Virtual workplaces : when metaphors breakdown

Thesis (M.S.)--Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Dept. of Architecture, 1998.Includes bibliographical references (leaves 79-81).Our model of work is shaped by the places we choose to work and the tools we choose to work with. As we introduce new technologies and build new environments our model is changing. Today's virtual workplaces are grounded in models of work that have been reformed from our experiences using current technology in physical workspace. However we are discovering opportunities and possibilities for work in collaborative, virtual environments that question physical models. Emerging patterns of distributed collaboration in persistent virtual environments are changing the way we work in time and space, recasting our notion of workplace. Virtual workplaces are interpreted and experienced through metaphors that describe a space of potential for work occurrences. Through the lens of metaphors, this research focuses on breakdowns between collaborative work and the environment in which work occurs. If what we understand and predict is based on what we already know, then by examining the breakdowns between design and use of collaborative environments we can illuminate the space of possibilities for collaborative work.by Thomas W.I. Gallemore.M.S

A Proposed Theoretical Foundation for the Information Systems Discipline (version 1. 1)

“Rethink the theoretical foundations of the IS discipline” is one of the grand challenges for IS research identified in a Delphi study in Business Information Systems Engineering (Becker et al., 2015). This draft addresses that challenge directly through an integrated approach to the operation and evolution of systems. Almost any attempt to articulate a theoretical foundation for IS (a TFIS) would need to cover that topic although other attempts might emphasize other topics and other viewpoints. The proposed Theoretical Foundation for IS (TFIS) has three main goals: 1) Integration. Build outward from an integrated core. Do not accept the excuse that the IS field is not ready for a serious attempt at integration. 2) Usefulness. Contribute to describing, analyzing, designing, and evaluating systems, developing new tools and methods, and supporting empirical IS research. 3) Near-symmetry. Treat sociotechnical systems (with human participants) and totally automated systems as similarly as possible. Trends toward digitalization, automation, AI, and robotics imply benefits from that type of near-symmetry for understanding changes in the “division of labor.

Tangible user interfaces : past, present and future directions

In the last two decades, Tangible User Interfaces (TUIs) have emerged as a new interface type that interlinks the digital and physical worlds. Drawing upon users' knowledge and skills of interaction with the real non-digital world, TUIs show a potential to enhance the way in which people interact with and leverage digital information. However, TUI research is still in its infancy and extensive research is required in or- der to fully understand the implications of tangible user interfaces, to develop technologies that further bridge the digital and the physical, and to guide TUI design with empirical knowledge. This paper examines the existing body of work on Tangible User In- terfaces. We start by sketching the history of tangible user interfaces, examining the intellectual origins of this field. We then present TUIs in a broader context, survey application domains, and review frame- works and taxonomies. We also discuss conceptual foundations of TUIs including perspectives from cognitive sciences, phycology, and philoso- phy. Methods and technologies for designing, building, and evaluating TUIs are also addressed. Finally, we discuss the strengths and limita- tions of TUIs and chart directions for future research

Personalization in cultural heritage: the road travelled and the one ahead

Over the last 20 years, cultural heritage has been a favored domain for personalization research. For years, researchers have experimented with the cutting edge technology of the day; now, with the convergence of internet and wireless technology, and the increasing adoption of the Web as a platform for the publication of information, the visitor is able to exploit cultural heritage material before, during and after the visit, having different goals and requirements in each phase. However, cultural heritage sites have a huge amount of information to present, which must be filtered and personalized in order to enable the individual user to easily access it. Personalization of cultural heritage information requires a system that is able to model the user (e.g., interest, knowledge and other personal characteristics), as well as contextual aspects, select the most appropriate content, and deliver it in the most suitable way. It should be noted that achieving this result is extremely challenging in the case of first-time users, such as tourists who visit a cultural heritage site for the first time (and maybe the only time in their life). In addition, as tourism is a social activity, adapting to the individual is not enough because groups and communities have to be modeled and supported as well, taking into account their mutual interests, previous mutual experience, and requirements. How to model and represent the user(s) and the context of the visit and how to reason with regard to the information that is available are the challenges faced by researchers in personalization of cultural heritage. Notwithstanding the effort invested so far, a definite solution is far from being reached, mainly because new technology and new aspects of personalization are constantly being introduced. This article surveys the research in this area. Starting from the earlier systems, which presented cultural heritage information in kiosks, it summarizes the evolution of personalization techniques in museum web sites, virtual collections and mobile guides, until recent extension of cultural heritage toward the semantic and social web. The paper concludes with current challenges and points out areas where future research is needed

Nothing is more practical than a good conceptual artifact... which may be a theory, framework, model, metaphor, paradigm or perhaps some other abstraction

This research commentary proposes a way to make progress in the IS discipline’s inconclusive discussion about the nature and role of theory. In some ways, the creation and testing of theory seems to be the primary goal of IS research. Despite that, there are persistent questions whether theory has become a fetish in the IS discipline and whether the routinized production and testing of mid-range theories is little more than an uninspired script that reduces the value and interest of IS research. This paper reframes the discussion around the idea of ‘conceptual artifact’ that has been discussed widely in educational psychology for over a decade. Conceptual artifacts are abstract knowledge objects that can be produced, tested and improved. This paper recognizes the value of both abstract knowledge (conceptual artifacts) and non-abstract knowledge. It explains that theorizing produces, evaluates or improves useful conceptual artifacts that may or may not be theories. It validates four premises related to conceptual artifacts by showing that theorizing related to work system theory created or used many different types of conceptual artifacts. It identifies nine criteria for evaluating conceptual artifacts and shows that some of them differ from typical criteria for evaluating Gregor Type IV theories. As a whole, it argues that that privileging theory over other types of conceptual artifacts may not be beneficial in pursuing the research questions that the IS discipline needs to study

Revisiting the archival finding aid

Archivists have been creating finding aids for generations, and in the last three decades they have done this work via a succession of standardized formats. However, like many other disciplines, they have carried out such work in violation of systems analysis. Although purporting to have the users of finding aids systems first and foremost in their mind, archivists have carried out their descriptive work apart from and with little knowledge of how researchers find and use archival sources. In this article, questions are raised about the utility of archival finding aids and how they will stand the test of time. Indeed, archivists, purportedly concerned with considering how records function and will be used over time, ought to apply the same kind of analysis and thinking to their finding aids. In this article, we explore three ways archival finding aids might be examined by outsiders, namely, those concerned with museum exhibitions, design experts, and accountability advocates. Doing this should assist archivists to reevaluate their next wave of experimentation with descriptive standards and the construction of finding aids. Archivists should expand the notion of what we are representing in archival representation. © 2007 by The Haworth Press

Innovation and design change strategies for learning technologies at Warwick : towards a ‘design capabilities’ heuristic for guiding practice and evaluating change.

This report gives a narrative account of an investigation into design and design capability in teaching and learning in a research-intensive university. It begins, in the Introduction, with definitions of key concepts: design, designing, successful design (achieving fit, stick, spread and growth), design change and design capability (although this last term is only really fleshed­out in Reading the Case Studies and the Conclusion). These words are common currency, but rarely used with precision. When clearly defined they provide a lens through which we can attain more clarity and granularity in analysing attempts at enhancing practice. In the second part, on the Origins of the Investigation and Earlier Experiments, we examine the limitations of a techno­centric approach to understanding, predicting and supporting the uptake of technology enhanced learning. It is argued that a design capability approach is needed, in which the ability of all people (including students) to discover, create, adopt, adapt designs that fit, stick, spread and grow is of prime value. In part 3, the design of the investigation is explained, with its focus upon discovering, creating and using design patterns as a key facilitating aspect of design capability. In part 4, this is put to the test, with an attempt at creatively reading the 23 mini case studies produced in interviews with academics. However, design patterns do not emerge easily from the cases, and we see that design and designing in this setting is more diverse and complex than expected. It is argued that a design patterns based approach will be useful, but much more work needs to be done before design patterns can become the lingua franca of teaching and learning design and development. This leads to a more sophisticated view of design capability, presented in the Conclusion. Drawing upon the experiences of the academics interviewed in the case studies, especially experienced and confident senior academics, it is conjectured that we need to increase the intensity with which academics encounter and reflect upon design challenges, designerly approaches, suboptimal and successful designs and design patterns. An integrated combination of Design Thinking and the Higher Education Academy Fellowship framework is recommended as a way of achieving this

An aesthetics of touch: investigating the language of design relating to form

How well can designers communicate qualities of touch? This paper presents evidence that they have some capability to do so, much of which appears to have been learned, but at present make limited use of such language. Interviews with graduate designer-makers suggest that they are aware of and value the importance of touch and materiality in their work, but lack a vocabulary to fully relate to their detailed explanations of other aspects such as their intent or selection of materials. We believe that more attention should be paid to the verbal dialogue that happens in the design process, particularly as other researchers show that even making-based learning also has a strong verbal element to it. However, verbal language alone does not appear to be adequate for a comprehensive language of touch. Graduate designers-makers’ descriptive practices combined non-verbal manipulation within verbal accounts. We thus argue that haptic vocabularies do not simply describe material qualities, but rather are situated competences that physically demonstrate the presence of haptic qualities. Such competencies are more important than groups of verbal vocabularies in isolation. Design support for developing and extending haptic competences must take this wide range of considerations into account to comprehensively improve designers’ capabilities

Nothing Is More Practical than a Good Theory … except possibly a Good Paradigm or Framework or Model or Metaphor

This research questions the frequently repeated, taken-for-granted aphorism that “there is nothing more practical than a good theory.” It seeks to demonstrate that there is no reason to believe that theory is more practical than good paradigms, frameworks, models, metaphors or good versions of other conceptual artifacts. It identifies different types of conceptual artifacts along with nine criteria for evaluating conceptual artifacts. It validates four premises related conceptual artifacts by examining different types of conceptual artifacts associated with work system theory (WST)