{"title":"What counts as success? punctuated patterns of use in a persistent chat environment","authors":"C. Halverson, T. Erickson, Jeremy B. Sussman","doi":"10.1145/958160.958188","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper presents a case study of a globally distributed work group's use of an online environment called \"Loops.\" Loops is a web-based persistent chat system whose aim is to support collaboration amongst corporate work groups. We describe the ways in which the group turned the system's features to its own ends, and the unusual usage rhythm that corresponded with the team's varying needs for communication as it moved through its work cycle. We conclude with a discussion of design implications, and a suggestion that \"community\" may not always be the best way to think about groups' use of online systems.","PeriodicalId":130289,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the 2003 ACM International Conference on Supporting Group Work","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2003-11-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"20","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Proceedings of the 2003 ACM International Conference on Supporting Group Work","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1145/958160.958188","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 20
Abstract
This paper presents a case study of a globally distributed work group's use of an online environment called "Loops." Loops is a web-based persistent chat system whose aim is to support collaboration amongst corporate work groups. We describe the ways in which the group turned the system's features to its own ends, and the unusual usage rhythm that corresponded with the team's varying needs for communication as it moved through its work cycle. We conclude with a discussion of design implications, and a suggestion that "community" may not always be the best way to think about groups' use of online systems.