260
H. E. Otto
and product development, and boundary work reported in (Bowker and Star 1999;
Bowker et al. 2015), a boundary object categorization relating to the affordances
those objects allow at the syntactic, semantic, and pragmatic boundaries has been
developed (Carlile 2002). Those affordances, as reported in (Carlile 2002; Carlile
2004), are as follows. At the syntactic boundary, through a shared language, a transfer,
that is a communication of knowledge underlying the perspectives, is afforded. At
the semantic boundary, creation of a shared meaning that facilitates the translation
of perspectives is afforded. At the pragmatic boundary, through the development of
common interests, the transformation of perspectives is afforded. Recent work on
boundary objects, using the concept of boundary construction, while focusing on
the active role of individuals and the function of perspective-giving and taking, is
reported in (Holford 2011).
As information transfer, knowledge sharing and creation, and perspective taking
across boundaries of groups, communities of practice, and organizations, are still
human-centered multi-dimensional activities, socio-cultural factors also need to be
considered, as well as technical factors. Although a heavy focus on technical issues
still prevails, especially in practice, a tendency towards wider recognition of the
importance of the human and socio-cultural dimension seems to be developing, albeit
at a slow pace (see also discussions in (Alavi et al. 2006; Ko et al. 2005; Szulanski
1996)). Within such an approach, the author argues, progress can be made by overcoming communication hurdles and interpretative barriers, which in turn can be
achieved by taking a fresh look at the problem space and the possibilities afforded by
the approach. This, in turn, can be facilitated by providing an epistemology oriented
and cross-disciplinary reference frame.
17.4 Toward a Shared Perspective and Understanding
at the Boundaries of Intersecting Social Worlds
17.4.1 Outline
The concept of energy efficiency, with its processes and instruments, has been
designed and developed in the West. This is a context that is quite different in its
quality and level of technological and economic development, and which also varies
considerably in its socio-cultural nature and structures, compared to that in Asia, and
in particular in nations with emerging and developing economies in Asia.
As outlined earlier, various problems encountered during the realization of energy
efficiency measures are usually approached from a Western perspective, discounting
the differences of the Asian context. In what follows, an alternative reference frame,
taking into account those differences, is presented and discussed as a first step in
regard to energy auditing and one of its immediate explicit outcomes, the energy
audit report. This should provide grounds for a more adequate perspective, building
on the issue.
H. E. Otto
and product development, and boundary work reported in (Bowker and Star 1999;
Bowker et al. 2015), a boundary object categorization relating to the affordances
those objects allow at the syntactic, semantic, and pragmatic boundaries has been
developed (Carlile 2002). Those affordances, as reported in (Carlile 2002; Carlile
2004), are as follows. At the syntactic boundary, through a shared language, a transfer,
that is a communication of knowledge underlying the perspectives, is afforded. At
the semantic boundary, creation of a shared meaning that facilitates the translation
of perspectives is afforded. At the pragmatic boundary, through the development of
common interests, the transformation of perspectives is afforded. Recent work on
boundary objects, using the concept of boundary construction, while focusing on
the active role of individuals and the function of perspective-giving and taking, is
reported in (Holford 2011).
As information transfer, knowledge sharing and creation, and perspective taking
across boundaries of groups, communities of practice, and organizations, are still
human-centered multi-dimensional activities, socio-cultural factors also need to be
considered, as well as technical factors. Although a heavy focus on technical issues
still prevails, especially in practice, a tendency towards wider recognition of the
importance of the human and socio-cultural dimension seems to be developing, albeit
at a slow pace (see also discussions in (Alavi et al. 2006; Ko et al. 2005; Szulanski
1996)). Within such an approach, the author argues, progress can be made by overcoming communication hurdles and interpretative barriers, which in turn can be
achieved by taking a fresh look at the problem space and the possibilities afforded by
the approach. This, in turn, can be facilitated by providing an epistemology oriented
and cross-disciplinary reference frame.
17.4 Toward a Shared Perspective and Understanding
at the Boundaries of Intersecting Social Worlds
17.4.1 Outline
The concept of energy efficiency, with its processes and instruments, has been
designed and developed in the West. This is a context that is quite different in its
quality and level of technological and economic development, and which also varies
considerably in its socio-cultural nature and structures, compared to that in Asia, and
in particular in nations with emerging and developing economies in Asia.
As outlined earlier, various problems encountered during the realization of energy
efficiency measures are usually approached from a Western perspective, discounting
the differences of the Asian context. In what follows, an alternative reference frame,
taking into account those differences, is presented and discussed as a first step in
regard to energy auditing and one of its immediate explicit outcomes, the energy
audit report. This should provide grounds for a more adequate perspective, building
on the issue.