Emergent Collaborations Outside of Organizational Frameworks: Exploring Relevant Concepts
Pages 163 - 173
Abstract
The broad notion of communities required a fine-grained vocabulary to investigate how communities interact with digital technologies. We can identify various constructs in the literature, such as temporary groups, coalitions, movements, communities of practice, place, and interest, that can describe different collaborative configurations. Despite the diversity of concepts describing the formation of “collectives”, we still need to understand how the formation of collectives and communities emerges through collaboration. We propose a vocabulary to analyze emergent forms of collaboration and the appropriation of technologies over time. This paper focuses on emergent, spontaneous, or unplanned collaborations facilitated by digital technologies in response to changing circumstances or problems. To frame different types of emergent collaboration, we borrow three concepts from activity theory, urban planning, and educational psychology: knotworking, self-organization, and the formation of publics. The paper examines these concepts in detail and describes their history and how they relate to each other, highlighting their qualities, similarities, and differences. Using these concepts, the paper aims to increase awareness of the complexity of emergent collaboration and its challenges and help designers operate with a more dynamic understanding of collaborative work outside established organizational settings.
References
[1]
D. Meyerson and K. Weick, “Kramer., R., 1996. Swift trust and temporary groups,” Trust in Organizations: Frontiers of Theory and Research. Sage, Thousand Oaks, pp. 166–195, 1996.
[2]
D. Zager, “Collaboration on the fly,” in Proceedings Academia/Industry Working Conference on Research Challenges ’00. Next Generation Enterprises: Virtual Organizations and Mobile/Pervasive Technologies. AIWORC’00. (Cat. No.PR00628), Apr. 2000, pp. 65–70.
[3]
A. Touraine, “An Introduction to the Study of Social Movements,” Social Research, vol. 52, no. 4, pp. 749–787, 1985.
[4]
J. Lave and E. Wenger, Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation. Cambridge University Press, 1991.
[5]
E. Wenger, Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning, and Identity. Cambridge University Press, 1999.
[6]
S. Brint, “Gemeinschaft Revisited: A Critique and Reconstruction of the Community Concept,” Sociological Theory, vol. 19, no. 1, pp. 1–23, Mar. 2001.
[7]
F. Henri and B. Pudelko, “Understanding and analysing activity and learning in virtual communities,” Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, vol. 19, no. 4, pp. 474–487, 2003.
[8]
J. L. Welbourne, A. L. Blanchard, and M. D. Boughton, “Supportive communication, sense of virtual community and health outcomes in online infertility groups,” in Proceedings of the fourth international conference on Communities and technologies, New York, NY, USA, Jun. 2009, pp. 31–40.
[9]
S. Niederer and R. Priester, “Smart Citizens: Exploring the Tools of the Urban Bottom-Up Movement,” Comput Supported Coop Work, vol. 25, no. 2–3, pp. 137–152, Jun. 2016.
[10]
O. Blunk and M. Prilla, “Supporting Communities of Practice in Public Administrations: Factors influencing Adoption and Readiness,” in Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Communities and Technologies, New York, NY, USA, Jun. 2017, pp. 36–45.
[11]
R. Cibin, M. Teli, and S. Robinson, “Institutioning and Community Radio. A comparative perspective,” in Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Communities & Technologies - Transforming Communities, New York, NY, USA, Jun. 2019, pp. 143–154.
[12]
H. Korsgaard, P. Lyle, J. Saad-Sulonen, C. N. Klokmose, M. Nouwens, and S. Bødker, “Collectives and Their Artifact Ecologies,” Proc. ACM Hum.-Comput. Interact., vol. 6, no. CSCW2, p. 432:1-432:26, Nov. 2022.
[13]
S. Herranz, P. Díaz, D. Díez, and I. Aedo, “Studying social technologies and communities of volunteers in emergency management,” 2013.
[14]
J. I. White, L. Palen, and K. M. Anderson, “Digital mobilization in disaster response: the work & self-organization of on-line pet advocates in response to hurricane sandy,” in Proceedings of the 17th ACM conference on Computer supported cooperative work & social computing, New York, NY, USA, Feb. 2014, pp. 866–876.
[15]
C. Bossen and E. Grönvall, “Collaboration In-between: The Care Hotel and Designing for Flexible Use,” in Proceedings of the 18th ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work & Social Computing, New York, NY, USA, 2015, pp. 1289–1301.
[16]
C. Leonardi, G. Schiavo, A. Fasoli, and M. Zancanaro, “Remote Collaborative Childcare in the Workplace: Sharing Childcare with Colleagues during COVID-19 Emergency,” in C&T ’21: Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Communities & Technologies - Wicked Problems in the Age of Tech, Seattle WA USA, Jun. 2021, pp. 44–50.
[17]
K. Abou Amsha and M. Lewkowicz, “Chapter 3 - Supporting Collaboration to Preserve the Quality of Life of Patients at Home—A Design Case Study,” in Designing Healthcare That Works, M. S. Ackerman, S. P. Goggins, T. Herrmann, M. Prilla, and C. Stary, Eds. Academic Press, 2018, pp. 39–57.
[18]
L. Malmborg, E. Grönvall, J. Messeter, T. Raben, and K. Werner, “Mobilizing Senior Citizens in Co-Design of Mobile Technology,” IJMHCI, vol. 8, no. 4, pp. 42–67, Oct. 2016.
[19]
S. Bødker, H. Korsgaard, P. Lyle, and J. Saad-Sulonen, “Happenstance, Strategies and Tactics: Intrinsic Design in a Volunteer-based Community,” in Proceedings of the 9th Nordic Conference on Human-Computer Interaction, New York, NY, USA, 2016, p. 10:1-10:10.
[20]
C. A. L. Dantec and C. DiSalvo, “Infrastructuring and the formation of publics in participatory design,” Soc Stud Sci, vol. 43, no. 2, pp. 241–264, Apr. 2013.
[21]
A. Botero and J. Saad-Sulonen, (Challenges and opportunities of) documentation practices of self-organised urban initiatives. 2018. Accessed: Feb. 16, 2023. [Online]. Available: https://aaltodoc.aalto.fi:443/handle/123456789/109153
[22]
K. Abou Amsha, C. Bossen, E. Grönvall, and M. Lewkowicz, “Computer-Supported Knotworking: Design Guidelines Based on Two Case Studies from the Healthcare Domain in Europe,” Proc. ACM Hum.-Comput. Interact., vol. 5, no. CSCW1, p. 125:1-125:26, Apr. 2021.
[23]
K. Schmidt and L. Bannon, “Constructing CSCW: The First Quarter Century,” Comput Supported Coop Work, vol. 22, no. 4–6, pp. 345–372, Aug. 2013.
[24]
K. Kuutti, The concept of activity as a basic unit of analysis for CSCW research. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 1991. Accessed: Mar. 28, 2019. [Online]. Available: https://dl.eusset.eu/handle/20.500.12015/2570
[25]
K. Kuutti and T. Arvonen, “Identifying potential CSCW applications by means of activity theory concepts: a case example,” in Proceedings of the 1992 ACM conference on Computer-supported cooperative work - CSCW ’92, Toronto, Ontario, Canada, 1992, pp. 233–240.
[26]
C. A. Halverson, “Activity Theory and Distributed Cognition: Or What Does CSCW Need to DO with Theories?,” Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW), vol. 11, no. 1–2, pp. 243–267, Mar. 2002.
[27]
J. Blomberg and H. Karasti, “Reflections on 25 Years of Ethnography in CSCW,” Comput Supported Coop Work, vol. 22, no. 4–6, pp. 373–423, Aug. 2013.
[28]
Y. Engeström, R. Engeström, and T. Vähäaho, When the center does not hold: The importance of knotworking, vol. 381. 1999.
[29]
J. Kangasoja, “Complex design problems: An impetus for learning and knotworking,” in Keeping Learning Complex: the proceedings of the fifth international conference on learning societies, Mahwah (NJ): Erlbaum, 2002, pp. 199–205.
[30]
B. Victor and A. C. Boynton, Invented Here: Maximizing Your Organization's Internal Growth and Profitability. Mineola, N.Y: Harvard Business Review Press, 1998.
[31]
Y. Engeström, “Seven theses,” Workplace learning in context, pp. 145–157, 2004.
[32]
Y. Engeström, From Teams to Knots: Activity-Theoretical Studies of Collaboration and Learning at Work. Cambridge University Press, 2008.
[33]
Y. Engeström, “Activity theory as a framework for analyzing and redesigning work,” Ergonomics, vol. 43, no. 7, pp. 960–974, Jul. 2000.
[34]
S. Reeves and S. Lewin, “Interprofessional collaboration in the hospital: strategies and meanings,” Journal of Health Services Research & Policy, vol. 9, no. 4, pp. 218–225, 2004.
[35]
L. Lingard, A. McDougall, M. Levstik, N. Chandok, M. M. Spafford, and C. Schryer, “Representing complexity well: a story about teamwork, with implications for how we teach collaboration,” Medical education, vol. 46, no. 9, pp. 869–877, 2012.
[36]
K. A. Amsha and M. Lewkowicz, “Shifting patterns in home care work: supporting collaboration among self-employed care actors,” in COOP 2016: Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on the Design of Cooperative Systems, 23-27 May 2016, Trento, Italy, 2016, pp. 139–154.
[37]
V. Haavisto, “Court work in transition: An activity-theoretical study of changing work practices in a Finnish district court,” 2002.
[38]
C. Owen, “Analysing joint work between activity systems,” Activités, vol. 05, no. 5–2, Oct. 2008.
[39]
S. Carmien, R. DePaula, A. Gorman, and A. Kintsch, “Increasing workplace independence for people with cognitive disabilities by leveraging distributed cognition among caregivers and clients,” Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW), vol. 13, no. 5–6, pp. 443–470, 2004.
[40]
S. Bødker, C. Dindler, and O. S. Iversen, “Tying Knots: Participatory Infrastructuring at Work,” Comput Supported Coop Work, pp. 1–29, Feb. 2017.
[41]
E. Raymond, “The cathedral and the bazaar,” Know Techn Pol, vol. 12, no. 3, pp. 23–49, Sep. 1999.
[42]
R. Bentley and P. Dourish, “Medium versus mechanism: Supporting collaboration through customisation,” in Proceedings of the Fourth European Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work ECSCW ’95, H. Marmolin, Y. Sundblad, and K. Schmidt, Eds. Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands, 1995, pp. 133–148.
[43]
K. Schmidt and L. Bannon, “Taking CSCW seriously,” Comput Supported Coop Work, vol. 1, no. 1–2, pp. 7–40, Mar. 1992.
[44]
T. Chau and F. Maurer, “A Case Study of Wiki-based Experience Repository at a Medium-sized Software Company,” in Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Knowledge Capture, New York, NY, USA, 2005, pp. 185–186.
[45]
A. Stocker, A. Richter, P. Hoefler, and K. Tochtermann, “Exploring Appropriation of Enterprise Wikis:,” Comput Supported Coop Work, vol. 21, no. 2, pp. 317–356, Jun. 2012.
[46]
M. Rohde, L. Reinecke, B. Pape, and M. Janneck, “Community-Building with Web-Based Systems? Investigating a Hybrid Community of Students,” Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW), vol. 13, no. 5–6, pp. 471–499, Dec. 2004.
[47]
J. Partanen and S. Wallin, “Bridging soft and hard–Towards a more coherent understanding of self-organisation within urban complexity research,” Finnish Journal of Urban Studies, 2017.
[48]
B. Boonstra and L. Boelens, “Self-organization in urban development: towards a new perspective on spatial planning,” Urban Research & Practice, vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 99–122, Jul. 2011.
[49]
S. Bødker, H. Korsgaard, and J. Saad-Sulonen, “`A Farmer, a Place and at least 20 Members- The Development of Artifact Ecologies in Volunteer-based Communities,” in Proceedings of the 19th ACM Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work & Social Computing - CSCW ’16, San Francisco, California, USA, 2016, pp. 1140–1154.
[50]
J. Saad-Sulonen and L. Horelli, “Urban self-organising groups as users of digital artefacts–Nordic experiences,” Finnish Journal of Urban Planning, vol. 55, no. 3, pp. 32–47, 2017.
[51]
S. Weise, P. Coulton, and M. Chiasson, “Designing in between Local Government and the Public – Using Institutional Analysis in Interventions on Civic Infrastructures,” Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW), vol. 26, no. 4–6, pp. 927–958, Dec. 2017.
[52]
J. I. White, L. Palen, and K. M. Anderson, “Digital mobilization in disaster response: the work & self-organization of on-line pet advocates in response to hurricane sandy,” in Proceedings of the 17th ACM conference on Computer supported cooperative work & social computing - CSCW ’14, Baltimore, Maryland, USA, 2014, pp. 866–876.
[53]
K. Starbird and L. Palen, “‘Voluntweeters’: self-organizing by digital volunteers in times of crisis,” in Proceedings of the 2011 annual conference on Human factors in computing systems - CHI ’11, Vancouver, BC, Canada, 2011, p. 1071.
[54]
A. Botero and J. Saad-Sulonen, “(Challenges and opportunities of) documentation practices of self-organised urban initiatives,” in Participatory Design Theory Using Technology and Social Media to Foster Civic Engagement, 2018.
[55]
J. Dewey, The Public and Its Problems by John Dewey, 1 edition. Swallow Press, 1954.
[56]
C. Le Dantec, “Participation and publics: supporting community engagement,” in Proceedings of the 2012 ACM annual conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems - CHI ’12, Austin, Texas, USA, 2012, p. 1351.
[57]
Le Dantec, “Publics in practice: ubiquitous computing at a shelter for homeless mothers,” in Proceedings of the 2011 annual conference on Human factors in computing systems - CHI ’11, Vancouver, BC, Canada, 2011, p. 1687.
[58]
Le Dantec and DiSalvo, “Infrastructuring and the formation of publics in participatory design,” Social Studies of Science, vol. 43, no. 2, pp. 241–264, Apr. 2013.
[59]
T. Ludwig, C. Reuter, and V. Pipek, “From Publics to Communities: Researching the Path of Shared Issues Through ICT,” Comput Supported Coop Work, vol. 25, no. 2, pp. 193–225, Jun. 2016.
[60]
C. Chay-Nemeth, “Revisiting Publics: A Critical Archaeology of Publics in the Thai HIV/AIDS Issue,” Journal of Public Relations Research, vol. 13, no. 2, pp. 127–161, Apr. 2001.
[61]
C. DiSalvo, “Design and the Construction of Publics,” Design issues, vol. 25, no. 1, pp. 48–63, 2009.
[62]
S. Carmona, N. Alayed, A. Al-Ibrahim, and R. D'Souza, “Realizing the potential of real-time clinical collaboration in maternal–fetal and obstetric medicine through WhatsApp,” Obstet Med, vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 83–89, Jun. 2018.
[63]
V. Wulf, K. Misaki, M. Atam, D. Randall, and M. Rohde, “‘On the Ground’ in Sidi Bouzid: Investigating Social Media Use During the Tunisian Revolution,” in Proceedings of the 2013 Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work, New York, NY, USA, 2013, pp. 1409–1418.
[64]
E. H. R. Rho, G. Mark, and M. Mazmanian, “Fostering Civil Discourse Online: Linguistic Behavior in Comments of #MeToo Articles Across Political Perspectives,” Proc. ACM Hum.-Comput. Interact., vol. 2, no. CSCW, p. 147:1-147:28, Nov. 2018.
[65]
E. Grönvall and S. Lundberg, “Designing for offline and online social work: Technology-mediated collaborative practices in and between municipalities,” in Proceedings of the 33rd European Conference on Cognitive Ergonomics, New York, NY, USA, Oct. 2022, pp. 1–7.
[66]
A. Strauss, “Work and the Division of Labor,” Sociological Quarterly, vol. 26, no. 1, pp. 1–19, Mar. 1985.
[67]
A. Strauss, Qualitative analysis for social scientists. Cambridge University Press, 1987. Accessed: Jan. 19, 2015. [Online]. Available: http://books.google.fr/books?hl=fr&lr=&id=y16ww5ZsJ0AC&oi=fnd&pg=PA109&dq=qualitative+analysis+for+social+scientists+strauss&ots=gV4xLSiajQ&sig=TD4l0qBRYJlj_Ftxq5A3UTQToJc
[68]
H. Karasti, K. S. Baker, and F. Millerand, “Infrastructure Time: Long-term Matters in Collaborative Development,” Comput Supported Coop Work, vol. 19, no. 3–4, pp. 377–415, Aug. 2010.
[69]
S. Marttila, A. Botero, and J. Saad-Sulonen, “Towards Commons Design in Participatory Design,” in Proceedings of the 13th Participatory Design Conference: Short Papers, Industry Cases, Workshop Descriptions, Doctoral Consortium Papers, and Keynote Abstracts - Volume 2, New York, NY, USA, 2014, pp. 9–12.
[70]
E. Ostrom, “Reformulating the Commons,” Swiss Political Science Review, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 29–52, Mar. 2000.
[71]
L. Huybrechts, H. Benesch, and J. Geib, “Institutioning: Participatory Design, Co-Design and the public realm,” CoDesign, vol. 13, no. 3, pp. 148–159, Jul. 2017.
[72]
H. Karasti, K. S. Baker, and F. Millerand, “Infrastructure Time: Long-term Matters in Collaborative Development,” Comput Supported Coop Work, vol. 19, no. 3–4, pp. 377–415, Aug. 2010.
[73]
N. J. Bidwell, “Decolonising HCI and interaction design discourse: some considerations in planning AfriCHI,” XRDS, vol. 22, no. 4, pp. 22–27, Jun. 2016.
[74]
S. Lazem, D. Giglitto, M. S. Nkwo, H. Mthoko, J. Upani, and A. Peters, “Challenges and Paradoxes in Decolonising HCI: A Critical Discussion,” Comput Supported Coop Work, vol. 31, no. 2, pp. 159–196, Jun. 2022.
Index Terms
- Emergent Collaborations Outside of Organizational Frameworks: Exploring Relevant Concepts
Recommendations
Establishing Core Concepts for Information-Powered Collaborations
AbstractScience benefits tremendously from mutual exchanges of information and pooling of effort and resources. The combination of different skills and diverse knowledge is a powerful capacity, source of new intuitions and creative insights. ...
Highlights- Advocating a Canonical Core as foundation for Information-Powered Collaborations.
Understanding and supporting emergent and temporary collaboration across and beyond community and organizational boundaries
C&T '17: Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Communities and TechnologiesThe way the Computer Supported Cooperative work (CSCW) community talks about, defines and investigates 'work' has changed since the early workplace studies. In the current literature, work has been described as being distributed, cross-organizational ...
Inter-organizational scientific collaborations and policy effects: an ego-network evolutionary perspective of the Chinese Academy of Sciences
The formation, evolution, and dynamics of Industry---University---Research Institute (IUR) scientific collaborations in China have not been uncovered fully in extant literature. This study seeks to fill this research gap based on a novel sample of the ...
Comments
Information & Contributors
Information
Published In
May 2023
279 pages
ISBN:9798400707582
DOI:10.1145/3593743
Copyright © 2023 ACM.
Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].
Publisher
Association for Computing Machinery
New York, NY, United States
Publication History
Published: 29 May 2023
Check for updates
Qualifiers
- Research-article
- Research
- Refereed limited
Conference
C&T '23
C&T '23: The 11th International Conference on Communities and Technologies
May 29 - June 2, 2023
Lahti, Finland
Acceptance Rates
Overall Acceptance Rate 80 of 183 submissions, 44%
Contributors
Other Metrics
Bibliometrics & Citations
Bibliometrics
Article Metrics
- 0Total Citations
- 75Total Downloads
- Downloads (Last 12 months)42
- Downloads (Last 6 weeks)5
Reflects downloads up to 30 Jan 2025
Other Metrics
Citations
View Options
Login options
Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.
Sign inFull Access
View options
View or Download as a PDF file.
PDFeReader
View online with eReader.
eReaderHTML Format
View this article in HTML Format.
HTML Format