Offices are open systems

ABSTRACT

This paper is intended as a contribution to analysis of the implications of viewing offices as open systems. It takes a prescriptive stance on how to establish the information-processing foundations for taking action and making decisions in office work from an open systems perspective. We propose due process as a central activity in organizational information processing. Computer systems are beginning to play important roles in mediating the ongoing activities of organizations. We expect that these roles will gradually increase in importance as computer systems take on more of the authority and responsibility for ongoing activities. At the same time we expect computer systems to acquire more of the characteristics and structure of human organizations.

REFERENCES

• 1: Gul Agha, Actors: a model of concurrent computation in distributed systems, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1986
• 2: Becker, H.S. Notes on the concept of commitment. Am. J. Social. 66 (july 1960), 32-40.
• 3: CORKILL, D.D. Hierarchical planning in a distributed environment. In Proceedings of the 6th International Joint Con{erence on Artificial Intelligence (Tokyo, Aug.). Kaufman, Los Altos, Calif., 1979, pp. 168-175.
• 4: DAVIS, K.C. Discretionary Justice. University of Illinois Press, Urbana, Ill., 1971.
• 5: DAVIS, R., AND SMITH, R. Negotiation as a metaphor for distributed problem solving. Memo 624, MIT Artificial Intelligence Laboratory, Cambridge, Mass., May 1981.
• 6: Leslie George Gasser, The social dynamics of routine computer use in complex organizations (work, management, sociology), 1984
• 7: Elihu M. Gerson , Susan Leigh Star, Analyzing due process in the workplace, ACM Transactions on Information Systems (TOIS), v.4 n.3, p.257-270, July 1986 [doi>10.1145/214427.214431]
• 8: HEWITT, C. PLANNER; A language for proving theorems in robots. In Proceedings of ISCAI- 69 (Washington, D.C., May). 1969.
• 9: Carl Hewitt, The challenge of open systems: current logic programming methods may be insufficient for developing the intelligent systems of the future, BYTE, v.10 n.4, p.223-242, April 1985
• 10: HEWITT, C., AND DE JONG, P. Analyzing the roles of descriptions and actions in open systems. In Proceedings of AAAI (August). 1983.
• 11: HUGHES, E.C. Going concerns: The study of American institutions. In The Sociological Eye. Aldines, Chicago, Ill., 1971.
• 12: LESSER, V., AND CORKILL, D.D. Functionally accurate, cooperative distributed systems. IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. SMC-1 I, 1 (Jan. 1981), 81-96.
• 13: MARCH, J. G., AND SIMON, H.A. Organizations. Wiley, New York, 1958.
• 14: MCCARTHY, J. Applications of circumscription to formalizing common sense knowledge. In Proceedings of the Non-Monotonic Reasoning Workshop (New Paltz, N.Y.). 1984, pp. 295-324.
• 15: MINSKY, M. A framework for representing knowledge. In The Psychology of Computer Vision, P. Winston, Ed. McGraw-Hill, New York, 1975.
• 16: REITER, R. A logic for default reasoning. Arti{. Intett. 13, 1, 2 (1980), 81-132.
• 17: STAR, S.L. Simplification in scientific work: An example from neuroscience research. Soc. Stud. Sci. 13, 2 (1983), 205-228.
• 18: STRAUSS, A. Negotiations. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, Calif., 1978.
• 19: WEVHRAUCH, R.W. Prolegamena to a theory of mechanical formal reasoning. Arti{. InteU. 13, 1, 2 (1980), 133-170.
• 20: WIMSATT, W. False models as means to truer theories. In Systematics Symposium on Neutral Models in Biology (Chicago, Ill.). 1985. To be published.

INDEX TERMS

Primary Classification:
  D. Software
  D.1 PROGRAMMING TECHNIQUES

Additional Classification:
  D. Software
  D.3 PROGRAMMING LANGUAGES
      D.3.2 Language Classifications
          Subjects: Very high-level languages
  D.4 OPERATING SYSTEMS

  I. Computing Methodologies
  I.2 ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE
      I.2.8 Problem Solving, Control Methods, and Search
          Subjects: Plan execution, formation, and generation

General Terms:
Management

Keywords:
debate, decision making, due process, logic, microtheories, negotiation, offices, open systems