PEOPLE'S DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF ALGERIA

Ministry of Higher Education and Scientific Research

Universety Of Mentouri Constantine

Faculty Of Social And Preliminary Master

Human Sciences Information System &
Department Of Library Science Knowledge Management

Presented by:
Youcef Lemehannet Mod.: Knowledge Management
Mounir Elhamza Prof.: HALIMA SAMRA

Academic year 2006 - 2007

1
 SUMMARY
Introduction __________________________________________3
4......................................................................................‫ ماهي البرمجيات الجماعية‬What is groupware .1
4..................................................‫دعم الحاسوب للعمل التعاوني‬Computer supported cooperative work 1.1
4............................................................ "‫? ما معنى"البرمجيات الجماعية‬What does Groupware mean.1.2
5.................................................................................................. ‫الصل والتطور‬Origin and growth.1.3
6........................................................................................................ ‫? لماذا هذه الضجة‬Why Bother.1.4

1.5.Typical Groupware Applications ‫أنواع تطبيقات البرمجيات الجماعية‬

_____________________________________________________7
1.5.1. The Two Interaction Levels ‫______________ مستويا التفاعل‬7
7.................................. -‫ البرمجيات الجماعية اللتزامنية –أوقات مختلفة‬Asynchronous Groupware .1.5.1.1
10...................................... ‫البرمجيات الجماعية المتزامنة‬Synchronous or Realtime Groupware .1.5.1.2
11......................................................... ‫ مستويات التعاون الثلثة‬The Three levels of collaboration .1.5.2
12............................................................... ‫أدوات التصال اللكتروني‬Electronic communication tools
12.................................................................... ‫أدوات الئتمار اللكتروني‬Electronic conferencing tools
12................................................................... ‫أدوات الدارة التعاونية‬Collaborative management tools
12............................................... ‫ عملية تصميم البرمجيات الجماعية‬The Groupware Design Process.1.6
14.............................................................................. -‫المشاكل المشتركة – العامة‬Common Problems .1.7
15..........................................................Socially vs. Technologically-Determined Structure.1.7.1
15............................................................................. ‫العلقات الجتماعية مقابل التركيبة التكنولوجية المحدودة‬
16.............................................................................................................. ‫الخصوصية‬Privacy .1.7.2
16................................................................................................................ ‫الوعي‬Awareness .1.7.3

2.Towards Library Groupware ‫___نحو البرمجيات الجماعية بالمكتبات‬18

18..................................................................................... Why Do Libraries Need Groupware? .2.1
18............................................................................................... ‫لماذا تحتاج المكتبات إلى البرمجيات الجماعية‬
19..........................Functional applications of groupware for library and information services. .2.2
20..................................................................................... ‫البريد اللكتروني‬Electronic Messaging .2.2.1
20......................................................... ‫ بيئات الجتماع الفتراضية‬Virtual Meeting Environments .2.2.2
20........................................................ ‫إدارة الوثائق اللكترونية‬Electronic Document Management.2.2.3
21...................................... ‫تدفق العمال وأدوات مجموعات العمل‬Workflow and Workgroup Utilities.2.2.4
21............................................................................... ‫ التشابك التعاوني‬Collaborative Networking.2.2.5
22......................................................................................................................................Conclusion

2
 Introduction
Groupware encompasses a wide variety of software applications that have in common the
ability to facilitate and enhance electronic collaboration between two or more users in a shared
environment. The activities supported must allow for dynamic interaction and data exchange, while
providing quality control mechanisms for outside mediators or administrators. The joint completion
of shared tasks among two or more workers is at the heart of groupware, and to qualify as such, the
workgroup software being implemented must contribute to that goal in a real-time environment.
This is the fundamental design feature that distinguishes groupware from other software
applications, which are designed solely for individual workers completing distinct tasks.

As an application genre, groupware universally refers to such products as electronic mail,

interactive chat, on-line whiteboards and blackboards, desktop videoconferencing, and hypertext
markup editing in shared document environments. Unlike the individual products designed
expressly for these tasks, however, groupware possesses two features that the stand-alone software
applications do not.

First, groupware facilitates dynamic exchange and manipulation of data by multiple

individuals across plaforms. Second, it is configured specifically to permit external monitoring to
meet organizational goals.Groupware is sometimes referred to as ‘‘computermediated
collaboration.’’ The amount of collaboration, which can occur on-line, is dictated at the system
level by programming parameters, and at the user level by restrictions set by application
environment mediators. Thus, dynamic interaction can be ensured in the virtual environment, but
still be actively monitored by others outside of the environment who may be responsible for the
activity. This capability has enhanced groupware’s popularity in the publishing, communications,
and information management arenas where demands for dynamic information sharing must be met
while maintaining system security.

3
 1. What is groupware ‫ماهي البرمجيات الجماعية‬
1.1 Computer supported cooperative work‫دعم الحاسوب للعمل التعاوني‬1
The term computer supported cooperative work (CSCW) was first coined by Irene Greif and Paul
M. Cashman in 1984, at a workshop attended by individuals interested in using technology to
support people in their work (Grudin 1994). At about this same time, in 1987 Dr. Charles Findley
presented the concept of Collaborative learning-work. According to Carstensen and Schmidt
(2002), CSCW addresses "how collaborative activities and their coordination can be supported by
means of computer systems." On the one hand, many authors consider that CSCW and groupware
are synonyms. On the other hand, different authors claim that while groupware refers to real
computer-based systems, CSCW focuses on the study of tools and techniques of groupware as well
as their psychological, social, and organizational effects. The definition of Wilson (1991) expresses
the difference between these two concepts:

CSCW [is] a generic term, which combines the understanding of the way people work in
groups with the enabling technologies of computer networking, and associated hardware,
software, services and techniques
CSCW [is] Refers to the field of study which examines the design, adoption, and use of
groupware. Despite the name, this field of study is not restricted to issues of "cooperation"
or "work" but also examines competition, socialization, and play. The field typically attracts
those interested in software design and social and organizational behavior, including
business people, computer scientists, organizational psychologists, communications
researchers, and anthropologists, among other specialties.

1.2.What does Groupware mean? ‫ما معنى"البرمجيات الجماعية‬2"

Groupware is technology designed to facilitate the work of groups. This technology may be used to
communicate, cooperate, coordinate, solve problems, compete, or negotiate. While traditional
technologies like the telephone qualify as groupware, the term is ordinarily used to refer to a
specific class of technologies relying on modern computer networks, such as email, newsgroups,
videophones, or chat.

Groupware technologies are typically categorized along two primary dimensions:

1. whether users of the groupware are working together at the same time ("realtime" or
"synchronous" groupware) or different times ("asynchronous" groupware), and
2. whether users are working together in the same place ("colocated" or "face-to-face") or in
different places ("non-colocated" or "distance").

1
Wikipedia. computer supported cooperative work. .[online].[10.04.2007]. Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. 2007
Available at:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_supported_cooperative_work
2
Brinck.Tom. Groupware: Applications.[online].[10.04.2007] Usabilityfirst.2005. Available at:
http://www.usabilityfirst.com/groupware/applications.txl

4
 Same time Different time
"synchronous" "asynchronous"
Same Place
voting,
"colocated" shared
presentation
computers
support
Different Place
"distance" videophones, email,
chat workflow

Several typical groupware applications are described in more detail on Groupware Applications.

1.3.Origin and growth‫الصل والتطور‬1

Collaboration technology has become the state-of-the art model for user-oriented work-group
software. Groupware’s genesis is the batch-processed software applications of the late 1970s and
early 1980s that allowed people to communicate with each other via time-sharing operations
(TSOs). These included the early iterations of electronic mail, LISTSERVTMs, and relational
database management systems (RDBMS). Due to the increased reliance upon graphical user
interfaces (GUIs) in recent years, groupware has become the de facto platform standard for person-
to-person software communication.
Early development of groupware applications can be traced to the birth of ARPANET, the military
precursor to today’s Internet. Distributed systems, parallel processing, interactive software
modeling, and even cognitive psychology as utilized in the development of Internet-working systems
and services, have all contributed to the growth and development of groupware and collaborative
engineering. Computer systems engineer Douglas Engel Bart, prominent in U.S. Department of
Defense research and development work during World War II, has been credited with having coined
the term ‘‘groupware.’’
Groupware has become an umbrella term describing a number of software applications supporting
person-to- person collaboration. The first product to advance groupware functions was Lotus
Notes, developed and launched during the 1980s and the early 1990s. Notes was developed initially
at a proprietary level to facilitate automated on-line collaboration among Lotus scientists and
engineers. It evolved into a corporate-wide office automation tool, and eventually was launched
commercially as a stand-alone product. In its infancy, groupware was designed almost exclusively
as an office automation platform, assisting with such tasks as group scheduling, calendaring, and
project management. These automated functions, while workgroup-based and operating in a limited
real-time environment, were still not dynamic or interactive. With the development of the electronic
bulletin board, the potential for real-time editing and dissemination of information was realized,
and application of groupware functions across the board began to grow. Electronic collaboration
on projects and tasks was soon facilitated by automated project management systems and on-line
document editing software, which allowed for simultaneous information sharing within and among
workgroups. Such efforts have led groupware to be categorized varyingly as ‘‘Electronic
Brainstorming Software’’ (EBS) and ‘‘Decision Support Systems’’ (DSS) software.
The deployment of electronic bulletin board systems (BBS) for businesses in the late 1980s is
considered to have been a turning point in the development of groupre. Though not interactive,
these electronic message posting centers were far more dynamic than the printed office memoranda
that were their direct predecessors. Early electronic bulletin boards provided mechanisms by which
announcements and communications could be posted in one central location, accessed
1
Jankm David. Groupware. [Online].[10.04.2007] Encyclopedia of Library and Information Science. New
York,2003. Available at:
www.dowling.edu/library/papers/david/Groupware_Encyclopedia_Chapter.pdf

5
electronically, and viewed by individuals throughout a variety of different geographic locations.
Unlike the print world, however, viewers could leave their responses to the announcements, provide
input, or otherwise contribute their observations on the spot as they viewed this information. These
contributions could then be addressed or responded to automatically and instantly, thus providing
for more timely communication among workgroups. Since on-line bulletin boards also prevent
individual contributors from altering or in some way editing the contributions of previous posters, a
relative degree of privacy and security could still be assured. Technical enhancements in other
areas of technology, such as videoconferencing, on-line whiteboarding, and satellite
communications, have also influenced the development of groupware. Electronic publishing, which
allowed for on-line editing of print documentation in a shared operating environment, has provided
another opportunity for groupware development. Electronic mail systems and on-line chat rooms
offer the latest example of groupware’s versatility as a platform for shared information exchange.
Finally, the more advanced groupware products of today offer the most effective networking
environment for information dissemination and knowledge management. They represent the essence
of library and information services in a knowledge-oriented environment.

1.4.Why Bother? ‫لماذا هذه الضجة‬

Groupware design involves understanding groups and how people behave in groups. It also
involves having a good understanding of networking technology and how aspects of that technology
(for instance, delays in synchronizing views) affect a user's experience. All the issues related to
traditional user interface design remain relevant, since the technology still involves people.

However, many aspects of groups require special consideration. For instance, not only do million-
person groups behave differently from 5-person groups, but the performance parameters of the
technologies to support different groups vary. Ease-of-use must be better for groupware than for
single-user systems because the pace of use of an application is often driven by the pace of a
conversation. System responsiveness and reliability become more significant issues. Designers must
have an understanding of the degree of homogeneity of users, of the possible roles people play in
cooperative work and of who key decision-makers are and what influences them.

Why is groupware design worth paying attention to in the first place?

Groupware offers significant advantages over single-user systems. These are some of the most
common reasons people want to use groupware:

o to facilitate communication: make it faster, clearer, more persuasive

o to enable communication where it wouldn't otherwise be possible
o to enable telecommuting
o to cut down on travel costs
o to bring together multiple perspectives and expertise
o to form groups with common interests where it wouldn't be possible to gather a sufficient
number of people face-to-face
o to save time and cost in coordinating group work
o to facilitate group problem-solving
o to enable new modes of communication, such as anonymous interchanges or structured
interactions

In addition to the benefits of groupware, another good reason to study usability and design issues in
groupware is to avoid a failed design. Groupware is significantly more difficult to get right than

6
traditional software. Typically, a groupware system can't succeed unless most or all of the target
group is willing to adopt the system. In contrast, a single-user system can be successful even if only
a fraction of the target market adopts it.

1.5.Typical Groupware Applications‫أنواع تطبيقات البرمجيات الجماعية‬1

1.5.1. The Two Interaction Levels ‫مستويا التفاعل‬
This page describes several types of groupware applications and their associated design options.
Comparing those design options across applications yields interesting new perspectives on well-
known applications. Also, in many cases, these systems can be used together, and in fact, are
intended to be used in conjunction. For example, group calendars are used to schedule
videoconferencing meetings, multi-player games use live video and chat to communicate, and
newsgroup discussions spawn more highly-involved interactions in any of the other systems.

Consider how these systems can be integrated in other ways. We are still quite far from developing
the grand groupware system that encompasses every type of communication, and we will probably
never get there since the possibilities are constantly evolving with changes in both our patterns of
social interaction and the technology we have available.

1.5.1.1. Asynchronous Groupware ‫البرمجيات الجماعية اللتزامنية –أوقات مختلفة‬-

Email is by far the most common groupware application (besides of course, the traditional
telephone). While the basic technology is designed to pass simple messages between 2 people, even
relatively basic email systems today typically include interesting features for forwarding messages,
filing messages, creating mailing groups, and attaching files with a message. Other features that
have been explored include: automatic sorting and processing of messages, automatic routing, and
structured communication (messages requiring certain information).

Newsgroups and mailing lists are similar in spirit to email systems except that they are intended
for messages among large groups of people instead of 1-to-1 communication. In practice the main

1
Brinck.Tom. Groupware: Introduction.[online].[10.04.2007] Usabilityfirst.2005. Available at:
http://www.usabilityfirst.com/groupware/intro.txl

7
difference between newsgroups and mailing lists is that newsgroups only show messages to a user
when they are explicitly requested (an "on-demand" service), while mailing lists deliver messages
as they become available (an "interrupt-driven" interface).

Workflow systems allow documents to be routed through organizations through a relatively-fixed

process. A simple example of a workflow application is an expense report in an organization: an
employee enters an expense report and submits it, a copy is archived then routed to the employee's
manager for approval, the manager receives the document, electronically approves it and sends it
on and the expense is registered to the group's account and forwarded to the accounting department
for payment. Workflow systems may provide features such as routing, development of forms, and
support for differing roles and privileges.

Hypertext is a system for linking text documents to each other, with the Web being an obvious
example. Whenever multiple people author and link documents, the system becomes group work,
constantly evolving and responding to others' work. Some hypertext systems include capabilities for
seeing who else has visited a certain page or link, or at least seeing how often a link has been
followed, thus giving users a basic awareness of what other people are doing in the system -- page
counters on the Web are a crude approximation of this function. Another common multi-user feature
in hypertext (that is not found on the Web) is allowing any user to create links from any page, so
that others can be informed when there are relevant links that the original author was unaware of.

8
 Group calendars allow scheduling, project management, and coordination among many people,
and may provide support for scheduling equipment as well. Typical features detect when schedules
conflict or find meeting times that will work for everyone. Group calendars also help to locate
people. Typical concerns are privacy (users may feel that certain activities are not public matters),
completeness and accuracy (users may feel that the time it takes to enter schedule information is
not justified by the benefits of the calendar).

9
 Collaborative writing systems may provide both realtime support and non-realtime support.
Word processors may provide asynchronous support by showing authorship and by allowing users
to track changes and make annotations to documents. Authors collaborating on a document may
also be given tools to help plan and coordinate the authoring process, such as methods for locking
parts of the document or linking separately-authored documents. Synchronous support allows
authors to see each other's changes as they make them, and usually needs to provide an additional
communication channel to the authors as they work (via videophones or chat).

1.5.1.2. Synchronous or Realtime Groupware ‫البرمجيات الجماعية المتزامنة‬

Shared whiteboards allow two or more people to view and draw on a shared drawing surface
even from different locations. This can be used, for instance, during a phone call, where each
person can jot down notes (e.g. a name, phone number, or map) or to work collaboratively on a
visual problem. Most shared whiteboards are designed for informal conversation, but they may also
serve structured communications or more sophisticated drawing tasks, such as collaborative
graphic design, publishing, or engineering applications. Shared whiteboards can indicate where
each person is drawing or pointing by showing telepointers, which are color-coded or labeled to
identify each person.

Video communications systems allow two-way or multi-way calling with live video, essentially a
telephone system with an additional visual component. Cost and compatibility issues limited early
use of video systems to scheduled videoconference meeting rooms. Video is advantageous when
visual information is being discussed, but may not provide substantial benefit in most cases where
conventional audio telephones are adequate. In addition to supporting conversations, video may
also be used in less direct collaborative situations, such as by providing a view of activities at a
remote location.

The Usability First site maintains a bibliography of papers on the user interface design of video
communications systems.

Chat systems permit many people to write messages in realtime in a public space. As each
person submits a message, it appears at the bottom of a scrolling screen. Chat groups are usually
formed by having listing chat rooms by name, location, number of people, topic of discussion, etc.

Many systems allow for rooms with controlled access or with moderators to lead the discussions,
but most of the topics of interest to researchers involve issues related to unmoderated realtime
communication including: anonymity, following the stream of conversation, scalability with number
of users, and abusive users.

While chat-like systems are possible using non-text media, the text version of chat has the rather
interesting aspect of having a direct transcript of the conversation, which not only has long-term

10
value, but allows for backward reference during conversation making it easier for people to drop
into a conversation and still pick up on the ongoing discussion.

Decision support systems are designed to facilitate groups in decision-making. They provide
tools for brainstorming, critiquing ideas, putting weights and probabilities on events and
alternatives, and voting. Such systems enable presumably more rational and even-handed
decisions. Primarily designed to facilitate meetings, they encourage equal participation by, for
instance, providing anonymity or enforcing turn-taking.

1.5.2. The Three levels of collaboration1 ‫مستويات التعاون الثلثة‬

Groupware can be divided into three categories depending on the level of collaboration—
communication tools, conferencing tools and collaborative management (Co-ordination) tools.

A lot of confusion in the field of CSCW raises from the different interpretations of the terms
collaboration and cooperation. Once again, many authors simply consider both terms as synonyms,
while others (cf. Dillenbourg, Baker et al. 1995) draw a distinction between them:

Cooperation and collaboration do not differ in terms of whether or not the task is
distributed, but by virtue of the way in which it is divided; in cooperation the task is split
(hierarchically) into independent subtasks; in collaboration cognitive processes may be
(heterarchically) divided into intertwined layers. In cooperation, coordination is only
required when assembling partial results, while collaboration is « ...a coordinated,
synchronous activity that is the result of a continued attempt to construct and maintain a
shared conception of a problem ».

The concept of cooperation is often used in relation to the concepts of coordination and
communication. First, the splitting of a cooperative task into independent subtasks naturally leads
to a need for coordination. In this context, coordination can be defined as "the management of
dependencies between activities and the support of (inter) dependencies among actors" (Bordeau
and Wasson 1997). Then, communication can be defined as a process by which information is
exchanged between individuals through a common system of symbols, signs, or behaviors.
According to Brehmer (1991), "communication is the cement of the organization, and the greater
the need for coordination and cooperation, the greater the necessity for communication."

Communication can be thought of as unstructured interchange of information. A phone call or an

IM Chat discussion are examples of this. Conferenceing (or collaboration level, as it is called in the
academic papers that discuss these levels) refers to interactive work toward a shared goal.
Brainstorming or voting are examples of this. Co-ordination refers to complex interdependent work
toward a shared goal. The best metaphor for understanding this is to think about a symphony
orchestra; everyone has to do exactly the right thing at the right time - but everyone is doing
something different - in order for the whole work effort to gel. That is co-ordinated work.

1
Wikipedia. Collaborative software.[online].[10.04.2007]. Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. 2007 Available at:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Groupware

11
 Electronic communication tools ‫أدوات التصال اللكتروني‬
Electronic communication tools send messages, files, data, or documents between people and hence
facilitate the sharing of information. Examples include: synchronous conferencing, e-mail, Instant
Messaging, faxing, voice mail, Web publishing …

 Electronic conferencing tools ‫أدوات الئتمار اللكتروني‬

Electronic conferencing tools facilitate the sharing of information, but in a more interactive way.
Examples include:Internet forums, Online chat, Telephony — telephones ,Video conferencing, Data
conferencing ; whiteboard …

 Collaborative management tools ‫أدوات الدارة التعاونية‬

Collaborative management tools facilitate and manage group activities. Examples
include:electronic calendars (time management), project management, workflow systems,
knowledge management, extranet

1.5.3.Traditional taxonomy of groupware applications1

‫التصنيف التقليدي لتطبيقات البرمجيات الجماعية‬
 Electronic Messaging
E-mail and Listserv Discussion Groups, Group Scheduling, Online Calendaring
 Virtual Meeting Environments
Electronic Bulletin Board Systems, Intranets, Wide Area Networks
 Electronic Document Management
Desktop Publishing, Whiteboarding, Online Documentation Systems
 Workflow and Workgroup Utilities
Documentation Processing, Project Management, Electronic File Transfer
 Collaborative Networking
Relational Database Systems, Real-Time Distributed Data Processing

1.6.The Groupware Design Process ‫عملية تصميم البرمجيات الجماعية‬

As with all user interface design, the method used for designing a groupware system is more
significant than specific design suggestions. This introduction thus begins with the groupware
design process. The remaining sections address some of the most common issues that face
groupware designers

It's best to start by gaining a solid understanding of your prospective users, what their goals are,
and how they go about their work. For broadly-targeted groupware applications, such as
videophones or email, understanding users can boil down to understanding how human beings
communicate in the first place. A design is also best informed by conducting user studies on system
prototypes. In these cases user testing is often significantly more difficult than with single-user
systems for the following reasons:

1
Jankm David. Op. cit.

12
 Organizing and scheduling for groups is more difficult than for individuals.
 Group interaction style is hard to select for beforehand, whereas individual
characteristics are often possible to determine before a study is conducted.
 Pre-established groups vary in interaction style, and the length of time they've been a
group affects their communication patterns.
 New groups change quickly during the group formation process.
 Groups are dynamic; roles change.
 Many studies need to be long-term, especially when studying asynchronous groupware.
 Modifying prototypes can be technically difficult because of the added complexity of
groupware over single-user software.
 In software for large organizations, testing new prototypes can be difficult or
impossible because of the disruption caused by introducing new versions into an
organization.

When designing groupware, it is often best to begin with field studies. The goal is to understand a
particular type of group or organization that will be using the groupware system. A number of
different studies can be conducted: interviews, surveys, analysis of artifacts used in the work
process, examination of processes and workflows, etc. In all cases, the object is to identify the
users' tasks and goals, understand how the group communicates and determine the power
structures and roles.

One key challenge is to appear non-threatening and objective to the users in order to obtain
accurate information and to insure that they will accept any design that results. Another challenge
is translating the findings from one organization to others -- this is especially a concern when the
groupware is intended for organizations which are truly unique or too large to effectively study.

 Adoption and Acceptance

Many groupware systems simply cannot be successful unless a critical mass of users chooses to use
the system. Having a videophone is useless if you're the only one who has it. Two of the most
common reasons for failing to achieve critical mass are lack of interoperability and the lack of
appropriate individual benefit.

 Incompatibility

In the early 90s, AT&T and MCI both introduced videophones commercially, but their two systems
couldn't communicate with each other. This lack of interoperability/compatibility meant that anyone
who wanted to buy a videophone had to make sure that everyone they wanted to talk to would buy
the same system. Compatibility issues lead to general wariness among customers, who want to wait
until a clear standard has emerged.

 Perceived Benefit

Even when everyone in the group may benefit, if the choice is made by individuals, the system may
not succeed. An example is with office calendar systems: if everyone enters all of their
appointments, then everyone has the benefit of being able to safely schedule around other people's
appointments. However, if it's not easy to enter your appointments, then it may be perceived by
users as more beneficial to leave their own appointments off, while viewing other people's
appointments.

13
This disparity of individual and group benefit is discussed in game theory as the prisoner's dilemma
or the commons problem. To solve this problem, some groups can apply social pressure to enforce
groupware use (as in having the boss insist that it's used), but otherwise it's a problem for the
groupware designer who must find a way to make sure the application is perceived as useful for
individuals even outside the context of full group adoption.

 Avoiding Abuse

Most people are familiar with the problem of spamming with email. Some other common violations
of social protocol include: taking inappropriate advantage of anonymity, sabotaging group work, or
violating privacy.

1.7. Common Problems ‫المشاكل المشتركة – العامة‬-

The biggest hurdle in implementing groupware is convincing people to use it. Training is required
to make people comfortable using it, and if people don't feel comfortable with the software, they
won't use it. Employees should be given incentives to contribute: the rewards could be either
financial or psychological.In many cases collaboration is at odds with the company's corporate
culture so implementation will be disruptive. Shifting a corporate culture from being competitive to
being cooperative is no small undertaking. It will require changes at all levels of the organization,
including the CEO.

One of the biggest hurdles is the typical large enterprise desire to standardise knowledge practice
across that enterprise and to implement tools and processes which support that aim. Much greater
value and quicker implementation can be achieved by avoidance of the "one size fits all" meme.
Driving people to adopt the same active role (for example: contribution measured by number of
uploads) only produces the behaviour driven by the metric - "the game exists of the rules by which
it is played". Cultivate the practice of collaboration where it flourishes of its own volition to gain
the quickest return.1

If a village has a "commons" area for grazing cattle then this area can be a strong benefit to the
community as long as everyone uses it with restraint. However, individuals have the incentive to
graze as many cattle as possible on the commons as opposed to their own private property. If too
many people send too many cattle to the commons, the area will be destroyed, and the whole village
is worse off as a result. There are a couple of straightforward solutions to the Commons Problem:
an appropriate fee can be charged for each head of cattle or a limit can be imposed on the number
of cattle any individual may bring. These solutions are an appropriate starting point for solving
problems of abuse in groupware.

1
Wikipedia. Collaborative software.[online].[10.04.2007]. Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. 2007 Available at:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Groupware

14
 1.7.1.Socially vs. Technologically-Determined Structure
‫العلقات الجتماعية مقابل التركيبة التكنولوجية المحدودة‬
 Communication Structure

Communication between people is typically highly-structured. When someone asks a question, they
usually expect either an answer or a request for clarification. After a request, a typical response is
to fulfill the request or specify a reason for not fulfilling the request. When someone fills out an
official form, that form usually has a pre-determined route that it takes through an organization --
possibly to a manager for a signature, then an administrator for processing and filing, then perhaps
a duplicate is sent back to the original employee. The point is that most actions have a known range
of responses and people to handle them -- communication has structure.

 Technological vs. Social

When the type of structure is known, systems can take advantage of the structure to speed up
communications and minimize errors. When the system determines exactly how the conversation is
structured, this is known as technologically-mediated communication structure. The alternative is
socially-mediated communication -- when someone wants to make a request, they send, for
instance, a plain email message to another person, and that person decides whether to respond,
how to respond, and who to respond to.

 Socially-mediated & Communication

This type of structure can be more time-consuming and prone to error, and thus it may be
unacceptable for certain types of organizations, especially ones that allow no exceptions to
protocol, such as the military or certain safety-critical organizations. On the other hand, exceptions
to the expected structure of communication are extremely common. For this reason,
technologically-mediated communication may actually be an obstruction to getting work done
efficiently and may lead people to not use a groupware system or use it incorrectly, especially when
the designer has not completely anticipated the range of communication possibilities.

 Facilitation vs. Enforcement

A reasonable compromise between the two possibilities is to make a groupware system aware of the
common structure of communication so that it can make common communication tasks more
straightforward (e.g. by providing a "quick send" button that routes a message to the appropriate
person), but insure that any kind of message can be sent regardless. Thus, the communication is
technologically-facilitated but not technologically-enforced.

15
 1.7.2. Privacy ‫الخصوصية‬
 Privacy, Security, and Anonymity ‫الخصوصية والسرية والمن‬

Whenever using groupware, some information needs to be shared, and there is a concern that
all other information remain private, and that critical information be secure even against
aggressive attempts to obtain the information. In many situations, users choose to be
anonymous or use a consistent pseudonym. Anonymity can be crucial in encouraging fair
participation in discussions and is useful for providing protection from harassment.

 Sharing Information, Identification, and Accountability ‫ومسؤولية‬،‫ تعريف‬،‫تشارك المعلومات‬

On the other hand, there is continuing pressure to share more information. The more
information gets shared, the more easily common ground can be achieved. Sharing information
about yourself enables many systems to provide more useful customization and matching to
your interests. Furthermore, while anonymity can protect an individual, there are also quite
legitimate reasons for identifying people for accountability, especially where security and the
risk of abusive behavior are involved.

 Control and Reciprocity

To resolve these conflicting needs, it's important to give users as much control as possible over
what information gets shared and what remains private. Let users decide how much information
to share, and use that to determine what kinds of information they can access. One example of
privacy policy is the principle of reciprocity: if a user wants information about another user,
then they must provide the equivalent information about themselves. Reciprocity isn't always the
right policy, but serves as a useful starting point.

1.7.3. Awareness ‫الوعي‬

In addition to explicit communication, such as sending a message or speaking to someone, many
group work situations benefit from implicit communication, such as indirect gestures, information
about people's environment (whether their office door is open or closed), or biographical
information about people in a conversation (what their job position is and what they had for lunch).
This information helps people to establish common ground, coordinate their activities, and helps
avoid surprises.

Awareness information takes many forms. In videoconferencing, simply providing a wide-angle

camera lens can provide a greater degree of environmental awareness. In email, simple information
about the time and date of the message or the signature file of the sender (i.e. with contact info,
company info, etc.) gives context for making sense of the message. Awareness tools can be designed
for letting others know when you're in the office or not, letting them know what document you're
working on, or how you're feeling at any given time.

Obviously, awareness can be at odds with privacy concerns, and as the last previous indicated, it's
important to give users control over how much information about themselves is made available to
others. This is not entirely a technical design issue, but is an issue we must be aware of as a society

16
-- we will often want more and more information from others, and the social and economic pressure
to share this information will increase over time. As a society, we are obligated to be sensitive to
when we are asking for too much information and find other ways of achieving our common
objectives without compromising individual privacy.

17
 2.Towards Library Groupware ‫نحو البرمجيات الجماعية بالمكتبات‬
In today’s business environment, concerns with immediacy, confidentiality, and organizational
interactivity have all been addressed in the development of traditional groupware applications.
These proprietary packages have focused on internal corporate functions such as archival records
management (ARM), sales force automation (SFA), and human resources information systems
(HRIS). Enhancements made to groupware throughout the 1990s, however, have been based on the
need to maximize external operating effectiveness for the organization as well. Library and
information service centers have proven to be ideal laboratories for enhancements to groupware
functionality. This is most clearly displayed in the areas of information organization and retrieval.
The influence of library and information service professionals can be seen in groupware
applications such as intranets, gateways, and business information portals (BIPs).Most
commercially available groupware packages have overlapping functions that are traditionally
couched in office management activity, and have heretofore been targeted toward decision making
in the firm via group support systems (GSS). 1

'Library groupware' - a set of networked tools supporting information management for individuals
and for distributed groups - is a new class of service we may choose to provide in our libraries. In
its simplest form, library groupware would help people manage information as they move through
the diversity of online resources and online communities that make up today's information
landscape. Complex implementations might integrate equally well with enterprise-wide systems
such as courseware and portals on a university campus, and desktop file storage on private
individual computers. Ideally, successful library groupware should provide individuals and groups
with a common set of information functions they may apply to any information they find
anywhere.Historically, more than a dozen software application categories have been identified as
constituting a taxonomy for groupware services. Functionally, they can be identified as five
application families, all operating interactively. 2

2.1. Why Do Libraries Need Groupware? 3

‫لماذا تحتاج المكتبات إلى البرمجيات الجماعية‬
Consider three networked applications that are already used constantly: link resolvers , which
short-cut access from one Web resource to related resources or library services; bibliographic
reference managers, which enable users to manage records about information resources they might
need to reference again; and weblogs, which let anyone write whatever they want about anything
they like. Support for each of these applications varies widely in today's libraries. Link resolvers
are centralised tools used via the Web by users and library staff to connect licensed resources and
library services; traditional tools for reference management are desktop applications introduced to
library visitors via bibliographic instruction, although recent versions and new products make Web-
based reference management possible; weblogs are typically managed by weblog users themselves,

1
Jankm David. Op. cit.
2
Daniel Chudnov. Towards Library Groupware with Personalised Link Routing.[online].[14.04.2007]. Ariadne
Issue 40. 01-Nov-2004. Available at:
http://www.ariadne.ac.uk/issue40/chudnov/
3
ibid.

18
with only a few examples of weblog support provided by libraries or campus computing services to
be found.

It is interesting to examine the relationships between these tools and what they help users to do. For
example, is following a cited reference link to a link resolver the same kind of action as following a
link on someone's weblog? Are citing a work in a peer-reviewed paper and citing a work on a
weblog the same action, or are they different somehow? Because the support levels libraries
provide for each kind of application vary widely, it might seem natural to consider that these
applications and their functions are quite different. But it also seems likely that to the library users
following and citing many references from many sources as they manage the bibliographic lifecycle
of their ongoing work, the functions these applications provide are quite similar.

In a fluid world where users move regularly between informal discussion and scholarly/research
domains, we can consider the functional areas of linking, reference management, and weblogging
to be service points on a single continuum of information gathering, study, and creation. Following
a reference from a weblog or from a scholarly article are each similar steps in exploring threads of
related ideas. Capturing a reference in your own weblog or reference library indicates that the
citation somehow relates to your own thought process. Publicly citing a reference more closely
associates your thinking with that of others.

The broader information landscape - including library resources among weblogs, pre-print
archives, and decentralised information resources and repositories mingling with enormous desktop
computing power and storage on private devices - is where users and groups find, collect, and use
information today. We would do well to consider how we might bring better navigational clarity
and the ability to customise connections to this more diverse and decentralised information
landscape.

2.2. Functional applications of groupware for library and information

services.
‫التطبيقات الوظيفية للبرمجيات الجماعية للمكتبات وخدمات المعلومات‬
Software application family Library and information services workgroup tasks
Electronic Messaging E-mail Reference, Resource Exchanges, Knowledge-based
Listserv Discussion Groups

Virtual Meeting Environments Interactive Digital Reference, Electronic Bulletin Board

Electronic Document Management
Workflow and Workgroup Utilities
Collaborative Networking
Systems, Community Calendars,
Online Public Access Catalogs, Desktop Videoconferencing
Web Authoring Tools, Online Cataloging, Desktop
Publishing, Graphical Interface Design
Shared Cataloging Systems, Electronic Documentation,
Project Management, Database Building, Automated
Indexing Systems
Online Databases, Knowledge Management Systems, Multi-
type Library Networks and Consortia, Intranets, Information
Portals

19
the field of library and information services, however, groupware is more accurately represented
within broader functional contexts, External information sharing and exchange is the characteristic
which most significantly distinguishes groupware applications for library and information services
from the more traditional applications of groupware. All components of the groupware applications
taxonomy are reflected in the emerging technologies of library and information services.

2.2.1. Electronic Messaging ‫البريد اللكتروني‬

Communication with library patrons or customers is now handled in much the same way as
customer relationship management (CRM) services are handled in various business sectors. So-
called ‘‘24/7’’ service models are being utilized in library and information services in an
attempt to facilitate client contact around the clock. Email reference service, promotional mailings
and announcements, and patron account status messaging are examples of some of these activities.
Among library and information services professionals, LISTSERVTMs and electronic discussion
groups are examples of electronic
messaging for the enhancement of professional development and resource sharing. Collection
development assistance for rural library systems, information and referral assistance for remote
users and underserved populations, interlibrary loan assistance, and ‘‘Needs and Offerings’’
programs instituted by government documents librarians are particularly strong examples of
groupware project implementations of this genre.

2.2.2. Virtual Meeting Environments ‫بيئات الجتماع الفتراضية‬

Groupware’s latest, and most dramatic, impact on library and information services has been in the
area of virtual communications. On-line meeting places are rooted in the early versions of
electronic bulletin boards for business,but they have greatly benefited from the popularity of online
chat rooms and instant messaging. So-called ‘‘Live Answer’’ software has been streamlined to meet
the needs of library and information services. The growing demand for enhanced digital reference
service has led to a variety of service platforms for interactive reference interviews and research
assistance, provided at any hour of the day or night, and in almost any geographic location.
Before the advancement of voice and video telecommunications, teleconferencing provided the
closest available alternative to face to face communication. Groupware functions provided by
videoconferencing on the desktop have been greatly enhanced by the successful launch of such
technologies as streaming video and audio data transmission. Ongoing developments in the
Internet and World Wide Web segments have resulted in voice over Internet telephony (VOIP)
technology offerings. In the area of library and information services, desktop videoconferencing
has enhanced service programs to the disabled, and has facilitated the information professional’s
support for those parties participating in desktop videoconferencing.

2.2.3.Electronic Document Management ‫إدارة الوثائق اللكترونية‬

With the advent of electronic publishing, companies continued their move toward on-line document
composition and editing. This provided another avenue for groupware’s foray into dynamic office
management technology. Electronic document management (EDM) encompasses interactive editing
capabilities not previously available in the electronic publishing world. This has permitted not only
automated publishing and distribution, but shared document editing as well. In the field of library
and information service, EDM applications are evident in such areas as Web-based authoring of
library and information services pages utilizing Hypertext Markup Language (HTML), newsletter
publishing, new media, and electronic ‘‘e-Books.’’ The advantages evidenced by on-line
whiteboarding in virtual business meetings and corporate training programs are also evident in the
world of library and information services by the increased use of electronic ‘‘blackboardTM’’ and
‘‘chalkboardTM’’ products in acade-mic, school, and special library settings.

20
 2.2.4.Workflow and Workgroup Utilities ‫تدفق العمال وأدوات مجموعات العمل‬
Some of the earliest forms of library and information services technology have actually paralleled
the earliest forms of groupware. The shared databases at the heart of such established services as
On-line Computer Library Center (OCLC), Dialog, and the Library of Congress, were precursors
to the systems and services now considered standard fare for groupware. What groupware has done
for so-called ‘‘back office processing’’ can be witnessed today in automated library systems.
Database indexing for on-line literature searching and On-line Public Access Catalogs (OPACs)
were among the first forms of library technology to benefit from groupware design.
Today, such high volume input-output (I/O) activities as circulation, reserves processing, and
interlibrary loan have
benefited from the type of groupware engineering undertaken earlier in a variety of business
settings.

2.2.5.Collaborative Networking ‫التشابك التعاوني‬

As the library and information science profession has evolved into one of knowledge-based
activities and services, groupware and collaborative design principles have continually been at the
heart of new products and services. Librarians and information specialists have seen their
responsibilities expand within the knowledge management arena, and the approaches to
information management afforded by collaboration technology have helped redefine their
functional roles as ‘‘organizational knowledge backbones.’’[5] This is true for both the earlier
iterations of library and information service technologies such as literature searching and technical
services, and newer product areas such as ‘‘push technology’’ and information portals.

21
 Conclusion
Groupware has impacted the library and information services paradigm more than any other
area of software development. The three most definitive traits of business groupware functionality
are paramount in knowledge management environments. These characteristics—interactivity,
information dissemination, and on-line monitoring—are driving the knowledge management
sector’s growth. Real-time collaboration is best reflected by assisted digital reference. The most
significant example of such knowledge assistance today is the collaborative digital reference
service (CDRS) jointly launched by OCLC and the Library of Congress.
Additionally, many library service networks are launching what are being called ‘‘After Hours
Reference’’ projects providing personalized collaborative research assistance to both clients and
colleagues. In previous years, the benefits of groupware in the library and information services
sector have mirrored those of the business world vis-a-vis ‘‘back office technology.’’ On-line
cataloging, interlibrary loan, OPACs, and database indexing were the extent to which groupware
developments readily took hold.
Today, advances in networking technology via the Internet and World Wide Web are expanding
groupware’s impact in the ‘‘front office’’ of library and information services, where information
users are most often outside of the library or information center structure. Whether with services to
users, to professional colleagues outside of the organization, or to the intra-organization clients
that they directly serve, library and information service professionals are now maximizing the
benefits that can be realized by groupware structures in external as well as internal information
settings.

22
 References

1. Brinck.Tom. Groupware: Applications.[online].[10.04.2007]

Usabilityfirst.2005. Available at:
http://www.usabilityfirst.com/groupware/applications.txl

2. Brinck.Tom. Groupware: Introduction.[online].[10.04.2007]

Usabilityfirst.2005. Available at:
http://www.usabilityfirst.com/groupware/intro.txl

3. Daniel Chudnov. Towards Library Groupware with Personalised Link

Routing.[online].[14.04.2007]. Ariadne Issue 40. 01-Nov-2004. Available at:
http://www.ariadne.ac.uk/issue40/chudnov/

4. Jankm David. Groupware. [Online].[10.04.2007] Encyclopedia of Library

and Information Science. New York,2003. Available at:
www.dowling.edu/library/papers/david/Groupware_Encyclopedia_Chapter.pdf

5. Wikipedia. Collaborative software.[online].[10.04.2007]. Wikipedia, the free

encyclopedia. 2007 Available at:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Groupware

6. Wikipedia. computer supported cooperative work. .[online].[10.04.2007].

Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. 2007 AvailablE at:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_supported_cooperative_work

23