research-article

Coordination-Artifacts Suiting: When Plans are in the Midst of Ordering Systems

Authors:

Ilaria Redaelli,

Antonella CarassaAuthors Info & Claims

CSCW '15: Proceedings of the 18th ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work & Social Computing

Pages 165 - 178

https://doi.org/10.1145/2675133.2675136

Published: 28 February 2015 Publication History

Abstract

This paper addresses the received understanding of the status of plans in cooperative work-that is, artefacts that anticipate future ways of performing activities, to challenge the received understanding of the plan's capacity to anticipate interdependencies as an immutable feature of plans. We propose conceptualizing the plan's capacity to anticipate interdependencies at work as an emergent, distributed and artifact-mediated activity that might be uncovered studying plans, planning and the plans application as work objects and activities occurring within a multiplicity of coordinative artifacts and protocols. This way we can expand our knowledge on how the plans anticipation is maintained in changing environments to support work coordination and we might support designers of computer-supported cooperative work (CSCW) -- efforts for the design of CSCW systems.

References

[1]

Bardram J. E. Plans as situated action: an activity theory approach to workflow systems. In Proc. ECSCW 1997, Kluwer Academic, (1997), 17--34.

Digital Library

[2]

Bardram, J. E., Bossen, C. A web of coordinative artifacts: collaborative work at a hospital ward. In Proc. SIGGROUP 2005, ACM Press (2005), 168--176.

Digital Library

[3]

Bardram, J. E., Hansen, T. R. Why the plan doesn't hold: a study of situated planning, articulation and coordination work in a surgical ward. In Proc. CSCW 2010, ACM Press (2010), 331--340.

Digital Library

[4]

Bentley, R., Hughes, J. A., Randall, D., Rodden, T., Shapiro, D., Sommerville I. Ethnographically-informed systems design for air traffic control. Proc. CSCW, ACM (1992), 123--129.

Digital Library

[5]

Berndtsson, J., Normark, M. The coordinative functions of flight strips: air traffic control work revisited. In Proc. SIGGROUP 1999, ACM Press (1999), 101--110.

Digital Library

[6]

Berndtsson, J., & Normark, M. Coordination in Air Traffic Control. Internal report, Center for Tele-Information, Technical University of Denmark, Lyngby, Denmark (1999).

[7]

Bossen C, Markussen R. Infrastructuring and ordering devices in health care: medication plans and practices on a hospital ward. Computer Supported Cooperative Work 19,6 (2010), 615--637.

Digital Library

[8]

Bossen, C., Jensen, L. G., Udsen, F. W. Boundary-Object Trimming: On the Invisibility of Medical Secretaries' Care of Records in Healthcare Infrastructures. Computer Supported Cooperative Work 23,1 (2014), 75--110.

Digital Library

[9]

Boujut, J. F., Blanco, E. Intermediary objects as a means to foster co-operation in engineering design. Computer Supported Cooperative Work 12, 2 (2003), 205--219.

Digital Library

[10]

Bowers, J., Button, G., Sharrock, W. Workflow from within and without: technology and cooperative work on the print industry shopfloor. In Proc. ECSCW'95, Springer (1995), 51--66.

Digital Library

[11]

Bowker, G. C., Star, S. L. Sorting things out: Classification and its consequences. MIT press (1999).

[12]

Brun-Cottan, F., Forbes, K., Goodwin, C., Goodwin, M., Jordan, B., Suchman, L., & Trigg, R. H. The workplace project: Designing for diversity and change (Videotape). Xerox Palo Alto Research Center, 3333 (1991).

[13]

Button, G., Sharrock, W. The organizational accountability of technological work. Social Studies of Science 28,1 (1998), 73--102.

[14]

Carassa, A. La conoscenza entra in azione. In: Mantovani G. (ed) Ergonomia. Il Mulino, Bologna (2000), 123--150.

[15]

Dant, T., Francis, D. Planning in Organisations: Rational Control or Contingent Activity' Sociological Research Online 3, 2 (1998), http://www.socresonline.org.uk/3/2/4.html.

[16]

Dourish, P. Process descriptions as organizational accounting devices: the dual use of workflow technologies. In Proc. SIGGROUP 2001, ACM Press (2001), 52--60.

Digital Library

[17]

Fields, B., Amaldi, P., Tassi, A. Representing collaborative work: the airport as common information space. Cognition, Technology & Work 7, 2 (2005), 119--133.

Digital Library

[18]

Garfinkel, H. Studies in ethnomethodology. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs (NJ) (1967).

[19]

Gerson, E. M., Star, S. L. Analyzing due process in the workplace. Transactions on Information Systems (TOIS), 4, 3 (1986), 257--270.

Digital Library

[20]

Gibson, J. J. The ecological approach to visual perception. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, New Jersey (1979).

[21]

Goodwin, C., Goodwin, M. H. Seeing as situated activity: Formulating planes. In Engeström, Y., Middleton, D. (eds) Cognition and communication at work. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, (1998), 61--95.

[22]

Halverson, C. A. Traffic management in air control: Collaborative management in real time. ACM SIGOIS Bulletin, 15, 2 (1994), 7--11.

Digital Library

[23]

Halverson, C. A., Ackerman, M. S. Yeah, the Rush ain't here yet-Take a break: Creation and use of an artifact as organizational memory. In Proc. Annual Hawaii International Conference, IEEE (2003),10 pp.

Digital Library

[24]

Harper, R. H., Hughes, J. A. What a F-ing System! Send 'em All to the Same Place and Then Expect Us to Stop 'em Hitting. Making Technology Work in Air Traffic Control. In (ed) Button, G. Technology in Working Order. Routledge, London, (1993), 127--144.

[25]

Harper, R. R., Hughes, J. A., Shapiro D. Z. "Harmonious working and CSCW: Computer Technology and Air Traffic Control." Studies in Computer Supported Cooperative Work. North-Holland Publishing Co. (1990).

[26]

Hughes, J. A., Randall, D., Shapiro, D. Faltering from ethnography to design. Proc. CSCW, ACM (1992), 115--122.

Digital Library

[27]

Hughes, J. A., King, V., Rodden, T., Andersen, H. Moving out from the control room: Ethnography in system design. Proc. CSCW, ACM (1994).

Digital Library

[28]

Jordan, B. Technology and social interaction: Notes on the achievement of authoritative knowledge in complex settings. Talent Development & Excellence 6,1 (1992), 95--132.

[29]

Koskinen, I. Plans, Evaluation, and Accountability at the Workplace. Sociological Research Online 4, 4 (2000) http://www.socresonline.org.uk/4/4/koskinen.html.

[30]

Lee, C. P. Boundary negotiating artifacts: Unbinding the routine of boundary objects and embracing chaos in collaborative work. Computer Supported Cooperative Work 16, 3(2007), 307--339.

Digital Library

[31]

Lutters, W. G., Ackerman, M. S. Beyond boundary objects: collaborative reuse in aircraft technical support. Computer Supported Cooperative Work 16,3 (2007), 341--372.

Digital Library

[32]

Llewellyn, N., Spence, L. Practice as a members' phenomenon. Organization Studies 30,12 (2009), 1419--1439.

[33]

Mackay, W. E., Fayard, A. L., Frobert, L., Médini, L. Reinventing the familiar: exploring an augmented reality design space for air traffic control. In Proc. SIGCHI 1998, ACM Press (1998), 558--565.

Digital Library

[34]

MacKay, W. E. Is paper safer? The role of paper flight strips in air traffic control. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction (TOCHI), 6, 4 (1999), 311--340.

Digital Library

[35]

Munkvold, G., Ellingsen, G., Monteiro, E. From plans to planning: the case of nurse care plans. In Proc. CSCW 2007, ACM Press (2007), 21--30.

Digital Library

[36]

Nevile, M. Beyond the black box: Talk-in-interaction in the airline cockpit. Ashgate Pub Ltd, (2004).

[37]

Randall, D., O'Brien, J., Rouncefield, M., Hughes, J.A.Organizational Memory and CSCW: Supporting the "Mavis" Phenomenon. In Grundy, J., Apperley, M. (eds.) Proc. HCI (OzCHI '96), IEEE (1996), 26--35.

Digital Library

[38]

Randall, D., Harper, R., Rouncefield, M. Fieldwork for design. Springer, London (2007).

[39]

Redaelli, I., Carassa, A. Temporality in planning: the case of the allocation of parking areas for aircrafts. In: Proc. ECSCW 2013, Springer (2013), 45--62.

[40]

Redaelli, I, Carassa, A. Reconsidering the Role of Plans and Planning in the Management of the Unexpected. In: Proc. COOP 2014, Springer (2014).

[41]

Rönkkö, K., Dittrich, Y., & Randall, D. When plans do not work out: How plans are used in software development projects. Computer Supported Cooperative Work 14,5 (2005), 433--468.

Digital Library

[42]

Schmidt, K., Simone, C. Coordination mechanisms: Towards a conceptual foundation of CSCW systems design. Computer Supported Cooperative Work 5,2--3 (1996),155--200.

Digital Library

[43]

Schmidt, K. Of maps and scripts: The status of formal constructs in cooperative work. Information and software technology 41,6 (1999), 319--329.

[44]

Schmidt, K., Wagner, I. Ordering systems: Coordinative practices and artifacts in architectural design and planning. Computer Supported Cooperative Work 13,5--6 (2004), 349--408.

Digital Library

[45]

Schmidt, K. Cooperative work and coordinative practices. In Schmidt, K. (ed) Cooperative Work and Coordinative Practices. Springer, London, (2011) 3--27.

[46]

Schmidt, K. Frail foundations. In Schmidt, K. (ed) Cooperative Work and Coordinative Practices. Springer, London, (2011), 359--389.

[47]

Sherman, Heyl, B. Ethnographic interviewing. In P. Atkinson, A. Coffey, S. Delamont, J. Lofland, L. Lofland (eds) Handbook of ethnography, Sage, London, (2001), 369--383.

[48]

Star, S. L. This is not a boundary object: Reflections on the origin of a concept. Science, Technology & Human Values, 35,5 (2010), 601--617.

[49]

Strauss, A. Work and the division of labor. The Sociological Quarterly, 26,1, (1985), 1--19.

[50]

Strauss, A. L., Fagerhaugh, S. Y. Social organization of medical work. Transaction Publisher (1997).

[51]

Subrahmanian, E., Monarch, I., Konda, S., Granger, H., Milliken, R., & Westerberg, A. Boundary objects and prototypes at the interfaces of engineering design. Computer Supported Cooperative Work 12,2 (2003), 185--203.

Digital Library

[52]

Suchman, L. A. Office procedure as practical action: models of work and system design. ACM Transactions on Information Systems (TOIS), 1, 4 (1983), 320--328.

Digital Library

[53]

Suchman, L. A. Plans and situated actions: the problem of human-machine communication. Cambridge University Press, New York (1987).

Digital Library

[54]

Suchman, L. Supporting articulation work. In (ed) Kling, R. Computerization and controversy: Value Conflicts and Social Choices, 2 Academic Press (1996), 407--423.

Digital Library

[55]

Suchman, L. (1996). Constituting shared workspaces. In Engeström, Y., Middleton, D. (eds) Cognition and communication at work. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1998), 35--60.

[56]

Suchman, L. Practice and its overflows: reflections on order and mess. TECNOSCIENZA: Italian Journal of Science & Technology Studies, 2,1 (2011), 21--30.

[57]

Ten Have, P. Understanding qualitative research and ethnomethodology. Sage (2004).

Cited By

Redaelli ICarassa A(2018)New Perspectives on PlansComputer Supported Cooperative Work10.1007/s10606-017-9278-927:1(107-148)Online publication date: 1-Feb-2018
Muller MDugan CBrenndoerfer MMonroe MGeyer WLee CPoltrock SBarkhuus LBorges MKellogg W(2017)What Did I Ask You to Do, by When, and for Whom?Proceedings of the 2017 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing10.1145/2998181.2998251(1009-1023)Online publication date: 25-Feb-2017
Lee CPoltrock SBarkhuus LBorges MKellogg W(2017)Proceedings of the 2017 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work and Social ComputingundefinedOnline publication date: 25-Feb-2017

Index Terms

Coordination-Artifacts Suiting: When Plans are in the Midst of Ordering Systems
1. Human-centered computing
  1. Collaborative and social computing

Recommendations

Planning for Coordination and Coordination for Planning
WI-IAT '08: Proceedings of the 2008 IEEE/WIC/ACM International Conference on Web Intelligence and Intelligent Agent Technology - Volume 01

Except in very controlled or fortuitous circumstances, good coordination between agents does not spontaneously occur. In general, agents need to plan for coordination, anticipating how their activities can affect each other and choosing actions that ...
Predicting possible conflicts in hierarchical planning for multi-agent systems
AAMAS '05: Proceedings of the fourth international joint conference on Autonomous agents and multiagent systems

This paper proposes a learning method to select the most appropriate abstract plans during hierarchical planning in the context of multi-agent systems (MAS). In hierarchical planning, a plan is first created at the most abstract level, and is then ...
Conflict estimation of abstract plans for multiagent systems
AAMAS '07: Proceedings of the 6th international joint conference on Autonomous agents and multiagent systems

In hierarchical planning, selecting a plan at an abstract level affects planning performance because an abstract plan restricts the scope of primitive plans. However, if all primitive plans under the selected abstract plan have difficult-to-resolve ...

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Conferences

CSCW '15: Proceedings of the 18th ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work & Social Computing

February 2015

1956 pages

ISBN:9781450329224

DOI:10.1145/2675133

General Chairs:
Dan Cosley
Cornell University, USA
,
Andrea Forte
Drexel University, USA
,
Program Chairs:
Luigina Ciolfi
Sheffield Hallam University, UK
,
David McDonald
University of Washington, USA

Copyright © 2015 ACM.

Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

Sponsors

SIGCHI: ACM Special Interest Group on Computer-Human Interaction

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 28 February 2015

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Request Permissions

Check for updates

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Research-article

Conference

CSCW '15

Sponsor:

SIGCHI

CSCW '15: Computer Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing

March 14 - 18, 2015

BC, Vancouver, Canada

Acceptance Rates

CSCW '15 Paper Acceptance Rate 161 of 575 submissions, 28%;

Overall Acceptance Rate 2,235 of 8,521 submissions, 26%

Upcoming Conference

CSCW '25

Sponsor:
sigchi

Computer-Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing

October 18 - 22, 2025

Bergen , Norway

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

3
Total Citations
View Citations
275
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)6
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0

Reflects downloads up to 05 Mar 2025

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

Redaelli ICarassa A(2018)New Perspectives on PlansComputer Supported Cooperative Work10.1007/s10606-017-9278-927:1(107-148)Online publication date: 1-Feb-2018
Muller MDugan CBrenndoerfer MMonroe MGeyer WLee CPoltrock SBarkhuus LBorges MKellogg W(2017)What Did I Ask You to Do, by When, and for Whom?Proceedings of the 2017 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing10.1145/2998181.2998251(1009-1023)Online publication date: 25-Feb-2017
Lee CPoltrock SBarkhuus LBorges MKellogg W(2017)Proceedings of the 2017 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work and Social ComputingundefinedOnline publication date: 25-Feb-2017

View Options

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Full Access

Get this Publication

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

eReader

View online with eReader.

Figures

Tables

Media

View Table of Conten