On the Capabilities of Digimaterial Artifacts

Structures, Symbols, Actions

Lars Bækgaard

Department of Business Development and Technology, Aarhus University,

Birk Centerpark 15, DK-7400, Herning, Denmark

Keywords: Digital Artifacts, Digimaterial Artifacts, Digimaterial Capabilities.

Abstract: The purpose of the paper is to propose and discuss three types of capabilities of digimaterial artifacts like

laptop computers, cameras, cars, robots etc. Digimaterial artifacts are material artifacts that combine digital

and non-digital elements by bearing one or more digital artifacts. Digital artifacts are linguistic expressions

like, say, binary sequences of 0's and 1's. Software and databases are examples of digital artifacts. Paper

pieces with digital inscriptions and cars with data and software are examples of digimaterial artifacts.

Digimaterial artifacts can bear, and potentially manipulate, digital artifacts. We describe and discuss

digimaterial structures and the capabilities that are enabled by these structures. And we describe and discuss

the plastic nature of such structures and capabilities. We expect that our work can be used to understand

digimaterial capabilities and to analyse and design digimaterial structures that possess a relevant set of

capabilities.

1 INTRODUCTION

The purpose if this paper is to define and discuss

three types of capabilities that can be used to

characterize the similarities and dissimilarities

between artifacts like cameras, laptop computers,

printers, smartphones, robots, and cars. Such

artifacts may have capabilities that are based on a

combination of digital and non-digital elements. A

smartphone has storage capabilities for digital data,

technology for processing of digital data, and a

material body. Similarly, a camera may be

constituted by digital storage and processing

technology and material components like glass.

Terms like IT artifacts (Orlikowski and Iacono

2001), digital artifacts (Kallinikos, Aaltonen et al.

2013), digitalized artifacts (Yoo 2010), and digital

technology (Yoo, Henfridsson et al. 2010) can be

used to denote different aspects of artifacts that

combine digital and material elements. The term IT

artifacts can be used to refer to a totality of

information and technology (Goldkuhl 2013). The

term digital artifact can be used to refer to digitally

represented data and software (Kallinikos, Aaltonen et

al. 2013). The term digital technology can be used to

refer to technological artifacts with digital storage and

processing capabilities (Yoo, Henfridsson et al. 2010).

In order to avoid term ambiguity, we distinguish

between digital artifacts and digimaterial artifacts.

We use the term digital artifact to denote

information artifacts like binary expressions and bar

codes. Digital artifacts can be viewed as non-

material artifacts that can be materialized by

material artifacts that bear them (Faulkner and

Runde 2011, Faulkner and Runde 2013). A piece of

software may be viewed as a digital artifact that is

constituted by a binary expression, i.e., a sequence

of zeroes and ones. This sequence is, in itself, a

conceptual, linguistic entity. It is non-material. A

hard disk or a USB drive may bear a representation

of the software. These artifacts are examples of

digimaterial artifacts. An e-book is a digital artifact

that is constituted by binary expressions. An e-book

reader that bears the e-book is a digimaterial artifact.

We use the term digimaterial artifact to denote

material artifacts that bear (and potentially

manipulates) one or more digital artifacts. We present

and discuss essential characteristics of digimaterial

artifacts.

Our conceptualization can be used to understand

the digital artifacts that are beared by and processed

by means of digimaterial artifacts. Also, it can be

used to understand how the potential capabilities of

digimaterial artifacts depend on a combination of

Bækgaard, L.

On the Capabilities of Digimaterial Artifacts.

DOI: 10.5220/0006808503930397

In Proceedings of the 20th International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems (ICEIS 2018), pages 393-397

ISBN: 978-989-758-298-1

393

digital and non-digital elements.

The paper is structured as follows. In Section 2,

we define the notion of digital artifacts. In Section 3,

we discuss the notion of digimaterial artifacts. In

Section 4, we define and discuss three types of

capabilities that digimaterial artifacts may possess.

In Section 5, we discuss the plastic nature of

digimaterial artifacts. In Section 6, we discuss our

findings, conclude the paper and suggest directions

for future research.

2 DIGITAL ARTIFACTS

In this section, we discuss essential characteristics of

digital artifacts like databases, text files, software

etc. The purpose is to create an understanding of the

roles played by digital artifacts in artifacts like

laptop computers, cameras, robots, cars etc. In order

to distinguish between digital and material aspects of

such artifacts we distinguish between digital artifacts

and the digimaterial artifacts that bear digital

artifacts.

We view a digital artifact as a linguistic

expression that is based on set of discrete symbols.

In the present paper, we focus solely on binary

digital artifacts where information is represented by

means of sequences of bits (binary digits). Usually,

the symbols 0 and 1 are used to represent binary

digits in the binary numeral system in which sequen-

ces of bits are used to represent numbers that in turn

may represent software, images, text, music etc.

The syntax and semantics of the binary numeral

system can be represented by written expressions on,

say, a piece of paper and the same holds for binary

expressions. The piece of paper can be called a

bearer of the expressions (Faulkner and Runde 2011,

Faulkner and Runde 2013). Bearers and the

expressions they bear represent a material aspect of

language. Databases, software, configuration files,

digital music files, digital image files, digital text

files etc. are examples of digital artifacts.

Binary expressions can be viewed as non-

material artifacts (Faulkner and Runde 2011,

Faulkner and Runde 2013). However, digital

artifacts become material-like when material

artifacts bear them (Leonardi 2010).

Digital artifacts can be divided into connected

components (Parnas 1972, Bækgaard 1990,

Henfridsson, Mathiassen et al. 2009, Kallinikos and

Mariátegui 2011).

Data Components can be based on media files

(Kallinikos and Mariátegui 2011) or databases

(Codd 1970, Chen 1976). Media files like images,

videos, text etc. can be divided into data components

and distributed on a number of digimaterial artifacts.

Likewise, databases can be divided into data

compoments and districuted on a number of

digimaterial artifacts.

Software Components can be procedures based

on procedural programming languages. Also,

software components can be parameters that

represent software properties in a way that can be

used to change selected software properties without

changing the source code itself (Bækgaard 1990).

3 DIGIMATERIAL ARTIFACTS

In this section, we discuss essential characteristics of

digimaterial artifacts. We view a digimaterial

artifact as a material artifact that bears one or more

digital artifacts. Binary expressions constitute the

digital core of contemporary digimaterial artifacts.

No material artifacts are completely digital. There

will always be non-digital elements in material

artifacts. A digimaterial artifact may (but does not

have to) contain technology that can process digital

artifacts.

3.1 Components

A digimaterial artifact is constituted by a set of

material components. At least one of the connected

components must be a digimaterial artifact. Some

components may have no digital elements. For

example, the front glass plates on many smartphones

are purely non-digital. Digimaterial components

combine material and digital aspects.

3.2 Connectivity

Mechanical Connections. Material components may

be connected by means of mechanical connections.

For example, car components like doors and car

bodies may be connected be means of mechanical

connections between the components.

Electrical Connections. Digimaterial components

may be connected by means of a combination of

mechanical and electrical connections. For example,

car components like steering wheels and driving

wheels my be connected by means of a combination

of material and electrical connections between

components.

Digital Connections. Electrical connections can

be used to establish digital connections by

interpreting binary electrical signals as binary

information. This makes digimaterial artifacts

ICEIS 2018 - 20th International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems

394

communicable (Yoo 2010) by facilitating sharing of

binary information across digimaterial artifacts.

Individual digimaterial artifacts or groups of

digimaterial artifacts can be selected as targets

because they are addressable (Yoo 2010).

Digital Associations. Digital components may be

associated by means of relationships between data

elements (Codd 1970, Chen 1976) or by means of

hyperlinks in, say, Web 2.0 structures. Digital

components may be related to and identified with

other entities (such as other artifacts, places, and

people) based on certain commonly shared

attributes. Digital associativity is enabled by tags,

keywords, or affiliation patterns (Yoo 2010).

Connectivity enables the distribution of

digimaterial components on a variety of locations

and distribution of digital artifacts across a variery

of digimaterial artifacts (Kallinikos, Aaltonen et al.

2013).

4 DIGIMATERIAL

CAPABILITIES

In this section, we create a vocabulary that captures

essential similarities and dissimilarities between

digimaterial artifacts. We propose three types of

digimaterial capabilities. We suggest that the

capabilities of digimaterial artifacts can be classified

as structural capabilities, symbolic capabilities, and

action capabilities.

4.1 Structural Capabilities

Digimaterial structures can be viewed as capabilities

in their own right. Digimaterial artifacts can possess

such structural capabilities. A car can keep driver

and passengers in fixed positions on seats while the

car is driving. A robot can grap an object and keep it

in a fixed position. An elevator system can keep a

car at a fixed position in a hoistway. The spatial

distribution of a digimaterial artifact distributes

access to the artifact.

4.2 Symbolic Capabilities

Digimaterial artifacts can possess symbolic

capabilities. Often, the symbolic capabilities of

digimaterial artifacts are based on the digital

artifacts they bear. Binary information stored on

hard disks can represent sound, text, images, movies

etc. The information can be presented on, say,

displays in ways that are relevant for human beings.

The symbolic capabilities of digital artifacts are

the basis of information systems that capture, store,

manipulate and present information (Checkland and

Holwell 1998, Avison and Fitzgerald 2006, Alter

2008). A digimaterial artifact can use action

capabilities like control, modify, sense, and move to

process digital artifacts with the intention of

manipulating their symbolic capabilities.

4.3 Action Capabilities

Digimaterial artifacts can possess action capabilities.

An action capability is a type of action that a

digimaterial artifact can perform. Below, we focus

on four types of such action capabilities: Control,

Modify, Sense, and Move (Bækgaard 2006,

Bækgaard 2011, Bækgaard 2016).

Control is an action capability that makes

it possible for a digimaterial artifact to request

that a target object executes a specified action

(Bækgaard 2016). Digimaterial artifacts can control

(digi)material artifacts. For example, a smartphone

with suitable apps can be used to control heating

devices and drones.

Modify is an action capability that makes it

possible for a digimaterial artifact to modify the

state of a target object (Bækgaard 2016). For

example, 3D printers can transform ink into 3-

dimensional objects. And programmers can modify

software. Many digimaterial artifacts can process

binary expressions. Binary expressions can be used

to control the manipulation and transformation of

binary expressions.

Sense is an action capability that makes it

possible for a digimaterial artifact to sense aspects of

the states of target objects (Yoo 2010, Bækgaard

2016). Digital cameras can sense light waves.

Digital watches can sense movement.

Move is an action capability that makes it

possible for a digimaterial artifact to change the

location of a material target object (Bækgaard 2016).

For example, robots can move material objects.

Digimaterial objects like drones and cars can move

themselves. Digital artifacts cannot be moved. They

can be copied and deleted. Apparent movement of

digital artifacts can be imitated by means of a

combination of sense and modify (delete).

5 PLASTICITY

Digimaterial artifacts are plastic in these sense that

they can be modified (Bækgaard 1990, Yoo,

Henfridsson et al. 2010, Kallinikos, Aaltonen et al.

On the Capabilities of Digimaterial Artifacts

395

2013). The plasticity of a digimaterial artifact is to a

large extent enabled by the flexibility and

modifiability of the digital artifacts it bears.

Digital artifacts like Internet pages (Kallinikos,

Aaltonen et al. 2013), image files (Kessler 2009),

and search engines (Orlikowski 2007) are modifi-

able. Digital artifacts are expandable (Kallinikos,

Aaltonen et al. 2013) within the limits of the storage

capabilities of the bearing digimaterial artifacts.

Programmed rules can be expressed as a

combination of software and parameters (Bækgaard

1990). If the software or the parameters are changed,

the programmed rules and thereby the logic of the

computer is changed and its behaviour is changed

correspondingly.

Traditional digimaterial artifacts like computers

can be viewed as implementations of Turing

machines. A Turing machine is a conceptual model

of a programmable machine (Turing 1936). A

specific instance of a Turing machine uses a set of

programmed rules to transform numbers to numbers.

Likewise, a computer uses programmed rules to

transform bit sequences to bit sequences.

Usually, the programmed rules are expressed by

means of a combination of software (expressed by

means of programming languages) and parameters

(Bækgaard 1990). If the software or the parameters

are changed, the programmed rules and thereby the

logic of the computer is changed and its behavior is

changed correspondingly.

The plasticity of digimaterial artifacts that is

rooted in the flexibility and modifiability of the

beared digital artifacts has a number of important

implications as illustrated by the following

examples.

Programmability. Digimaterial artifacts are

partially programmable (Yoo 2010). They can

accept new logic to modify their structures and the

enabled capabilities.

Late Binding. Digimaterial artifacts support late

binding of properties (Hylving, Henfridsson et al.

2012).

Weak Coupling. The structures of digimaterial

artifacts are plastic and the coupling between form

and function is weakened (Autio, Nambisan et al.

2018).

Flexible Use. Digimaterial artifacts possess use

plasticity in the sense that there are multiple ways of

activating functions and exploring information

(Kallinikos, Aaltonen et al. 2013). For example,

there are multiple ways to explore the content of

databases.

Flexible Re-configuration. Digimaterial artifacts

can be designed as flexible assemblages, i.e. "...

arrangements of different entities linked together to

form a new whole ..." (Müller 2015). Typically, the

digimaterial artifacts that constitute an assemblage

are autonomous and their connections are flexible.

6 DISCUSSION, CONCLUSION

AND FUTURE WORK

Our conceptualizations can be viewed as a

generalization and unification of existing

conceptualizations (Orlikowski and Iacono 2001,

Yoo 2010, Yoo, Henfridsson et al. 2010, Goldkuhl

2013, Kallinikos, Aaltonen et al. 2013, Matook and

Brown 2017).

We have defined a digital artifact as a linguistic

expression that is based on a discrete set of symbols

like, say, the binary numeral system. And we have

defined a digimaterial artifact as a material artifact

that bears one or more digital artifacts. Binary digital

artifacts (bit sequences) can be stored directly on

and by manipulated by contemporary technology

with digital capabilities. For example, a laptop

computer may be viewed as a digimaterial artifact

that bears binary digital artifacts like software and

databases. As another example, many cameras may

be viewed as digimaterial artifacts that bears binary

digital artifacts like image files and image

processing software.

We have characterized the plastic structures of

digimaterial artifacts in terms of connected and

layered components. We have characterized the

capabilities of digimaterial artifacts in terms of

action capabilities, symbolic capabilities, and

structural capabilities. Each capability type applies

to the digital as well as the material aspects of

digimaterial artifacts. Many digimaterial systems are

based on a combination of the three types of

capabilities.

The capability types can be used to unite two

important applications of digimaterial artifacts.

First, they can be used to characterize information

systems perspective where the symbolic capabilities

are at the core. In such systems, the material aspects

and the enabled action capabilities support the

symbolic capabilities. For example, an ERP system

may be based on symbolic capabilities (for example,

digitally represented information), action capabilities

(for example, capture and manipulation of

information), and structural capabilities (for

example, distribution of access to the system and its

information).

ICEIS 2018 - 20th International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems

396

Second, they can be used to support the material

perspective perspective where structural capabilities

and material action capabilities are at the core. In

such systems, the digital artifacts support the

material action capabilities. For example, a robot

may be based on symbolic capabilities (for example,

information that represents its actions), action

capabilities (for examole, movement of robot arms),

and structural capabilities (for example, the ability to

hold an object in a fixed position).

Future work includes experiments with the use

of our conceptualizations for analysis and design of

networks of digimaterial artifacts.

REFERENCES

Alter, S. (2008). Defining Information Systems as Work

Systems: Implications for the IS Field. European

Journal of Information Systems. 17: 448-469.

Autio, E., et al. (2018). Digital affordances, spatial

affordances, and the genesis of entreprenerurial

ecosystems. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal.

Avison, D. E. and G. Fitzgerald (2006). Information

Systems Development. Methodologies, Techniques &

Tools. Blackwell Scientific Publications.

Bækgaard, L. (1990). Designing Adaptable Software -

Parametrization of Volatile Properties. Conference on

Software Maintenance. San Diego, California, USA.

Bækgaard, L. (2006). Interaction in Information Systems -

Beyond Human Computer Interaction. Conference on

Action in Language, Action in Language,

Organisations and Information Systems (ALOIS'06).

Borås, Sweden.

Bækgaard, L. (2011). A Socio-Technical Approach to

Interaction Modeling. Americas Conference on

Information Systems - AMCIS'2011. Detroit, USA.

Bækgaard, L. (2016). On the Capabilities of Digital

Artifacts. AIS SIGPRAG 2016. Pre-ICIS Workshop on

Practice-based Design and Innovation of Digital

Artifacts. Dublin, Ireland.

Checkland, P. and S. Holwell (1998). Information,

Systems, and Information Systems. Wiley.

Chen, P. P. (1976). The Entity-Relationship Model -

Towards a Unified View of Data. ACM Transactions

on Database Systems.

Codd, E. F. (1970). A Relational Model of Data for Large

Shared Data Banks. Communications of the ACM.

Faulkner, P. and J. Runde (2011). The Social, the

Material, and the Ontology of Non-Material

Technological Objects. 27th European Group for

Organizational Studies Colloquium. Sweden.

Faulkner, P. and J. Runde (2013). Technological objects,

social positions, and the transformational model of

social activity. MIS Quarterly. 373(3): 803-818.

Goldkuhl, G. (2013). The IT artefact: An ensemble of the

social and the technical? – A rejoinder. Systems, Signs

& Actions. 7(1): 90-99.

Henfridsson, O., et al. (2009). Reconfiguring Modularity:

Closing Capability Gaps in Digital Innovation.

Sprouts: Working Papers on Information Systems. 9:

1-30.

Hylving, L, et al., (2012). The Role of Dominant Design

in a Product Developing Firm´s Digital Innovation.

Journal of Information Technology Theory and

Application. 13(2).

Kallinikos, J. and J.-C. Mariátegui (2011). Video as

Digital Object: Production and Distribution of Video

Content in the Internet Media Ecosystem. The

Information Society. 27(5): 281-294.

Kallinikos, J., et al. (2013). The Ambivalent Ontology of

Digital Artifacts. MIS Quarterly. 37(2): 357-370.

Kessler, F. (2009). What you get is what you see. Digital

images and the claim on the real. In Van den Boomen,

M., et al. Digital Material. Tracing New Media in

Everyday Life and Technology

. Amsterdam University

Press.

Leonardi, P. M. (2010). Digital materiality? How artifacts

without matter, matter. First Monday. 15(6).

Matook, S. and S. A. Brown (2017). Characteristics of IT

artifacts: a systems thinking-based framework for

delineating and theorizing IT artifacts. Information

System Journal. 27: 309-346.

Müller, M. (2015). Assemblages and actor-networks:

Rethinking socio-material power, politics and space.

Geography Compass. 9(1): 27-41.

Orlikowski, W. J. and C. S. Iacono (2001). Research

Commentary: Desperately Seeking the "IT" in IT

Research - A Call to Theorizing the IT Artifact.

Information Systems Research. 12(2): 121-134.

Orlikowski, W. J. (2007). Sociomaterial Practices:

Exploring Technology at Work. Organization Studies.

28(9).

Parnas, D. L. (1972). On the Criteria to be Used in

Decomposing Systems into Modules. Communications

of the ACM. 15(12): 1053-1058.

Turing, A. (1936). On computable numbers, with an

application to the entscheidungsproblem. Proceedings

of the London Mathematical Society.

Yoo, Y. (2010). Computing in Everyday Life: A Call for

Research on Experiential Computing. MIS Quarterly

34(2): 213-231.

Yoo, Y., et al. (2010). The New Organizing Logic of

Digital Innovation: An Agenda for Information

Systems Research. Information Systems Research

21(4): 724-735.

On the Capabilities of Digimaterial Artifacts

397