A comparative theoretical and empirical analysis of three methods for workplace studies

Abstract: Workplace studies in Human-Computer Interaction (HCI) is a research field that has expanded in an explosive way during the recent years. Today there is a wide range of theoretical approaches and methods to choose from, which makes it problematic to make methodological choices both in research and system design. While there have been several studies that assess the different approaches to workplace studies, there seems to be a lack of studies that explore the theoretical and methodological differences between more structured methods within the research field. In this thesis, a comparative theoretical and empirical analysis of three methods for workplace studies is being conducted to deal with the following research problem: What level of theoretical depth and methodological structure is appropriate when conducting methods for workplace studies to inform design of complex socio-technical systems? When using the two criterions descriptive power and application power, to assess Contextual Design (CD), Determining Information Flow Breakdown (DIB), and Capturing Semi-Automated Decision-Making (CASADEMA), important lessons are learned about which methods are acceptable and useful when the purpose is to inform system design.