A web of human relationships

Back to index page

Previous article: Truly open-source science

Next article: News in brief

Have you ever thought about software as a web of social relationships? Dimitrina Spencer, a social anthropologist, thinks in this way to better understand e-Science projects. Her project, Embedding e-Science: designing and managing for usability, studies the ways that e-Science applications are developed/embedded in organisations such as OMII-UK, the NGS, CARMEN and PRAGMA. We asked Dimitrina to explain this fascinating work.

My ethnographic research into e-Science projects suggests that the ways in which projects initiate and build collaborations and working relationships is of paramount importance to their success. The quality of the software produced by an e-Science project is directly affected by the ways in which developers, project managers, researchers, users and other stakeholders negotiate and implement responsibilities and work practices. This complex and dynamic web of relationships extends to the project’s position relative to its respective universities, funding bodies, research councils, commerce or other relevant actors. Following the work of prominent Harvard anthropologist, Prof. Michael Jackson, and drawing on some of the ideas of actor-network theorists, I describe my work as relational knowing: linking people, things, and environment to social practices through my own involvement with people in e-Science.

One aspect on which I have focussed is the way that power can characterise some processes. This draws on existing work in the social studies of science. I have observed examples of structural inequality between different people, groups or institutions – particularly between users and developers – determining important characteristics of the end product. If one person is more powerful in determining outcomes than another, then their vision is realised, even if it is not the best (or most appropriate) vision. Conflicting interests within a project can prevent a common vision of the end product being realised, which impedes high-quality development. For example, a project member may feel attached to a piece of software they have developed. They might hope to continue the life of that software by pushing for it to be used on a project where a different piece of software might work better. Alternatively, one of the principal investigators may suggest adding an additional user group halfway through a project. This may lead to more funding and a wider user base, but attempting to cater for the different needs of these groups could significantly affect the software’s quality. Such (sometimes) harmful dilution results from expanding the web of relationships beyond the capacity of the original vision.

Software is indeed a living web of social relations. Precisely because of this fact, the role of the project manager is crucial. They foster the web of social relations, and, in doing so, have a direct impact on the quality of the software. The main functions of the project manager are to facilitate relationships and establish effective communication between everyone involved in a project. If project managers have the potential to facilitate, but have no leverage to make critical decisions relating to staff and the day-to-day work of the project, their effectiveness is reduced, and so is the quality of the software.

I am also interested in the exploration of the moment-to-moment interactions between e-Science groups. Here, I focus on the evolving relationships between project members. I pay attention to the crucial processes of contracting, which takes place in the initial stages of a project, and re-contracting, which takes place throughout the life of a project. These processes highlight two, simultaneously occurring ways in which people relate to each other: the external (types of formal or informal agreements) and the motivational (how much everyone commits, and in what way). Focusing on these processes enables strategies to be determined for establishing effective working relationships, which can lead to more successful outcomes. It is important to observe and understand the relationships ‘in action’ to find what facilitates or hinders them. How do different actors negotiate their interests at meetings, on a daily basis, and over a long period of time? What are the dynamics of project relations? What are the mechanisms, or the ways, styles and idioms of relating? My project will study all of these issues.

If you want to know more, or are interested in participating, please contact: dimitrina.spencer@oerc.ox.ac.uk. Dimitrina Spencer,

Oxford e-Research Centre.

www.tinyurl.com/59ugxn