Center for Coordination Science 
        @ MIT
      1998 TECHNICAL 
        REPORTS AND WORKING PAPERS
       
      
       
      NOTE: If an electronic version of a paper 
        is not available here, or you are unable to successfully download the 
        paper that you want in the formats available, please contact MIT 
        Document Services at (617) 253-5668, DOCS@MIT.EDU. 
        Please, do not contact the authors for copies of papers.  
       
      ABSTRACTS
      1998 Working Papers
      No. 203
      
      Mark Klein 
      April 1998 
      This paper describes a novel knowledge-based 
        approach for helping workflow process designers and participants better 
        manage the exceptions (deviations from an ideal collaborative work process 
        caused by errors, failures, resource or requirements changes etc.) that 
        can occur during the enactment of a workflow. This approach is based on 
        exploiting a generic and reusable body of knowledge concerning what kinds 
        of exceptions can occur in collaborative work processes, how these exceptions 
        can be detected, and how they can be resolved. This work builds upon previous 
        efforts from the MIT Process Handbook project and from research on conflict 
        management in collaborative design. 
       
      No. 204
      
      Kevin Crowston and Charles Osborn 
      July 1998 
      Managers must understand, influence, and 
        redesign organizational processes to improve business performance. In 
        this paper we present a technique for documenting a business process. 
        The technique has six steps: defining process boundaries, collecting data, 
        determining actors and resources, determining activities, determining 
        dependencies and model verification. While similar to other process-mapping 
        techniques, our approach is novel in incorporating ideas from coordination 
        theory, thus the attention to dependencies. As a result, the technique 
        is useful both for documenting a process and suggesting ways in which 
        the process could be redesigned. We present an extended illustration with 
        the hope that the technique can be used by readers of this article.  
       
      No. 205 
      
      Wanda Orlikowski and JoAnne Yates 
      July 1998 
      In this paper, we demonstrate that teams 
        may use genre systems -- sequences of interrelated communicative actions 
        -- strategically or habitually to structure their collaboration. Using 
        data from three teams' use of a collaborative electronic technology, Team 
        Room, over an eight month period, we illustrate that genre systems are 
        a means of structuring six aspects of communicative interaction: purpose 
        (why), content (what), form (how), participants (who/m), time (when), 
        and place (where). We suggest that CSCW researchers, designers, implementors, 
        and users may benefit from an explicit recognition of the role genre systems 
        can play in collaboration.  
       
      No. 206 
      
      Manabu Ueda 
      July 1998 
      In this paper I proposed the creation of 
        a dialogue document for making available the knowledge contained within 
        a creative conversation process. I discussed three main issues: the role 
        of ordinary documents, the need to better represent conversation processes 
        rationally, and the costs of editing conversation. I looked at the reasons 
        why we rarely see the knowledge from the conversation process recorded 
        in documents, even though this knowledge is in same cases as important 
        as the result of the conversation. The dialogue documents I propose are 
        documents of edited actual transcript for readers. My argument is that 
        such documents in dialogue form, are the most effective way to provide 
        access to the knowledge included in the conversation process, because 
        the dialogue documents allow readers to become virtual audiences in the 
        conversation. This means that dialogue documents convey not only explicit 
        knowledge but also allow access to some tacit knowledge by relying on 
        the reader's active formulation of the experience. Perhaps, this is the 
        essential value of dialogue. To crystallize my notion of the dialogue 
        document, I discussed its features in contrast with those of a transcript 
        of conversation as well as an ordinary document. I analyzed the dialogue 
        document from the perspective of 'production costs and benefits' and 'message 
        quality and editing time'. Finally, I considered the possibility of IT 
        support for the dialogue document production process and I discussed the 
        implications of both the technological and social aspects of dialogue 
        documents production and use. 
       
     |