Abstract
This paper addresses the use of artefacts as a powerful resource for analysis, focusing on the ‘artefact as designed’ as a means of eliciting the designers’ explicit and implicit knowledge and ‘artefacts as used’ as a means of uncovering the trail left by currently inactive processes. Artefact analysis is particularly suitable in situations where direct observation is ineffective, especially in activities that occur infrequently. We demonstrate the usefulness of our technique through the analysis of artefacts within both the office and the meeting environment. This is part of a wider study aimed at understanding the nature of decisions in meetings with the view of producing a tool to aid decision management and hence reduce rework. We conclude by drawing out some general lessons from our analysis, which reaffirms the intricate role that artefacts play in maintaining activity dynamics.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Explore related subjects
Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.Notes
2001 IBM T.J. Watson Research Center, The Boeing Company http://www.research.ibm.com/teamspace
References
Abowd G (1999) Classroom 2000: an experiment with the instrumentation of a living educational environment. IBM Syst J Spec Issue Pervasive Comput 38 (4):508–530
Austin JL (1962) How to do things with words. Clarendon press, Oxford
Bannon L, Bødker S (1991) Beyond the interface: encountering artefacts in use. In: Carroll J (eds) Designing interaction. Cambridge Univeristy Press, Cambridge, pp 227–253
Bertelsen O, Bødker S (2003) Activity theory, Chap 11. In: Carroll J (eds) HCI models, theories, and frameworks: toward an multidisciplinary science. Morgan, Kaufman, pp 291–324
Buckingham Shum S (1996) Analyzing the usability of a design rationale notation. In: Moran TP, Carroll JM (eds) Design rationale: concepts, techniques, and use. Lawrence Earlbaum, Hillside, pp 185–215
Conklin J, Begeman ML (1989) gIBIS: a tool for all reasons. J Am Soc Inf Sci 40(3):200–213
Dix A (1994) Computer-supported cooperative work - a framework. In: Rosenburg D, Hutchison C (eds) Design issues in CSCW. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York, pp 23–37
Dix A (2002) Managing the ecology of interaction. In: Pribeanu C, Vanderdonckt J (eds) Proceedings of Tamodia 2002, first international workshop on task models and user interface. INFOREC, Bucharest
Dix A, Wilkinson J, Ramduny D (1998a) Redefining organisational memory–artefacts, and the distribution and coordination of work. In Understanding work and designing artefacts (York, 21st Sept., 1998). http://www.hiraeth.com/alan/papers/artefacts98/
Dix A, Ramduny D, Wilkinson J (1998b) Interaction in the large. Interact Comput 11(1):9–32
Dix A, Ramduny D, Rayson P, Sommerville I (2001) Artefact-centred analysis—transect and archaeological approaches. Team-Ethno Online, Issue 1—Field(work) of Dreams, November 2001, Lancaster University, UK. http://www.teamethno-online.org/Issue1/Dix.html
Dix A, Ramduny-Ellis D, Wilkinson J (2002) Trigger analysis—understanding broken tasks. In: Diaper D, Stanton N (eds) The handbook of task analysis for human–computer interaction. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, London
Englebart D, English W (1968) A research centre for augmenting human intellect. In: Proceedings fall joint computing conference, Thompson, Washington DC, pp 395–410
Garfinkel H (1967) Chapter 6: good organizational reason for ‘bad’ clinic records. Studies Ethnomethodol. Polity Press
Gibson J (1977) The theory of affordances. In: Shaw R, Bransford J (eds) Perceiving, acting and knowing: towards ecological psychology. Lawrence Earlbaum, Hillside
Grudin J (1994) Groupware and social dynamics: eight challenges for developers. Commun ACM, Vol. 37, No. 1, Jan 1994, pp 92–105
Hartson HR (2003) Cognitive, physical, sensory, and functional affordances in interaction design. Behav Inf Technol, September–October 2003, Taylor and Francis Ltd, 22(5):315–338
Heath C, Luff P (1992) Collaboration and control: crisis management and multimedia technology in London underground line control rooms. Comput Support Coop Work 1:69–94
Howes A, Payne S (1990) Display-based competence: towards user models for menu-driven interfaces. Int J Man Mach Stud 33:637–655
Hughes J, O’Brien JJ, Rouncefield M, Sommerville I, Rodden T (1995) Presenting ethnography in the requirements process. In: Proceedings of IEEE conferance on requirements engineering, RE’95. IEEE Press, pp 27–34
Hutchins E (1990) The technology of team navigation. In: Gallagher J, Kraut R, Egido C (eds) Intellectual teamwork: social and technical bases of collaborative work. Lawrence Earlbaum, Hillside
Hutchins E (1995) Cognition in the wild. MIT Press, Cambridge, USA
Kunz W, Rittel HWJ (1970) Issues as elements of information systems. working paper no. 131. Center for Planning and Development Research, University of California, Berkeley, July 1970
Lee J (1990) Sibyl: a tool for managing group decision rationale. In: Proceedings of conference on computer supported cooperative work ’90, Los Angeles, CA, pp 79–92
Leontiev A (1978) Activity, consciousness and personality. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs
MacLean A, Young R, Bellotti V, Moran T (1991) Questions, options, and criteria: elements of design space analysis. In: John M Carroll, Thomas P. Moran (eds) Human–computer interaction, 6 (3–4), Spec Issue Design Rationale, pp 201–250
Richter H, Abowd G, Geyer W, Fuchs L, Daijavad S, Poltrock S (2001) Integrating meeting capture within a collaborative team environment. In: Proceedings of the international conference on ubiquitous computing, Ubicomp 2001, Atlanta, GA, September, Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York, pp 123–138
Rogers Y, Ellis J (1994) Distributed cognition: an alternative framework for analysing and explaining collaborative working. J Inf Technol 9(2):119–128
Selvin A, Buckingham Shum S, Sierhuis MS, Conklin J, Zimmermann B, Palus C, Drath W, Horth D, Domingue J, Motta E, Li G (2001) Compendium: making meetings into knowledge events. Knowledge Technologies 2001, http://kmi.open.ac.uk/publications/tr.cfm?trnumber=103
Spillers F (2003) Task analysis through cognitive archeology, chap 14. In: Diaper D, Stanton N (eds) The handbook of task analysis for human–computer interaction. Lawrence Erlbaum Associate, London, pp 279–290
Stefik M, Bobrow D, Foster G, Lanning S, Tatar D (1987) WYSIWIS revisited: early experiences with multiuser interfaces. ACM Trans Office Inf Syst 5(2):147–167
Suchman L (1987) Plans and situated actions: The problem of human–machine communication. Cambridge University Press, London
Vygotsky L, Cole M, John-Steiner V, Scribner S (1978) Mind in society. Harvard University Press, Cambridge
Acknowledgements
Tracker: Reducing rework through decision management project is funded by the EPSRC Systems Integration programme in the UK, EPSRC Grant Ref. GR/R12183/01, May 2001. We would like to thank the Business Enterprise Centre (BEC) at Lancaster University for giving us access to their meetings and offices, the Interdisciplinary Research Collaboration in Dependability (DIRC) project for the use of their minutes and finally, the developers of TeamSpace at the Georgia Institute of Technology for the use of their tool.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Ramduny-Ellis, D., Dix, A., Rayson, P. et al. Artefacts as designed, artefacts as used: resources for uncovering activity dynamics. Cogn Tech Work 7, 76–87 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10111-005-0179-1
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10111-005-0179-1