Curtis 2009 Design Philosophy

DESIGN PHILOSOPHY: Helping Mobile Workers Stay In Sync and In Touch Jennifer S. Curtis Novay Enschede, the Netherlands User-System Interaction Eindhoven University of Technology Eindhoven, the Netherlands July, 2009

Design Philosophy - 2 CURTIS 2009

Background The incidence of geographically distributed project teams is on the rise. As a consequence, individuals working within these teams must embrace the notion of mobility in order to adapt. Mobility, according to Kakihara & Sorensen (2002), “is not just a matter of people traveling, but, far more importantly, related to the [types of] interactions they perform.” In other words, working within the context of a geographically distributed team forces individuals who are separated by distance, time, and context to collaborate. Knowledge workers who are embedded in such teams – particularly those working for large companies – are forced to adapt on two levels. 1. First, they must find a way to stay up-to-date (i.e., in sync) and connected (i.e., in touch) with their occasionally geographically removed project-level colleagues. o Based on interviews with a subset of mobile workers, it is possible to define this goal as a primary need; Some examples:
One woman I interviewed said that she drove each Wednesday to work with her project team in a distant city. Her reason for doing so was that she felt things did not “go as well” as when she failed to spend time this time with her team, face-to-face.
Another individual that I interviewed said that each evening, on his way home, he called his team to get updates on the end-of-the day activities and to see if any issues had arisen. He was in phone contact with his geographically distant team several times a day, and claimed to rarely use email. 2. Secondly, they must find a way to stay up-to-date (i.e., in sync) and connected (i.e., in touch) with their oftentimes geographically removed departmental colleagues. o Based on interviews with a subset of mobile workers, it is possible to define this goal as a secondary need; Some examples:
One mobile worker that I interviewed said that she “had no idea” what some of the people were working on within her department.
She also said that one major problem was that despite the fact that her department scheduled periodic (e.g., monthly) meetings and events in the evenings, attendance was inconsistent because her colleagues were working on projects in different areas of the country – thus making it difficult to return to the home office at times. I began to characterize most of the knowledge workers who I initially interviewed as Traditionalists because – although they were mobile workers – their use of communication tools and practices more closely resembled traditional, co-located office workers. That is to say, most co-located colleagues prefer face-to-face and email methods of interaction with their colleagues (Kraut et al, 1990) -- and, so did these individuals, as well1. Moreover, they were comparatively more

conservative in their practices and attitudes towards staying in sync and in touch with their professional contacts than a second group of knowledge workers that I interviewed. Problem In their characteristic use of communication tools and practices, the Traditionalists expressed satisfaction in their ability to stay in sync and in touch with those in their project teams [first level, as described in the previous section]. However, they complained of an inability to stay in sync and in touch with their departmental colleagues [second level]. 1

Many of these individuals (6 of the 10 interviewed) said that they would also use a contact’s chat client status prior to phoning him or her.

Design Philosophy - 3 CURTIS 2009

Problem analysis: • •

•

•

First, in doing primarily off-site project work, the number of opportunities to interact face-to-face with their departmental/organizational colleagues are few. Secondly, their primary needs deal principally with the activities that support their current project work and team -- thus making anything that falls outside (including interactions at the departmental or organizational level) of this narrow focus secondary. The favored tools for staying in sync and in touch at the project level include the phone, face-to-face meetings, and email (and occasionally chat clients, which are primarily to check availability). Finally, breakdowns occur when the preferred tools for staying in sync and in touch at the project level are also used for interactions at the more highly-distributed departmental level (and, in the context of the organization, beyond).

Problem Implications Stated differently, the problem for the Traditionalists occurs when they try to use the same tools and practices for staying in sync and in touch with their project-level colleagues to stay in sync and in touch with colleagues at the departmental-level. The consequences which arise out of this problem include: -

Direct implications: The direct effects of having a breakdown in one’s ability to stay in sync and in touch with one’s departmental colleagues are: o Difficulty making new contacts within the department o Not knowing what departmental colleagues are either currently working on or have worked on in the past
On the flip side, a lack of personal visibility to one’s departmental colleagues; An example: • Several individuals that I spoke to said that they made a pointed effort to work in the main office when they could. They felt this approach was necessary to nurture relationships with colleagues and maintain good rapport with support staff. The problem with this tactic, however, was that departmental colleagues were also oftentimes away, working on their own projects and they could not count on particular individuals to also be in on any given day. It is noteworthy to mention that all of these above factors are symptomatic of professional isolation (e.g., Cooper & Kurland, 2002; Golden, 2006).

-

Indirect implications: The indirect effects of having a breakdown in one’s ability to stay in sync and in touch with one’s departmental colleagues are: o Increased risk of not receiving information – either in a timely manner or at all – that has implications for one’s project work (e.g., pertinent developments in related projects, the outcome of budget decisions, etc.); For example:
One man that I interviewed tried to piece together a network of individuals who would keep him informed of potentially pertinent developments that might impact his main project. Oftentimes, however, he found himself in situations in which he learned of an issue only once it was “too late”. In these cases, he would track down someone in the information loop and ask them to keep him informed of any new developments in the future. He conceded that this was not most effective system, but the best strategy he could come up with, given the circumstances. He said there was no system

Design Philosophy - 4 CURTIS 2009

within the organization to widely distribute brief updates and news flashes, and that such information tended to pass from person-to-person. In other words, a breakdown in one’s ability to stay in sync and in touch with one’s departmental colleagues certainly has direct implications for the nature of relationships that exist with those colleagues. In addition, however, such a breakdown can also indirectly affect one’s project work detrimentally. Solution Focus Any design solution should address the following end-goal; that is to: Support mobile workers in their ability to stay in sync and in touch with colleagues at the departmental and organizational levels. Constraints In order to come up with solutions to adequately address the above mentioned breakdowns that occur for traditionalists in their interactions with colleagues at the departmental level, it is important to also take into consideration the following constraints: -

-

-

New tool adoption is low among the Traditionalists, for a number of possible reasons: o Lack of organizational support (e.g., to provide employees with smartphones, mobile broadband cards, VPN connectivity, etc.) o New tool adoption is also low among their existing contacts o Tool fatigue – in other words, they feel as though they manage too many tools already o Their current tool set is adequate for satisfying their primary, project level needs Willingness to learn new tools and/or maintain their use is limited; For example: o One man that I spoke to said that the use of Sharepoint was not appreciated or updated among his departmental colleagues because it was difficult to use. o Several people that I spoke to said that the databases that had been developed for the purposes of cataloging the various areas of expertise within an organization were rarely updated by the knowledge workers themselves. Any solution should support either directly – or indirectly (i.e., have the potential to support) – primary needs in addition to secondary needs. In other words, a solution should not adversely affect the user’s ability to complete work at the project level.

The first two constraint, regarding tool adoption and use arguably have a lot to do with (although not entirely) attitudes; this attitude is shaped by a sense of adequate satisfaction with their current tool sets and a desire not to overburden themselves by adopting new tools unnecessarily. The second constraint addresses issues related to meeting their higherlevel priorities. Useful Directions for Solutions Highly connected professionals tend to make extensive use of a variety of tools in an effort to stay in sync and in touch with their networks. To that end, some of the tactics that highly connected professionals employ might be of use when crafting possible solutions for the traditionalists. In other words, perhaps there are things that the highly connected professionals do that might inspire supportive solutions for the interactions of less highly networked mobile workers with their departmental colleagues.

Design Philosophy - 5 CURTIS 2009

Here are some tools and practices used by the highly connected professionals I interviewed that would be useful in the design of a solution: -

-

The use of filters. o Filters help cull information so that the most potentially important information is readily accessible. There are two types of filters that highly connected professionals use regularly:
Explicit filters – For example, via the use of RSS or other information aggregator. The defining characteristic of an explicit filter is that funnels content on requested topics or located on particular websites to the user.
Tacit filters – Tacit filters are driven by one’s social connections. Tacit filters operate when one’s contacts help call attention to information that might otherwise be overlooked. The use of open communication. o Highly connected individuals share status updates via the use of one-to-many methods of communication (such as through LinkedIn, twitter, or forums).

Why were these particular practices chosen as possible solutions, and not others? The highly connected professionals that I interviewed also displayed other noteworthy characteristics. Here are just a few: -

They were all bloggers – thus underscoring their willingness to share information, their viewpoints, and open a dialogue on topics of interest. They also had showed an overt willingness to adapt their contacts’ preferred method of communication. Generally speaking, in their view face-to-face communication was clearly beneficial -- but not always absolutely necessary, not even for collaborative work.

It is important to address why other tools, practices, and strategies used by the highly professionals are not included as design suggestions. The above examples underscore how the communication practices of the highly connected professionals in this sample have been shaped by their attitudes. Whereas designing a system that makes use of filters and/or open communication is feasible, attempting to encourage the traditionalists to rethink their deeply held views on the necessity of face-to-face communication, for example, would be pose a formidable challenge. Requirements for a Solution Factoring in the aforementioned constraints and suggested directions for a solution, the following is a list of design requirements to consider when coming up with viable solutions to help support mobile workers in their ability to stay in sync and in touch with their departmental and organizational level colleagues. 1. Maintain the integrity of the Traditionalist’s original tool set (i.e., mobile phone, email, face-to-face communication, and instant messaging) by a. Not necessitating the addition of new tools (e.g., smart phones) b. Integrating any solutions into the existing tool set (e.g., a solution that makes use of a user’s email as an input/output device) 2. Should require zero-to-low effort in the initial set-up of the system 3. Participation in the system should require minimal effort (e.g., this could be done via the use of some amount of automatically generated status updates) 4. System elements should be available to the user while he is on-the-go

Design Philosophy - 6 CURTIS 2009

5. Push relevant information to the user via the use of filters 6. Support one-to-many or many-to-many communication via the use of status updates and/or information exchange References Cooper, C., & Kurland, N.B. 2002. Telecommuting, Professional Isolation, and Employee Development in Public and Private Organizations. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 23(4): 511-532. Golden, T. D. 2006. The role of relationships in understanding telecommuter satisfaction. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 27(3): 319 – 340. Kakihare, M., & Sorensen, C. 2002. “Mobility: an extended perspective”, Proceedings of the 35th Hawaii International Conference on System Science. Kraut, R.E., Fish, R.S., Root, R.W., & Chalfonte, B. 1990. Informal Communication in Organizations: Form, Function, and Technology. Oskamp, I.S., & Spacapan, S. (Eds.). Human Reactions to Technology: The Claremont Symposium on Applies Social Psychology. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications.