Scholarlink

In their paper on boundary objects, Leigh Star and Jim Griesemer laid out an agenda which has been remarkably productive in the fields of science and technology studies (STS); organization theory; and information and computer science. It is far the most cited paper of the central STS journal Social Studies of Science. Jim Griesemer once commented to me on the strangeness of his most cited paper not being squarely in his home discipline. The paper explored centrally the question of ‘cooperation without consensus’–how separate communities with different agendas could work together without any two agreeing on just what they were doing though the development of ‘boundary objects,’ which permitted this cooperation. In this brief aperçu, I briefly describe the paper’s reception and explore its resonance across many disciplines.

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Introduction to “Institutional Ecology, ‘Translations’ and Boundary Objects: Amateurs and Professionals in Berkeley’s Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, 1907–39”

  • 章节

  • 发表日期：

    2025年

查看全文
  • Geoffrey C. Bowker

摘要

In their paper on boundary objects, Leigh Star and Jim Griesemer laid out an agenda which has been remarkably productive in the fields of science and technology studies (STS); organization theory; and information and computer science. It is far the most cited paper of the central STS journal Social Studies of Science. Jim Griesemer once commented to me on the strangeness of his most cited paper not being squarely in his home discipline. The paper explored centrally the question of ‘cooperation without consensus’–how separate communities with different agendas could work together without any two agreeing on just what they were doing though the development of ‘boundary objects,’ which permitted this cooperation. In this brief aperçu, I briefly describe the paper’s reception and explore its resonance across many disciplines.