Empowering End-Users: A Pattern-Centered Groupware Development Process

  • Till Schümmer
  • Stephan Lukosch
  • Robert Slagter
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 3706)

Abstract

When developing groupware satisfying user requirements is even more difficult than in the context of single-user application development; not only the interaction with the application itself but also the interaction between group members must be respected. Current design methodologies insufficiently focus the designers’ attention to this aspect. Therefore, we propose the Oregon Software Development Process (OSDP) that fosters end-user participation, structures the interaction between end-users and developers, and emphasizes the use of a shared language between users and developers.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Alexander, C., Silverstein, M., Angel, S., Ishikawa, S., Abrams, D.: The Oregon Experiment. Oxford University Press, New York (1980)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Schümmer, T., Slagter, R.: The oregon software development process. In: Eckstein, J., Baumeister, H. (eds.) XP 2004. LNCS, vol. 3092, pp. 148–156. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Heidegger, M.: Sein und Zeit. 17 (1993) edn. Niemeyer, Tübingen (1927)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Alexander, C.: Notes on the Synthesis of Form. 7 (2002) edn. Harvard University Press, Cambridge (1964)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Rittel, H.W.J., Webber, M.M.: Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy Sciences 4, 155–169 (1973)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Alexander, C.: A city is not a tree. Architectural Forum 122, 58–62 (1965)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Alexander, C.: The timeless way of building. Oxford University Press, New York (1979)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Schön, D.A.: The Reflective Practictioner: How Professionals Think in Action. Basic Books, New York (1983)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Schuler, D., Namioka, A.: Participatory design: Principles and Practices. Erlbaum, Hillsdale (1993)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Bjerknes, G., Bratteteig, T.: User participation and democracy: a discussion of scandinavian research on systems development. Scand. J. Inf. Syst. 7, 73–98 (1995)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Naur, P., Randell, B. (eds.): Software Engineering: Report of a conference sponsored by the NATO Science Committee, Garmisch, Germany, Brussels (1969), Scientific Affairs Division (1968)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Boehm, B.W.: Software engineering. IEEE Trans. Computers, 1226–1241 (1976)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Boehm, B.W.: A spiral model of software development and enhancement. IEEE Computer 21, 61–72 (1988)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Jacobson, I., Booch, G., Rumbaugh, J.: Unified Software Development Process. Addison-Wesley, Reading (1999)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Beck, K.: eXtreme Programming Explained. Addison Wesley, Reading (1999)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Muller, M.J., Kuhn, S.: Participatory design. Communications of the ACM 36, 24–28 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Kahler, H., Mørch, A., Stiemerling, O., Wulf, V.: Tailorable systems and cooperative work (introduction). Special Issue of Computer Supported Cooperative Work 9 (2000)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Gamma, E., Helm, R., Johnson, R., Vlissides, J.: Design Patterns: Elements of Reusable Object-Oriented Software. Addison-Wesley, Reading (1995)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Borchers, J.: A Pattern Approach to Interaction Design. John Wiley and Sons Ltd., Chichester (2001)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Rossi, G., Garrido, A., Carvalho, S.: Design patterns for object-oriented hypermedia applications. In: Vlissides, J.M., Coplien, J.O., Kerth, N.L. (eds.) Pattern Languages of Program Design, vol. 2, pp. 177–191. Addison-Wesley, Reading (1995)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Eckstein, J.: Workshop report on the pedagogical patterns project: Successes in teaching object technology. In: Proceedings of OOPSLA 1999 Educator’s Symposium, Denver (1999)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Erickson, T.: Lingua francas for design: sacred places and pattern languages. In: Proceedings of the conference on Designing interactive systems, pp. 357–368. ACM Press, New York (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Dewan, P.: An integrated approach to designing and evaluating collaborative applications and infrastructures. Computer Supported Cooperative Work 10, 75–111 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Fitzpatrick, G.A.: The Locales Framework: Understanding and Designing for Cooperative Work. PhD thesis, Department of Computer Science and Electrical Engineering, The University of Queensland (1998)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Grudin, J.: Groupware and social dynamics: eight challenges for developers. Communications of the ACM 37, 92–105 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Slagter, R., Biemans, M., Ter Hofte, G.H.: Evolution in use of groupware: Facilitating tailoring to the extreme. In: Proceedings of the CRIWG Seventh international Workshop on Groupware, Darmstadt, pp. 68–73. IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Teege, G.: Users as composers: Parts and features as a basis for tailorability in cscw systems. Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW) 9, 101–122 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Fernandez, A., Haake, J.M., Goldberg, A.: Tailoring group work. In: Haake, J.M., Pino, J.A. (eds.) CRIWG 2002. LNCS, vol. 2440, pp. 232–242. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Wulf, V., Rohde, M.: Towards an integrated organization and technology development. In: DIS 1995: Proceedings of the conference on Designing interactive systems, pp. 55–64. ACM Press, New York (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Wulf, V., Krings, M., Stiemerling, O., Iacucci, G., Fuchs-Fronhofen, P., Hinrichs, J., Maidhof, M., Nett, B., Peters, R.: Improving inter-organizational processes with integrated organization and technology development. Journal of Universal Computer Science 5, 339–365 (1999)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Fischer, G., Grudin, J., McCall, R., Ostwald, J., Redmiles, D., Reeves, B., Shipman, F.: Seeding, evolutionary growth and reseeding: The incremental development of collaborative design environments. In: Olson, G., Malone, T., Smith, J. (eds.) Coordination Theory and Collaboration Technology, pp. 447–472. Lawrence Erlbaum, Mahwah (2001)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Floyd, C., Reisin, F.M., Schmidt, G.: Steps to software development with users. In: Ghezzi, C., McDermid, J.A. (eds.) ESEC 1989. LNCS, vol. 387, pp. 48–64. Springer, Heidelberg (1989)Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Lukosch, S., Schümmer, T.: Patterns for managing shared objects in groupware systems. In: Proceedings of the 9th European Conference on Pattern Languages and Programs, Irsee, Germany, pp. 333–378 (2004)Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Schümmer, T.: Patterns for building communities in collaborative systems. In: Proceedings of the 9th European Conference on Pattern Languages of Programs (EuroPLoP 2004), Irsee, Germany, UVK, Konstanz, Germany, pp. 379–440 (2004)Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Rittenbruch, M., McEwan, G., Ward, N., Mansfield, T., Bartenstein., D.: Extreme participation - moving extreme programming towards participatory design. In: Binder, T., Gregory, J., Wagner, I. (eds.) Participation and Design: Inquiring Into the Poltics, Malmo, Sweden. Contexts and Practices of Collaborative Design Work – PDC 2002 Proceedings of the Participatory Design Conference (2002)Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Haake, J.M., Haake, A., Schümmer, T., Bourimi, M., Landgraf, B.: End-user controlled group formation and access rights management in a shared workspace system. In: CSCW 2004: Proceedings of the 2004 ACM conference on Computer supported cooperative work, Chicago, Illinois, USA, pp. 554–563. ACM Press, New York (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • Till Schümmer
    • 1
  • Stephan Lukosch
    • 1
  • Robert Slagter
    • 2
  1. 1.Computer Science DepartmentFern Universität in HagenGermany
  2. 2.Telematica InstituutThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations