[CSCW] Computer Supported Cooperative Work - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

About This Presentation

[CSCW] Computer Supported Cooperative Work


[CSCW] Computer Supported Cooperative Work CS376 Reading Summary Bjoern Hartmann (bjoern_at_cs) – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:116
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 27
Provided by: stanf204
Learn more at: https://hci.stanford.edu


Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: [CSCW] Computer Supported Cooperative Work

CSCWComputer Supported Cooperative Work
  • CS376 Reading Summary
  • Bjoern Hartmann (bjoern_at_cs)

  • Beyond Being ThereJim Hollan and Scott
    StornettaCHI 1992 ACM Conference on Human
    Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 119-25
  • Groupware and social dynamics Eight challenges
    for developersJonathan GrudinCommunications of
    the ACM, January 1994, pp. 93-105
  • Social, Individual Technological Issues for
    Groupware Calendar Systems Leysia Palen CHI
    1999 ACM Conference on Human Factors in
    Computing Systems, pp. 17-24

Hollan, Stornetta Beyond Being There
  • Upshot most of telecommunication research is
    headed along a dead end street. Hollan
    Stornetta present an alternate route.
  • The telecommunication problem afford the
    richness and variety of physically proximate
    interaction during distant interaction. (focus on
    tele part)
  • Ever since Strand 1898, the standard goal has
    been totransmit synchronous audiovideo of
    realtime conversation.

Hollan, Stornetta BBT 2
  • Problem imitation can never get close enough.
    Any discrepancy is decisive.
  • Solution Lets forget about being there as the
    natural and perfect state. Instead, lets develop
    communication tools that people prefer to use
    even if they could interact face-to-face. (focus
    on the communication part)

Social Presence-O-Meter
Hollan, Stornetta BBT 3
  • Conceptual framework
  • Communication needs are medium-independent.
  • Media mediate. (duh)
  • Mechanisms are medium-specific enablers of
    communication needs.
  • Physical proximity is just one medium, not the
    entire model. New technologies should satisfy
    basic needs, not re-implement mechanisms.
  • Significant features of computer-mediated
    communication not present in face-to-face
  • Asynchronicity, anonymity, automatic archiving

Hollan, Stornetta BBT 4
  • Examples Email and its derivatives
  • Email
  • Also used in physically proximate situations
  • Asynchronous
  • Archival
  • Ephemeral interest groups
  • Informal, disposable, asynchronous discussion
    linked to (virtual) seed objects.
  • Sought to increase peoples sense of presence in
    a community.
  • Today Slashdot et al. definitely informal, but
    not ephemeral
  • Meeting Others
  • Personal homepage activity indicator
  • Computing personals automatic matchmaking
  • Today social networking sites - Friendster,
    Orkut, etc.

Hollan, Stornetta BBT 5
  • Email derivatives contd
  • Anonymity
  • Allows for discussion of issues associated with
    social stigma
  • Today Group hug , FreeNet
  • Semisynchronous discussion
  • Discussion threads that are batch-updated in
    regular intervals
  • Avoids thread-hijacking, allows for greater range
    of opinions
  • Today daily digest mailing lists?
  • Beyond face-to-face
  • Ideas for rapid, synchronous feedback BUT with
    higher info richness
  • Clarity/disambiguation
  • Feedback beyond the head nod
  • Easy archiving

Hollan, Stornetta BBT 6
  • Anticipated criticism
  • Imitation is good people are used to
    face-to-face interaction.HS Yes, but then we
    can never exceed what is possible in the familiar
    situation. No progress.
  • You are ignoring the cultural context of media
    use.HS Culture is dynamic, will adapt.
  • Only face-to-face has intersubjectivity (I know
    that you know that I know what you are talking
    about).HS Intersubjectivity is possible in any
    medium in principle. Managing it may be

Grudin Groupware and Social Dynamics Eight
  • Upshot Groupware is situated in between
    applications aimed at individual users and
    mainframe systems targeting entire organizations.
    Because of its peculiar spot, groupware boasts an
    impressively high failure rate.Eight design and
    evaluation challenges are discussed.

Grudin Eight Challenges
  • What is groupware?
  • Defining feature software designed/used to
    support groups -gt social factors become an issue.
  • Around since mid-1980s when standalone personal
    computers connected to network architectures
    became pervasive.
  • Examples desktop and video conferencing,
    bulletin boards, coauthoring, calendar
    scheduling, email.
  • Market mostly driven by shrink-wrapped sales
    isolated development typical of off-the-shelf
    products is behind many of the challenges
    encountered. In contrast, IS software is designed
    and deployed individually with management support.

Grudin Challenge 1
  • Work vs. Benefit disparity
  • Problem Costs and benefits from using groupware
    are often distributed unevenly. Principal
    beneficiaries are often the purchase decision
    makers/management but others have to carry out
    bulk of work without clear motivation.
  • Examples meeting scheduling, voice annotation.
  • Solution create benefits for all group members
    during design stage.

Demotivated schedule maintainer communicateinstit
Grudin Challenge 2
  • Critical Mass / Prisoners Dilemma
  • Problem Groupware is only useful if most group
    member utilize it more stringent requirement
    than for individual software. If individuals
    prefer lurking/freeloading, groupware the app
    will ultimately fail.
  • Solution Build in use incentives, emphasize
    individual/group benefites (vague).

Grudin Challenge 3
  • Disruption of social processes
  • Problem Groupware has to fit into implicit
    framework of social group interaction. Not all
    processes can be represented explicitly without
    violating taboos.
  • Example meeting scheduling
  • Solution Dont assume a completely rational work
    environment. Understand the subtleties of the
    target environment. Work with representative

Grudin Challenge 4
  • Exception handling
  • Problem Groupware has to adapt to/enable ad hoc
    problem solving and improvisation post hoc
    rule-based systems are too rigid and brittle. In
    Reality, decoupling of rules and actual work
    patterns is pervasive - allows for flexibility
    and localized judgment
  • Examples the chocolate factory
  • Solution Learn how work is really done.

Grudin Challenge 5
  • Infrequently used features
  • Problem To a hammer, everything looks like a
    nail group communication may be infrequent.
  • Solution
  • Integrate group features w/ individual activity
  • Design should be unobtrusive yet accessible
  • Add groupware features to already existing
    applications (e.g., MS Office)

Grudin Challenge 6
  • Difficulty of evaluation
  • Problem Group context introduces social,
    motivational, economic, political dynamics that
    are hard to measure. Lab situations and
    prototypes are ineffective. Because of a lack of
    definitive studies, the same mistakes are
    repeated over and over again.
  • Solution Grudin doesnt know.

Grudin Challenge 7
  • Breakdown of intuitive decision making
  • Problem Developers cannot rely on their own
    individual informed intuition when group
    processes are concerned. Nor can any other
    resource inside the development environment help
    out. Too many applications target managers,
    neglecting to accommodate other users
    resistance results.
  • Solution Involve real users early on in the
    design process.

Grudin Challenge 8
  • Managing acceptance
  • Problem Most CSCW software is shrink-wrapped
    developers are removed from system acceptance
    issues needs to be overcome.
  • Solution Learn form IS cooperate with
    marketers package software w/ consulting
    services (Lotus Notes)

Grudin Wrap-up
  • Evaluation of email w.r.t. 8 challenges is left
    as an exercise to the reader.
  • Take home messages from the paperGroupware
  • Directly benefit all users.
  • Augment existing applications if possible.
  • Developers must
  • Truly understand the working environment where
    the software will be used.
  • Interact directly with the users in an iterative
  • Question their own decision making processes
    during the design stage.
  • Dear Mr. Grudin Concision is a virtue.

Palen Issues for Groupware Calendar Systems
  • Upshot A synthesis of three design and
    evaluation perspectives is needed for groupware
    (in this case GCS) to be successful
    technological, individual, and social.
  • Ethnographic study of GCS use at Sun Microsystems
    (software CM)
  • Interviews, in-office observation, video
    recording, photographs of work environments,
    printouts of calendars, survey
  • Remember critique from last paper meeting
    scheduling is the least useful groupware app

Palen GCS 2
  • How single-perspective design and deployment
  • Exclusively technology-centric development is
    cheap but often ignores reality.
  • Traditional HCI takes software into account,
    but focuses only on the individual.
  • CSCW looks at work practice and social
    structures, but needs the previous two levels to
    build upon.

Palen GCS 3
Palen GCS 4
  • Single User Calendar Demands (arrow 1)
  • Software has to support all of the flexible uses
    of a physical calendar otherwise competition
    with other calendars will result.
  • Temporal orientation
  • Scheduling
  • Tracking (contacts, expense reports)
  • Reminding
  • Note recording/archiving
  • Retrieval recall
  • For successful adoption, calendar maintenance has
    to be simple and attractive (cf. Grudins
    challenge 1).

Palen GCS 5
  • Interpersonal Communication (arrow 2)
  • Personal and social use may conflict.
  • Managing privacy / protection from peer judgment
    is mainly left to user through adopting usage
    strategies like cryptic entry, omission,
    defensive scheduling (cf. Grudins challenge 3
    disruption of social processes)
  • Peer pressure results in homogenous usage
    patterns within groups
  • Open calendars enable more than meeting
    scheduling locating people, mtg. room info for
    non-participants, organizational memory,
    non-meeting synchronization

Palen GCS 6
  • Socio-technical evolution (arrow 3)
  • Reciprocal interaction between organizational
    structures and technology possible at Sun since
    development was internal. What about
    off-the-shelf products?
  • Default settings are rarely changed passivity
    and institutionalization

Palen GCS 7
  • Interaction between the three levels
  • Final section describes how in Suns specific
    case technological features, personal usage
    patterns, peer pressure and institutionalization
    intermesh to shape how CM is used.
  • Particular setting matters we can generalize
    that these interactions happen, but not what they
    will be in any particular case.
Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
About PowerShow.com