S. Greenberg. Personalizable Groupware: Accomodating individual roles and Group Differences. In In Proceedings of the European Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work(ECSCW), pages 17-31, 1991.  Home/Search   Document Details and Download   Summary   Related Articles   Check

....of Computer Science, University of Minnesota Minneapolis, MN 55455 Abstract In collaboration systems, a group of users cooperate and coordinate using shared objects towards some common goal. Based on the responsibilities and privileges within a collaboration, many systems [SC85, DTT93, EGR91, Gre91] identify users roles to specify coordination and security policies. Roles facilitate the speci cation of these policies for collaboration systems without knowing the users who will participate in the collaboration. We have designed and developed a role based speci cation model to capture ....

S. Greenberg. Personalizable Groupware: Accomodating individual roles and Group Differences. In In Proceedings of the European Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work(ECSCW), pages 17-31, 1991.

....systems, i.e. any number of users should be able to concurrently edit any part of the shared document. Approaches such as turn taking protocols, locking or Moira Norrie norfieinf. ethz.ch serialization based protocols fail to meet at least one of these requirements. Turn taking protocols [3] allow only one active participant at a time, the one who has the floor ; this approach is equivalent to document locking, in this way lacking concurrency. Locking [4] guarantees that users access objects in the shared workspace one at a time. Concurrent editing is allowed only if users are ....

Greenberg, S. Personalizable groupware: Accomodating individual roles and group differences. In Proceedings of the European Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work, Amsterdam, Sept. 1991, pp. 17-32.

....groups. A client joins a group and receives the shared state of the group or leaves a group unobtrusively; the existing processes in the group are able to carry on with their operations in the presence of multiple, concurrent joins and leaves. The Corona server allows clients to specify roles [8] when joining a group. The group multicast service provides interfaces for broadcasting updates on shared state. Messages from members of a group are multicast as point to point messages in the order of arrival to all the members, thus ensuring total order. The synchronization service provides ....

....adaptive QoS driven resource management in heterogeneous distributed systems and propose a graceful degradation of the application QoS under certain circumstances. Mathur et al. 12] address the QoS problem in group collaboration systems by means of a protocol composition approach. Greenberg [8] uses roles as a distinction among categories of users, as well as among individual users within a group. Edwards [6] presents a specification language for Intermezzo, a collaborative framework which supports static and dynamic roles assigned to users. Roles and priorities are introduced in DCWPL ....

S. Greenberg. Personalizable Groupware: Accomodating individual roles and Group Differences. In Proceedings of the European Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work(ECSCW), Amsterdam, September 1991.

.... : 138 BIBLIOGRAPHY : 140 xi List of Tables TABLE PAGE 1 Time and Place Dimensions : 5 2 Floor Control Policies Relative To SHARE [Greenberg, 1991b] 26 3 Turn System Signals : 37 4 Alternate Names for Signals : 76 5 Stimulus Response Classification of Signals : 106 6 Some Contributions, Relative to Previous Work ....

....any of the elements of socially applied floor control 2. Mapping) Is it possible to map them into the shared environments of synchronous groupware 3. Utility) Are these elements still effective once mapped 1 The exceptions include Greenberg s descriptions of SHARE [Greenberg, 1990, Greenberg, 1991b] 2 4. Usability) Do participants understand the elements once mapped, and are they able to use them correctly, i.e. as the original elements are used in social settings, and is groupware more effective with or without these elements 5. Adoption) Will participants adopt these elements if ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

Greenberg, S. (1991b). Personalizable groupware: Accomodating individual roles and group differences. In [Bannon et al., 1991], pages 17--31.

....groups. A client joins a group and receives the shared state of the group or leaves a group unobtrusively; the existing processes in the group are able to carry on with their operations in the presence of multiple, concurrent joins and leaves. The Corona server allows clients to specify roles [7] when joining a group. The group multicast service provides interfaces for broadcasting updates on shared state. Messages from members of a group are multicast as point to point messages in the order of arrival to all the members, thus ensuring total order. The synchronization service provides ....

....adaptive QoS driven resource management in heterogeneous distributed systems and propose a graceful degradation of the application QoS under certain circumstances. Mathur et al. 11] address the QoS problem in group collaboration systems by means of a protocol composition approach. Greenberg [7] uses roles as a distinction among categories of users, as well as among individual users within a group. Edwards [5] presents a specification language for Intermezzo, a collaborative framework which supports static and dynamic roles assigned to users. Roles and priorities are introduced in DCWPL ....

S. Greenberg. Personalizable Groupware: Accomodating individual roles and Group Differences. In Proceedings of the European Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work(ECSCW), Amsterdam, September 1991.

....the group should be acceptable and usable by nearly all its members, for groupware acts as a common medium through which people communicate, coordinate, and pursue their common goals. If the groupware cannot accommodate its potential users, then conditions can occur that contribute to its failure [7]. A critical mass of system adopters may not be reached if too many people opt out of using the groupware product, e.g. see Markus and Connolly s [15] discussion of payoff criteria for adopting technology. Participants who cannot or will not use the technology face the danger of becoming ....

.... Groupware Personalizable groupware is defined as groupware that users can tailor to match their individual needs (each member of the group may observe a different behavior) and that groups as a whole can change to match their overall needs (each group may observe a different collective behavior) [7]. We see personalizable groupware offering its users a range of behaviors that reflect a corresponding range of the groups requirements. The catch with personalizable groupware is that it is difficult, if not impossible, for a designer to predict ahead of time the complete range of behaviors the ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

Greenberg, S. (1991) "Personalizable groupware: Accomodating individual roles and group differences." In Proceedings of the European Conference of Computer Supported Cooperative Work (ECSCW `91), pp. 17-32, Amsterdam, September 24-27, Kluwer Academic Press.

....the group on task, enforcing roles and commitments, and making the group more efficient and productive. There is certainly controversy between those who believe that social protocol should be determined only by the group members (eg [7] by the software (eg [24] and somewhere in between (eg [16,14]) We believe that some group process primitives should be provided by the toolkit, accommodating groupware that wishes to control meeting structure. The list below discusses only a few group process requirements. c) Provide various floor control policies. Floor control or turn taking mechanisms ....

....accommodating groupware that wishes to control meeting structure. The list below discusses only a few group process requirements. c) Provide various floor control policies. Floor control or turn taking mechanisms provide a way to mediate access to shared work items. Lauwers [19] and Greenberg [14] recommend that systems should support a broad range of [floor control] policies to suit the users needs. Systems such as SHAREDX [10] and ASPECTS (from Group Technologies) support a few different policies, while SHARE [14] strives to provide complete flexibility. Floor control can be important ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

Greenberg, S. Personalizable groupware: Accomodating individual roles and group differences. In Proceedings of the 2nd European Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work (EC-CSCW '91), Sept. 1991.

Online articles have much greater impact   More about CiteSeer.IST   Add search form to your site   Submit documents   Feedback  

CiteSeer.IST - Copyright Penn State and NEC