Steven Haveman, Industrial Design Student at the University of Twente completed his master’s graduation assignment within FWS on a study towards new ways of working for system architects. This post is a roundup of the results obtained in this research project. It shows the general findings and the findings regarding the concepts that were developed.
Steven’s research project has been a study towards new ways of working for system architects. System architects are responsible for the architecture of complex systems, like printers, MRI-scanners or radar systems. A series of interviews has been conducted with system architects at Océ, Philips and Thales to discuss concepts and obtain insights. This resulted in Project Buzz Tracker, a tool that couples activity information to project and workflow planning. Persons frequently give an update on their actions, thus showing the Buzz in a project. By observing this overview, the system architect can see concentrations or a lack of Buzz. These can be indications of problematic issues. Project Buzz Tracker will further strengthen team cohesion, especially if distant workers are involved. (more…)
During the Future Workspaces project day we also introduced a social networking concept called ‘Borrelpraat’. Borrelpraat is a prototype of a social networking tool that can be used at networking events. Participants have a tag on their badge with which they can indicate their position (using RFID technology). Furthermore, they indicated their interests at registration. On a swipe of their badge their location and interests are visualized on a big screen. These interests are matched with other participants at that location to stimulate conversations. Due to the use of standard Web 2.0 and RFID technology, Borrelpraat is easy to extend. Below is a short movie (in dutch) that shows the working of this prototype
We tested this prototype at the future workspaces project day. The participants of this day reacted enthusiastically, which resulted in approximately 100 swipes of badges within the hour. We are going to explore this way of social interaction more and extend this concept. If you are interested please feel free to contact us.
As part of the projectday 2009, we organized the workshop “Have a break!”. Breaks are an important, yet sometimes undervalued part of effective knowledge work: you change contexts, clear your mind and fuel your engine. Additionally, breaks provide an opportunity to interact with people outside your usual circle to benefit from cross-pollination over traditional organizational boundaries or simply to get inspired.
The workshop consisted of two parts: one in which the group explored and experienced how an interactive tool at the coffee corner could help trigger conversations and one part where they discussed key elements to make breaks valuable knowledge sharing moments, assisted by a visual thinker. For the experience part we used the prototype of Buzzcuit, pre-loaded with profiles of some of the workshop participants.
Some of the outcomes of the discussions that triggered me:
Make sure you have breaks in pure virtual meetings (phone conferences, meetings in a virtual world) as well – and facilitate the chitchat that in non-virtual meetings proves to be so important for trust building.
When using an interactive screen with profiles of people, target the information to the people around the screen (e.g., based on Bluetooth or RFID). That also allows for matchmaking.
When talking about the office as a meeting space, the term “break” may be misleading. Talking to people, insiode and outside your team, is an important part of being a knowledge worker.
Management should lead by example and take time to talk to people outside their usial circles.
And although it is sometimes difficult to fit breaks in, realize that in the 21st century breaks is where an important part of the work is done. Break = work!
Dennis from Jam visualized outcomes of the discussion. More of the results (also from the other workshops) can be found here.
Last year, an experiment was conducted at the VU University to determine what the role of virtual worlds could be in geographically distributed decision making processes. Virtual worlds have been receiving a lot of media attention over the past year, and people in organizations increasingly have experience in various virtual environments. Still, we are in the dark about the potential value of these environments for organizations. Combined with the fact that people in organizations increasingly work geographically dispersed, and independent of time and location, this triggered us to consider the possibilities of virtual worlds as group decision support systems.Our aim was to study the contribution of virtual worlds to geographically dispersed team decision making in terms of both facilitating (and improving) the interaction between participants, and improving the quality of the decision being reached. Not that important now, but I think we could better frame this in terms of communication/interaction and information gathering/processing. Improving the decision being reached is an outcome, while facilitating interaction concerns the process (see presentation) In order to be able to do this, we compared decision making in virtual worlds (we used Second Life for our experiment) to decision making that was supported by a purely text-based chat functionality. This would enable us to determine the added value of the visualization that virtual worlds offer in terms of both interaction and decision making.
The decision process that was central in the experiment focused on a spatial decision problem. A team had to make a decision on the use of a vacant piece of land situated in an urban area. The virtual world of Second Life was used to create a virtual image of an urban area.
E-mail is a powerful medium for communication and document distribution. So powerful actually, that it is becoming the victim of its own success. When you keep these 10 simple rules in mind, your communication via e-mail will become more effective. The etiquette is available in an English and a Dutch version.
In 2010 gebruiken meer bedrijven instant messaging dan e-mail voor hun communicatie. Dit concludeert IDC uit onderzoek in opdracht van Nortel Networks. (Source: Automatisering Gids, July 7, 2008)
Email is frequently used to assign work to others; it has become a “poor men’s workflow system”. Senders often expect a (nearly) immediate response, whereas recipients may think very differently – but are often silent – about that. A simple “No!”-button (“No!” for “I cannot do this”) can lower the threshold for the recipient to give a prompt reply and thus avoid unnecessary confusion for the sender (did she get my message?).
RSS
Steven Haveman, Industrial Design Student at the University of Twente completed his master’s graduation assignment within FWS on a study towards new ways of working for system architects. This post is a roundup of the results obtained in this research project. It shows the general findings and the findings regarding the concepts that were developed.
