TOOLS AND CHANNELS OF COMMUNICATION: DEALING WITH THE EFFECTS OF COMPUTER MEDIATION ON DESIGN COMMUNICATION

International audienceThis paper proposes a methodology to evaluate theeffects of computer-mediated communication oncollaboratively solving design problems. When setting up avirtual design community, choices must be made between avariety of tools, choices dictated by budget, bandwidth,ability and availability. How do you choose between thetools, which is useful and how will each affect the outcomeof the design exchanges you plan? A commonly usedmethod is to analyze the work done and to identify toolswhich support this type of work. In general, research on theeffects of computer-mediation on collaborative work hasconcentrated mainly on social-psychological factors such asdeindividuation and attitude polarization, and usedqualitative methods. In contrast, we propose to examine theprocess of collaboration itself, focusing on separating thosecomponent processes which primarily involve individualwork from those that involve genuine interaction. Extendingthe cognitive metaphor of the brain as a computer, we viewcollaboration in terms of a network process, and examineissues of control, coordination, and delegation to separatesub-processors. Through this methodology we attempt toseparate the individual problem-solving component from thelarger process of collaboration. There is a long history of research into the role andapplication of computers to communication andcollaboration from which has arisen a variety of tools tofacilitate work done in groups. Holtham [1994] traces thishistory from the 1960s through to the 1990s, fromaddressing basic issues of computer communication throughcommercial implementation and diversified applications ofthe tools. Little of this research has focused on the work ofdesigners, with no commercial systems availablespecifically for the design professions. Research hastended instead to look at typical office work, withparticular attention to group work in formal and informalbut coherent groups. This research provides a rich anduseful heritage for investigations of design collaboration,but the findings have to be interpreted with therecognition that design work differs from typical officework in one substantial aspect – the use of graphics iscentral to design communication and this places asignificant and different burden on the computer-supportedcommunication when compared to textual interactions