The Right Kind of Feedback: Working through Standardized Tools


  • Marte Fanneløb Giskeødegård Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU), Trondheim, Norway



Standardization, globalization, transnational companies, globally integrated IT systems, international division of labor, feedback


This article discusses the implications of working through globally integrated computer systems in transnational firms and addresses in particular employees’ possibility to give feedback on how these systems are working. The aim is to contribute to the literature on the standardization of IT with a focus on co-production by questioning the apparent neutrality of feedback processes.

The literature focusing on co-production has shed light on the fact that stand-ardized IT systems are not fixed, but rather flexible in the sense that they are con-tinuously developed based on user feedback. However, based on my empirical case, I argue that employees identified the existence of a frame for acceptable criticism. Two different cases of business critical IT systems are presented; these cases share a common consensus among managers and employees that the systems required improvements. However, employees had experiences of providing business critical feedback on functionality that had not been acted upon. Consequently, when evaluating their possibility to provide feedback, this was not just interpreted in the sense of functionality of the system, but also the perceived prestige of the stakeholders of the systems, which in turn had implications for both the relationship between the central organization and employees and the functionality of the systems.


Aneesh, Aneesh (2009): “Global Labor: Algocratic Modes of Organization”, Social Theory 27:4, 347-370.

Almklov, Petter Grytten (2006): Kunnskap, Kommunikasjon og Ekspertise: Et antropologisk studium av en tverrfaglig ekspertgruppe i oljeindustrien. Doktoravhandlinger ved NTNU 2006:241, Department of Social Anthropology, Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU) ISSN 1503-8181.

Almklov, Petter & Vidar Hepsø (2011): “Between and Beyond Data: How Analogue Field Experience Informs the Interpretation of Remote Data Sources in Petroleum Reservoir Geology”, Social Studies of Science, 41:4, 539-560.

Appadurai, Arjun (1996): Modernity at Large: Cultural Dimensions of Globalization, Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

Boes Andreas & Tobias Kämpf. (2007): “The Nexus of Informatisation and Internationalisation: A New Stage in the Internationalisation of Labour”, Work Organization, Labour & Globalisation.,1:2, 193-208.

Bush, Lawrence (2011): Standards: Recipes for Reality, Cambridge MA.: The MIT Press.

Bowker, Geoffrey C. & Susan Leigh Star (1999/2000): Sorting Things Out: Classification and its Consequences, Cambridge, MA.: MIT Press.

Dicken, Peter (2007): Global Shift: Mapping the Changing Contours of the World Economy, London: Sage.

Eckhardt, Giana M. (2004): “The Role of Culture in Conducting Thrustworthy and Credible Qualitative Business Research In China”, Rebecca Marschan-Pekkari & Catherine Welch (eds): Handbok of Qualititative Research Methods for International Business, Edward Elgar Publishing: Cheltenham.

Ellingsen, Gunner, Eric Monteiro & Glenn Munkvold (2007): “Standardization of Work: Co-constructed Practice”, The Information Society, 23:5, 309-326.

Eriksen, Thomas Hylland (2008): Globalisering: åtte nøkkelbegreper, Oso: Universitetsforlaget

Foucault, Michel (1975/1994): Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison, Westminister, MD: Vintage.

Fuller, Steve (2002): Knowledge Management Foundations, Boston: Butterwurth-Heinemann.

Goffman, Erving. (1959): “The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life”, Garden City, N.Y: Doubleday.

Harvey, David (1989): The Conditions of Postmodernity, Oxford: Basil Blackwell Ltd.

Hepsø, Vidar. (2009): Leading Research in Technoscience: Insider Social Science in Socio-technological Change, Saarbrücken: VDM Verlag Dr. Müller.

Knorr Cetina K. & Urs Brugger (2001): “Transparancy Regimes and Management by Content in Global Organizations: The Case of Institutional Currency Trading”, The Journal of Knowledge Management, 5:2, 180-194.

Knorr Cetina K. & Urs Brugger (2002): “Traders’ Engagement with Markets: A Postsocial Relationship”, Theory Culture Society 19:5/6, 161-184.

Larsen, Tord (2010): “Acts of Entification: The Emergence of Thinghood in Social Life”, Nigel Rapport (ed.): Human Nature as Capacity. Beyond Discourse and Classification, New York: Berghahn Books.

Latour, Bruno (1991): “Technology is Society Made Durable”, John Law (ed.): A Sociology of Monsters: Essays on Power, Technology and Domination, London: Routledge.

Latour, Bruno (1992): “Where are the Missing Masses? The Sociology of a Few Mudane Artifacts”, Wiebe Bijker & John Law (eds): Shaping Technology, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press

Monteiro, Eric & Knut H. Rolland (2012): “Trans-situated Use of Integrated Information Systems”, European Journal of Information Systems, 20:3.

Orlikowski, Wanda J. (2010): “The Sociomateriality of Organisational Life: Considering Technology in Management Research”, Cambridge Journal of Economics, 34, 125–141.

Orlikowski, Wanda J. & Susan V. Scott (2008): “10 Sociomateriality: Challenging the Separation of Technology, Work and Organization”, The Academy of Management Annals, 2:1, 433-474.

Pollock, Neil (2005): “When is a Work-Around?: Conflict and Negotiation in Computer System Development”, Science, Technology and Human Values, 30:4, 496-514.

Pollock, Neil, Robin Williams & Luciana D’Adderio (2007): “Global Software and its Provenance: Generification Work in the Production of Organizational Software Packages”, Social Studies of Science, 37, 254-280.

Rolland, Knut H & Eric Monteiro (2002): “Balancing the Local and the Global in Infrastructural Information Systems”, The Information Society, 18: 87-100.

Scott, James C. (1998): Seeing Like a State: How Certain Schemes to Improve the Human Condition Have Failed, New Haven: Yale University Press.

Timmermans, Stefan & Marc Berg (1997): “Standardization in Action: Achieving Local Universality through Medical protocols”, Social Studies of Science, 27, 273- 305.

Townley, Barbera (1993): “Foucault, Power/Knowledge, and Its Relevance for Human Resource Management”, Academy of Management review, 18:3, 518-545.




How to Cite

Fanneløb Giskeødegård, M. (2013) “The Right Kind of Feedback: Working through Standardized Tools”, Culture Unbound, 4(4), pp. 699–720. doi: 10.3384/cu.2000.1525.124699.



Theme: Objectification, Measurement and Standardization