The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Technology as an occasion for structuring: evidence from observations of CT scanners and the social order of radiology departments
Abstract
New medical imaging devices, such as the CT scanner, have begun to challenge traditional role relations among radiologists and radiological technologists. Under some conditions, these technologies may actually alter the organizational and occupational structure of radiological work. However, current theories of technology and organizational form are insensitive to the potential number of structural variations implicit in role-based change. This paper expands recent sociological thought on the link between institution and action to outline a theory of how technology might occasion different organizational structures by altering institutionalized roles and patterns of interaction. In so doing, technology is treated as a social rather than a physical object, and structure is conceptualized as a process rather than an entity. The implications of the theory are illustrated by showing how identical CT scanners occasioned similar structuring processes in two radiology departments and yet led to divergent forms of organization. The data suggest that to understand how technologies alter organizational structures researchers may need to integrate the study of social action and the study of social form. Editors' introduction This is not a paper that claims to be about strategy, but it is highly relevant to this book for three reasons. First it is an extremely well designed piece of micro-level research. Second it is a rare example of the links in figure 1.1 in chapter 1, both of the interrelationship of institutional forces and activities (V3) and also of how activities influence organizational outcomes (V1). Third, it is a truly exemplar paper in terms of its style and structure.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Grounded theory research: Procedures, canons, and evaluative criteria
Corbin, J. M., & Strauss, A. (1990) · Qualitative Sociology · doi:10.1007/bf00988593 · Cited by 11,133
Strategies for Theorizing from Process Data
Langley, A. (1999) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.5465/amr.1999.2553248 · Cited by 7,008
The Collapse of Sensemaking in Organizations: The Mann Gulch Disaster
Weick, K. E. (1993) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2393339 · Cited by 5,000
Orlikowski, W. J. (2000) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.11.4.404.14600 · Cited by 4,760
Reconceptualizing Organizational Routines as a Source of Flexibility and Change
Feldman, M. S., & Pentland, B. T. (2003) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/3556620 · Cited by 4,020
Metadata
- Authors
- Barley, S. R.
- Venue
- Strategy as Practice
- Publisher
- Cambridge University Press
- Published
- 2007-08-02
- Volume
- 31
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 83-100
- OpenAlex
- W2030461396
- Cited by
- 2,116
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 780.29
- Type
- book chapter
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Technology as an occasion for structuring: evidence from observations of CT scanners and the social order of radiology departments. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1017/cbo9780511618925.007
- The paper
- Barley, S. R. (2007). Technology as an occasion for structuring: evidence from observations of CT scanners and the social order of radiology departments. Strategy as Practice. https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9780511618925.007
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.