Post on 22-Nov-2014
description
Conversations in ContextA Twitter Case for Social Media Systems Design
Aldo de MoorCommunitySense
the Netherlands
WWW.COMMUNITYSENSE.NL
Communication tools: then
Communication tools: now
Collaborative communities
� Communities� Strong, lasting interactions
� Bonds between members
� Common space
� Sense of community
� Collaborative communities
?
� Collaborative communities� Common goals
� Effective/efficient communication
� Perform/coordinate work� Community governance structures/processes� Common space = Internet + face-to-face� Prime examples in/between/around (multinational)
corporations, (government) bureaucracies, research networks
Collaborative fragmentation
� Paradox:� Never before so much need & potential for collaboration
� Never before so much fragmentation of collaboration
� Collaborative fragmentation� Organizations
� Workflows� Workflows
� Technologies
� Pragmatic errors abound� Breakdown of social and contextual components of a
discourse
� Far beyond ICT
PragWeb to the rescue
� Pragmatic Web perspective� How are communicative actions with a pragmatic context
performed via Web media?
� How can mutual understanding and commitments to action evolve in conversations?
� Research questionHow can social media (and other tools/information systems) � How can social media (and other tools/information systems) be put to effective use
� In the goal-driven conversation context typical of collaborative communities?
Outline
� Conceptual model of collaborative communities� Conversations in socio-technical context� Communicative affordances/constraints of Twitter� Social media systems design perspective� Scenario
Collaborative communities –usage context
� Goals� Activities: operationalized goals, with deliverable
� “writing a group report”
� Aspects: abstract goals, across processes and structures
� “legitimacy”, “efficiency”
� Actors� Detailed role ontologies
� “Administrator”, “Facilitator”, “Member”
� “WikiChampion”, “WikiZenMaster”
� “Position Defender”, “Argument Summarizer”, “Report Conclusion Editor”
� Domains� Professional culture, work practices, …
Collaborative communities –tool system
� Tool system� the system of integrated and customized information and
communication tools tailored to the specific information, communication, and coordination requirements of a collaborative community
Tool system levels� Tool system levels� Systems: “group report writing system”� Tools: “blogs”, “courseware”, “authoring support tool” � Modules: “position definition/taking”, “argument creation”� Functions: “add argument pro”, “add argument con”
Collaboration patterns
Community = conversation
� Conversations build the common ground of a community� Principle of least collaborative effort
� depends on purpose and (costs of using) the medium
� Language/Action Perspective� Conversations = set of communicative acts grounded in social
relationships and focused on organizational coordination
� Conversations are back with a vengeance on the Internet� 1960s-1980s: e-mail, mailing lists, Usenet (communication)
� 1990s-2000s: the Syntactic, early semantic Web (information)
� 2010s-…: Web 2.0, social media, Semantic Web++/Pragmatic Web… (content + conversations + context = collaboration)
Socio-technical conversation context
Conversation purposes
� Information exchange� Coordination� Collaborative sensemaking� Relationship building� Relationship building
Twitter functions
• Self-contained tweets
• Replies• Replies• Retweets• Links• Topics (#)• Lists
Twitter personal profiles
http://twitter.com/hrheingold
Twitter lists
http://twitter.com/hrheingold/journalism
Twitter topic conversations
#semanticweb
http://twitter.com/#search?q=%23semanticweb
Twitter use characteristics
• Twitter usage– Information sharing, information seeking, maintaining
relationships (Java et al. 2007)
– Keeping in touch, drawing attention to info, gathering useful info, seeking help and opinions, releasing emotional stress (Zhao and Rosson 2009)emotional stress (Zhao and Rosson 2009)
• Twitter users– Broadcasters, acquaintances, miscreants/evangelists
(Krishnamurty et al. 2008)
– Information sources, friends, information seekers (Java et al. 2007)
Tool comparison: conversation functionality
Blogs Twitter
Conversation fragmentation
• Many blogs • One server
Conversationlinks
• Comment on post? +
• Tweet reply to tweet? –links post? +
• Post on post? -tweet? –• Tweeter has replies? +
Conversationtracking
• Scattered:conversation reconstruction -
• Centralized: replies, topics +• Linear presentation -
Tool comparison: conversation practices
Blogs Twitter
“Conversationalglue”
• Linking to posts/comments +
• Replies, # topics +
Conversationspawning
• Tangentialconversations +
• Tangentialconversations ++spawning conversations + conversations ++
Conversation with self/others
• Conversation with self +
• Conversation with others +
Twitter in conversation context
Socio-technical systems design
� Ecosystems of tools� Communityware = dinosaurs R.I.P.
� Functionalities compete, evolve, are used, and replaced
� Apps = essence of Pragmatic Web!
� No generic solutions, always collaborative sensemaking (of collaboration patterns?) needed by community for (of collaboration patterns?) needed by community for selection, linking, configuring of tools
� Socio-technical systems design� Collaborative communities need to evaluate the
functionalities in their unique usage context
� Understand the purpose of the technologies in this context
� Adopt a collaborative sensemaking process view with stakeholders
Scenario: IPCC report review
� International Panel on Climate Change
• Very complex assessment reports• E.g. 5th report had 831 scientific contributors• E.g. 5th report had 831 scientific contributors
• Results often controversial
• InterAcademy Council requested to do independent review
• But: quality/legitimacy requires input from multitude of stakeholders
• How to scale their sufficient/timely input ?
Scenario: IPCC report review (1)
Write review
IPCC Report Review Wiki
IPCC Report ReviewMailing List
Coordinate
Topic #1Topic #1
Topic #11
View: worldEdit: topic stewards
Coordinate review
View: review committeeEdit: review committee
Scenario: IPCC report review (2)
@ipcc_review #ipcc_t11 #ipcc_t11
• Requests• Announcements
View: worldEdit: review committee
Solicit input
@ipcc_reviewaccount
#ipcc_t11: Needed, experton polar ice cap melting
• @John: I know an expert X #ipcc_t11• @Jane: I know an expert Y#ipcc_t11”
View: worldEdit: ---
Review input(public)
#ipcc_t11topic conv’n
View: review committeeEdit: review committee
Use input(private)
#ipcc_t11experts list
• @Jane: I know an expert Y#ipcc_t11”
Conclusions
� More communicative potential, but less of it used than ever
� Collaborative communities analysis� socio-technical conversation contexts
� Social media systems design� Collaborative sensemaking
� Match communicative requirements with enabling (social � Match communicative requirements with enabling (social media) functionalities, e.g. Twitter
� Directions� Ontologies for interaction
� E.g. collaboration patterns
� “Pragmatic bus”
� Community lifecycle alignment
� Socio-technical systems devt methodologies
� Use social media systems lens to (re)gain collaborative focus