Creativity Greenhouse: At-a-distance collaboration and competition over research funding

This paper describes the design and evaluation of a novel mechanism to develop research proposals and distribute funding: Creativity Greenhouse (CG). Building on an established funding sandpit mechanism for co-located participants, communication technologies and structures were designed to support similar activities at-a-distance. Given a particular topic, selected academic participants collaborate during an ideation phase, then form sub-groups around selected ideas to develop research proposals and compete for the available research funding. This paper details the motivations for developing a distributed approach, before describing our iterative design process and trials. We describe an iterative design and evaluation process to support at-a-distance ideation, group formation, and then competitive development of proposals in a shared virtual space, leading to the detailed evaluation of a full-scale CG event that resulted in the distribution of ?1.85 million of funding. This work contributes a novel, fully-developed mechanism to produce research projects, evaluated 'In the Wild'. Our findings are explored with regards to distinctions and similarities between co-located and distributed events, participant well-being and pastoral care, and the capacity of technologies to mediate complex combinations of cooperative and competitive group work. Through this, we contribute knowledge of how to effectively support research funding events, and also to wider understanding of high-stakes, computer-mediated processes, that involve complex creative and social processes. We designed, deployed and evaluated a novel mechanism to distribute research funding 'In the Wild'.Communication technology allowed academics and a facilitation team to participate remotely.Collaborative ideation, group formation and between group competition were supported.Particular attention needs to be paid to well-being, work-life-balance and pastoral care.The Creativity Greenhouse approach successfully supported the process of a funding sandpit and ?1.85 million were distributed through the mechanism.

[1]  Li Zhao,et al.  Cooperation and Competition Dynamics in an Online Game Community , 2007, HCI.

[2]  Judith S. Olson,et al.  Distance Matters , 2000, Hum. Comput. Interact..

[3]  J. R. Britton,et al.  Research Programmes That Promote Novel, Ambitious, Unconventional and High-Risk Research: An Analysis , 2008 .

[4]  W. Lewis Johnson,et al.  Extending virtual humans to support team training in virtual reality , 2003 .

[5]  Steve Benford,et al.  Exploiting interactivity, influence, space and time to explore non-linear drama in virtual worlds , 2001, CHI.

[6]  Richard Bentley,et al.  The World Wide Web as Enabling Technology for CSCW: The Case of BSCW , 1997, Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW).

[7]  Jay F. Nunamaker,et al.  Electronic meeting systems , 1991, CACM.

[8]  Gerhard Fischer,et al.  Distances and diversity: sources for social creativity , 2005, C&C '05.

[9]  Marina Jirotka,et al.  Supporting Scientific Collaboration: Methods, Tools and Concepts , 2013, Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW).

[10]  Paul Dourish,et al.  Portholes: supporting awareness in a distributed work group , 1992, CHI.

[11]  Kim-Kwang Raymond Choo,et al.  Google Drive: Forensic analysis of data remnants , 2014, J. Netw. Comput. Appl..

[12]  Yvonne Rogers,et al.  Research in the wild: understanding 'in the wild' approaches to design and development , 2012, DIS '12.

[13]  A. Osborn.  Applied Imagination: Principles and Procedures of Creative Thinking , 1953 .

[14]  Thomas Heinze,et al.  How to sponsor ground-breaking research: a comparison of funding schemes , 2008 .

[15]  John M. Carroll,et al.  Supporting creativity in distributed scientific communities , 2005, GROUP.

[16]  Christothea Herodotou,et al.  Social Praxis Within and Around Online Gaming: The Case of World of Warcraft , 2010, 2010 Third IEEE International Conference on Digital Game and Intelligent Toy Enhanced Learning.

[17]  Anoop Gupta,et al.  Presenting to local and remote audiences: design and use of the TELEP system , 2000, CHI.

[18]  Mario Piattini,et al.  Challenges and Improvements in Distributed Software Development: A Systematic Review , 2009, Adv. Softw. Eng..

[19]  Robert Johansen,et al.  Groupware: Computer Support for Business Teams , 1988 .

[20]  S. Atkinson.  Explaining Creativity: The Science of Human Innovation , 2007 .

[21]  Steve Benford,et al.  Vivid: A Symbiosis between Virtual Reality and Video Conferencing , 2007 .

[22]  Holger Schnädelbach,et al.  Hybrid spatial topologies , 2012 .

[23]  Hideaki Kuzuoka,et al.  Fractured Ecologies: Creating Environments for Collaboration , 2003, Hum. Comput. Interact..

[24]  Ralph Schroeder,et al.  Activeworlds: Geography and social interaction in virtual reality , 2001 .

[25]  Austin Henderson,et al.  Methods in search of methodology—combining HCI and object orientation , 1994, CHI '94.

[26]  Scott Witthoft,et al.  Make Space: How to Set the Stage for Creative Collaboration , 2011 .

[27]  Paul Dourish,et al.  Awareness and coordination in shared workspaces , 1992, CSCW '92.

[28]  Ekaterina Prasolova-Førland,et al.  Creative curriculum visualization in a 3D CVE: experiences and guidelines , 2007 .

[29]  Steven Wooding,et al.  Alternatives to Peer Review in Research Project Funding , 2013 .

[30]  Jonathan Grudin,et al.  Computer-supported cooperative work: history and focus , 1994, Computer.

[31]  Ralph Schroeder,et al.  Trust in the Core: A Study of Long-term Users of Activeworlds , 2000 .

[32]  Martin H. Levinson.  Creativity: Flow and the Psychology of Discovery and Invention , 1997 .

[33]  Judith S. Olson,et al.  What Still Matters about Distance , 2009 .

[34]  Robert E. Kraut,et al.  The VideoWindow system in informal communication , 1990, CSCW '90.

[35]  Ralph Schroeder,et al.  Small-Group Behavior in a Virtual and Real Environment: A Comparative Study , 2000, Presence: Teleoperators & Virtual Environments.

[36]  Maria Roussou,et al.  Design and Evaluation of a Real-World Virtual Environment for Architecture and Urban Planning , 2007, PRESENCE: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments.

[37]  Gail Kay,et al.  Effective Meetings through Electronic Brainstorming , 1994 .

[38]  Steve Benford,et al.  Broadcasting on-line social interaction as inhabited television , 1999, ECSCW.

[39]  Vincent R. Brown,et al.  Toward More Creative and Innovative Group Idea Generation: A Cognitive‐Social‐Motivational Perspective of Brainstorming , 2007 .

[40]  Anja Le Blanc,et al.  The virtual learning space: an interactive 3D environment , 2005, Web3D '05.

[41]  Gordon B. Davis,et al.  User Acceptance of Information Technology: Toward a Unified View , 2003, MIS Q..

[42]  Steve Benford,et al.  A Spatial Model of Interaction in Large Virtual Environments , 1993, ECSCW.

[43]  Pamela J. Hinds,et al.  What Do We Know about Proximity and Distance in Work Groups? A Legacy of Research , 2002 .

[44]  Steve Benford,et al.  Moving office: inhabiting a dynamic building , 2006, CSCW '06.

[45]  Ilona Heldal,et al.  Presence, Creativity and Collaborative Work in Virtual Environments , 2007, HCI.

[46]  Lee Sproull,et al.  Reducing social context cues: electronic mail in organizational communication , 1986 .

[47]  Ilona Heldal,et al.  Collaborating in networked immersive spaces: as good as being there together? , 2001, Comput. Graph..

[48]  Hideyuki Nakanishi,et al.  FreeWalk: supporting casual meetings in a network , 1996, CSCW '96.

[49]  Timothy Collins,et al.  The Ideas Lab Concept, Assembling the Tree of Life, and AVAToL , 2013, PLoS currents.

[50]  Brian Christopher Smith,et al.  CU-SeeMe VR immersive desktop teleconferencing , 1997, MULTIMEDIA '96.

[51]  Pamela J. Hinds,et al.  Structures that work: social structure, work structure and coordination ease in geographically distributed teams , 2006, CSCW '06.

[52]  Jeffrey Mervis.  National Science Foundation. Digging for fresh ideas in the sandpit. , 2009, Science.

[53]  Michael Diehl,et al.  Productivity loss in idea-generating groups: Tracking down the blocking effect. , 1991 .

[54]  Ronald E. Rice,et al.  Video as a technology for informal communication , 1993, CACM.

[55]  W A Wulf,et al.  The collaboratory opportunity. , 1993, Science.

[56]  Jim Giles.  Sandpit initiative digs deep to bring disciplines together , 2004, Nature.

[57]  Gerry Stahl,et al.  Group Creativity in Interaction: Collaborative Referencing, Remembering, and Bridging , 2008, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Interact..