aalto stanford webinar-on collaborative working ennvironments 2013
DESCRIPTION
This is a material of Aalto-Stanford webinar on Collaborative Working Environment held on 4th and 5th February 2013TRANSCRIPT
Aalto&Stanford,webinar,on,Collabora2ve,Working,Environments,
2/19/2010,Digital'Product'Process'
February'4th'and'5th'2013''
Collabora<on'Environments'for'Global'Distributed''Product'Processes'(ColPro)'2011D2013'
hEp://www.hankegalleria.fi/tekes?so_id=27615'
Collaborative Working Environments Webinar 1: Collaboration needs and practices in global industrial environments:
Cases and Findings February 4, 2013 8:30-10:20am PST / 18:30-20:30 EET Chair: Dr. Renate Fruchter, Stanford University
Challenges and Enablers of Global Collaborative Working Environments - Matti Vartiainen and Olli Jahkola, Aalto University
• ABBo Global product transfer knowledge Portal=> Finland / Shanghai - Eero
Palomäki, Aalto University o Company comment - Kim Kaijasilta, AAC Global
• Konecranes o Facilitating Ideation in Innovation Processes - Pekka Alahuhta, Aalto
Universityo Company comment - Olli Kuismanen, KoneCranes
• Metso / UPM o Need for collective co-operation - Petri Mannonen, Aalto University o Company comment - Jani Honga, Metso
Wrap-up - Renate Fruchter, Stanford University o Corporate partners' experienceso Lessons learned from companies after each case presentation o Cross-case Discussion
Webinar 2: Presence and Engagement in Emergent Collaboration Environments February 5, 2013 8:30-10:20am PST / 18:30-20:30 EET Chair: Dr. Renate Fruchter, Stanford University
10 Key Characteristics for Next Generation Collaboration Environments - Renate Fruchter, Stanford University Increasing awareness and attention in collaboration - Seppo Valli, VTT Deploying cutting edge technologies: success stories and lessons learned
o Tomorrow Delivered Today: Immersive Terf Real Customer Use Cases? - Ms. Julie LeMoine, CEO, 3D ICC
o Eating Your Own Dog Food: How Microsoft Uses Its Own Collaboration Tools Both On Campus and Off - Dr. Randy Guthrie,PhD Microsoft, Microsoft Technology Evangelist, US-West
o Collaboration Tool For Problem Solving in Field Service - Henry Palonen and Kari Niinimäki, Inno-W
TEKES Scenario and Plans for the future - Kari Penttinen, Tekes Discussion and Closing Remarks
Collaboration Environments for Global Distributed Product
Processes (ColPro) 2011-2013
2/19/2010 Digital Product Process
Webinar at Stanford University February 4th to 5th 2013
Prof. Matti Vartiainen & Olli Jahkola, Work Psychology and Leadership,
Department of Industrial Engineering and Management, Aalto University School of
Science
2
ColPro: Main goals •! To analyze and design new collaborative working environments
(CWE) to develop global product processes, •! To synthesize the state-of-art practices of CWE for globally
distributed teams and projects in corporate settings. •! To develop prototype mixed media environments, test them in
learning and business settings in order to study the emergent team work processes and product quality improvements, and assess their transformative impacts.
The overall results will be a “dashboard for collaboration
technology”, (that is: synchronous and asynchronous tools for collaborating on global product data) and organizational practices of implementing, adapting and using it.
3
ColPro: research partrners and approach Research partners: •! Aalto/TKK (http://vmwork.tkk.fi), prof. Matti Vartiainen (coordinator) with his
team (Pekka Alahuhta, Olli Jahkola, Emma Nordbäck and Eero Palomäki), & prof. Marko Nieminen and Petri Mannonen (project manager (http://stratus.soberit.hut.fi/) and Venlakaisa Hölttä
•! Stanford, prof. Renate Fruchter with her team (http://pbl.stanford.edu/fruchter_bio.htm)
•! VTT Media technologies, prof. Caj Södergård and Seppo Valli with their team (http://www.vtt.fi/research/area/media_technologies.jsp?lang=en)
Companies: AAC Global (Ismo Laukkanen), ABB (Jouni Ikäheimo), DNA (Mikko Knuuttila), Inno-W (Henry Palonen), Konecranes (Olli Kuismanen), Metso Automation (Jouni Pyötsiä), UPM (Heikki Ilvespää)
Research approach: Company cases and quasi-experimental studies of
interaction episodes collecting data by observations, interviews and questionnaires and by using secondary data
Framework to study impacts, inhibitors and facilitators in global teams
Work processes Intra group processes
SOCIAL RESOURCES
INDIVIDUAL RESOURCES
TASK COMPLEXITY •! Complicatedness •! Interdependence •! Ambiguity
A B
PHYSICAL RESOURCES
VIRTUAL RESOURCES
Work-processes – intra-group processes – performance
CONTEXTUAL COMPLEXITY of Global Collaborative Working Environments
OUTCOMES Creativity - e.g. new ideas
Innovativeness - E.g. % of new product revenue, innovative climate Effectiveness - E.g. planned vs. actual results Well-being - E.g. stress vs. flow Engagement - E.g. fluency
A, B, C, D and E = Individual life spheres LOCATION
TEMPORARINESS
Work-processes – intra-group processes – performance Work-processes – intra-group processes – performance Work-processes – intra-group processes – performance Work-processes – intra-group processes – performance Work-processes – intra-group processes – performance Work-processes – intra-group processes – performance Work-processes – intra-group processes – performance Work-processes – intra-group processes – performance Work-processes – intra-group processes – performance Work-processes – intra-group processes – performance Work-processes – intra-group processes – performance Work-processes – intra-group processes – performance Work-processes – intra-group processes – performance Work-processes – intra-group processes – performance Work-processes – intra-group processes – performance Work-processes – intra-group processes – performance Work-processes – intra-group processes – performance Work-processes – intra-group processes – performance Work-processes – intra-group processes – performance Work-processes – intra-group processes – performance
Collaboration practices of Finnish global companies: Data and methods
•! The data was collected in eleven companies in e.g. telecommunications, electronics manufacturing, IT services, industrial manufacturing, and technical consulting
•! First, a context analysis was made in each company by collecting documents and by interviewing company management.
•! A total of 94 interviews were conducted between 2008 and 2011. The interviews lasted between 40-90 minutes and were conducted either face-to-face or via phone.
•! The interview sessions, ranging from 45 minutes to 2 hours, were recorded and transcribed and then analyzed with Atlas/ti
Findings 1: aggregated list of ICT tools used in the 12 cases, with counts in parentheses
TIM
E Communication systems
Information/ knowledge sharing systems
Coordination systems
Co-operation systems
Group maintenance systems
Asy
nchr
onou
s
E-mail (12), SMS (4), Message board (2)
SharePoint / Intranet (9), Separate Document repository (7), Wiki (4), Social media tool (4), Newsletters/mailing lists (3), Blogs (2) FTP (2), Network drive (2), SAP (2), CRM tool (1)
Shared calendars (6), Availability/status information (6), Shared task list (1), Project management tool (1), Ticketing system (1), Miscellaneous tools (3)
- No "Phonebook" with photos, titles and interests of team members (1)
Sync
horo
nous
Phone/VOIP (12), Instant messaging (11), Teleconferences (8), Web conferences (8), Dedicated videoconferencing rooms (8)
Document/screen/ application sharing for web conferences (7)
- No - No Permanently open Skype/webcam link between two sites (1)
From Jahkola, O. (2013) The role of ICT tools and contextual factors in global virtual teams- MA thesis, p. 30
Findings 2: Challenges of using ICT tools in the 12 cases
Communication systems
Information/ knowledge sharing systems
Coordination systems
Co-operation systems
Group maintenance systems
CH
ALL
ENG
ES
- E-mail: too many, emotions and reactions aren’t available, communication in a foreign language is difficult. - Calls, Skype, OCS, Sametime etc.: accessibility and poor UI. - IM tools: don’t automatically archive discussions. - Teleconferences: background noises. - Synchronous communication: stressful. - Dedicated videoconference: availability, technical expertise needed.
-! Sharepoint et al.: hard to find information, shortcomings in user-friendliness/ease of use, missing version control.
-! Wikis: can crash and/or be slow.
-! Shared calenders and status information: no complaints
- Not mentioned
- Group maintenance appeared to particularly be associated with informal communication, which mostly happened face-to-face, via telephone/VOIP, and via IM. - Face-to-face interaction was considered a necessary prerequisite, but not always possible.
From Jahkola, O. (2013) The role of ICT tools and contextual factors in global virtual teams- MA thesis, p. 35-46.
Facilitating and inhibiting factors in global teamwork: an example
•! All of the twelve cases were analyzed to identify facilitating and inhibiting factors in global teamwork.
•! Facilitating and inhibiting factors were categorized according to the space (mental, physical, virtual, social and organizational) they originated.
•! An example: High interdependence: a software development team in a Swedish telecom company called “Sweco” (name changed). Sweco outsourced some software testing to a consulting company “Itcon” (name changed) with employees in India. Swedish/Indian team was formed and started its work in January 2007. The team consists of seven team members: three people in India and four in Sweden.
From Jahkola, O. (2013) The role of ICT tools and contextual factors in global virtual teams- MA thesis, p. 89.
Physical spaces
Virtual spaces
Social spaces
Mental spaces Incompatible t o o l s e t s b e t w e e n stakeholders
Infrastructure
Organizational context
Various downsides to individual ICT tools
ICT toolset in general
Trust and team building through face-to-face and informal communication
C e r t a i n competences and traits
Trust
S o c i a l support
Team spirit
L a n g u a g e barriers
O f f i c e environment
N o n -collocation
Silent/conference rooms
Case company’s experience
Case company’s policies
Case company’s organizat ional culture
Certain current or potential tools or functionalities
C u l t u r a l factors
C u s t o m e r c o m p a n y ’ s organizat ional context
“Sweco” team
!! "#$%&%'#()*!+#$',- !! .)/%0%()*!+#$',- !! 1%234!+#$',-
Conclusions
•! Companies use a variety of ICT tools in their global collaboration, mostly very basic ones such as e-mail and teleconferences
•! Integrated toolsets in ge eral use are still ’on their way’ •! Facilitating factors are found in all spaces (mental,
physical, virtual and social) •! Inhibiting factors are mostly related to virtual spaces
such as Incompatible toolsets between stakeholders and social spaces such as cultural issues
•! Organizational policies concerning collaboration need to be developed and improved.
Case: Two countries & four dimensions of collaboration and communication
•! Social support •! Management •! Culture •! People •! Institutions
•! Mood during the project
•! Project climate
•! IT systems •! eCWEs •! Distributed
work
•! Offices •! Meeting
rooms •! Context •! Support
Physical
eCWEs• Distributed
work
Virtual
Social support • Management • Culture
Social
Mood during the project
Mental
••
Offices Meeting rooms Context Support
Meeting
Support
•
SharePoint Portal is here
Social Mental
The image cannot be displayed. Your computer may not have enough memory to open the image, or the image may have been corrupted. Restart your computer, and then open the file again. If the red x still appears, you may have to delete the image and then insert it again.
Portal is here
Usefulness: •! Usage testing •! Task suitability
Mirror organization
The image cannot be displayed. Your computer may not have enough memory to open the image, or the image may have been corrupted. Restart your computer, and then open the file again. If the red x still appears, you may have to delete the image and then insert it again.
Finland China
Research questions RQ 1: What are the collaboration challenges in the case? RQ 2: What was the task suitability of the portal? RQ 3: How having two different cultures affected the distributed collaboration? RQ 4: How to get project participants use the portal more and better?
Data collection •! Main data: Interviews (n = 19) of different roles in
Finland, Poland, Sweden, China
RQ 1: Communication tools
•! Company tools in use this project: Phone, email (Lotus Notes), Sametime, visiting face-to-face, portals (PDM, project portal)
•! From which employees choose based on: –! Task priority –! Time of the day (time zones) –! Organizational unit (i.e. designers use PDM system to share documents) –! What communication tools were used before the transfer project –! Language skills (written vs. speech) –! Contact network, how familiar the contact is –! Free-time vs. work topic
•! Challenges –! Time zones –! Shaky phone lines –! Understanding written vs. spoken English –! Language skills –! Role and personnel changes break contact networks
RQ 1: Differing organizational practices
Amount of overlap matters!
ABB Global Organization
ABB Sending unit
ABB Receiving unit
The virtual team needs to bridge differing organizational practices despite working under the shelf of one organization. For example differing prioritizations, support response times, norms, supplier lead times, and regulations create challenges for the virtual team leader and members.
RQ 2: Task suitability of the portal
•! Quality and implementation is good for sharing information! •! !but other tools and practices in place: Email perceived faster and
simpler. Also other local portals used for sharing and communication. •! Good for collecting information and reporting hours. These
purposes force people to visit regularly. But still the frequency of usage is low.
•! Portal and project model are mainly tools for the project manager and the upper management. They are not so relevant for other team members. ”The main purpose for this portal is for the project manager. [!] For a project member, I just do my own work.”
•! PMs edit files in the portal, and can find work hour reports in one place easily. The portal works here as expected.
•! However, finding and organizing information has some challenges: Structure of the portal is based on the gate project model, but this model not quite related to daily work in the receiving end !structure of portal is confusing for them.
RQ 3: Cultural differences framed the collaboration •! Way of working (related to cultural differences)
–! Some differences were detected in the way of working, but not many affecting daily work. Especially people who have worked in foreign companies adapt well to global team work.
•! Language –! No major problems, writing down makes easier to understand –! Shyness, politeness and losing face affect more in communication situations
•! Hierarchical boss-subordinate relationships –! Chinese work for their supervisor. A separate project organization might have problems to
motivate people to work for the project. –! Your vision is quite restricted, everything comes from your boss. The bigger picture is lost. –! General manager should commit everyone to the extra project beforehand.
•! Losing face –! Chinese are a little bit afraid to announce own mistakes. They fear losing their jobs. They
take mistakes personally and want to avoid losing face •! Detailed instructions
–! Chinese work a lot according to instructions, they will not question or challenge the instructions. In Finnish culture people apply more.
–! With limited experience it is harder to make decisions with the fear of losing face. New products would need a detailed documentation as it is hard just to remember everything.
RQ 4: Supporting participants use the portal more and better
•! We need to improve the perceived usefulness –! Each participant needs to understand the benefits the portal brings to he/his department.
(i.e. “Maybe for scheduling. Seeing schedules and status of others.”) –! Define the roles and purpose of each portal, many systems in use outside the project portal:
“For engineering we use PDM system. It is used for document transfer from Helsinki. This is also a tool for the communication.”
•! We need to improve the perceived ease of use –! “Should be more easier.” Now all documents are put to one basket, because people don’t
understand the gate model. And the gate model is the structure of the portal. -> Increase training of the project model.
–! Using the portal for sharing seems like extra trouble, when faster email available. –! Ensure good start and a good first impression -> Logins, access, and documents ready.
Smooth and speedy operation of the portal to be ensured.
•! We need to increase usage –! Attitudes and understanding of the meaning have increased along increased usage –! Project manager influence on usage is major. Portal used when asked, PM should ask
more often! –! Portal usage has been made a measurable goal of a project, but how to make it the
personal goal of project members?
RQ 4: Case through implementation theory lense
Improve this (meaning, sharing experiences from peers, project
model understanding)
Give time here (1-2 projects/user)
theory This seems ok for
knowledge sharing!
You will get here
Preface
• Konecranes utilizes a global idea management system, to capture the ideas of the personnel.
• Room for improvement? – Communication and mutual understanding – Distributed decision-making
• Are radical ideas being dismissed due to errors in communication?
• How collaboration tools and communication patterns can support the innovation process? – Usage of concurrent web-conferencing systems (MS Lync) – Potential benefits of emerging collaboration technology (virtual
worlds / Teleplace) – Brainstorming embracing collective creativity?
Research Setting: Different collaboration tools in ideation Case studies - 10 MS Lync sessions
- Teams were collaborating around an idea. - Task: Achieve common understanding about the idea => decision
to move the idea further or request more information - 6 BrainMerge sessions
- A brainstorm tool and user manual were handed out to teams of Konecranes’ summer workers developing an idea to product.
- Task: Select a question or idea, around which brainstorming might be potentially useful. Pilot the tool.
- 5 Teleplace sessions - Teams collaborating and ideating in virtual world - Task: Project meeting in virtual environment. Process some acute
tasks / problems.
Data collection
• Recording the session (+20 hrs) • Questionnaire (50 answers in total)
– Engagement – Physical and social space – Expectations – Global outcome judgements – System usability scale (SUS) – Relationships among the participants – Overall performance of the group
• Corroborating data – Contents of Idea Management system related to the selected ideas
• Explanation of the idea • Comments • Phase transitions of the idea
– Interviews and discussions with Konecranes’ Innovation experts
19.2.2013 Presentation Name / Author
4
Data analysis • Transcriptions • Video protocol analysis
– Coding – Boundary objects
• Linkography • Survey analysis
19.2.2013 Presentation Name / Author
5
Transcribed discussion
Diagrams of video protocol analysis
Linkographic representations
Artifacts, Facilitation and Transformative Interaction Experiences in Distributed Design Collaboration
• Context: Design Thinking in distributed settings – Design is viewed as an iterative process
• Starts from identifying the user’s need • Widening and narrowing of problem space • Testing + Empathy
– Increasingly global design teams
• Questions: – How distributed design teams differ in their use of artifacts as boundary objects when
communicating in traditional versus emerging collaborative working environments? – What are the role and tasks of a facilitator and team members in traditional versus emerging
collaboration environments?
• Comparing the manifestation of boundary objects and effective facilitation practices in both environments
– Boundary objects => Objects or artifacts, helping to overcome the knowledge barrier among individuals
– Facilitation = > Ways to improve team’s performance
Artifacts, Facilitation and Transformative Interaction Experiences in Distributed Design Collaboration Results
• Boundary objects – Some boundary objects common for both collaboration environments
• Presentation (images, technical drawings, video clips…) • Co-authoring (sketching, co-writing..)
– Boundary objects in virtual world • Parallel processing of multiple boundary objects • The environment itself can work as a boundary object
– Boundary objects in webconferencing system • Rich epistemic obejcts / metaphors
• Facilitation – Interventions classified as technical, process and content interventions – Present in both collaboration tools
⇒ But different frequencies of interventions
• User experience and results – Routinized usage of webconferencing system vs. new virtual world – Similar performance => why?
Conclusions
- Global collaboration in product development and innovation processes
- Tools contributing towards distributed ideation
- Collaboration environment supporting the interaction - Different boundary objects manifest within different tools - Different environments support different activities?
- Practices contributing towards distributed ideation - Facilitation overcoming the barriers of distributed teamwork
- Technical facilitation helped the team to overcome usage barriers of a new system
- Process facilitation helped the team to overcome barriers of distributed setting
Need For Collective Co-operation Building Knowledge Intensive And Location Dependent Problem Solving Services Petri Mannonen Strategic Usability Research Group Aalto University School of Science
Current Organization: Industrial Maintenance and Support
Operator
Operator
Maintenance man
Technical support centerCustomer
Customer
Customer
Operator Maintenance man
Specialist
Knowledge Intensive Distributed Services
•! Development Trends –! Intelligent and networked equipment in factories –! Aim for higher and higher level of automation –! From situation awareness to true control of processes
and equipment –! Maximizing efficiency of human resources
•! Challenge –! Building, spreading and maintaining the new
competence in the company
Future vision: Global Network of Experts Networkd of experts
Field worker
Field worker
Operator
Customer's Specialist
Customer Operator Customer
R & D
Field worker
Customer's Specialist
Support for collaboration tools and organizational
learning
Case: Emerging Service – Metso Loop Monitoring
•! Proactive maintenance and optimization of the factory –! Automatic ‘component-level’ data collection and analysis to
identify sub-optimal process areas and emerging problems –! High-level expertise to plan and execute changes in equipment
or software and conduct precise maintenance
•! Control Loop and Performance Monitoring aims –! Higher production –! Decrease in production and maintenance costs –! Increase in production quality –! Decrease in environmental emissions –! Improve in safety issues
Collaboration and co-operation partners
•! Customers with previous experience on the topic •! Customer – factory management •! Customer – engineer/specialist •! Customer – Factory operator •! Field experts (problem owner) •! Field experts with previous experience on the topic •! Global technical support centers •! Service R&D
Collaboration and co-operation needs
•! Focusing on the main task: problem solving –! Searching, sharing and structuring information –! Adjoined tasks: Learning, information sharing
•! Straightforward and light-weight contacting –! Identifying and motivating best available experts
•! Good control on information sharing and spreading –! Respecting non-disclosure agreements
•! Organizational learning –! Building reusable and findable information
Change requirements•! Organizational
–! Support and motivation for shared problem solving–! Automatizing meta-tasks (e.g. billing related measurements)–! Capability to create data mining and analysis tools
•! Personal–! New problem solving practices
–! analog -> digital –! private -> public
•! Technical/Tool-wise–! Social network tools–! Robust and flexible tools for information creation and sharing–! Robust and flexible collaboration tools–! New data mining and analysis tools
[email protected] Strategic Usability Research group Aalto University School of Science
Dr. Renate Fruchter
Founding Director
Project Based Learning Laboratory (PBL Lab) http://pbl.stanford.edu
© Stanford University
10 Key Characteristics for
Next Generation Collaboration Environments
Capitalize on Global Corporate Competences
HOW DO YOU COMMUNICATE?
HOW DO YOU WORK TOGETHER?
HOW DO YOU SHARE IDEAS / FEEDBACK?
HOW DO YOU MAKE YOUR CONDITIONS VISIBLE?
HOW DO YOU CONNECT MOBILE KNOWLEDGE WORKERS?
HOW DO YOU CREATE, CAPTURE, SHARE, AND RE-USE KNOWLEDGE?
10 Key Characteristics for Next Generation Collaboration EcoSystems
1. Foster co-creation, inter-action, and co-action
2. Transform the way participants express ideas and solutions
3. Enrich formal and informal interaction experiences
4. Increase awareness, attention, participation, & engagement
5. Sustain persistent presence of content & models in context
6. Leverage knowledge in context and collective competences
7. Facilitate transparency
8. Maximize flexibility, remixing, & repurposing
9. Create emergent work practices, processes, & social dynamics
10. Create and manage choice
M3RRemote Collaboration in Mixed Media Mixed Reality
Fusion of Physical, Virtual, and Mobile Worlds
3Di Collaboration Team Space
Virtual WorldiRoom
Physical World
[Fruchter, Ivanov, Bharath, 2012]Sponsors & Partners:
Smart Phones
Mobile World
iRoom
Physical World
3Di
Virtual World
Content-in-Context: Real Time Situation Status, Explore and Make Decisions
River2012: Digital and Virtual Presence in Collaborative Environment
With Rich Media Content and 3D BIM Building Model
Persistent Product Models & Content in Context
Madison Stanford Stanford Stanford DenmarkGermany
From Stacks of Content to
Spreads of Content in ContextApplication Sharing (e.g. GoToMeeting) Immersive Virtual World (e.g. 3DICC)
3D Team Neighborhood
Cognition
•Attention
•Memory
•Correlation
•Capacity
•Multitasking
# Shared
Documents
~3 docs
Cognition
•Attention
•Memory
•Correlation
•Capacity
•No
Multitasking
# Shared
Documents
Attention and Awareness DistributionWeb conferencing Application Sharing 3D Team Neighborhood
• Meetings held in the 3D Team Neighborhood kept participants’ attention 24% more time
on the task, more often and longer time - than in meetings held with Web conferencing - application sharing.
• Multitasking during meetings:
- 3D Team Neighborhood ���� NONE or MINIMAL- Web conferencing application sharing ���� TYPICAL BEHAVIOR
[Fruchter and Cavallin, 2011]
1
Increasing awareness and attention in collaboration
VTT work in ColProAalto – Stanford webinar, 5th February 2013
Seppo ValliVTT Technical Research Centre of Finland
205/02/2013
Contents
1. Some theory and lessons learnedAbout terminologyWhy supporting awareness is important?Bill Buxton’s spaces for collaborationAbout classification of collaboration systems
2. Increasing awareness and attention: VTT HydraMain question and starting pointCocktail Party EffectHydra by Buxton, Microsoft and VTTFindingsWhat next?
3. Short reflection
2
305/02/2013
Part 1: Some theory and lessons learned
405/02/2013
About terminology
Collaboration = working together jointly, in interaction
Attention = act of listening and looking sth/sbThe process whereby a person concentrates on some features of the environment to the (relative) exclusion of others
Awareness = [having knowledge on] agents + attentions + actions + artefacts 1)
Awareness includes having knowledge on the context, i.e. indirect information of the [collaboration] situationThe concept of deixis (in linguistic) is comparable to awareness (here in space!)
1) “A for Awareness” (A4A), as formulated by S.Valli 2012
3
505/02/2013
Why supporting awareness is important?
Awareness is particularly helpful for communication processesCollaboration requires intensive use of senses, i.e. human input and output interfaces
Senses (human “front end”) are a scarce resource and a bottleneck in collaboration
Awareness (incl. gaze awareness) reduces cognitive load in this [front end data] processing
Awareness leaves more capacity to higher cognitive processesCf. “Data-to-Wisdom continuum” (HoU)
605/02/2013
Data-to-Wisdom continuum,a.k.a. Hierarchy of Understanding (HoU)
Figure: Data-to-Wisdom continuum (Gene Bellinger 2004; http://www.systems-thinking.org/kmgmt/kmgmt.htm)
4
705/02/2013
Bill Buxton’s “spaces of collaboration”
Spaces (writer’s interpretation: “functionality categories”) needed in collaboration [Sellen1992]:
Personal space, i.e. support for communicationTask space, i.e. supporting tools for collaboration (sc. groupware for jointly refining data to information and knowledge)Reference space, i.e. support for referencing (awareness) between the two above
The above division is a good example of high level classification for collaboration systems
Buxton’s classification emphasises the importance of awareness, especially space (positions, directions, relations, etc.) as context
Classification is generally a challenging task due to multiple factors (dimensions) affecting collaboration
Cf. e.g. those by Andriessen2003 and Wolff2006
805/02/2013
Part 2: Increasing awareness and attention: VTT Hydra
5
905/02/2013
Main question and starting point
What makes face-to-face collaboration “the gold standard” in collaboration [Nardi2002]?
A good candidate for an answer is the gaze awareness in face-to-face meetingsA straightforward way to enable gaze awareness is the Hydra system reported by Buxton et.al. (e.g. 1997)
Hydra was implemented and demonstrated by VTTVTT focus was in personal space (communication)Multi-party 3D viewing was implemented for groupware (cf. task space)
1005/02/2013
The Cocktail Party Effect:Human ability to discuss with people in noisy environment
How to exploit this ability in networked communication?
6
1105/02/2013
Hydra and the Cocktail Party Effect
Cocktail party effect refers to the human ability to follow discrete discussions in a “cocktail party” situationMore generally, is not just a matter of auditory perception, but of audio-visual signal separationHydra type of telepresence system aims to replicate the “cocktail party” communication protocol over network, for both video and audio
This is achieved by supporting separate AV channels between each and every participantVisual cues (gaze, lip movements, gestures, etc.) are for big help even when the audio is monaural=> better quality and awareness
Little can be done if all the signal sources are bundled together already when being captured, as e.g. in conventional videoconferencing systems
1205/02/2013
Hydra replicates the “Cocktail Party Protocol” over network
Full Mesh GeometryVTT Hydra
audio/visualspace
I can see who is being looked at!I cannot understand who is being addressed & looked at!
Directional audio and video with knowledge of their origin = source separation
Figure modified from eSoundTM ; http://www.oki.com/en/esound/technology/positioning.html
7
1305/02/2013
A look is worth a thousand words!”
Eye-contact (gaze awareness) intensifies communication and builds trust (cf. Andrew F. Monk and Caroline Gale, 2002).
In conventional videoconferencing, gaze is not conveyed correctly due to parallax error (cf. image to the right)
Technical means to support true gaze awareness between multiple remote users is needed
Gaze awareness in relation to commonly viewed objects are needed
Figure: Displacement of the camera from the display causes parallax error => eye-contact is disturbed
1405/02/2013
Personal telepresence system “Hydra”(cf. Hydra by Buxton et.al. 1997)
Straightforward way to convey gaze (facial direction)Each remote participant is represented by a terminal with display, camera and microphoneTerminal are connected by a full mesh (n2-n connections, where n is the number of sites; cf. Metcalf’s law) Full Mesh Geometry
8
1505/02/2013
MS Personal Telepresence Station (Zhang, et.al. 2009)
MS Personal Telepresence Station (http://research.microsoft.com/en-us/news/features/personaltelepresencestation-030909.aspx)
1605/02/2013
Snapshots of three party collaboration with VTT Hydra (ColPro project demonstrations 2012)
The local partner (“you”) is an observer for the two other to discuss (left)
The local partner (“you”) is discussing with another party who is being looked at also by the third (right)
9
1705/02/2013
Static information linked to 3D model (e.g. maintenance instructions)
Instant messaging linked to the selected 3D model componentEnables storing conversation history thatis linked to the conversation context.
Video conferencing
Associated groupware SW in Hydra: 3D viewing in browser environment [Siltanen2012]
1805/02/2013
Scenario for Hydra: Mobility with tablets (iPads or alike)
10
1905/02/2013
Remarks on VTT Hydra performance
Awareness is improved the closer the surrogates are to the real physical setting (cf. next slide)The original Hydra system was implemented with very small terminals and displays => gaze awareness was not disturbed by the parallax difference between the camera and displayEarly experience from VTT’s Hydra system suggests that correcting the above mentioned parallax is necessary
• Various means to correct eye-contact exist• A straightforward and rather good way is to
interpolate the view using e.g. two cameras on opposite sides of the display
• Requires ability to capture several cameras and enough processing power
• Better accuracy with more complex methods, e.g. with 3D sensors
2005/02/2013
Three-way Distributed Collaboration (by Tang et.al. 2010)
Figure: Social surrogates (“Hydra” terminals) in a natural physical setting [Tang2010]
11
2105/02/2013
Future steps with Hydra
Audio needs further considerationVideo transmission implementation with WebRTC (is started)
Browser based implementation for more flexibility, portability, and ease of further development
Increasing the number of participants (>3)Improving and enhancing the groupware for 3D viewingUser studies(!)True gaze awareness(!)
Options, e.g.:Using tablets as display (and interaction) devicesIntegrating VTT’s multi-touch table for interactionInformation visualisation functionalities in 3D, Mixed Reality, etc.
2205/02/2013
Part 3: Short reflection
12
2305/02/2013
Summary: Awareness in collaboration space
Physical world is naturally organized in 3D, making good use of spatial relations (directions and distances, i.e. locations)In most videoconferencing, collaboration, and telepresence systems spatiality is not typically exploited
Awareness = [knowledge on] agents + attentions + actions + artefactsCollaboration space = sum of virtual and physical spaces > physical space
We need new solutions to support “Awareness in collaboration space”
Slightly more specifically, we need: Communication and groupware solutions supporting multi-party interaction and awareness
2405/02/2013
References
Andriessen, J.H.Erik (2003). Working with the groupware. Understanding and evaluating collaboration technology. London: Springer.Buxton, W., Sellen, A. & Sheasby, M. (1997). Interfaces for multiparty videoconferencing. In K. Finn, A. Sellen & S. Wilber (Eds.). Video Mediated Communication. Hillsdale, N.J.: Erlbaum, pp. 385-400.Hollan, J. and Stornetta, S. (1992). Beyond being there. In Proceedings of CHZ’92, ACM, N.Y., 1992, pp. 119-125.Andrew F. Monk and Caroline Gale (2002). A look is worth a thousand words: full gaze awareness in video-mediated Conversation. Discourse Processes, 1532-6950, Volume 33, Issue 3, 2002, pages 257 – 278.Bonnie A. Nardi, Steve Whittaker (2002), The Place of Face-to-Face Communication in Distributed Work, in “Distributed Work”, edited by Pamela Hinds and Sara Kiesler, MIT Press, 2002. Pekka Siltanen, Seppo Valli (2012), Web-based 3D Mediated Communication in Manufacturing Industry, CE2012, 12 p.A.Tang, M.Pahud, K.Inkpen, H.Benko, J.C.Tang, B.Buxton (2010), Three’s Company: Understanding Communication Channels in Three-way Distributed Collaboration, CSCW2010, pp. 271-280. Wolff, R., Roberts, D. J., Steed, A. & Otto, O. (2006), A Review of Tele-collaboration Technologies with Respect to Closely Coupled Collaboration, International Journal of Computer Applications in Technology (IJCAT), 29(1), pp.11-26.
13
2505/02/2013
Contact: [email protected]/multimedia
VTT - 70 years oftechnology for business and society
Immersive Terf™ Real Customer
Use CasesTerf™ Training/Meeting Center Layout by Jim Linehan
Terf™ Construction Project Layout by LeMoine
Topics
3D ICC & Terf™ Advances Corporate Changes Technology Roadmap
Enterprise Impact Harness Clinical Trials Training Game Global Coaching Global Transformation Team
Truthful Insights
25+ Years Innovation & Adv Tech
Highlights Co-creator ARPANet protocols for IP router security now standard in all Internet routers (IETF Chair)Lead Security Architect for largest Intranet ever built Security systems on Space Shuttle Early collaboration from chat to video Serial Entrepreneur – 5 companies 2004 Top 10 Woman to Watch in Technology in New England (MIT & Mass High Tech) First Entrepreneur in Residence at Simmons Post Grad, MBA program Founded & Ran Ctr For Adv. Collaboration for Fidelity Investments in Technology ThinkTank CEO & Founder at 3D ICC
Julie – Who?
Julie LeMoine CEO, 3D ICC
Ah, ha years!
They are / have…
Brings…
members, customers, users, …
Via…
Natural, “like real” locations
3D ICC Confidential, not for reuse with out written authorization from 3D ICC
Source: The Immersive Enterprise by LeMoine
Enterprise Harness of Immersive Terf™ (In-World Snapshot)
Source: The Immersive Enterprise by LeMoine
3D ICC confidential & proprietary ; no distributed with out written permission from 3D ICC
Immersive Terf Core Features in Action
©
3D ICC confidential & proprietary ; no distributed with out written permission from 3D ICC
Tools 3D sound Chat Whiteboarding Live Video Streaming Video Screen Share Stickynotes co-create : mouse and keyboard share Whiteboarding, PPT, Excel, Word… 2D and 3D Creation Contextually Accurate Locations
Impactful Harness
Examples: Clinical Trial Training Game Global Coaching Global Transformation
Source: Social Insides by LeMoine/Rudkoswki
3D ICC confidential & proprietary ; no distributed with out written permission from 3D ICC
Professionals = Gamer
Sweet Spot Games Selection
1. “Hard” problems • Better, Faster, Cheaper
2. Require no specialty training / skill 3. No overlap with associate’s main job 4. Limited level of effort to contribute 5. Elicit engagement e.g., “good citizenship”
toward firm or Customers/Clients
Source: Social Insides by LeMoine/Rudkoswki
3D ICC confidential & proprietary ; no distributed with out written permission from 3D ICC
Problems that require Us (not just computers)
Hard Stuff
Gaming
Source: Social Insides by LeMoine/Rudkoswki
3D ICC confidential & proprietary ; no distributed with out written permission from 3D ICC
3D ICC confidential & proprietary ; no distributed with out written permission from 3D ICC
Terf © Example Use Cases
- Goals - Concept
Design - Draft
Script
- Review & Socialize
- Update
Content & Experience
-Deployment
& Tracking Details
- Outreach
- MarCom & Launch Kit
- Prepare
Org Admin / Mgmt
- Pilot - Learnings
- Updates - Expanded
launch
Source: The Immersive Enterprise by LeMoine
3D ICC confidential & proprietary ; no distributed with out written permission from 3D ICC
Source: The Immersive Enterprise by LeMoine
…So far •80% Thumbs Up on Experience •4 technical issues •Almost 100% participation by their Reps
3D ICC confidential & proprietary ; no distributed with out written permission from 3D ICC
Impactful Harness
Examples: Clinical Trial Training Game Global Coaching Global Transformation
Source: Social Insides by LeMoine/Rudkoswki
3D ICC confidential & proprietary ; no distributed with out written permission from 3D ICC
3D ICC confidential & proprietary ; no distributed with out written permission from 3D ICC
Terf © Example Use Cases
Impactful Harness
Examples: Clinical Trial Training Game Global Coaching Global Transformation
Source: Social Insides by LeMoine/Rudkoswki
3D ICC confidential & proprietary ; no distributed with out written permission from 3D ICC
3D ICC confidential & proprietary ; no distributed with out written permission from 3D ICC
Terf © Example Use Cases
• Not all “gamers” or tools are equal Familiarity, terminology, likes/dislikes, dexterity, features, security…
• Gaming frivolity & right timing push-back
• Console vs. Computer vs. Hollywood Expectations, Quality, Expenses
• Everyone’s an expert
• Impact content doesn’t create itself Creating content takes SMEs 3D is not Web Design
• Its “shiny new”
Source: Social Insides by LeMoine/Rudkoswki
3D ICC confidential & proprietary ; no distributed with out written permission from 3D ICC
User Motivation & Time Commitment
•Recreation : Entertainment, play as much as possible •Enterprise: Work, not play, lowest level commitment possible for impact
Value Proposition
• Recreation: sell site/game itself, create following
• Enterprise: Reduce costs, make $, solve problems, improve service, increase knowledge, innovate/create/brainstorm…
Fun vs. Ease
•Recreation: Challenge is part of the fun • Enterprise: Must be easy to do, looking for that “least amount of effort for impact” factor
Enterprise Tool Recreation
Recreation
Tool
Source: The Immersive Enterprise by LeMoine
3D ICC confidential & proprietary ; no distributed with out written permission from 3D ICC
They are / have…
Brings…
learners, team members…
Via…
Natural, “like real” locations
3D ICC Confidential, not for reuse with out written authorization from 3D ICC
Source: The Immersive Enterprise by LeMoine
Purchased all of Teleplace's IP Owns OpenQwaq IP outright plus much more
Rebranded platform : Immersive Terf or Terf
platform
Moved platform to 100% commercial ◦ Purchas of Teleplace & commercial license for H.264 use
Hired CEO: Serial Entrepreneur & Collaboration
Expert ◦ Significant Growth in customer base ◦ Established standard pricing and reseller channel
Prelaunch of Corporate Website ◦ Improved support for prospects and customers
Purchased all of Teleplace's IP Owns OpenQwaq IP outright plus much more
3D ICC confidential & proprietary ; no distributed with out written permission from 3D ICC
1
2
3
4
5
3D ICC’s Terf™ Roadmap Summary
SAML 2.0 Croquet
OpenQwaq Teleplace
Qwaq
Terf© Platform Current
SSL Support IE Browser Client Group mgmt. Vision Impaired (JAWS) Performance Enh. New Python Apps
+
Terf© Platform 2013 Roadmap
IE, Safari, FireFox, Chrome Vision Impaired- NVDA
Auto-provisioning
SIP Endpoint Support Mobile: Slate/Smart Phone Server Cloud Provisioning
Video sound sync & encoding enh.
RDP support
Update help & You Tube Videos And more…
3D ICC confidential & proprietary ; no distributed with out written permission from 3D ICC
Distributed Agile Global Class Room Construction Project Mgmt. & Urban Planning Conferences / Corporate Awards
3D ICC confidential & proprietary ; no distributed with out written permission from 3D ICC
3D ICC confidential & proprietary ; no distributed with out written permission from 3D ICC
Terf © Example Use Cases
Agile Team Mantra
To be highly performant, co-location is a must
25
3D ICC confidential & proprietary ; no distributed with out written permission from 3D ICC
LOCATION TRANSPARENCY? NOPE…
We need a location where we can all be, regardless of where we all …be…
26
3D ICC confidential & proprietary ; no distributed with out written permission from 3D ICC
persistent
27
+ visceral, easy
+ large but affordable
+ address hybrid (groups & individual remotes)
Global Agile Team Rooms
+ ecosystem supportive
Code
3D ICC confidential & proprietary ; no distributed with out written permission from 3D ICC
3D ICC confidential & proprietary ; no distributed with out written permission from 3D ICC
Terf © Example Use Cases
3D ICC confidential & proprietary ; no distributed with out written permission from 3D ICC
Terf © Example Use Cases
3D ICC confidential & proprietary ; no distributed with out written permission from 3D ICC
Terf © Example Use Cases
3D ICC confidential & proprietary ; no distributed with out written permission from 3D ICC
Terf © Example Use Cases
Copyright © Tekes
Tekes' scenario and plans for the future ?
Kari Penttinen 5.2.2013
“NOT AN OFFICIAL TEKES SCENARIO – MORE MY THOUGTHS ABOUT IMPORTANT FACTORS AND ACTIONS
Copyright © Tekes
Contents:
1. Where we come from 2. Drivers and needs for collaboration 3. Currect Tekes -activities
Copyright © Tekes
Background in agriculture, forests and lakes Only two generations ago !
We understand now completely that the high living standard comes from export, global markets and networks
Copyright © Tekes
Textile industry, Paper making, Electronics manufacturing New industries like Gaming industry, software industry in general are developing new skills in younger generations
Copyright © Tekes
How the world is changing from our point of view?
This change is even much faster in manufacturing and it has changed the businesses already a lot
Copyright © Tekes
This starting point is important to know when we think about our competencies as well as our weaknesses as a nation! Technology is usually easy for us but some other skills need to be developed?
Copyright © Tekes
"Ageing cannot be seen as a problem" In his first such address since taking office last spring, Niinistö referred to Finland’s rapidly-growing imbalance between pensioners and people of working age. “The public debate often emphasises the impact of demographic changes on the economy,” he said. “Yet we must not forget that ageing is a natural part of life. It cannot be seen as a problem.”
There’s a lot of discussion about the demographic change The President pointed out that the ageing of people is not a problem – it’s natural and can not be seen as a reason econimical problems Can Finland change the culture and working life fast enough to utilize foreign labour force from other countries and in general to collaborate with different cultures efficiently ????
Copyright © Tekes
A lof of studies and attention to our ICT cluster has been paid during the last few year – this study is one of them and still available at www.megasignals.com
Copyright © Tekes
The way we do R&D and innovate has to change from traditional R&D to Include more new business and service innovations
Copyright © Tekes
Key-customer driven business
Part of international network
Independent global SME actors with their own product and service offering
Finnish Industry foresight – eBusiness
2002 2012 2022
Technology industry companies increased their foreign staff by seven per cent - domestic personnel figures grew only slightly.
Finnish SME companies are able ot penetrate international markets independently both in B2B and B2C
Finnish export sales growth depends mainly on the growth of large companies
BYOD=bring your own devices
Social media, Crowdsourcing, 3D printing
Cloud services for business applications IT Consumerization, focus on usability
SaaS services for business IT
Single Euro Payments Area (SEPA) RosettaNet, Databases, Data warehouses
SME’s have to focus on international business – have they realized the potential of eBusiness ?
Copyright © Tekes
Near future?
Source: http://www.informationweek.in/software/13-01-29/by_2016_50_percent_of_large_organizations_will_have_internal_facebook-like_social_networks_says_gartner.aspx?goback=%2Egde_3454994_member_210511913
However, Gartner, Inc. estimates that through 2015, 80 percent of social business efforts will not achieve the intended benefits due to inadequate leadership and an overemphasis on technology.
Like in all implementation of new technologies – the users are the biggest challenge This is what the management has to understand
Copyright © Tekes
UNDER THIS TITLE WE ACTIVATE COMPANIES TO DEVELOP THE WAY THE COLLABORATE WITH PARTNERS AND VENDORS MAYBE SPECIFIT PROGRAMM LEVEL ACTIVITIES ALSO COMING LATER
Copyright © Tekes
The ManufacturingNet pointed out this scary observation We are in the middle of ”race against the machines” !
Copyright © Tekes
Is this the way to go - ? A simple diagram from Tekes Liideri –program presentation
Copyright © Tekes
Other more technology focused program activities from Tekes: Learning Solutions – The objective of the programme is to develop internationally important learning solutions in cooperation with participants in the sector Skene – Games Refueled - By launching the Skene programme focusing on value networks in game development, Tekes aims to strengthen the Finnish game industry's position at the global top by creating an internationally significant game and entertainment cluster in Finland.
Copyright © Tekes
Thank you! There’s a real for good development project and high level research in order to get more understanding and knowledge in this area.
Kari Pen)nen Senior Adviser, M.Sc.(Eng.) Products, Produc:on Systems and Manufacturing Technologies Programme Manager, Digital Product Process -‐programme Tekes, Finnish Funding Agency for Technology and Innova:on P.O.Box 69 FI-‐00101 Helsinki, FINLAND tel. +358 1060 55916, mobile +358 50 5577916 kari.pen)[email protected]