Computer Systems and The Design of Organizational Interaction Fernando Flores, Michael Graves,Brad Hartfield,Terry Winograd ACM Transactions on Office Information Systems 1988 Swapnil Sinvhal and Eunyee Koh CPSC 671 Spring 2004

Introduction Theory and practice : Design of the Coordinator Organizational communication and management Technology = Design of practices and possibilities (opens up possibilities of new realms of practice) != Design of physical things Theory of language as social action Design of the Coordinator

difficult to predict acceptability of new technology Theory And Design (1 of 2) Design of new technology  intervention into ongoing activity  resettling into new practices “A theory, as an ontology, is a set of key distinctions for observing, participating, and designing.” Effectiveness of design , theory must be assessed in terms the context of the consequences difficult to predict acceptability of new technology

Theory And Design (2 of 2) Two prominent orientations of existing computer systems Data and information Decision Support Systems Data Formattings Algorithms for data storage , manipulation Focus on Problem solving Decision making MIS : accurate, up-to-date info to managers Assumption: More information  consider alternatives, make better decisions Series of steps Key distinctions = Decision, Evaluation, Search, Cognition Management != Management of information Too much information could be distracting, in a secondary domain (Failed) Relies on well-established, formalized problem space. In real life, ill-defined background ... scope for research !! Rationalistic Believes more electronically connected  more information  more effective organizations  better management BUT Productivity != quantity of information (Overload) it concerns effectiveness of people getting things done

Language / Action Perspective (1 of 3) Human beings are fundamentally linguistic being Verbal / non-verbal, formal / informal Details of the situation: - Context of phrases (request/invite) - Some cultures "never decline a request" Theory: Teach ontology of linguistic action for better management Reduce time and effort spent in “unproductive” conversation People become more aware of distinctions Lead to a less panicked, confused atmosphere Computer Tools for Acting in Language Domain = Networks of people engaged in conversation Networks of action that connect them

Language / Action Perspective (2 of 3) Older media Specialized roles, institutions to handle breakdown (Libraries, Universities, publishers, editors, ...) Assistance in managing information (Secretaries, Receptionists, Assistants) Email Pro: New possibilities for communication, Cut across organizational hierarchies Con: New source for breakdown Is that really a “pro” ?!

Language / Action Perspective (3 of 3) The problem: Accessibility of information outpaced growth of new roles/institutions to handle it Management of information becomes a burden - not a support The Solution ??? The Coordinator

The Coordinator (1 of 3) Metaphor: Dance Social Action happens through language Request Action Request Action Decline (someone does it) Promise Revoke promise Ask for progress report Cancel Declare complete Report completion >1 variations of workflow?

The Coordinator (2 of 3) Program: Explicit declarations of structure Natural Language Processing by users Email Integration Mainly written language

The Coordinator (3 of 3) Basic unit of work = conversation Renaming? Sub-conversations? >1 topic ? Undo? Basic unit of work = conversation Retrieval based on status “Complete” vs “Open” Time – oriented retrieval Calendar subsystem integrated Identify potential breakdowns Theories of language (replace typing) Generic tool

The Coordinator … for Management May be good for multi-location teams New overhead? – strictly define work May even lead to new management strategies Managers have to manage : Very complex projects, actions Recurrent mis-coordination of actions Information overload “The activity of management is the creation and development of conversations for completing action.” “Coach” the user People begin to acquire a “new common sense”

Social Environment By making the network of requests and promises explicit in its structure, the Coordinator can provide a means of improving the degrees to which people have adequately shared interpretations of their commitments and actions. Each message of the Coordinator carries a label that distinguishes it as a request or as not-a request (e.g., a conversation for possibilities). This changes the space of possibilities for communication – the form of the dance. The Coordinator offers more structure than conventional mail systems and is less confining than the customer-order system.

The underlying Claim Conversation Types – only dealing with some of the conversations in an office setting. As office communication systems evolve, there will be a mix in which computer-based text is used for the more explicit forms, while recorded and transmitted voice and video images become the preferred mode for the casual conversation. Stability of Role Structure – the basic parameters of authority, obligation, and cooperation are stable. Cooperation and Competition – the cooperative aspects of achieving mutually declared results dominate over the competitive aspects of interpersonal or intergroup conflict.

Technology, Change and Learning “missionary software” – organizational or social change is being imposed on an unwilling populace by outsiders with a dogmatic theory. “educational software” – the everyday use of the Coordinator serves to educate users in the principles of conversation and action.

Discussion The Coordinator depends on the setting of stable roles within organization. What if roles are unstable, or in the case of large organization? The Coordinator supports the “dance” of request and commitment. What if the pattern is maintained but the actual content is confused? The actual working environment is not coordinative but competitive. Will the Coordinator succeed in such a competitive environment? What if we do an iterative work like the design, prototype, evaluation cycles with the Coordinator?

Fernando Flores 1979. Management and Communication in the Office of the Future. PhD Thesis, Department of Philosophy, University of California at Berkerly. Principal author of this paper, at the time of writing(1988) was associated with Action Technologies in Emeryville. Dr. Fernando Flores is founder and former CEO of Business Design Associates which he recently sold.   In addition, Dr. Flores founded Action Technologies, Inc and introduced new distinctions in Workflow Analysis, GroupWare software design and business process analysis. In the late 1980's and early 90's, Dr. Flores designed and presented numerous educational programs through Logonet, Inc.  He is now living in Chile and has been recently elected to the senate there.

Terry Winograd Professor Winograd's focus is on human-computer interaction design, with a focus on the theoretical background and conceptual models. He directs the teaching programs in Human-Computer Interaction and HCI research in the Stanford Interactivity Lab. He is also a principal investigator in the Stanford Digital Libraries Project and the Interactive Workspaces Project. 1970 M.I.T -- Ph.D. (Applied Mathematics), 1967 University College, London – (Linguistics), 1966 The Colorado College – B.A. (Mathematics) http://www-pcd.stanford.edu/winograd/

Books Articles Bringing Design to Software, Addison-Wesley, 1996. with Paul Adler (eds.), Usability: Turning Technologies Into Tools, New York: Oxford University Press, 1992.  with Fernando Flores, Understanding Computers and Cognition: A New Foundation for Design, (220 pp.) Norwood, NJ: Ablex, 1986. Paperback issued by Addison-Wesley, 1987, translations published in Italian, Spanish, German, French and Japanese.  Language as a Cognitive Process: Volume I: Syntax , (650 pp.) Reading MA: Addison-Wesley, 1983.  Articles Brad Johanson, Terry Winograd, and Armando Fox, Interactive Workspaces, IEEE Computer 36:4 (April 2003), 99-103. Winograd, Terry (2001), Interaction Spaces for 21st Century Computing, in John Carroll (ed.), Human-Computer Interaction in the New Millennium, Addison-Wesley, 2001. "Thinking machines: Can there be? Are We?," in James Sheehan and Morton Sosna, eds., The Boundaries of Humanity: Humans, Animals, Machines, Berkeley: University of California Press, 1990. Reprinted in D. Partridge and Y. Wilks, The Foundations of Artificial Intelligence, Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press, 1990.  "Strategic computing research and the universities," in D. Schuler and J. Jacky, eds., Directions and Implications of Advanced Computing, Norwood NJ: Ablex, 1989, pp. 18-32. 

Michael Graves Flores, Fernando and Michael Graves, Reading a Text, 1-11. Berkeley, California: Logonet, Inc., 1985 Flores, C. F. & Graves, M. (1986a). Domains of permanent human concerns. Unpublished report, Logonet Inc., Berkeley. Flores, C. F. & Graves, M. (1986b). Designing education. Unpublished report, Logonet Inc., Berkeley.

Brad Hartfield Learning HCI design: mentoring project groups in a course on human-computer interaction B. Hartfield, Terry Winograd, John Bennett Proceedings of the SIGCSE ‘92 Technical Symposium of the ACM, March, 1992 Winograd, Terry, with John Bennett, Laura De Young, and Bradley Hartfield (eds.), Bringing Design to Software , Reading, MA: Addison Wesley, 1996. Teaching at Stanford 1996