skip to main content
10.1145/302979.302982acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PageschiConference Proceedingsconference-collections
Article
Free Access

Social, individual and technological issues for groupware calendar systems

Authors Info & Claims
Published:01 May 1999Publication History

ABSTRACT

Designing and deploying groupware is difficult. Groupware evaluation and design are often approached from a single perspective, with a technologically-, individually-, or socially-centered focus. A study of Groupware Calendar Systems (GCSs) highlights the need for a synthesis of these multiple perspectives to fully understand the adoption challenges these systems face. First, GCSs often replace existing calendar artifacts, which can impact users calendaring habits and in turn influence technology adoption decisions. Second, electronic calendars have the potential to easily share contextualized information publicly over the computer network, creating opportunities for peer judgment about time allocation and raising concerns about privacy regulation. However, this situation may also support coordination by allowing others to make useful inferences about ones schedule. Third, the technology and the social environment are in a reciprocal, co-evolutionary relationship: the use context is affected by the constraints and affordances of the technology, and the technology also co-adapts to the environment in important ways. Finally, GCSs, despite being below the horizon of everyday notice, can affect the nature of temporal coordination beyond the expected meeting scheduling practice.

References

  1. 1.Beard, D., Palanlappan, M., Humm, A., Banks, D., Nair, A. & Shan, Y-P. (1990). A Visual Calendar for Scheduling Group Meetings. Proceedings of the A CM CSCW'90 Conference, 279-290. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. 2.Ehrlich, S.F. (1987a). Social and Psychological Factors Influencing the Design of Office Communication Systems. Proceedings of the A CM CH1+ G1'87 Conference, 323-329. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. 3.Ehrlich, S.F. (1987b). Strategies for Encouraging Successful Adoption of Office Communication Systems. ACM Transactions on Office Information Systems 5(4), 340-357. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. 4.Francik, E., Rudman, S.E., Cooper, D. Levine, S. (1991). Putting Innovation to Work: Adoption Strategies for Multimedia Communication Systems. Communications of the ACM 34(12), 52 (12 }pages). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. 5.Greif, I. (1984). The User Interface of a Personal Calendar Program. In Y. Vassiliou (Ed.) Human Factors and Interactive Systems: Proc. of the NYU Symposium on User Interfaces '82. Ablex, 207-222. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. 6.Grudin, J. (1988). Why CSCW Applications Fail: Problems in the Design and Evaluation of Organizational Interfaces. Proceedings of A CM CSCW'88 Conference, 85-93. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. 7.Grudin, J. & Palen, L. (1995). Why Groupware Succeeds: Discretion or Mandate? Proc. of European CSCW (ECSCW'95), H. Marmolin, Y. Stmdblad, K. Schmidt (eds.), Kluwer Academic Publishers, 263-278. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. 8.Kelley, J.F. & Chapanis, A. (1982). How Professional Persons Keep Their Calendars: Implications for Computerization. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 55, 241-256.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  9. 9.Kincaid, C., Dupont, P. & Kaye, A. (1985). Electronic Calendars in the Office:An Assessment of User Needs and Current Technology. ACM Transactions on Office Information Systems 3(1), 89-102. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. 10.Mackay, W.E. (1990). Users and Customizable Software: A Co-Adaptive Phenomenon. Dissertation, Sloan School of Management. Cambridge, ~L~t, MIT.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.Markus, M. L. & Connolly, T. (1990). Why CSCW Applications Fail" Problems in the Adoption of Interdependent Work Tools. Proceedings qf the ACM CSCW'90 Conference, 371-380. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. 12.Mosier, J.N. & Tammaro, S.G. (1997). When are Group Scheduling Tools Useful? CSCW: The Journal of Collaborative Computing, 6, 53-70. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. 13.Myers, B. (1998). A Brief History of Human-Computer Interaction Technology. interactions 5(2), 44-54. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. 14.Orlikowski, W. (1992). The Duality of Technology: Rethinking the Concept of Technology in Organizations. Organization Science 3(3), 398-427.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. 15.Palen, L. (1998). Calendars on the New Frontier: Challenges of Groupware Technology. Dissertation, Info. & Computer Science, Univ. of California, lrvine. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. 16.Payne, S.J. (1993). Understanding Calendar Use. Human Computer Interaction 8(2), 83-100.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. 17.Schwartz, B. (1968). The Social Psychology of Privacy. American Journal of Sociology 73(6), 741-752.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  18. 18.Zerubavel, E. (1981). Hidden Rhythms: ScJhedules and Calendars in Social Life. Univ. of Chicago Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Social, individual and technological issues for groupware calendar systems

        Recommendations

        Comments

        Login options

        Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

        Sign in
        • Published in

          cover image ACM Conferences
          CHI '99: Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
          May 1999
          632 pages
          ISBN:0201485591
          DOI:10.1145/302979

          Copyright © 1999 ACM

          Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

          Publisher

          Association for Computing Machinery

          New York, NY, United States

          Publication History

          • Published: 1 May 1999

          Permissions

          Request permissions about this article.

          Request Permissions

          Check for updates

          Qualifiers

          • Article

          Acceptance Rates

          CHI '99 Paper Acceptance Rate78of312submissions,25%Overall Acceptance Rate6,199of26,314submissions,24%

        PDF Format

        View or Download as a PDF file.

        PDF

        eReader

        View online with eReader.

        eReader