This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
2012 STUDENT NO: 0726885 SUPERVISOR: DR. LUIGINA CIOLFI COURSE: DIGITAL MEDIA DESIGN
For Bridget, Geraldine and Liam, for all of their support throughout the years.
I would like to thank all of the academic staff in the CSIS department of the University of Limerick for all their help in completing this final year project. In particular I would like to thank my supervisor, Dr. Luigina Ciolfi, who was at all times available with help and advice. I would also like to thank my second reader, Dr. Gabriela Avram, who in her role of both course leader and lecturer was a helpful and inspiring influence. A special word of thanks must be reserved for the technical support staff within the department, who were at all times both prompt and efficient. Particular and special thanks are extended to Mr. Mark Congiusta and all of the staff at the offices of Cisco Systems, Inc in Oranmore, Co. Galway. Their dedication in giving up their time during a particularly busy period is very much appreciated. Without them and their unfailing enthusiastic support this project could never have existed. Finally thanks go out to Mr. Daniel Beere and Mr. Brian Rogers pushed me to excel myself throughout this project and were a driving force in the success of the project.
1. Project Summary ........................................................................... 1 2. Introduction .................................................................................. 3 2.1 General Introduction ................................................................ 3 2.2 Motivating Factors .................................................................... 6 2.3 Objectives ................................................................................. 8 2.4 Design Assumptions ................................................................. 8 2.5 Structure of Report ................................................................... 9 3. Research ..................................................................................... 10 3.1 Literature Review .................................................................... 11 3.1.1 Key Issues ........................................................................ 11 3.1.2 Social Awareness and Translucence .................................. 11 3.1.3 Geographical Dispersion ................................................... 12 3.1.4 Serendipity ....................................................................... 12 3.1.5 Similar Projects ................................................................ 13 3.2 Software Research .................................................................. 15 3.2.1 Skype .................................................................................. 15 3.2.2 Jabber/XMPP ................................................................... 15 3.2.3 Other................................................................................ 16 4. First Site Visit .............................................................................. 17 4.1 Preparation............................................................................. 17 4.2 Site visit ................................................................................. 18 4.3 findings .................................................................................. 20 5. Persona Generation ..................................................................... 25 5.1 Personas................................................................................. 25 5.1.1 Robert .............................................................................. 25
5.1.2 Amanda ............................................................................ 25 5.1.3 Jeremy ............................................................................. 26 6. Scenario Generation .................................................................... 27 7. Initial Design Phase ..................................................................... 28 8. Second Design Phase ................................................................... 32 9. Second Site Visit .......................................................................... 40 9.1 Preparation............................................................................. 40 9.2 Site Visit ................................................................................. 41 9.3 Findings ................................................................................. 43 10. Conclusions ............................................................................... 46 11. References ................................................................................. 48 12. Bibiography ............................................................................... 51 13. Appendices ................................................................................ 55 13.A. Interview Recruitment E-mail .............................................. 55 13.B. Declaration of Informed Consent ......................................... 57 13.C. Participant Information Sheet .............................................. 59 13.D. Semi-Structured Interview Questions .................................. 61 13.E. Cisco Employee Survey ........................................................ 65 13.G. Survey Recruitment E-mail ................................................. 69 13.H. Interview Transcriptions ...................................................... 70 13.H.1 interview A ..................................................................... 70 13.H.2 Interview B..................................................................... 81 13.h.3 Interview C ..................................................................... 90 13.h.4 Interview D ..................................................................... 97 13.h.5 Interview E ................................................................... 105 13.h.6 Interview F ................................................................... 115 13.I. Application walkthrough guidelines .................................... 121
1. PROJECT SUMMARY
The focus of this project is an overall exploration of awareness technologies within unified communications, and methods through which these systems can be improved. The intention of this project is to design a more useful system of awareness in unified communication and to present this new design as a working prototype using Adobe Flash as the primary prototyping tool. Pleasant (2008) defines unified communication software not as a single product, "but rather a solution made up of a variety of communication tools and components". Commonly used examples of unified communications software include Skype and Cisco Jabber, as well as web based systems such as Facebook chat and Google Talk. Core to this project is the improvement of current presence information systems to make them more useful within the modern business environment. This project is primarily research and design based, and focuses on finding improvements for the currently existing model of awareness in unified communications. The research conducted consists of two main areas: a) an in depth review of existing literature and solutions, and b) on site interviews with core users of unified communications software and site wide surveys of these users to best ascertain what improvements would be most useful for these users of unified communications. These interviews took place at the offices of Cisco Systems Ltd in Oranmore, Co. Galway. Cisco was chosen because of my prior experiences in working there, their use of unified communications as a primary method of communication in their office, and their work on the Cisco Jabber client. The design phase of the project is largely concerned with finding novel methods of introducing the improvements determined during the research stage into a workable prototype which is both generic enough 1
as to be portable to any unified communications system, and specific enough as to be a useable system in its own right. The design process follows the user centred design approach, and also involves some level of participatory design on behalf of the users in Cisco Galway. Two primary design phases were conducted, with a final prototype produced for testing at Cisco Galway.
2.1 GENERAL INTRODUCTION This project is an exploration of awareness systems in unified communications software, and new approaches and designs which could be applied to these systems to make them both more useful to end users and also more usable for users with limiting factors. This exploration resulted in a series of prototypes and designs of improved systems which were implemented at various stages of fidelity including paper, visual design and Adobe
FIGURE 1. CREATED BY CHRISTOPHER GLENN, 2011 AND USED UNDER THE CREATIVE COMMONS ATTRIBUTION-SHARE ALIKE 3.0 UNPORTED LICENCE
Flash. These prototypes were tested with users and the results fed back into the design process until the development of a final prototype. The final goal of the design is that it should, as espoused by Redström et al (2000), "provide a subtle
reflection" of activity in the office and in doing so provide rich information to users. Unified communications software is defined by Pleasant (2008) not as a single product, "but rather a solution made up of a variety of communication tools and components". Unified communication clients usually consist of audio, video and instant messaging communication systems, as well as a system of displaying users contacts and their availability. The most popular examples of unified communication software include Skype and the various implementations of the XMPP protocol, including Cisco Jabber.
Awareness systems in unified communications, usually identified as "presence" in the case of Jabber (Emacs-Jabber Project, 2011) and "status" in the case of Skype (Skype, 2011), are systems which allow users to share useful information about themselves with their contacts through their unified communications client. Because of the common usage of the terms "presence" and "status" in the documentation of the main unified communication systems, and also because the prevalence of the term "presence" among the users interviewed at Cisco Galway, awareness systems will at times be mentioned as 'presence systems' or 'status systems' throughout the report. The most prevalent example of these presence information systems is the simple green, yellow and red status indicators used in Skype and Jabber, which are usually followed by a short status message such as 'Available', 'Away' or 'Do Not Disturb'. A generic unified communications awareness system is should in Figure 1, and shows the name, availability and short text status of the users contact list. However, this image also shows the many limitations of such systems in providing rich, useful, information to users. Information such as current location, mood, level of activity and ability to switch task cannot be accurately displayed using such a system. It is the purpose of this project therefore to discover precisely what information would be most useful to users, and how this information can best be visualised and presented for the user. This project consists primarily of periods of research and design, and is based largely on the user centred design model, as well as elements of participatory design. The research is divided between a review of existing literature in the field of awareness technologies (particularly in relation to unified communications), and field research at the offices of Cisco in Oranmore, Co. Galway. Cisco was chosen as an ideal location for field research because of their work in developing unified communications clients such as CUPC (Cisco Unified Personal 4
Communicator), CUCI Lync (Cisco Unified Communication Integration for Lync) and Cisco Jabber. All employees at the Cisco Galway office use unified communications systems as a core element of their work day, so their familiarity with these systems is extremely high. Also, their experiences in developing unified communications systems provide invaluable insight into the issues they have encountered in the past, in relation to presence and awareness technologies. Presence and awareness systems, such as those which exist within Skype and Cisco Jabber are key to successful communication between employees in large organisations, especially geographically dispersed companies with offices in many locations throughout the world. The presence system used in XMPP is particularly important because it can be used cross platform and in many different devices, including software desk-phones such as those produced by Cisco. It is vital then that presence systems such as these are well designed and provide vital information to workers who need to communicate with one another. The design process used in this project is based on the user-centred design model, and will specifically informed by the field research conducted at Cisco Galway. Surveys and interviews from the Cisco Galway office will be used to construct Personas and Scenarios which will inform the design process from start to finish. The design is constructed in several phases, starting at low fidelity paper prototypes, moving to wireframes, then pixel perfect Adobe Photoshop mock-ups and finally interactive Adobe Flash prototypes. . This process of prototyping has been describes by Bødker and Christianson (2006) as "prototyping not to create solutions per se, but to explore and question the context of future design challenges." The lower fidelity prototypes allow users to quickly test the designs and give immediate feedback, therefore increasing the participatory nature of the design. The higher level prototypes, and in particular the 5
Adobe Flash based prototypes are far more useful for detecting intricacies and flaws in the overall interaction model, and allow for the fast and easy correction of these. The Adobe Flash prototypes are also useful for testing out concepts and designs which are not as easy to duplicate at lower levels of fidelity, particularly sliders, drop-down menus and multiple window management 2.2 MOTIVATING FACTORS I was primarily motivated to choose this project from my work with Cisco Galway in designing the interface of their Cisco Jabber project. During my time at Cisco Galway I used their CUPC unified communications client on a daily basis and had a number of problems with the CUPC presence model, in particular not being able to tell if someone was too busy to talk or whether it was appropriate to video call them at that particular time. Other colleagues also mentioned issues with the presence model but felt that it was simply a matter of becoming familiar with the system. I fundamentally disagreed with this stance, and feel that the presence and awareness model of a unified communications client should be both easy to use while at the same time providing rich, useful, information. I am apparently not alone in this opinion; Saunders (2006) describes the Skype presence model as a "broken idea", going on to explain that it "tells you nothing about the person using the PC at the other end". Saunders core question was how presence could be improved to express ones willingness to communicate, rather than their mere physical presence at a keyboard. The author at the blog 'Steve's Tech Journal' (2006) goes so far as to say that "presence no longer has meaning" due to the problem of people setting their status to 'Available' at all times even when they are too busy to talk. To this end I decided that my final year project should be a design exploration of methods of improving presence and awareness models within unified communications. 6
Previous to my employment with Cisco, unified communication technologies (specifically Skype) had been used heavily at WebDev Ltd, based in Limerick, where I had worked for an eight month period. Communication between the offices of WebDev Ltd and in Limerick and Poland takes place almost entirely through Skype, with employees utilizing video, voice and text chat to communicate with each other. During my time at WebDev, I noticed that many employees in Limerick found it difficult to remember when their Polish counterparts would be away to lunch, due to the one hour time difference. Communication through unified communications was often a disturbance to the Limerick office, because the Skype presence system was not integrated with the more traditional phone network which was crucial to the way they worked. It was, in essence, impossible to tell when a colleague in Limerick was 'on call' because their status did not automatically change to 'Busy' or 'In a Call' as it normally would if one were on a Skype call.
2.3 OBJECTIVES The primary objectives of this project are: To gain an understanding of current literature in regard to presence and awareness models. To gain a deep understanding of the needs of real world users in regard to presence in unified communications. To design a more useful model of presence for unified communications. To create an Adobe Flash based prototype which will accurately and easily convey this improved presence model. It is my belief that these objectives were largely achieved within the scope of this project, but that the scope for further research is obviously broad. 2.4 DESIGN ASSUMPTIONS This project was conducted on the basis of a number of core design assumptions. These assumptions were based on both my own previous experiences in using unified communications and research from the like of Schmidt (2002) and Bjerrum and Bødker (2003). The assumptions were the following: Good awareness is peripheral in that it does not require the users attention or focus in order to be effective. Schmidt (2002) shows that users are capable of taking peripheral information use this to create useful meaning effortlessly. Awareness information must be useful outside of a traditional desk based environment.
Even people who consider themselves as „desk workers‟ actually spend less than 50% of their working time at a desk (Bjerrum and Bødker, 2003). 2.5 STRUCTURE OF REPORT
This report is structured in a largely chronological order, beginning with a Research chapter containing a review of existing literature and an examination of existing unified communications solutions. This is followed by a description of the first research visit to the Cisco Galway site, describing preparation, the visit itself and the findings which emerged from this. This is followed by a section on the development of the design personas and scenarios which emerged from this first visit. Two large chapters follow detailing the design processes and outcomes of the first and second phases of the design process. A conclusions chapter follows which re-examines some of the findings and conclusions drawn throughout the report. Finally, appendices are included after the References and Bibliography. Included in these appendices are copies of many of the most prominent documents produced during the course of this project as well as the full transcripts of the interviews carried out at the Galway site.
Before embarking on any field research or design work, I felt that it was extremely important that I gain an in-depth knowledge of the field of awareness technology development, previous similar projects and similar existing software. I began this review by searching out academic papers and journals which referenced awareness technology as a method of creating social connection between users. I have included my literature review below which I feel shows the broad plethora of methods that researchers have used to develop awareness between users using technology. Examples such as the Chatterbox (Redström et al, 2000), Portholes (Bly and Dourish, 1992), MyUnity (Biehl et al, 2010) and the various products examined by Gaver (2002) may seem abstract to my current project, but I felt that their level of abstraction was what made them useful in conveying meaningful information in a nonobtrusive manner. I then follow my literature review with a short overview of the two platforms most commonly used by my target users in relation to awareness technologies: Skype and XMPP.
3.1 LITERATURE REVIEW 3.1.1 KEY ISSUES There are a number of core design issues presented within the literature for producing a coherent, useful and usable system of awareness. These are Social Awareness, Translucence, Serendipity and Geographical Dispersion. 3.1.2 SOCIAL AWARENESS AND TRANSLUCENCE Social awareness is a crucial element of any awareness system, and we must seek to design for it particularly in systems which promote geographically dispersed communication, such as unified communication. Bardram and Hansen (2010), citing Schmidt (2002) and numerous others, argue that social awareness "fosters efficient coordination and collaborating", going on to claim that social awareness helps to reduce the amount of interruption and disturbance which occurs when people are engaged in cooperative work. Bardram and Hansen define four key areas in which contextual workplace awareness can be fostered: Social, Temporal, Spatial and Activity, calling these the "'who', 'when', 'where' and 'what' in a shared work environment." Bødker and Christiansen (2006) argue that workers in flexible work environments often "lack a sense of co-presence", that is to say that they find themselves completely unaware of whether their co-workers are available to communicate, and indeed how to 'leave them a message" if they are unable to communicate. Clearly then in designing for social awareness we must also design for a sense of co-presence which makes the virtual workplace of the unified communication environment as easy to navigate as a real world environment. A common solution to this problem within unified communication is to share ones calendar or itinerary with the entire office, however Bødker and Christiansen argue that "office inhabitant do not necessarily wish 11
to expose this level of information" to everyone who passes their real office, so it is unlikely that they would wish to share it in a virtual environment either. 3.1.3 GEOGRAPHICAL DISPERSION Maintenance of "mutual knowledge" (Cramton, 2001) is one of the main problems which exists for geographically dispersed groups who wish to communicate. Cramton defines mutual knowledge as "not only the information itself, but also the awareness that the other knows it". Cramton maintains that failure to achieve mutual knowledge in collaborative communication can be extremely detrimental to "decision quality and productivity", this loss of productivity may be caused by the increased need for monitoring communications to protect their decision quality. This can be an extremely difficult factor to design for. As humans we give on another strong nonverbal cues that show that we are listening and understand one another (Hogan and Stubbs, 2003), however distances destroy our ability to adequately do so. In fact, distance may cause us to make incorrect assumptions about dispersed team mates, and Cramton advises that this must be avoided. A core problem in working collaboratively across distances is that according to Armstrong and Cole (1995), group members dispersed only a small geographical distance from one another would begin to talk about one another in terms of "us and them", rather than as a coherent unit. Clearly then, we must find a way to design awareness technologies which dilute the power of geographical dispersion, and allow geographically dispersed team members or coworkers to collaborate in a cohesive manner. 3.1.4 SERENDIPITY Kraut et al (1990) claim that there are four main types of interpersonal interactions. They define these as scheduled interactions, intended interactions, opportunistic interactions and 12
spontaneous interactions. While it is obviously important to design for all of these while designing a communications system, it is spontaneous interactions which are of particular interest when we speak of designing an awareness system. The reason that spontaneous interactions are important to design for is that they are unlikely to be mentioned as a wanted or required feature by users, but their action would certainly impoverish the interactions that users can engage in. Phillip and McGrath (2000) describe these serendipitous forms of interaction as "chance encounters" and argue that these forms of encounter are core forms of interaction in business environments as office interactions tend to be short "lightweight interactions" (Whittaker et al, 1994). Designing for short, serendipitous interactions in terms of presence systems means allowing people to 'stumble' across one another in their normal everyday use of the system, just as they would if they were walking around their own office, thus we must allow users within any awareness system that we design to find one another naturally, and outside of their forced interactions. 3.1.5 SIMILAR PROJECTS While the problems faced in creating an online awareness platform for unified communication are common to the problems found in the design of many awareness systems, I have not found many specific examples of the design of such a system within the existing literature. Therefore I have chosen to examine some projects which examine the problems of awareness systems on a broader level, as I believe that such problems are abstract enough as to be relevant to almost any awareness system. One of the early systems to investigate social awareness in technology was the media space system "Portholes" by Bly and Dourish (1992). The portholes project, which was based in the Xerox EuroPARC research centre, used video feeds of users desks to provide a social 13
awareness to each of the workers, and to allow them to see one another and their work environments even while they were in separate work environments. Bly and Dourish found that users would watch even the empty portholes (where nobody was actively working) because it gave them an increased awareness of their surroundings, "what's going on" as the users themselves described it. Bly and Dourish concluded that such systems were useful for "community access" and "community building", and helped users to maintain working relationships. However, I would question the privacy aspects of constant video surveillance, and while it may well be the most effective method of transmitting broad contextual information, it is simply too invasive to be useful in awareness systems. The "Peepholes" system, described by Greenberg (1996), is a similar system which attempts to subvert these privacy concerns through the use of more abstract avatars and icons rather than a direct video feed. Greenberg found that the Peepholes system was successful in allowing users to "maintain informal awareness and establish contact with others". I therefore think that this form of abstraction is an excellent tool in the design of presence and awareness systems. Redström et al (2000) designed the "Chatterbox" system as a method of providing a "subtle reflection of the local activities and provide inspiration for new, unexpected combinations and thoughts". The Chatterbox system worked by extracting meaning from various forms of co-workers communications, including e-mails, messages etc and recombining them in novel ways to create new messages which were then displayed in the work environment as a visualisation. The authors themselves describe the Chatterbox system as "somewhere between a tool and a piece of art", and certainly the abstract nature of the systems output is a concern in terms of the systems usefulness.
3.2 SOFTWARE RESEARCH 3.2.1 Skype Skype is a popular unified communications client, primarily sold as a VOIP solution for home and business users, which is owned by the Microsoft Corporation. Skype is a cross platform client, available on Windows, Apple OS X, Linux and numerous mobile and ubiquitous computing systems including Televisions (Skype, 2011). Skype shares many key features with other unified communications clients, including VOIP, video chat, instant messaging and presence management. Skype also offers some more unusual and advanced features including screen sharing, file sharing, SMS messaging and group video calling. Skype uses a proprietary VOIP protocol which is not available to the public, however they recently added support for the XMPP protocol (Wolff, P. 2011) for the purposes of interoperability with the Facebook chat service. 3.2.2 JABBER/XMPP XMPP, or the Extensible Messaging and Presence Protocol, is an open source collection of technologies for " instant messaging, presence, multi-party chat, voice and video calls, collaboration, lightweight middleware, content syndication, and generalized routing of XML data" (XMPP, 2011) . The XMPP protocol is overseen by the XMPP Standards Foundation, whose main role is to " define open protocols for presence, instant messaging, and real-time communication and collaboration on top of the IETF‟s Extensible Messaging and Presence Protocol (XMPP)" (XMPP, 2011) . The XMPP protocol was initially developed by the Jabber community as an open-source solution for handling unified communication tasks.
3.2.3 OTHER There are a wide range of unified communications solutions on the market currently, ranging from the popular (various Cisco and Microsoft products such as Microsoft Lync and Cisco Unified Personal Communicator) to the niche. Elliot & Blood (2011) identify a number of existing integrated unified communications suites including: Alcatel-Lucent (OpenTouch Communication Suite) Avaya (Aura) Cisco (CUPC, Jabber, WebEx Connect) Digium (Switchvox) Huawei (SoftCo) IBM (UC2) Microsoft (Lync, Skype) Mittel (MAS) NEC (Univerge Sphericall) Siemens (OpenScape UC)
Most of these products share very similar characteristics in terms over overall user interface design and functionality. What is clear from the breadth of unified communications software available is that this is a rapidly expanding and vibrant field of software design, with millions of corporate and enterprise users throughout the world.
4. FIRST SITE VISIT
4.1 PREPARATION Cisco Galway were contacted as their interest in being a part of this project due to four primary factors. Firstly, being a large enterprise with a large number of on and off-site employees the fulfil my need for a large number of available enterprise based employees. Secondly, being consummate users of unified communications software they were ideally situated to discuss their experiences with unified communications in an in-depth manner and to provide insightful feedback. Thirdly, due to the presence of engineering, design, managerial and quality assurance teams on campus, they would be able to provide a broad range of potential users for research and testing purposes. Finally, they were particularly open to on-site research visits due both to my previous employment there, and their own interest in the results of this project due to their involvement in the development of unified communications software such as Cisco Unified Personal Communicator and Cisco Jabber. A semi-structured interview was chosen as the most appropriate method for carrying out the on-site research as it allows the interviewer to prepare pertinent and important questions in advance, but also allows the interviewee to lead the conversation and bring up subjects which they feel are important or relevant. A structured interview would have been far too restrictive as the purpose of this round of research
FIGURE 2. AN EXAMPLE OF THE SEMI-STRUCTURED INTERVIEW QUESTIONNAIRE
was, in many ways, to illicit from the users the most significant aspects of 17
unified communications and presence from users. Likewise an unstructured interview may have been difficult to keep on track as the subject is so wide, and as constant users of unified communications the users at Cisco are likely to have opinions on many areas of unified communications outside of the scope of this project (for example video and audio quality). Mark Congiusta, a user experience designer and manager at Cisco, was contacted due to my prior relationship from working with him at Cisco. He helped to set up the site visit, which took place on October 27th, 2011 from 10am to 3pm. Prior to the on-site visit an ethics proposal and numerous documents were prepared, including an interview recruitment e-mail which could be forwarded to employees at the Galway site in order to recruit potential interviewees, a research questionnaire containing potential questions for the semi-structured interviews, a declaration of informed consent form to be signed by interviewees before the start of the interview, an information sheet detailing information about the project and interview, and an e-mail survey also passed along to employees. All of these documents were submitted to the departmental ethics committee and they gave clearance for the research to proceed as planned. Equipment was kept to a minimum in order to keep distraction to a minimum and to facilitate an informal, conversational tone with interviewees. The only physical equipment present at the time of interviews was a small digital voice recorder, which was placed on the table, and a notepad and paper upon which I made informal notes throughout the interviews. 4.2 SITE VISIT The visit to the Cisco Galway site in Oranmore, Co. Galway took place on October 27th, 2011 from 10am to 3pm as pre-arranged with my contact on site. Interviews had been arranged with seven members of 18
the Cisco Jabber team through their calendaring system for a period of between 40-45 minutes each. One interview took place with myself and two members of the Jabber team, due to time constraints, but all others were one on one interviews. Most interviews were conducted at the employees own desk, as it was felt that this would allow the employees to feel most comfortable and at ease. Interviewees were drawn from numerous teams within the Cisco Jabber project including software engineering, user experience, quality assurance and management and interviews were scheduled so as to best fit their daily schedule without causing too much interruption. Interviewees were selected through a recruitment e-mail which was forwarded throughout the office on my behalf. Selected interviewees were, prior to their interview, asked to read the information sheet provided. Upon confirming that they wished to take part in the research, the interviewees were asked to read and sign the declaration of informed consent and their interview could begin. Interviewees were informed that it was a semi-structured interview, and were encouraged to lead the interview as they saw fit and to point out any points that they felt may have been missed. In line with the semi-structured nature of the interviews, while most began in a similar manner with me asking some general questions on users patterns and opinions on presence and unified communications, the quickly became focused on what the users themselves found most important and their opinions on various aspects of using unified communications systems. These free form discussions, guided at times by my pre-prepared questions, gave an enormous amount of insight into the way that real enterprise users use unified communications, and the daily problems and issues they face in using these software clients. Upon conclusion of interviews, interviewees were thanked for their participation in the research and provided with my e-mail address 19
through which I could be contacted if they had any further questions or follow-up comments. The declaration of informed consent forms were collected, however the information sheets were left with each interviewee in case they wished to review it further. A further e-mail was forwarded to each interviewee thanking them for taking part. 4.3 FINDINGS Following the site visit to Cisco Galway, the audio recordings were transcribed manually to allow for better analysis of the interview data. Both the audio files and printed transcripts were then analysed for particularly pertinent statements, repeating and reoccurring statements and ideas, and meaningful themes. In line with Saffer (2010) I made the data physical by
FIGURE 3. INTERVIEW DATA LAID OUT ON PAPER WITH RELATED ELEMENTS CLUSTERED AND CONNECTED
highlighting key and repeating terms in the transcript and transferring them to post-it
notes and large sheets of paper. These core pieces of data could then be combined, clustered and juxtaposed, with the resulting clusters being named and ordered in order to produce new and meaningful insights (Saffer, 2010.)
After this initial stage of analysis, the preliminary findings were placed in a spider diagram to allow for a better overall overview of the how the findings related to one another, and where core themes could be found. I gleamed a huge
FIGURE 4. A SPIDER DIAGRAM SHOWING CORE INTERCONNECTED ELEMENTS OF THE INTERVIEW DATA
amount of information about how users actually
use presence and awareness systems from the participants in Cisco Galway, and also some extremely useful information in terms of narrowing down what features actually find useful. Users within a corporate environment are unsure of the usefulness of sharing their mood with their workmates. Some also showed a level of discomfort in sharing this level of personal information with their workmates. For example, Interviewee D (Appendix H.4) claimed that they didn't "think [mood indicators] are that appropriate for a corporate environment, because when you bring in emotions it doesn't gel well with corporate structures" and that users "need more background, but nothing private." Many users would be dishonest in sharing their mood with workmates, and would prefer to show themselves as always in a good mood. Interviewee C (Appendix H.3) accurately describes 21
such a situation: " In most cases I would be honest, but in some cases I would pretend to be in a good mood. To be polite. It's a little bit rude to say bad mood. I'd just leave it empty. To friends mood is fine but not at work." Users within a corporate environment feel that there is a pressure to be 'Available' in their unified communications client despite how busy they may be. Interviewee D (Appendix H.4) described this as an "inference of rejection" that must be avoided. Users feel that if presence was used as a method of ensuring accountability in work, this would be detrimental to how users used unified communications. Interview E (Appendix H.5), Interviewee 1 claims " You'd be more careful of what you'd say in an IM", and Interviewee 2 asserts the benefit of unified communications as an unmonitored tool, stating "it gives an opportunity to talk informally, which can increase collaboration and relax attitudes in a good way." Users feel that emoticons are an extremely effective method for sharing emotion through text, and would be happy and comfortable to use them. Interviewee A (Appendix H.1) claims "I think they communicate. I use them to communicate when I'm making a joke", and gives the following example of using an emoticon to resolve a social situation: "If I'm unhappy with the situation. Rather than berating someone about it, you know, you throw an emoticon in there, you let them know you're not thrilled. It's kind of a polite way of being disappointed." Users feel that their level of activity, or how busy they are, is far more important to convey than what mood they are in. Interviewee 2 in Interview E (H.5) describes how one can be perturbed by an interruption through IM: "It's not so much about mood though, it's more about ability to talk. Like you're about to give a presentation. You're just not in the right frame of 22
mind. You're mind is elsewhere. You might not reply there and then." Some users expressed interest in having a sliding scale of busyness which would allow other users to understand their inability to communicate at a particular time. Rennecker (2005) describes this as the "what I need to know to do my job" ethos. Users would be extremely interested in being able to show different status messages to different groups of people, for example showing a different status message to teammates than other work colleagues. Interviewee C (Appendix H.3) describes this as "different people different face". Many feel that this would be in keeping with how they currently use 'groups' in their unified communication client. Many users within an office setting use their co-workers presence indicators as a method of knowing if that person is in the office or at their desk. Even those who do not use the system in this manner have expressed that they would find it useful to know people's location. Interviewee A (Appendix H.1) gives the following example: "If someone's in a meeting and I know that they're in a conference room and I really need to get that person, that could be useful." Users have mixed feelings about sharing their location, often for privacy reasons. While many would like to know where their coworkers are, they would also be uncomfortable with sharing this information themselves. A sliding level of accuracy was suggested by a number of users, while one in particular that location outside of the actual office building was not a useful factor. However Interviewee 1 in Interview E (Appendix H.5) claimed that location was a primary way in which he differentiated people, claiming: "I would categorise people into a location rather than a function for my IM groups, that's just the way my brain works I suppose" 23
Users would like to be able to specify their preferred method of being contacted, for example 'IM only', 'Phone only' or 'Video Preferred'. Some users felt that this preference could be tied to the activity they were performing, for example 'IM only' should be assumed by the program if the users status is 'In a Meeting'. Interviewee B (Appendix H.2) however felt that the importance should be placed on how someone wishes to contact you, rather than on how you want to be contacted, claiming: "I don't care about your preferred method of communication. I care about what my own preferred method is, so if I want to chat, I'll send a chat, if I want to call you I'll call you, if I want to send video I'll do that."
Physical distance are not a huge factor in being able to contact someone, however time differences are. Interviewee A describes how he reacts when he sees an American co-worker online during the Irish work day: "it's like 3am there. They're available but I'm still gonna think twice about contacting them. If they're up at 3am they're either crazy or they're doing something and they don't need me bothering them." Many users felt that presence could be used to effectively convey time differences between users.
5. PERSONA GENERATION
I have developed a number of personas (based on my research at the Cisco Galway site) and use case scenarios through which I can step the personas to inform the designs I produce. The personas are generic users of unified communications within a corporate environment as these are the primary users for whom I am designing. The scenarios are based on scenarios mentioned during the interviews conducted at the Galway site, as well as my own experiences with using unified communications in that environment. 5.1 PERSONAS 5.1.1 ROBERT Robert is a 35 year old mid-level manager at a large corporation based in Ireland. His duties include managing a team of ten engineers within a software development environment. His team are free to work from home if they need to, so he regularly contacts them through e-mail and Jabber. His own managers are widely geographically dispersed, in offices located in the United States, London and the Netherlands. He mainly uses his unified communications client for work related tasks, and rarely uses unified communications applications outside of work. Robert is task driven and likes receiving feedback from his team members on their active projects. Despite being a good team leader, he is not particularly out-going. 5.1.2 AMANDA Amanda is a member of Robert's team. She is a 24 year old software engineer, based in the same location as Robert. Her job requires her to regularly liaise with not only her own team members, but also the managers of many other teams within the organisation. She primarily uses her unified communications client for this task. She also uses 25
her UC client to chat with her friends throughout the day, mainly through instant messaging. Amanda is focused on enjoying her time at work and encouraging a good relationship with her co-workers. She is friendly, outgoing and hard working. 5.1.3 JEREMY Jeremy is a designer who frequently works with the engineers on Robert's team. He is friendly and out-going and enjoys socialising with his co-workers. Jeremy tends to work late hours due to the fact that most of the rest of his team work from the North American office and there is a five hour time difference between them. Because of this, Jeremy often starts work much later than his co-workers in Ireland. Jeremy is a dedicated worker, and a self-motivator. He is an excellent communicator, and works with many engineering teams to produce their visual design requirements.
6. SCENARIO GENERATION
Having developed these sample user personas, I then proceeded create scenarios which I could use as design aids in designing for my personas. Examples of some of the scenarios used as part of my design process include: Contacting a busy manager in the same building Contacting a co-worker in a distant office Contacting a co-worker who is known to be very busy Contacting a temperamental co-worker Checking if a co-worker is available to talk at their desk Contacting an unknown co-worker for the first time a. In the same office b. In a geographically removed location Checking the overall availability of favourite contacts Contacting an executive o a. In the same office b. In a geographically removed location Ascertaining the geographical location of a co-worker Ascertaining the local time of a co-worker, and the appropriateness in contacting such a co-worker Contacting an client or contact outside of the workplace a. Contacting a customer o b. Contacting a client o c. Contacting a contracted employee
7. INITIAL DESIGN PHASE
Having created the initial personas and scenarios, sketches were then developed for a large number of design ideas based on working through these scenarios. Many of these exploratory designs are based on Bardram and
FIGURE 6. A SKETCH SHOWING THE EVOLUTION OF THE 'WHO', 'WHAT', 'WHEN' AND 'WHERE' MODEL.
Hansen's (2010) notion of the "'who', 'when', 'where' and 'what' in a shared work
environment." In these terms I focused on the usefulness and implementation of geolocation as an element of presence, mood as a method of determining the level of appropriateness in contacting a user, the temporal element of personal connections in terms of different time-zones and patterns of usage, activity based approaches to connection and communication and finally person focused communication, which is an often referenced aspect of communication within the interviews. The two main areas of geolocation that are crucially important based on the feedback received from the Galway interviews were specificity, or accuracy, and ease of scannability in including it as an element of a person's presence. Based on a number of sketches and design explorations, the three 28
FIGURE 5. A SKETCH SHOWING THE EVOLUTION OF THE USER PROFILE
key interface elements chosen to display geolocation as an element of presence were a map with some form of locational key, and accuracy slider and a text based location identifier. These three core elements are included to different degrees in most future sketches and design explorations. Temporality is, in many ways, a more simple task. It is clear from the feedback received in Galway that navigation of time zones is vitally important, and currently mentally challenging, aspect of unified communications which must be addressed. The decision was quickly made that some form of clock icon or text displaying the current time at the contacts current location should be included as an aspect of their presence. This information was included at various stages of the design as an element of the main contact list, the users profile and a mouse-over option before the decision was made to include it as optional information contained in the users profile. In hindsight, as a crucial piece of communication information this should have been included as a core UI element and been a much more accessible piece of data. Mood was conveyed through both traditional emoticon style icons and richer, more detailed, icons. Most interviewees agreed that mood is appropriately conveyed through emoticons when necessary, though
FIGURE 7. A SKETCH SHOWING THE EVOLUTION OF A NUMBER OF UI ELEMENTS INCLUDING MOOD ICONS, ACTIVITY SLIDERS AND PRESENCE ICONS.
interviewee D mentioned that emotions and mood don't "gel well with corporate structures", and expressed some concern as
to the ability of users to draw inappropriate conclusions from such icons, based on their own preconceptions. 29
These initial sketches were largely based on individual issues and problems which a user might face of walking through various scenarios. I then iterated upon these sketches until I felt that I had boiled the main problems down to three core design areas: a) Appropriateness to Contact, b) Willingness to be Contacted, and c) Privacy Concerns. These three categories cover many of the individual issues already discussed, and also have the advantage of being broad enough to encourage wider design thinking. A variety of UI types were explored during this initial design phase, from some very experimental designs which were focused on the human-based aspect of communication, to the more traditional style of unified
FIGURE 8. A SKETCH SHOWING A PERSON CENTRIC UI DESIGN
communications client familiar to users of Skype, WebEx, Cisco Jabber and countless other unified communications solutions. It was indeed in this design vein that the initial design phase was largely devoted, as I wished to examine how traditional unified communications clients could be expanded to easily contain richer and more relevant information. Based on this core design decision, I then began producing numerous wireframes to solidify some of my main areas of concern, particularly overcrowding of the UI and ease of
FIGURE 9. A NEAR FINAL UI SKETCH FOR THE FIRST ROUND OF WIREFRAMES
discerning important information. As you can see from some of the screenshots attached, these were rightly areas of concern, and my main task going forward will be dealing with these challenges. Having initially focused on fully featured unified communications clients, I then began to question if these programs, which are very focused on allowing users to communicate through voice, video and instant messaging, are the best place to manage ones online presence information. I then began to boil my ideas down to a self contained presence/status management program, which would manage ones presence across a large number of unified communication clients.
FIGURE 10. A WIREFRAME SHOWING THE CULMINATION OF THE DESIGN WORK FROM THE FIRST PHASE OF DESIGN
8. SECOND DESIGN PHASE
Note: All of the real people used as contacts in this section and the final prototype are stock images sourced from http://www.sxc.hu/and used with permission, except that of Daniel Beere, also used with permission. The map used in the 'Places' section of the application was sourced from Google Maps, and used with permission. The second design phase occurred after a period of reflection on the initially produced designs and a re-examination of the findings from the Galway interviews. Core to this second design phase was a move away from the more traditional tropes of user interface design for unified communications clients and a move towards a new paradigm for this sort of system. This second design phase also led directly into the development of the final Adobe Flash prototype which was tested onsite at Cisco Galway in March of 2012.
FIGURE 11. A SKETCH SHOWING HOW VARIOUS CONTACT METHODS MIGHT BY INTEGRATED INTO A CENTRAL UI
The first step in this re-examination of the initial designs, and traditional unified communications UI in general, was to examine how exactly users use unified communications clients to communicate. It was clear from my findings at the Galway site that users use unified communications in a broad selection of ways, and for different reasons. Clearly a unified communications system must be capable of providing both streamlined and clear interaction, and also accommodate the needs of these users. The most common interactions with a unified communications client, based on the results of the interviews conducted, are chat, phone calls, video calls and checking a users status in that order. In a person centric design model, each of these interactions must available whenever the person or their avatar is on screen, therefore it is extremely important to keep this in mind when developing a design language for the application. This design process continued with a round of sketching, ideation and exploration of some of the elements which had become obvious based on the last design phase, such as the inherent flaws of a traditional unified
FIGURE 12. A SKETCH SHOWING AN EVOLUTION OF THE UI TOWARDS THE FINAL DESIGN
communications client design in conveying more rich
information within the established confines of the user interface. Elements which made it into the final prototype quickly emerged from the sketching process, specifically a wider interface which allows for more information to be displayed at a larger and more scannable
scale, larger profile pictures and avatars, and a sliding scale of activity. After this came an exploration, through sketching and reference of existing systems, of the presence model of the client. Keeping the
FIGURE 13. A FINAL DESIGN SHOWING THE FINAL IMPLEMENTATION OF THE "TRAFFIC LIGHT" SYSTEM
"traffic light" (Appendix H.4) system prominent in most unified communications systems allows us to keep a level of familiarity to the system, however the status message must be separated out from this so as to allow richer use of that status, as it is currently often wasted on
"Available", "Busy" or "Do Not Disturb". Allowing colour to convey this information allows the status system to be used for conveying more rich information such as activities, time and location.
FIGURE 14. A EXPLORATION OF HOW THE PRESENCE OF A USER COULD BE DISPLAYED
Placement and location of this indicator is also crucial however, it must be clearly visible whenever the users avatar or profile is seen within the application, without being too obtrusive or indeed too unobtrusive. Various methods in which this could be accomplished were sketched out and it was finally decided that a semi transparent bar on top of the users image would be the best compromise, and also allows for extremely easy scannability due to its size and prominence.
FIGURE 15. THE IM HERE LOGO
This fairly extensive sketching and ideation stage was at this stage beginning to develop a fairly clear and consistent design language, so I felt that at this stage it would be appropriate to begin to tie all of these elements together in a single core concept. This went through a number of iterations but eventually became what is not known as 'IM Here', a play on words between 'instant messaging' and 'I am' which I feel established the correct playful and social tone for the application.
FIGURE 16. A NEAR FINAL DESIGN OF THE IM HERE 'PEOPLE' SECTION
The layout of the main 'People' section of the application was designed to be quite wide, to accommodate much larger profile images than would normally be the case in a unified communications application. This width also allows for an easy to use sorting function through which a users contacts can be sorted based on frequency of communication, availability, name, location and activity level.
FIGURE 17. FINAL IM HERE ICONOGRAPHY
As usability, user experience and a clear overall design language were to be prominent features of this application, it was important to have a well designed set of iconography which was easy to understand and 36
would allow users to easily navigate the application. Based on sketches and an examination of various communication user interfaces, I designed a set of icons using Adobe Illustrator and Photoshop which I feel are both clear and in keeping with the overall look and feel of the application. The main communication menu, or the context menu, exists when the user clicks a small arrow which appears when the roll over a contacts profile image. This menu allows users to rapidly complete any of the common interactions that they would accomplish in their UC client through a very simple and person
FIGURE 18. THE IM HERE 'CONTEXT MENU'
focused method. This menu was designed to centralise all communication with a contact in
a single, easily accessibly location which can be accessed throughout the application whenever the contacts profile picture is in view.
FIGURE 19. THE FINAL IM HERE 'PLACES' SECTION
The 'Places' section of the application was designed with a singular function, to allow users to easily find users at a specific location and contact them. To this end I kept the interface of this section to a minimal. The user essentially sees a large map, which they can move around and zoom in and out of. Each location with active contacts displays a clear square icon with a number displaying the number of contacts currently at that location. The colour of the icon is based on an average of the presences of all of the users at that location, so if for example all of the users in a location were available, it would be green, if some were and some were not it would be yellow, and if no contacts were available there it would be red. Upon clicking this icon, the user reveals the contacts at that location and can communicate with them through the context menu.
FIGURE 20. THE FINAL IM HERE 'ACTIVITIES' SECTION
The 'Activities' section was designed to provide a contextually rich way to track the activities of individual contacts and groups of users. This section allow users to view trending statuses from their group of contacts and sort through these trends. Users can also sort by location to see all of the statuses from their contacts in a specific location, such as all of their contacts in Dublin or Limerick. Users' latest status updates are displayed beside their profile picture, with the newest update appearing at the top and then so forth chronologically. As will all other areas of the application, users can communicate with their contacts directly from here using the context menu on their profile images.
9. SECOND SITE VISIT
9.1 PREPARATION Prior to finishing research at the Cisco Galway site, many of the employees interviewed as well as managers had agreed to a follow up visit to test a completed prototype and give feedback. This prototype was completed early in the Spring of 2012, and once again Mark Congiusta was contacted to help in arranging testing and scheduling with Cisco employees. Six Cisco employees were asked to complete a guided walkthrough of the final prototype and to think aloud as they did so to provide relevant and useful feedback on the system. The reason for the guided walkthrough was twofold. Firstly, the prototype had only been designed for a specific set of testing criteria. It is not fully functional, but rather an experiment in UI design meant purely for testing purposes. Therefore allowing users to move freely through such a limited system would have limited usefulness and might instead cause confusion as to why not all elements were active or capable of interaction. Secondly, a guided walkthrough allows for a more focused test, which concentrates on the main user interface and interaction elements rather than purely aesthetic elements and feedback. Prior to the site visit, declarations of informed consent and information sheets were again prepared for the participants as well as a sheet containing the steps for the guided walkthrough, to ensure that each walkthrough was repeated accurately. These documents were in text almost identical to those prepared for the first site visit, except that references to an interview were replaced with references to the guided walkthrough of the prototype.
I once again wished to keep visible equipment to a minimum for this visit, to encourage open and unpressured feedback from the participants, and to ensure that they were not distracted during the testing process. The Cisco Jabber prototype, in the form of a portable .swf Adobe Flash file, was loaded onto a laptop running the latest version of Xubuntu Linux. This file could easily be opened using the Mozilla Firefox browser installed on the system and provided a clean and distraction free testing environment. This setup was tested thoroughly before the site visit to ensure its reliability as a testing platform and it was found to meet and indeed exceed expectation as such. This laptop was also preloaded with the Audacity audio editing program, which was used along with the builtin microphone to record the participants feedback as they used to prototype for future reference. A portable video recording device was also brought to the Galway site, as it allowed for accurate capture of not only the users on-screen movements, but also their body movement and feedback. Finally, a notepad and pen were brought to allow for note taking during the testing sessions, which was vital in terms of immediately capturing important feedback and findings. 9.2 SITE VISIT The second site visit to Cisco Galway took place on March 21st between 10am and 1pm as had been scheduled with the various participants. An e-mail was sent around the Cisco Galway site to recruit potential testing participants, and participants were selected based on their availability, willingness to participate and job. A broad range of different participants was selected based on these attributes, and time was scheduled using the in-house calendaring system to ensure the availability of each participant. Participants had again been selected from various elements of the Cisco Jabber team, including software engineers, quality assurance, 41
management and user experience design. Many of these participants were in different and dispersed areas of the Cisco Galway site. For this reason, and because of the tight testing schedule, only 20 to 25 minutes was allocated for testing with each participant. Testing was however delayed a number of weeks until March 21st due to scheduling conflicts at the Cisco site. This meant that most of the feedback received from this testing session could not be fed back into the final prototype. The findings from this testing session are however still an important result of this design process, perhaps more so even than the prototype itself. Most of the testing took place in various meeting rooms around the Cisco Galway campus as it was felt that this was more appropriate for testing. These meeting rooms provided an uninterrupted space with few distractions which led to an improved testing environment. These meeting spaces were also equipped with numerous power points which ensured the reliability of the testing equipment. Participants, upon entering the testing environment were given a brief description of the research project they would be involved in, as well as a description of the testing process they would be involved in on that occasion. They were also provided with an information sheet detailing information about the project and a declaration of informed consent which they were asked to sign in order to begin testing. Participants were then presented with the prototype which had been pre-loaded and refreshed in the Firefox browser before each testing session. They were asked to carry out a number of pre-defined actions and to comment on their experience as they were doing so. Their actions were recorded using video, audio and written notes. After they had completed the tasks, they were thanked and asked to contact me or my supervisor if they had any further questions or feedback. The declaration of informed consent forms were collected, however the information sheets were once again left with each interviewee in case 42
they wished to review it further. A further e-mail was forwarded to each participant thanking them for taking part. A full video walkthrough of the IM Here application can be viewed here: http://youtu.be/mlVJo0J9j5E This shows the exact path that users were expected to follow. 9.3 FINDINGS Following the second site visit to Cisco Galway, I collected my written notes from the site visit and began to re-examine the video and audio content I had collected while there. This data was not transcribed as I felt that the complex interplay between the users and the software system, as captured on video would be extremely difficult to transform in any sort of meaningful or useful way to a text based transcription. Instead I took revised notes as I re-examined the video data numerous times. Again, in line with Saffer (2010) I made the data physical by arranging my notes on paper and rearranging it to find meaningful relationships and common threads in the data. It was clear from this re-ordered data that common and clear themes had emerged from this round of testing. Using these common themes I again recoded the data and re-analysed both the media content and my own notes to find the core problems being found during this testing session. • Users were concerned as to whether people affected by colourblindness would be able to use the application. While none of the actual users tested suffered from colour blindness, many were struck by the prominence of colours as an element of the user interface design. This was an element that I had certainly overlooked in this prototype, despite having come across it previously in my research. This could however be easily 43
redressed in a future redesign by utilising more and better iconography and relying less on colour as a differentiating feature in the user interface. • Users found it difficult and disliked the concept of averaging the presence of a group of people (as occurs in the 'Places' tab of the prototype). People are either available individually or not. None of the users tested realized that the colour variations here referred to the general availability of users in a given location, until it was pointed out to them. Therefore this could certainly be seen as a failure of the prototype. • Users in general found the user interface clean and easy to navigate. Comments were made on the size and readability of the text, as well as the large size of clickable icons. Specific note was made to the lack of "clutter" within the user interface. Mouse-overs largely worked well, however due to a flaw with the Flash prototype, sometimes the 'Mouse off' state of buttons did not work every time. This caused some confusion. • Some users found the grey text difficult to read on some backgrounds. This is certainly a readability issue for many users, however I feel that this could be easily resolved by increasing the size and contrast of the text where this is a problem. • Users were concerned that they might not always recognise a user by their profile picture alone. This is a clear issue for users in larger environments such as large enterprises, corporations or universities. This could be remedied by including the name of the contact at all times with the profile picture. • Users found the menu system and call transfer system relatively straightforward. There appears to be no issue with the iconography developed for these scenarios, and most users 44
seemed to be comfortable in performing these actions without any guidance.
Throughout this project I have endeavoured to learn more about unified communications systems, their presence system, awareness technologies in general and the methods in which these systems could be improved. I also endeavoured to use the skills that I have learned throughout my time in university including interaction design, interface design and prototyping to design such an improved system, and develop a testable prototype. I believe that I was largely successful in gaining a deep understanding of existing literature in regard to presence and awareness models in unified communication. This understanding of academic literature on this subject helped me to design what I believe is an excellent, if somewhat incomplete, unified communications system which builds upon the current state of the art in unified communications and introduces some new concepts into the discussion of interface design in this area, such as a more person, place and activity focused interface, a focus on people and faces as core communicators of identity, and a level of abstraction to presence as I showed in both the 'Places' and 'Activities' sections of the final prototype. As I previously pointed out, the final testing prototype was neither complete nor free from flaws, however the second site visit to Cisco Galway allowed me to immediately discover some of these flaws, and to show how they could be rectified. Given more time, I believe that this prototype could easily be honed to a complete software package with a unique approach to interaction and communication for users. This project allowed me to grow my skills in terms of research, design and prototyping to an extent which I think would not have been otherwise possible. Issues which occurred during this project during the design and prototyping phases allowed me to problem solve and come up with new and I believe better solutions where applicable.
In terms of future directions for the project, scalability would be an issue I would have liked to have addressed. Most of the design work for this project was based upon the assumption of a relatively small population, however in larger populations such as enterprise it would be useful to implement search functionality and an improved method of browsing the larger population. I also feel that this application would be perfect to port to mobile interfaces such as Android, iPhone and Windows phone. The core design principles as outlined in this report could be transferred to any of these platforms with equal success, and in many ways the prototype is already cross-platform, being usable on Windows, Macintosh and Linux based machines which support Adobe Flash.
 Pleasant, B (2008) What UC is and isn't, http://searchunifiedcommunications.techtarget.com/feature/WhatUC-is-and-isnt, 16/12/11  Redström, J., Ljungstrand, P. and Jaksetic, P. (2000) The ChatterBox; Using Text Manipulation in an Entertaining Information Display. Proceedings of Graphics Interface 2000, Montréal, Canada. Proceedings of Graphics Interface 2000, Montréal, Canada  Emacs-Jabber Project (2011) Presence, http://emacsjabber.sourceforge.net/manual-0.8.0/Presence.html, 16/12/11  Skype (2011) Status and Mood, http://www.skype.com/intl/en/business-userguide/pc/essentials/status-mood/, 16/12/11  Bødker, S. and Christiansen, E. (2006) Computer Support for Social Awareness in Flexible Work, Computer Supported Cooperative Woek, 15(1), p.1-28.  Saunders, A. (2006) SaundersLog.com, http://www.saunderslog.com/2006/05/23/the-value-of-presence/, 17/12/11  Steve's Tech Journal (2006) Skype identity crisis?, http://www.ampersand.com/blog/2006/05/22/skype-identitycrisis/, 16/12/11  Schmidt, K. (2002) The Problem with Awareness: Introductory Remarks on Awareness in CSCW , Computer Supported Cooperative Work, 11(3-4), p.285-298.  Bjerrum, E. and S. Bødker (2003): Knowledge Sharing in the „„new oﬃce‟‟ – Possibility or Problem? K. Kuutti, E. Karsten G., Fitzpatrick, P. Dourish and K. Schmidt (eds): Proceedings of the Eighth European Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work, 14–18 September 2003, Helsinki, Finland, pp. 199–218
 Bly, S., & Dourish, P. (1992). Portholes: Supporting awareness in a distributed group. Proceedings of the 1992 Conference on Computer–Human Interaction, p. 541–547. New York: ACM.  Biehl, J et al. (2010) “MyUnity: Building awareness and fostering community in the workplace,” FXPAL-TR-09-21 and arXiv:1006.5024  Gaver, B. (2002) Provocative Awareness, Computer Supported Cooperative Work, 11(3-4), p.475-493.  Bardram, J.E. and Hansen T.R. (2010) Context-based workplace awareness concepts and technologies for supporting distributed awareness in a hospital environment. Computer Supported Cooperative Work, 19, pp. 105–138.  Cramton, C.D. (2001) The Mutual Knowledge Problem and Its Consequences for Dispersed Collaboration. Organization Science, 12, 3, 346-371.  Armstrong, D., Cole, P. B (1995) Managing distances and differences in geographically distributed work groups. Diversity in Work Teams, American Psychological Association, Washington, DC, pp 187-216  Kraut, R., Fish, R., Root, B., Chalfonte, B. (1990) Informal communication in organisation: Form function and technology. People's reaction to technology in factories, offices and aerospace. The Claremont Symposium on applied social psychology, Sage, 145-199  Phillip, J. and McGrath, A. (2000) “Sharing Serendipity in the Workplace”, Proceedings of the Conference on Collaborative Virtual Environments (CVE), San Francisco, pp. 173-179.  Whittaker, S., Frohlich, D., and Daly-Jones, O. (1994) “Informal workplace communication: What is it like and how might we support it?”, Proceedings of the Conference on Computer Human Interaction (CHI) ‘94, Boston, MA, pp. 131-137.  Greenberg, S. (1996) Peepholes: Low Cost Awareness of One‟s Community. Short paper, CHI‟96 Companion, Vancouver, 206, 207.
 Wolff, P. (2011) SkypeJournal.com, http://skypejournal.com/blog/2011/06/28/new-skype-beta-uses-iminterop-code/, 17/12/11  XMPP Standards Foundation. (2011). Home. Available: http://xmpp.org/. Last accessed 23/03/2012.  Elliot, B. and Blood, S. (2011) Magic Quadrant for Unified Communications. Gartner Research. Note G00214025  Saffer, D (2010). Designing for Interaction. Berkeley: New Riders.  Rennecker, J. (2005) “Promoting Awareness in Distributed Mobile Organizations: A cultural and technological challenge.” GROUP'05, Sanibel, Florida, USA, November 6-9, 2005.
Armstrong, D., Cole, P. B (1995) Managing distances and differences in geographically distributed work groups. Diversity in Work Teams, American Psychological Association, Washington, DC, pp 187-216 Bardram, J.E. and Hansen T.R. (2010) Context-based workplace awareness concepts and technologies for supporting distributed awareness in a hospital environment. Computer Supported Cooperative Work, 19, pp. 105–138. Biehl, J et al. (2010) “MyUnity: Building awareness and fostering community in the workplace,” FXPAL-TR-09-21 and arXiv:1006.5024 Bjerrum, E. and S. Bødker (2003): Knowledge Sharing in the „„new oﬃce‟‟ – Possibility or Problem? K. Kuutti, E. Karsten G., Fitzpatrick, P. Dourish and K. Schmidt (eds): Proceedings of the Eighth European Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work, 14–18 September 2003, Helsinki, Finland, pp. 199–218 Bly, S., & Dourish, P. (1992). Portholes: Supporting awareness in a distributed group. Proceedings of the 1992 Conference on Computer– Human Interaction, p. 541–547. New York: ACM. Bødker, S. and Christiansen, E. (2006) Computer Support for Social Awareness in Flexible Work, Computer Supported Cooperative Woek, 15(1), p.1-28. Bødker, S. and Christiansen, E. (2004). Designing for ephemerality and prototypicality, In DIS '04: Proceedings of the 2004 conference on Designing interactive systems, p. 255-260. ACM Press. Cramton, C.D. (2001) The Mutual Knowledge Problem and Its Consequences for Dispersed Collaboration. Organization Science, 12, 3, 346-371. DeGuzzman, E., Yau, M., Gagliano, A. et al. (2004) Exploring the Design and Use of Peripheral Displays of Awareness Information. CHI2004, Vienna, 1247-1250.
Elliot, B. and Blood, S. (2011) Magic Quadrant for Unified Communications. Gartner Research. Note G00214025 Emacs-Jabber Project (2011) Presence, http://emacsjabber.sourceforge.net/manual-0.8.0/Presence.html, 16/12/11 Fuchs, L., Pankoke-Babatz, U. and Prinz, W. (1995), Supporting cooperative awareness with local event mechanisms: The GroupDesk system, in Proceedings of ECSCW‟95, Stockholm, Sweden, 11-15 September, Kluwer Academic Publishers, p. 247-262. Gaver, B. (2002) Provocative Awareness, Computer Supported Cooperative Work, 11(3-4), p.475-493. Greenberg, S. (1996) Peepholes: Low Cost Awareness of One‟s Community. Short paper, CHI‟96 Companion, Vancouver, 206, 207. Healey, P. et al. (2007) Communication Spaces, Computer Supported Cooperative Work, 17(2-3), p.169-193. Heath, C.C. and Luff, P. (1992) Collaboration and control: Crisis management and multimedia technology in London Underground control rooms. Computer Supported Cooperative Work. An international journal. 1(1-2), pp 69-94. Hogan, K., Stubbs, R. (2003). Can‟t get Through 8 Barriers to Communication. Grenta, LA: Pelican Publishing Company. Kraut, R., Fish, R., Root, B., Chalfonte, B. (1990) Informal communication in organisation: Form function and technology. People's reaction to technology in factories, offices and aerospace. The Claremont Symposium on applied social psychology, Sage, 145-199 Redström, J., Ljungstrand, P. and Jaksetic, P. (2000) The ChatterBox; Using Text Manipulation in an Entertaining Information Display. Proceedings of Graphics Interface 2000, Montréal, Canada. Proceedings of Graphics Interface 2000, Montréal, Canada Rennecker, J. (2005) “Promoting Awareness in Distributed Mobile Organizations: A cultural and technological challenge.” GROUP'05, Sanibel, Florida, USA, November 6-9, 2005. 52
Robertson, T. (2002) The Public Availability of Actions and Artefacts, Computer Supported Cooperative Work, 11(3-4), p.299-316. Pallot, M., Bergmann, U., Kuhnle, H., Pawar, K.S., Riedel, J. CKH. (2010) “Collaborative Working Environments: Distance Factors Affecting Collaboration”, Proceedings of the 16th International Conference on Concurrent Enterprising, ICE'2010, 2010. Phillip, J. and McGrath, A. (2000) “Sharing Serendipity in the Workplace”, Proceedings of the Conference on Collaborative Virtual Environments (CVE), San Francisco, pp. 173-179. Pleasant, B (2008) What UC is and isn't, http://searchunifiedcommunications.techtarget.com/feature/WhatUC-is-and-isnt, 16/12/11 Saffer, D (2010). Designing for Interaction. Berkeley: New Riders. Saunders, A. (2006) SaundersLog.com, http://www.saunderslog.com/2006/05/23/the-value-of-presence/, 17/12/11 Schmidt, K. (2002) The Problem with Awareness: Introductory Remarks on Awareness in CSCW , Computer Supported Cooperative Work, 11(3-4), p.285-298. Skype (2011) Status and Mood, http://www.skype.com/intl/en/business-userguide/pc/essentials/status-mood/, 16/12/11 Steve's Tech Journal (2006) Skype identity crisis?, http://www.ampersand.com/blog/2006/05/22/skype-identitycrisis/, 16/12/11 Wiese, J. et al. (2011) Beyond „yesterday‟s tomorrow‟: Towards the design of awareness technologies for the contemporary worker. [ONLINE] Available at: http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~jwwiese/publications/wiese-myUnity.pdf. [Accessed 23 September 11]. Whittaker, S., Frohlich, D., and Daly-Jones, O. (1994) “Informal workplace communication: What is it like and how might we support 53
it?”, Proceedings of the Conference on Computer Human Interaction (CHI) „94, Boston, MA, pp. 131-137. Wolff, P. (2011) SkypeJournal.com, http://skypejournal.com/blog/2011/06/28/new-skype-beta-uses-iminterop-code/, 17/12/11 XMPP Standards Foundation. (2011). Home. Available: http://xmpp.org/. Last accessed 23/03/2012.
13.A. INTERVIEW RECRUITMENT E-MAIL To whom it may concern, My name is William Kennedy, a student at the University of Limerick. Some of you might remember me from my internship over the summer with the UE department on site. I am currently working on my final year project, which involves evaluating how people use presence technologies, such as exist in Jabber, CUPC, WebEx and Skype, on a daily basis and how such technologies could be improved by either redesign, improved interaction design or augmentation of features. I am writing to you in regard to taking part in a short 30 minute interview on your usage of presence technologies, your habits, personal experiences and opinions on using presence technologies. I will not be asking questions about technical aspects of presence, but rather how you use it in your day to day work life. This research will be conducted under best practice guidelines as regards privacy and confidentiality. Recordings made during these interviews will not be passed on to third parties, and you will at no point be identified personally or by name and all data will remain anonymous. Your feedback and the conclusions I draw from our interview may be shared with Cisco with a view to improving presence technologies, but you will remain anonymous. The more interviewees which participate, the more information I will have to improve the usefulness and usability of presence technology, so please participate if you have the time. Please contact either myself or Mark Congiusta if you are interested and we can set up a time for your interview. This round of interviews will take place on October 20th at the offices of Cisco in Oranmore, Galway. Yours Faithfully, 55
William Kennedy firstname.lastname@example.org
13.B. DECLARATION OF INFORMED CONSENT I, the undersigned, hereby declare that I am willing to take part in a research project that is part of a Final Year Project at the University of Limerick. The nature of this study is as follows: Title: Presence anywhere: Facilitating an active presence environment from any location using presence systems such as XMPP and Skype Purpose: In this study I aim to understand how users use presence technologies such as exist in XMPP and Skype, and to evaluate how these technologies could best be improvement through redesign or augmentation so as to better serve the end user. I also aim to discover, and in turn design for, how users use awareness information in terms of building communal awareness within an organization, both local and over dispersed distances. I declare that I have been fully briefed on the nature of this study and my role in it and have been given the opportunity to ask questions before agreeing to participate. I understand that my role in this evaluation is as a co-evaluator and that this is not an evaluation of my ability, knowledge or intelligence, rather it is an evaluation of the system or product in terms of how usable it is. I fully understand that there is no obligation on me to participate in this study and that I am free to withdraw my participation at any time without having to explain or give a reason. I am also entitled to full confidentiality in terms of the details of my participation and my personal details. I understand that some or all of the data (verbal and behavioural) may be used (quoted) in the report on the evaluation for illustrative purposes but I shall not be identifiable from this data either in the body of the report or in appendices. I also understand that my participation in this study may be recorded by video or audio means as well as in the form of notes taken by observers and I agree to this. However, should I feel uncomfortable 57
with being recorded at any time, I can request that all recording equipment be switched off. I am entitled to copies of all recordings made during the session if I wish to have them. I acknowledge the fact that deception and concealment are inappropriate to and not required in this study and that no attempt will be made to elicit information or actions from me using these means. ___________________ Signature of participant _________ Date
13.C. PARTICIPANT INFORMATION SHEET
Dear Cisco Employee, Thank you for agreeing to take part in this round of interviews in the use of presence and awareness technologies in a corporate environment. My name is William Kennedy and I am a student at the University of Limerick, and this study is a part of my final year project. Over the course of the interview I hope to have a fairly informal discussion about the way that you personally use presence technologies, any problems or issues you may have with presence, what you like about presence and what you think could be improved. While I may from time to time prompt you with questions, feel free to talk about any area of presence you wish as the main point of these interviews is to get your unique viewpoint. There are just a few points of information of which you should be aware: Recording: This interview will be recorded by me using a portable recording device. I hope that the device will be as unobtrusive as possible and will not hamper your ability to speak freely during the interview. However, if you feel uncomfortable with being recorded in this manner, please let me know and I will do my best to arrange an alternative. Time: The interview should take just over 30 minutes, but you are free to leave at any time if you should so wish. Data Privacy: All data collected during this research including audio files will remain anonymous, and will only be available for access by myself and my supervisor, Luigina Ciolfi, and only for the purposes of research. In 59
my report, fictional names will be used to keep the participants information anonymous, and the location of the study will not be disclosed. Physical documents and tapes will be kept locked in a cabinet in my supervisors office, while electronic copies will be kept in an encrypted, password protected folder on my computer, which is also password protected. Rights as a participant: As a voluntary participant in this study, you have the right at any time not to answer any question that you feel uncomfortable or unable to answer, without the need for explanation. Likewise you are free to end the interview at any point at your own discretion. It is your right not to disclose any information which you may find damaging either personally, to another employee or the company as a whole. Please enjoy the interview Yours Faithfully William Kennedy
13.D. SEMI-STRUCTURED INTERVIEW QUESTIONS Mood 1. Do you often use emoticons to convey your mood while chatting with co-workers? 2. Do you think this is an effective way to convey mood? Why? 3. Have you ever used an emoticon in your status message to convey mood? 4. Do you feel that a system that used rich personal information such as mood is more useful than a broad DND, Available or Busy presence model? 5. Do you feel that you accurately convey your mood through IM? 6. Have you ever been in a situation when you were contacted by a coworker, but in no mood to talk to them? 7. Do you feel that people equate Availability with mood? For example, if someone is available, then they are obviously in the mood to talk? 8. If so, do you feel this is appropriate?
Presence and Meaning 1. Do you often derive judgments from your co-workers presence? For example, if you saw that someone was always online at 8am and never logged off until 7pm, would you think of this person as a hard worker? 2. Do you ever check people‟s presence outside of when you want to call or IM them? 3. Do you use presence as a way of knowing if you can approach them at their desk or office?
4. Would you compare viewing the presence of your colleagues to walking past their cubicle or office? If not, what would you compare it to? 5. If you see a co-workers status as „Available‟, do you feel completely comfortable in contacting them, or would you like more contextual cues? 6. What do you understand by the word „presence‟? Generally first and then specifically in the case of unified communications? 7. Do you notice patterns in your own presence use, or do you change your presence often to suit the situation? 8. If I were to describe your unified communications as your „home‟, what would you describe your contacts as? Neighbours? Friends? 9. Do you feel that it would be useful to be able to display yourself differently to different people in the office? For example, friends at work as opposed to managers or team members. 10. Do you ever find a conflict between being occupied by a task you are working on, but still being „available‟ to communicate? 11. Do you feel that a presence system in a workplace leads to increased accountability? 12. Step me through a scenario where you would contact a co-worker through a unified communications client.
Distances and attitudes 1. Do you find it more difficult to accurately judge when it is appropriate to contact someone in a distant off site location, for example the US or China?
2. Do you ever feel that you tend to group employees at such other sites together based on their location? 3. Do you feel that employees working in a distant office tend to be similar to one another? (For example, all employees working in San Jose) 4. Do you feel there is an „us and them‟ attitude to contacting distant offices? 5. Do you feel that presence information helps to bridge this gap? (Skip if you feel there is no significant gap) 6. Do you feel that improvements in presence could likewise help to improve this gap? (Skip if you feel there is no significant gap)
Expanding Presence 1. Would you find it useful to know your co-workers location as an element of their presence? 2. Would you find the tracking of location information through presence to be an affront to your privacy? 3. If so, are there any exceptions to this? 4. If you were able to disable this feature, do you think people would judge you negatively for doing so? 5. Do you think that understanding the location of your colleagues while they are working from the road might give you cues as to when you were most likely to get a response? 6. Would you find it useful to see the “Moods” of your co-workers, for example through an Emoticon as part of their presence? 7. Do you think you would be “honest” in sharing your mood, or would you put on the „brave face‟? 63
8. Would a „bad mood‟ icon disincline you from contacting a person at that time? 9. Do you feel that sharing personal information such as mood and location is appropriate within a corporate organization? 10. Do you feel that presence as it currently exists in clients such as XMPP and Skype provides a rich source of information? 11. Would you find it useful if presence conveyed your preferred method of being contacted at that specific moment? For example „Chat only‟, „Phone only‟ or „Video, Phone and Chat available‟ 12. Would you find it useful if you could set the urgency of a phone call or chat message, for example like can be done with e-mail? 13. As a recipient, would you find it useful to know how urgently someone was trying to contact you? 14. Would you find it useful if presence linked with your calendar and informed users that you were in an important meeting?
13.E. CISCO EMPLOYEE SURVEY Age: ___________ Occupation: ______________________ What is your preferred Unified Communications client? [_] Cisco Jabber [_] CUPC [_] WebEx Connect [_] Skype [_] Other (Please Specify) ________________ How effective would you say the presence system is in your chosen client? [_]Poor [_]Excellent How would you rate your effectiveness in using presence technologies: [_]Poor [_]Excellent How many times per day do you consult your Unified Communication client (other than when being contacted by another user)? [_] Never [_]1-25 [_]26-50 [_] 50+ [_]Okay [_]Good [_]Very Good [_]Okay [_]Good [_]Very Good
Do you ever check people‟s presence outside of when you want to call or IM them? [_] Yes [_]No
Do you use presence as a reliable way of knowing if you can approach co-workers at their desk/ office? [_] Yes [_]No
If you see a co-workers status as „Available‟, do you feel completely comfortable in contacting them, or would you like more information before making that decision? [_] Feel completely comfortable 65
[_] Feel somewhat comfortable [_] Would like more information Do you often derive judgments from your co-workers presence? For example, if you saw that someone was always online at 8am and never logged off until 7pm, would you think of this person as a hard worker? [_] Yes [_]No
Do you feel that it would be useful to be able to display yourself differently to different people in the office? For example, friends at work as opposed to managers or team members. [_] Yes [_]No
Do you feel that a presence system in a workplace leads to increased accountability? [_] Yes [_]No
Do you often use emoticons to convey your mood while chatting with co-workers? [_] Yes [_]No
Do you think this is an effective way to convey mood? [_] Yes [_]No
Do you feel that people equate Availability with mood? For example, if someone is unavailable or busy, then they are obviously not in the mood to talk? [_] Yes [_]No [_] Sometimes
Would you be less inclined to contact someone if you knew they were busy or in a bad mood? [_] Yes [_]No
Do you find it more difficult to accurately judge when it is appropriate to contact someone in a distant off site location, for example the US or China? [_] Yes [_]No 66
Do you ever feel that you tend to group employees at such other sites together based on their location? (i.e. “I like it, but the people in San Jose might not.”) [_] Yes [_]No
Please tick which extra information would help you in making the decision to contact co-worker (tick all that apply): [_] Location within the office [_] Geolocation [_] Mood [_] How busy they are [_] If they are in a meeting [_] If they are already talking/chatting to someone [_] Preferred method of communication (e.g. Chat Only, Phone only, Video only) As a recipient, would you find it useful to know how urgently someone was trying to contact you? [_] Yes [_]No
Do you feel that you can get a general „sense‟ of the office by checking your co-workers presences? (For example, if the office is full or empty, how busy the office is, etc) [_] Yes [_]No
13.G. SURVEY RECRUITMENT E-MAIL To whom it may concern, My name is William Kennedy, a student at the University of Limerick. Some of you might remember me from my internship over the summer with the UE department on site. I am currently working on my final year project, which involves evaluating how people use presence technologies, such as exist in Jabber, CUPC, WebEx and Skype, on a daily basis and how such technologies could be improved by either redesign, improved interaction design or augmentation of features. I am e-mailing you to ask if any of you would be interested in taking part in a short survey which will ask you some questions in this area. The survey is anonymous, and no information gathered through this survey will be used to identify you personally or by name, and the results will be kept completely private except for my FYP supervisors and myself. I‟m hoping to get as many Cisco workers to respond as possible in order for my results to be worthwhile, so if you have a space 5-10 minutes, please take part. If you are interested, please contact either myself or Mark Congiusta and we can forward the survey along to you. Yours Faithfully William Kennedy email@example.com
13.H. INTERVIEW TRANSCRIPTIONS 13.H.1 INTERVIEW A INTERVIEWER: I'll just start off by asking you a few questions and
you can just feel free to talk about whatever topic you want, whatever comes into your head from it. INTERVIEWEE: INTERVIEWER: Sure, yeah. So we'll start off with how presence affects mood
and how mood affects presence. So do you find you often use emoticons to convey your mood? INTERVIEWEE: Um, yeah, I do but I use a limited set of emoticons,
right? I use like the happy one and the sad one, and that's pretty much it right. So... You know I know people have a wider repertoire than I do and that's just... uh... and actually some of our customers... we ship Jabber I think with eighteen of them. Something like that. Fourteen or eighteen around there. But actually one of our customers [removed] has requested the ability to add in their own custom ones. So apparently they have people who really love emoticons. INTERVIEWER: INTERVIEWEE: INTERVIEWER: convey mood? INTERVIEWEE: Yeah. In think, you know, they're simplistic. Which Okay. But myself, I'm kind of limited in my repertoire. Okay. Do you find them kind of an effective way to
is why I think I only use the two or three that I do. Um... I think they communicate. I use them to communicate when I'm making a joke. Sarcasm, right, cos sarcasm never comes across in typed conversation. Um... Or if there's... If I'm unhappy with the situation. Rather than berating someone about it, you know you throw an
emoticon in there, you let them know you're not thrilled. It's kind of a polite way of being disappointed. INTERVIEWER: message? INTERVIEWEE: INTERVIEWER: INTERVIEWEE: INTERVIEWER: anywhere? INTERVIEWEE: You know I don't think I've seen anyone do it. I I don't. In my presence you mean? Sure. Yeah, yeah. I actually don't think I ever have. Um. Have you ever noticed anyone else doing it Right. Do you ever use emoticons in your status
don't think so. I don't think so. INTERVIEWER: Okay, that's interesting. Other than emoticons, do
you feel that you can convey your mood through IM? INTERVIEWEE: INTERVIEWER: INTERVIEWEE: INTERVIEWER: INTERVIEWEE: Through IM or through presence? Through text only, say in IM. Without emoticons? Yeah. Um yes. Again I think there's types of speech that
don't get communicated. Sarcasm is definitely one of them. Joking that kind of stuff. You want to be sure that people know you're making a joke and not being serious. And also, I know it's not the same thing but I'll sometimes write a really angry e-mail and then edit it so it's not so angry. So I think that one of the problems with text is that it's easy to over express yourself sometimes. So I try to edit those moments out. I'm not always successful but I try.
INTERVIEWER: Not Disturb'? INTERVIEWEE:
Fantastic. Do you feel that more rich information
such as mood is more useful than just say 'Available', 'Busy' or 'Do
Yeah, cos actually some of my presence states... I
set one the other day which was "Reading e-mails while weeping", because I had just back from vacation that day. So that was my status all week because that's all I was doing. So yeah, I think sometimes you can convey something. INTERVIEWER: Do you think sometimes that people can equate
availability with mood. So say if someone was set to 'Do Not Disturb' you might think they were in a bad mood. INTERVIEWEE: I don't. Those are like canned presence states.
They're set by default. So I would read emotional intent into those. The only time I might do that is if it was a custom presence state, and even then it would depend. So if someone said 'Busy working on a project', In wouldn't equate that with mood. But if someone said 'Leave me alone', I would equate that with mood. So it would depend on the explicitness of the status. INTERVIEWER: Okay. Have you ever been in a situation where you
were contacted by a co-worker but were in no mood to talk to them. INTERVIEWEE: INTERVIEWER: Oh... I'll say yes. I'll just leave it at yes okay? Sure. So we can move to something else here. So do
you ever derive judgements from your co-workers presences, for example habit they have. If someone is always online at 8am and never goes offline until 11pm, do you think of that person as a hard worker? INTERVIEWEE: Yeah, and it's kind of unfair, because some people
just leave their computers on all night. So for example if I come online here and I see someone online in San Jose I'm like "What the hell is wrong with this person, it's like three in the morning over there!" But 72
yeah, I sometimes do. But I think it probably those specific cases where time is involved or time has shifted. We're talking about someone eight hours away. I guess maybe if I sign on very late at night and I see someone. But it's outside of working hours I think. INTERVIEWER: Okay that's interesting. Do you check peoples
presences outside of when you actually need to contact them, just to see if they're in or whatever? INTERVIEWEE: INTERVIEWER: Yeah, absolutely. All the time. Just to make a comparison, would you compare
checking someone's presence to walking past their desk or office? INTERVIEWEE: Yeah, I think that's a fair statement. I think so. The
one difference would be that you can be 'Available' and not be in your office. Now I think that might be splitting hairs but like, I can be in a conference room or at home even. When I work from home I set my status to 'Available'. Actually I usually set it to 'Working from home' just so people know they can't just walk past my desk and find me. INTERVIEWER: INTERVIEWEE: INTERVIEWER: Okay so you set that distinction. I do set that distinction. So if you see your co-workers status as available,
would you automatically feel comfortable in contacting them. INTERVIEWEE: INTERVIEWER: Yeah, absolutely. Do you notice patterns in your presence use? So
like every day at the same time. INTERVIEWEE: Um, no. I think it really depends on what my
schedule for the day is. Cos you know, I'm in a lot of meetings during the day. My presence is set to 'Away' or 'Busy' or in a meeting, I'd say 50% of the day my presence is that status. Aside of that I usually try to keep it available or some variant. 73
Another comparison, if you were to describe your
unified communications client as your home, how would you describe your contacts. Would you describe them as neighbours, or friends or co-workers? INTERVIEWEE: I think it depends. I set up groups, I divide people
into groups. They're basic ones. So I have my team, and I can always check who's available on my team. That's my top group. Then I have a UE management team that's [names removed], because I tend to talk to those guys quite a bit. And because they're all in different time zones so I need a quick view of that. And then funny enough I have a group for managers here and people here that I work with but I check that less often I think, because when I'm involved with them I'm usually in the same room as them. INTERVIEWER: INTERVIEWEE: INTERVIEWER: So you can literally walk past their desk. Yeah. That's interesting. Would you find it useful if you
could have different presences for different groups. INTERVIEWEE: be. INTERVIEWER: Yeah, I mean a joke came up when I was discussing I would think yes, but I'm not sure what it would
be. I can see it would have a benefit but I'm not sure what that would
this with some colleagues that you might say 'Hard at work' for the boss and then 'Ready for a drink' for your friends. INTERVIEWEE: Yeah, I think the level of familiarity or reverence...
I'm not going to say honesty but I think the level of familiarity would change... Like if I was to do that between those four groups I mentioned. With my team I would be, you know joking, then with the UE managers more formal, the managers here more formal again and then everyone else very formal.
Sure that makes sense. You mentioned familiarity
there, so do you think it would be useful if there was some algorithm which said "You talk to this guy in a very casual manner" or if you could set that maybe. INTERVIEWEE: Yes I do. So one of the things we're hoping to get in
the [Jabber] client is favourites. So I talk to this person all the time. I know that I can talk to them in a certain way. INTERVIEWER: communication. INTERVIEWEE: Sometimes, yeah. Especially if I know that people, if Do you ever feel that there's a conflict between you
being busy with a task but still needing to be available for
[names removed] are rushing to meet a deadline and they need me to review something yet I'm stuck in meetings. So there are occasions. So I wouldn't say it happens a lot but there are times when it does happen. INTERVIEWER: Okay. So do you think in a situation like where you
have here. Where everyone is online with their presence. Do you think that can lead to increased accountability? INTERVIEWEE: I think... Part of me wants to say yes, but I think it
depends on how your team or manager uses presence. If they use use it as a monitoring tool, then yes. But I think if everyone did that, everyone would just set their status to 'Available' all the time. But I think if people did do it that way it would be detrimental to the utility of it. I think it's about people. INTERVIEWER: So could you just quickly step me through, in your
head, how you would go about contacting someone from your desk using UC. From start to finish. INTERVIEWEE: Sure. It would depend on what it was I needed to
contact them for. Who it was, where they were. Say I needed to contact [name removed]. Actually sometimes she'll IM me from over 75
there and I'll just get up and walk over. Because I'm not the world's greatest typer. It's easier just to do that. But let's just say someone on a different floor. Obviously if I have them in my buddy list I'll check out their presence in my buddy list. And then depending on their presence, if their presence is 'Available' or 'Away', I'll IM them first. If they're 'In a Meeting' I'd probably IM them as well. But if they're in 'Do Not Disturb' or in a WebEx meeting I'd probably send them an e-mail and ask them to contact me when they're free. So say I send them an IM and they say "No problem", then I'll just escalate that right to a call. But say they're not then I'll just tell them to ping me back when they're free. INTERVIEWER: INTERVIEWEE: Right. Then say someone's not in my buddy list then I'll
just do a search for them. There are people here that don't use a contact list, they do everything through search. Which is fine. Essentially you just have a huge buddy list. From that point on it's pretty much the same thing. INTERVIEWER: Do you find it actually difficult to know, based
solely on their presence, if you can contact someone in an offsite location? Or would you find it the same as someone on a different floor. INTERVIEWEE: Yeah, I think it's the same. The time difference does
change it a bit. If someone's available but it's like 3am there. They're available but I'm still gonna think twice about contacting them. If they're up at 3am they're either crazy or they're doing something and they don't need me bothering them. So I think the time zone plays a big factor in that. INTERVIEWER: Do you think you tend to group employees in other
sites together based on their location. INTERVIEWEE: Yes, absolutely, yeah. 76
So would you say there's a kind of an 'us and them'
attitude? In any way confrontational? INTERVIEWEE: No, I don't think confrontational. I just think that if
there's a different time zone, there's obviously that. Obviously if I'm asking them a question on a specific subject, obviously they know about that than I do. That's more of an "I'm going to them for information". And the reverse is true, if they're coming to us. INTERVIEWER: Would you find it useful to know your co-workers
exact locations as an element of presence? INTERVIEWEE: Sometimes. I think it could be interesting. If
someone's in a meeting and I know that they're in a conference room and I really need to get that person, that could be useful. But I think it's limited. INTERVIEWER: Okay, so obviously that's the office environment,
but say somebody was on the road. Would you find it useful to know where they were? Say an airport, as opposed to a bar or cafe. If you knew they were more busy at that point in time. INTERVIEWEE: INTERVIEWER: That's a fair point. That could be useful. Would you find that kind of tracking of information
to be an affront to your privacy? INTERVIEWEE: Yeah, like you say, I don't know how often I'd want
to let people know that I was at a bar. So yeah, I think you would definitely need the ability to turn it on and off. INTERVIEWER: Okay. So if you were able to disable that feature, do
you think that people might judge you for doing that? INTERVIEWEE: Okay, so here's a thought, maybe I don't turn it off,
maybe I can set the accuracy of it. So, I'm not in the pub, I'm in Galway. So I can set the specificity. So then if I'm in an airport I can
get more specific. So I'm in Dublin airport as opposed to say, the city of Dublin. INTERVIEWER: And what about a check- in system, so it didn't
actually track you but you could check in. INTERVIEWEE: INTERVIEWER: Yeah I that would be a good compromise. Okay. Do you think you would be honest sharing
your mood or would you put on the 'brave face'? INTERVIEWEE: I think it would depend on the situation. Sometimes
I wouldn't, sometimes I would. INTERVIEWER: So I mean, if you were genuinely in a bad mood,
would you share that with the office? INTERVIEWEE: If that mood was bad enough that I didn't want to
talk, yes. Or if I felt I had a really good reason to be in a bad mood. I think it would depend on the reason I was in a bad mood. INTERVIEWER: Okay, and if you saw a bad mood icon on someone
else's presence would that dissuade you from contacting them? INTERVIEWEE: INTERVIEWER: Yeah, definitely. Okay, would you find it useful if presence conveyed
your preferred method of being contacted at that particular time, so say chat, phone or video? INTERVIEWEE: Yes. I think what we've tried to do with presence is
that, in a very basic way. I'll give you the perfect example, which is the difference between being in a meeting and being in a WebEx meeting right? The difference being that if someone is in a WebEx meeting they're on their computer and also on the phone. It tells you exactly what they're up to. So if they're just in a meeting, IMing becomes easier because I'm more free and my ability to multitask is greater.
Would you find it useful if you could set the
urgency of a phone call or chat message? INTERVIEWEE: You know... yes. Like in e-mail. I do it once a month
if that, if I really need something. I wouldn't do it with a phone call, because I think that itself implies a certain sense of urgency. So, you know, if I'm calling you I'm calling you for a reason. I need to talk to you. An IM... If I had to talk to you and I sent an IM and got no response and called and got no response, I'd probably revert and leave an e-mail, and a voice message as well. INTERVIEWER: your calendar? INTERVIEWEE: Absolutely yes. We don't do it, we want to do it very Would you find it useful if presence linked with
very badly but there's some integration problems with Exchange that's preventing us. But yes, your calendar should independent of your email client it should be universal. You should be able to transmit that information through presence absolutely. INTERVIEWER: I think that's everything, unless there's anything
you can think of you want to talk about? INTERVIEWEE: No. Well I guess you started talking about one thing
that I thought about. This is one thing we talk about when we have visitors and we're talking about [Cisco] Quad is "How do we get people to use it". I'll buy it and put it up there but how do I get people to use it? In just wasted a ton of money. And you could say the same about presence. I mean I could set my presence to 'Away' 24 hours a day and what's my incentive to change it? The incentive, when you look at like Foursquare is by creating a kind of game and rewarding people. So especially when you talk about more personal information is how do you get people to use that. Certainly if it's useful they might do it, but is there anything else, where there's another mode of encourage them? 79
That's interesting, because I've looked into
gamification and what you find is that those kinds of things promote specific activities. So you could create a system which promotes people setting a certain status such as 'Good', but you can't really promote them just changing their status or being honest. INTERVIEWEE: You know what, agreed, in the Foursquare case,
but what if I was then able to go back and track my mood. So it allows me to see every Wednesday at 3pm I'm in a bad mood. So it gives me some useful data. Not everything has to be a game for the public, it could be for personal benefit. INTERVIEWER: INTERVIEWEE: Okay, thanks very much. You're very welcome.
13.H.2 INTERVIEW B INTERVIEWER: Do you ever use emoticons to convey your mood
when you're chatting with co-workers? INTERVIEWEE: INTERVIEWER: INTERVIEWEE: Always. A lot, yeah. Do you think they're useful for conveying mood? I definitely do, especially with people who are in a
different geographical location. It's nice to be able express something when you're not face to face or on a call or even video. It's the next best thing. INTERVIEWER: So if you were picking an emoticon, do you prefer
fewer types or more different types. So say if you only had four. INTERVIEWEE: I think I'd want more. I'd want all sorts, I want
anything and everything. I like it all. INTERVIEWER: message. INTERVIEWEE: INTERVIEWER: INTERVIEWEE: Yeah, but I don't think it renders properly. Do you think that works in conveying your mood? Yeah and usually that might be something more Have you ever used an emoticon in your status
like I'm just trying to be positive or maybe if it's like a holiday. I might put up like "Merry Christmas" with a smiley. INTERVIEWER: So would you say how you type your presence
conveys what you want to put forward... INTERVIEWEE: INTERVIEWER: Like my own personality? In terms of what you would like to see, or does it
reflect what you're actually feeling? INTERVIEWEE: A little bit of both I guess? 81
INTERVIEWER: INTERVIEWEE: INTERVIEWER: system? INTERVIEWEE:
Okay, so you're pretty honest with your status. Yeah I think so? So do you think a more rich presence system which
includes mood is more useful than a broad 'Available' or 'Busy'
Yeah, definitely. And when you say mood do you
mean the emoticons as an example? INTERVIEWER: Even something which says "This person is in a
good or bad mood". INTERVIEWEE: I do, it depends on how explicit that is I guess. It's
different when you're face to face, because you can get a sense of someone from their body language, from their facial expressions. You can see whether they're approachable. So if someone was emotional or whatever, if they had their head down. In person you can read that body language, but it's not something you'd put in your presence. I wouldn't want to hinder someone from approaching me just because I'm in a bad mood. You still need to do your work. If someone need to approach you or contact you, just because you're in a bad mood doesn't mean you can't help someone out. It would affect how urgent they need to contact you or how deeply engaged a conversation you'd have. On chat you don't have to talk to someone face to face, which can be better. INTERVIEWER: So would you say there's an obligation to forward
an image that you're available for work? INTERVIEWEE: Yeah, kind of I do. Because I feel like that's why I'm
working. I guess it might affect the media they use to contact you. They might chat instead of calling you. But I wouldn't want to hinder someone from contacting me.
So I've used the comparison between a UC client
and walking through an office, but what you're saying here is quite different because if I was walking through an office I could see if someone were upset, but on UC I have no way of seeing that. INTERVIEWEE: Yeah, it's like another level of presence. It's like "I
know she's there, but I guess she might be having a bad day". INTERVIEWER: So we'll just move on to some of the meanings we
get from presences. So say if someone was always online at 8am on their Jabber client and never logged off until 7pm or later, would you derive a judgement from that, like would you consider that person a hard worker? INTERVIEWEE: INTERVIEWER: or something. INTERVIEWEE: Exactly. Maybe they're a remote worker or forgot to Yeah, I think that would be my initial reaction. Until you maybe knew later that they just left it on
turn it off when they walk away from their desk. INTERVIEWER: So do you ever check people's presence outside of
when you actually need to contact them? INTERVIEWEE: INTERVIEWER: INTERVIEWEE: No. Never. I might have a glance when I first open my client. I
do sometimes like to check people's custom presence in case there's something interesting. But I would never say "Hey let's just see what's going on!" INTERVIEWER: Okay so would you say you use your UC client
contact list as a way or gauging the mood of the office? INTERVIEWEE: Yeah, definitely.
So do you people's presence to see if they're
available to talk to at their desk? INTERVIEWEE: INTERVIEWER: more context? INTERVIEWEE: someone. INTERVIEWER: INTERVIEWEE: So if it says 'Available', they are available. Exactly. And sometimes I'll forgot myself and people I would be totally comfortable in contacting Yeah. Definitely. So if you feel someone's status as 'Available', do you
feel completely comfortable in contacting them? Or would you like
will start contacting me and I'll say "Oh wait a minute, I'm really working on something" and it'll prompt me to change it to something else. INTERVIEWER: your presence? INTERVIEWEE: I definitely adapt to different situations. But I Interesting. So do you notice regular patterns in
definitely make sure, say if I go to lunch, to change it to like 'Away'. Whenever there's the random odd situation, I use custom states to let my team know about certain things. I'll use it almost as an advertisement, say if I'm gonna be out of the office Friday, contact me today, or I'm working on this, send me that. INTERVIEWER: So would you compare presence almost to putting a
sign up on your door? INTERVIEWEE: Yeah, almost. Or almost like a prior warning for out
of office. Which sometimes I wonder would it backfire, if I'm gonna get all this extra work before I head off on a holiday. I just like to let people know that.
So do you use Groups very often, or do you just
tend to have a broad list? INTERVIEWEE: I don't, you know, I tend to just kind of have a
broad list and I've always thought "Maybe I should organize this", but I never do and I never have. I think the way my brain works is it's alphabetical and I know who everyone is so I don't need to say he's a manager or whatever. I know my names and I know my alphabet. INTERVIEWER: INTERVIEWEE: things that way. INTERVIEWER: Would you find it useful if you could display So you keep everything in your head? Yeah, and then I have search, if I don't want to
scroll down. So for me it's kind of a waste of my time to organize
yourself differently to different people? INTERVIEWEE: Ah okay, so now that you've asked me that I would.
I would use that. Whether the groups would be displayed as such or if it was just a tagging system. For example when I use Skype, that would be a perfect situation for me, the reason being that it's a mix. I have a lot of old co-workers and we all used Skype. But I also have my family and friends. And because I live so far away from home, I use it all the time. And I would like to be able to display certain statuses to only my friends and family and not to my ex co-workers. INTERVIEWER: So in an office would you find it useful if you could
display a different status say to managers as opposed to friends? INTERVIEWEE: Yeah, yeah, I could see that. Yeah, I would definitely
do that. I am... I like to have fun. I like to laugh. Maybe we have like a little inside joke, that management might look at and draw their own conclusion.
So going back to what you said earlier, do you ever
find mentally that there's a conflict between being occupied by a task and still feeling as if you need to be 'Available'? INTERVIEWEE: Yeah, I think so. For us designers... we're problem
solvers so we might need complete quite to completely focus and not feel like you wanna be interrupted. And yet you don't want to hinder your co-workers who maybe want to get their work done and ask questions. Especially in this agile environment. I mean this is an agile development environment and we need to be agile for them. So it's a little bit of a struggle. Sometimes when I need complete quite I'll just work at home. INTERVIEWER: the office. INTERVIEWEE: Yeah, exactly and I think there was someone who What if you had a light on your desk which was the
colour of your presence, so you could literally set yourself to 'Busy' in
came up with that idea. It was almost like a reflection of your virtual self in the real world. INTERVIEWER: upstairs. INTERVIEWEE: status. INTERVIEWER: Do you tend to group employees in other off site I don't. I think that's the purpose of the presence So just a few questions on distance. Do you find it
more difficult to contact someone in San Jose than say someone
locations as one group in your head? INTERVIEWEE: INTERVIEWER: In my head? In my head I do know. Okay. So would you find it useful to know your co-
workers exact location, say in terms of their presence? Either in office or not, or where in the building.
Yeah, I would. But I think in the building might be
actually too much. But on the road, yeah, I dunno if it's useful but I would find it interesting. Something like that might spark an additional conversation, or whatever. INTERVIEWER: opposed to a cafe? INTERVIEWEE: Yeah, so obviously they might be busy getting onto So say if you knew someone was in an airport as
a plan, or they have some time to kill. INTERVIEWER: Do you think then that that type of gathering of
information might be a problem for you in terms of privacy? INTERVIEWEE: No, but I do think that that type of thing needs to
be configurable by the user. Users should be able to turn it on or off. INTERVIEWER: scale? INTERVIEWEE: Maybe both. For me I feel like privacy is the most So would you prefer an on and off or a sliding
important thing to give users so I feel like the more options the better. INTERVIEWER: So again, following on from that, do you feel like
people might judge you for turning that off? INTERVIEWEE: like that. INTERVIEWER: to contact them? INTERVIEWEE: Yeah. It would. And that's why I was saying earlier Okay, great. So if there was a mood icon, as part of I don't really, maybe because... I don't really
because I feel like that's within someone's own right to do something
presence... If someone had a bad mood icon, would that disincline you
that I wouldn't necessarily want to display my mood, because I think it hinders... I mean nobody's going to want to contact you if they know
you're in a bad mood. And if you're in that bad a mood, maybe you shouldn't really be in the office. Or set it to 'Do Not Disturb'. INTERVIEWER: Okay, so how would you feel about maybe a sliding
scale so that you could set your activity level, so that people would know exactly how busy you were? Would you find that useful? INTERVIEWEE: Yeah, maybe. Although, in a way I'm sort of
wondering if some of these are making me think too much before making the decision to contact someone. I wonder is there maybe a happy medium. Whereas now it's very clear. If it's green, sure. If it's yellow, hmm. You know? INTERVIEWER: I suppose one of the reasons I'm looking at this is
that when you're in that yellow condition, do you need more information at that point? INTERVIEWEE: INTERVIEWER: "Video only". INTERVIEWEE: This is an interesting one, and I'm laughing because It's a fair point yeah, it is a fair point. Would you find it useful if you could choose your
preferred method of being contacted, so for example "Phone only" or
we've talked about this over the years. And we actually used to have that exact thing tied in with the presence model. It was found to be too confusing, at least in terms of how it was being displayed. You might see a yellow phone, and does that mean you're on a phone. But really what it meant was you were busy but your preferred method was phone. It was really confusing. So you had like chat and red, or chat and green. INTERVIEWER: INTERVIEWEE: Sure Like what... it was too much. It was way too
complicated. But my feeling on that is that I feel that it's all about yourself. And it kind of sounds selfish, but I don't care about your 88
preferred method of communication. I care about what my own preferred method is, so if I want to chat, I'll send a chat, if I want to call you I'll call you, if I want to send video I'll do that. Maybe with people I knew better maybe I'd be more considerate of that. Like if I knew someone hated chat. But sometimes it about your own working environment, and what you can do. INTERVIEWER: a chat or a call? INTERVIEWEE: It's interesting, because we used to have that as That's really interesting. So going back to what we
hit off earlier. Would you find it useful if you could set the urgency of
well! So if you go back and look back at the original Jabber, their original client had urgency of chats. It was a single button that was almost like an emoticon and it put a little red icon next to a chat. I'm kind of surprised we removed it, because if something's urgent, something's urgent. If someone is communicating on chat all day long... people were saying that's what e-mail is for. They were kind of saying that chat is kind of urgent anyway, because it's so immediate. But I had used it before, and I think it is useful for certain things. INTERVIEWER: So that's fine unless you can think of anything else.
13.H.3 INTERVIEW C Note: Interviewee C used slightly broken English, which I transcribed verbatim. INTERVIEWER: people? INTERVIEWEE: INTERVIEWER: Yeah. I use a lot. Do you find that's effective way of displaying So do you use emoticons when you're chatting with
emotions or mood? INTERVIEWEE: just simple text. INTERVIEWER: So when you say emotions do you mean, it tells Yeah, I love that. It's easier to explain rather than
people what kind of mood you're in? INTERVIEWEE: Yeah, yeah, yeah. And how happy you are. If you
agree with the other person. INTERVIEWER: So you feel a presence system that conveys mood
and location would be more useful. INTERVIEWEE: INTERVIEWER: INTERVIEWEE: INTERVIEWER: INTERVIEWEE: INTERVIEWER: Yeah. So would you be more likely to use that? You mean like emoticons and presence? So say if you could set it as part of your presence. Yeah, I'd love to use it. Do you ever use an emoticon in your presence, say
a little smiley at the end? INTERVIEWEE: Yeah, yeah. Or like say a festival like Halloween, I'll
put a festival emoticon or something like that.
INTERVIEWER: them? INTERVIEWEE:
Very good. Have you ever been in a situation where
you've been contacted by a co-worker but were in no mood to talk to
No. For me, if I don't want to talk to someone I just
tell them "too busy" or "too busy with current thing". Not like, "I'm really moody, I don't want to talk." INTERVIEWER: So it's more to do with how busy you are.
Interesting, so would you find it useful if you could set on a sliding scale just how busy you are? INTERVIEWEE: "Busy". INTERVIEWER: Do you think that people equate availability with Yeah. Sometimes just the general "I don't want to
chat", but I'd still like to hear the urgent things. But there's only one
mood or how busy you are? So as an example do you think that when you're "Available", people always know they can talk to you and it's fine? INTERVIEWEE: INTERVIEWER: worker? INTERVIEWEE: based on that. INTERVIEWER: Interesting. Do you ever check your UC client Maybe a little, but I wouldn't complete a judgement Yeah, I think so. So if someone was always logged in at 8am and
always logged off at 7pm would you consider that person a hard
outside of when you're contacting someone, just to check their presence for example? INTERVIEWEE: INTERVIEWER: Rarely. Okay. Do you think presence is an accurate way of
knowing you can approach someone at their desk? 91
INTERVIEWEE: INTERVIEWER: their desk. INTERVIEWEE:
Umm... Yeah. Yeah. So if someone is "Available" you can reach them at
Yeah. But I'd like to know more. Like if they're at
their desk or in the lab. Their location. INTERVIEWER: So if I was to compare you're UC client to say your
desk, how would you describe your contacts? INTERVIEWEE: INTERVIEWER: INTERVIEWEE: INTERVIEWER: Other than co-workers you mean? Co-workers is fine if you think that's the best fit. Yeah, co-workers. Do you notice regular patterns with your presence?
Do you set it the same way every day? INTERVIEWEE: changes. INTERVIEWER: INTERVIEWEE: INTERVIEWER: So do you use groups? Yeah. Would you find it useful if you could have different Yeah sometimes? In most cases you just
automatically update as you're in a meeting or... As the situation
presences say for different groups? INTERVIEWEE: Yeah, very useful. Especially say if I'm at work. I'd
like to show busy to all my family members and friends. But I'm available to my work. Because I'm at work I only have one status either "Available" or "Busy". But I don't want my co-workers think I'm busy and then they stop trying to contact me. INTERVIEWER: and Co-Workers. So would you have different presences for Managers
A little bit but I think it's more co-workers and
friends and family. It's more outside of work. INTERVIEWER: pressure there? INTERVIEWEE: INTERVIEWER: Yeah. Say when you're working with someone say in the So do you ever find a conflict when you're really
busy but you feel the need to be "available" on Jabber. Is there a
US office, do you find it more difficult to know when to contact them, say as opposed to someone here in the office? INTERVIEWEE: Yeah, there's time difference and you don't know
like. Like say in the same office you see people in a meeting room but with the US it's only presence. INTERVIEWER: INTERVIEWEE: INTERVIEWER: So you rely heavily on presence. Yeah. It's presence is more useful. Do you think it matters how far away someone is?
So say upstairs as opposed to the US. INTERVIEWEE: Upstairs I can check. If they're upstairs I can walk
up and check their desk. INTERVIEWER: INTERVIEWEE: talk to him. INTERVIEWER: So just looking at some features that could be So do you prefer talking face to face or IM. Face to face. Talk to [name removed] here. I just
added to presence here. So would you find it useful to know your coworkers exact location? INTERVIEWEE: INTERVIEWER: Yeah, it would be helpful. In what way?
Yeah say... I have choice and I prefer face to face. If
I know a person is "Available" and I know where he is I can just if he's close enough I can just pop-up. INTERVIEWER: So would you like it to be very exact. So like "Where
they are in the office" or just "Somewhere in the office"? INTERVIEWEE: INTERVIEWER: INTERVIEWEE: INTERVIEWER: Like "At the desk", or "In the Lab". So exactly where they are? Yeah. So what if you had to contact someone who was
working while they were travelling... INTERVIEWEE: INTERVIEWER: INTERVIEWEE: mind. INTERVIEWER: privacy? INTERVIEWEE: so. INTERVIEWER: Fair enough. So if you were able to judge that Yeah. And I think it's not that much useful for me So would you find that to be kind of an invasion of Oh, then it doesn't matter. So you don't care where they are? If they're too far out, it doesn't matter, I'm not
going to catch them. Inside the building is file, but outside... I don't
tracking feature, do you think people would judge you for that. INTERVIEWEE: Just say I'm outside of the building or maybe in
Shanghai office I don't need to tell them exactly where I am. INTERVIEWER: Sure. Do you think if you were sharing your mood
as part of presence, do you think you would be honest with that or would you put on the 'brave face'?
In most cases I would be honest, but in some cases
I would pretend to be in a good mood. To be polite. It's a little bit rude to say bad mood. I'd just leave it empty. To friends mood is fine but not at work. INTERVIEWER: If you saw someone else had a bad mood icon would
you be less likely to contact them? INTERVIEWEE: INTERVIEWER: Yeah. So do you think that sharing mood and location is
appropriate in a corporate environment or is that more for friends? INTERVIEWEE: Yeah, I think location's fine to share with both sort
of people. Emoticons, maybe more friends and family. INTERVIEWER: INTERVIEWEE: INTERVIEWER: managers. INTERVIEWEE: INTERVIEWER: Yeah. So different people different face. Great, yeah. So would you find it useful if presence So what about friends in work? Oh yeah. So you could show them to your friends but not
conveyed your preferred method of being contacted at a particular time, so say "IM only" or "phone only"? INTERVIEWEE: Yeah. Say you were in a meeting or online
conference and you can IM but can't make phone calls. Or say you're at home and don't have the phone set up, so just e-mail. INTERVIEWER: So do you think it would be useful if you could set
the urgency of an IM or a phone call? INTERVIEWEE: Yeah, yeah. Say I'm busy at work. General
messages, I'll leave it to later on. But anything urgent I'd like to know.
So say if someone was phoning you, would you like
to know how urgent that was? INTERVIEWEE: INTERVIEWER: Yeah, so sometimes there's an urgent case. Sure. So would you find it useful if presence
automatically linked with your calendar? INTERVIEWEE: set myself. INTERVIEWER: INTERVIEWEE: INTERVIEWER: anything else. INTERVIEWEE: INTERVIEWER: No. Okay, thanks very much. Do you ever use your calendar for personal stuff? Personal stuff? No. Okay, I think that's it unless you can think of Yeah yeah. That is handy. I don't need to manually
13.H.4 INTERVIEW D INTERVIEWER: Okay, we'll just start. So as an example if someone
logged on at 8am and logged on to 7pm. Would you make a judgement about that person? Would you consider that person a hard worker? INTERVIEWEE: In the past I've made judgements, but I've found out
that people it logged in for a variety of reasons. So I stopped making judgements calls that that means they're actually paying attention or if they've just left it logged on. INTERVIEWER: contact screen? INTERVIEWEE: the afternoon. INTERVIEWER: Do you use presence as a way of knowing if you can Oh yeah, yeah. Yeah I check their presence in the So do you ever check people's presence outside of
when you need to IM them, just to have a look at your UC clients
morning. Make a judgement call to say whether it's best to get them in
approach someone at their desk? INTERVIEWEE: Yes. So if they're red they're probably busy or in a
focused mode. If they're "Away", I'm making a judgement call. But that's only after knowing a person for a certain amount of time and how they use presence. INTERVIEWER: really busy? INTERVIEWEE: Yeah. And that's something you store for later So have you ever approached someone at their desk
presuming they were available but when you got there, they were
reference. This person only changes presence when they've been interrupted. Presence is used to varying degrees of engagement by people, so you actually need to make a connection with someone before you really know.
So if I was make a comparison. Would you consider
viewing your contacts presence to walking down a hall at work? INTERVIEWEE: No. Because I think people use presence for wildly
different reasons. People who ignore presence are unreliable users. You can't make a straight judgement call that their physical presence is accurately conveyed by their virtual presence. INTERVIEWER: So do you think if there was more context, that that
could be more accurately conveyed? INTERVIEWEE: I think that there's more system drive presence. So
acknowledging what their system is doing or isn't. INTERVIEWER: INTERVIEWEE: So you would prefer some form of automation? Yeah. I think that "Idle" is a bad term, because
people dislike the word "idle". So when a machine is auto-idling people will perform an action to wake it up again. But if there was a method to show the application they're using, or multi-tasking. INTERVIEWER: INTERVIEWEE: How detailed show that be? You'd have to abstract away the programs they're
using and perhaps the amount of time as well. It could be quite voyeuristic, so the challenge would be to find a way to communicate their activity in such a way that people don't judge a lack of activity. They could be reading a document. INTERVIEWER: INTERVIEWEE: Do you find patterns in your presence usage? I like to play around with presence. Sometimes I
use custom states to indicate various things. I've got states in Spanish, or one's that are in Irish so that the San Jose people can't contact me but local people do. INTERVIEWER: groups. 98 So you use language almost as a barrier between
INTERVIEWEE: knowledge. INTERVIEWER: INTERVIEWEE:
Yeah because there's global presence but there's
also local presence. And you can convey local presence by using local
So do you group people? No. I have split out friends from corporate contacts,
but it's essentially one long list. I don't take actions according to groups, like communicate with them all at one time. INTERVIEWER: But you talk to the Irish group by speaking in Irish.
So what that brings me to is, would you find it useful if you could show a different presence to people in San Jose than Ireland? INTERVIEWEE: Ya, but using the model of just coloured icons
breaks down I think. So you need to have established a relationship. So you have a barrier of people who don't know you, and then a second of people that have worked with you before, and then a third when people are right beside you and can see if you're busy or whatever. INTERVIEWER: So there's almost three groups of people there. So
would you find it useful if you could group those people or tag them so that certain presences go to them. INTERVIEWEE: Sure, but there sure be the minimum admin on
your side. So it have to be system driven, there has to be some form of intelligence, some logic. INTERVIEWER: So two particular groups are work people and
friends. And you obviously have to be available to work colleagues and unavailable to friends. So do you think that can work within one client? INTERVIEWEE: In the current model, where every event is treated
equally, no. You've a case of someone sends you an IM and that's treated equally all the time. There's a case now where you won't 99
receive that if you're in "Do Not Disturb", and that's the first step to establishing a hierarchy of where messages come from. So friends, if you're at work it might be more subtle. INTERVIEWER: available on IM. INTERVIEWEE: Oh yeah, completely and I think there's no real way So do you ever find that there's ever a conflict
between being completely occupied with a task and the pressure to be
around it. There's people who need to be available and people focused on a certain task. And there's always an inference of rejection if I don't respond to your IM or I don't take your call. And I think the culture now... I think before mobile phones people accepted that getting people was more of a crab shoot. Now you make the explicit choice not to be contactable, whereas before it was more down to circumstances. INTERVIEWER: Do you feel that a presence system can lead to
increased accountability? INTERVIEWEE: If you use it as a monitoring tool, yes. You can use
it as a communication tool, you can use it as a monitoring tool, you can use it as a quick 'tinned' status. People are using presence for all different kinds of reasons. And people use presence differently and people read presence differently. People have to work within a framework of what they understand. They have to make an individual judgement call. INTERVIEWER: So for example sarcasm can be very hard to convey
through text. Do you think emoticons can be useful to help convey these kinds of things? INTERVIEWEE: They can be. A food emoticon for lunch shows that
you're eating. Other emoticons like sad smileys, again people have to judge what that means. Are you content, or happy or open to be contacted. They're open to interpretation.
Do you think people do draw those advanced
conclusions from emoticons? INTERVIEWEE: Yes, but they're based on people's own experiences
with emoticons. If a boss decides to include an emoticon. What does that say as opposed to someone who just started. Different levels of authority change the meaning. It's very context driven and very fluid. INTERVIEWER: presence? INTERVIEWEE: I've used symbols. Like when I listen to music I So have you ever used an emoticon as part of your
copy in a character. If I'm feeling playful I might paste in the trademark symbol or the Apple symbol. I'm just experimenting. INTERVIEWER: INTERVIEWEE: Would you see those as an in joke. They're an in joke. I don't expect people to pick up
exactly what I mean when I use those. INTERVIEWER: those? INTERVIEWEE: They might consider me a Mac fanboy or whatever. What do you think people pick up when you use
But it's up to them to interpret it. INTERVIEWER: Have you ever been contacted by a co-worker who
you were in no mood to talk to? I won't ask for specifics. INTERVIEWEE: Yeah. You might know from a one line piece of text
that this will require a ten minute conversation. INTERVIEWER: So do you think people sometimes people equate
your presence or availability with your mood? INTERVIEWEE: INTERVIEWER: Yeah. So if someone is "available"...
They're open. They're open to communication. For
example, my boss is always "Away", but I know that's because he's constantly being IM'd and I'm one of the people who needs to IM him, so the presence becomes irrelevant. INTERVIEWER: Do you find it more difficult to contact someone in
the San Jose office then? INTERVIEWEE: Exactly. So having met them I would understand is
someone was "Available" during the morning, I'd know if they were an early riser. But you'd have to know someone. Using presence to judge someone's openness to communication I think is bad. INTERVIEWER: So do you think if there were more contextual cues
that that would help you to make a decision? INTERVIEWEE: Yeah. I think the system we currently use, we use
colours. We use the traffic light system. Which accepts that everyone is ready to go unless something is in their way. But people stay in particular states all the time. INTERVIEWER: INTERVIEWEE: And they're quite binary. Yeah. But when you say you can bring in mood
messages, I don't think they're that appropriate for a corporate environment, because when you bring in say emotions it doesn't gel well with corporate structures. You need more background, but nothing private. INTERVIEWER: Do you think it would be useful if you could set
your level of activity through the day? INTERVIEWEE: Yeah, so maybe like a graph that showed meetings
throughout the day, maybe connected to the calendar. Showing how busy someone will be shows the small gaps when people can be contacted. But it's still a binary state. You might schedule down time and it could be read as a meeting. 102
INTERVIEWER: slider for activity. INTERVIEWEE:
So a few people have said it could be like a volume
I would say like heat maps that show their level of
engagement. Shows who they've interacted with. It shows they're okay for short inquiries. Maybe they haven't replied to anyone all day. INTERVIEWER: INTERVIEWEE: So you'd like very strong information on people. Well the problem is that you're reporting on people's
activities which can be a problem, ethically. But unless you really know them, that's the only real way to infer anything about them. INTERVIEWER: So would you find it useful to know a co-workers
location as part of that? INTERVIEWEE: Yes and no. Yes if they're outside of the office, but
once they're in the office I think that tracking them is kind of chasing the wrong thing. The richest form of communication is face to face. Presence should lead you to face to face for certain tasks. INTERVIEWER: of time. INTERVIEWEE: Yeah, and I think that IM here can be a quick So that interesting because if someone is on
another floor, going up to see if they're at their desk could be a waste
check, a quick poke to see you're amenability to talking, and that then leads to a trip up to talk to them. INTERVIEWER: So outside of the building would you prefer broader
or more specific information valuable? INTERVIEWEE: People in Dublin know that I'm in Galway, where I
am in Galway is no consequence to them, so location awareness for people changes for people. If someone wants me, they can ring me. INTERVIEWER: Would you find it more useful if you knew that
someone was in a cafe as opposed to an airport? 103
Yeah, and those are situations where it changes
context. But then your back to using presence to infer context rather than actually knowing them. Using it as a crutch. INTERVIEWER: Would you find it useful if you could convey your
preferred means of being contacted at a particular time? INTERVIEWEE: Yeah, but I have to drive that and change that when
my situation changes. It can be useful, but I have to constantly watch that and change that. I think the personal administration of presence is wrong. It's very admin heavy. INTERVIEWER: Would you find it useful if you could set the
urgency of a call or IM? INTERVIEWEE: I'm going to say no, because urgency is in the eye of
the beholder and it's been used and abused to such a degree that... I understand if my manager in San Jose rings me at 5am his time, I infer that that's urgent. He understands that it's an imposition. INTERVIEWER: I think that's it unless you can think of anything
else you'd like to say? INTERVIEWEE: I think that inferring everything from presence and
IM is a poor experience as opposed to just picking up the phone and calling them. I think everything based on these binary states leads to horrifically complex states. I think presence is like fashion. Some people want to say something, and some people just don't want to get involved. Everyone needs to wear clothes, but not everyone chooses to make a statement. It's something that's partially imposed on you, so you use it to different degrees.
13.H.5 INTERVIEW E Note: Due to time constraints, this interview took place with two interviewees at the same time. INTERVIEWER: Do either of you find that you use emoticons when
you're trying to convey your mood? INTERVIEWEE 1: I definitely would. I use them all the time. I use them with a certain subset of people. It's often the sad face I use, which means I maybe have too much work on my plate. I use the happy face now and again. So I use the both of them. INTERVIEWEE 2: Very similar answer. Depending who I'm IMing, be it friends maybe or peers, it would depend. Supervisors, managers... I'd nearly wait to see if they used them first before using them. INTERVIEWER: So do you think that it's an effective way of
conveying your mood then? INTERVIEWEE 1: Yeah, I think so, because things can be misinterpreted and like sometimes if you have a smiley face or a sad face or an embarrassed face or an angry face it helps. People only use a subset of them, there's so many in there. I tend to use more of them when I'm texting, as in different types of emoticons when I'm texting. INTERVIEWEE 2: Very similar again, I think again the context of what someone is saying is very easy to misunderstand, what's being conveyed. Not just to say the same answer! INTERVIEWER: Have you ever used an emoticon as part of your
presence or status? INTERVIEWEE 1: No, I haven't actually. INTERVIEWEE 2: No, it would usually be custom presences now.
INTERVIEWEE 1: I'd consider it but I'd probably want to be in a place where other people are doing the same thing. I wouldn't want to be the only person. If it took off in an organisation I'd do it I'd say. INTERVIEWER: to them? INTERVIEWEE 2: Of course, yeah. That happens all the time. Well, not all the time. Now and then. It's not so much about mood though, it's more about ability to talk. Like you're about to give a presentation. You're just not in the right frame of mind. You're mind is elsewhere. You might not reply there and then. INTERVIEWER: So would you find that you are set to 'Available' and Feel free not to answer this now, but have you ever
been contacted by a co-worker and have just been in no mood to talk
then you realize that you're actually quite busy? INTERVIEWEE 1: I actually try to avoid that. I try to set up my status in advance. Like at the moment I'm working on all of these employee sessions, so all morning I have it set to "Do Not Disturb - In CPC" as a custom status. I'll set it to "Do Not Disturb". I prefer to do it up from and let people know in advance. But I have the odd time changed it to "Do Not Disturb" after they've contacted me, but I think that's a little bit cheeky almost. INTERVIEWEE 2: Generally I would only set "DND" when I'm presenting or in an online meeting. I tend to be always "Available", but I might not always be available to ping back someone that pings me. It depends on the person that's pinging me as well as when they're pinging me. I might be in a meeting but I'd still be available for an IM. It comes down to the state of availability. INTERVIEWEE 1: You can customize you presence to "Available for IM but not for Phone Call" INTERVIEWER: Do either of you use groups for your contacts?
INTERVIEWEE 1: Definitely. I'm a big fan of groups. I probably have twenty groups in there. It's kind of like sorting e-mail or phone numbers. You try to have a folder for everything and eventually you have so many folders you just say damn this I'll just have one folder. In IM though I haven't been bothered that there's so many groups. The reason it probably works so well though is that I don't scroll down to look for them, I just search for them. So you're kind of bypassing the list and just going straight to the person. INTERVIEWEE 2: Exactly the same, my group lists have become misaligned to where people should be because I just search. INTERVIEWEE 1: I have people down as engineers who are now managers. I don't really keep my groups up to date. INTERVIEWER: Would you find it useful if you could convey
different presences to different groups? INTERVIEWEE 1: I probably would yeah. Say to the management group I'd have to be available, because they always want you to be available. You have to be able to ping them back immediately, because he might need a key piece of information. So for exec and for managers you need to always get back to them. But then for other people who get in touch for run of the mill queries, you could be semiavailable or available when I get a chance. But you'd have to make sure your groups are more up to date. INTERVIEWEE 2: Yeah, I think it's a good idea. INTERVIEWER: It has come up in a few conversations that they
have outside of work friends in their contact list and obviously they have to be unavailable to them but still available to anyone in work. INTERVIEWEE 2: Yeah, and that's why I don't put outside of work mates in my work IM client, because they could say anything!
INTERVIEWEE 1: Most people don't I think. Because how many stories have you heard where people are sharing their screen in a WebEx meeting and they received something that they'd rather everyone else didn't see, you know. It does happen. INTERVIEWEE 2: Friends don't seem to recognise "Do Not Disturb". INTERVIEWER: Do you think that people might equate your
availability with your mood? For example if someone is "Available", they're happy to chat? INTERVIEWEE 2: Not necessarily. They might be available but not necessarily to you. INTERVIEWEE 1: Yeah, I wouldn't equate them. People use very standard presence updates, so they're just relaying the state of play. They're either "Available" or not or their busy or not. INTERVIEWER: Would you view your UC client to walking down the
hallway, that you can see that people are busy or available? INTERVIEWEE 1: I think it can be an indication of how busy are in real life. If you see someone logging on late in the evening to check email or whatever, you're not checking to see if he's online but you see him come online and you notice things. So yeah. This guy's always on late, he must be working hard. Or maybe you want to see if someone's in yet. Maybe you want to talk to someone but they sit on the next floor of the building. Then you could check their presence rather than walking over. They're most likely at their desk. INTERVIEWEE 2: I take a slightly different view of whether they're physically available. If I see someone in a meeting I'll still IM them, if they're on IM... INTERVIEWEE 1: I'd agree with that. "In a meeting" is not... the only time I wouldn't ping someone is if they're on "Do Not Disturb". I wouldn't physically walk over if they were on a call or in a meeting 108
though. People notice when you're online, not that they're particularly looking for it but you're going to notice it. It's not used for anything, it's never commented on. People accept that. INTERVIEWER: Do either of you notice patterns in your presence or
would you be likely to adapt depending on the day? INTERVIEWEE 1: I'd have similar patterns because I'd have similar type of number of meetings every week. You might get a week where things are a bit different. This week I have twelve hours of meetings I would never have. But normally in a week I would never use "Do Not Disturb". I think it's more that I have a regular pattern, and there might be a short term change but then I'll revert back. INTERVIEWEE 2: Very Similar. I'd rarely if ever go into "DND". Depending on who and when I'm presenting or in a meeting, that's the only time I'd go in "DND". INTERVIEWEE 1: Or the odd custom status. Say "Back in an hour" or something. Little odd custom statuses. INTERVIEWER: Do you think people pick up on those custom
statuses even if they're not about to contact you? Do you think they notice that in their contact list? INTERVIEWEE 1: I'd say they would, yeah. They'd deliberately search for you and if they saw that then they'd wait for you to come back. They do notice custom statuses and respect that. INTERVIEWEE 2: And not even if you're searching. If you happen to see someone's name in the contact list that has a custom presence, that stands out more. INTERVIEWEE 1: Some people use it all the time. Mini paragraphs. It's quite interesting, what's this chap up to today? I think the reason why custom status and "DND" are respected is because they're a little bit special and they're not used every day. 109
Do either of you ever find a conflict between being
quite busy and occupied with a task also feeling the need to be
INTERVIEWEE 1: Oh yeah. Definitely. You're trying to do something. Trying to have a conversation or prepare some data or some slides, or do some normal work or testing or whatever, and there's three or four people IMing you looking for stuff. So it can be a distraction. Certain people you're always going to reply to. Execs and stuff. You don't leave them waiting. They're always asking for something. They don't say "How are you?" INTERVIEWER: So do you think that a presence system in a
workplace leads to increased accountability? INTERVIEWEE 1: I don't think it leads to accountability, I think there are other ways that an organization such as this looks at accountability, stuff like your work cost and so forth, so I think the reason we can all happily use these clients is that it's not used in any bad way against anybody. INTERVIEWEE 2: No, really not no. We don't save history or track IMs or anything like that. It gives an opportunity to talk informally, which can increase collaboration and relax attitudes in a good way. INTERVIEWEE 1: E-mail then is seen as a more formal record of things. You'd be more careful of what you'd say in an IM. INTERVIEWER: Fine, great. So do you find it more difficult to judge
when it's appropriate to contact someone, say in a US office as opposed to somewhere else in the same building? INTERVIEWEE 1: I don't see any distinction. If someone is "Available" in Galway as opposed to San Jose, I see them all as the same group of people.
INTERVIEWEE 2: Yeah, I just do a quick check in my head of what time it is there and then, if they're online I'll IM them. INTERVIEWEE 1: You would do that, because you work with China, India and the States. It's 2am for them, so they may not want you to contact them. Time is more important that status for cross site communication. INTERVIEWER: I wonder would it be important to include time as a
part of presence for people that are dispersed in that way? INTERVIEWEE 1: Yeah, possibly because you have to work it out in your head and it takes a while. That's not a bad suggestion. INTERVIEWEE 2: But saying that, I don't want to see the time for everyone here in Galway. INTERVIEWER: Do you ever find that you tend to group employees
in an offsite office, or do you view just the broader Cisco community. INTERVIEWEE 1: Well I have a group for San Jose, and I have one for China as well, so I would tend to group people certainly by location and by time as well. INTERVIEWEE 2: I wouldn't work with as many remote people, but I would see it as one big group of people. There's not much of a difference in time with my group but... INTERVIEWEE 1: Yeah, I would categorise people into a location rather than a function for my IM groups, that's just the way my brain works I suppose. INTERVIEWER: Just some features then. Would you find it useful to
know your co-workers location as an element of presence? INTERVIEWEE 1: Yeah, I would. I'd like "Available but at home" or something, so I could do some VPN. Or "Available in the office" I'd find it very useful. 111
What do you think of the level of accuracy and
INTERVIEWEE 1: How does it reflect the location? So say it's at home. Does that mean Co. Mayo, or the full address or just "home". It'd be useful as an addiction. INTERVIEWEE 2: It'd fall back on presence ultimately I think. If they're available they're available. I'd probably IM them anyway. INTERVIEWEE 1: Most of the time you're IMing them anyway. Presence overrides a lot of other things. INTERVIEWER: ignore? INTERVIEWEE 1: It depends, if there's no urgent requirement. Sometimes though you need a quick answer though, and I'll ping a team answer. But I'll make it obvious, I'll say "I need it right away." INTERVIEWEE 2: I think it depends on the context on whether you need a response or not. It depends on personal vs. work as well. I mean if I message a friend and they don't get back to me, no problem, but in work you expect a certain level of response. Because we're in an environment where we IM all day long, sometimes we expect the same of friends, but they're slower to respond. INTERVIEWER: So would you find it useful to be able to set the Would you view an IM as something they're free to
urgency of a communication? INTERVIEWEE 1: I would definitely find that useful, yeah. It would save me having to type in "This is urgent". But then for most communications it would be necessarily, but for the ones that are it would be urgent. INTERVIEWEE 2: Yeah, kind of going back to e-mail. I suppose anyway, so if there was a button there.
INTERVIEWEE 1: Right now, all IMs are kind of equal. INTERVIEWEE 2: I can see everyone clicking the flag. INTERVIEWEE 1: Some people abuse the urgent tag on e-mails, but most people would limit that. INTERVIEWER: If we were to implement an emoticon feature, do
you think you would be honest with your mood. INTERVIEWEE 1: Well if your mood is being broadcast to everybody you would sort of have to average your mood out. You might want to portray one mood to one group and another mood to a different group. But then you have to portray one mood to everyone. I'd probably be relatively honest, but you'd be slow to put out an angry or sad face. You don't want to be known as an angry or a sad person. INTERVIEWEE 2: Do you mean an emoticon in your presence? INTERVIEWER: Yeah.
INTERVIEWEE 2: I wouldn't. I'd be slow to use that. INTERVIEWEE 1: I'd use it but in such a restricted manner, it would always be the smiley face. INTERVIEWER: different groups. INTERVIEWEE 1: Yeah, I think that would help it. INTERVIEWER: Would you find it useful if presence conveyed your So it ties in with showing different presence to
preferred method of communication, so for example chat only, or phone only and so forth. INTERVIEWEE 1: Yeah, I'd like that. INTERVIEWEE 2: If I didn't want to IM, I'd turn off IM. Saying that, I'd rarely do that. I'd prefer an IM to a call.
INTERVIEWEE 1: Sometimes I set my status to IM Only. I'll be in a meeting but I can take IMs. I would like your status to reflect you preferred method of contact. INTERVIEWER: Okay, that's great. I think that's it unless anyone
has anything else they'd like to bring up? INTERVIEWEE 1: That was pretty comprehensive INTERVIEWER: Thanks.
13.H.6 INTERVIEW F INTERVIEWER: workers? INTERVIEWEE: INTERVIEWER: Yeah, I would yeah. Do you think that they're an effective way to Do you use emoticons when you're chatting with co-
describe mood? Would you use them to describe mood? INTERVIEWEE: I wouldn't use them to describe my mood. I would
use them if I said something slightly controversial but not meant to be taken seriously. So if I'm IMing somebody that I want to be taken in a light hearted fashion and not to be taken seriously. INTERVIEWER: And would that depend on if it was a co-worker as
opposed to a manager? INTERVIEWEE: INTERVIEWER: I'd use them with everyone. Okay. Do you feel that you're able to accurately
convey your mood through text in IM? INTERVIEWEE: INTERVIEWER: through IM. INTERVIEWEE: INTERVIEWER: I don't feel the need. Okay. Do you find that you derive judgements from Hmmm. Or do you feel the need to convey your mood
your co-workers presence, so just as an example, if someone was logging in to their UC client every morning at 8am and not logging out until 7pm, would you judge them to be a hard worker? INTERVIEWEE: Hmm. No not here, because someone's presence
isn't necessarily reliable. Well people might show up as available because they're logged into their Smartphone, but you're not going to get a response. So sometimes it doesn't really matter. Just because 115
you're "available", doesn't mean that you're necessarily available to contact. INTERVIEWER: You would say that in this company, presence is
not very reliable most of the time or is it outside of office hours? INTERVIEWEE: It's... It's fairly reliable. Outside of working hours
not so much though. INTERVIEWER: Do you ever find that you check peoples presence
outside of when you contact them? INTERVIEWEE: INTERVIEWER: No. Do you use presence as a way of knowing if you can
approach someone at their desk? INTERVIEWEE: INTERVIEWER: Umm... So for example if their presence was "Busy" would
you take that as a way of knowing that they maybe shouldn't be approached at their desk? INTERVIEWEE: If they're in a meeting I'd leave them alone. If they
were specifically "In a Meeting." INTERVIEWER: INTERVIEWEE: But otherwise. Yeah. Because presence might be "Idle" or "Away",
that doesn't mean they're out of the office. INTERVIEWER: Sure. Would you compare a UC client to walking
down the corridor in work in that you can see the avatars and presence. Would that equate to you to being in the office? INTERVIEWEE: Well, first, in here being "Available" doesn't mean
that they're at the office. There's a lot of people that work from home, so just because you're "Available" doesn't mean anything, doesn't mean you're part of any geographical location whatsoever. 116
INTERVIEWER: INTERVIEWEE: INTERVIEWER: INTERVIEWEE: INTERVIEWER:
Sure. Do you use groups often? No. So you don't group your contacts? No. Okay, great. Do you ever feel that it might be useful
if you could display different presences to different types of people? For example friends versus managers. INTERVIEWEE: INTERVIEWER: INTERVIEWEE: INTERVIEWER: No. So you're happy just... Yeah. Some people have mentioned friends outside of
work being on their contact list, and some problems there. INTERVIEWEE: INTERVIEWER: No, I use different IM clients. Okay, good stuff. Do you ever feel that there's ever
any kind of conflict between you being at your desk, perhaps being very busy and yet having to be "Available" for others to contact you? INTERVIEWEE: Umm... I would generally reply to IMs even if I'm
busy. That's not really an interruption. Multi-tasking. INTERVIEWER: INTERVIEWEE: INTERVIEWER: Galway? INTERVIEWEE: Hmm... No, not really no, Do you work much with the US office? Yeah, all the time. Okay, do you find it harder to judge if it's
appropriate to contact someone over there as opposed to here in
INTERVIEWER: that they use IM? INTERVIEWEE: INTERVIEWER: people use it or... INTERVIEWEE: INTERVIEWER: presence? INTERVIEWEE: INTERVIEWER:
Okay, great. Do you think that employees that work
in a distanced office tend to be quite similar to one another in the way
Yeah. Would you say it's different to the way that Irish
I don't think so, no. I don't think so. Just some of the features so. Would you find it
useful to know your co-workers location as an element of their
Yeah. So say in the office, would you find it useful to
know exactly where they are in the office? INTERVIEWEE: INTERVIEWER: INTERVIEWEE: more useful. INTERVIEWER: Dublin? INTERVIEWEE: Well, working from home or on the road is different. Okay. Then outside of the office, would you prefer a No. Not so much. So more outside the office. They're either in the office or outside the office... is
broader location, say Dublin, or more specific details, like in Cisco
It doesn't matter whether they're in Dublin or San Jose. They're equally unavailable. INTERVIEWER: your privacy? INTERVIEWEE: No, because I use different IM clients for outside Would you find that kind of tracking an affront to
office and inside office. 118
INTERVIEWER: INTERVIEWEE: INTERVIEWER:
Okay, so you separate those quite clearly. Yeah. Would you find it useful if you could see other
people's moods, if it was accurate, as part of their presence? INTERVIEWEE: that anyway. INTERVIEWER: moods. INTERVIEWEE: INTERVIEWER: No. Fair enough. Would you find it useful if presence Okay, fair enough. Which leads to the next No, I wouldn't trust the accuracy of anything like
question, do you think that people would be honest in sharing their
conveyed their preferred method of being contacted, so chat only or phone only or whatever? INTERVIEWEE: In this culture here [in Cisco], we never use phone
so no. It's either a scheduled meeting or it's IM. I never ring anybody. INTERVIEWER: Would you find it useful if you could set the
urgency of a chat message then? INTERVIEWEE: INTERVIEWER: INTERVIEWEE: think. INTERVIEWER: Okay, finally, would you find it useful if presence No, I don't think I would. Do you ever use it with e-mail. Use it with e-mail alright but I wouldn't for IMs I
interacted and synced with your Outlook calendar? INTERVIEWEE: INTERVIEWER: It's useful yeah. Do you use your calendar for personal scheduling.
If I know I have something out of office or whatever,
I'll block out that time so I'm shown as unavailable then. INTERVIEWER: Okay, thanks very much.
13.I. APPLICATION WALKTHROUGH GUIDELINES While taking your time and thinking aloud: 1. 2. Can you give your initial impressions of this section? Can you please sort the contacts on this first page for me, using the options provided? (clarify if required and take note of lack of clarity) 3. 4. 5. 6. Do you now have any other impressions or feedback on this section? Can you now navigate to the 'Places' section of the application? (clarify if required and take note of lack of clarity) Can you give your initial impressions of this section? Can you please try to locate a contact called Tom Henry in this section for me? (clarify if required and take note of lack of clarity) 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. Do you now have any other impressions or feedback on this section? Can you now navigate to the 'Activities' section please? (clarify if required and take note of lack of clarity) Can you give your initial impressions of this section? Can you please sort the statuses using the options provided? (clarify if required and take note of lack of clarity) Do you now have any other impressions or feedback on this section? Can you now return to the 'People' section for me? (clarify if required and take note of lack of clarity) Can you please attempt to make a video call to a Contact called 'Daniel Beere' for me? (clarify if required and take note of lack of clarity) 14. Can you now try to add another contact to this call? (clarify if required and take note of lack of clarity) - The top left woman is the active contact.
And can you now please end the call. (clarify if required and take note of lack of clarity) Thank you. Do you have any further feedback on the application?