I recently asked:
When are the processes that bring about a black box the same as those that bring about — in the institutionalist frame — the notion of taken-for-grantedness … and, when are the processes that bring about either of these notions incapable of producing the other?
Seems, upon further reflection, to be an obvious paper, which might bridge some of the thinking about technology and institutional arrangements. Restated as a couple of thesis statements, it would go:
Q1. What circumstances/processes do the concepts of “black box” and “taken-for-granted” both meaningfully capture?
Q2. What circumstances/processes does the concept of “black box” meaningfully capture that the concept “taken-for-granted” cannot?
Q3. What circumstances/processes does the concept of “taken-for-granted” meaningfully capture that the concept “black box” cannot?
Seems like an interesting review piece to see where organizational theorists and STSers have historically overlapped and where they have diverged, with the caveat that each might learn something if orthogonal points of divergence where re-considered in the respective lines of research.
Also, I’ll post an excerpt from an old paper that Fabio Rojas and I wrote (which was largely published, but this section from B&L never made it past final edits).