Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Configuring User-Designer Relations pp 31–58Cite as

Design as and for Collaboration: Making Sense of and Supporting Practical Action

  • Chapter
  • First Online:

Part of the book series: Computer Supported Cooperative Work ((CSCW))

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Although the pessimism in the Standish Group’s Chaos reports is questioned by some (e.g., Glass 2006). More recent studies report significant (though less severe) problems delivering IT projects to time, budget, and scope (Sauer et al., 2007).

  2. 2.

    This is the case for any kind of development. In some circumstances it may be possible to control change, but this can be done only to an extent.

  3. 3.

    We will use the terms ‘collaborative’ and ‘cooperative’ interchangeably to denote any

    socially organised work undertaken within an organisational division of labour .

  4. 4.

    We choose to avoid the term ‘thick description’ à la Geertz (1973) because of its various connotations, which are not of interest in the context of this chapter (cf. Ortner, 1997).

  5. 5.

    We concur with Jirotka et al.’s point to an extent. We would agree that ethnography by itself does not provide a means for unambiguously settling such questions, but would argue that ethnography can help with the work of envisaging the future. See the conclusions of this chapter for further discussion on this point.

  6. 6.

    In relation to formal requirements documents: we would not want designers to have to rely solely on formal requirements specifications, but be able to interrogate them as appropriate in light of a more detailed understanding of the phenomena they either represent or have emerged from.

  7. 7.

    Crabtree’s (2003) recent admirable book on the practical application of ethnography for design goes a considerable way to filling this gap.

  8. 8.

    http://www.comp.lancs.ac.uk/computing/research/cseg/projects/pointer/patterns.html

  9. 9.

    An example of the former concerned the creation of a contacts database for psychiatrists working in a hospital ward, where a prior ethnography suggested both the need for such a database, as well as how it might best be organised and searched (Hartswood et al., 2000). An example of the latter concerned the use of a decision aid for mammography. Examining the details of breast screening practice showed up the tool’s simplifying assumptions and suggested alternative avenues for design (Hartswood, 1999).

  10. 10.

    Taking the mammography decision support example again (Hartswood, 1999), as stated above, our study did identify ‘simplifying assumptions and open up new avenues for design’ but since we were evaluating a software package nearing maturity, there was little value to be gained from simply saying ‘if you were going to start again, I’d do it differently’, but much from assisting efforts deploying the existing system.

  11. 11.

    Suchman (1995) draws out the equivocal nature of producing ethnographic representations to inform design.

References

  • Anderson, R.J. (1994). Representations and requirements: The value of ethnography in system design.Human-Computer Interaction, 9, 151–182.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, R.J. (1997). Work, ethnography, and system design. In: Kent, A. and Williams, J.G. (eds.),The Encyclopaedia of Microcomputing. New York: Marcel Dekker, pp. 159–183.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anderson R.J., Hughes, J.A. and Sharrock, W.W. (1989).Working for Profit: The Social Organisation of Calculation in an Entrepreneurial Firm. Avebury: Aldershot.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bannon, L. (1991). From human factors to human actors: The role of psychology and human computer interaction studies in system design. In: Greenbaum, J. and Kyng, M. (eds.),Design at Work: Cooperative Design of Computer Systems. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bannon, L. and Schmidt, K. (1991). CSCW: Four characters in search of a context. In: Bowers, J. and Benford, S. (eds.),Studies in Computer Supported Cooperative Work: Theory, Practice and Design. Amsterdam: North-Holland, pp. 3–16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bansler, J.P. and Havn, E. (1991). The nature of software work: Systems development as a labor process. Van den Besselaar, P., Clement, A. and Järvinen, P. (eds.),Information System, Work and Organization Design. Elsevier Science Publishers B. V., pp. 145–153.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beck, K. (1998). Extreme programming: A humanistic discipline of software development. Astesiano, E. (ed.),Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Fundamental Approaches to Software Engineering, Lecture Notes in Computer Science 1382, Springer, pp. 1–6.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beck, K. (2000).Extreme Programming Explained: Embracing Change. Addison Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bentley, R., Hughes, J.A., Randall, D., Rodden, T., Sawyer, P., Shapiro, D. and Sommerville, I. (1992). Ethnographically-informed systems design for air traffic control.Proceedings of the 1992 ACM conference on Computer-supported cooperative work, November 01–04, Toronto, Canada, pp. 123–129.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berg, M. and Timmermans, S. (2000). Order and their others: On the constitution of universalities in medical work.Configurations, 8(1), 31–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beyer, H. and Holtzblatt, K. (1998).Contextual Design: Defining Customer- Centered Systems. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bjerknes, G. and Kautz, K. (1991). Overview – A Key Concept in Computer Supported Cooperative Work.Computergestützte Gruppenarbeit (CSCW): 1. Fachtagung, 20. September bis 2.Oktober, Bremen. B.G. Teubner, pp. 153–169.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blomberg, J., Giacomi, J., Mosher, A. and Swenton- Wall, P. (1991). Ethnographic field methods and their relation to design. In: Schuler, D. and Namioka, A. (eds.),Participatory Design: Perspectives on Systems Design. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, pp. 123–155.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blomberg, J., Suchman, L. and Trigg, R. (1996). Reflections on a work-oriented design project.Human- Computer Interaction, 11(3), 237–265.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boehm, B.W. (1988). A spiral model of software development and enhancement.IEEE Computer, 21, 61–72, May 1988.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boehm, B. and Turner, R. (2005). Management challenges to implementing agile processes in traditional development organizations.IEEE Software, September/October 2005, pp. 30–39.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bowers, J., Button, G. and Sharrock, W. (1995). Workflow from within and without. Marmolin, H., Sundblad, Y. and Schmidt, K. (eds.),Proceedings of the Fourth European Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work, 10–14, September 1995, Stockholm, Sweden, pp. 51–66.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Bowers, J. and Pycock, J. (1994). Talking through design: Requirements and resistance in cooperative prototyping.Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI’94), Boston, Massachusetts, pp. 299–305.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brooks, F.P., Jr. (1975).The Mythical Man-Month: Essays on Software Engineering. Addison-Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Büscher, M., Christensen, M., Grønbæk, K., Krogh, P., Mogensen, P., Shapiro, D. and Ørbæk, P. (2000). Collaborative augmented reality environments: Integrating VR, working materials, and distributed work spaces.Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Collaborative Virtual Environment, ACM Press, San Francisco, CA, USA, pp. 47–56.

    Google Scholar 

  • Büscher, M., Gill, S., Mogensen, P. and Shapiro, D. (2001). Landscapes of practice: Bricolage as a method for situated design.Computer Supported Cooperative Work,10(1), 1–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Büscher, M., Eriksen, M.A., Kristensen, J.F. and Mogensen, P.H. (2004). Ways of grounding imagination. Proceedings of the Participatory Design Conference, Toronto, Canada, pp. 193–203.

    Google Scholar 

  • Button, G. (1993). An organisational account of the question “Do users get what they want?”.ACM SIGOIS Bulletin, 14(2), 35–40.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Button, G. and Sharrock, W. (1994). Occasioned practices in the work of software engineers. In: Jirotka, M. and Goguen, J.A. (eds.),Requirements Engineering: Social and Technical Issues. London: Academic Press, pp. 217–240.

    Google Scholar 

  • Button, G. and Sharrock, W. (1995a). Practices in the work of ordering software development. In: Firth, A. (ed.),The Discourse of Negotiation: Studies of Language in the Workplace. Oxford: Pergamon, pp. 159–180.

    Google Scholar 

  • Button, G. and Sharrock, W. (1995b). The mundane work of writing and reading computer programs. In: ten Have, P. and Psathas, G. (eds.),Situated Order: Studies in the Social Organization of Talk and Embodied Activities. University Press of America, pp. 231–258.

    Google Scholar 

  • Button, G. and Sharrock, W. (1996). Project work: The organisation of collaborative design and development in software engineering.Computer Supported Cooperative Work, 5(4), 369–386.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Button, G. and Sharrock, W. (1998). The organizational accountability of technological work.Social Studies of Science, 28(1), 73–102.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Button, G. and Sharrock, W. (2000). Design by problem-solving. In: Luff, P., Hindmarsh, J., and Heath, C. (eds.),Workplace Studies: Recovering Work Practice and Informing System Design. Cambridge University Press, pp. 46–67.

    Google Scholar 

  • Charette, R.N. (2005). Why software fails.IEEE Spectrum, 42(9), 42–49, Sept. 2005..

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crabtree, A. (2003).Designing Collaborative Systems: A Practical Guide to Ethnography. Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Curtis, B., Krasner, H. and Iscoe, N. (1988). A field study of the software design process for large systems.Communications of the ACM, 31(11), 1268–1287.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Erickson, T. (2000). Supporting interdisciplinary design: Towards pattern languages for workplaces. In: Luff, P., Hindmarsh, J. and Heath, C. (eds.),Workplace Studies: Recovering Work Practice and Informing System Design. Cambridge University Press, pp. 252–261.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fleck, J. (1988). Innofusion or diffusation: The nature of technological development in robotics.Edinburgh PICT Working Paper No. 4, Edinburgh University, Edinburgh.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fleck, J. (1993). Innofusion: Feedback in the innovation process. In: Stowell, F. A. et al. (eds.),Systems Science, Plenum Press, pp.169–174.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fleck, J. (1999). Learning by trying: The implementation of configurational technology. In: MacKenzie, D. and Wajcman, J. (eds.),The Social Shaping of Technology, (2nd ed.). Open University Press, pp. 244–265.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garfinkel, H. (1967).Studies in Ethnomethodology. Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Geertz, C. (1973) Thick Description: Toward an Interpretive Theory of Culture. In his The Interpretation of Cultures. New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glass, R.L. (2006).Communications of the ACM, 49(8), 15–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greenbaum, J. and Kyng, M. (1991). Introduction: Situated design. In: Greenbaum, J. and Kyng, M. (eds.),Design at Work: Cooperative Design of Computer Systems. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grinter, R.E. (2003). Recomposition: Coordinating a web of software dependencies.Computer Supported Cooperative Work, 12, 297–327.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harper, R.H.R. (2000). The organisation in ethnography: A discussion of ethnographic fieldwork programs in CSCW.Computer Supported Cooperative Work, 9, 239–264.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hartswood, M. (1999).Human-factors in computer- aided mammography. PhD Thesis, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hartswood, M., Jirotka, M., Procter, R., Slack, R., Voss, A. and Lloyd, S. (2005) Working IT out in e-Science: Experiences of requirements capture in a HealthGrid project. InProceedings of HealthGrid Conference, Oxford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hartswood, M., Procter, R., Rouncefield, M. and Sharpe, M. (2000). Being there and doing IT in the workplace: A case study of a co-development approach in healthcare. In: Cherkasky, T., Greenbaum, J. and Mambery, P. (eds.),Proceedings of the CPSR/IFIP WG 9.1 Participatory Design Conference, Nov. 28th-Dec. 1st, New York, pp. 96–105.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hartswood, M., Procter, R., Rouncefield, M., Slack, R., Voss, A., Büscher, M. and Rouchy, P. (2007). Co-realisation: Evolving IT artefacts by design. In: Ackerman, M., Halverson, C., Erickson, T. and Kellogg, W. (eds.),Resources, Co-Evolution and Artefacts. Springer, pp. 59–94.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hemmings, T., Crabtree, A., Rodden, T., Clarke, K. and Rouncefield, M. (2002). Probing the probes. In: Binder, T., Gregory, J. and Wagner, I. (eds.),Proceedings of the Participatory Design Conference, Malmö, Sweden, pp. 42–50.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heritage, J. (1984).Garfinkel and Ethnomethodology. Polity Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hughes, J.A., King, V., Rodden, T. and Andersen, H. (1994). Moving out of the control room: Ethnography in system design. InProceedings of the 1994 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work, Chapel Hill, NC: ACM Press, pp. 429–438.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hughes, J., King, V., Rodden, T. and Andersen, H. (1995).The Role of Ethnography in Interactive Systems Design. Interactions, April.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hughes, J., O’Brien, J., Rodden, T. and Rouncefield, M. (2000). Ethnography, communication and support for design. In: Luff, P., Hindmarsh, J. and Heath, C. (eds.),Workplace Studies: Recovering Work Practice and Informing System Design. Cambridge University Press, pp. 187–214.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hughes, J.A., Randall, D. and Shapiro, D. (1992). Faltering from ethnography to design.Proceedings of the 1992 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work, Toronto, Ontario, Canada, pp. 115–122.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hughes, J.A., Randall, D. and Shapiro, D. (1993). From ethnographic record to system design: Some experiences from the field.Computer Supported Cooperative Work, 1(3), 123–141.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jirotka, M., Gilbert, N. and Luff, P. (1992). On the social organisation of organisations.Computer Supported Cooperative Work, 1, 95–118.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jirotka, M. and Goguen, J.A. (eds.). (1994).Requirements Engineering: Social and Technical Issues. Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kling, R. (1991). Cooperation, coordination and control in computer-supported work.Communications of the ACM, 34(12), 83–88, Dec. 1991.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lehman, M.M. (1998). Software’s future: Managing evolution.IEEE Software, 15(1), 40–44, Jan.–Feb. 1998..Martin, D., Rodden, T., Rouncefield, M., Sommerville, I. and Viller, S. (2001). Finding patterns in the fieldwork. Proceedings of the European Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work, Kluwer, pp. 39–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martin, D., Rodden, T., Rouncefield, M., Sommerville, I. and Viller, S. (2001). Finding Patterns in the Fieldwork. Proceedings of the European Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work. Kluwer. Pp. 39–58.

    Google Scholar 

  • Martin, D. and Sommerville, I. (2004). Patterns of cooperative interaction: Linking ethnomethodology and design. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction, 11(1), 59–89.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nandhakumar, J. and Avison, D.E. (1999). The fiction of methodological development: A field study of information systems development.Information Technology & People, 12(2), 176–191.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nardi, B.A. and Miller, J.R. (1990). An ethnographic study of distributed problem solving in spreadsheet development.Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Computer-supported Cooperative Work, Oct. 7–10, Los Angeles, pp. 197–208.

    Google Scholar 

  • Naur, P. and Randell, B. (eds.). (1969). Software engineering.Report on a Conference Sponsored by the NATO Science Committee, Garmisch, Germany, 7–11 Oct. 1968. Scientific Affairs Division, NATO, Brussels.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ortner, S. (1997). Introduction. Representations, no. 59, Special Issue: The Fate of “Culture”: Greetz and Beyond. pp. 1–13

    Google Scholar 

  • Plowman, L., Rogers, Y. and Ramage, M. (1995). What are workplace studies for? InProceedings of ECSCW'95, Stockholm, September.

    Google Scholar 

  • Procter, R. and Williams, R. (1996a). Beyond design: Social learning and computer-supported cooperative work. In: Shapiro, D., Taubner, M. and Traunmüller, R. (eds.),The Design of Computer-Supported Cooperative Work and Groupware Systems, Elsevier Science, pp. 445–464.

    Google Scholar 

  • Procter, R. and Williams, R. (1996b). Social learning and innovations in multimedia-basedCSCW. ACM SIGOIS Bulletin, 17(3), 73–76.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Randall, D., Hughes, J. and Shapiro, D. (1994). Steps toward a partnership: Ethnography and system design. In: Jirotka, M. and Goguen, J.A. (eds.),Requirements Engineering: Social and Technical Issues. Academic Press, pp. 241–258.

    Google Scholar 

  • Royce, W.W. (1987 [1970]). Managing the development of large software systems: Concepts and techniques.Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Software Engineering, Monterey, CA, pp. 328–338. (originally published inProc. IEEE WESCON 1970, pp. 1–9).

    Google Scholar 

  • Rönkkö, K., Dittrich, Y. and Randall, D. (2005). When plans do not work out: How plans are used in software development projects.Computer Supported Cooperative Work, 14, 433–468.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rouncefield, M.F. (2002).‘Business as Usual’: An Ethnography of Everyday (Bank) Work. PhD Thesis, Department of Sociology, University of Lancaster.

    Google Scholar 

  • Russo, N.L. and Stolterman, E. (2000). Exploring the assumptions underlying information systems methodologies: Their impact on past, present and future ISM research.Information Technology & People, 13(4), 313–327.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sauer, C., Gemino A. and Reich, B.H. (2007). The impact of size and volatility on IT project performance.Communications of the ACM, 50(11), 79–84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schmidt, K. (2000). The critical role of workplace studies in CSCW. In: Luff, P., Hindmarsh, J. and Heath, C. (eds.),Workplace Studies: Recovering Work Practice and Informing System Design. Cambridge University Press, pp. 141–149.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmidt, K. and Bannon, L. (1992). Taking CSCW seriously supporting articulation work.Computer Supported Cooperative Work, 1(1–2), 7–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sharma, S. and Rai, A. (2000). CASE deployment in IS organizations.Communications of the ACM, 43(1), 80–88.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sharrock, W. and Anderson, R. (1993). Working towards agreement. Button, G. (ed.),Technology in Working Order: Studies of work, interaction and technology. Routledge, pp. 149–161.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sharrock, W. and Anderson, R. (1994). The user as a scenic feature of the design space.Design Studies, 15(1), 5–18. Also Rank Xerox EuroPARC Technical Report EPC-91-105, 1991.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sørensen, K.H. (1996). Learning technology, constructing culture, socio-technical change as social learning.STS Working Paper, No. 18/96, University of Trondheim, Centre for Technology and Society.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sommerville, I. (2001)Software Engineering (6th ed.). Addison Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Standish Group International. (1995).The Chaos Report. www.standishgroup.com/sample_ research/PDFpages/Chaos1994.pdf

  • Stewart, J. and Williams, R. (2005). The wrong trousers? Beyond the design fallacy: Social learning and the user. In: Howcroft, D. and Trauth, E.M. (eds.),Handbook of Critical Information Systems Research: Theory and Application. Edward Elgar, pp. 195–221.

    Google Scholar 

  • Suchman, L.A. (1987).Plans and Situated Actions: The Problem of Human-Machine Communication. Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Suchman, L. (1995). Making work visible.Special issue of CACM, 38(9), 56–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Trigg, R.H., Blomberg, J. and Suchman, L. (1999). Moving document collections online: The evolution of a shared repository. In: Bødker, S., Kyng, M. and Schmidt, K. (eds.),Proceedings of the 6th European Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work. Kluwer Academic Publishers, pp. 331–350.

    Google Scholar 

  • Turk, D., France, R. and Rumpe, B. (2002). Limitations of agile software processes.Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Extreme Programming and Flexible Processes in Software Engineering, XP2002, May 26–30, Alghero, Italy, pp. 43–46.

    Google Scholar 

  • Voss, A., Procter, R. and Williams, R. (2000). Innovation in use: Interleaving day-to-day operation and systems development. In: Cherkasky, T., Greenbaum, J. and Mambery, P. (eds.),Proceedings of the CPSR/IFIP WG 9.1 Participatory Design Conference, New York, Nov. 28th–Dec. 1st, pp. 192–201.

    Google Scholar 

  • Warr A., de la Flor, G., Jirotka, M. and Lloyd, S. (2007). Usability in e-Science: The eDiaMoND case study. InCHI International Workshop on Increasing the Impact of Usability Work in Software Development, San Jose, CA, Apr. 28th–May 3rd.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wastell, D.G. (1996). The fetish of technique: Methodology as a social defence.Information Systems Journal, 6, 25–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Williams, R., Stewart, J. and Slack, R. (2005).Social Learning in Technological Innovation: Experimenting with Information and Communication Technologies. Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Woolgar, S. (1991). Configuring the user: The case of usability trials. Law, J. (ed.),A Sociology of Monsters: Essays on Power, Technology and Domination. Routledge, pp. 58–100.

    Google Scholar 

  • Woolgar, S. (1994). Rethinking requirements analysis: Some implications of recent research into producer – consumer relationships in IT development. In: Jirotka, M. and Goguen, J. (eds.),Requirements Engineering: Social and Technical Issues. Academic Press, pp. 201–216.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yourdon, E. and Constantine, L.C. (1979).Structured Design: Fundamentals of a Discipline of Computer Program and System Design. Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. National Centre for e-Social Science, University of Manchester, Manchester

    Alex Voss & Rob Procter

  2. School of Social Sciences, University of Wales at Bangor, Bangor

    Roger Slack

  3. School of Informatics, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh

    Mark Hartswood

  4. Computing Department, Lancaster University, Lancaster

    Mark Rouncefield

Authors
  1. Alex Voss
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Rob Procter
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Roger Slack
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Mark Hartswood
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Mark Rouncefield
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Alex Voss .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

    Rights and permissions

    Reprints and permissions

    Copyright information

    © 2009 Springer-Verlag London Limited

    About this chapter

    Cite this chapter

    Voss, A., Procter, R., Slack, R., Hartswood, M., Rouncefield, M. (2009). Design as and for Collaboration: Making Sense of and Supporting Practical Action. In: Büscher, M., Slack, R., Rouncefield, M., Procter, R., Hartswood, M., Voss, A. (eds) Configuring User-Designer Relations. Computer Supported Cooperative Work. Springer, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-84628-925-5_3

    Download citation

    • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-84628-925-5_3

    • Published:

    • Publisher Name: Springer, London

    • Print ISBN: 978-1-84628-924-8

    • Online ISBN: 978-1-84628-925-5

    • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

    Publish with us

    Policies and ethics

    Search

    Navigation