1. How do you build an information system that works? Lessons from environmental case studies Karen I. Stocks San Diego Supercomputer Center kstocks@sdsc.edu Karen S. Baker Scripps Institution of Oceanography kbaker@ucsd.edu

2. Task: Forward Planning for CalCOFI “California Cooperative Oceanic Fisheries Investigations”

3. How do you build an information management system that works?

4. Insights from 4 Environmental Information Systems CalCOFI (www.calcofi.org): –biological and physical oceanographic data –50+ year time span –2 institutions, centralized system OBIS (Ocean Biogeographic Information System - www.iobis.org) –species distribution data –5 years –international federation, distributed system LTER (Long Term Ecological Research Network - www.lternet.edu) –broad array of ecological data –24 years –26 field sites nationally, distributed system SeamountsOnline (seamounts.sdsc.edu) –species distribution data –4 years –1 person, centralized system

5. Our Conclusion Information system projects (or project components) fail or succeed for organizational/social reasons as frequently as they fail or succeed for technical reasons

6. Lessons Learned What have these four system case studies taught us? -What are the characteristics that foster success - What mechanisms create those characteristics

7. Characteristic: Sustainability Mechanism: recognizing and providing rewards for participation at the individual, project, and institution level non-monetary rewards can be effective Example: LTER learning community, OBIS editorial board titles

8. Characteristic: Participant Engagement Mechanism: consensus decision making (with hierarchical representation when needed for large bodies) Mechanism: seed resources available for allocation to participants

9. Characteristic: Usefulness of the System Mechanism (long-term): clearly articulated, focused project vision/goals produced with broad input from users and participants Mechanism (short-term): modular development with usable products at each step

10. Lessons from Science and Technology Studies: Myths and Realities NSF/Human Social Dynamics 2004-2007: Interoperability Strategies for Scientific Cyberinfrastructure: A Comparative Approach (Bowker and Baker)

11. Information System Design and Development Myth: System development is linear: design, then implement, then finish In practice: - complex feedbacks and interdependencies exist, development is iterative - technological, organizational, and funding landscape constantly changing

12. Waterfall Model requirements design implementation test Determine Objectives Evaluate alternatives Develop alternatives Reflect and Plan Spiral Model Design for Flexibility Boehm, 1986. A Spiral Model of Software Development and Enhancement. ACM SIGSOFT Software Engineering Notes 11(4):14-24.

13. Participatory Design an approach to the design and development of technological and organizational systems that places a premium on the active involvement of workplace practitioners in design and decision-making processes. Schuler and Namioka, 1993. Participatory Design: Principles and Practices. Hillsdale, NJ, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Letondal and Mackay, 2004. Participatory Programming and the Scope of Mutual Responsibility: Balancing Scientific, Design and Software Commitment. Proceedings Participatory Design Conference 2004, Toronto, Canada.

14. Organizational Concepts Myth: Technology is objective - it gets used by an organization In practice: - enacting technology changes organizations Fountain, 2001 Technology Work practice

15. Understand the tensions observed ecosystem view Species view modeled community economic long-term microsoft open-source short-term technology science outreach inreach standards flexibility

16. New Organizational Models Traditional hierarchical structure Integrated horizontal structure knowledge work routine work Integrated routine and knowledge work And new roles: system architects, data managers, programmers

17. Managing Organizational Change Weick and Sutcliffe. 2001. Managing the Unexpected, Assuring High Performance in an Age of Complexity. Jossey-Bass Recognize and define the new roles Rewards for interdisciplinary and new roles Professional development at all levels Mixed representation on decision-making bodies

18. Reading List Davenport, 1997. Information Ecology, Oxford University Press. New York. Iivari, 1991. Paradigmatic Analysis of Contemporary Schools of IS Development. European Journal of Information Systems 1(4):249-272. Jirotka and Goguen, 1994. Requirements Engineering: Social and Technical Issues. London, Academic Press. Karasti and Baker, 2004. Infrastructuring for the Long-Term: Ecological Information Management, Proceeding of the Hawaii International Conference for System Science, Big Island, hawaii 5-8 Jan 2004. Karasti and Syrjanen, 2004. Artful Infrastructuring in Two Cases of Community Participatory Design. Proceedings of the Participatory Design Conference, Toronto, Canada. Star and Bowker, 2002. How to Infrastructure in The Handbook of New Media. Lievrouw and Livingstone (eds), SAGE Publications, London, p151-162. Funding provided by the National Science Foundation Office of Polar Programs, and the NSF Social, Behavioral and Economic Sciences