16 - Reading - Interaction and Arrangement in The Process of Informing PDF

Accounting OrganizationsandSocieOJ,Vol. 11, No. 6, pp. 521-540, 1986.
Printed in Great Britain
0361-3682/86 $3.00+.00
PergamonJournals Ltd.
INTERACTIONS AND ARRANGEMENTS IN THE PROCESS OF INFORMING*
ALISTAIR PRESTON
Department o f Management Sciences, University o f Manchester

Institute o f Science and Technology
Abstract
Based on year long participant observation study, this paper attempts to explain how managers are
informed or inform themselves. In contrast to the hierarchical systems model of organisations and
behaviour typically adopted by information designers, a model of the social order is presented. Adopting a
symbolic interactionist perspective, the way managers are informed is defined as a process of informing in
which managers construct and maintain arrangements to inform each other and themselves. These arrangements to inform employ the media of interactions, observations, personal record keeping and attending
meetings. In addition to describing the process of informing, supported with qualitative data from the
research setting, a number of implications of this perspective for information design are considered.
M i n t z b e r g ( 1 9 7 5 ) poses the q u e s t i o n : W h y d o
m a n a g e r s n o t use i n f o r m a t i o n as they a p p a r e n t l y
should? Such a q u e s t i o n is asked from the perspective of i n f o r m a t i o n specialists w h o are typically e n g a g e d in the d e v e l o p m e n t of highly formalised a n d n u m e r i c a l i n f o r m a t i o n systems.
O n e possible a n s w e r to the q u e s t i o n ( o t h e r t h a n
those suggested b y M i n t z b e r g himself) m i g h t b e
that designers a n d i n f o r m a t i o n specialists dev e l o p systems o n the basis of m o d e l s w h i c h are
n o t r e p r e s e n t a t i v e of i n f o r m a t i o n processes in
organisations. In short, i n f o r m a t i o n specialists
m i g h t b e d e s i g n i n g i n a p p r o p r i a t e systems.
Effective i n f o r m a t i o n system design r e q u i r e s
k n o w l e d g e a n d u n d e r s t a n d i n g of actual informat i o n processes in organisations. To date, there
has b e e n little r e s e a r c h c o n d u c t e d in this area.
C o n s e q u e n t l y empirical e v i d e n c e of h o w managers are informed, is e x t r e m e l y limited. A
n u m b e r of a u t h o r s ( S i m o n et al. , 1954; Gore,
1956; Wilensky, 1967; H o p w o o d , 1974; Hoos,
1975; Mintzberg, 1975, 1 9 7 9 ) p o i n t to the exis-
t e n c e of a variety of p r o c e s s e s in organisations
t h r o u g h w h i c h m a n a g e r s gather, d i s t r i b u t e a n d
r e c e i v e information. T h e s e processes are s e e n to
stand in j u x t a p o s i t i o n to formal or officially
s a n c t i o n e d i n f o r m a t i o n systems a n d are typically referred to as informal sources. Such evid e n c e suggests that i n f o r m a t i o n processes in organisations e n c o m p a s s a w i d e r r a n g e of activities t h a n those typically c o n s i d e r e d b y inform a t i o n specialists. Yet, w h i l e recognised, syst e m a t i c investigation of these processes has
b e e n slow to develop.
This paper, based o n a year-long p a r t i c i p a n t
o b s e r v a t i o n study, seeks to e x a m i n e the w i d e r
aspects of i n f o r m a t i o n processes w i t h i n an organisation. T h e p a p e r e x p l o r e s the m e c h a n i s m s
a n d m e d i a i n v o l v e d in the various i n f o r m a t i o n
processes a n d the m e a n i n g that these have for
the m a n a g e r s w h o d e v e l o p a n d use them. T h e
analysis a n d i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of these processes is
i n f o r m e d b y social c o n s t r u c t i o n t h e o r y ( B e r g e r
& Luckmann, 1 9 6 6 ) a n d s y m b o l i c interac-
The author is indebted to David Cooper and the reviewers for their comments and suggestions.
*Allproper names have been changed throughout the text to preserve the anonimity of the participants.
521
522
ALISTAIRPRESTON
tionism (Blumer, 1969). It is argued that these

p e r s p e c t i v e s are m o r e a p p r o p r i a t e as interpretations of information p r o c e s s e s than the m o d e l s
typically a d o p t e d by information specialists.
The research was c o n d u c t e d in the plastics
containers division of a large divisionalised organisation in England. The fieldwork lasted o n e
year, four days a week, during which time I
g a t h e r e d relevant documents, i n t e r v i e w e d the
managers, talked with them informally on the
shop floor, in their offices and over lunch in the
c a n t e e n and o b s e r v e d them as they w e n t about
their daily activities. The p a p e r is therefore an
analysis of the information p r o c e s s e s in a single,
although c o m p l e x organisation, with many situations and characteristics unique to that context. The analysis of this case is not p r o p o s e d as
a series of generalisations. However, many of the
ideas are to do with m o r e fundamental aspects of
human and social behaviour and are, I believe,
trans-situational and can be o b s e r v e d in many
organisational contexts.
The division e m p l o y e d a p p r o x i m a t e l y 250
persons. The p r o d u c t i o n p r o c e s s was highly automated, c o n v e r t i n g plastic pellets into finished
and p r i n t e d containers, primarily for the food
p r o c e s s i n g industry. The division was undergoing a reorganisation and had a p p o i n t e d a n e w
Managing Director (Chris Davis) and a Production Manager (Cyril Jenkins) both of w h o m w e r e
r e g a r d e d as the "bright young men" of the group.
Plastic containers w e r e r e c o g n i s e d as a potential
g r o w t h area and the division was e a r m a r k e d for
substantial capital investment.
The rapid g r o w t h in d e m a n d for plastic containers had c r e a t e d pressure on the division. Inadequate space, old-fashioned equipment, lack
of skilled o p e r a t o r s and inadequate m a n a g e m e n t
w e r e all cited as p r o b l e m areas. Demand for the
p r o d u c t s was high, yet c o m p e t i t i o n was fierce
and growing. P r o d u c t i o n inefficiencies caused
late deliveries, high levels of waste and sometimes p o o r quality; certain customers w e r e
threatening to cancel their orders. It was towards these p r o d u c t i o n p r o b l e m s that the n e w
Managing Director and the P r o d u c t i o n Manager
d i r e c t e d their attention. One strategy was to
c o m p u t e r i s e the p r o d u c t i o n information system
( t h e existing system was manually compiled,

p r o d u c i n g forms at different times of the w e e k
and in differing formats) in an attempt to p r o v i d e
an information base on which to i m p r o v e production. O t h e r strategies for i m p r o v e m e n t w e r e
to c o n s t r u c t n e w w a r e h o u s e facilities, to invest
in n e w plant and e q u i p m e n t and to i n t r o d u c e
p l a n n e d maintenance on the existing machinery.
The initial focus of the research was to study
the design, i m p l e m e n t a t i o n and use of the comp u t e r i s e d p r o d u c t i o n information system. This
focus shifted, as will b e c o m e clear, to a study of
h o w the managers informed themselves and
each other.
A brief calendar of events during the early part
of the research follows.
W e e k 1. Formation of a working party comp r i s e d of Simon White, the Information Manager,
David Clark, the Factory Accountant, and myself,
as observer, to d e v e l o p a c o m p u t e r i s e d p r o d u c tion information system.
W e e k 3. C o m p l e t i o n of the n e w information
system which was essentially a c o m p u t e r i s a t i o n
of the existing manual system p r e p a r e d on a prod u c t i o n information package used by o t h e r divisions in the group and p r o c e s s e d centrally.
W e e k 4. After approval from Senior Managers, the w o r k i n g party cancelled p r e p a r a t i o n of
the existing manual system and distributed the
c o m p u t e r i s e d system.
W e e k 8. After p e r m i t t i n g the n e w system to
settle d o w n I began interviewing the Senior
Managers. Their initial response was favourable.
The managers valued the unified nature of the
n e w system w h i c h they claimed n o w p e r m i t t e d
comparisons by machine, d e p a r t m e n t and over
time.
W e e k 12. I began interviewing the managers
w h o w e r e directly involved in the p r o d u c t i o n
process. (These managers w e r e referred to as
the Factory Managers.) They included:
Mike Shilling
CharlieJohnston
Jim Brown
Peter Travers
Departmental Manager
Departmental Manager
P r o d u c t i o n Planner
Sales Manager ( r e s p o n s i b l e
for liaison b e t w e e n
INTERACTIONSAND ARRANGEMENTSIN THE PROCESSOF INFORMING
Martin Keyes
P r o d u c t i o n and Sales)
Material C o n t r o l Manager
W h e n I began interviewing these managers I

w a s startled to find that n o n e o f t h e m had rec e i v e d c o p i e s o f t h e p r o d u c t i o n i n f o r m a t i o n syst e m o v e r t h e t w o m o n t h p e r i o d . J i m Brown, t h e
P r o d u c t i o n Planner, c o m m e n t e d o n this situation.
Well I was supposed to be getting the production efficiency records (part of the previous manual system) but
they seem to have dried up. There's also some information that's been compiled by Simon White (the head of
the working party) which once again I was meant to be
getting a copy of, which I'm not.
I c h e c k e d w i t h S i m o n White, th e I n f o r m a t i o n
Manager, a b o u t t h e s e findings and his r e s p o n s e
was:
To be perfectly honest Alistair, I stopped circulating the

old information (to the Factory Managers) around Christmas (two months previously) and haven't heard a murmur since.
M o r e surprising than t h e a b s e n c e o f this inform a t i o n was that t h e r e w e r e n o c o m p l a i n t s , n o r

any requests, by t h e F a c t o r y Managers, for any
information.
This d i s c o v e r y r e s u l t e d in a r e o r i e n t a t i o n o f
th e research. It l e d m e to ask: If t h e m a n a g e r s did
n o t u s e t h e official d o c u m e n t e d information,
w h a t information, if it c o u l d b e c a l l e d that, did
t h e y use?
W h e n I asked t h e F a c t o r y Managers w h e r e
t h e y g o t t h ei r i n f o r m a t i o n f r o m t h e y invariably
a n s w e r e d than t h e y did n o t r e c e i v e any. T h e
t e r m " i n f o r m a t i o n " was r e s e r v e d for t h e offi-
523
cially p r e p a r e d material, s a n c t i o n e d b y Senior

M a n a g e m e n t , w h i c h at that t i m e t h e F a c t o r y
Managers w e r e n o t r e c e i v i n g . ~ T h e m a n a g e r s
did, h o w e v e r , r ef er to o t h e r p r o c e s s e s t h r o u g h
w h i c h t h e y i n f o r m e d t h e m s e l v e s and e a c h o t h e r ,
b u t did n o t define t h e m as part o f t h e informat i o n s y s t e m p e r se. T h e s e p r o c e s s e s w e r e referr e d to as " g e t t i n g g e n n e d up", " g e t t i n g c l u e d up"
and m o s t c o m m o n l y "finding o u t w h a t t h e hell's
g o i n g on". Each o f t h e s e p h r ases d e s c r i b e d a process r a t h e r than a tangible entity. T h e m a n a g e r s
had n o n o u n s to d e s c r i b e this t y p e o f information. 2 T o e m p h a s i s e this p r o c e s s o r i e n t e d v i e w
and to distinguish t h e p r o c e s s e s f r o m t h e official
d o c u m e n t e d system, I r ef er to t h e m c o l l e c t i v e l y
as t h e " p r o c e s s o f informing".
T h e p r o c e s s o f i n f o r m i n g fulfilled m a n y o f t h e
claims m a d e for official d o c u m e n t e d informat i o n b y i n f o r m a t i o n theorists; it r e d u c e d u n c e r tainty and e q u i v o c a l i t y ( W e i c k , 1979): it ~ e r f o r m e d an a w a r e n e s s f u n c t i o n ( A n t h o n y e t al.
1984); it p r o v i d e d t h e n e c e s s a r y e v i d e n c e for
t h e m a n a g e r s to arrive at a s o l u t i o n ( M a s o n &
Mitroff, 1973). Yet t h e p r o c e s s o f i n f o r m i n g w as
f u n d a m e n t a l l y different to t h e formal o r official
d o c u m e n t e d i n f o r m a t i o n sy st em s as d e s c r i b e d
in t h e traditional literature. T h e p r o c e s s o f inf o r m i n g w as p r o c e s s o r i e n t e d r a t h e r than structured, w as largely b ased o n p e r s o n a l i n t e r a c t i o n s
r a t h e r than a d e p e r s o n a l i z e d s y s t e m and was
d y n a m i c r a t h e r than static.
The process of informing apparently belonged
to a different o p e r a t i n g o r d e r than the official
d o c u m e n t e d i n f o r m a t i o n system. I suggest that
it b e l o n g e d to a social o r d e r r a t h e r than an official order. T h e f o l l o w i n g t w o s e c t i o n s o u t l i n e
and e x p l o r e t h e s e t w o o r d er s, i n d i c a t i n g h o w
t h e official d o c u m e n t e d s y s t e m and t h e p r o c e s s
o f i n f o r m i n g relate to each.
Shortly after raising this issue with Simon White, the Information Manager, the managers were supplied with the computerised information.
2 Over my year long stay in the organisation, the managers began to adopt the term "information" to refer to what they found
out. They further began to adopt a formal/informal dichotomy. In many respects I now regret this corruption of their language. It indicates how the researcher may have an impact on the subjects of the research, their language and even their conception of the "organisation" and its "systems". Nevertheless the managers still differentiated between the official
documented information and the way they found out what was going on, even after they adopted the new terminology.
524
ALISTAIRPRESTON
DIFFERENT ORDERS
The o f f i c i a l o r d e r
The typical official d o c u m e n t e d information
system, as represented in the conventional textbook wisdom on information systems (Davis &
Olsen, 1984; McCosh et al. 1981; Taggart, 1980;
Murdick, 1980), may be viewed as an attempt to
impose or reinforce a particular kind oforganisational order.
That order is basically hierarchical in nature
with well-defined areas of responsibility and accountability. The hierarchical structure emphasises well delineated lines of authority expressed in superior/subordinate relationships
and structured channels of control, with regular
and patterned information flows. The information (and control) system which incorporates or
is designed upon these organisation characteristics is intended to ensure purposive, rational and
goal directed behaviour as well as promoting
consistency and coordinating the various activities of the functional subsystems in the organisation (Anthony et al., 1984). The model of
the organisation is of a reified system, functionally divided into a series of interactive and responsive subsystems and existing in an environment separated by and interacting through a system boundary. The model of human behaviour is
deterministic, relying on a rational economic
model and explains human responses ~and decision making in terms of environmental stimuli
and the motivation to attain predetermined
goals.
The design principles of information systems
emphasise the formal and highly proceduralised
recording, processing and reporting of preselected data at regular intervals and in a structured and consistent format. In this respect such
information systems mirror and reinforce the official order or hierarchical model of organisations. The routine of information systems further
reinforces, or possibly creates, a sense oforganisational time. This clock time (Clark,1982) or
calendar of events may impose patterned regularity onto many processes within the official
order, particularly those of planning, control and
the evaluation of performance.
Official d o c u m e n t e d systems may also create

or contribute to an organisational language
(Hayes, 1983). This language is highly quantitative, employing and comparing a number ofstandardised measures. A language incorporates a
meaning structure which may influence the interpretation of events by those managers w h o internalise it. Thus, standardised nomenclature
may set the parameters of the managers'
thoughts, conditioning their analysis of events or
problematic situations along repetitive or structured paths.
The hierarchical model of organisations and
information systems, with its implications for organisational
time
and
language,
might
adequately be used to describe the computerised production information system as produced in the factory. The information was broken down by five departments, representing the
structure of accountability and responsibility in
the organisation. The information was further
disaggregated by machine group, by individual
machine and finally by product. The format of
the new system was based on the conventional
procedure of presenting planned and actual performance with variances calculated. Standardised data, mainly from time sheets and the
machine record charts, were collected, recorded and distributed at regular intervals. Information was provided on numbers produced,
stroke rates, levels of waste and analysis of
downtime. The measurement of performance
was expressed in physical or time units. Thus,
the computerised system conformed to the official, structured order. It further implied a
routine calendar and used standardised nomenclature and quantitative measures to express or
represent repetitive events within the factory.
However, the model representing the official
order was unable to account for the process of
informing. This apparently belonged to, or operated within, another type of order to that depicted in the traditional information system and
design literature.
The s o c i a l order
Burns ( 1 9 6 9 ) suggests that there exists a plurality of social systems in an organisation and

w r i t e s o f a "social system, e x i s t i n g in juxtaposit i o n w i t h t h e social s y s t e m r e p r e s e n t e d b y t h e
formal organisation, w i t h its o w n n o r m s , relat i o n s h i p s a n d acts" (p. 233). Such a s y s t e m m a y
b e s e e n as a socially c o n s t r u c t e d o r d e r ( B e r g e r
& Luckmann, 1 9 6 9 ) o r o n e c o n s t r u c t e d o u t o f
t h e social milieu. T h e social o r d e r is c o m p o s e d
o f t h e p a t t e r n s o f relationships, m e a n i n g s a n d int e r p r e t a t i o n s as c o n s t r u c t e d a n d m a d e s e n s e o f
b y t h e i n t e r a c t i n g individuals. T h e o r d e r is continually r e i n f o r c e d o r else m o d i f i e d a n d c h a n g e d
b y individuals as t h e y s e e k to align t h e i r individual c o u r s e s o f a c t i o n in o r d e r to act in conc e r t ( M a n g h a m , 1979). This o r d e r c o u l d b e defined as a n e g o t i a t e d o r d e r (Strauss, 1 9 7 8 ) y e t
without the formal bargaining characteristics of
c o m m e r c i a l o r p o l i t i c a l negotiations.
A social o r d e r m a y b e v i e w e d as a series o f int e r r e l a t e d s h a r e d o r w o r k i n g a r r a n g e m e n t s , implicitly recognised or explicitly stated by the
participating members. These arrangements
c o n s t i t u t e a c o m p l e x o f t a k e n - f o r - g r a n t e d rules
w h i c h individuals m u s t r e c o g n i s e w h e n a c t i n g
w i t h i n them. T h e s e t a k e n - f o r - g r a n t e d rules a r e
rules-in-process. T h e y are t h e m s e l v e s socially
c o n s t r u c t e d a n d are c o n t i n u a l l y r e i n f o r c e d o r
m o d i f i e d t h r o u g h s u c c e s s i v e interactions. T h e y
act as c o n s t r a i n t s o n individuals' b e h a v i o u r .
M e a d ( 1 9 3 4 ) d e s c r i b e d this p r o c e s s in t e r m s o f
t h e I a n d t h e me. T h e m e , w h i c h r e p r e s e n t s s o m e
g e n e r a l i s e d o r specific other, acts b a c k u p o n t h e
/, w h i c h is t h e i m p u l s i v e self, s e t t i n g c o n s t r a i n t s
a n d giving f o r m to t h e s u b s e q u e n t acts. In m a n y
r e s p e c t s a r r a n g e m e n t s are similar to t h e c o n c e p t
o f l o o s e l y c o u p l e d s u b - a s s e m b l i e s offered b y
Weick (1979).
T h e social o r d e r is in a c o n t i n u a l state o f flux
as individuals a d a p t and r e - a r r a n g e t h e m s e l v e s
to t h e d y n a m i c s o f o r g a n i s a t i o n a l life. Such
c h a n g e s take p l a c e w i t h o u t n e c e s s a r i l y t e a r i n g
t h e social fabric o r d e s t r o y i n g t h e social o r d e r ,
and yet, w i t h e a c h change, t h e p r e v i o u s o r d e r is
i r r e t r i e v a b l y lost.
T h e m o r e stable c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of t h e s e arr a n g e m e n t s m a y give t h e a p p e a r a n c e o f an en-
525
d u r i n g s t r u c t u r e . H o w e v e r , if this p e r s p e c t i v e is
a d o p t e d , t h e o b s e r v e r loses t h e ability to s e e t h e
p o t e n t i a l for i m m i n e n t change. M o r e i m p o r tantly s u c h a p e r s p e c t i v e fails to r e c o g n i s e that
t h e i n t e r a c t i n g i n d i v i d u a l s are t h e sole agents in
events, situations and p r o c e s s e s a n d n o t s o m e
reified n o t i o n o f s t r u c t u r e , system, coalition,
g r o u p o r organisation.
Crucial to t h e social c o n s t r u c t i o n p e r s p e c t i v e
is t h e individual. I n d i v i d u a l s are s e e n to act tow a r d s things ( b y things it is m e a n t events, situations, p r o c e s s e s , p r o b l e m s , ideas, w o r d s and
o t h e r p e o p l e ) o n t h e basis o f t h e m e a n i n g s that
t h e s e things have for t h e m ( B l u m e r , 1969).
Things in t h e m s e l v e s have n o i n h e r e n t meaning,
b u t rather, are socially d e r i v e d t h r o u g h successive i n t e r a c t i o n s . Thus, m e a n i n g s w i t h i n t h e social o r d e r are shared. Shared m e a n i n g s a n d t h e
p a t t e r n s o f i n t e r a c t i o n s in w h i c h t h e y are
f o r m e d and a c t e d u p o n , give s h a p e to t h e w o r k ing a r r a n g e m e n t s a n d h e n c e t h e social o r d e r .
S h a r e d m e a n i n g s p e r m i t i n d i v i d u a l s to act a n d
w h i l s t d o i n g so, to anticipate, w i t h i n limits, t h e
r e s p o n s e o f t h e o t h e r parties. H o w e v e r , m e a n ings are s u b j e c t to d e v e l o p m e n t o r m o d i f i c a t i o n
t h r o u g h an i n t e r p r e t i v e p r o c e s s ( B l u m e r , 1969 ).
Participants m a y d e v e l o p a n d assign n e w meanings to things o v e r time, t h r o u g h s u c c e s s i v e exp e r i e n c e s and interactions. I n d i v i d u a l s are able,
e i t h e r c o l l e c t i v e l y o r individually, to r e i n t e r p r e t
o r r e d e f i n e things. R e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s m a y introd u c e m i n o r o r significant c h a n g e s into t h e existing w o r k i n g a r r a n g e m e n t s w h i c h p e r p e t u a t e s
t h e flux w i t h i n t h e social order. 3
T h e r e m a i n d e r o f t h e p a p e r is c o n c e r n e d w i t h
analysing t h e p r o c e s s o f i n f o r m i n g w i t h i n t h e
p e r s p e c t i v e o f t h e social order.
ARRANGEMENTS T O INFORM
T h e p r o c e s s o f i n f o r m i n g m a y b e d e f i n e d as a
series of w o r k i n g a r r a n g e m e n t s to inform. T h e s e
a r r a n g e m e n t s w e r e c o n s t r u c t e d , m a i n t a i n e d and
m o d i f i e d b y t h e m a n a g e r s as t h e y i n t e r a c t e d a n d
3 These points are derived from the symbolic interactionist perspective and in part reinforce the use of this perspective in
accounting and information research (Boland, 1979; Boland & Pondy, 1983; Colville, 1981 ).
526
ALISTAIRPRESTON
w o r k e d with one another. They w e r e therefore

socially c o n s t r u c t e d . T h e y c o n s t i t u t e d a p a t t e r n
o f r e l a t i o n s h i p s t h r o u g h w h i c h m a n a g e r s arr a n g e d to i n f o r m t h e m s e l v e s and e a c h other.
Thus, to u n d e r s t a n d t h e p r o c e s s o f i n f o r m i n g it is
n e c e s s a r y to e x p l o r e h o w t h e s e a r r a n g e m e n t s
w e r e f o r m e d and o p e r a t e d w i t h i n t h e s e t t i n g
and, m o r e i m p o r t a n t l y , w h a t t h e y m e a n t to t h e
managers.
T h e p r o c e s s o f i n f o r m i n g was twofold. Firstly,
t h e m a n a g e r s a r r a n g e d to i n f o r m e a c h o t h e r ,
p r e d o m i n a n t l y t h r o u g h i n t e r a c t i o n and to a lesser e x t e n t t h r o u g h m e e t i n g s . Secondly, t h e managers a r r a n g e d t o i n f o r m t h e m s e l v e s , t h r o u g h
o b s e r v a t i o n and t h e k e e p i n g o f p e r s o n a l r e c o r d s .
T h e s e t w o c a t e g o r i e s will b e d e a lt w i t h separately, a l t h o u g h t h e y are i n t e r r e l a t e d .
P e t e r T r a v e r s (Sales Manager):
It's back to the word-of-mouth again. We'd like to think
that people can come over, which happens a lot, and say
they've got a problem. I wouldn't like to see that change
an awful lot.
In a d d i t i o n to b e i n g an i m p o r t a n t m e a n s o f
finding o u t w h a t was g o i n g o n in t h ei r o w n right,
i n t e r a c t i o n s w e r e u s e d to c h e c k " i n f o r m a t i o n "
g a t h e r e d o r r e c e i v e d f r o m o t h e r s o u r c e s including e a r l i e r interactions. As P e t e r T r a v e r s ( t h e
Sales M a n a g e r ) c o m m e n t e d :
As I say, the information we get from that side of the business, from dispatch.(here he was referring to the monthly
stock list) is always suspect anyway, and I always feel I'd
rather go and check it and talk to the people involved.
Jim Brown (the Production Planner) confirmed
this p u r p o s e o f interactions:
ARRANGEMENTS T O INFORM EACH O T H E R

T h e r e was a c o n t i n u a l i n t e r c h a n g e b e t w e e n
t h e m a n a g e r s o f t h e organisation. T h e m a n a g e r s
talked to e a c h o t h e r o n t h e s h o p floor, in e a c h
o t h e r s ' offices, and at tea, c o f f e e and l u n c h
breaks a b o u t e v e n t s o r situations that h a d taken
place, w e r e taking p l a c e o r w e r e likely to take
p l a c e in t h e organisation. S o m e c o n v e r s a t i o n s
w e r e n o n - w o r k specific, p a r t i c u l a r l y at l u n c h
and b r e a k times, y e t m o s t w e r e c e n t r e d a r o u n d
activities r e l e v a n t to th e m a n a g e r s ' w o r k i n g day.
It was p r i n c i p a l l y t h r o u g h t h e s e i n t e r a c t i o n s that
t h e m a n a g e r s f o u n d o u t w h a t w a s g o i n g on. Initially t h e s e i n t e r a c t i o n s a p p e a r e d to b e r a n d o m .
However, over time patterns emerged; dynamic
and changing, b u t n e v e r t h e l e s s patterns. It was
the e m e r g e n c e o f t h e s e p a t t e r n s that le d m e to
d e f i n e t h e m as a r r a n g e m e n t s to inform.
T h e F a c t o r y Managers r e g a r d e d i n t e r a c t i o n s
as i m p o r t a n t m e a n s o f finding o u t w h a t w a s
g o i n g o n in p r o d u c t i o n , as is m a d e c l e a r f r o m t h e
following comments.
Mike Shilling ( D e p a r t m e n t a l P r o d u c t i o n Manager):
Well I might have to go around the back doors and check

with the Engineers on breakdowns (reported in the
analysis of downtime) just to make sure that I'm getting
the right information.
W o r d - o f - m o u t h "information", w h i c h usually
p r e c e d e d t h e c o m p u t e r p r i n t o u t , was also u s e d
by t h e m a n a g e r s to c h e c k and r e v e a l inacc u r a c i e s in t h e latter. P e t e r Travers, t h e Sales
Manager, n o t e d that:
One of the biggest effective ways of keeping the thing

(the production process ) ticking over, is obviously fairly
regular word-of-mouth contact.
Word-of-mouth contact very often gives you reason to

doubt some of the information that comes to you by the
formal route.
J i m Brown, t h e P r o d u c t i o n Planner, c o n f i r m e d
this point:
Most of the information given to me (the official
documented information), I will have reasonable idea
whether it's true or accurate. But, if I do get a piece of information that I don't think is correct, then I might go the
backhanded way and check it.
T h e r o l e w h i c h i n t e r a c t i o n s p l a y e d in gathering additional details o n " i n f o r m a t i o n " g a t h e r e d
o r r e c e i v e d f r o m o t h e r sources, i n c l u d i n g ear l i er
interactions, also was k n o w n to t h e managers.
P e t e r T r a v e r s explains t h e p r o c e s s :

You hear something then you go and check on it. You
probe and you try and find out what is happening and you
then find out what you feel to be the true picture.
He t h e n added:
527
t e r a c t i o n or i n d e e d a series of i n t e r a c t i o n s is
s o m e w h a t artificial. A single i n t e r a c t i o n c o u l d
entail each or all of the a b o v e purposes.
I n t e r a c t i o n s as a s o u r c e o f m e a n i n g a n d j o i n t
action
There are a lot of cases still, where you think you ended
T h e phrase "finding o u t w h a t was g o i n g on"
up with the true picture. Then you talk to somebody else
had t w o m e a n i n g s to the managers. Firstly, as disabout it or you put forward your theory, just to find
you've got the whole thing wrong anyway,or there have cussed above, it m e a n t f i n d i n g o u t that s o m e
e v e n t had o c c u r e d , was o c c u r i n g or m i g h t
been developments.
occur. Secondly, it m e a n t f i n d i n g o u t w h a t the
Peter Travers implicitly r e c o g n i s e d that multi- n a t u r e of that e v e n t was or w h a t it meant.
ple definitions of a single situation c o u l d exist.
I n t e r a c t i o n s w e r e a f o r u m in w h i c h the manaMoreover, a d e f i n i t i o n held c o u l d c h a n g e over gers c o n s t r u c t e d a n d shared their m e a n i n g s or
t i m e as o n e f o u n d o u t m o r e a b o u t the situation definitions of the situation t h e y w e r e c o n f r o n t e d
with. T h e i n p u t to these interactions, g l e a n e d
or b e c a u s e t h e r e had b e e n d e v e l o p m e n t s in it.
T h e language w i t h i n the p r o c e s s of i n f o r m i n g from w h a t e v e r source, m a y b e d e f i n e d as "mere
was colloquial or natural language (Daft & i n f o r m a t i o n " w h i c h was t h e n s u b j e c t to an inW i g l n t o n , 1979). T h e use of verbal c o m m u n i c a - t e r p r e t i v e p r o c e s s in w h i c h the m a n a g e r s sot i o n p e r m i t t e d the m a n a g e r s to richly d e s c r i b e cially d e r i v e d its m e a n i n g . T h e c o n s t r u c t i o n of a
intricate a n d possibly unfamiliar events. Conver- shared d e f i n i t i o n p e r m i t t e d the m a n a g e r s to act
sation a l l o w e d for the clarification of m e a n i n g i n concert. I n t e r a c t i o n s w e r e therefore n o t o n l y
a n d r e s t r u c t u r i n g of phrases to emphasise diffe- a s o u r c e o f " i n f o r m a t i o n " t h e y w e r e also a s o u r c e
r e n t aspects of the p r o b l e m . Daft & W i g i n t o n of meaning.
( 1 9 7 9 ) suggest that natural language is an apIt was possible, h o w e v e r , that n o shared m e a n p r o p r i a t e basis for organisational c o m m u n i c a - ing or d e f i n i t i o n of the s i t u a t i o n c o u l d b e cont i o n a n d u n d e r s t a n d i n g in that its subtleties a n d s t r u c t e d and thus an agreed c o u r s e of a c t i o n
c o m p l e x i t i e s fit the subtleties and c o m p l e x i t i e s c o u l d n o t b e e m b a r k e d u p o n . T h e s e situations
of the p h e n o m e n a it is u s e d to discuss a n d de- w e r e rare. Most situations d e m a n d e d i m m e d i a t e
scribe.
a c t i o n a n d a high p r e m i u m was p l a c e d o n agreeIt s h o u l d b e n o t e d that the s e p a r a t i o n be- ment. W h e n s u c h situations did occur, resolut w e e n official a n d natural language was n o t al- tion was sought b y referring t h e m to a higher auways clear. Official language c o u l d b e s e e n to
thority ( u s u a l l y Cyril J e n k i n s the P r o d u c t i o n
Manager). Alternatively the manager, w h o was
p e r m e a t e into the social to b e c o m e part of the
everyday natural language. T h e managers, durr e g a r d e d b y the others as b e i n g m o r e directly reing c o n v e r s a t i o n , often referred to "stroke
sponsible for the situation's solution, c o u l d imrates", " d o w n t i m e " , "wait labour" and "wait pose his d e f i n i t i o n of the situation b y acting unmaterial" as well as the p r o d u c t a n d material
ilaterally.
specifications in "official" terms.
In a d d i t i o n to b e i n g s o u r c e s of m e a n i n g , inI n t e r a c t i o n s w e r e an integral part in the mana- t e r a c t i o n s w e r e also a f o r u m in w h i c h the managers' daily activities. As part of the p r o c e s s of in- gers c o u l d c o o r d i n a t e their individual c o u r s e s of
f o r m i n g they p r o v i d e d the m a n a g e r s w i t h the
a c t i o n (this s u g g e s t i o n is i m p l i e d in the a b o v e
m e a n s of finding o u t a b o u t s u r p r i s i n g or undiscussion). W h e n such j o i n t action was u n d e r k n o w n e v e n t s as well as c h e c k i n g "information" taken, particularly in situations w h e r e the outfrom o t h e r sources, revealing i n a c c u r a c i e s in the
c o m e of that a c t i o n was u n c e r t a i n , the m a n a g e r s
a r r a n g e d to keep each o t h e r informed, or m o r e
official i n f o r m a t i o n systems a n d g a t h e r i n g additional detail o n specific situations. Separating colloquially, "to keep each o t h e r u p to date" or
each of the above p u r p o s e s from any single in- "to keep each o t h e r in the picture". This p r o c e s s
528
ALISTAIRPRESTON
b e c a m e a m o r e formal a r r a n g e m e n t to i n f o r m
each o t h e r a b o u t an o n - g o i n g situation. I n s o m e
cases, a r r a n g e m e n t s to i n f o r m a b o u t r o u t i n e or
r e p e t i t i v e situations w e r e r e m o v e d from the
f o r u m of i n t e r a c t i o n a n d w r i t t e n m e m o s or
d o c u m e n t e d c o m m e n t s and results w e r e exchanged. T h e s e m e m o s or d o c u m e n t s constit u t e d a m o r e p e r m a n e n t r e c o r d of p a r t i c u l a r imp o r t a n t - t o - t h e - m a n a g e r situations a n d constit u t e d or c o n t r i b u t e d to the m a n a g e r s ' p e r s o n a l
records. (See s e c t i o n o n A r r a n g e m e n t s to Inform T h e m s e l v e s . )
The need to k n o w
A r r a n g e m e n t s to inform, as w i t h o t h e r arr a n g e m e n t s in the social order, w e r e s u b j e c t to a
series of taken-for-granted rules. These takenfor-granted rules i n f l u e n c e d w h o was i n v o l v e d
in the a r r a n g e m e n t s a n d the d e g r e e of i n f o r m i n g
that took place. To b e reliably a n d a c c u r a t e l y inf o r m e d was of c o n s i d e r a b l e i m p o r t a n c e to the
managers. Being i n f o r m e d e n a b l e d t h e m to w o r k
effectively as i m p l i e d in their c o m m e n t s above.
H o w e v e r , b e i n g i n f o r m e d was also i m p o r t a n t to
the m a n a g e r s ' p r e s e n t a t i o n of self (Goffman,
1 9 5 9 ) or to their credibility.
Martin Keyes, the Material C o n t r o l Manager,
m a d e the following c o m m e n t :
At the production meetings people ask me what's been
used (meaning material). Then they want tt) know why;
and ifI haven't been out there to find out what's happening, they'd tear me down.
Jim B r o w n m a d e this m o r e e m p h a t i c c o m m e n t :
And obviously if you haven't got the bloody information
it makes you look like a bloody idiot, which means that
your credibility suffers and people think you don't know
what you're doing.
Thus, the m a n a g e r s e x p e n d e d c o n s i d e r a b l e time
a n d effort to "be s e e n to b e in the k n o w " or to app e a r to b e well informed. To achieve this, managers had to d e l i b e r a t e l y d e v e l o p a n d cultivate arr a n g e m e n t s to inform.
T h e following s e c t i o n s identify s o m e takenfor-granted rules implicit in the f o r m a t i o n a n d
o p e r a t i o n of a r r a n g e m e n t s to i n f o r m w i t h i n the
factory.
The definition o f the situation

A r r a n g e m e n t s to i n f o r m did n o t take place o n
an arbitrary basis. T h e i r m a k e - u p ( b y w h i c h I
m e a n the p e r s o n s i n v o l v e d ) a n d the c o n t e n t of
the i n t e r a c t i o n s w e r e i n f l u e n c e d b y the situation
under consideration. The arrangements were
n o t fixed b u t w e r e in a state of flux; their makeu p a n d c o n t e n t w e r e d e p e n d e n t o n h o w the
m a n a g e r s i n t e r p r e t e d or d e f i n e d the situation
they w e r e faced with. Based o n the d e f i n i t i o n of
the situation ( T h o m a s , 1937), the m a n a g e r s
c o u l d t h e n d e c i d e w h o to inform.
At this p o i n t it is useful to distinguish b e t w e e n
situations that w e r e d e f i n e d b y the m a n a g e r s to
b e familiar a n d those d e f i n e d to be unfamiliar. I n
situations w h i c h w e r e d e f i n e d to b e familiar, the
m a n a g e r c o u l d anticipate the c o n s e q u e n c e s of
that situation for others and i n f o r m t h e m of its
o c c u r r e n c e . Thus, the d e f i n i t i o n of the situation,
based o n successive e x p e r i e n c e s of similar situations in the past, w o u l d largely d e t e r m i n e w h i c h
o t h e r m a n a g e r s w e r e to b e informed, and thus
the n a t u r e of the a r r a n g e m e n t to inform.
For situations that w e r e d e f i n e d to b e unfamiliar, a less p r e d i c t a b l e a r r a n g e m e n t to i n f o r m
c o u l d emerge. T h e c o n s e q u e n c e s of unfamiliar
situations w e r e n o t as i m m e d i a t e l y a p p a r e n t to
the m a n a g e r involved, a n d thus, it was less obvious w h o to inform. I n t e r a c t i o n s in unfamiliar
situations w e r e as m u c h to find o u t the n a t u r e
and c o n s e q u e n c e s of the event, or to c o n s t r u c t a
d e f i n i t i o n of the situation, as to inform others of
its o c c u r e n c e . This p r o c e s s is i m p l i e d in the previous c o m m e n t s by Peter Travers, the Sales Manager, w h e r e h e talked of "probing" a n d "trying to
find o u t w h a t is h a p p e n i n g " a n d h o w t h r o u g h
s u b s e q u e n t i n t e r a c t i o n s a n e w p i c t u r e of the
situation emerged. In unfamiliar situations the
m a n a g e r s w o u l d a t t e m p t to d r a w o n o t h e r s '
stocks of e x p e r i e n c e (Schutz, 1 9 6 2 ) or a c c u m u lated w i s d o m to define the p r o b l e m . The managers w o u l d seek o u t others w h o they felt m i g h t
k n o w a b o u t the situation. For e x a m p l e Jim
Brown, the P r o d u c t i o n Planner, relied o n Charlie J o h n s o n , the old t i m e r of the factory,

w h e n e v e r h e was u n c e r t a i n a b o u t t h e n a t u r e and
c o n s e q u e n c e s o f an event.
Thus, for r o u t i n e o r r e p e t i t i v e situations fairly
stable a r r a n g e m e n t s to i n f o r m e m e r g e d . But for
situations that w e r e unfamiliar a m o r e e r r a t ic or
explorative approach was adopted. However,
situations w e r e n o t t h e o n l y d e t e r m i n a n t s o f arr a n g e m e n t s to inform.
The taken -for-granted rule of reciprocity

A r r a n g e m e n t s to i n f o r m e x i s t e d o n a recipr o c a l basis. T o b e reliably a n d a c c u r a t e l y inf o r m e d , t h e m a n a g e r s h a d to in t u r n reliably and
a c c u r a t e l y i n f o r m others. This r e c i p r o c i t y w a s
n o t o n a f o r m a l o r v a l u e e x c h a n g e basis. Rather,
it was a g e n e r a l c o m m i t m e n t o r taken-forg r a n t e d r u l e to i n f o r m o n e another.
J i m Brown, t h e P r o d u c t i o n Planner, m a d e t h e
following comment:
Generally speaking, if a machine is shut down for more
than about an hour I will be told why.., and when it will
start again.
In t h e s u b s e q u e n t i n t e r c h a n g e , t h e e l e m e n t o f
r e c i p r o c i t y was e m p h a s i s e d :
Alistair Preston (Researcher):
When it's happening?
Jim Brown:
Yes while it's actually happening.
Alistair Preston:
Do they actually come over to you?
Jim Brown:
Yes they come to me. But if I'm there I'll ask the
question then. I spend a lot of time in production but
if I'm not there they'll come over to me.
Alistair Preston:
Do you in turn keep them informed?
Jim Brown:
Yes, it's a two way thing.
In a d d i t i o n to r e f e r r i n g to th e r e c i p r o c a l n a t u r e
o f t h e p r o c e s s o f i n f o r m i n g by d e s c r i b i n g it as
a " t w o - w a y thing", this c o n s e r v a t i o n raises
a n o t h e r point. It r e v e a l s t h e t i m e l i n e s s o f arr a n g e m e n t s to inform. T h e t i m e l i n e s s o f interac-
529
tions p e r m i t t e d t h e F a c t o r y Managers to res p o n d to e v e n t s that w e r e d e f i n e d by t h e m to b e

u r g e n t o r r e q u i r i n g i m m e d i a t e attention. 4 T h e
t i m e frames w i t h i n t h e p r o c e s s o f i n f o r m i n g display s o m e different c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s to t h o s e o f
t h e official d o c u m e n t e d system. Rather than
o p e r a t i n g p u r e l y o n an abstract c l o c k o r calendar time, t h e p r o c e s s o f i n f o r m i n g c o u l d o p e r a t e
o n t i m e frames d i c t a t e d b y t h e n a t u r e o f t h e
event. W i t h i n t h e f act o r y s o m e e v e n t s w e r e defined to b e u r g e n t w h i l e o t h e r s w e r e not. Rush
o r d e r s o r special n e w c u s t o m e r o r d e r s w e r e
m o r e t i m e sensitive t h a n p r o d u c i n g g o o d s for
stock.
T h e m a n a g e r s h o w e v e r , w e r e aw ar e o f t h e official " c l o c k time". Shift c h a n g e - o v e r s at c e r t a i n
t i m es o f t h e day, tea times, l u n c h times, starting
times, finishing t i m e s and t i m e s for m e e t i n g s all
p l a y e d a part in t h e m a n a g e r s ' daily activities.
T h e m a n a g e r s also c o n s t r u c t e d t h ei r own, t i m e
frames by visiting t h e s h o p floor at c e r t a i n t i m e s
and p e r f o r m i n g c e r t a i n r o u t i n e tasks at o t h e r
r eg u l ar times. This c o n s c i o u s n e s s o f t i m e
c r e a t e d p a t t e r n e d r e g u l a r i t y in t h e activities o f
t h e managers. H o w e v e r , this sen se o f t i m e c o u l d
be, and v e r y o f t e n was, d i s r u p t e d b y u r g e n t
events. Managers o f t e n had "n o t i m e" for tea o r
l u n c h o r i n d e e d for m eet i n g s. T h e sen se o f t i m e
c o n t a i n e d in an e v e n t (Clark, 1 9 8 2 ) o f t e n o v er r o d e t h e m o r e stable organisational time. Again
t h e c o n c e p t o f t i m e p o i n t s for an interplay bet w e e n t h e "official" and "socially c o n s t r u c t e d "
o r d e r s w i t h i n t h e organisation.
The requirement of being a reliable and

accurate informant
T o b e i n v o l v e d in an a r r a n g e m e n t to inform, a
m a n a g e r had to b e d e f i n e d by t h e o t h e r s as a reliable and a c c u r a t e informant. T h e m a n a g e r s w e r e
t h e r e f o r e careful tO e n s u r e that w h a t t h e y passed
o n was r e l e v a n t and accurate. In this sen se t h e
m a n a g e r s a c t e d as " i n t e l l i g e n t filters" o f informat i o n ( M i n t z b e r g , 1975). J i m B r o w n , t h e P r o d u c t i o n Planner, n o t e d that h e w as t h e sole p e r s o n
4Arrangements to inform were an attempt to generate real time richly descriptive information. In this respect they are similar
to Galbraith's notion of Local Real Time Information Systems (1977).
530
responsible for communication
Office and added the following:
ALISTAIR PRESTON
w i t h t h e Sales
If that is the case I feel must ensure that the information

I've got is correct before I take it over to them.
J i m B r o w n w a s a c u t e l y c o n s c i o u s o f h i s s t a t u s as
a timely, accurate and consistently reliable informant not least for his own credibility, but also to
e n s u r e t h a t o t h e r s w o u l d i n t u r n k e e p h i m informed.
The managers' response to whatever they
found out through interaction largely depended
o n t h e i r d e f i n i t i o n o f t h e i n f o r m a n t . As P e t e r
T r a v e r s , t h e Sales M a n a g e r , n o t e d i n t h e f o l l o w ing conversation:
It depends on the source actually. From certain people
you can almost guarantee it as being grossly inflated or
exaggerated or whatever.
Alistair Preston (the Researcher ):
So the person involved is important?
Peter Travers:
Yes I think so, I won't go into personalities. But there
are people we can rely on 100%. As far as we're concerned until such times as something goes wrong, we
take their word as being factual.
Alistair Preston:
So you make some judgments about the people
involved?
Peter Travers:
Yes there's no doubt that you do, and you know, you
react accordingly. If it's from a certain source you do
something about it (take action). If you hear about it
from another source you may probe a little and try and
find out ifjt's true, but probably you don't take much
notice of it quite honestly. So I think it all comes down
to people in the end. Certainly you do build up a
feeling towards other people, no question about that,
and decide just how reliable that person is.
again, it looks they're taking the main rollers out.

Jim Brown:
Yeah, thanks a lot Martin.
Martin Keyes:
O.K. you're welcome. (He leaves).
Is that going to affect your plan?
Jim Brown:
I knew the Waddington was being taken apart after this
run, (he pointed to the planning board). It's been on
the cards for weeks.
Alistair Preston:
So it was not that important?
Jim Brown:
No! Martin always brings me history.
T h i s i n c i d e n t s h o w e d t h a t M a r t i n K e y e s w a s singularly ill-informed. Most of the managers knew
that the Waddington was being serviced and
none thought to inform Martin Keyes. Martin
Keyes usually reported outdated information
w h i c h m a d e h i s p o s i t i o n i n t h e p r o c e s s o f informing even worse. The process of excluding
Martin Keyes did not appear to be malicious. He
s i m p l y d i d n o t f i g u r e i n a n y b o d y ' s "list" o f
people to inform.
Arrangements and organisational position
Certain managers, notably Martin Keyes, were

e x c l u d e d f r o m m o s t o f t h e a r r a n g e m e n t s t o inform because they themselves were not seen to
be reliable or accurate informants. They, in turn,
w e r e c o n s i s t e n t l y i l l - i n f o r m e d as is m a d e c l e a r i n
the following incident.
I was talking to Jim Brown, the Production
Planner, when Martin Keyes, the Material Cont r o l M a n a g e r c a m e in:
M a n a g e r s c o u l d a l s o b e e x c l u d e d f r o m arrangements to inform because of the position

t h e y h e l d i n t h e o r g a n i s a t i o n ( p o s i t i o n as d e fined by the other participating individuals and
the person himself). Cyril Jenkins, the Product i o n M a n a g e r a n d t h e s u p e r i o r o f all t h e m a n a gers at production level, was generally excluded
f r o m all t h e a r r a n g e m e n t s t o i n f o r m . J i m B r o w n ,
the Production Planner, described Cyril Jenkins'
p o s i t i o n as b e i n g o n e o f " h a l f - w a y n e s s " ; n e e d i n g
to be involved in production matters and yet not
being part of the Factory Management team. He
further noted that "there was a tremendous void
between the Top Managers and the Factory Managers", which distanced Cyril Jenkins even more.
I asked Mike Shilling and Charlie Johnson, the
t w o D e p a r t m e n t a l M a n a g e r s , if t h e y i n f o r m e d
Cyril Jenkins about events in their departments.
T h e i r r e s p o n s e s w e r e as f o l l o w s :
Martin Keyes:
The Waddington (the name of the machine)is down
Mike Shilling:
No, not from me, as far as I'm concerned he will
531
receive it from the management information thing

which is passed through a week later.
me. I have to run around and find things out from other
sources about his department which I shouldn't do.
Charlie Johnson:
No, no, sorry! He comes and asks me. The only thing I
point out to him are the problems I've got.
Thus, p e r s o n a l relationships, w h i c h w e r e
d y n a m i c and changing, c o u l d facilitate o r disr u p t t h e p r o c e s s o f informing.
A f u r t h e r p o i n t is raised in t h e a b o v e c o m m e n t ; J i m B r o w n w as a w a r e that finding o u t
f r o m a t h i r d p ar t y b r o k e a taken-for-granted r u l e
in t h e p r o c e s s o f informing. T o d o so c o u l d c o m p r o m i s e t h e t h i r d p a r t y and j e o p a r d i z e his arr a n g e m e n t s to inform. This again r e i n f o r c e s t h e
p o i n t that t h e c o n t e n t o f i n t e r a c t i o n s w as n o t a
p u b l i c c o m m o d i t y , and s h o u l d o n l y b e transferr e d to l e g i t i m a t e parties.
T o s o m e e x t e n t Cyril J e n k i n s e x c l u s i o n f r o m
t h e a r r a n g e m e n t s to i n f o r m at p r o d u c t i o n l ev el
was also b e c a u s e o f t h e d e f i n i t i o n t h e m a n a g e r s
h e l d o f him. Mike Shilling d e s c r i b e d his appointm e n t as a "disaster" w h i l e Charlie J o h n s o n , q u e s t i o n e d w h e t h e r a U n i v e r s i t y G r a d u a t e in Law
( w h i c h Cyril Jen k i n s w a s ) was cap ab l e o f runn i n g a factory. Charlie J o h n s o n m a d e it cl ear to
m e that h e did n o t think so. By h a r b o u r i n g s u c h
feelings, t h e m a n a g e r s w e r e n o t p r e d i s p o s e d to
m a k e his j o b any easier by i n f o r m i n g him.
Cyril J e n k i n s was n o t r e g a r d e d as a l e g i t i m a t e
pa r t y to any a r r a n g e m e n t s to inform. T h e manag e r s w e r e at pains to stress that t h e y did n o t inf o r m h i m unless t h e y w e r e d e l i b e r a t e l y asked.
T h e p o s i t i o n that Cyril J e n k i n s h e l d r e q u i r e d
h i m to e v a l u a t e t h e p e r f o r m a n c e o f t h e F a c t o r y
Managers u n d e r his responsibility. T h e F a c to r y
Managers r e c o g n i s e d this, and d e l i b e r a t e l y
e x c l u d e d h i m f r o m any details h e m i g h t h a v e
u s e d for this p u r p o s e . Unlike t h e official
d o c u m e n t e d i n f o r m a t i o n , t h e c o n t e n t o f interactions, w i t h i n a r r a n g e m e n t s to inform, w e r e n o t a
p u b l i c c o m m o d i t y . T o b e r e g a r d e d as an inf o r m e r o f Senior M a n a g e m e n t was a stigma that
m o s t m a n a g e r s s t r o v e to avoid.
Arrangements and personal relationships

Personal r e l a t i o n s h i p s b e t w e e n t h e managers,
f r a m e d in t h e d ef in it io n s that t h e m a n a g e r s h e l d
o f e a c h other, c o u l d also affect t h e n a t u r e o f arr a n g e m e n t s to inform. 5 T h e d e f i n i ti o n s that t h e
managers held of each other w e r e formed
through successive interactions b e t w e e n them,
i n c l u d i n g t h o s e n o t specifically r e l a t e d to w o r k
issues. ( Th i s p o i n t suggests that t h e p r o c e s s o f
i n f o r m i n g was an integral part o f t h e w i d e r social
o r d e r in t h e o r g a n i s a t i o n . ) C e r ta in m a n a g e r s
o f t e n did n o t k e e p e a c h o t h e r i n f o r m e d s i m p l y
b e c a u s e t h e y did n o t like e a c h o t h e r o r b e c a u s e
t h e r e w e r e hostilities b e t w e e n them.
J i m Brown, t h e P r o d u c t i o n Planner, c o m m e n t e d o n his r e l a t i o n s h i p w i t h Mike Shilling, a
D e p a r t m e n t a l P r o d u c t i o n Manager:
Arrangements to misinform
Relationships b e t w e e n t h e F act o r y Managers
w e r e in a state o f flux; s o m e t i m e s amicable,
s o m e t i m e s hostile. W h e n t h e r e w e r e conflicts o f
i n t e r e s t o r w h e n t h e m a n a g e r s w e r e b e i n g delibe r a t e l y strategic t h e y c o u l d ar r an g e to misinf o r m e a c h other. P e t e r Travers, t h e Sales Manager c o m m e n t e d :
We do make some devious moves without a doubt. But
having said that it's for the best possible motive. This
obviously doesn't get back to Planning and so on.
No, no, strictly confidential.
As far as Mike Shilling is concerned I think there is a certain animosity between Mike and I. I'm in constant conflict with him. The feedback from Mike is very poor to
Peter Travers:
There are times when we are building in extra time,
5 Within the managers' interactions a great deal of non work related issues were discussed. Although these issues were not
related to work, they were an important means by which the managers formed definitions of each other which had an impact
on subsequent interactions, including those of a work related nature. They thus had implications for the process of informing.
532
ALISTAIRPRESTON
knowing that the factory cannot do what we want
them to do. So if you like, we assess what we think is
going to happen and we add a certain amount of time
to give ourselves a bit of breathing space. So we're
putting pressure on maybe a week before the pressure
really has to go on. But that is the only way we can safeguard our customer requirements.
It was p a r t i c u l a r l y difficult to d e t e r m i n e t h e
e x t e n t o f m i s i n f o r m i n g . T h e m a n a g e r s w e r e rel u c t a n t to d i s c l o s e s u c h i n c i d e n c e s b e c a u s e o f
t h e i m p a c t it w o u l d h a v e o n t h e i r e s t a b l i s h e d arr a n g e m e n t s if t h e o t h e r p a r t i c i p a n t s w e r e e v e r
to find out. N o t i c e also that P e t e r T r a v e r s was
q u i c k to justify his m i s i n f o r m i n g in t e r m s o f
safeguarding c u s t o m e r interests.
Conflicting definitions: the production

meeting
C o n f l i c t i n g d ef in it io n s o f t h e p u r p o s e o f t h e
various arrangements within the factory could
j e o p a r d i s e t h e f l o w o f information. For e x a m p l e ,
t h e F a c t o r y Managers a t t e n d e d a w e e k l y P r o d u c t i o n M e e t i n g c h a i r e d by Cyril Jenkins, t h e Prod u c t i o n Manager, w h i c h w a s h e l d o n M o n d a y
m o r n i n g s . This m e e t i n g c o u l d b e d e f i n e d as a
semi-formal arrangement.
Cyril J e n k i n s r e g a r d e d t h e P r o d u c t i o n Meeting as an i m p o r t a n t m e a n s o f " k e e p i n g abreast" o f
e v e n t s in t h e f a c t o r y and, thus, for h i m it w a s an
a r r a n g e m e n t to inform. In contrast, t h e F a c t o r y
Managers, w h o w e r e a l r e a d y abreast 'of events,
d e f i n e d t h e P r o d u c t i o n M e e t i n g as a " w a s t e o f
time". T h e F a c t o r y Managers felt that s u c h a
m e e t i n g s h o u l d b e for m a k i n g jo in t decisions,
a nd w i t h i n this c o n t e x t t h e y d e f i n e d it as a failure. As C h ar l i e J o h n s o n , a D e p a r t m e n t a l Prod u c t i o n Manager, c o m m e n t e d :
There's so much talk in the meeting, but there's no follow-up or anything. If you've got the minutes of three
months ago, some of those bloody things are still on it
today.
J i m B r o w n m a d e a similar point:
Oh well, at the moment I think that all it does (the Production Meeting) is really indicate what's going on in
Production. I think it serves very little else. I think it's rare
that there's any positive action taken from the Production Meeting.
A c o n f l i c t o f d ef i n i t i o n s ar o se w i t h r e g a r d to
t h e P r o d u c t i o n Meeting. For t h o s e o u t s i d e t h e
daily activities o f p r o d u c t i o n , it w as a useful
m e a n s o f i n f o r m i n g oneself. In contrast, for t h o s e
w i t h an i n t i m a t e k n o w l e d g e o f e v e n t s in p r o d u c tion, t h e m e e t i n g was r e d u n d a n t as a m e a n s o f informing. T h e m a n a g e r s w e r e f u r t h e r critical o f
t h e m e e t i n g b e c a u s e it t o o k p l a c e o n a M o n d a y
m o r n i n g w h e n t h e y w o u l d p r e f e r to b e o n t h e
s h o p f l o o r finding o u t w h a t w as g o i n g o n after
t h e w e e k e n d shift. Finally, Cyril Jenkins, t h e Prod u c t i o n Manager, was c r i t i c i s e d for n o t passing
o n i n f o r m a t i o n to t h e F a c t o r y Managers and thus
t h e m e e t i n g did n o t satisfy t h e c r i t e r i o n o f reciprocity. As Mike Shilling, a D e p a r t m e n t a l P r o d u c t i o n Manager, n o t e d w h e n I asked h i m w h e t h e r
e n o u g h i n f o r m a t i o n was passed d o w n in t h e Prod u c t i o n Meeting:
No, 1think that's because the Production Manager is loath
to pass on information because he feels it might be used
against them (the Senior Managers) or something.
In r e t u r n t h e F a c t o r y Managers w e r e again reluctant to i n f o r m Cyril Jenkins.
In s u m m a r y , t h e p r o c e s s o f i n f o r m i n g w i t h i n
t h e social c o n s t r u c t i o n p e r s p e c t i v e , m a y b e s e e n
as a series o f s h a r e d a r r a n g e m e n t s to i n f o r m o n e
another through interaction. The managers
p l a c e d c o n s i d e r a b l e v a l u e o n t h e s e arrangem e n t s in o r d e r to p e r f o r m t h e i r f u n c t i o n s and to
b e s e e n w e l l i n f o r m e d in t h e e y e s o f others. T h e
a r r a n g e m e n t s w e r e in part situationally d e t e r m i n e d b u t w e r e also s u b j e c t to taken for g r a n t e d
rules w h i c h t h e participants w e r e r e q u i r e d to
take c o g n i z a n c e of. T h e rules e n s u r e d t h e continuation of the m o r e durable arrangements, but
e v e n t h e s e w e r e s u b j e c t to c h a n g e as circ u m s t a n c e s , p a t t e r n s o f r el at i o n sh i p s and feelings b e t w e e n the m a n a g e r s e v o l v e d o v e r time.
Although the managers regarded interactions
as t h e c o r n e r s t o n e o f t h e o v er al l p r o c e s s o f informing, o t h e r m e c h a n i s m s o f finding o u t w h a t
was g o i n g o n w e r e also o p e n to them. T h e s e will
b e d i s c u s s e d in t h e n e x t section.
INTERACTIONSANDARRANGEMENTSIN THE PROCESSOF INFORMING

ARRANGEMENTS T O INFORM THEMSELVES
W h e n m a n a g e r s i n t e r a c t e d w i t h others they
w e r e e n g a g e d i n the p r o c e s s of i n f o r m i n g themselves as w e l l as the o t h e r party or parties. However, the m a n a g e r s did n o t rely solely o n interactions. T h e y e m p l o y e d o t h e r m e a n s of f i n d i n g o u t
w h a t was g o i n g on; in effect t h e y m a d e arrangem e n t s to i n f o r m themselves. T h e t w o p r i n c i p a l
means involved were direct observation and
k e e p i n g p e r s o n a l records.
Observations
Managers w o u l d f r e q u e n t l y go d o w n o n t o the
shop floor a n d d i r e c t l y o b s e r v e w h a t was going
on. T h e m a n a g e r s e x p r e s s e d an i n t e r e s t in seeing
w h a t was h a p p e n i n g .
Because the factory m a n u f a c t u r e d c o n t a i n e r s
for the food p r o c e s s i n g industry, the m a n a g e r s
w e r e r e q u i r e d to w e a r w h i t e coats for h y g i e n e
purposes. T h e i r visits to the shop floor had the
a p p e a r a n c e of d o c t o r s m a k i n g w a r d rounds.
These r o u n d s w e r e fairly regular, taking place at
c e r t a i n times of the day. O t h e r m a n a g e r s w e r e
aware of these times a n d c o u l d arrange to " b u m p
into" each other. T h e m a i n p u r p o s e of these
r o u n d s w e r e to cast a n eye over the p r o d u c t i o n
p r o c e s s to see if t h e r e w e r e a n y u n t o w a r d e v e n t s
w h i c h they had n o t b e e n i n f o r m e d about. For
o n - g o i n g p r o b l e m a t i c situations the visit w o u l d
b e m o r e specific a n d m i g h t take place o u t s i d e
their n o r m a l daily rounds.
As n o t e d earlier, Jim Brown, the P r o d u c t i o n
Planner, stated that he "spent a lot of t i m e i n production". W h e n there, he c o u l d directly o b s e r v e
m a c h i n e b r e a k d o w n s , levels of waste, n u m b e r s
p r o d u c e d a n d so forth. Charlie J o h n s o n , a Dep a r t m e n t a l P r o d u c t i o n Manager, invariably
looked a r o u n d his d e p a r t m e n t s w h e n he arrived
in the m o r n i n g a n d i n d e e d s p e n t m u c h of his day
o n the shop floor, as did Mike Shilling the o t h e r
D e p a r t m e n t a l P r o d u c t i o n Manager.
Martin Keyes, the Material C o n t r o l Manager,
had to rely m o r e heavily o n o b s e r v a t i o n b e c a u s e
he c o u l d n o t rely o n b e i n g i n f o r m e d b y others.
He m a d e the following c o m m e n t :
I've got to get on my feet and walk down there to see
533
what's going on. I come i n . . . in the morning and see a

machine stRl runningand have to go to the setter and ask
what's going on?
Jim Brown, the P r o d u c t i o n Planner, also relied
o n o b s e r v a t i o n as a m e a n s of i n f o r m i n g himself,
as is d e m o n s t r a t e d i n the following c o m m e n t :
You know, when you come in on Monday mornings and
check the level of the silos, you find it's down to 1% and
you say, "Why the bloody hell's that down to 1%?" Then
you go downstairs and find out that they hadn't run regrind (reprocessed waste material) over the weekend.
T h e o b s e r v a t i o n of e v e n t s c o u l d o n l y take place
in the p r e s e n t w h e n the e v e n t was o c c u r r i n g a n d
thus, c o u l d n o t b e relied o n in all situations.
F u r t h e r m o r e , o b s e r v a t i o n rarely p r o v i d e d a full
e n o u g h p i c t u r e or a c c o u n t of an e v e n t a n d was
closely l i n k e d w i t h the p r o c e s s of i n t e r a c t i o n .
This is i m p l i e d i n the a b o v e c o m m e n t s from Martin Keyes a n d Jim Brown. Having o b s e r v e d that
s o m e t h i n g i n t e r e s t i n g or u n t o w a r d was taking
place, the m a n a g e r s w o u l d t h e n ask the appropriate p e r s o n a b o u t that e v e n t to c o n f i r m their
o b s e r v a t i o n s o r to gather additional details.
Managers, w h e n visiting o t h e r d e p a r t m e n t s ,
w o u l d invariably stop o n in the m a n a g e r of that
s e c t i o n to "find o u t w h a t was g o i n g on". This was
a form of casual e n q u i r y , e n route, in w h i c h general gossip or w o r k related issues w e r e discussed, thus a d d i n g to the m a n a g e r s ' stock of knowledge a b o u t the organisation.
Personal records
I n a d d i t i o n to o b s e r v a t i o n , the m a n a g e r s kept
p e r s o n a l r e c o r d s of r o u t i n e or regular e v e n t s
w h i c h they p e r s o n a l l y d e f i n e d as b e i n g important to t h e m s e l v e s a n d their work. Personal records i n c l u d e d m u c h of w h a t the m a n a g e r s
found out through observation and interaction.
T h e m a n a g e r s also m a d e m o r e formalised requests for figures, c o m m e n t s a n d m e m o s from
o t h e r p e o p l e in the o r g a n i s a t i o n w h i c h in t u r n
f o r m e d part of the managers' p e r s o n a l records.
Jim Brown, the P r o d u c t i o n Planner, m a d e the
following c o m m e n t :
Sometimeswe've had a situation when maybe two or
534
ALISTAIR PRESTON
three tonnes are rejected (as waste). I wasn't told and the
machines have run out three or four days early without
me knowing about it. That's been corrected. Now I get a
slip of paper which is a carbon copy showing the amount
of material which goes to store.
Jim Brown then compiled a record of rejected
m a t e r i a l w h i c h h e u s e d to adjust his p r o d u c t i o n
schedules.
T h e m a n a g e r s h a d r e c o u r s e to use m o r e form a l i s e d c h a n n e l s o f informing, p a r t i c u l a r l y for
the m o r e routine problems they encountered.
However, these formalised channels w e r e cons t r u c t e d b y t h e managers, b a s e d o n t h e i r perc e i v e d n e e d for that p a r t i c u l a r i n f o r m a t i o n and
n o t i m p o s e d f r o m w i t h o u t , as w a s t h e case o f t h e
official d o c u m e n t e d i n f o r m a t i o n .
P e t e r T r a v e r s in Sales k e p t c u s t o m e r r e c o r d
cards o n w h i c h h e r e c o r d e d t h e n u m b e r o f
g o o d s p r o d u c e d and s e n t to s t o r e f r o m t h e s t o r e
r e c o r d slips. He c o m p a r e d t h e s e w i t h t h e disp a t c h n o t e s to c a l c u l a t e t h e l e v e l s o f s t o c k for his
c u s t o m e r s ' orders. H e c o n s t a n t l y f o u n d that his
c a l c u l a t i o n s differed f r o m th e official stocklist,
w h i c h h e o f t e n c o m p l a i n e d about. H e r e g a r d e d
his o w n p e r s o n a l r e c o r d s as b e i n g m o r e a c c u r a t e
than t h e official stocklist and r e f e r r e d to his o w n
c u s t o m e r cards w h e n a n s w e r i n g enquiries.
T o a large e x t e n t r e c o r d s w e r e k e p t as personal i n s u r a n c e against f u t u r e investigation.
Ch arl i e J o h n s o n , o n e o f t h e D e p a r t m e n t a l Prod u c t i o n Managers, e x p l i c i t l y d e f i n e d this purpose:
What we are going to have is a history card with the
machine tool. So on any run with that tool, the date
goes in and all the faults on that run will be put on the
history card. So in two months time when there's a
bloody inquest on it . . . I will be able to say "Hang on
a minute, here's the bloody history card; this is what
happened, we had six water leaks, the bloody dye was
buggered up or all sorts" and we can throw it back to
them.
Will the card be kept with Cyril Jenkins (the Production Manager)?
Charlie Johnson:
No it bloody well will not! It will be kept in my office.
Alistair Preston:
As a record for you?
Charlie Johnson:
Yes, as a record for me.
P e r s o n a l r e c o r d s w e r e i n d e e d personal, t h e y
w e r e r e g a r d e d as p r i v a t e p r o p e r t y . It was t h e r e f o r e difficult to d e t e r m i n e t h e e x t e n t o f p e r s o n a l
r e c o r d k e e p i n g in t h e factory.
Apart f r o m p r i v a t e u se and p r i v a t e insurance,
p e r s o n a l r e c o r d s w e r e u s e d for w h a t J i m B r o w n ,
t h e P r o d u c t i o n Planner, d e f i n e d as o n e u p m a n ship. In t h e f o l l o w i n g c o m m e n t h e d e s c r i b e s t h e
process:
It's downright aggression. It's really a case of dog eat dog.
It certainly is a case of personalities (a phrase used by the
managers to denote personal conflict or hostilities). It's

certainly a case of oneupmanship. People will very often
go out of their way to nail your backside to the wall for
fun. You know, just for personal satisfaction.
P e r s o n a l r e c o r d s , b e c a u s e o f t h e i r l i m i t e d circulation, w e r e o f t e n u s e d in this p r o c e s s o f o n e u p manship. T h e f o l l o w i n g i n t e r a c t i o n r e c o r d e d at

t h e P r o d u c t i o n M e e t i n g e m p h a s i s e s this less
s a v o u r y u se o f p e r s o n a l information.
Cyril Jenkins (Production Manager):

How many blue tubs will be ready tonight?
Martin Keyes (Material Control Manager):
Four thousand.
Jim Brown (Production Planner):
Two thousand one hundred and sixty!
Cyril Jenkins:
Come on, which one is it?
Jim Brown:
Nearly half the tubs have pin holes, at least that is what
the packers have told me.
Martin Keyes:
(Looldng somewhat bemused) "I'll go and check. ( O n
returning) Yeah about two thousand. Practically 50%
of the tubs have got holes.
J i m B r o w n r e c e i v e d a c o p y o f t h e p a c k i n g slips
and c o m p i l e d a r e c o r d o f t h e n u m b e r o f g o o d
units p r o d u c e d f r o m this so u r ce. Martin K ey es
did n o t h a v e access to t h e s e r e c o r d s and therefore h ad his p o s i t i o n u n d e r m i n e d d u r i n g t h e
P r o d u c t i o n Meeting.
O n e u p m a n s h i p f o l l o w e d t h e p a t t e r n s o f personal c o n f l i c t and hostilities w i t h i n t h e factory.
In m o r e f r i e n d l y w o r k i n g r e l a t i o n s h i p s p e r s o n a l
r e c o r d s w e r e shared. Charlie J o h n s o n c o l l e c t e d

a r e c o r d of u n i t s p r o d u c e d p e r shift, w h i c h was
t h e n c i r c u l a t e d to Sales, P l a n n i n g a n d e v e n to
Martin Keyes. This r e c o r d h o w e v e r , was comp i l e d before Q u a l i t y C o n t r o l sample c h e c k e d
the b a t c h a n d therefore c o u l d i n c l u d e defective
units. This led Jim B r o w n to c o l l e c t additional
data from the p a c k i n g slips w h i c h i n c l u d e d o n l y
good units produced.
W i t h i n the factory a plurality of p e r s o n a l rec o r d s w e r e kept a n d s o m e t i m e s c i r c u l a t e d b y
the managers. T h e s e w e r e n o t a d h o c processes
b u t w e r e d e l i b e r a t e l y c o n s t r u c t e d to p r o v i d e
specific, t i m e l y a n d often detailed i n f o r m a t i o n
a b o u t crucial or i m p o r t a n t - t o - t h e - m a n a g e r
events. Personal r e c o r d k e e p i n g was costly in
t e r m s of the m a n a g e r s ' o w n time. T h e y r e q u i r e d
diligent a n d c o n s i s t e n t g a t h e r i n g a n d p r o c e s s i n g
of data. T h e e n e r g y r e q u i r e d in their p r e p a r a t i o n
emphasises the i m p o r t a n c e that m a n a g e r s
p l a c e d o n them, b o t h in t e r m s of p e r f o r m i n g
their tasks a n d in b e i n g well informed.
Observations, p e r s o n a l r e c o r d k e e p i n g along
w i t h interactions, a n d to a lesser e x t e n t meetings, c o n t r i b u t e d to the overall p r o c e s s of inf o r m i n g i n the organization. However, t h e r e also
existed the official d o c u m e n t e d p r o d u c t i o n inf o r m a t i o n system w h i c h the m a n a g e r s w e r e
r o u t i n e l y s u p p l i e d w i t h after the initial period.
T h e role that this system played in the p r o c e s s of
i n f o r m i n g is the s u b j e c t of the n e x t section.
OFFICIAL DOCUMENTED INFORMATION

AND THE PROCESS OF INFORMING
F r o m the managers' c o m m e n t s a n d from m y
o w n o b s e r v a t i o n s of its use, the official
d o c u m e n t e d i n f o r m a t i o n system a p p a r e n t l y
played little or n o role in the managers' p r o c e s s
of informing. T h e Factory Managers r e g a r d e d official d o c u m e n t e d i n f o r m a t i o n as lacking in a
n u m b e r of crucial respects w h i c h l i m i t e d its use
as a m e a n s of f i n d i n g o u t w h a t was g o i n g on.
T h e s e i n a d e q u a c i e s c o r r e s p o n d e d q u i t e closely
to those e x p r e s s e d b y M i n t z b e r g ( 1 9 7 5 ) . The
m a n a g e r s f o u n d the official d o c u m e n t e d inform a t i o n to b e u n t i m e l y , lacking in detail a n d
s o m e t i m e s inaccurate.
535
Some critical limitations of official

documented information
Each of t h e m a n a g e r s in t h e s t u d y referred to
t h e u n t i m e l i n e s s of official d o c u m e n t e d inform a t i o n a n d r e g a r d e d this as the m o s t serious
limitation. A few sample q u o t e s are s u p p l i e d
below:
Simon White (Information Manager):
Another thing of course is that management information is bound to be so far behind. Section Managers
must react much quicker. They've got to react on an
hour by hour basis.
Mike Shilling(Departmental Production Manager):
Mind the dynamic department we are, we obviously
know what's going on in any case. You know, the printout comes out a week later and confirms what we
already know.
T h e Official d o c u m e n t e d i n f o r m a t i o n was unt i m e l y in the sense that w h e n the m a n a g e r s rec e i v e d it, they already k n e w m o s t of the r e l e v a n t
i n f o r m a t i o n that it c o n t a i n e d . Official docu m e n t e d i n f o r m a t i o n was almost e n t i r e l y n o n surprising. It was n o t "too late" i n the sense that
the t i m e for taking effective a c t i o n had passed.
Rather, the m a n a g e r s w o u l d have already t a k e n
action, b a s e d o n the i n f o r m a t i o n they g a t h e r e d
or r e c e i v e d t h r o u g h the p r o c e s s of informing. I n
this sense, as a basis for taking action, the official
d o c u m e n t e d i n f o r m a t i o n was n o t simply too
late, it was r e d u n d a n t .
T h e Factory Managers f u r t h e r criticised the
official d o c u m e n t e d i n f o r m a t i o n for its lack of
detail:
Jim Brown (Production Planner):
The overall picture is good enough; it's just that the
detail is not good enough in some cases.
Charlie J o h n s o n , a D e p a r t m e n t a l P r o d u c t i o n
Manager a n d the l o n g e s t s e r v i n g m e m b e r of the
Factory Managers c o m m e n t e d o n the type of inf o r m a t i o n p r o v i d e d b y the official d o c u m e n t e d
source:
I don't know what I can do about it; they're just showing
me some bloody figures aren't they. What can I do about
figures? They just mean 60, 70, or 80 or whatever the
bloody figure is. It doesn't tell me how to get better figures.
536
ALISTAIR PRESTON
T h e lack of detail p o s e d n o specific p r o b l e m to

the managers, for o n c e again the m a n a g e r s had
already g a t h e r e d specific detailed i n f o r m a t i o n ,
o n w h i c h to base their actions from o t h e r
sources. This r e i n f o r c e s the r e d u n d a n c y o f the
official i n f o r m a t i o n in the p r o c e s s of informing.
Finally, the m a n a g e r s c o m m e n t e d o n the inacc u r a c i e s t h e y f o u n d in the official d o c u m e n t e d
information:
t h e r e f o r e historical. It also lacked sufficient detail a n d the m a n a g e r s had d o u b t s a b o u t its accuracy. T h e official system was therefore largely red u n d a n t in the p r o c e s s of i n f o r m i n g a n d in managers' d e c i s i o n m a k i n g processes.
A l t h o u g h n o t a part of the p r o c e s s of informing, official d o c u m e n t e d i n f o r m a t i o n had o t h e r
uses w h i c h the m a n a g e r s valued.
The uses o f official documented information

David Clark (the Factory Accountant )
I n f o r m a t i o n falls d o w n o n the basic i n f o r m a t i o n that is
used to work on. There are too many inaccuracies. If

you get it wrong at one stage then it's invariably
wrong throughout.
David Clark a t t r i b u t e d these i n a c c u r a c i e s to
carelessness. H o w e v e r , carelessness was n o t the
o n l y s o u r c e of inaccuracies. Jim Brown, the Prod u c t i o n Planner, m a d e the following c o m m e n t s :
T h e r e are also q u i t e a f e w m i s t a k e s m a d e o n the
machine record charts (the main source of data for the

official documented information). On quite a few occasions they have proved to be wrong, but you know,
that's just the human element.
AlistairPreston (the Researcher)
Is that all it is, just carelessness?
Jim Brown (the Production Planner)
Well in some cases that's all it is, but in other cases I'm
bloody sure it isn't. Bonuses are all linked to it.
I n a c c u r a c i e s w e r e d i s c o v e r e d o n r e c e i p t of the
official d o c u m e n t e d i n f o r m a t i o n b e c a u s e they
c o n t r a d i c t e d w h a t the m a n a g e r s had already
f o u n d out, a n d o f t e n c o n f i r m e d , t h r o u g h the process of informing. I n a c c u r a c i e s rarely led to the
w r o n g d e c i s i o n b e i n g made, b u t did r e i n f o r c e
the m a n a g e r s ' lack of faith in the official
d o c u m e n t e d information. However, w h e n the
i n a c c u r a c i e s w e r e of a significantly high order,
the m a n a g e r s m i g h t r e c o n f i r m their existing und e r s t a n d i n g of the s i t u a t i o n for their o w n reassurance.
In e s s e n c e the official d o c u m e n t e d information did n o t c o n t r i b u t e t o w a r d s the m a n a g e r s '
p r o c e s s of c o n s t r u c t i n g definitions of situations.
F u r t h e r m o r e , it rarely featured i n their d e c i s i o n s
to e m b a r k o n a c o u r s e of action. T h e m o s t crucial l i m i t a t i o n was that it arrived too late; it was
T h e m a n a g e r s r e g a r d e d official d o c u m e n t e d
i n f o r m a t i o n as useful for historical b a c k g r o u n d .
As Mike Shilling, a D e p a r t m e n t a l P r o d u c t i o n
Manager, n o t e d :
T h e j o b is so m u c h a day-to-day job that it's i n t e r e s t i n g to
h a v e the h i s t o r i c a l b a c k g r o u n d to see w h e t h e r the dep a r t m e n t is i m p r o v i n g o r what.
T h e official d o c u m e n t e d i n f o r m a t i o n therefore
p r o v i d e d the m a n a g e r s w i t h relief from the fine
detail a n d close focus of t h e i r daily activities a n d
p r o v i d e d t h e m w i t h a m o r e g e n e r a l a c c o u n t of
events.
Linked to the a b o v e point, official d o c u m e n ted i n f o r m a t i o n was r e g a r d e d as b e i n g useful as
a g u i d e to g e n e r a l trends. Simon White, the Inf o r m a t i o n Manager, m a d e the following comment:
It c e r t a i n l y gives g e n e r a l trends, e v e n if e v e r y s i n g l e fig u r e is n o t correct.
Official d o c u m e n t e d i n f o r m a t i o n also prov i d e d c o n f i r m a t i o n of w h a t was already k n o w n

from the o t h e r s o u r c e s and p r o v i d e d the managers w i t h an additional s e n s e of c o n f i d e n c e a n d
reassurance. Jim B r o w n m a d e the following
comments:
So I c a n l o o k at it ( t h e c o m p u t e r p r i n t o u t ) a n d say Christ
that w a s 42%, so the p r i n t o u t t e n d s to r e i n f o r c e information that I've g a i n e d anyway.
Official d o c u m e n t e d i n f o r m a t i o n was f u r t h e r
used b y the m a n a g e r s to r e m i n d t h e m of e v e n t s
that had p r e v i o u s l y taken place. Jim Brown, the
P r o d u c t i o n Planner, c o m m e n t e d that the printo u t jarred his m e m o r y of "things that had fallen
INTERACTIONSANDARRANGEMENTSIN THE PROCESSOF INFORMING

by the wayside". It therefore provided a catch
net, to bring events, which had slipped the manager's mind, to his attention.
Finally, the managers were aware that the official d o c u m e n t e d information might be useful to
Senior Managers w h o were distanced from the
ongoing activities in the production departments and were mostly excluded from the arrangements to inform. Simon White, the Information Manager, claimed that "it will be information on which Senior Management will be able to
take action on."
The implications of this statement by Simon
White are that the Senior Managers could possibly construct a definition of a situation or event
from the official documented information, while
the Factory Managers would construct their definition from the process of informing. In view of
the differences in time, detail and inaccuracies,
and thus meaning, it could be possible that different definitions of a single situation might be
constructed, leading to conflict between managers from the two groups.
In associating official documented information with Senior Managers, the Factory Managers
were conscious of the impression the information gave of their performance. For the most
part, they were diligent in reading the documents, albeit sometimes considerably after the
date of receipt, and were at pains to correct any
inaccuracies. Furthermore, they conscientiously
filed the itiformation as a permanent, although
partial, record of events. Official d o c u m e n t e d information made the managers visible (Foucault,
1975). This visibility warranted careful attention.
The general overview, the analysis of trends
and the sense of reassurance the official
d o c u m e n t e d information provided were important to the managers. They were defensive of it,
despite the increased visibility, when I
suggested that it could be terminated.
IMPLICATIONS FOR INFORMATION SYSTEM

DESIGN
It might be suggested that the process of in-
537
forming described above pertains to a narrow

band of managers and managerial activities.
There is however, strong evidence in the literature to suggest that what is typically referred to
as informal information is used in all levels of
management and in many types of managerial activity. (Gore, 1956; Wilensky, 1967; Hoos, 1975;
Mintzberg, 1975, 1979; Clancy & Collins, 1979).
Implicit in most of these sources and in particular Mintzberg ( 1 9 7 5 ) there is the assumption that informal sources are constructed and
used because of limitations or impediments in
the formal information system. Indeed, the new
production information system was merely a
computerisation of the existing manual system.
In this respect the system could have been of a
poor design. It therefore could be argued that inadequacies in design led to the system's rejection. I would however suggest, that so called informal sources are used in spite of formal or official d o c u m e n t e d sources. The process of informing preceded the computerised production information. Interactions, observations, keeping
personal records, in the form of notes or diaries
and even meetings are characteristics of the social being. These processes, particularly interactions, are intrinsic to the construction of reality
and of making sense of the social and physical
world. Despite all attempts to design more
timely, detailed and accurate information systems I believe managers will continue to talk to
each other, observe events and keep personal records of those events they regard as important.
Furthermore, these processes are important to
the operations of an organization. The process of
informing therefore has implications for the design and implementation of formal documented
information systems.
Information system design is typically based
on a model of organisations and human behaviour similar to that of the official order outlined in an earlier section. Design is almost entirely concerned with the development of formalised, or d o c u m e n t e d information systems.
Implicit in this approach is the assumption that
such formalised systems constitute the sole
legitimate, or at least the most efficient and objective, means of processing and distributing in-
538
ALISTAIRPRESTON
formation within an organisation. It is further ass u m e d that formal systems lead to the effective
c o n t r o l and c o o r d i n a t i o n of organisational activities and to m o r e effective managerial decision making.
W a r n e r & Stone ( 1 9 7 0 ) suggest that there is
no neutral r e c o r d of the "facts" for any situation.
Information systems are i m p o s e d from w i t h o u t
and are i n t e n d e d to motivate managers to
achieve the s u p p o s e d aims, goals or simply intentions
of
the
organisation.
Official
d o c u m e n t e d information, may be v i e w e d as a
means of intervening in the managers' interp r e t a t i v e processes, or of imposing meaning
o n t o situations and events. This imposition of
meaning is assumed to achieve consistency and
this is d e e m e d to be desirable (March, 1976).
However, consistency may also have the effect
of eliciting "scripted responses" from the managers (Mangham, 1979). This may restrict creative or original decision making and p r o b l e m
solving particularly in unfamiliar situations.
Furthermore, the p r e c i s i o n of the language contained in official d o c u m e n t e d information systems may harm or i m p e d e c o m m u n i c a t i o n
w h i c h is o n e of the major roles claimed for such
systems (Hayes, 1983). Apart from the seemingly i n h e r e n t limitations of formal information
systems w h i c h result in them being inadequate
tools in the p r o c e s s of informing, imposition of
such systems may p r o v e detrimental to the very
p r o c e s s e s they are i n t e n d e d to support.
The major c o n c e r n with this n a r r o w m o d e l
based p e r s p e c t i v e (Boland, 1979) is that it ignores the w i d e r and extant p r o c e s s e s of informing within organisations and fails to c o n s i d e r
their role in managerial activities. W h e r e the
w i d e r p r o c e s s e s of informing are r e c o g n i s e d
they are typically referred to as a d h o c systems,
inefficient, costly and resulting in the duplication of effort. They are d e s c r i b e d in prejorative
terms such as "grapevines . . . . black books"
"butcher books" and "gossip". However, there is
strong e v i d e n c e in the literature and from this
particular study to suggest that these informal
processes are highly valued by practicing managers and are intrinsic to many of their managerial
and decision making activities. This being the
case, there is a strong argument for the p r o c e s s

of informing to be included, if not to be central
to the design of information systems, or better,
information processes.
The m o s t i m m e d i a t e and in s o m e respects the
most i m p o r t a n t question to be raised is w h e t h e r
it is sensible or even desirable to talk of designing the social or the informal. Processes within
the social appear to be e m e r g e n t rather than designed (Foucault, 1975). Thus any design principles applied to the social might have the effect of
transforming it into the official or of making the
informal formal. Such a transformation may disrupt rather than enhance information p r o c e s s e s
within organisations.
At best, information systems designers may
only be able to e n c o u r a g e the view that interactions, observations and the keeping of personal
r e c o r d s are legitimate mechanisms for the
gathering and distribution of information
t h r o u g h o u t organisations. Within this perspective, information p r o c e s s e s may be seen as multifaceted collages of accounts p r o v i d i n g multiple
and s o m e t i m e s c o n t r a d i c t o r y points of view
(Boland, 1979), rather than, as single, uniform
and highly s t r u c t u r e d systems. It needs to be recognised that the definition of the situation, its
urgency, c o m p l e x i t y and d e g r e e of familiarity
will all play a role in d e t e r m i n i n g the a p p r o p r i a t e
means of informing, as will the personal relationships b e t w e e n the managers involved. In many
situations, official d o c u m e n t e d information may
be entirely inappropriate.
In the design and i m p l e m e n t a t i o n of formal information systems, care must be taken that the
process of informing is e n h a n c e d rather than retarded. Formal information should c o m p l e m e n t
the existing processes of informing rather than
attempting to replace them. It requires the recognition that formal systems may, at most, constitute o n e of many arrangements to inform and
then only to the e x t e n t that they are defined as
meaningful or relevant by the practicing managers. The meaning of formal information, its role
in the p r o c e s s of informing and its relevance to
managerial activities has largely gone unresearched. Yet, these factors are of crucial importance to the internalisation and use of such sys-
INTERACTIONSANDARRANGEMENTS1NTHE PROCESSOF INFORMING

terns within organisations.
The limitations of formal systems might have
to be accepted as given. The nature of official
d o c u m e n t e d systems may limit their role in the
process of informing to the historical recording
of routine and repetitive events. This in turn may
limit their use to the analysis of historical and
general trends, to confirming what is already
known, as a device to jog the m e m o r y or as a general and partial picture of events for those w h o
are distanced from the context of the situation
and/or excluded from the process of informing.
More urgent, complex and surprising situations,
which require rich, detailed explanations to arrive at a satisfactory definition and suitable
course of action, may be better served by interactions, observations and personal records.
Attempts to eclipse the process of informing by
developing faster, more detailed and more accurate systems, but based on the same explicit or
implicit assumptions as those adopted to date,
may simply prove expensive and ineffective.
In many respects the formal/informal
dichotomy or an absolute distinction between
the social and official is unhelpful. It might be
more constructive to view organlsational processes as actual operating orders or as an interweave of the social and official. Mintzberg
( 1 9 7 9 ) refers to a symbiosis of formal and informal. With this viewpoint a wider perspective of
information processes in organisations is encouraged. However, for design purposes a synthesis between the official and social might encounter a number of difficulties. Information is
not regarded as neutral (Warner and Stone,
1970). In the factory the contents of interactions, observations and especially personal records were not seen as a public commodity. Deliberate strategies to exclude individuals from
the process of informing were undertaken.
While personal records might give insights into
539
important-to-the-manager information, gaining

access to those personal records might not be
possible.
CONCLUSIONS
The existing knowledge, within the literature
of management information, of the way managers inform themselves and each other with organisations is limited. However, there is increasing evidence ( Boland, 1979; Cooper e t al., 1981;
Swieringa, 1980) to suggest that the models of
organisations and behaviour, which typical information (and accounting) systems are designed upon, are inadequate as representations
of the actual-operating-order that may be seen to
exist in organisations. What is now required, to
advance our understanding and design of information system, is an appreciation of h o w managers inform themselves and each other within
their organisational context. What is required is
the development of more representative and appropriate models of depictions of organisational
reality. Such models may only be developed by
research conducted within the organisational
context.
This paper suggests that it might be appropriate to view organisations as "gatherings of
people" (Silverman, 1971 ). What is therefore required is an attempt to understand h o w people
gather; h o w they form arrangements with each
other; h o w they arrange to inform themselves
and each other. It is also required that we seek to
understand the rules of these various arrangements; and h o w they are constructed, maintained or modified. Without such an understanding, information systems designers may continue to provide systems which are redundant or
irrelevant to the way managers inform themselves.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Anthony,R.N., Dearden,J. & Bedford,N. M.,Management Control Systems (Homewood 1L:Irwin, 1984).
Berger, P. L. & Luckmann,T., TheSocial Construction of Reality (London:Doubleday 1966).
Biumer, H., Symbolic Interactionisrrt. Perspective and Method (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall,
540
ALISTAIR PRESTON
1969).
Boland, R~J., Jr., Control, Causality and Information Systems Requirements, Accounting Organizations
and Society (1979) pp. 259-272.
Boland, R. J., Jr. & Pondy, L. R., Accounting in Organisations: A Union of Natural and Rational Perspectives,
Accounting Organizations and Society (1983) pp. 223-234.
Burns, T., On the Plurality of Social Systems, in Burns, T. (ed.) Industrial Mar~ (Harmondsworth:
Penguin, 1969).
Clancy, D. K. & Collins, F., Informal Accounting Information Systems: Some Tentative Findings,Accounting
Organizations and Society ( 1979 ) pp. 21-30.
Clark, P. A., A Review of the Theories of Time and Structure for Organisational Sociology, University o f
Aston Management Centre Working Paper Series ( 1982 ).
Colville, I., Reconstructing Behavioural Accounting, Accounting Organizations and Society ( 1981 ) pp.
119-132.
Cooper, D. J., Hayes, D. & Wolf, F., Accounting in Organised Anarchies: Understanding and Designing
Accounting Systems in Ambiguous Situations, Accounting Organizations and Society ( 1981 ) pp. 175191.
Daft, R. L. & Wiginton, J. C., Language and Organisation. The Academy o f Management Review (April
1979) pp. 179-191.
Davis, G. B. & Olson, M. H.,Management Information Systems (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1984).
Foucault, M., Discipline a n d P u n i s h (Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1975).
Galbraith, J. R., OrganisationalDesign (Reading, MA: Addison Wesley, 1977).
Goffman, E., Tbe Presentation o f Self in Everyday Life (London: Pelican, 1959).
Gore, W. J., Administration Decision Making in Federal Field Offices, Public Administration Review
(1956) pp. 281-291.
Hayes, D. C., Accounting for Accounting: A Story about Managerial Accounting, Accounting Organizations and Society ( 1983 ) pp. 241-250.
Hoos, I. R., Information Systems and Public Planning, Management Science (1975) pp. 658-671.
Hopwood, A. G., Accounting and H u m a n Behaviour ( London: Haymarket, 1974 ).
Mangham, I. L., The Politics o f Organisational Change. (London: Associated Business Press, 1979).
March, J. G., The Technology of Foolishness, in March, J. G. and Olsen, J. P. ( eds ) Ambiguity and Choice in
Organisations (Bergen: Universitetsforlaget, 1976).
Mason, R. O. & Mitroff, I. I., A Program for Research on Management Information Systems, Management
Science (January 1973) pp. 475--487.
Mead, G. H., Min~ Self and Society (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1934).
McCosh, J., Rahaman, M. & Earl, M. J., Developing Managerial Information Systems ( London: Macmillan,
1981).
Mintzberg, H., Impediments to the Use o f Management Information (New York: National Association of
Accountants, 1975).
Mintzberg, H., The Structuring o f Organisations: a Synthesis o f the Research ( Englewood Cliffs, NJ:
Prentice-Hall, 1979).
Murdick, R. G., MIS Concepts andDesign (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1980).
Schutz, A., Collected Papers, Natanson, M. (Ed.) ( The Hague: Nijhoff, 1962).
Silverman, D., The Theory o f Organisations (New York: Basic Books, 1971 ).
Simon, H. A., Guertzkow, H., Kozmetsky, G. & Tyndall, G., Centralization Vs Decentralization in
Organizing the Controller's Department ( New York: Controllership Foundation. 1954 ).
Strauss, A., Negotiations: Varieties, Contexts, Processes and Social Order (San Francisco: Jossey Bass,
1978).
Swieringa, R. J., Behavioural Implications of Planning and Control Systems, in Holtzer, H. P. (ed.)Management Accounting Proceeds o f the University o f Illinois, Management Accounting Symposium
(Urbana, IL: 1980, Department of Accounting).
Taggart, W. M.,Jr., Information Systems (Boston: Allyn and Bacon, 1980).
Thomas, W. I., The Unadjusted Girl (Boston: Little Brown, 1937).
Warner, M. & Stone, M., The Data Bank Society.. Organisationg Society and Social Freedom (London:
Allen & Unwin, 1970).
Weick, K. E., The Social Psychology ofOrganising, 2nd ed (Reading, MA: Addison Wesley, 1979).
Wilensky, A., Organisational Intelligence: Knowledge and Polic~ in Goverment (New York: Basic Books,
1967).

16 - Reading - Interaction and Arrangement in The Process of Informing PDF

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Исходное описание:

Оригинальное название

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

16 - Reading - Interaction and Arrangement in The Process of Informing PDF

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Accounting OrganizationsandSocieOJ,Vol. 11, No. 6, pp. 521-540, 1986.

Printed in Great Britain

INTERACTIONS AND ARRANGEMENTS IN THE PROCESS OF INFORMING*

Department o f Management Sciences, University o f Manchester

tionism (Blumer, 1969). It is argued that these

( t h e existing system was manually compiled,

INTERACTIONSAND ARRANGEMENTSIN THE PROCESSOF INFORMING

W h e n I began interviewing these managers I

To be perfectly honest Alistair, I stopped circulating the

M o r e surprising than t h e a b s e n c e o f this inform a t i o n was that t h e r e w e r e n o c o m p l a i n t s , n o r

cially p r e p a r e d material, s a n c t i o n e d b y Senior

Official d o c u m e n t e d systems may also create

INTERACTIONSAND ARRANGEMENTSIN THE PROCESSOF INFORMING

w o r k e d with one another. They w e r e therefore

ARRANGEMENTS T O INFORM EACH O T H E R

Well I might have to go around the back doors and check

One of the biggest effective ways of keeping the thing

Word-of-mouth contact very often gives you reason to

INTERACTIONSAND ARRANGEMENTSIN THE PROCESSOF INFORMING

The definition o f the situation

INTERACTIONSAND ARRANGEMENTSIN THE PROCESSOF INFORMING

The taken -for-granted rule of reciprocity

tions p e r m i t t e d t h e F a c t o r y Managers to res p o n d to e v e n t s that w e r e d e f i n e d by t h e m to b e

The requirement of being a reliable and

If that is the case I feel must ensure that the information

again, it looks they're taking the main rollers out.

Arrangements and organisational position

Certain managers, notably Martin Keyes, were

M a n a g e r s c o u l d a l s o b e e x c l u d e d f r o m arrangements to inform because of the position

INTERACTIONSAND ARRANGEMENTSIN THE PROCESSOF INFORMING

receive it from the management information thing

Arrangements and personal relationships

Conflicting definitions: the production

INTERACTIONSANDARRANGEMENTSIN THE PROCESSOF INFORMING

what's going on. I come i n . . . in the morning and see a

managers to denote personal conflict or hostilities). It's

P e r s o n a l r e c o r d s , b e c a u s e o f t h e i r l i m i t e d circulation, w e r e o f t e n u s e d in this p r o c e s s o f o n e u p manship. T h e f o l l o w i n g i n t e r a c t i o n r e c o r d e d at

Cyril Jenkins (Production Manager):

INTERACTIONSAND ARRANGEMENTSIN THE PROCESSOF INFORMING

OFFICIAL DOCUMENTED INFORMATION

Some critical limitations of official

T h e lack of detail p o s e d n o specific p r o b l e m to

The uses o f official documented information

used to work on. There are too many inaccuracies. If

machine record charts (the main source of data for the

Official d o c u m e n t e d i n f o r m a t i o n also prov i d e d c o n f i r m a t i o n of w h a t was already k n o w n

INTERACTIONSANDARRANGEMENTSIN THE PROCESSOF INFORMING

IMPLICATIONS FOR INFORMATION SYSTEM

forming described above pertains to a narrow

case, there is a strong argument for the p r o c e s s

INTERACTIONSANDARRANGEMENTS1NTHE PROCESSOF INFORMING

important-to-the-manager information, gaining

Вам также может понравиться