Interview with Roberta Lamb
Roberta Lamb first met Rob Kling in 1990 and ultimately became one of his graduate students at the University of California, Irvine, where she earned her Ph.D. in Information and Computer Science in 1997. She is now an Associate Professor at the University of Hawaii, Manoa in Information Technology Management in the College of Business Administration and also serves as the Director of the Center for IT Research in Enterprises (CITRE). Having spent the last 6 years in Hawaii, she will be taking a position in 2006 at the University of California, Irvine as an Associate Professor in the School of Information and Computer Science. For more information about Dr. Lamb, please visit her website at http://lamb.cba.hawaii.edu/.
On March 9, 2006, a telephone interview was conducted with Roberta Lamb. A recap of the interview follows…
I understand that you were a student of Rob Kling’s when he was at the University of California at Irvine.Correct.
What motivated your interest in working with Rob?I had worked in industry for a long time before that. I had received a master’s degree from Cal State Fullerton. I was not even thinking about getting a PhD, but I was frustrated in industry. None of the systems design implementation strategies had anything to do with research in academia. There was no learning curve that spanned academia and industry. The same mistakes were being made over and over, so I complained a lot. A person sitting in the cube next to me, whose husband was a professor at UC Irvine, said “Don’t you know Rob Kling? That’s what he studies all the time - this organizational mish mash between systems and implementation. Why don’t you talk to him?” So I did, and he said sure, he’d be happy to chat.
So what was this first meeting with Rob like?Rob invited me to his house. We talked, and he said “Why don’t you enroll in the PhD program?” So I did. While in the program, I continued working fulltime as the project manager for system development at a computer company.
Can you describe what life was like for Rob and his graduate students during the “Irvine years”?I was older, so I was pretty careful. I knew we couldn’t have a master-slave relationship where I was dependent on my advisor for money and self-esteem. I maintained financial independence - even funding my own travel when I needed to for my dissertation. I had heard some stories about Rob being domineering and students having problems with working with a strong personality like that. I had enough experience with working those kinds of folks, so I had a strategy. I decided to treat Rob like an important client. I scheduled appointments to see him, and we went to lunch. Our relationship was more constrained in terms of time, since we were both really busy. We would meet and have objectives at the meeting. I always had a meeting agenda on what to achieve. It was more businesslike for me than for most other students. I did that for six years.
In your tribute article to Rob in The Information Society entitled “The Social Construction of Rob Kling”, you state that “[Rob] balanced his highly critical, almost abusive remarks [about the work of his graduate students], with conciliation and very generous opportunities and contacts - eventually.”Some remarks Rob would make were cutting and insulting. That’s a style that, if you’re from the east coast, it’s more expected in interactions between people. East coasters tend to have insulting humor. They may say things to be funny, but people take those remarks personally - especially if they’re not used to that kind of exchange. Still, you take it to heart when someone says something that isn’t complimentary. I think a lot of students felt that way, but I can’t remember feeling that way. Students cried. This is also a reflection of the graduate student condition because they’re so dependent on their advisor. So even things not intended to be critical can be read that way. But Rob was extremely generous in terms of opportunities.
Can you provide some examples of Rob’s generosity in your case? I counted at least six articles that you co-authored with Rob, as well as a few conference proceedings and reviews. Do you feel that Rob’s style with his graduate students made you stronger as a student and as a researcher?Rob invited me to write with him early and often. Getting publications early in my career taught me how to write funding proposals. Helping me do those things early rather than shoving me through the program early as a product wasn’t his way. He brought me into his network and made me a scholar, as opposed to having me fulfill requirements of the program and then just getting me out the door. That’s a more inclusive and difficult way of mentoring, and it takes lots of time and effort.
In your own teaching and mentoring - currently as Associate Professor at the University of Hawaii, Manoa - have you followed Rob’s lead or have you taken a different approach?I hope I try to do that now. But I may justify occasional lapses.
Do you find many students highly interested in Social Informatics?I see them everywhere. However, it’s hard to tell the difference initially between interest in Social Informatics per se or with working with a professor who has good funding. Having good students is a function of the program you’re in. It is difficult, for example, to get students in a remote place like Hawaii. It’s easier to get good students on the mainland.
I see where this past fall (2005) you were a Fulbright Scholar with the University of Turku, Finland. What specifically were you doing and did you find it to be a valuable experience?Yes, I was there as a Fulbright. I was working with some people at the University of Turku. I had met Eija Karsten, and we put together an exchange program where she came to University of Hawaii in spring 2005. I went there in fall 2005. We worked on research together both here and there. I found this to be very productive. Nokia was the sponsor of the Fulbright.
What are you working on now?I am starting on some new international IT-related socio-technical research that I would rather not discuss right now, since we have not put in our proposal yet. I am also doing some work that extends previous work involving collaborating scientists.
Do you work a lot with corporate sponsors?No, I use all taxpayer money now. Nokia sponsored the Fulbright for me, but that was actually done through the U.S. State Department. Nokia paid for my stipend to be there, but the whole thing was managed through the Fulbright program.
Your biographical sketch indicates that you are currently directing two NSF-funded studies that focus on the role of information and communication technologies (ICTs) in scientific collaborations that cross the institutional boundaries between academia and industry. How is that research coming along?There are lots of articles on those involving socio-technical multi-method research studies and roles of ICTs in shaping society. We think we have really interesting findings and are having good luck with getting published.
What is your perception of the current funding climate for researchers in Social Informatics?It’s great. There’s a lot of interest in it. You just have to get out there and get it. Too many people don’t apply. That’s why they don’t have any funding. I do a whole talk on this. The main reason why people don’t have any money is because they don’t send in proposals. I have graduate students that have NSF funding. Funded studies are better studies. First of all, you get money to collect data you need and time to do your analysis. Second, it puts you through a series of reviews that give you insights to make the research better. It’s trial by fire that ends up with better data, a better study, and better results. Even if you’re turned down, it’s important to fix what they say is wrong. Then resubmit. People don’t always do that.
You are currently Deputy Editor of “The Information Society,” Associate Editor of “Information Technology & People,” and Social Aspects Theme Editor of the “Journal of Digital Information.” What challenges do you face in fulfilling these editorial responsibilities and do you recommend editorial work for others? What types of contributions are you seeking in particular for these journals?I take too many of those service roles on. I need to learn to say “no”. You don’t get paid much, and it’s usually way more work than you need to be doing. Then you get antsy about timelines and getting your own stuff out. It’s not well-rewarded. We’re all overcommitted on it. It’s part of the academic enterprise. We are finding quality work; it’s just hard to get it through the pipeline.
Is anything lacking?If it’s not submitted.
Is there an area of research that provides special opportunities for fledgling researchers like me?There is a whole lot of interesting work that you can do. The question is - do you have the perseverance to do it? It’s not all survey work. It’s not all just testing a bunch of existing theories. We’re in a time of transition. It’s all about understanding how that transition is happening - how technologies are becoming inseparable from our functions at every level every day. It’s really even exploring the idea that the human organism is techno-foundational in some ways. It’s hard to make a separation between people and their technologies in basic interchanges and interactions. A lot of people are doing that kind of work. I would complain about the way people decide to investigate it - and how quickly they make normative claims when they’re not ready to do it. However, they’re pushed to do it by the publications. For example, in the management arena, based on your research, you’re pushed to come up with recommendations on what should managers do. These off-the-cuff recommendations come too early and too fast.
So are you staying away from making those recommendations?Yes, I’m trying.
Still management goes on, so what do they do?I’m not so sure you need that much management. More and more layers are being removed. More technology is becoming infused in a number of different ways - in work and home settings. There wasn’t management until the railroads, as you read in The Visible Hand. Management is new. Overmanagement is one of my personal dislikes.
You indicate in your writings about Rob Kling that he harbored resentment toward those who did not take him seriously and that he felt his research was dismissed in particular by computer scientists.That’s still ongoing. In other schools, computer science groups feel folks like Rob should be part of sociology instead of IT - which is considered more “scientific.” Computer scientists think those soft things weaken their own discipline or school and look at it as something that should be eliminated. At UC Irvine this has always been a problem that Rob and John King fought. It still goes on, with all the same arguments. It’s in the Information Technology Systems (ITS) school over there, but tentatively separated into computing systems, theory and informatics. I don’t know how hard those divisions really should be. Anything that is not hardware, like software or thinkware/theory, is pushed into informatics, which is more the applications and social side of things.
Do you think Social Informatics as a field has made any headway in earning respect? Or do Social Informatics researchers still have a long way to go to get the word out about the need for critical examination of ICTs and the importance of social/cultural/political issues?Not everyone thinks Social Informatics is the right title. I don’t say I’m a social informatician. I say that I do research in information systems and how people use ICTs. They usually find that more informative.
Do you have any words of wisdom you would like to pass on to others involved in Social Informatics research - especially for fledgling graduate students like myself?I do a whole talk on it. One of the main points is to do what you really love doing. Make sure you do it and don’t stop. That will take up all your time. It’s not a 9-5 kind of thing.
Where would you like to see the field of Social Informatics go?I don’t have disciplinary and field aspirations. I want to see the whole planet come to an understanding of how to live better, take care of the planet better, and use ICTs to make things better. I don’t care about discipline and academic enterprise. I have no aspirations for managerial positions or administrative institutionalization. I really care about the research.
Are there specific threats to be dealt with?People who kowtow to production limits and requirements about getting a certain number of students out the door rather than doing interesting research. People who don’t do what they really want to do, but instead simply follow an expeditious path. They’re not doing good research.
Do you see a lot of not good research?Yes it’s out there. It does fulfill requirements and gets people moving up the academic ladder. But it’s not helpful to the pursuit of knowledge. It’s not good to push students to do that kind of crap. And you shouldn’t do it yourself.
What does the immediate future hold for you professionally?My move to UC Irvine has been engineered to put me in the middle of a group that’s more collaboratively challenging in terms of what can do together. It will also be possible to draw on a student population that’s likely to be more highly skilled and motivated to do the kind of research I want to do. There will be more resources in terms of colleagues, connections, and students. This will lead to more research, more funding, and more fun.
What were the most valuable things you learned from Rob?Rob made me understand that this is possible. You can really forge your own path. You don’t have to follow. Other people can’t force you to do their kind of research. You have to be prepared to fight the fight and get your stuff recognized as good work. But you don’t have to bend your pursuits to someone else’s expectations. Rob did not fold his work into a box someone else made for him. I don’t know that I have done anything that ground breaking, but I haven’t had to change what I do for anyone else. Rob and his pals forged a broad path for us to go down. We’re benefiting from the work they did before and are still doing.
Do you have any suggestions for RKCSI?That’s an administrative body. Do whatever you want. It’s about the people and the research. It’s important to work toward what you find fascinating and interesting. Who cares what it’s called.
