Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!samsung!know!slug!wex From: wex@sitting.pws.bull.com (Buckaroo Banzai) Newsgroups: comp.groupware Subject: Re: Groupware Effects on Hierarchies Message-ID: Date: 28 Jun 90 20:20:53 GMT References: <2004@east.east.sun.com> <1138200028@cdp> <1990Jun24.130413.16511@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG> <2092@east.East.Sun.COM> Sender: news@pws.bull.com Organization: Bull Worldwide Information Systems Inc. Lines: 29 In-reply-to: db@witzend.East.Sun.COM's message of 25 Jun 90 17:58:50 GMT I've been looking at this issue with an eye to implementing some groupware systems. One of the things I've been finding in talking with potential users is that people really resent having something authoritarian-seeming made explicit in the computer, even when they deal with it in real life. For example, Subject 2 was observed to have this interaction: Subject 2: "What are we doing about the XXX contract?" Peer: "I've set up a meeting at 2. You'll get the agenda as soon as the secretary finishes typing it up." Subject 2: "OK." However, Subject 2 explicitly rejected the idea of having an electronic calendar system which would allow his Peer to schedule this meeting automatically, with him being able to remove it if he didn't like it. That, he said, was "too authoritarian." Upon having it pointed out that the computer would simply be implementing the now-informal procedure, Subject 2 ventured the opinion that "having the interaction on the computer [made] it more authoritarian." Comments? -- --Alan Wexelblat Bull Worldwide Information Systems internet: wex@pws.bull.com phone: (508) 294-7485 (new #) Usenet: spdcc.com!know!wex "The first myth of management is that it exists. The second myth of management is that sucess equals skill."