Resumo:
Fundamentado em abordagens teóricas relativas à existência de paradoxos associados ao uso de artefatos tecnológicos, este artigo procura identificar a existência de paradoxos associados ao uso diário de smartphones pelos executivos brasileiros. O método de estudo de caso único foi aplicado analisando-se uma companhia brasileira atuante no setor farmacêutico, a qual tem por política fornecer smartphones a seus executivos seniores. Os dados foram coletados por meio de questionários desenvolvidos a partir dos paradoxos identificados na literatura, os quais foram respondidos por 14 executivos da companhia em questão, entrevistas em profundidade conduzidas com cinco desses executivos e análise de e-mails enviados pelos respondentes via smartphones por um dado período de tempo. Após a consolidação e análise dos dados obtidos verificou-se que dois paradoxos se mostraram fortemente associados ao uso de smartphones pelos executivos em questão, i.e. continuidade vs. assincronicidade e autonomia vs. vício. Além disso, três outros paradoxos se mostraram moderadamente associados ao uso de smartphones pelos executivos em questão, i.e. liberdade vs. escravidão, dependência vs. independência e planejamento vs. improvisação. Ao final, as implicações e limitações desta pesquisa são apresentadas.
Resumo Inglês:
Based on theoretical approaches concerning the existence of paradoxes associated with the use of technological appliances, this article seeks to identify the existence of ambiguities in the day-to-day use of smartphones by Brazilian executives. The single representative case study method was applied, by analysing a Brazilian company within the pharmaceutical sector, which has a policy of providing smartphones to its senior executives. Data were collected from: questionnaires filled out by fourteen executives of the company in question; in-depth interviews conducted with five of these executives and e-mails sent by them via smartphones over a given period of time. After consolidation and analysis of the data obtained, it was seen that two paradoxes were strongly related to the use of smartphones by the executives in question, namely: continuity vs. asynchronicity and autonomy vs. addiction. Furthermore, three other paradoxes were moderately associated with the use of smartphones by the executives in question, namely freedom vs. enslavement, dependence vs. independence, and planning vs. improvisation. Lastly, the implications and limitations of the research are set forth.
Referências:
ASBELL, B. The New Improved American. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1963.
AVGEROU, C. The significance of context in information systems and organizational change. Information Systems Journal, v. 11, n. 1, p. 43-63, 2001. Disponível em: .
BAWDEN, D.; ROBINSON, L. The dark side of information: overload, anxiety and other paradoxes and pathologies. Journal Information Science, v. 35, n. 2, 2009. Disponível em: . Acesso em: 23 ago. 2013.
BENBASAT, I.; GOLDSTEIN, D.; MEAD, M. The case research strategy in studies of information systems. MIS Quarterly, v. 77, n. 3, p. 369-386, 1987.
BOORSTIN, D. The republic of technology. New York: Harper & Row, 1978. De VRIES, M. K. Organizational paradoxes: clinical approaches to management. New York: Norton, 1995.
De VRIES, M. K. Organizational paradoxes: clinical approaches to management. New York: Norton, 1995.
DEWETT, T.; JONES, G. R. The role of information technology in the organization: a review, model, and assessment. Journal of Management, v. 27, n. 3, p. 313-346, 2001.
EISENHARDT, K. Building theories from case study research. Academy of Management Review, v. 14, n. 4, p. 532-550, 1989.
EISENHARDT, K.; WESTCOTT, B. Paradoxical demands and the creation of excellence: the case of just-in-time manufacturing. In: QUINN, R. E.; CAMERON, K. S. (Ed.). Paradox and transformation: toward a theory of change in organization and management. Cambridge, MA: Ballinger, 1988. p. 81-121
FARSON, R. Management of the absurd: paradoxes in leadership. New York, NY: Simon and Schuster, 1996.
FERKISS, V. Technological man: the myth and the reality. New York: Braziller, 1969.
GIDDENS, A. The consequence of modernity. Stanford,California: Stanford University Press, 1990.
GLENDINNING, C. When technology wounds: the human consequences of progress. New York: William Morrow, 1990.
GOODMAN, E. Time bandits in the machine age. Chicago Tribune, Tempo Section, 10 Jan. 1988.
HANDY, C. The age of paradox. Boston: Harvard Business School Press, 1994.
HATCH, M.; EHRLICH, S. Spontaneous humor as an indicator of paradox and ambiguity in organizations. Organization Studies, v. 14, n. 4, p. 539-560, 1993.
HILL, S. The tragedy of technology. London: Pluto, 1988.
JARVENPAA, S.; LANG, K. Managing the paradoxes of mobile technology. Information Systems Management, v. 22, n. 4, p. 7-23, 2005.
JOHN, G.; WEISS, A.; DUTTA, S. Marketing in technology-intensive markets: toward a conceptual framework. Journal of Marketing, v. 63, special issue, p. 78-91, 1999.
KELBAUGH, D. The paradox of progress, 2005. Acesso em 13 de outubro de 2008 em: http://www.consiliencejournal.org/index.php/consilience/article/ viewFile/295/139
KOOT, W.; SABELIS I.; YBEMA S. Contradictions in context: puzzling over paradoxes in contemporary organizations. Amsterdam: VU University Press. 1996.
LEE, A. A scientific methodology for MIS case studies. MIS Quarterly, v. 13. n. 1, p. 33-50, 1989.
LEE, A. Integrating positivist and interpretive approaches to organizational research., Organization Science, v. 2, n. 4, p. 342-365, 1991.
LYYTINEN, K.; YOO, Y. Issues and challenges in ubiquitous computing. Communication of the ACM, v. 45, n. 2, p. 63-65, 2002.
MALHOTRA, N. Pesquisa de marketing: uma orientação aplicada. Porto Alegre: Bookman, 2001.
MAZMANIAN, M.; ORLIKOWSKI, W.; YATES, J. Crackberrys: exploring the social implications of ubiquitous wireless email devices. In: EGOS CONFERENCE, 22., 2006, Bergen, Noruega, Proceedings… Bergen, Noruega, 2006.
MICK, D.; FOURNIER, S. Paradoxes of technology: consumer cognizance, emotions and coping strategies. Journal of Consumer Research, v. 25, n. 20, p. 123-143, 1998.
MURNIGHAN, J.; CONLON, D. The dynamics of intense work groups: a study of British string quarters. Administrative Science Quarterly, v. 36, n. 2, p. 165-186, 1991. O’CONNOR E. Paradoxes of participation: textual analysis and organizational change. Organization Studies, v. 16, n. 5, p. 769-803, 1995.
O’CONNOR E. Paradoxes of participation: textual analysis and organizational change. Organization Studies, v. 16, n. 5, p. 769-803, 1995.
PARÉ, G. Investigating information systems with positivist case study research. Communications of the Association of Information Systems, v. 13, 2004.
PICA, D.; KAKIHARA, M. The duality of mobility: designing fluid organizations through stable interaction. In: EUROPEAN CONFERENCE ON INFORMATION
SABELIS, I. Temporal paradoxes: working with cultural diversity in organizations. In: KOOT, W.; SABELIS, I.; YBEMA, S. (Ed.). Contradictions in context: puzzling over paradoxes in contemporary organizations. Amsterdam: VU University Press, 1996. p. 171-192.
SIEGEL, S.; CASTELLAN Junior., N. J. Estatística não-paramétrica para ciências do comportamento. Porto Alegre: Artmed, 2006.
SMITH, K.; BERG, D. Paradoxes of group life, San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, 1987.
STAKE, R. Case studies. In: DENZIN, N. K.; LINCOLN, I. S. (Ed.). Strategies of qualitative inquiry. London; Thousands Oaks: Sage Publications, 1988. p. 86-109
VINCE, R.; BROUSSINE, M. Paradox, defense and attachment: accessing and working with emotions and relations underlying organizational change. Organizations Studies, v. 17, n. 1, p. 1-21, 1996.
WILSON, J. M. et al. Perceived proximity in virtual work: explaining the paradox of far-but-close. Organization Studies, v. 29, n. 7, p. 970-1002, 2010.
WINNER, L. Three paradoxes of the information age. In: GRETCHEN, B.; TIMOTHY, D. (Ed.). Culture on the brink: ideologies of technology. Seattle: Bay Press, 1994. p. 191-197.
YIN, R. Estudo de caso: planejamento e métodos. 3. ed. Porto Alegre: Bookman, 2005
