augmenting team sensemaking john t. nosek temple university sensemaking technologies corporation...
TRANSCRIPT
Augmenting Team Sensemaking
John T. Nosek
Temple University
SenseMaking Technologies Corporation
SenseMaking Technologies Corporation HELPING YOU CREATE A BETTER FUTURE TM
©2001
ENVIRONMENT
Question
Create
s
ResponseTeam member
Human Artifacts:Knowledge repositoriesCognitive mapsDatabases; reports...
Team member
Question
Creates
Que
stio
nR
esponseR
espo
nse
Stimul
i Stimuli
Stimul
i
Group Sensemaking
ENVIRONMENT
Question
Creat
es
ResponseTeam member
Human Artifacts:Knowledge repositoriesCognitive mapsDatabases; reports...
Team member
Question
Creates
Que
stio
nR
esponseR
espo
nse
Stimul
i StimuliStim
uli
Group Sensemaking
Phases:PlanningCreating
EvaluatingNegotiating
Consolidating
LimitingFactors
Parallel
Situational Awareness
Anytime, Anyplace
Artifacts of Group Sensemaking: Plans, Responses, Reports ...
SenseMaking Technologies Corporation HELPING YOU CREATE A BETTER FUTURE TM
Information*
Knowledge derived from study, experience, or instruction.
Knowledge of specific events or situations
A collection of facts or data.
Communication of knowledge.
Computer Science. Processed, stored, or transmitted data.
*American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth EditionCopyright © 2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company.
CognitiveDomain
Physical Domain
Objects/events
Boundary Objects
Information
Actions
Group Sensemaking
Boundary Objects
Filters: Increase capacity to Act? Decide to Share
Means to me
STIMULUS: Datum
Individual Agent Responses to Stimulus
Received Affordances:
Projected Affordances:
Interpreted Affordances:
Informational value: Yes
Knowledge increased: Yes(increased capacity to act)
Boundary Object
STIMULUS: Datum
Individual Agent Responses to Stimulus
Received Affordances:
Projected Affordances:
Interpreted Affordances:
Informational value: Yes
Knowledge increased: Yes(increased capacity to act)
Informational value: No
Knowledge increased: No(no increased capacity to act)
Boundary Object
To Achieve Right Thinking, By the Right People
At the Right Time
• Construct Boundary Objects.
• Transmit them to right team members.
• Have right team members construct a judgment that boundary object has informational value.
• Do this at the right time.
Knowing
Of Knowledge and KnowingKnowing (Effective Knowledge):
Constructed Subset of Stored Knowledge Plus Stimulus
Stored Knowledge:Stored capacity to act
Boundary Object:Stimulus
Dynamic Nature of Constructing Effective Knowledge:Group Construction of Shared Meaning
Effective Knowledge (EK)
Stimulus 1
Stimulus 1Time 1
Boundary Object ofother agent
Dynamic Nature of Constructing Effective Knowledge:Group Construction of Shared Meaning
Effective Knowledge (EK)
Stimulus 1
Effective Knowledge (EK)
Stimulus 2
Stimulus 1Time 1
Boundary Object ofother agent
Stimulus 2Time 2
Boundary Object ofother agent
Dynamic Nature of Constructing Effective Knowledge:Group Construction of Shared Meaning
Effective Knowledge (EN)
Stimulus 1
Effective Knowledge (EN)
Stimulus 2
Effective Knowledge (EK)
Stimulus n
Stimulus 1Time 1
Boundary Object ofother agent
Stimulus 2Time 2
Boundary Object ofother agent
Stimulus nTime n
Boundary Object ofother agent
Constructing Shared Meaning:
Boundary Object of Agent 1
I share this
Effective Knowledge(EK)
Agent 1
Effective Knowledge(EK)
Agent 2
This means to me
Cycle in Dynamic Construction of Shared Meaning
Boundary Object of Agent 1
Boundary Object of Agent 2
I share this
Effective Knowledge (EK)
Agent 1
Effective Knowledge (EK)
Agent 2
This means to me
I share thisThis means to me
Typical Sensemaking ConversationBoundary
ObjectA 1/T1
Statement and implicit assumption
Boundary Object A4/T2
Fact supporting Statementin BO A1/T1
Boundary Object A3/T3
Story on BO A1/T1
Boundary Object A5/T4
Story on implicit assumptionof BO A1/T1
Boundary Object A3/T5
Fact supporting statementin BO A1/T1
Boundary Object A1/T6
Questionregarding story onimplicitassumption
Mitigating Working Memory Limitations:Organizing and Categorizing Boundary Objects
Boundary Object A 1/T1
Boundary Object A1/T1
Claim:
Assumption:
Boundary Object A5/T4
Story:
Boundary Object A4/T2
Fact:
Boundary Object A2/T5
Fact:
Boundary Object A3/T3
Story:
Boundary Object A1/T6
Question:
Using Meaning Theories toHelp Construct Shared Meaning
• Osgood’s Theory of Meaning– Describe the subject– Judgment, potency, action
• Example: Its very(potency) bad(judgment), and getting worse
• Kelly’s Cognitive Constructs– Understand subject sensemaking process– shortcut, limited meaningful dimensions, reduce
overload– Valid Team Constructs? Situational?
Judgment: DangerousPotency: VeryAction: Getting worse
Boundary Object:
Sign
Sign
VeryDangerousWorsening
Very DangerousWorsening
Receiving Agent
Cases: Receiving Agent:• has similar expertise to sending agent:
> Other BO = facts
• has deep experience of the sign • does not have expertise or does not share sign
> Other BO = story
• holds implicit trust in sending agent
Other
Sending Agent
Constructing Shared Meaning
Push/Post, Pull/Peruse Stimuli
Push Technology: Sending Stimuli
Push: Directed, PreciseExample: instant messaging
Post: Broadcast, InformingExample: bulletin board
Push/Post, Pull/Peruse Stimuli
Push Technology: Sending Stimuli
Push: Directed, PreciseExample: instant messaging
Post: Broadcast, InformingExample: bulletin board
Pull Technology: Grabbing Stimuli
Pull: Specific, reachingExample: keyword filtering“I must know this”
Peruse: scanExample: web surfing“Let’s see what’s out there
Trust and Push Stimuli Technology
No ability to selectively push. Least Trusted Agent Filter
I can only share this
I can only share this
I want to share this
Trust and Push Stimuli Technology
No ability to selectively push. Least Trusted Agent Filter
I can only share this
I can only share this
I want to share this
Selectively push
I can only share this
I want and can share this
Artifact Creation:Augmenting Sensemaking and Focussing Attention
Time
A1: Version 1
A: Agent 1,2,3 ...stands for Agent 1, 2, 3...
A2: Version 1+
A2 Input
A1: Version 2Version 1
+Selected A2 Input
A3: Version 1 +
A3 InputA4: Version 2
+ A4 Input
A1: Version 3Version 2
+Selected A3 Input
to Version 1
A1: Version 4Version 3
+Selected A4 Input
to Version 2
Customized Focussed Attention:Team Constructs and Sharing Meaning Efficiently
Time
A: Agent 1,2,3 ...stands for Agent 1, 2, 3...
A1: Version 1
A2: Version 1+
A2 Input
A1: Version 2Version 1
+Selected A2 Input
A3: Version 1 +
A3 Input
A4: Version 2+
A4 Input
A1: Version 3Version 2
+Selected A3 Input
to Version 1
A1: Version 4Version 3
+Selected A4 Input
to Version 2
Compare to Version 4
Compare to V4
Compare To V4
Collaboration Envelope™Owner Agent: How can I push this BO to Agent…? I need to organize and categorize this BO ...
Receiving Agents: Has this BO changed since I saw it last? How can I pull this BO to me? I suggest this alternative BO. ...
Both Owner and Receiving Agents: How does this BO compare to the last version I saw? How does a suggested alternative compare to the original BO? I need to chunk a part of this BO Who has seen these changes to this BO? Do all agents understand this BO? ...
Boundary Object (BO)Created by an Agent
UsingMost Effective &
Easiest to UseTool
Key Take Aways
• Team sensemaking requires iterations between the physical (boundary objects) and cognitive worlds of multiple agents.
• Agents can be human and non-human.• A Collaboration Envelope™ provides a
notion that there are common actions that agents need to engage around boundary objects to support sensemaking among agents.