Information Technology Reference
In-Depth Information
change for the document, making it “Potentially
Expired”, which in turn sends an update to Mel
that changes are needed. This update includes
the reasoning Mary and Joe have written down
in the previous steps. Mel receives an email and
updates the charter document. Mary and Joe have
been added as the peer reviewers of the change
automatically.
content publicly
•
post more personal, non-transactional
information
such as photos, interests etc.
(think MySpace page)
Now a user's activities in the repository would
have a known focal point. Her collaborators could
steer to that page to understand what is happening
in the user's life.
Deeper User Profiles
Des started to work with the team and quickly
became active in the vault. When he started to
comment and suggest changes, the already estab-
lished team members wanted to know more about
him. Des' system profile became a quick way to
understand his thinking.
To turn strangers in a project to people knowing
each other is a daunting task. The system could help
by providing in-depth, activity-based information
about each user. What is she interested in, what
are her areas of expertise, what is she responsible
for, where do people trust her judgment? What are
her thoughts on the project and needed decisions.
Whose postings does she follow? Where is she
most active? The answers to these questions can
help her collaborators to understand her better.
The user needs to drive this profiling; the
system would only collect, collate, and aggregate
it. An easy way to achieve that could be to make
the user's start page in part visible to others. In
effect, her start page becomes her profile page.
Here, she could:
His profile showed the documents he authored
and reviewed, his topics of interest, the areas
where his suggestions were received favorably
(his expertise), and the work products he was
responsible for. The most insightful information
came from his personal blog, where he shared his
experiences in joining the team and his expecta-
tions for the project.
Beyond Commenting
•
register standing searches
for content ac-
tivities, including date/time, location, sub
team, author, keywords, content, most-
published, most-commented, most urgent-
ly needed peer review
list her
The repository lives through the interaction of its
members. They form opinions; they make deci-
sions through interactions. Interactions should
come in different forms, going far beyond simple
comments:
•
areas of interest
and view the ac-
tivities in those
list her
•
Online real-time chats, both text and voice
•
areas of expertise
(required re-
viewer), and view her activities in those
areas
list her
•
Online asynchronous news groups
•
Formal peer reviews, including formal sta-
tus change requests
Telephone Conferences
•
areas of responsibility
, and view
her activities (decisions) in those
list her
•
•
Face2face meetings
•
personal project blog
•
make personal comments
, more like
notes, that allow her to collect her thoughts
on a specific topic in private before posting
The modern repository could handle all these
interactions and present them in a unified way to
the users. Look at the mockup (Figure 6).
Search WWH ::
Custom Search