Contrato de personal

3.2.1 Initial phenomenological analysis of the Activity System

The process of analysis using a CHAT framework begins by developing a preliminary

phenomenological insight into the nature of the discourse and problems as experienced by

those involved in the central activity being examined, which in this case is the sharing and discussing of practice issues concerning clinical research training. This stage involves

grasping the need state and primary contradiction beneath the surface problems, doubts and uncertainties experienced among the participants of the activity.

Contextualising and delineating the activity system under investigation forms the next step, which means explicitly identifying the locus and limits of the activity of interest through modelling the central activity and its components as shown in Figure 2-2, Chapter 2. By extension, general models of neighbouring activities or systems represent sources of contradiction depending on their neighbouring role with the central activity or system of activity, as shown in Figure 3-3. However, in this respect,

“…contradictions are not the same as problems or conflicts. Contradictions are historically accumulating structural tensions within and between activity systems. The primary contradiction of activities within capitalism is that between the use and exchange value of commodities. The primary contradiction pervades all elements of our activity systems” (Engeström, 2001:137).

In the first phase of this study, the aim was to explore the TF and to develop

phenomenological insight into its context and its activities. At this stage, the CoP construct guided the descriptive analysis of the structural dimensions of the community, its domain and practice. That is, framing practice as a structural element in the CoP, contextualised the concept of practice within the community’s structure and its domain. Thus, Wenger’s

(op.cit:76) criteria defining the structural features of a CoP were used to descriptively analyse the TF as outlined in Table 3-1.

This phase of research culminated in the delineation of the TF as the AS of interest. Tensions in surface problems or disturbances were also considered as contradictions within or between its elements (subject, tools, object, rules, community, and division of labour). As shown in Figure 3-3: four levels of contradictions within an activity system at the end of the chapter, examining neighbouring activity systems according to their impact on the constituent elements of the central activity system of interest reveals additional sources of contradiction. Finally, in a CHAT framework the analytical process is accomplished in-depth through three types of rigorous analyses of the activity system, each of which is discussed in the following sections (Holzkamp, 1983 ): -

• _{the object-historical analysis;} • _{the theory-historical analysis; and} • _{the actual-empirical analysis.}

3.2.2 Object-historical & theory-historical analysis of the Activity System Object-historical analysis involves identifying and analysing successive developmental phases of the activity system in terms of the qualitative transformations of the object, which by itself can be appreciated as an activity system. At the same time, the object remains an integral component of the central activity. Identifying and analysing successive

developmental phases of the activity system is done by periodising the activity of interest, following its basic temporal structure while simultaneously uncovering secondary

contradictions between elements of the activity system driving its transition from one developmental phase to another. In effect, the history of an activity system lies not just in its internal structure and organisation but also in the global history of its tools, procedures, concepts and principles that have mediated the activity. In addition, analysing the impact of neighbouring activities or systems of activity in terms of their role reveals further sources of contradiction, or quaternary contradiction (level 4).

Theory-historical analysis within an activity theory framework involves analysing the concepts and models that constitute the shared secondary or cultural artefacts employed by the activity system in any of its developmental phases. The main aim of this form of analysis is to “identify and trace the formation of the secondary contradictions initiated by or

connected to the secondary instruments of the successive developmental periods”. For example, such artefacts “…are embodied in different modalities (i.e. handbooks, working instructions, fixed procedures for classification and diagnosis, etc.), but all are in principle public knowledge, and function as general conceptual instruments of the practical activity” (Engeström, 1987).

More fundamentally, these tools or artefacts will have been “…partly constructed within the central activity”. Understanding these tools means probing the underpinning theories or

models introduced into the central activity, and eventually tracing the instrument-producing activities behind those theories.

Finally, in the last stage of a CHAT methodology, object-historical and theory-historical analyses are complemented by actual-empirical analysis of “…the internalised and invented models professed and actually used, or upheld by the participants of the activity” (Engeström, ibid: (5): 6).

The process involved in this last stage is outlined in the next section. 3.2.3 Actual-empirical analysis of the Activity System Engeström proposes three tenets for the actual-empirical analysis:-

1. If possible, models actually applied in the activity should be analysed on all three levels of activity/motive, action/goal and operation/conditions

2. Models should be analysed as: declarative conceptions; procedural performances; social discourses or interactions; communicational networks; and organizational structures. 3. The results of the historical and theoretical analyses of identified concepts and models

(constituting artefacts) should be evaluated using what Engeström (ibid: (5): 7) refers to as five general historical types of models (prototypes, classificatory models, procedural models, systemic models, germ cell models).

Thus, consistent with the methodological application of CHAT theory, identification and analysis of models or concepts of practice “professed and/or used” in the activity system calls for the development of an instrument. In effect, this instrument was constituted during the process of both the object-historical and the theory-historical analyses, and was then tested systematically in the actual-empirical phase of analysis. It therefore, simultaneously

constituted the outcome of object-historical and the theory-historical analyses, and presented the results of the actual-empirical analysis of the object of activity (sharing practice). Accordingly, this instrument is presented with integrated coding schema as the outcome of analyses in Part 3: Results in Tables 9-1 and 9-2.

Meanwhile, the development of the framework constituting this instrument is explained in section 3.3, and shown in two parts at the end of the chapter in Tables 3-2 and 3-3, respectively14.