Keeping Mobile Workers In Sync and In Touch:

Big Challenges, Modest Solutions

Jennifer Curtis, MA
September 2009
 Overview

• Part I: Introduction
• Who are mobile workers?
• Project Goals
• Part II: Defining in sync and in touch (Goal #1)
• Background
• Interviews (+ more interviews)
• Interim conclusions ( = challenges)
• Constraints & requirements
 Overview

• Part III: Designing solutions (Goal #2)

• Concept brainstorm v 1.0 concepts
• Pruning (by experts review) v 2.0 concepts
• Focus group v 3.0 concepts
• Final evaluations:
• One-on-one interviews
• Online evaluation
• Part IV: Conclusions
Part I: Intro
A mobile worker?
 Mobile Workers

Mobility:

“It’s not just a matter of people traveling…”

– Kakihara & Sorensen, 2002

 Project Goals
(1) Identifying the consequences and
challenges of mobile work – particularly
with respect one’s ability to stay up-to-
date and connected with his or her
distant colleagues;

(2) And, coming up with potential

solutions to address these challenges.
 Project Goals
(1) Identifying the consequences and
challenges of mobile work – particularly
Research
with respect one’s ability to stay
up-to-date and connected with his or
her distant colleagues;

(2) And, coming up with potential

solutions toDesign
address these challenges.
Part II: Staying in sync
& in touch (Goal #1)
4 challenges to mobile work

In sync In touch

In flow In control

– Slagter et al, 2008

4 challenges to mobile work

In sync In touch

In flow In control

– Slagter et al, 2008

4 challenges to mobile work

In sync = up-to-date

In touch = connected
 Interviews
Exploratory Follow-up
Interviews + Interviews
(n = 10) (n = 6)

Mobile workers, 8 of
“Highly connected”
which work for large
professionals, mostly
national/international
self-employed
companies

Focus: What is needed to stay in sync

& in touch (with distant colleagues)?
 Main finding

The main problem for mobile workers occurred when

they tried to use traditional office tools – i.e.,
principally face-to-face meetings, phone, and email
– to infiltrate a second, much more dispersed and
loosely connected group of individuals at the
departmental level.
– Curtis, 2009
 Implications

Direct Indirect

Relationships Performance
(Dept level) (Project level)
 Design constraints

1. New tool adoption was low among

Traditionalists for “cultural” reasons.
2. Willingness to learn new tools was also
low.
3. Support (directly or indirectly) of
project work is critical.
 Design requirements

1. No new tools!
2. Low effort system set-up
3. Minimal participation requirements
4. On-the-go functionality
5. Use filters
6. Support one-to-many or many-to-many
communication
Part III: Designing
Solutions (Goal #2)
Concept brainstorm v 1.0 concepts
Expert Evaluation v 1.0 concepts
Focus Group v 2.0 concepts
Desktop Updater
 Focus Group v 2.0 concepts
Concept
Evaluation
(n = 4)

Novay Business
Developers

4 10-item Overall
+
Questionnaires Rating
 Focus Group v 2.0 concepts
• Questionnaire results (in brief!)
- Bulletin Board:
- Most highly rated in touch tool; highly rated in sync
tool
- BUT, thought to be too time consuming and effortful
to use
- Overall, the Desktop Updater & Hover Status
tool were thought to require the least effort &
time
- Low in touch ratings, however
 Focus Group v 2.0 concepts Ping
I would use the tool frequently and Bulletin Board
actively.
Easy Status Updater
2,00
Hover Status
The benefits appear to outweigh the
I think this tool looks easy to use.
costs of using this tool.
1,00

0,00

This tool could provide benefits to my This tool would help me to exchange
work. information with my colleagues.
-1,00

-2,00

Using this tool I would be in control This tool would help others keep up-to-
over what others can learn about me. date with what's going on with me.

This tool would take up too much of my This tool would help me keep up-to-
valuable time. date with what's going on with others.

This tool would help me to get to know

my colleagues more personally.
Focus Group v 2.0 concepts
Focus Group v 2.0 concepts

Overall Impressions
 Focus Group v 2.0 concepts

But…
“I am not interested in what other people are doing…”
– Focus group participant

“I would update my status, but only if it was done

automatically…”
– Focus group participant
 Final Evalution v 3.0 concepts
1

3
 Final Evalution v 3.0 concepts
One-on-one Online
Interviews + Evaluation
(n = 6) (n = 10)

5 participated in the Experienced mobile

original exploratory workers, on the road 1
interviews – 5 days/week (on
average)

3 10-item Overall
+
Questionnaires Rating
 Interviews v 3.0 concepts
Ping

I would use the tool frequently and Bulletin Board

actively.
2,00 Status Sharing

The benefits appear to outweigh

I think this tool looks easy to use.
the costs of using this tool.
1,00

0,00
This tool would help me to
This tool could provide benefits to
exchange information with my
my work. -1,00 colleagues.

-2,00

Using this tool I would be in control This tool would help others keep
over what others can learn about up-to-date with what's going on
me. with me.

This tool would help me keep up-

This tool would NOT take up too
to-date with what's going on with
much of my valuable time.
others.

This tool would help me to get to

know my colleagues more
personally.
 Interviews v 3.0 concepts

• Questionnaire results (in brief!)

- Overall, all of the concepts were rated positively
on all items & for the most part quite similarly*
- That is, all tools were thought to:
- Take up little time/effort
- Help keep them in sync/in touch with their colleagues
 Interviews v 3.0 concepts

• Questionnaire results (in brief!)

- Notable exceptions:
- Bulletin Board was thought to take up the most
amount of time, and had the highest associated costs
- It was also the most highly rated in touch tool
- Along with the Status Sharing tools, it was the most highly
rated in sync tool
- Results indicated that there might be some privacy
(i.e., control) issues with Ping.
 Interviews v 3.0 concepts

Overall Impressions
 Online evaluation v 3.0 concepts
Ping

Bulletin Board
I would use the tool frequently
and actively.
2,00 Status Sharing
The benefits appear to outweigh
I think this tool looks easy to use.
the costs of using this tool.
1,00

0,00
This tool would help me to
This tool could provide benefits
exchange information with my
to my work. -1,00 colleagues.

-2,00

Using this tool I would be in This tool would help others keep
control over what others can up-to-date with what's going on
learn about me. with me.

This tool would help me keep up-

This tool would NOT take up too
to-date with what's going on
much of my valuable time.
with others.

This tool would help me to get to

know my colleagues more
personally.
 Online evaluation v 3.0 concepts
• Questionnaire results (in brief!)
- Positive responses overall with respect to in
sync/in touch for all 3 concepts
- For in sync: Status Sharing was rated the highest
- Closely followed by the Bulletin Board
- For in touch: The Bulletin Board was the most highly
rated concept
 Online evaluation v 3.0 concepts
• Questionnaire results (in brief!)
- With respect to time and costs:
- Ping & Status Sharing tools rated highest
- Bulletin Board was viewed “neutrally”
 Online evaluation v 3.0 concepts

Overall Tool Preferences

MostFav LeastFav

4 4

3 3

Ping Status Sharing Bulletin Board

Part IV: Conclusions
 Meeting the Requirements
Concept
Ping Status Sharing Bulletin Board
Requirement Met? How Met? How Met? How
Could be used Integration with Outlook;
1 - Maintain tool set Yes without a Yes for use on Yes For use on computer/laptop
smartphone computer/laptop
Find out whether
Supports the automatic Content is principally shared in the
contacts are nearby
3 - Low effort to participate Yes Yes updating of one's own Unclear* form of very short, text-based
with a single
status messages
selection
A mobile phone Desktop application; Desktop or web-based application;
4 - Available on-the-go Yes Yes Yes
application Laptop Laptop
Share one's status with
Filter contacts by
5 - Uses filters Yes Yes only chosen Yes Filter by group or individual.
group
contacts/groups.

Option to Ping a Updates distributed to Messages and shared content

6 - One-to-many communication Yes Yes Yes
group of people one's contacts distributed to the wider organization
 Further development?
1

3
Final Thoughts
Project

Dept

Org

The tool thought to have

the most in touch/in sync
potential overall was not
the most highly regarded.
Final Thoughts
Project

Dept

Org
Final Thoughts
Project

Dept

Org
 Final Thoughts
Project

Dept

Org
Modest solutions
Final Thoughts

Viable modes of human interaction

 Acknowledgements

@Novay: Ruud Janssen, and the rest of the Future

Workspaces team
@TU/e: Panos Markopolous, and the USI program
Also: All of the volunteers who helped with the
evaluations
Any...
Comments or
questions?