So, How Do People Really Use Their Handheld Devices? an Interactive Study of Wireless Technology Use

Topics: Wireless, Wireless network, Technology Pages: 39 (13138 words) Published: April 30, 2013
Journal of Organizational Behavior J. Organiz. Behav. 23, 401–423 (2002) Published online in Wiley InterScience ( DOI: 10.1002/job.146

So, how do people really use their handheld devices? An interactive study of wireless technology usey FRANCINE K. SCHLOSSER*
University of Waterloo, Canada


Using a symbolic interactionist methodology, the diverse meanings assigned by employees to wireless handheld technology are investigated. Interviews were conducted with 11 individuals representing three organizations in the public and private sector enhancing our understanding of technology use within an organizational context. Wireless technology practices are examined as they relate to aspects of self-identity, that is, the imaged self, the relational self, the integrated self and the isolated self. Individuals were able to fit the technology into their work and personal roles, and at the same time, adjusted these roles to fit new expectations arising from the technology. Innovative ways of using the technology were shaped by individual needs as users adapted their message contexts, social etiquette, self-impressions, and ways of doing business. A need to self-regulate emerged with high expectations of availability and the blurring of multiple work and personal roles. Copyright # 2002 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

The most important lesson that can be learned from seeing the different emphases that different civilizations attach to technology is that this process is determined as much by the nature of the tool-user as by the nature of the tool. Rybczynski, 1983, p. 210. We have entered a new era of workplace connectivity through the advent of portable wireless technologies. These tools will provide needed flexibility to juggle work and family aspects of our selfidentities, and provide the needed control to preserve this sense of self. However, in this fast-forward age, they may also blur traditional boundaries to such a degree, that the lines delineating our sense of self will become shadowy and inconsequential. Just as our greatest strength is often our greatest weakness, we may find that the challenges involved in harnessing technology within our own personal and organizational context will create a much stronger sense of self. How then, do normal people who find * Correspondence to: Francine K. Schlosser, Department of Management Sciences, University of Waterloo, 200 University Avenue West, Waterloo, ON, N2L 3G1, Canada. E-mail: y Portions of this paper were presented at the 2001 18th Qualitative Research Conference, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada.

Copyright # 2002 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.



themselves on the frontline perceive wireless handheld devices and how has use affected their sense of self? In the current study, we investigate the meaning that each individual gives to wireless handheld technology. We examine this question from a multi-faceted perspective including aspects surrounding relational, imaged, integrated and isolated selves. The meaning given to technology and the development of technology-practices surrounding technology gives rise to a continuous cycle of innovation through use. The goals of this research are to investigate the meaning that individuals give to wireless handheld technology within an organizational context. This includes a consideration of the changes to wireless technology-practice and to traditional personal-work boundaries utilizing a symbolic interactionist viewpoint and methodology. A methodology identifying key ‘generic social processes’ underpins the study’s theoretical framework. As it relates to the subjectivist interactionist research process, Prus (1997) pioneered this concept of categorizing group life and suggested that all forms of human activity, occurring within many various subcultures, could be analysed and grouped within similar, or generic, categories. Wireless handheld...

References: Bijker WE. 1995. Of Bicycles, Bakelites, and Bulbs: Toward a Theory of Sociotechnical Change. The MIT Press: Cambridge, MA. Bjorklund D. 1985. Dignified joking: humor and demeanor in a public speaking club. Symbolic Interaction 8: 33–46. Blumer H. 1969. Symbolic Interactionism: Perspective and Method. Prentice-Hall: Englewood Cliffs, NJ. Bolino MC. 1999. Citizenship and impression management: good soldiers or good actors? Academy of Management Review 24: 82–98. Chase S. 2000. BlackBerry season. The Globe and Mail. (Toronto), 14 December, T1. Cooley CH. 1902. Human Nature and the Social Order. Scribner’s: New York. Csikszentmihalyi M. 1975. Beyond Boredom and Anxiety. Jossey-Bass Publishers: San Francisco. Daft RL, Lengel RH. 1984. Information richness: a new approach to managerial behavior and organizational design. In Research in Organizational Behavior (Vol. 6), Staw BM, Cummings LL (eds). JAI Press: Greenwich, CT. DeSanctis G, Poole M. 1994. Capturing the complexity in advanced technology use: adaptive structuration theory. Organization Science 5: 121–147. Dix A, Rodden T, Davies N, Trevor J, Friday A, Palfreyman K. 2000. Exploiting space and location as a design framework for interactive mobile systems. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction 7: 285–321. Eadie A. 2001. How wireless connects in North America. The Globe and Mail. (Toronto), 9 January: T2. Fulk J. 1993. Social construction of communication technology. Academy of Management Journal 36: 921–950. Gephart R. 1997. Hazardous measures: an interpretive textual analysis of quantitative sensemaking during crises. Journal of Organizational Behavior 18(S1): 583–622. Goffman E. 1959. The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life. Doubleday & Company: New York. Heracleous L, Barrett M. 2001. Organizational change as discourse: communicative actions and deep structures in the context of information technology implementation. Academy of Management Journal 44: 755–778.
Copyright # 2002 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
J. Organiz. Behav. 23, 401–423 (2002)
Lowe GS, Schellenberg G. 2001. What’s a good job? The importance of employment relationships. Canadian Policy Research Networks. Renouf Publishing Co. Ltd.: Ottawa, ON. pwgj_e.htm. Markus H, Wurf E. 1986. The dynamic self-concept: a social psychological perspective. Annual Review of Psychology 3: 299–337. Mehta V, Das R, Jones JM, Mattio DJ, Chopra SP. 2001. Research in Motion Ltd. (RIMM) Technology: Mobile Internet. Goldman Sachs Global Equity Research, April 6, 2001. New York. Orlikowski WJ. 2000. Using technology and constituting structures: a practice lens for studying technology in organizations. Organization Science 11: 404–428. Orlikowski WJ, Iacono CS. 2001. Research commentary: desperately seeking the ‘IT’ in IT research—A call to theorizing the IT artifact. Information Systems Research 12: 121–134. Ossip D. 2001. Into the plant and onto the road: extending wireless applications to all employees. HRProfessional, October/November, 54. Palen L, Salsman M, Youngs E. 2000. Going wireless: behavior and practice of new mobile phone users. ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work, December 2–6 (pp. 201–210). ACM: Philadelphia, PA. Parasuraman S, Simmers CA. 2001. Type of employment, work–family conflict and well-being: a comparative study. Journal of Organizational Behavior 22: 551–568. Perlow LA. 1997. Finding Time. ILR Press: Ithaca, NY. Pinch TJ, Bijker WE. 1987. The social construction of facts and artefacts: or how the sociology of science and the sociology of technology might benefit each other. In The Social Construction of Technological Systems, Bijker WE, Hughes TP, Pinch TJ (eds). The MIT Press: Cambridge, MA. Prus R. 1996. Symbolic Interaction and Ethnographic Research. State University of New York Press: Albany. Prus R. 1997. Subcultural Mosaics and Intersubjective Realities. State University of New York Press: Albany. Rybczynski W. 1983. Taming the Tiger. The Viking Press: New York. Saga VL, Zmud RW. 1994. The nature and determinants of IT acceptance, routinization, and infusion. In Diffusion, Transfer and Implementation of Information Technology, Levine L (ed.). Elsevier Science B. V.: North-Holland. Sandstrom KL, Martin DD, Fine GA. 2001. Symbolic interactionism at the end of the century. In The Handbook of Social Theory, Ritzer G, Smart B (eds). Sage Publications Ltd: Thousand Oaks, CA. Schwartz E. 2001. Mobile’s day in court. Infoworld, July 23, 52. Spradley JP. 1979. The Ethnographic Interview. Holt, Rinehart and Winston: New York. Taylor S, Todd PA. 1995. Understanding information technology usage: a test of competing models. Information Systems Research 6: 144–176. Van Maanen J. 1979a. On the understanding of interpersonal relations. In Essays in Interpersonal Dynamics, Bennis W, Van Maanen J, Schein EH, Steele F (eds). The Dorsey Press: Homewood Ill. Van Maanen J. 1979b. The self, the situation, and the rules of interpersonal relations. In Essays in Interpersonal Dynamics, Bennis W, Van Maanen J, Schein EH, Steele F (eds). The Dorsey Press: Homewood Ill. Willoughby KW. 1990. Technology Choice: A Critique of the Appropriate Technology Movement. Westview Press: Boulder, CO. Yates J, Orlikowski WJ, Okamura K. 1999. Explicit and implicit structuring of genres in electronic communication: reinforcement and change of social interaction. Organization Science 10: 83–103. Yoels WC, Clair JM. 1994. Never enough time: how medical residents manage a scarce resource. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography 23: 185–213.
Copyright # 2002 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
J. Organiz. Behav. 23, 401–423 (2002)
Continue Reading

Please join StudyMode to read the full document

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • The Use of Wireless Technology Essay
  • Use Of Technology Essay
  • Use of Technology Essay
  • Uses of Technology Essay
  • Essay about Use of Technology
  • Why Do People Use Drugs Essay
  • Essay on For Use Study
  • What Devices Do People Use to Maintain Brevity When Messaging Research Paper

Become a StudyMode Member

Sign Up - It's Free