Marlot Kuiper

236 Connective Routines create social connections. In contrast, not by refusing the artefact, but by taking it on as their ‘duty’. Dingwall (1977) already noted how difficult it is for professions like nursing to establish themselves when there is a ‘dominant’ profession in their environment. Nurses seem to gratefully use the whiteboards to generate a more prominent role in the team; by incorporating the artefact in their repertoire, their role in the team becomes more visible. In her study on occupational boundaries, Bechky (2003) observed that different occupational groups continuously negotiate boundaries and frequently use organisational artefacts to reinforce their boundaries and maintain power and legitimacy. In this case, the whiteboards representing the checklist can be identified as boundary object (Star & Griesemer, 1989) for the negotiation of power relations between different professional groups in the team. 7.6.4 Technology is a tool, not a panacea Lastly, in studies on artefacts, ‘technologies’ seem to dominate. How new technologies (might) transform or even diminish professional work is hot topic (Susskind & Susskind, 2017). The findings of this study suggest that a dominant focus on technologies invites researchers to overlook other artefacts that still determine many of the patterns of action. Yes, technology increasingly plays a role in professional work, and abstract notions reflect other types of artefacts to be ‘outdated’ and herewith even ‘unprofessional’. The data show however, that technological artefacts at the most interact with other artefacts, and do not determine patterns of action alone. Moreover, in St. Sebastian ‘old fashioned paper’ was the sole representation of the checklist, and practices did not always match abstract ideas. Despite that actants stipulated the checklist as ‘outdated’ and ‘unprofessional’, it mostly did stimulate mindful patterns of action, with focused attention by the team. Future research should therefore focus on how technological artefacts mediate routines, but not in isolation (see also Cacciatori, 2012). If we want to improve our understanding of artefacts as ‘models for routines’ we have to consider the multiplicity of artefacts in an arrangement.