cywong@syacus.acus.oz.au (CY Wong) (03/10/91)
hi there, Back in 1985, Anatol Holt wrote a paper on 'Coordination Technology and Petri Nets'. (Paper was published in LNCS 222 - Advances in Petri Nets 1985) Abstract of paper reads as follows: 'This paper introduces a new apporach to Petri net interpretation. With this approach, properly interpreted Petri nets yield new insights about the mechanics of human work organizations. Furthermore, these insights take technically useful form. In the last few years, the approach has led to the development of an industrial software technology - Coordination Technology - for the construction of electronic work environments. The technological and scientific background are described enough to provide motivation for the new approach to Petri net interpretation.' At that time, CSCW and Groupware were unheard of (at least to me). I am curious as to the following: 1) was groupware and CSCW actively researched back in 1985 2) if so, was Holt's paper well-known amongst you people 3) were there further papers from Holt (or his colleagues from ITT) on this topic 4) is his paper relevant to the area of groupware/cscw (or am i barking up the wrong tree) (email me and I shall summarise to this newsgroup. I am happy to send copies of paper to anyone if LNCS 222 is difficult to obtain from your library) Chek Yoon WONG A.C.U.S. 115 Wicks Rd North Ryde NSW 2113
cywong@syacus.acus.oz.au (CY Wong) (03/12/91)
In article <1991Mar10.074044.16329@syacus.acus.oz.au> I wrote: >Back in 1985, Anatol Holt wrote a paper on 'Coordination Technology and >Petri Nets'. (Paper was published in LNCS 222 - Advances in Petri Nets 1985) >Abstract of paper reads as follows: > >'This paper introduces a new apporach to Petri net interpretation. With this >approach, properly interpreted Petri nets yield new insights about the >mechanics of human work organizations. Furthermore, these insights take >technically useful form. In the last few years, the approach has led to the >development of an industrial software technology - Coordination Technology - >for the construction of electronic work environments. The technological and >scientific background are described enough to provide motivation for the new >approach to Petri net interpretation.' > >At that time, CSCW and Groupware were unheard of (at least to me). >I am curious as to the following: > >1) was groupware and CSCW actively researched back in 1985 >2) if so, was Holt's paper well-known amongst you people >3) were there further papers from Holt (or his colleagues from ITT) on > this topic >4) is his paper relevant to the area of groupware/cscw (or am i barking up > the wrong tree) > >(email me and I shall summarise to this newsgroup. I am happy to send copies >of paper to anyone if LNCS 222 is difficult to obtain from your library) > >Chek Yoon WONG >A.C.U.S. >115 Wicks Rd >North Ryde NSW 2113 here's are the replies I've received: ----------------------------------- From: Ken Grant <kgrant@us.oracle.com> About 1) & 2)- Yes, work was going on before 1985. The first meeting explicitly on CSCW I know of was organized by Irene Greif (who coined the term "CSCW") at MIT's Endicott House in (I think) August 1984. About 2 or 3 dozen people were invited to come talk about their research. I think that people had been doing CSCW for a while but the field lacked organization - a lot of credit is due Irene for doing much of that organization herself. Anyway, I don't remember if Holt was at that first meeting - my binder with things from that meeting disappeared a couple of years ago :^( However, I am certain that there were attendees there who knew him and had read his work. I'm not sure about 3); as to 4), sure its relevant. Ken Grant Internet: kgrant@us.oracle.com UUCP: ...{hplabs,apple,uunet}!oracle!kgrant USMail: Oracle Corporation, 400 Oracle Parkway, Redwood Shores CA 94065 AT&T: (415) 506-2908 ----------------------------- From: "Hanhwe N. Kim" <hnkst2@unix.cis.pitt.edu> When I first started my Master's back in 1985, I became interested in CSCW and hypertext. The research was dispersed, and could be gleaned from journals that had to do with user interface design .. eg. "From cognitive to social Ergonomics(john Seely Brown)" in Norman and Drapers 'user centered systems design'. The first time I ran into Holt's research was in "Computers and Cognition" by Terry Winograd and Fernando Flores.. there is a small reference to the work he did at ITT... So it was 1986-7 I think. Holt's work is relevant for defining collaborative tasks in terms of resource allocation, time constraints, dependencies. I'm not sure whether, industrial engineers use petri nets to layout automated factories, but Holt tries to describe office/professional work in an anolgous manner. He mentions in later articles that the 'Coordination base' is to occupy a layer in a future distributed, networked operating system.. defining the sematics of collaborative applications.
dsstodol@daimi.aau.dk (David S. Stodolsky) (03/15/91)
A problem with Holt's work from ITT is the failure to recognize the integrity of the individual. That is, if a person switches from one role to another, the person can just as easily be talking to themself as to another person within the framework of the coordination system. Also, the concept of role is not that clear from a sociological standpoint. -- David S. Stodolsky Messages: + 45 46 75 77 11 x 24 41 Department of Computer Science Tel: + 45 31 95 92 82 Bldg. 20.2, Roskilde University Center Internet: david@ruc.dk Post Box 260, DK-4000 Roskilde, Denmark Fax: + 45 46 75 74 01
hnkst2@unix.cis.pitt.edu (Hanhwe N. Kim) (03/15/91)
In article <1991Mar14.182538.29557@daimi.aau.dk> dsstodol@daimi.aau.dk (David S. Stodolsky) writes: > >A problem with Holt's work from ITT is the failure to recognize the >integrity of the individual. That is, if a person switches from one role to >another, the person can just as easily be talking to themself as to another >person within the framework of the coordination system. >Also, the concept of role is not that clear from a sociological standpoint. > Absolutely right.. the 'scandinavian perspective' where the interests of workers is taken into account has been accepted only recently .. (post 'CSCW 88) I think. Holt was more interested in the coordination of resources in time... avoiding conflicts in resource allocation in the project-management sense.... and insuring the completion of tasks that other tasks relied upon.... His earlier petri-net examples, as well as his coordination base show that.... The definition of role he gives is more related to a job task responsibility rather than an individual..... It is not to say he did not care about the worker... I think there were references to how such a coordination base would allow more flexibility... etc... Just my truly HUMBLE opinion... I'm just a graduate student... no disclaimer needed!:) -Han Kim
dsstodol@daimi.aau.dk (David S. Stodolsky) (03/16/91)
In comp.groupware you write: >In article <1991Mar14.182538.29557@daimi.aau.dk> dsstodol@daimi.aau.dk (David S . Stodolsky) writes: >> >>A problem with Holt's work from ITT is the failure to recognize the >>integrity of the individual. That is, if a person switches from one role to >>another, the person can just as easily be talking to themself as to another >>person within the framework of the coordination system. >>Also, the concept of role is not that clear from a sociological standpoint. >> >Absolutely right.. the 'scandinavian perspective' where the interests of >workers is taken into account has been accepted only recently .. (post Unfortunately, the 'Scandinavian perspective' assumes that the union represents the interest of the worker. This may not always be true, especially when the union becomes a large bureaucratic organization. More on this in: Citation: Stodolsky, D. (1989, July). _Computer-supported cooperative work: The question of personal integrity_. Paper for presentation at the International Conference on Information System, Work, and Organization Design, Berlin, GDR. =========================================================== For presentation at the International Conference on Information System, Work, and Organization Design, Berlin, GDR (July 10-13, 1989). Computer Supported Cooperative Work: The Question of Personal Integrity David S. Stodolsky, PhD University of Copenhagen Abstract The expanding use of personal computers in the work place has catalyzed a new interest in cooperation. This interest appears to be generated by a "technology push". Large numbers of independent computer workstations have led to many databases controlled by individual workers. The easy interchange of this data, made technologically possible by the new networking technology, has been inhibited by inadequate mechanisms for cooperation. A significant risk exists that the cooperation embodied in these new systems will have little relationship to co-operation as it is understood by social researchers. This is because, first, the system designers confronted with these questions are primarily dealing with specific problems visible in the implementation of computer networks, and the problems are viewed as primarily technical problems that demand technical solutions. Second, the system designers tend to have little social science expertise. Third, the currently available hardware and software systems may preempt many potential co-operative solutions. These factors reinforce current trends that permit computers to play an increasingly important role in the erosion of personal integrity in the work place and in society at large. Potential outcomes of these trends include elimination of cooperatively structured organizations and a neo-Luddite reaction against the use of computer technology. -- David S. Stodolsky Messages: + 45 46 75 77 11 x 24 41 Department of Computer Science Tel: + 45 31 95 92 82 Bldg. 20.1, Roskilde University Center Internet: david@ruc.dk Post Box 260, DK-4000 Roskilde, Denmark Fax: + 45 46 75 74 01
hnkst2@unix.cis.pitt.edu (Hanhwe N. Kim) (03/16/91)
I used the words 'Scandinavian perspective' in an ambiguous manner .. I can't remember who actually coined the term (Greenbaum?) but in several papers it refers to design processes that try to incorporate user involvement. There is also mention of value orientation on the part of the designer to try to promote certain types of organizations ... workplace 'democracy', skills, autonomy etc. It seemed that hierarchies are seen as bad, and bureaucracies are to be avoided. I thought that 'bureaucrtized unions' did not fit in the 'Scandanavian perspective'. While I share the concerns of many in the field about the organizational impact of computer technology, the lack of definitions for things like autonomy, democracy(workplace) bureaucracy and etc. seem troubling. I'd really appreciate if people posted more of their thoughts on how to deal with the organizational impact of computer technology. Thanks! -Han Kim
campbell@redsox.bsw.com (Larry Campbell) (03/17/91)
You all may be interested to know that about five years ago Holt founded a company, named (surprise!) Coordination Technology, to build products based on his work. He has since left the company, but they are still in business. No, they have not shipped a product yet. I can not say any more at this point, other than the fact that the company is located in Trumbull, Connecticut. -- Larry Campbell The Boston Software Works, Inc., 120 Fulton Street campbell@redsox.bsw.com Boston, Massachusetts 02109 (USA)