Knut H. Sørensen
Information Society Skills
Programming versus Social Sciences

Programming is often extolled as a basic skill of the Information Society, needed to produce the software that is to become the backbone of work, education and play. Taken at face value, this is a technical skill that may be performed through different level of virtuosity. Often, the skill is extended to include information systems design and knowledge modelling. Today's ICT consultants represent the embodiment of this hyper-programming that occupies, dominates and monopolise the space of constructing ICT-and-organization hybrids. Thus, we are faced with the challenge of analysing the nature of this set of skills and how it is put in motion. Are we finding a rather traditionally professionalised setting, or do we encounter transdisciplinary Modus 2 type production of knowledge a la Gibbons et al.?

From a social science point of view, the image of this sort of hyper-programming as a technological skill is misleading. While individual programmers may find intrinsic satisfaction in writing programmes for themselves, the software industry has to provide "workable" products. In particular, business systems often have to be "translated" to fit the situation of a particular customer. Basically, there is no such thing as off-the-shelf or out-of-the-laboratory products. The social science point of view is that social science skills are needed in order to embed such products in the local culture and to provide a "workable" programme-culture configuration of human and non-human practices.

However, the social science point of view is basically an outsider's position. Only a very few social scientists are found practising hyper-programming, and social science approaches are not very well developed. In fact, social scientists are rather vulnerable to computer scientists' critique of them as analytic bystanders rather than as active designers.

The situation is paradoxical but also problematic. Interviews with computer scientists working as software consultants in Norwegian companies indicate quite clearly that they have made hyper-programming into a professional possession in a quite traditional way. At the same time, the combination of a professional and a hierarchical-organisational logic implies a devaluation of the core competence of programmers. While they emphasize the need to know programming, ICT consultants are eager to present themselves as persons who do not too much of it. Writing software is constructed as a task of low prestige. It is much more important to be engaged with costumers, using skills of communication and organisation. Such skills, including good abilities as project manager, provide the basis of promotion and good pay. The few who appreciate programming, are thinking about starting their own business. Most programmers prefer to act the role of "virtual sociologists". This may mean that much of the software industry is a stepping-stone, as a space of liminality (Turner) where computer scientists are transformed into managers and organisation development consultants. Since their professional authority is based on their programming expertise, this may strengthen the present tendency of making ICT into a basic structure of management rhetoric.

On the other hand, many ICT projects are failures in the meaning that companies are losing money, systems do not perform, important tasks are not taken care of, etc. Of course, there is no single explanation of this fact. Rather, one should expect that the problems are due to varying combinations of programming failures, organization development failures, training failures and so on.

The professional power of computer scientists does of course provide challenges to any effort of the social sciences to enter this field. However, basically, computer scientists are going to pay an increasing prize to retain their professional monopoly. This is due to the fact that this professional power resides in an outdated mode of knowledge organization, the poly-technical regime of cross-disciplinarity. ICT consultants practice a monodisciplinary form of transdisciplinary production of knowledge; thus the real potential of transdisciplinarity is not made use of.

There is definitely a need to examine the potential of social science skills in this context. One cannot assume a priori that social scientists will prove themselves able to play a role in design teams. Thus, in the end, what we may be facing is the need to reform the education of computer scientists as well as social scientists, while developing new ways of juxtaposing and combining different skills in the practice of hyper-programming.