Everyone,

I'm finally going to wade into this thread.  My work in industry does
not afford me the time to engage more fully in this wonderful community
and for that I apologize if what I share seems redundant.

I first encountered Latour's Actor Network Theory during my PhD work in
2003.  It, coupled with a few other references on Social Capital formed
a critical part of my dissertation research where I examined how good
design impacts good business.  The three legs of my assessment model
included Product Intellectual Capital, Product Financial Capital, and
finally Product Social Capital.  Product Social Capital measured the
social capital between users and their products.  ANT was critical to
establishing the link between the social capital theories and metrics we
normally associate between people, and applying these same constructs to
the relationship between people and their products/services.

There were two key findings in this research, the first was that a more
comprehensive set of design metrics(Intellectual, Financial, and Social)
outperformed traditional financial-only metrics in modeling corporate
performance.  The second finding, upon which ANT is built, is that
Product Social Capital was a significant (statistically speaking)
leading indicator of down stream corporate revenues.  One way to state
this is that the stronger the relationship between the actors in the
network (specifically the user and product as measured by Product Social
Capital), the greater performance is enjoyed by the enterprise producing
the product-actors in that network.

One of my major sources of data that formed Product Social Capital was
online customer reviews.  Users routinely anthropomorphized not only
their products but also services associated with their experience.  One
user spoke of wanting to marry their PDA given the support the device
provided and gratitude she felt in return.  This speaks to how personal
our relationships are our products and services.  When a beloved product
fails or reaches the end of it's useful life, the user can be
traumatized on a similar level to losing a pet or loved one.  Given that
every new product or service disrupts the experience of the new user,
typically breaking the bonds of social capital that the user enjoys with
what product or service is being displaced, ANT can provide a useful
construct to become more relationship-centered rather than just
human-centered in our design approaches.

In my current role in industry, I live between R&D, Design, and Business
Development.  The notion of designing new businesses offerings (product
and/or service) around the relationships is a novel concept in the
circles I roam and one that has allow the firms that I have worked for
and with to push ahead of novel design innovations and more importantly
ensure that their development decisions seek either to maintain or
improve the existing relationships that users have with their products
and services.

If anyone is interested in a copy of my dissertation or conference
papers on topic, please let me know.  I am more than happy to share.

Cheers,

John

John Feland, PhD.
Chief Technologist, SK Telecom Americas
Guest Lecturer, Stanford University
[log in to unmask]

Elizabeth Guffey wrote:
> As editor of Design and Culture, the peer-reviewed design studies journal that
> launched with its first issue in March, I've read the ANT thread with interest.
> Indeed, noting increasing interest in ANT and its implications for the field, we
> are publishing Albena Yaneva's "Making The Social Hold: Toward an Actor-
> Network Theory of Design."  The forthcoming article, which is both descriptive
> and prescriptive, will appear in Design and Culture, volume 1, issue 3
> (appearing in November of this year).
>
>