Methods for Developing Functions for Dynamic Online Performance Support Systems: A New Methodology combining HPT, Sensemaking and Design Theory Steven Schatz Indiana University

What’s the question? Learning objects –Tensions Size Control (designer or user) Tags (universal or unique) –Can learning or knowledge be objectified?

What’s the answer? Dynamic online performance Support System DOPSS –Objects Performance, information, learning, knowledge?? Unique tags User control Focus on “ad hoc” – so smaller objects Communications tools Push information Customized for each person, based on unique tags

What’s the Process? Decide on functions Decide on tags Decide on initial objects Develop implementation strategy Help it grow and evolve

What’s the context? Navy Building a performance portal Existent portal focused on lots of information. –Pdfs of manuals –Links to other sites

What’s the study? Can a combination of HPT, sensemaking and design theory methods be used to inform the development of the function set for an online performance support system?

What’s the method? HPT –Users in context – users, task and environment Weick –Sensemaking –What’s my problem? Alexander –Object in use –Piecemeal growth

What’s the method - 2? Current – Focus on object and software to decide functions Move to 1.Focus on the user and the environment (HPT) 2.Focus on the problem and reason for going to the site or using the tool. (Weick) 3.Focus on the site in use over time. (Alexander)

What did I do? Interviews – group and individual on site with end users. On site observation. Extended discussions with designers/ managers. Some interviews with second potential user group.

What did I do 2? Analysis with Weick – –Who am I? –What’s my problem? Analysis with Alexander and Gabriel –Piecemeal growth –Solution to a problem in context –Habitability

Weick How can I know what I think until I see what I say? Threshold of dissatisfaction causes a “shock”. Then action taken to resolve. Sensemaking is 1. Identity construction, 2. Retrospective, 3. Enacts sensible environments 4. Social 5. Ongoing 6. Extracted Cues 7. Plausible over accurate.

Design Theory (Alexander and Gabriel) The life of a house is not given to it directly, by the shape of its buildings, or by the ornament and plan – it is given to them by the quality of the events and situations we encounter there. Always it is our situations which allow us to be what we are. The action and the space are indivisible. The action is supported by this kind of space. The space supports this kind of action. The two form a unit, a pattern of events in space. It is the pattern in their minds which cause them to behave the way that people do behave on sidewalks, not the purely spatial aspect of the concrete and the walls and curbs.

What did I find? The need was communication. Looking at problems, most were solved through unofficial communications. When current leaders retire, that technique may be gone. Needs include who is, where is, who can? Little need for most of the work being done.

What did I find - 2? Importance of killer app. –A few easy functions would save 100s of hours. Importance of looking at each potential user group. Importance of piecemeal growth. Importance of a gardener. –Bring objects in as needed. –Make connections.

What’s the big lesson? Talk to users. Use sensemaking to think about what answers they will seek. Function sets will be different for different apps… this WON’T be a tool in a box. Use Alexander for DOPSS in use.

What’s the future hold? Test the methods –NCREL Build tags Build communications tools Implementation Test the methods over a complete implementation.

What’s the difference? A new way of handling workplace learning. If this is used, can cut training and move from training to performance support. Applications –Research groups –Fast moving high end folks –Large scale geographically diverse groups. Caveat – these are not going to be cheap.

Thank you. Steve Schatz Paper posted at