Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!samsung!know!pug!wex From: wex@sitting.pws.bull.com (Buckaroo Banzai) Newsgroups: comp.groupware Subject: Groupware effects (was Re: Peers (ao.gw)) Message-ID: Date: 5 Jun 90 20:34:56 GMT References: <1138200010@cdp> <1998@east.East.Sun.COM> Sender: news@pws.bull.com Organization: Bull Worldwide Information Systems Inc. Lines: 57 In-reply-to: db@witzend.East.Sun.COM's message of 5 Jun 90 13:14:17 GMT In article <1998@east.East.Sun.COM> db@witzend.East.Sun.COM (David Brownell) writes: What do readers of comp.groupware feel about the potential that groupware has to foster social or political agendas? Is it good, bad, inevitable? Is there any particular bias among the readers of this group? I can say, based on my five years of working with groupware theory and groupware systems that "must" is the correct answer. The street has its own uses for technology, and so does every user out there. We cannot avoid the truth that every piece of software comes with its own preferred methodology (implicit or explicit) and that methodology will change the way users do work. What's different about groupware is that it propagates the changes of/by one user across to others. If I use my Excel spreadsheet in one particular way, that likely won't impact you. If I use my news-posting software, that likely will. For example, I tend to hand-edit Subject: lines to make my topics clearer. I wish more people did, but I've learned to be careful with the 'k' key lest I miss an interesting comment by a person who simply forgot tochange the subject or References: line. I think that after information technologies are widely enough dispersed, THEN they could begin to be used for promoting egalitarian social agendas rather than a power/control agenda. You can see this already in communities that have lots of computer power, and networking is an environmental feature. Good luck, my friend. Nothing will fail faster than a groupware system which fails to recognize existing social and power relationships. Look at the paucity of group calendars, for example. There's nothing new in that technology - hasn't been for a while. Why doesn't every PC in corporate America have one? (Hint: if your answer has to do with technology, you're missing the point.) Another question: how many executives at or near VP level in your company use email? I can't even get my division manager to use it. It's not entirely bad that the software reflect how the organization using it really works. There are organizations with which I would have a severe conflict of values, however, and I'd rather not facilitate their effective functioning! I agree with you in principle, but reality intrudes again. We'd like to support how people work, but the way they work is non-electronic (or they wouldn't need our tools in the first place). Therefore, by introducing an electronic system, we're going to be disrupting the pattern of work. (Nevertheless, you'll never catch me implementing a performance-monitoring system. There are things that just grate too much.) -- --Alan Wexelblat Bull Worldwide Information Systems internet: wex@pws.bull.com phone: (508) 671-7485 Usenet: spdcc.com!know!wex The taxes of every American west of the Mississippi are used to pay off the interest on the national debt.