HCI, as we know, is an interdisciplinary field, drawing on either the intersection or combination of established practices from the fields it encompasses. Due to this wide-ranging foundation, it can be difficult to pin down a clear scope of work in HCI, leading to a variety of theories that branch out and coexist as valid outcomes of HCI research. This raises the question: how does the inherently variable nature of this field, where even its core definition has multiple interpretations, affect it? From foundational concepts to methodologies, there are numerous perspectives, creating diverse ways of approaching and understanding HCI. What impact might this complexity have?

Using the broadest definition of information work, we can reasonably include HCI within its scope. However, there are many variations, and no universally accepted definition for information work exists. When we focus on information careers, confusion arises as well. Organizations categorize information work differently, assigning various titles, powers, and responsibilities. This leads to the ongoing question: Who is responsible for what? This leads to debates over conflicting roles, such as UX/UI designers, where discussions often focus more on the precise differences between these job roles than on their contributions. And, for HCI research, it is divided into three paradigms, with no clear boundaries between them, and each allowed to coexist alongside the others. This can lead to differing views on how research should be conducted, with individuals adhering to different paradigms and evolving their approaches based on their own beliefs and preferred methods.

Researchers, as they engage in their own practices, often work across disciplinary boundaries, incorporating concepts, frameworks, and theories from various sources. While advancing, expanding, and developing theory is crucial to strengthening the foundations of HCI, there is also recognition that creating something novel and innovative can bring legitimacy and recognition. This allows researchers to differentiate themselves and leave a lasting impact. Based on the ways in which research is valued in HCI, with a focus on a need to create something novel and exciting. In HCI, as individuals strive to validate different methodologies and evolve into new roles, the field itself evolves. However, as the focus shifts from human-centered issues to personal goals, it remains uncertain whether we continue to address the core problems that HCI was designed to solve. While the evolution of the field is evident, whether it is moving in the right direction remains unclear, much like other aspects of the subject.