PEOPLE'S DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF ALGERIA Ministry of Higher Education and Scientific Research Universety Of Mentouri Constantine Faculty Of Social

And Human Sciences Department Of Library Science Preliminary Master Information System & Knowledge Management

Presented by: Youcef Lemehannet Mounir Elhamza Mod.: Knowledge Management Prof.: HALIMA SAMRA

Academic year 2006 - 2007
1

SUMMARY Introduction __________________________________________3
4......................................................................................‫ ماهي البرمجيات الجماعية‬What is groupware .1 4..................................................‫دعم الحاسوب للعمل التعاوني‬Computer supported cooperative work 1.1 4............................................................ "‫? ما معنى"البرمجيات الجماعية‬What does Groupware mean.1.2 5.................................................................................................. ‫الصل والتطور‬Origin and growth.1.3 6........................................................................................................ ‫? لماذا هذه الضجة‬Why Bother.1.4

1.5.Typical Groupware Applications ‫أنواع تطبيقات البرمجيات الجماعية‬ _____________________________________________________7 1.5.1. The Two Interaction Levels ‫7______________ مستويا التفاعل‬
7.................................. -‫ البرمجيات الجماعية اللتزامنية –أوقات مختلفة‬Asynchronous Groupware .1.5.1.1 10...................................... ‫البرمجيات الجماعية المتزامنة‬Synchronous or Realtime Groupware .1.5.1.2 11......................................................... ‫ مستويات التعاون الثلثة‬The Three levels of collaboration .1.5.2 12............................................................... ‫أدوات التصال اللكتروني‬Electronic communication tools 12.................................................................... ‫أدوات الئتمار اللكتروني‬Electronic conferencing tools 12................................................................... ‫أدوات الدارة التعاونية‬Collaborative management tools 12............................................... ‫ عملية تصميم البرمجيات الجماعية‬The Groupware Design Process.1.6 14.............................................................................. -‫المشاكل المشتركة – العامة‬Common Problems .1.7 15..........................................................Socially vs. Technologically-Determined Structure.1.7.1 15............................................................................. ‫العلقات الجتماعية مقابل التركيبة التكنولوجية المحدودة‬ 16.............................................................................................................. ‫الخصوصية‬Privacy .1.7.2 16................................................................................................................ ‫الوعي‬Awareness .1.7.3

2.Towards Library Groupware ‫81___نحو البرمجيات الجماعية بالمكتبات‬
18..................................................................................... Why Do Libraries Need Groupware? .2.1 18............................................................................................... ‫لماذا تحتاج المكتبات إلى البرمجيات الجماعية‬ 19..........................Functional applications of groupware for library and information services. .2.2 20..................................................................................... ‫البريد اللكتروني‬Electronic Messaging .2.2.1 20......................................................... ‫ بيئات الجتماع الفتراضية‬Virtual Meeting Environments .2.2.2 20........................................................ ‫إدارة الوثائق اللكترونية‬Electronic Document Management.2.2.3 21...................................... ‫تدفق العمال وأدوات مجموعات العمل‬Workflow and Workgroup Utilities.2.2.4 21............................................................................... ‫ التشابك التعاوني‬Collaborative Networking.2.2.5 22......................................................................................................................................Conclusion

2

Introduction
Groupware encompasses a wide variety of software applications that have in common the ability to facilitate and enhance electronic collaboration between two or more users in a shared environment. The activities supported must allow for dynamic interaction and data exchange, while providing quality control mechanisms for outside mediators or administrators. The joint completion of shared tasks among two or more workers is at the heart of groupware, and to qualify as such, the workgroup software being implemented must contribute to that goal in a real-time environment. This is the fundamental design feature that distinguishes groupware from other software applications, which are designed solely for individual workers completing distinct tasks. As an application genre, groupware universally refers to such products as electronic mail, interactive chat, on-line whiteboards and blackboards, desktop videoconferencing, and hypertext markup editing in shared document environments. Unlike the individual products designed expressly for these tasks, however, groupware possesses two features that the stand-alone software applications do not. First, groupware facilitates dynamic exchange and manipulation of data by multiple individuals across plaforms. Second, it is configured specifically to permit external monitoring to meet organizational goals.Groupware is sometimes referred to as ‘‘computermediated collaboration.’’ The amount of collaboration, which can occur on-line, is dictated at the system level by programming parameters, and at the user level by restrictions set by application environment mediators. Thus, dynamic interaction can be ensured in the virtual environment, but still be actively monitored by others outside of the environment who may be responsible for the activity. This capability has enhanced groupware’s popularity in the publishing, communications, and information management arenas where demands for dynamic information sharing must be met while maintaining system security.

3

1. What is groupware ‫ماهي البرمجيات الجماعية‬ 1.1 Computer supported cooperative work‫1دعم الحاسوب للعمل التعاوني‬
The term computer supported cooperative work (CSCW) was first coined by Irene Greif and Paul M. Cashman in 1984, at a workshop attended by individuals interested in using technology to support people in their work (Grudin 1994). At about this same time, in 1987 Dr. Charles Findley presented the concept of Collaborative learning-work. According to Carstensen and Schmidt (2002), CSCW addresses "how collaborative activities and their coordination can be supported by means of computer systems." On the one hand, many authors consider that CSCW and groupware are synonyms. On the other hand, different authors claim that while groupware refers to real computer-based systems, CSCW focuses on the study of tools and techniques of groupware as well as their psychological, social, and organizational effects. The definition of Wilson (1991) expresses the difference between these two concepts: CSCW [is] a generic term, which combines the understanding of the way people work in groups with the enabling technologies of computer networking, and associated hardware, software, services and techniques CSCW [is] Refers to the field of study which examines the design, adoption, and use of groupware. Despite the name, this field of study is not restricted to issues of "cooperation" or "work" but also examines competition, socialization, and play. The field typically attracts those interested in software design and social and organizational behavior, including business people, computer scientists, organizational psychologists, communications researchers, and anthropologists, among other specialties.

1.2.What does Groupware mean? ‫"2ما معنى"البرمجيات الجماعية‬
Groupware is technology designed to facilitate the work of groups. This technology may be used to communicate, cooperate, coordinate, solve problems, compete, or negotiate. While traditional technologies like the telephone qualify as groupware, the term is ordinarily used to refer to a specific class of technologies relying on modern computer networks, such as email, newsgroups, videophones, or chat. Groupware technologies are typically categorized along two primary dimensions: 1. whether users of the groupware are working together at the same time ("realtime" or "synchronous" groupware) or different times ("asynchronous" groupware), and 2. whether users are working together in the same place ("colocated" or "face-to-face") or in different places ("non-colocated" or "distance").

1

Wikipedia. computer supported cooperative work. .[online].[10.04.2007]. Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. 2007 Available at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_supported_cooperative_work 2 Brinck.Tom. Groupware: Applications.[online].[10.04.2007] Usabilityfirst.2005. Available at: http://www.usabilityfirst.com/groupware/applications.txl

4

Same time "synchronous" Same Place "colocated" Different Place "distance" voting, presentation support videophones, chat

Different time "asynchronous" shared computers email, workflow

Several typical groupware applications are described in more detail on Groupware Applications.

1.3.Origin and growth‫1الصل والتطور‬
Collaboration technology has become the state-of-the art model for user-oriented work-group software. Groupware’s genesis is the batch-processed software applications of the late 1970s and early 1980s that allowed people to communicate with each other via time-sharing operations (TSOs). These included the early iterations of electronic mail, LISTSERVTMs, and relational database management systems (RDBMS). Due to the increased reliance upon graphical user interfaces (GUIs) in recent years, groupware has become the de facto platform standard for personto-person software communication. Early development of groupware applications can be traced to the birth of ARPANET, the military precursor to today’s Internet. Distributed systems, parallel processing, interactive software modeling, and even cognitive psychology as utilized in the development of Internet-working systems and services, have all contributed to the growth and development of groupware and collaborative engineering. Computer systems engineer Douglas Engel Bart, prominent in U.S. Department of Defense research and development work during World War II, has been credited with having coined the term ‘‘groupware.’’ Groupware has become an umbrella term describing a number of software applications supporting person-to- person collaboration. The first product to advance groupware functions was Lotus Notes, developed and launched during the 1980s and the early 1990s. Notes was developed initially at a proprietary level to facilitate automated on-line collaboration among Lotus scientists and engineers. It evolved into a corporate-wide office automation tool, and eventually was launched commercially as a stand-alone product. In its infancy, groupware was designed almost exclusively as an office automation platform, assisting with such tasks as group scheduling, calendaring, and project management. These automated functions, while workgroup-based and operating in a limited real-time environment, were still not dynamic or interactive. With the development of the electronic bulletin board, the potential for real-time editing and dissemination of information was realized, and application of groupware functions across the board began to grow. Electronic collaboration on projects and tasks was soon facilitated by automated project management systems and on-line document editing software, which allowed for simultaneous information sharing within and among workgroups. Such efforts have led groupware to be categorized varyingly as ‘‘Electronic Brainstorming Software’’ (EBS) and ‘‘Decision Support Systems’’ (DSS) software. The deployment of electronic bulletin board systems (BBS) for businesses in the late 1980s is considered to have been a turning point in the development of groupre. Though not interactive, these electronic message posting centers were far more dynamic than the printed office memoranda that were their direct predecessors. Early electronic bulletin boards provided mechanisms by which announcements and communications could be posted in one central location, accessed
1

Jankm David. Groupware. [Online].[10.04.2007] Encyclopedia of Library and Information Science. New York,2003. Available at: www.dowling.edu/library/papers/david/Groupware_Encyclopedia_Chapter.pdf

5

electronically, and viewed by individuals throughout a variety of different geographic locations. Unlike the print world, however, viewers could leave their responses to the announcements, provide input, or otherwise contribute their observations on the spot as they viewed this information. These contributions could then be addressed or responded to automatically and instantly, thus providing for more timely communication among workgroups. Since on-line bulletin boards also prevent individual contributors from altering or in some way editing the contributions of previous posters, a relative degree of privacy and security could still be assured. Technical enhancements in other areas of technology, such as videoconferencing, on-line whiteboarding, and satellite communications, have also influenced the development of groupware. Electronic publishing, which allowed for on-line editing of print documentation in a shared operating environment, has provided another opportunity for groupware development. Electronic mail systems and on-line chat rooms offer the latest example of groupware’s versatility as a platform for shared information exchange. Finally, the more advanced groupware products of today offer the most effective networking environment for information dissemination and knowledge management. They represent the essence of library and information services in a knowledge-oriented environment.

1.4.Why Bother? ‫لماذا هذه الضجة‬
Groupware design involves understanding groups and how people behave in groups. It also involves having a good understanding of networking technology and how aspects of that technology (for instance, delays in synchronizing views) affect a user's experience. All the issues related to traditional user interface design remain relevant, since the technology still involves people. However, many aspects of groups require special consideration. For instance, not only do millionperson groups behave differently from 5-person groups, but the performance parameters of the technologies to support different groups vary. Ease-of-use must be better for groupware than for single-user systems because the pace of use of an application is often driven by the pace of a conversation. System responsiveness and reliability become more significant issues. Designers must have an understanding of the degree of homogeneity of users, of the possible roles people play in cooperative work and of who key decision-makers are and what influences them. Why is groupware design worth paying attention to in the first place? Groupware offers significant advantages over single-user systems. These are some of the most common reasons people want to use groupware:
o o o o o o o o o

to facilitate communication: make it faster, clearer, more persuasive to enable communication where it wouldn't otherwise be possible to enable telecommuting to cut down on travel costs to bring together multiple perspectives and expertise to form groups with common interests where it wouldn't be possible to gather a sufficient number of people face-to-face to save time and cost in coordinating group work to facilitate group problem-solving to enable new modes of communication, such as anonymous interchanges or structured interactions

In addition to the benefits of groupware, another good reason to study usability and design issues in groupware is to avoid a failed design. Groupware is significantly more difficult to get right than

6

traditional software. Typically, a groupware system can't succeed unless most or all of the target group is willing to adopt the system. In contrast, a single-user system can be successful even if only a fraction of the target market adopts it.

1.5.Typical Groupware Applications‫1أنواع تطبيقات البرمجيات الجماعية‬ 1.5.1. The Two Interaction Levels ‫مستويا التفاعل‬
This page describes several types of groupware applications and their associated design options. Comparing those design options across applications yields interesting new perspectives on wellknown applications. Also, in many cases, these systems can be used together, and in fact, are intended to be used in conjunction. For example, group calendars are used to schedule videoconferencing meetings, multi-player games use live video and chat to communicate, and newsgroup discussions spawn more highly-involved interactions in any of the other systems. Consider how these systems can be integrated in other ways. We are still quite far from developing the grand groupware system that encompasses every type of communication, and we will probably never get there since the possibilities are constantly evolving with changes in both our patterns of social interaction and the technology we have available.

1.5.1.1. Asynchronous Groupware ‫البرمجيات الجماعية اللتزامنية –أوقات مختلفة‬Email is by far the most common groupware application (besides of course, the traditional telephone). While the basic technology is designed to pass simple messages between 2 people, even relatively basic email systems today typically include interesting features for forwarding messages, filing messages, creating mailing groups, and attaching files with a message. Other features that have been explored include: automatic sorting and processing of messages, automatic routing, and structured communication (messages requiring certain information).

Newsgroups and mailing lists are similar in spirit to email systems except that they are intended for messages among large groups of people instead of 1-to-1 communication. In practice the main
1

Brinck.Tom. Groupware: Introduction.[online].[10.04.2007] Usabilityfirst.2005. Available at: http://www.usabilityfirst.com/groupware/intro.txl

7

difference between newsgroups and mailing lists is that newsgroups only show messages to a user when they are explicitly requested (an "on-demand" service), while mailing lists deliver messages as they become available (an "interrupt-driven" interface). Workflow systems allow documents to be routed through organizations through a relatively-fixed process. A simple example of a workflow application is an expense report in an organization: an employee enters an expense report and submits it, a copy is archived then routed to the employee's manager for approval, the manager receives the document, electronically approves it and sends it on and the expense is registered to the group's account and forwarded to the accounting department for payment. Workflow systems may provide features such as routing, development of forms, and support for differing roles and privileges.

Hypertext is a system for linking text documents to each other, with the Web being an obvious example. Whenever multiple people author and link documents, the system becomes group work, constantly evolving and responding to others' work. Some hypertext systems include capabilities for seeing who else has visited a certain page or link, or at least seeing how often a link has been followed, thus giving users a basic awareness of what other people are doing in the system -- page counters on the Web are a crude approximation of this function. Another common multi-user feature in hypertext (that is not found on the Web) is allowing any user to create links from any page, so that others can be informed when there are relevant links that the original author was unaware of.

8

Group calendars allow scheduling, project management, and coordination among many people, and may provide support for scheduling equipment as well. Typical features detect when schedules conflict or find meeting times that will work for everyone. Group calendars also help to locate people. Typical concerns are privacy (users may feel that certain activities are not public matters), completeness and accuracy (users may feel that the time it takes to enter schedule information is not justified by the benefits of the calendar).

9

Collaborative writing systems may provide both realtime support and non-realtime support. Word processors may provide asynchronous support by showing authorship and by allowing users to track changes and make annotations to documents. Authors collaborating on a document may also be given tools to help plan and coordinate the authoring process, such as methods for locking parts of the document or linking separately-authored documents. Synchronous support allows authors to see each other's changes as they make them, and usually needs to provide an additional communication channel to the authors as they work (via videophones or chat).

1.5.1.2. Synchronous or Realtime Groupware ‫البرمجيات الجماعية المتزامنة‬
Shared whiteboards allow two or more people to view and draw on a shared drawing surface even from different locations. This can be used, for instance, during a phone call, where each person can jot down notes (e.g. a name, phone number, or map) or to work collaboratively on a visual problem. Most shared whiteboards are designed for informal conversation, but they may also serve structured communications or more sophisticated drawing tasks, such as collaborative graphic design, publishing, or engineering applications. Shared whiteboards can indicate where each person is drawing or pointing by showing telepointers, which are color-coded or labeled to identify each person. Video communications systems allow two-way or multi-way calling with live video, essentially a telephone system with an additional visual component. Cost and compatibility issues limited early use of video systems to scheduled videoconference meeting rooms. Video is advantageous when visual information is being discussed, but may not provide substantial benefit in most cases where conventional audio telephones are adequate. In addition to supporting conversations, video may also be used in less direct collaborative situations, such as by providing a view of activities at a remote location. The Usability First site maintains a bibliography of papers on the user interface design of video communications systems.

Chat systems permit many people to write messages in realtime in a public space. As each person submits a message, it appears at the bottom of a scrolling screen. Chat groups are usually formed by having listing chat rooms by name, location, number of people, topic of discussion, etc. Many systems allow for rooms with controlled access or with moderators to lead the discussions, but most of the topics of interest to researchers involve issues related to unmoderated realtime communication including: anonymity, following the stream of conversation, scalability with number of users, and abusive users. While chat-like systems are possible using non-text media, the text version of chat has the rather interesting aspect of having a direct transcript of the conversation, which not only has long-term

10

value, but allows for backward reference during conversation making it easier for people to drop into a conversation and still pick up on the ongoing discussion. Decision support systems are designed to facilitate groups in decision-making. They provide tools for brainstorming, critiquing ideas, putting weights and probabilities on events and alternatives, and voting. Such systems enable presumably more rational and even-handed decisions. Primarily designed to facilitate meetings, they encourage equal participation by, for instance, providing anonymity or enforcing turn-taking.

1.5.2. The Three levels of collaboration1 ‫مستويات التعاون الثلثة‬
Groupware can be divided into three categories depending on the level of collaboration— communication tools, conferencing tools and collaborative management (Co-ordination) tools. A lot of confusion in the field of CSCW raises from the different interpretations of the terms collaboration and cooperation. Once again, many authors simply consider both terms as synonyms, while others (cf. Dillenbourg, Baker et al. 1995) draw a distinction between them: Cooperation and collaboration do not differ in terms of whether or not the task is distributed, but by virtue of the way in which it is divided; in cooperation the task is split (hierarchically) into independent subtasks; in collaboration cognitive processes may be (heterarchically) divided into intertwined layers. In cooperation, coordination is only required when assembling partial results, while collaboration is « ...a coordinated, synchronous activity that is the result of a continued attempt to construct and maintain a shared conception of a problem ». The concept of cooperation is often used in relation to the concepts of coordination and communication. First, the splitting of a cooperative task into independent subtasks naturally leads to a need for coordination. In this context, coordination can be defined as "the management of dependencies between activities and the support of (inter) dependencies among actors" (Bordeau and Wasson 1997). Then, communication can be defined as a process by which information is exchanged between individuals through a common system of symbols, signs, or behaviors. According to Brehmer (1991), "communication is the cement of the organization, and the greater the need for coordination and cooperation, the greater the necessity for communication." Communication can be thought of as unstructured interchange of information. A phone call or an IM Chat discussion are examples of this. Conferenceing (or collaboration level, as it is called in the academic papers that discuss these levels) refers to interactive work toward a shared goal. Brainstorming or voting are examples of this. Co-ordination refers to complex interdependent work toward a shared goal. The best metaphor for understanding this is to think about a symphony orchestra; everyone has to do exactly the right thing at the right time - but everyone is doing something different - in order for the whole work effort to gel. That is co-ordinated work.

1

Wikipedia. Collaborative software.[online].[10.04.2007]. Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. 2007 Available at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Groupware

11

 Electronic communication tools ‫أدوات التصال اللكتروني‬
Electronic communication tools send messages, files, data, or documents between people and hence facilitate the sharing of information. Examples include: synchronous conferencing, e-mail, Instant Messaging, faxing, voice mail, Web publishing …

 Electronic conferencing tools ‫أدوات الئتمار اللكتروني‬
Electronic conferencing tools facilitate the sharing of information, but in a more interactive way. Examples include:Internet forums, Online chat, Telephony — telephones ,Video conferencing, Data conferencing ; whiteboard …

 Collaborative management tools ‫أدوات الدارة التعاونية‬
Collaborative management tools facilitate and manage group activities. Examples include:electronic calendars (time management), project management, workflow systems, knowledge management, extranet

1.5.3.Traditional taxonomy of groupware applications1 ‫التصنيف التقليدي لتطبيقات البرمجيات الجماعية‬
 Electronic Messaging
E-mail and Listserv Discussion Groups, Group Scheduling, Online Calendaring

 Virtual Meeting Environments
Electronic Bulletin Board Systems, Intranets, Wide Area Networks

 Electronic Document Management
Desktop Publishing, Whiteboarding, Online Documentation Systems

 Workflow and Workgroup Utilities
Documentation Processing, Project Management, Electronic File Transfer

 Collaborative Networking
Relational Database Systems, Real-Time Distributed Data Processing

1.6.The Groupware Design Process ‫عملية تصميم البرمجيات الجماعية‬
As with all user interface design, the method used for designing a groupware system is more significant than specific design suggestions. This introduction thus begins with the groupware design process. The remaining sections address some of the most common issues that face groupware designers It's best to start by gaining a solid understanding of your prospective users, what their goals are, and how they go about their work. For broadly-targeted groupware applications, such as videophones or email, understanding users can boil down to understanding how human beings communicate in the first place. A design is also best informed by conducting user studies on system prototypes. In these cases user testing is often significantly more difficult than with single-user systems for the following reasons:
1

Jankm David. Op. cit.

12

 Organizing and scheduling for groups is more difficult than for individuals.  Group interaction style is hard to select for beforehand, whereas individual characteristics are often possible to determine before a study is conducted.  Pre-established groups vary in interaction style, and the length of time they've been a group affects their communication patterns.  New groups change quickly during the group formation process.  Groups are dynamic; roles change.  Many studies need to be long-term, especially when studying asynchronous groupware.  Modifying prototypes can be technically difficult because of the added complexity of groupware over single-user software.  In software for large organizations, testing new prototypes can be difficult or impossible because of the disruption caused by introducing new versions into an organization. When designing groupware, it is often best to begin with field studies. The goal is to understand a particular type of group or organization that will be using the groupware system. A number of different studies can be conducted: interviews, surveys, analysis of artifacts used in the work process, examination of processes and workflows, etc. In all cases, the object is to identify the users' tasks and goals, understand how the group communicates and determine the power structures and roles. One key challenge is to appear non-threatening and objective to the users in order to obtain accurate information and to insure that they will accept any design that results. Another challenge is translating the findings from one organization to others -- this is especially a concern when the groupware is intended for organizations which are truly unique or too large to effectively study.  Adoption and Acceptance Many groupware systems simply cannot be successful unless a critical mass of users chooses to use the system. Having a videophone is useless if you're the only one who has it. Two of the most common reasons for failing to achieve critical mass are lack of interoperability and the lack of appropriate individual benefit.  Incompatibility In the early 90s, AT&T and MCI both introduced videophones commercially, but their two systems couldn't communicate with each other. This lack of interoperability/compatibility meant that anyone who wanted to buy a videophone had to make sure that everyone they wanted to talk to would buy the same system. Compatibility issues lead to general wariness among customers, who want to wait until a clear standard has emerged.  Perceived Benefit Even when everyone in the group may benefit, if the choice is made by individuals, the system may not succeed. An example is with office calendar systems: if everyone enters all of their appointments, then everyone has the benefit of being able to safely schedule around other people's appointments. However, if it's not easy to enter your appointments, then it may be perceived by users as more beneficial to leave their own appointments off, while viewing other people's appointments.

13

This disparity of individual and group benefit is discussed in game theory as the prisoner's dilemma or the commons problem. To solve this problem, some groups can apply social pressure to enforce groupware use (as in having the boss insist that it's used), but otherwise it's a problem for the groupware designer who must find a way to make sure the application is perceived as useful for individuals even outside the context of full group adoption.  Avoiding Abuse Most people are familiar with the problem of spamming with email. Some other common violations of social protocol include: taking inappropriate advantage of anonymity, sabotaging group work, or violating privacy.

1.7. Common Problems ‫المشاكل المشتركة – العامة‬The biggest hurdle in implementing groupware is convincing people to use it. Training is required to make people comfortable using it, and if people don't feel comfortable with the software, they won't use it. Employees should be given incentives to contribute: the rewards could be either financial or psychological.In many cases collaboration is at odds with the company's corporate culture so implementation will be disruptive. Shifting a corporate culture from being competitive to being cooperative is no small undertaking. It will require changes at all levels of the organization, including the CEO. One of the biggest hurdles is the typical large enterprise desire to standardise knowledge practice across that enterprise and to implement tools and processes which support that aim. Much greater value and quicker implementation can be achieved by avoidance of the "one size fits all" meme. Driving people to adopt the same active role (for example: contribution measured by number of uploads) only produces the behaviour driven by the metric - "the game exists of the rules by which it is played". Cultivate the practice of collaboration where it flourishes of its own volition to gain the quickest return.1 If a village has a "commons" area for grazing cattle then this area can be a strong benefit to the community as long as everyone uses it with restraint. However, individuals have the incentive to graze as many cattle as possible on the commons as opposed to their own private property. If too many people send too many cattle to the commons, the area will be destroyed, and the whole village is worse off as a result. There are a couple of straightforward solutions to the Commons Problem: an appropriate fee can be charged for each head of cattle or a limit can be imposed on the number of cattle any individual may bring. These solutions are an appropriate starting point for solving problems of abuse in groupware.

1

Wikipedia. Collaborative software.[online].[10.04.2007]. Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. 2007 Available at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Groupware

14

1.7.1.Socially vs. Technologically-Determined Structure ‫العلقات الجتماعية مقابل التركيبة التكنولوجية المحدودة‬
 Communication Structure Communication between people is typically highly-structured. When someone asks a question, they usually expect either an answer or a request for clarification. After a request, a typical response is to fulfill the request or specify a reason for not fulfilling the request. When someone fills out an official form, that form usually has a pre-determined route that it takes through an organization -possibly to a manager for a signature, then an administrator for processing and filing, then perhaps a duplicate is sent back to the original employee. The point is that most actions have a known range of responses and people to handle them -- communication has structure.  Technological vs. Social When the type of structure is known, systems can take advantage of the structure to speed up communications and minimize errors. When the system determines exactly how the conversation is structured, this is known as technologically-mediated communication structure. The alternative is socially-mediated communication -- when someone wants to make a request, they send, for instance, a plain email message to another person, and that person decides whether to respond, how to respond, and who to respond to.  Socially-mediated & Communication This type of structure can be more time-consuming and prone to error, and thus it may be unacceptable for certain types of organizations, especially ones that allow no exceptions to protocol, such as the military or certain safety-critical organizations. On the other hand, exceptions to the expected structure of communication are extremely common. For this reason, technologically-mediated communication may actually be an obstruction to getting work done efficiently and may lead people to not use a groupware system or use it incorrectly, especially when the designer has not completely anticipated the range of communication possibilities.  Facilitation vs. Enforcement A reasonable compromise between the two possibilities is to make a groupware system aware of the common structure of communication so that it can make common communication tasks more straightforward (e.g. by providing a "quick send" button that routes a message to the appropriate person), but insure that any kind of message can be sent regardless. Thus, the communication is technologically-facilitated but not technologically-enforced.

15

1.7.2. Privacy ‫الخصوصية‬
 Privacy, Security, and Anonymity ‫الخصوصية والسرية والمن‬ Whenever using groupware, some information needs to be shared, and there is a concern that all other information remain private, and that critical information be secure even against aggressive attempts to obtain the information. In many situations, users choose to be anonymous or use a consistent pseudonym. Anonymity can be crucial in encouraging fair participation in discussions and is useful for providing protection from harassment.  Sharing Information, Identification, and Accountability ‫تشارك المعلومات، تعريف،ومسؤولية‬ On the other hand, there is continuing pressure to share more information. The more information gets shared, the more easily common ground can be achieved. Sharing information about yourself enables many systems to provide more useful customization and matching to your interests. Furthermore, while anonymity can protect an individual, there are also quite legitimate reasons for identifying people for accountability, especially where security and the risk of abusive behavior are involved.  Control and Reciprocity To resolve these conflicting needs, it's important to give users as much control as possible over what information gets shared and what remains private. Let users decide how much information to share, and use that to determine what kinds of information they can access. One example of privacy policy is the principle of reciprocity: if a user wants information about another user, then they must provide the equivalent information about themselves. Reciprocity isn't always the right policy, but serves as a useful starting point.

1.7.3. Awareness ‫الوعي‬
In addition to explicit communication, such as sending a message or speaking to someone, many group work situations benefit from implicit communication, such as indirect gestures, information about people's environment (whether their office door is open or closed), or biographical information about people in a conversation (what their job position is and what they had for lunch). This information helps people to establish common ground, coordinate their activities, and helps avoid surprises. Awareness information takes many forms. In videoconferencing, simply providing a wide-angle camera lens can provide a greater degree of environmental awareness. In email, simple information about the time and date of the message or the signature file of the sender (i.e. with contact info, company info, etc.) gives context for making sense of the message. Awareness tools can be designed for letting others know when you're in the office or not, letting them know what document you're working on, or how you're feeling at any given time. Obviously, awareness can be at odds with privacy concerns, and as the last previous indicated, it's important to give users control over how much information about themselves is made available to others. This is not entirely a technical design issue, but is an issue we must be aware of as a society

16

-- we will often want more and more information from others, and the social and economic pressure to share this information will increase over time. As a society, we are obligated to be sensitive to when we are asking for too much information and find other ways of achieving our common objectives without compromising individual privacy.

17

2.Towards Library Groupware ‫نحو البرمجيات الجماعية بالمكتبات‬
In today’s business environment, concerns with immediacy, confidentiality, and organizational interactivity have all been addressed in the development of traditional groupware applications. These proprietary packages have focused on internal corporate functions such as archival records management (ARM), sales force automation (SFA), and human resources information systems (HRIS). Enhancements made to groupware throughout the 1990s, however, have been based on the need to maximize external operating effectiveness for the organization as well. Library and information service centers have proven to be ideal laboratories for enhancements to groupware functionality. This is most clearly displayed in the areas of information organization and retrieval. The influence of library and information service professionals can be seen in groupware applications such as intranets, gateways, and business information portals (BIPs).Most commercially available groupware packages have overlapping functions that are traditionally couched in office management activity, and have heretofore been targeted toward decision making in the firm via group support systems (GSS). 1 'Library groupware' - a set of networked tools supporting information management for individuals and for distributed groups - is a new class of service we may choose to provide in our libraries. In its simplest form, library groupware would help people manage information as they move through the diversity of online resources and online communities that make up today's information landscape. Complex implementations might integrate equally well with enterprise-wide systems such as courseware and portals on a university campus, and desktop file storage on private individual computers. Ideally, successful library groupware should provide individuals and groups with a common set of information functions they may apply to any information they find anywhere.Historically, more than a dozen software application categories have been identified as constituting a taxonomy for groupware services. Functionally, they can be identified as five application families, all operating interactively. 2

2.1. Why Do Libraries Need Groupware? 3 ‫لماذا تحتاج المكتبات إلى البرمجيات الجماعية‬
Consider three networked applications that are already used constantly: link resolvers , which short-cut access from one Web resource to related resources or library services; bibliographic reference managers, which enable users to manage records about information resources they might need to reference again; and weblogs, which let anyone write whatever they want about anything they like. Support for each of these applications varies widely in today's libraries. Link resolvers are centralised tools used via the Web by users and library staff to connect licensed resources and library services; traditional tools for reference management are desktop applications introduced to library visitors via bibliographic instruction, although recent versions and new products make Webbased reference management possible; weblogs are typically managed by weblog users themselves,
1 2

Jankm David. Op. cit. Daniel Chudnov. Towards Library Groupware with Personalised Link Routing.[online].[14.04.2007]. Ariadne Issue 40. 01-Nov-2004. Available at: http://www.ariadne.ac.uk/issue40/chudnov/ 3 ibid.

18

with only a few examples of weblog support provided by libraries or campus computing services to be found. It is interesting to examine the relationships between these tools and what they help users to do. For example, is following a cited reference link to a link resolver the same kind of action as following a link on someone's weblog? Are citing a work in a peer-reviewed paper and citing a work on a weblog the same action, or are they different somehow? Because the support levels libraries provide for each kind of application vary widely, it might seem natural to consider that these applications and their functions are quite different. But it also seems likely that to the library users following and citing many references from many sources as they manage the bibliographic lifecycle of their ongoing work, the functions these applications provide are quite similar. In a fluid world where users move regularly between informal discussion and scholarly/research domains, we can consider the functional areas of linking, reference management, and weblogging to be service points on a single continuum of information gathering, study, and creation. Following a reference from a weblog or from a scholarly article are each similar steps in exploring threads of related ideas. Capturing a reference in your own weblog or reference library indicates that the citation somehow relates to your own thought process. Publicly citing a reference more closely associates your thinking with that of others. The broader information landscape - including library resources among weblogs, pre-print archives, and decentralised information resources and repositories mingling with enormous desktop computing power and storage on private devices - is where users and groups find, collect, and use information today. We would do well to consider how we might bring better navigational clarity and the ability to customise connections to this more diverse and decentralised information landscape.

2.2. Functional applications of groupware for library and information services. ‫التطبيقات الوظيفية للبرمجيات الجماعية للمكتبات وخدمات المعلومات‬
Software application family
Electronic Messaging Virtual Meeting Environments Electronic Document Management Workflow and Workgroup Utilities Collaborative Networking

Library and information services workgroup tasks
E-mail Reference, Resource Exchanges, Knowledge-based Listserv Discussion Groups Interactive Digital Reference, Electronic Bulletin Board Systems, Community Calendars, Online Public Access Catalogs, Desktop Videoconferencing Web Authoring Tools, Online Cataloging, Desktop Publishing, Graphical Interface Design Shared Cataloging Systems, Electronic Documentation, Project Management, Database Building, Automated Indexing Systems Online Databases, Knowledge Management Systems, Multitype Library Networks and Consortia, Intranets, Information Portals

19

the field of library and information services, however, groupware is more accurately represented within broader functional contexts, External information sharing and exchange is the characteristic which most significantly distinguishes groupware applications for library and information services from the more traditional applications of groupware. All components of the groupware applications taxonomy are reflected in the emerging technologies of library and information services.

2.2.1. Electronic Messaging ‫البريد اللكتروني‬
Communication with library patrons or customers is now handled in much the same way as customer relationship management (CRM) services are handled in various business sectors. Socalled ‘‘24/7’’ service models are being utilized in library and information services in an attempt to facilitate client contact around the clock. Email reference service, promotional mailings and announcements, and patron account status messaging are examples of some of these activities. Among library and information services professionals, LISTSERVTMs and electronic discussion groups are examples of electronic messaging for the enhancement of professional development and resource sharing. Collection development assistance for rural library systems, information and referral assistance for remote users and underserved populations, interlibrary loan assistance, and ‘‘Needs and Offerings’’ programs instituted by government documents librarians are particularly strong examples of groupware project implementations of this genre.

2.2.2. Virtual Meeting Environments ‫بيئات الجتماع الفتراضية‬
Groupware’s latest, and most dramatic, impact on library and information services has been in the area of virtual communications. On-line meeting places are rooted in the early versions of electronic bulletin boards for business,but they have greatly benefited from the popularity of online chat rooms and instant messaging. So-called ‘‘Live Answer’’ software has been streamlined to meet the needs of library and information services. The growing demand for enhanced digital reference service has led to a variety of service platforms for interactive reference interviews and research assistance, provided at any hour of the day or night, and in almost any geographic location. Before the advancement of voice and video telecommunications, teleconferencing provided the closest available alternative to face to face communication. Groupware functions provided by videoconferencing on the desktop have been greatly enhanced by the successful launch of such technologies as streaming video and audio data transmission. Ongoing developments in the Internet and World Wide Web segments have resulted in voice over Internet telephony (VOIP) technology offerings. In the area of library and information services, desktop videoconferencing has enhanced service programs to the disabled, and has facilitated the information professional’s support for those parties participating in desktop videoconferencing.

2.2.3.Electronic Document Management ‫إدارة الوثائق اللكترونية‬
With the advent of electronic publishing, companies continued their move toward on-line document composition and editing. This provided another avenue for groupware’s foray into dynamic office management technology. Electronic document management (EDM) encompasses interactive editing capabilities not previously available in the electronic publishing world. This has permitted not only automated publishing and distribution, but shared document editing as well. In the field of library and information service, EDM applications are evident in such areas as Web-based authoring of library and information services pages utilizing Hypertext Markup Language (HTML), newsletter publishing, new media, and electronic ‘‘e-Books.’’ The advantages evidenced by on-line whiteboarding in virtual business meetings and corporate training programs are also evident in the world of library and information services by the increased use of electronic ‘‘blackboardTM’’ and ‘‘chalkboardTM’’ products in acade-mic, school, and special library settings.

20

2.2.4.Workflow and Workgroup Utilities ‫تدفق العمال وأدوات مجموعات العمل‬
Some of the earliest forms of library and information services technology have actually paralleled the earliest forms of groupware. The shared databases at the heart of such established services as On-line Computer Library Center (OCLC), Dialog, and the Library of Congress, were precursors to the systems and services now considered standard fare for groupware. What groupware has done for so-called ‘‘back office processing’’ can be witnessed today in automated library systems. Database indexing for on-line literature searching and On-line Public Access Catalogs (OPACs) were among the first forms of library technology to benefit from groupware design. Today, such high volume input-output (I/O) activities as circulation, reserves processing, and interlibrary loan have benefited from the type of groupware engineering undertaken earlier in a variety of business settings.

2.2.5.Collaborative Networking ‫التشابك التعاوني‬
As the library and information science profession has evolved into one of knowledge-based activities and services, groupware and collaborative design principles have continually been at the heart of new products and services. Librarians and information specialists have seen their responsibilities expand within the knowledge management arena, and the approaches to information management afforded by collaboration technology have helped redefine their functional roles as ‘‘organizational knowledge backbones.’’[5] This is true for both the earlier iterations of library and information service technologies such as literature searching and technical services, and newer product areas such as ‘‘push technology’’ and information portals.

21

Conclusion
Groupware has impacted the library and information services paradigm more than any other area of software development. The three most definitive traits of business groupware functionality are paramount in knowledge management environments. These characteristics—interactivity, information dissemination, and on-line monitoring—are driving the knowledge management sector’s growth. Real-time collaboration is best reflected by assisted digital reference. The most significant example of such knowledge assistance today is the collaborative digital reference service (CDRS) jointly launched by OCLC and the Library of Congress. Additionally, many library service networks are launching what are being called ‘‘After Hours Reference’’ projects providing personalized collaborative research assistance to both clients and colleagues. In previous years, the benefits of groupware in the library and information services sector have mirrored those of the business world vis-a-vis ‘‘back office technology.’’ On-line cataloging, interlibrary loan, OPACs, and database indexing were the extent to which groupware developments readily took hold. Today, advances in networking technology via the Internet and World Wide Web are expanding groupware’s impact in the ‘‘front office’’ of library and information services, where information users are most often outside of the library or information center structure. Whether with services to users, to professional colleagues outside of the organization, or to the intra-organization clients that they directly serve, library and information service professionals are now maximizing the benefits that can be realized by groupware structures in external as well as internal information settings.

22

References
1.

Brinck.Tom. Groupware: Applications.[online].[10.04.2007] Usabilityfirst.2005. Available at: http://www.usabilityfirst.com/groupware/applications.txl Brinck.Tom. Groupware: Introduction.[online].[10.04.2007] Usabilityfirst.2005. Available at: http://www.usabilityfirst.com/groupware/intro.txl Daniel Chudnov. Towards Library Groupware with Personalised Link Routing.[online].[14.04.2007]. Ariadne Issue 40. 01-Nov-2004. Available at: http://www.ariadne.ac.uk/issue40/chudnov/ Jankm David. Groupware. [Online].[10.04.2007] Encyclopedia of Library and Information Science. New York,2003. Available at: www.dowling.edu/library/papers/david/Groupware_Encyclopedia_Chapter.pdf Wikipedia. Collaborative software.[online].[10.04.2007]. Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. 2007 Available at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Groupware Wikipedia. computer supported cooperative work. .[online].[10.04.2007]. Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. 2007 AvailablE at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_supported_cooperative_work

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

23

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful