Adaptability of classification schemes in cooperation: What does it mean?

The overview of a set of field studies highlights how different are the scenarios on which classification schemes (CS) play a role in cooperation. In all cases, adaptability is claimed as a fundamental requirement for their usability and effective usage. What adaptability means for CS is not an easy question. The paper tries to articulate this requirement and derive implications on the design of a supportive technology.

[1]  Peter H. Carstensen,et al.  Towards information exploration support for engineering designers , 1997 .

[2]  Kevin Crowston,et al.  Tools for Inventing Organizations: Toward a Handbook of Organizational Processes , 1999 .

[3]  Paul Dourish,et al.  Technical and Social Features of Categorisation Schemes , 2000 .

[4]  Stefania Bandini,et al.  A Support System Based on CBR for the Design of Rubber Compounds in Motor Racing , 2000, EWCBR.

[5]  John Bennett,et al.  Reflective conversation with materials , 1996 .

[6]  Olivier Corby,et al.  Methods and tools for corporate knowledge management , 1999, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[7]  Thomas W. Malone.  Center for coordination science, MIT , 1989, CHI '89.

[8]  Volker Wulf.  Storing and Retrieving Documents in a Shared Workspace: Experiences from the Political Administration , 1997, INTERACT.

[9]  Gloria Mark,et al.  Supporting Groupware Conventions through Contextual Awareness , 1997, ECSCW.

[10]  Kjeld Schmidt,et al.  Using Classification in Common Information Spaces , 2000 .

[11]  John Seely Brown,et al.  Book Reviews : The Social Life of Information By John Seely Brown and Paul Duguid. Boston: Harvard Business School Press, 2000. 320 pages , 2000 .

[12]  Robin Milner,et al.  A Calculus of Communicating Systems , 1980, Lecture Notes in Computer Science.

[13]  Susan Leigh Star,et al.  Grounded Classification: Grounded Theory and Faceted Classification , 1998, Libr. Trends.

[14]  Terry Winograd,et al.  Bringing Design to Software , 1996 .

[15]  Elin K. Jacob,et al.  The Dynamics of Classification Systems as Boundary Objects for Cooperation in the Electronic Library , 1998, Libr. Trends.

[16]  Kjeld Schmidt,et al.  Taking CSCW Seriously: Supporting Articulation Work * , 1992 .

[17]  Liam J. Bannon,et al.  Shifting perspectives on organizational memory: from storage to active remembering , 1996, Proceedings of HICSS-29: 29th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.

[18]  Kevin Crowston,et al.  Tools for inventing organizations: toward a handbook of organizational processes , 1993, [1993] Proceedings Second Workshop on Enabling Technologies@m_Infrastructure for Collaborative Enterprises.

[19]  Giorgio De Michelis,et al.  Weakly augmented reality: observing and designing the work-place of creative designers , 2000, DARE '00.

[20]  I. Nonaka,et al.  The Knowledge Creating Company , 2008 .

[21]  David R. Karger,et al.  Haystack: per-user information environments , 1999, CIKM '99.

[22]  Liam J. Bannon,et al.  Constructing Common Information Spaces , 1997, ECSCW.

[23]  Mike Robinson,et al.  Diaries at work , 1998, CSCW '98.

[24]  Susan Leigh Star,et al.  Sorting Things Out: Classification and Its Consequences , 1999 .

[25]  John Bowers,et al.  Workflow From Within and Without: Technology and Cooperative Work on the Print Industry Shopfloor , 1995, ECSCW.

[26]  Jeanette Blomberg,et al.  Moving document collections online: the evolution of a shared repository , 1999 .

[27]  Carla Simone,et al.  Interoperability as a means of articulation work , 1999, WACC.

[28]  Christine Halverson,et al.  Considering an organization's memory , 1998, CSCW '98.

[29]  Eswaran Subrahmanian,et al.  Classification for Communication and Communication for Classification In Engineering Design , 2000 .

[30]  Carla Simone,et al.  Mind the Gap! Towards a Unified View of CSCW , 2000, COOP.

[31]  Joachim Hinrichs,et al.  Telecooperation in Engineering Offices - The Problem of Archiving , 2000, COOP.

[32]  Tom Rodden,et al.  Building bridges: customisation and mutual intelligibility in shared category management , 1999, GROUP.

[33]  Elihu M. Gerson,et al.  DIFFERENT PARTS FOR DIFFERENT SMARTS: PARTONOMIES AND THE ORGANIZATION OF WORK , 2000 .

[34]  Stefanie N. Lindstaedt,et al.  Bridging the gap between face-to-face communication and long-term collaboration , 1997, GROUP.