Augmenting Team Sensemaking John T. Nosek Temple University SenseMaking Technologies Corporation...

Augmenting Team Sensemaking

John T. Nosek

Temple University

SenseMaking Technologies Corporation

SenseMaking Technologies Corporation HELPING YOU CREATE A BETTER FUTURE TM

©2001

ENVIRONMENT

Question

Create

s

ResponseTeam member

Human Artifacts:Knowledge repositoriesCognitive mapsDatabases; reports...

Team member

Question

Creates

Que

stio

nR

esponseR

espo

nse

Stimul

i Stimuli

Stimul

i

Group Sensemaking

ENVIRONMENT

Question

Creat

es

ResponseTeam member

Human Artifacts:Knowledge repositoriesCognitive mapsDatabases; reports...

Team member

Question

Creates

Que

stio

nR

esponseR

espo

nse

Stimul

i StimuliStim

uli

Group Sensemaking

Phases:PlanningCreating

EvaluatingNegotiating

Consolidating

LimitingFactors

Parallel

Situational Awareness

Anytime, Anyplace

Artifacts of Group Sensemaking: Plans, Responses, Reports ...

SenseMaking Technologies Corporation HELPING YOU CREATE A BETTER FUTURE TM

Information*

Knowledge derived from study, experience, or instruction.

Knowledge of specific events or situations

A collection of facts or data.

Communication of knowledge.

Computer Science. Processed, stored, or transmitted data.

*American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth EditionCopyright © 2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company.

Data/Information/KnowledgeHierarchy

Data

Information

Knowledge

Wisdom

CognitiveDomain

Physical Domain

Objects/events

Boundary Objects

Information

Actions

Group Sensemaking

Boundary Objects

Filters: Increase capacity to Act? Decide to Share

Means to me

STIMULUS: Datum

Individual Agent Responses to Stimulus

Received Affordances:

Projected Affordances:

Interpreted Affordances:

Informational value: Yes

Knowledge increased: Yes(increased capacity to act)

Boundary Object

STIMULUS: Datum

Individual Agent Responses to Stimulus

Received Affordances:

Projected Affordances:

Interpreted Affordances:

Informational value: Yes

Knowledge increased: Yes(increased capacity to act)

Informational value: No

Knowledge increased: No(no increased capacity to act)

Boundary Object

UselessInformation

To Achieve Effective Team Action:

• Right thinking

• Right team members

• Right time

To Achieve Right Thinking, By the Right People

At the Right Time

• Construct Boundary Objects.

• Transmit them to right team members.

• Have right team members construct a judgment that boundary object has informational value.

• Do this at the right time.

Knowing

Of Knowledge and KnowingKnowing (Effective Knowledge):

Constructed Subset of Stored Knowledge Plus Stimulus

Stored Knowledge:Stored capacity to act

Boundary Object:Stimulus

Dynamic Nature of Constructing Effective Knowledge:Group Construction of Shared Meaning

Effective Knowledge (EK)

Stimulus 1

Stimulus 1Time 1

Boundary Object ofother agent



Stimulus 1


Stimulus 2

Stimulus 1Time 1


Stimulus 2Time 2



Effective Knowledge (EN)

Stimulus 1

Effective Knowledge (EN)

Stimulus 2


Stimulus n

Stimulus 1Time 1


Stimulus 2Time 2


Stimulus nTime n


Constructing Shared Meaning:

Boundary Object of Agent 1

I share this

Effective Knowledge(EK)

Agent 1

Effective Knowledge(EK)

Agent 2

This means to me

Cycle in Dynamic Construction of Shared Meaning



I share this


Agent 1


Agent 2

This means to me

I share thisThis means to me

Typical Sensemaking ConversationBoundary

ObjectA 1/T1

Statement and implicit assumption

Boundary Object A4/T2

Fact supporting Statementin BO A1/T1


Story on BO A1/T1


Story on implicit assumptionof BO A1/T1


Fact supporting statementin BO A1/T1


Questionregarding story onimplicitassumption

Mitigating Working Memory Limitations:Organizing and Categorizing Boundary Objects

Boundary Object A 1/T1


Claim:

Assumption:


Story:


Fact:


Fact:


Story:


Question:

Using Meaning Theories toHelp Construct Shared Meaning

• Osgood’s Theory of Meaning– Describe the subject– Judgment, potency, action

• Example: Its very(potency) bad(judgment), and getting worse

• Kelly’s Cognitive Constructs– Understand subject sensemaking process– shortcut, limited meaningful dimensions, reduce

overload– Valid Team Constructs? Situational?

Judgment: ThreatPotency: SeriousAction: Getting worse

Constructing Meaning

Boundary Object:Stimulus

Judgment: DangerousPotency: VeryAction: Getting worse

Boundary Object:

Sign

Sign

VeryDangerousWorsening

Very DangerousWorsening

Receiving Agent

Cases: Receiving Agent:• has similar expertise to sending agent:

> Other BO = facts

• has deep experience of the sign • does not have expertise or does not share sign

> Other BO = story

• holds implicit trust in sending agent

Other

Sending Agent

Constructing Shared Meaning

Push/Post, Pull/Peruse Stimuli

Push Technology: Sending Stimuli

Push: Directed, PreciseExample: instant messaging

Post: Broadcast, InformingExample: bulletin board

Push/Post, Pull/Peruse Stimuli

Push Technology: Sending Stimuli

Push: Directed, PreciseExample: instant messaging

Post: Broadcast, InformingExample: bulletin board

Pull Technology: Grabbing Stimuli

Pull: Specific, reachingExample: keyword filtering“I must know this”

Peruse: scanExample: web surfing“Let’s see what’s out there

Trust and Push Stimuli Technology

No ability to selectively push. Least Trusted Agent Filter

I can only share this


I want to share this

Trust and Push Stimuli Technology

No ability to selectively push. Least Trusted Agent Filter



I want to share this

Selectively push


I want and can share this

Artifact Creation:Augmenting Sensemaking and Focussing Attention

Time

A1: Version 1

A: Agent 1,2,3 ...stands for Agent 1, 2, 3...

A2: Version 1+

A2 Input

A1: Version 2Version 1

+Selected A2 Input

A3: Version 1 +

A3 InputA4: Version 2

+ A4 Input


+Selected A3 Input

to Version 1


+Selected A4 Input

to Version 2

Customized Focussed Attention:Team Constructs and Sharing Meaning Efficiently

Time

A: Agent 1,2,3 ...stands for Agent 1, 2, 3...

A1: Version 1

A2: Version 1+

A2 Input


+Selected A2 Input

A3: Version 1 +

A3 Input

A4: Version 2+

A4 Input


+Selected A3 Input

to Version 1


+Selected A4 Input

to Version 2

Compare to Version 4

Compare to V4

Compare To V4

Collaboration Envelope™Owner Agent: How can I push this BO to Agent…? I need to organize and categorize this BO ...

Receiving Agents: Has this BO changed since I saw it last? How can I pull this BO to me? I suggest this alternative BO. ...

Both Owner and Receiving Agents: How does this BO compare to the last version I saw? How does a suggested alternative compare to the original BO? I need to chunk a part of this BO Who has seen these changes to this BO? Do all agents understand this BO? ...

Boundary Object (BO)Created by an Agent

UsingMost Effective &

Easiest to UseTool

Key Take Aways

• Team sensemaking requires iterations between the physical (boundary objects) and cognitive worlds of multiple agents.

• Agents can be human and non-human.• A Collaboration Envelope™ provides a

notion that there are common actions that agents need to engage around boundary objects to support sensemaking among agents.

Augmenting Team Sensemaking John T. Nosek Temple University SenseMaking Technologies Corporation...

Documents

Transcript of Augmenting Team Sensemaking John T. Nosek Temple University SenseMaking Technologies Corporation...