Editing Activity theory (section)

==An explanation==
This section presents a short introduction to activity theory, and some brief comments on human creativity in activity theory and the implications of activity theory for [[tacit knowledge]] and learning.

===Activities===
Activity theory begins with the notion of activity. An activity is seen as a system of human "doing" whereby a subject works on an object in order to obtain a desired outcome. In order to do this, the subject employs tools, which may be external (e.g. an axe, a computer) or internal (e.g. a plan). As an illustration, an activity might be the operation of an automated call centre. As we shall see later, many subjects may be involved in the activity and each subject may have one or more motives (e.g. improved supply management, career advancement or gaining control over a vital organisational power source). A simple example of an activity within a call centre might be a telephone operator (subject) who is modifying a customer's billing record (object) so that the billing data is correct (outcome) using a graphical front end to a database (tool).{{Citation needed|date=March 2012}}

Kuutti formulates activity theory in terms of the structure of an activity. "An activity is a form of doing directed to an object, and activities are distinguished from each other according
to their objects. Transforming the object into an outcome motivates the existence of an activity. An object can be a material thing, but it can also be less tangible."<ref name="Perspectives on Activity Theory"/>

Kuutti then adds a third term, the tool, which 'mediates' between the activity and the object. "The tool is at the same time both enabling and limiting: it empowers the subject in the transformation process with the historically collected experience and skill 'crystallised' to it, but it also restricts the interaction to be from the perspective of that particular tool or instrument; other potential features of an object remain invisible to the subject...".<ref name="Perspectives on Activity Theory"/>

As Verenikina remarks, tools are "social objects with certain modes of operation developed socially in the course of labour and are only possible because they correspond to the objectives of a practical action."<ref>{{cite web|author=Verenikina, Irina M|title=Vygotsky in twenty-first-century research|year=2010|page=16|url=http://ro.uow.edu.au/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2337&context=edupapers}}</ref>

===Levels===
An activity is modelled as a three-level hierarchy.<ref name="Engestrom1987">{{cite book|last1=Engeström|first1=Yrjö|title=Learning by Expanding: An Activity-theoretical Approach to Developmental Research|date=1987|publisher=Orienta-Konsultit Oy|isbn=9789519593326}}</ref> Kuutti schematises processes in activity theory as a three-level system.

Verenikina paraphrases Leont'ev as explaining that "the non-coincidence of action and operations... appears in actions with tools, that is, material objects which are crystallised operations, not actions nor goals. If a person is confronted with a specific goal of, say, dismantling a machine, then they must make use of a variety of operations; it makes no difference how the individual operations were learned because the formulation of the operation proceeds differently to the formulation of the goal that initiated the action."<ref name="Engeström 1987">{{Cite book |last=Engeström |first=Yrjö |url=https://www.worldcat.org/oclc/28711285 |title=Learning by expanding : an activity-theoretical approach to developmental research |date=1987 |publisher=Orienta-Konsultit Oy |isbn=951-95933-2-2 |location=Helsinki |oclc=28711285}}</ref>

The levels of activity are also characterised by their purposes: "Activities are oriented to motives, that is, the objects that are impelling by themselves. Each motive is an object, material or ideal, that satisfies a need. Actions are the processes functionally subordinated to activities; they are directed at specific conscious goals... Actions are realised through operations that are determined by the actual conditions of activity."{{Citation needed|date=March 2010}}

Engeström developed an extended model of an activity, which adds another component, community ("those who share the same object"), and then adds rules to mediate between subject and community, and the division of labour to mediate between object and community.

Kuutti asserts that "These three classes should be understood broadly. A tool can be anything used in the transformation process, including both material tools and tools for thinking. Rules cover both explicit and implicit norms, conventions, and social relations within a community. Division of labour refers to the explicit and implicit organisation of the community as related to the transformation process of the object into the outcome."<ref name="Engeström 1987"/>

Activity theory therefore includes the notion that an activity is carried out within a social context, or specifically in a community. The way in which the activity fits into the context is thus established by two resulting concepts:
* rules: these are both explicit and implicit and define how subjects must fit into the community;
* division of labour: this describes how the object of the activity relates to the community.

===The internal plane of action===
Activity theory provides a number of useful concepts that can be used to address the lack of expression for 'soft' factors which are inadequately represented by most process modelling frameworks. One such concept is the internal plane of action. Activity theory recognises that each activity takes place in two planes: the external plane and the internal plane. The external plane represents the objective components of the action while the internal plane represents the subjective components of the action. Kaptelinin defines the ''internal plane of actions'' as "[...] a concept developed in activity theory that refers to the human ability to perform manipulations with an internal representation of external objects before starting actions with these objects in reality."<ref>Kaptelinin 1996, p. 51</ref>

The concepts of motives, goals and conditions discussed above also contribute to the modelling of soft factors. One principle of activity theory is that many activities have multiple motivation ('polymotivation'). For instance, a programmer in writing a program may address goals aligned towards multiple motives such as increasing his or her annual bonus, obtaining relevant career experience and contributing to organisational objectives.

Activity theory further argues that subjects are grouped into communities, with rules mediating between subject and community and a division of labour mediating between object and community. A subject may be part of several communities and a community, itself, may be part of other communities.

===Human creativity===
Human creativity plays an important role in activity theory, that "human beings... are essentially creative beings" in "the creative, non-predictable character". Tikhomirov also analyses the importance of ''creative activity'', contrasting it to ''routine'' activity, and notes the important shift brought about by computerisation in the balance towards creative activity.

Karl Marx, a sociological theorist, argued that humans are unique compared to other species in that humans create everything they need to survive. According to Marx, this is described as species-being. Marx believed we find our true identity in what we produce in our personal labor.<ref>{{Cite book|title=The social lens : an invitation to social and sociological theory|last=Allan|first=Kenneth|isbn=9781412992787|edition=Third|location=Thousand Oaks, CA|oclc=829099056|date = 2013-05-21}}</ref>

===Learning and tacit knowledge===
Activity theory has an interesting approach to the difficult problems of ''learning'' and, in particular, ''tacit knowledge''. Learning has been a favourite subject of management theorists, but it has often been presented in an abstract way separated from the work processes to which the learning should apply. Activity theory provides a potential corrective to this tendency. For instance, Engeström's review of Nonaka's work on ''[[knowledge management|knowledge creation]]'' suggests enhancements based on activity theory, in particular suggesting that the organisational learning process includes preliminary stages of goal and problem formation not found in Nonaka. Lompscher, rather than seeing learning as ''transmission'', sees the formation of learning goals and the
student's understanding of which things they need to acquire as the key to the formation of the learning activity.

Of particular importance to the study of learning in organisations is the problem of ''tacit knowledge'', which according to Nonaka, "is highly personal and hard to formalise, making it difficult to communicate to others or to share with others."<ref>{{cite book |last1=Nonaka |first1=Ikujiro |last2=Takeuchi |first2=Hirotaka |title=The Knowledge-Creating Company: How Japanese Companies Create the Dynamics of Innovation |year=1995 |publisher=Oxford University Press |isbn=978-0-19-509269-1 |url=https://archive.org/details/knowledgecreatin00nona }}</ref> Leont'ev's concept of operation provides an important insight into this problem. In addition, the key idea of ''internalisation'' was originally introduced by Vygotsky as "the internal reconstruction of an external operation."<ref>{{Cite book|title=Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes.|last=Vygotsky|first=L. S.|publisher=Harvard University Press|year=1978|isbn=978-0-674-57628-5|location=Cambridge, MA|pages=56}}</ref> Internalisation has subsequently become a key term of the theory of tacit knowledge and has been defined as "a process of embodying explicit knowledge into tacit knowledge."{{Citation needed|date=March 2010}} Internalisation has been described by Engeström as the "key psychological mechanism" discovered by Vygotsky and is further discussed by Verenikina.