Makers in the Plant? Exploring the Impact of Knowledge IT Artifacts on DIY Practices in Manufacturing Firms

Luca Cremona, Aurelio Ravarini

2016

Abstract

In this study we investigate the impact of digital technologies on fabrication activities carried out by a worker leading her organizational role to be critically reshaped. We assume that the characteristics of the Makers (individual and environmental characteristics) could be applied to workers in a manufacturing plant, bringing benefits in terms of higher achievements deriving by the digitization of fabrication. We propose to interpret the digital technologies enabling digitization through the lens of the KITA construct. Two case studies have been carried out in order to explore these assumptions and providing preliminary insights of the effects of Digital DIY practices on manufacturing firms.

References

  1. Anderson, C.: Makers: The new industrial revolution. New York, NY: Random House (2012).
  2. Azevedo, F. S.: Lines of practice: A practice-centered theory of interest relationships. Cognition and Instruction, 29, 2, pp. 147-184 (2011).
  3. Bedeian, A. G., Wren, D. A.: Most Influential Management Books of the 20th Century. Organizational Dynamics, 29, 3, pp. 221-225 (2001).
  4. Benbasat, I., Goldstein, D. K., Mead, M.: The Case Research Strategy in Studies of Information Systems. MIS Quarterly, 11, 3, pp. 369-386 (1987).
  5. Bernstein, A., Raman, A.: The Great Decoupling: An Interview with Erik Brynjolfsson and Andrew McAfee. Harvard Business Review. http://bit.ly/2acgQbh (2015).
  6. Buxmann, P., Hinz O.: Makers. Business & Information Systems Engineering, 5, 5, pp. 357-360 (2013).
  7. Cabitza, F., & Locoro, A. “Made with Knowledge”: Disentangling the IT Knowledge Artifact by a Qualitative Literature review”, KMIS 2014, Rome, Oct. 2014
  8. D'Aveni, R.: 3D printing will change the world. HBR, 91, 3, pp.34 (2013).
  9. D'Aveni, R.: The 3-D Printing Revolution. https://hbr.org/2015/05/the-3-d-printingrevolution (2015).
  10. Darke, P., Shanks, G., Broadbent, M.: Successfully Completing Case Study Research: Combining Rigour, Relevance and Pragmatism. ISJ, 8, pp. 273-289 (1998).
  11. Davenport, T. H., Kirby, J.: Beyond Automation. http://bit.ly/2a4l5U3 (2015).
  12. Dewey, J.: The quest for certainty: A study of the relation of knowledge and action, New York, NY: Minton, Balch and Company (1929).
  13. Dougherty, D.: The maker mindset. In M. Honey & D.E. Kanter (Eds.), Design, make, play: Growing the next generation of STEM innovators, pp. 7-11. New York, NY: Routledge (2013).
  14. Dubé, L., Paré, G.,: Rigor in Information Systems Positivist Case Research: Current Practices, Trends, and Recommendations. MIS Quarterly, 27, 4, pp. 597-636 (2003).
  15. Dweck, C.: Self-theories: Their role in motivation, personality, and development. Psychology Press (2000).
  16. Edwards, C.: Home is where the art is': Women, handicrafts and home improvements 1750 - 1900. Journal of design history, 19(1): 11-21 (2006).
  17. Elby, A., Hammer, D.: On the substance of a sophisticated epistemology. Science Education, 85, 5, pp. 554-567 (2001).
  18. Emory, W. C.: Business Research Methods. Irwin (1980).
  19. Franke N., Von Hippel E., Schreier M.: Finding Commercially Attractive User Innovations: A Test of Lead-User Theory. Journal of Product Innovation Management, vol.3, Issue 4, pages 301-315 (2006).
  20. Gershenfeld, N.: Fab: The coming revolution on your desktop - from personal computers to personal fabrication. Cambridge, MA: Basic Books (2005).
  21. Gibson, D., Rosen, W., Stucker, B.: Business opportunities and future directions. Additive Manufacturing Technologies: Rapid Prototyping to Direct Digital Manufacturing, 18, pp. 437-446, Springer (2010).
  22. Glaser B.: Basics of grounded theory analysis. Mill Valley, CA: Sociology Press (1992).
  23. Grover, V., Kohli, R.: Cocreating IT Value: New Capabilities and Metrics for Multifirm Environments. MIS Quarterly, 36, 1, pp. 225-232 (2012).
  24. Gutierrez, K., Rogoff, B.: Cultural ways of learning: Individual traits or repertoires of practice. Educational Researcher, 32, 5, pp. 19-25 (2003).
  25. Hatano, G., Inagaki, K.: Two courses of expertise. In Stevenson, H., Assume, H., Hakuta, K. (Eds.), Child development and education in Japan, pp. 262-272, New York, NY: Freeman (1986).
  26. Hofferbert, S., Cahalane M., Finnegan P.: Gamification as an Architecture of Participation: An Investigation of an Innovation Maker Community (2015).
  27. Hoftijzer J.: DIY and Co-creation: Representatives of a Democratizing Tendency. Design Principles & Practices, An International Journal 3 (6) (2009).
  28. Holsti O.R.:Content analysis for the social sciences and humanities: Addison-Wesley, Reading, Mass (1969).
  29. Honey, M., & Siegel, E.. Proceedings from the Innovation, Education & Maker Movement Workshop. New York Hall of Science (2010).
  30. Kerlinger, F.: Foundations of behavioral research: Educational and psychological inquiry. Holt. Rinehart and Winston. Inc. John Wiley, New York (1964).
  31. Koten, J.: Revolution in the making. The Wall Street Journal, June 11, R1 (2013).
  32. Kuznetsov S., Paulos E.: Rise of the Expert Amateur: DIY Projects, Communities, and Cultures. NordiCHI 7810, ACM, New York, NY, USA, 295-304 (2010).
  33. Lande, M., & Jordan, S. S., & Nelson, J., Defining Makers Making: Emergent Practice and Emergent Meanings Paper presented at 2013 ASEE Annual Conference, Atlanta, Georgia. https://peer.asee.org/ 19382 (2013, June).
  34. Leadbeater C.: We-Think: Mass innovation, not mass production. Profile Books (2008).
  35. Lipson, H., Kurman, M.: Fabricated: The New World of 3D Printing. Indianapolis. IN: John Wiley & Sons (2013).
  36. Martin, L.: The promise of the Maker Movement for education. Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research (J-PEER), 5, 1, p. 4 (2015).
  37. Maye, L.: Sustainable DIY Technologies Servicing. Cultural Heritage. UD for Sustainability in Maker Communities. Workshop co-located with the Fourth International Symposium on End-User Development. ITU Copenhagen (2011).
  38. McFedries, P.: The hobbyist renaissance. IEEE Spectrum. 2007, June.
  39. McKinsey, http://tabsoft.co/1J2ji1m (2015).
  40. McKinsey, http://bit.ly/1bWlTem, retrieved on 30.04.2015.
  41. McKinsey, http://bit.ly/224Htlg (2015).
  42. Merchant, N.: 11 Rules for Creating Value in the Social Era. Cambridge MA, Harvard Business (2012).
  43. Miles, M.B, Huberman, A.M.: Qualitative Data Analysis. 2nd Ed., Newbury Park, CA: Sage, pp. 10-12 (1994).
  44. Morris, M. G., Venkatesh, V.: Job characteristics and job satisfaction: understanding the role of enterprise resource planning system implementation. MIS Quarterly, pp. 143-161 (2010).
  45. NN et al., “From smart work to Digital Do-It-Yourself: a research framework for digital-enabled jobs” accepted at itAIS workshop of Information Systems, Verona, Italy (2016).
  46. Oxman N.: Digital Craft: Fabrication Based Design in the Age of Digital Production, in Workshop Proceedings for Ubicomp 2007: International Conference on Ubiquitous Computing. September 2007; Innsbruck, Austria; pp. 534-538 (2007).
  47. Peppler, K., Bender S.: Maker movement spreads innovation one project at a time." Phi Delta Kappan 95.3, pp. 22-27 (2013).
  48. Perkins, D., Tishman, S., Ritchhart, R., Donis, K., Andrade, A.: Intelligence in the wild: A dispositional view of intellectual traits. Educational Psychology Review, 12, 3, pp. 269-293 (2000).
  49. Petrich, M., Wilkinson, K., Bevan, B.: It looks like fun, but are they learning? In Honey, M., & Kanter, D. E. (Eds.), Design. Make. Play. Growing the next generation of STEM innovators, pp. 50-70, New York, NY: Routledge (2013).
  50. Quinn Patton M.: Qualitative Research & Evaluation Methods. Sage Publications, Thousands Oaks et al (2002).
  51. Ratto, M., Ree, R.: Materializing information: 3D printing and social change”, First Monday, 17 (7), July 2012
  52. Ravarini, A., Strada, G., Leandri, M.: From smart work to Digital Do-It-Yourself: a research framework for digital-enabled jobs. Proceedings of itAIS 2016 conference, October 2016, Verona, Italy.
  53. Rode, J. A., et al.: From computational thinking to computational making. Proceedings of the ACM UbiComp 2015.
  54. Ryan, R. M., Deci, E. L.: Intrinsic and extrinsic motivations: Classic definitions and new directions. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25, 1, pp. 54- 67 (2000).
  55. Sharp, B., Dawes, J.: Is Differentiation Optional? A Critique of Porter's Generic Strategy Typology. In: Earl, P. (ed) Management, Marketing and the Competitive Process. Edward Elgar (1996).
  56. Soep, E.: Participatory politics: Next-generation tactics to remake public spheres. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press (2014).
  57. Spender, J.C., Kraaijenbrink, J.: Why Competitive Strategy Succeeds - and With Whom. In: Huggins, R., Izushi, H. Competition, Competitive Advantage, and Clusters: The Ideas of Michael Porter. Oxford University Press (2011).
  58. Strauss A.: Qualitative analysis for social scientists. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press (1987).
  59. Tanenbaum, J. G., et al.: Democratizing technology: pleasure, utility and expressiveness in DIY and maker practice. Proceedings of the SIGCHI 2013.
  60. Tiwana, A.: Separating Signal from Noise: Evaluating Emerging Technologies. MIS Quarterly Executive, 13, 1, pp. 45-61 (2014).
  61. Vansteenkiste, M., Simons, J., Lens, W., Sheldon, K. M., Deci, E. L.: Motivating learning, performance, and persistence: the synergistic effects of intrinsic goal contents and autonomy-supportive contexts. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 87, 2, p. 246 (2004).
  62. Wing, J. M. "Computational thinking and thinking about computing."Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences 366.1881, pp. 3717-3725 (2008):.
  63. Yetton, P., Craig, J., Davis, J., Hilmer, F.: Are Diamonds a Country's Best Friend? A Critique of Porter's Theory of National Competition as Applied to Canada, New Zealand and Australia. Australian Journal of Management, 17, 1, pp. 89-120 (1992).
  64. Yin, R. K.: Case Study Research: Design and Methods”, Thousand Oaks, CA, Sage Publications (2003).
  65. Zhang, X., Venkatesh, V.: Explaining Employee Job Performance: The Role of Online and Offline Workplace Communication Networks. MIS Quarterly, 37, 3, pp.695-722 (2013).
  66. Jordan S., and Lande M., "Might young makers be the engineers of the future?", Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE) 2014 IEEE, pp. 1-4, 2014.
Download


Paper Citation


in Harvard Style

Cremona L. and Ravarini A. (2016). Makers in the Plant? Exploring the Impact of Knowledge IT Artifacts on DIY Practices in Manufacturing Firms . In - KITA, (IC3K 2016) ISBN , pages 0-0. DOI: 10.5220/0006094502810288


in Bibtex Style

@conference{kita16,
author={Luca Cremona and Aurelio Ravarini},
title={Makers in the Plant? Exploring the Impact of Knowledge IT Artifacts on DIY Practices in Manufacturing Firms},
booktitle={ - KITA, (IC3K 2016)},
year={2016},
pages={},
publisher={SciTePress},
organization={INSTICC},
doi={10.5220/0006094502810288},
isbn={},
}


in EndNote Style

TY - CONF
JO - - KITA, (IC3K 2016)
TI - Makers in the Plant? Exploring the Impact of Knowledge IT Artifacts on DIY Practices in Manufacturing Firms
SN -
AU - Cremona L.
AU - Ravarini A.
PY - 2016
SP - 0
EP - 0
DO - 10.5220/0006094502810288