch, M. and Cole, S. (2005) `Science and Technology Studies on Trial: Dilemmas of Expertise', Social Studies of Science35(2): 269-311.
61.
MacKenzie, D. (1990) Inventing Accuracy: A Historical Sociology of Nuclear Missile Guidance. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
62.
MacKenzie, D. and Millo, Y. (2003) `Constructing a Market, Performing Theory: The Historical Sociology of a Financial Derivatives Exchange', American Journal of Sociology109(1): 107-45.
63.
Martin, B. (1996) `Sticking a Needle into Science: The Case of Polio Vaccines and the Origins of AIDS', Social Studies of Science26(2): 245-76.
64.
McLean, C. and Alcadipani, R. (2008) `Critical Management Studies: Some Reflections' , Brazilian Administration Review5(1): 70-84.
65.
McLean, C. and Hassard, J. (2004) `Symmetrical Absence/Symmetrical Absurdity: Critical Notes on the Production of Actor-Network Accounts', Journal of Management Studies41(3): 493-519.
66.
McLennan, G. (2000) `The New Positivity', in J. Eldridge, J. Macinnes, S. Scott, C. Warhurst and A. Witz (eds) For Sociology: Legacies and Prospects, pp. 17-32. Durham: Sociology Press.
67.
Mirowski, P. and E.-M. Sent (2008) `The Commercialization of Science and the Response of STS', in E. J. Hackett, O. Amsterdamska, M. Lynch and J. Wajcman (eds) The Handbook of Science and Technology Studies, 3rd edn, pp. 635-89. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
68.
Mol, A. (2002) The Body Multiple: Ontology in Medical Practice . Durham, NC: Duke University Press .
69.
Mulkay, M. (1985) The Word and the World: Explorations in the Form of Sociological Analysis. London: George Allen and Unwin
70.
Mutch, A. (2002) `Actors and Networks or Agents and Structures: Towards a Realist View of Information Systems', Organization9(3): 477-96.
71.
Nanda, M. (2003) Prophets Facing Backward: Postmodern Critiques of Science and Hindu Nationalism in India. Piscataway, NJ: Rutgers University Press.
72.
Neyland, D. and Woolgar, S. (2002), `Accountability in Action? The Case of a Database Purchasing Decision', British Journal of Sociology53(2):259-74.
Oxford (2004) `Does STS Mean Business?'A one-day workshop at the Saïd Business School, University of Oxford. Available at: http://www.sbs.ox.ac.uk/news/archives/Main/Does+STS+Mean+Business.htm
75.
Oxford (2005) `Does STS Mean Business Too?'A one-day workshop at the Saïd Business School, University of Oxford. Available at: http://www.sbs.ox.ac.uk/news/archives/Main/Does+STS+Mean+Business+2.htm
76.
Pang, A. (2008a) Personal communication.
77.
Pang, A. (2008b) `STS@Work: Applying Science and Technology Studies in Technology Forecasting and Scenario Planning', available at: http://askpang.typepad.com/relevant_history/writing/STS-at-work.DOC .
78.
Pels, D. (1996) `The Politics of Symmetry', Social Studies of Science26(2): 277-304.
79.
Pfeffer, J. and Fong, C.T. (2004) `The Business School "Business": Some Lessons from the US Experience', Journal of Management Studies41(8): 1501-20.
80.
Pinch, T.J. and Bijker, W.E. (1994) `The Social Construction of Facts and Artifacts: Or How the Sociology of Science and the Sociology of Technology Might Benefit Each Other', in W. E. Bijker, T. P. Hughes and T.J.Pinch (eds) The Social Construction of Technological Systems: New Directions in the Sociology and History of Technology, pp. 17-50. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
81.
Pollner, M. (1991) `Left of Ethnomethodology: The Rise and Decline of Radical Reflexivity,' American Sociological Review56(3): 370-80.
82.
Pollner, M. (2002) `Inside the Bubble: Communion, Cognition and Deep Play at the Intersection of Wall Street and Cyberspace', in S. Woolgar (ed.) Virtual Society? Technology, Cyberbole, Reality, pp. 230-46. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
83.
Quattrone, P. (2004) ```Does STS mean Business?" or "What Does Business Mean?" Comments on the papers by Claes-Fredrik Helgesson and Hans Kjelberg, and John Law', presented at `Does STS Mean Business', workshop 30 June at Saïd Business School, Oxford. Available at http://www.sbs.ox.ac.uk/news/archives/Main/Does+STS+Mean+Business.htm
84.
Roberts, J. (1996) `Management Education and the Limits of Technical Rationality: the Conditions and Consequences of Management Practice', in R. French and C. Grey (eds) Rethinking Management Education, pp. 54-75. London : Sage.
85.
Shove, E. and Rip, A. (2000) `Users and Unicorns: A Discussion of Mythical Beasts in Interactive Science', Science and Public Policy, Special Issue on Interactive Social Science27(3): 175-82.
86.
Simakova, E. (2007) `Marketing Technologies: An Ethnographic Study of the Performative Properties of Narratives, and of Accountability Relations, in Hi-Tech Marketing'. Unpublished DPhil thesis, Science and Technology Studies, Saïd Business School, University of Oxford.
87.
Simakova, E. and Coopmans, C. (2007) `The Mutant Science Scholars Speak', blog entry on Socializing Finance: A Blog on the Social Studies of Finance, August 7. Available at: http://socfinance.wordpress.com/2007/08/08/the-mutant-science-scholars-speak/
88.
Simakova, E. and Neyland, D. (2008) `Marketing Mobile Futures: Assembling Constituencies and Creating Compelling Stories for an Emerging Technology', Marketing Theory8(1): 91-116.
89.
Smith, D. (2001) `Texts and the Ontology of Organisations and Institutions' , Studies in Cultures, Organisations and Societies7: 159-98.
90.
Star, S.L. and Griesemer, J.R. (1989) `Institutional Ecology, "Translations" and Boundary Objects: Amateurs and Professionals in Berkeley's Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, 1907-39', Social Studies of Science19(3): 87-420.
91.
Starkey, K., Hatchuel, A. and Tempest, S. (2004) `Rethinking the Business School: A European Perspective' , Journal of Management Studies41(8): 1521-31.
92.
Steen, J., Coopmans, C. and Whyte, J. (2006) `Structure and Agency? Actor-Network Theory and Strategic Organization', Strategic Organization4(3): 303-12.
93.
Suchman, L. (2007 [2000]) `Anthropology as "Brand" Reflections on Corporate Anthropology', paper presented at the Colloquium on Interdisciplinarity and Society, Oxford University , 24 February 2007, and published by the Department of Sociology, Lancaster University, Lancaster LA1 4YL, UK. Available at: http://www.lancs.ac.uk/fass/sociology/papers/Suchman-Anthropology-as-Brand.pdf
94.
Times (2003) `How Would You Feel if You Learnt That This Man Was "Studying"' Your Rubbish? Or That You Were Being Filmed During Your Weekly Shop? Be Warned: In The Name Of Market Research, Someone Could Be Watching Your Every Move', report by R. Johnson, Sunday Times Magazine, 11 May: 44-50.
95.
Virginia Tech (2005) `STS (R)Evolutions' March 17-19. Available at: http://www.stsgso.org.vt.edu/STS(R)Evolutions/
96.
Waldby, C., Wakeford, N, and Green, N., eds (2006) `Feminist Technoscience: Intimacy, Embodiment and Abjection in Science Studies' , Science Studies (special issue) 19(2).
97.
Whittle, A. and Spicer, A. (2008) `Is Actor Network Theory Critique?', Organization Studies29(4): 611-29.
98.
Winner, L. (1993) `Upon Opening the Black Box and Finding it Empty: Social Constructivism and the Philosophy of Technology', Science, Technology and Human Values18(3): 362-78.
99.
Woodhouse, E., Hess, D., Breyman, S. and Martin, B. (2002) `Science Studies and Activism: Possibilities and Problems for Reconstructivist Agendas', Social Studies of Science32(2): 297-319.
100.
Woolgar, S. (1988) Science The Very Idea. London : Routledge.
101.
Woolgar, S. (1991a) Configuring the User: The Case of Usability Trials' , in J. Law (ed.) A Sociology Of Monsters, pp. 57-99. London: Routledge.
102.
Woolgar, S. (1991b) `The Turn to Technology in Social Studies of Science' , Science, Technology, and Human Values16(1): 20-50.
103.
Woolgar, S. (1997) `Accountability and Identity in the Age of UABs', CRICT Discussion Paper 60, Brunel University.
104.
Woolgar, S. (2000) The Social Basis of Interactive Social Science', Science and Public Policy, Special Issue on Interactive Social Science, 27(3): 165-73.
105.
Woolgar, S. (2003) `Virtual Society?-The Social Science of Electronic Technologies', Report to theEconomic and Social Research Council, UK.
106.
Woolgar, S. (2004) `What Happened to Provocation in Science and Technology Studies?' History and Technology20(4): 339-49.
107.
Woolgar, S., Coopmans, C., Neyland, D. and Simakova, E. (2005) `Does STS Mean Business Too?', position paper, presented at Does STS Mean Business 2, workshop , 29 June at Saïd Business School, Oxford. Available at: http://www.sbs.ox.ac.uk/news/archives/Main/Does+STS+Mean+Business+2.htm
108.
Wouters, P. and Beaulieu, A. (2007) `Critical Accountability: Dilemmas for Interventionist Studies of E-Science', Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication12(2): article 12. Available at http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol12/issue2/wouters.html
