groupware chapter 19 Groupware What is groupware? The Time/Space Matrix Classification by Function Time/Space Matrix (ctd)

Transcription

1 Groupware chapter 19 groupware What is groupware Types of groupware 1 computer-mediated 2 meeting and decisions support systems 3 shared applications and artefacts Models of groupware Implementation issues 1/67 2/67 What is groupware? The Time/Space Matrix Software specifically designed to support group working with cooperative requirements in mind NOT just tools for Groupware can be classified by when and where the participants are working the function it performs for cooperative work Specific and difficult problems with groupware implementation 3/67 Classify groupware by: when the participants are working, at the same time or not where the participants are working, at the same place or not Common names for axes: time: synchronous/asynchronous place: co-located/remote 4/67 same place same time different time different place Time/Space Matrix (ctd) Classification by Function same place different place Cooperative work involves: articipants who are working Artefacts upon which they work same time face-to-face conversation telephone participants understanding direct different time post-it note 5/67 letter artefacts of work 6/67 A control and feedback 1

2 What interactions does a tool support? computer-mediated direct between participants meeting and decision support systems common understanding shared applications and artefacts control and feedback with shared work objects understanding participants artefacts of work direct A control and feedback 7/67 (2) meeting and decision support systems common understanding (1) computer-mediated direct between participants (3) shared applications and artefacts control and feedback with shared work objects 1 computer-mediated and bulletin boards structured message systems [text messaging] video, virtual environments 8/67 and bulletin boards vs. bulletin boards asynchronous/remote familiar and most successful groupware Recipients of direct in To: field copies in Cc: field delivery identical difference is social purpose 9/67 fan out one-to-one , direct one-to-many , distribution lists BBs, broadcast distribution control sender , private distribution list administrator , shared distribution list recipient BBs, subscription to topics 10/67 Structured message systems asynchronous/remote `super' cross between and a database sender fills in special fields recipient filters and sorts incoming mail based on field contents but work by the sender benefit for the recipient 11/67 Structured message systems (ctd) Type: Seminar announcement To: all From: Alan Dix Subject: departmental seminar Time: 2:15 Wednesday lace: D014 Speaker: W.T. ooh Title: The Honey ot Text: Recent research on socially constructed meaning has focused on the image of the Honey ot and its dialectic interpretation within an encultured hermeneutic. This talk N.B. global structuring by designer vs. local structuring 12/67 by participants 2

3 Video conferences and synchronous/remote Technology: ISDN + video compression internet, web cams major uses: video conferences pervasive video for social contact integration with other applications often cheaper than face-to-face meetings (teles costs vs. air flights) 13/67 Video issues not a substitute for face-to-face meetings small field of view lack of reciprocity poor eye contact One solution for lack of eye contact the video-tunnel 14/67 Roel Vertegaal on Eye Contact and Gaze in Video Conferences Video issues Fred 15/67 What: FRED is a multi-agent embodied dialogue engine with a state-of-the-art behavioural system. 3D cyberscans generate physical head models that provide photo-realistic conversational internet appliances. Why: Current speech recognition systems lack common sense. We believe this is because they lack common senses. Traffic lights (and even some toilets) know more about their users than computers do. How: Our conversational agents can tell whether you are talking to them, or some other entity, by monitoring things like body orientation and eyegaze 16/67 and ecsglasses, Eye Contact Sensing Glasses Example Video conference, gaze direction Tracking Attention Video demo 2 minutes What: A video and collaboration system which shows where you look. Why: During conference calls, it's hard to tell who's talking or listening to whom. Others need to know whom you look at. Others also need to know what you look at when you say: "Look here! How: The system measures where you look, and rotates your video image to align with your gaze. It captures frontal gaze using a new kind of attentive video tunnel 17/67 18/67 and 3

4 web-video video-conferencing expensive technology but internet (almost) free! web-cams used for face-to-face chat for video-conferencing for permanent web-cams low bandwidth pictures block out not terrible audio more problematic may use text chat 19/67 collaborative virtual environments (CVEs) meet others in a virtual world participants represented embodiment artefacts too computer (e.g. spreadsheet) and real (virtually) objects text? consistent orientation or easy to read MUDs (Multi-user domains) 2D/3D places to meet on the web users represented as avatars 20/67 outside looking in inside looking out 21/67 22/67 Meeting and decision support 2 meeting and decision support systems argumentation tools meeting rooms shared work surfaces In design, management and research, we want to: generate ideas develop ideas record ideas primary emphasis common understanding 23/67 24/67 4

5 Three types of system argumentation tools argumentation tools asynchronous co-located recording the arguments for design decisions meeting rooms synchronous co-located electronic support for face-to-face meetings shared drawing surfaces synchronous remote shared drawing board at a distance asynchronous co-located hypertext like tools to record design rationale Two purposes: reminding the designers of the reasons for decisons communicating rationale between design teams Mode of collaboration: very long term sometimes synchronous use also 25/67 26/67 Meeting rooms Typical meeting room synchronous co-located electronic support for face-to-face meetings individual terminals (often recessed) large shared screen (electronic whiteboard) special software U or C shaped seating around screen shared screen Various modes: brainstorming, private use, WYSIWIS WYSIWIS what you see is what I see all screens show same image any participant can write/draw to screen 27/67 28/67 meeting capture use ordinary whiteboard detector and special pens LCD projection on whiteboard low-cost alternative to dedicated meeting room 29/67 Issues for cooperation Argumentation tools concurrency control two people access the same node one solution is node locking notification mechanisms knowing about others' changes Meeting rooms floor holders one or many? floor control policies who can write and when? solution: locking + social protocol group pointer for deictic reference (this and that) 30/67 5

6 Example: Collaboration in oil expoloration Collaboration in oil expoloration 31/67 32/67 Collaboration in oil expoloration Example Sticky Chats Separate Video resentation 33/67 34/67 Shared editors - multiple views 3 shared applications and artefacts [shared Cs and windows] shared editors, co-authoring tools shared diaries through the artefact 35/67 Options: same view or different view single or separate insertion points Single view scroll wars Multiple views loss of context with indexicals 36/67 6

7 loss of WYSIWIS Co-authoring systems We will look at some of the More adaptable systems are options and how they affect needed to allow for the wide the style of cooperation. variation between groups, Thinking about the shared and within the same group view vs. different view over time. options, it at first seems We will look at some of the obvious that we should allow options and how they affect people to edit different the style of cooperation. parts of a document. Thinking about the shared This is certainly true while view vs. different view they are working effectively options, it at first seems independently. obvious that we should allow your screen your colleague s screen I don t like the line at the top but I just wrote that! 37/67 Emphasis is on long term document production, not editing Two levels of representation the document itself annotation and discussion Often some form of hypertext structure used Similar problems of concurrency control to argumentation systems Sometimes include rôles: author, commentator, reader, but who decides the rôles? and how flexible are they? 38/67 Shared diaries Idea: make diaries and calendars more easily shared allow automatic meeting scheduling etc. Issues for cooperation: privacy who can see my diary entries? control who can write in my diary? Similar to file sharing issues, but need to be lightweight Communication through the artefact When you change a shared application: you can see the effect feedback your colleagues can too feedthrough feedthrough enables through the artefact Many systems have failed because they ignored these issues 39/67 40/67 Shared data Example Feedthrough not just with real groupware Shared data is pervasive: shared files and databases casework files (often non-electronic) passing electronic copies of documents passing copies of spreadsheets Often need direct as well, but indirect through the artefact central Distributed Collaborative Science Separate Video resentation Few examples of explicit design for cooperation. Liveware is an exception, a database with merging of copies 41/67 42/67 7

8 Time/space matrix revisited frameworks for groupware time/space matrix revisited! shared information and work awareness synchronous asynchronous co-located meeting rooms argumentation tools remote video conferences, video-wall, etc. shared work surfaces and editors shared Cs and windows and electronic conferences co-authoring systems, shared calendars 43/67 44/67 Refined time/space matrix (a) concurrent synchronized (a/b) mixed (b) serial (c) unsynchronized co-located Mobile workers and home workers have infrequent they require unsynchronised groupware Need fluid movement between synchronised/unsynchronised operation 45/67 remote video conferences meeting rooms video-wall, etc. shared work surfaces and editors shared Cs and windows co-authoring systems, shared calendars argumentation tools and structured messages electronic conferences Integrating and work feedthrough Added: deixis reference to work objects feedthrough for through the artefact Classified groupware by function it supported Good groupware open to all aspects of cooperation e.g., annotations in co-authoring systems embedding direct bar codes form of deixis, aids diffuse 46/67 large scale cooperation understanding direct deixis A control and feedback awareness what is happening? who is there e.g. IM buddy list what has happened and why? what has happened who is there A how did it happen Example Music FX Separate Video resentation 47/67 48/67 8