Groupware: Design, Implementation, and Use

Effective groupware toolkits not only make it possible for average programmers to develop groupware, but also enhance their creativity. By removing low-level implementation burdens and supplying appropriate building blocks, toolkits give people a ‘language’ to think about groupware, which in turn allows them to concentrate on creative designs. This is important, for it means that programmers can rapidly generate and test new ideas, replicate and refine ideas presented by others, and create demonstrations for others to try. To illustrate the link between groupware toolkits and creativity, I describe example toolkits we have built and how others have leveraged them in their own work.

[1]  R. Bales,et al.  How People Interact in Conferences , 1955 .

[2]  Michael X Cohen,et al.  A Garbage Can Model of Organizational Choice. , 1972 .

[3]  Roger S. Pressman,et al.  Software Engineering: A Practitioner's Approach , 1982 .

[4]  Kenneth L. Kraemer,et al.  The impact of technological support on groups: An assessment of the empirical research , 1989, Decis. Support Syst..

[5]  Jay F. Nunamaker,et al.  Experience at IBM with group support systems: A field study , 1989, Decis. Support Syst..

[6]  Olivia R. Liu Sheng,et al.  ESP: an expert system for pre-session group decision support systems planning , 1990, Twenty-Third Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.

[7]  Jay F. Nunamaker,et al.  A Comparison of Laboratory and Field Research in the Study of Electronic Meeting Systems , 1990, J. Manag. Inf. Syst..

[8]  Tom Rodden,et al.  Moving out from the control room: ethnography in system design , 1994, CSCW '94.

[9]  Gerardine DeSanctis,et al.  The meaning of the interface : A functional and holistic evaluation of a meeting software system , 1994, Decis. Support Syst..

[10]  Jonathan Grudin,et al.  Groupware and social dynamics: eight challenges for developers , 1994, CACM.

[11]  Graham Pervan.  The measurement of GSS effectiveness: a meta-analysis of the literature and recommendations for future GSS research , 1994, 1994 Proceedings of the Twenty-Seventh Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.

[12]  Wanda J. Orlikowski,et al.  Technological frames: making sense of information technology in organizations , 1994, TOIS.

[13]  Frédéric Adam,et al.  Experimentation with Organisation Analyser, a tool for the study of decision making networks in organisations , 1996 .

[14]  Michael Pidd,et al.  Tools for thinking , 1996 .

[15]  Jeremy Tunstall,et al.  Newspaper Power: The New National Press in Britain , 1996 .

[16]  Antonis C. Stylianou,et al.  A total quality management-based systems development process , 1997, DATB.

[17]  Karen Holtzblatt,et al.  Contextual design , 1997, INTR.

[18]  José A. Pino,et al.  A first step to formally evaluate collaborative work , 1997, GROUP.

[19]  Efraim Turban,et al.  A proposed research framework for distributed group support systems , 1998, Decis. Support Syst..

[20]  Klaus Schmid,et al.  A systematic approach to derive the scope of software product lines , 1999, Proceedings of the 1999 International Conference on Software Engineering (IEEE Cat. No.99CB37002).

[21]  Jay F. Nunamaker,et al.  A Technology Transition Model Derived from Field Investigation of GSS Use Aboard the U.S.S. CORONADO , 1998, J. Manag. Inf. Syst..

[22]  Saila Ovaska.  Lots of data, lots of evaluation—lots of findings? , 1999, SIGG.

[23]  Starr Roxanne Hiltz,et al.  An Assessment of Group Support Systems Experimental Research: Methodology and Results , 1998, J. Manag. Inf. Syst..

[24]  Kim J. Vicente.  HCI in the global knowledge-based economy: designing to support worker adaptation , 2000, TCHI.

[25]  Carl Gutwin,et al.  A review of groupware evaluations , 2000, Proceedings IEEE 9th International Workshops on Enabling Technologies: Infrastructure for Collaborative Enterprises (WET ICE 2000).

[26]  Jay F. Nunamaker,et al.  Meeting analysis: findings from research and practice , 2001, Proceedings of the 34th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.

[27]  Jay F. Nunamaker,et al.  ThinkLets: achieving predictable, repeatable patterns of group interaction with group support systems (GSS) , 2001, Proceedings of the 34th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.

[28]  Bjørn Erik Munkvold,et al.  Organizational adoption and diffusion of electronic meeting systems: a case study , 2001, GROUP.

[29]  Jay F. Nunamaker,et al.  The technology transition model: a key to self-sustaining and growing communities of GSS users , 2001, Proceedings of the 34th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.

[30]  Mike Chiasson,et al.  Factors influencing the formation of a user's perceptions and use of a DSS software innovation , 2001, DATB.

[31]  E.,et al.  GROUPS : INTERACTION AND PERFORMANCE , 2001 .

[32]  César A. Collazos,et al.  Evaluating Collaborative Learning Processes , 2002, CRIWG.

[33]  Pedro Antunes,et al.  Handheld CSCW in the Meeting Environment , 2002, CRIWG.

[34]  Michael J. Muller,et al.  Understanding the benefit and costs of communities of practice , 2002, CACM.

[35]  Flávia Maria Santoro,et al.  The CSCW Lab for Groupware Evaluation , 2002, CRIWG.

[36]  Carl Gutwin,et al.  Empirical development of a heuristic evaluation methodology for shared workspace groupware , 2002, CSCW '02.