没有工作流程是足够的:众包工作流程如何限制复杂的工作

Daniela Retelny, Michael S. Bernstein, Melissa A. Valentine
{"title":"没有工作流程是足够的:众包工作流程如何限制复杂的工作","authors":"Daniela Retelny, Michael S. Bernstein, Melissa A. Valentine","doi":"10.1145/3134724","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The dominant crowdsourcing infrastructure today is the workflow, which decomposes goals into small independent tasks. However, complex goals such as design and engineering have remained stubbornly difficult to achieve with crowdsourcing workflows. Is this due to a lack of imagination, or a more fundamental limit? This paper explores this question through in-depth case studies of 22 workers across six workflow-based crowd teams, each pursuing a complex and interdependent web development goal. We used an inductive mixed method approach to analyze behavior trace data, chat logs, survey responses and work artifacts to understand how workers enacted and adapted the crowdsourcing workflows. Our results indicate that workflows served as useful coordination artifacts, but in many cases critically inhibited crowd workers from pursuing real-time adaptations to their work plans. However, the CSCW and organizational behavior literature argues that all sufficiently complex goals require open-ended adaptation. If complex work requires adaptation but traditional static crowdsourcing workflows can't support it, our results suggest that complex work may remain a fundamental limitation of workflow-based crowdsourcing infrastructures.","PeriodicalId":224409,"journal":{"name":"Proc. ACM Hum. Comput. Interact.","volume":"68 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-12-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"73","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"No Workflow Can Ever Be Enough: How Crowdsourcing Workflows Constrain Complex Work\",\"authors\":\"Daniela Retelny, Michael S. Bernstein, Melissa A. Valentine\",\"doi\":\"10.1145/3134724\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The dominant crowdsourcing infrastructure today is the workflow, which decomposes goals into small independent tasks. However, complex goals such as design and engineering have remained stubbornly difficult to achieve with crowdsourcing workflows. Is this due to a lack of imagination, or a more fundamental limit? This paper explores this question through in-depth case studies of 22 workers across six workflow-based crowd teams, each pursuing a complex and interdependent web development goal. We used an inductive mixed method approach to analyze behavior trace data, chat logs, survey responses and work artifacts to understand how workers enacted and adapted the crowdsourcing workflows. Our results indicate that workflows served as useful coordination artifacts, but in many cases critically inhibited crowd workers from pursuing real-time adaptations to their work plans. However, the CSCW and organizational behavior literature argues that all sufficiently complex goals require open-ended adaptation. If complex work requires adaptation but traditional static crowdsourcing workflows can't support it, our results suggest that complex work may remain a fundamental limitation of workflow-based crowdsourcing infrastructures.\",\"PeriodicalId\":224409,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Proc. ACM Hum. Comput. Interact.\",\"volume\":\"68 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2017-12-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"73\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Proc. ACM Hum. Comput. Interact.\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1145/3134724\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Proc. ACM Hum. Comput. Interact.","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1145/3134724","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 73

摘要

目前占主导地位的众包基础设施是工作流,它将目标分解成小的独立任务。然而,设计和工程等复杂的目标仍然很难通过众包工作流程来实现。这是由于缺乏想象力,还是一个更根本的限制?本文通过对6个基于工作流的群体团队中的22名工作人员进行深入的案例研究来探讨这个问题,每个团队都追求一个复杂且相互依赖的web开发目标。我们使用归纳混合方法来分析行为跟踪数据、聊天记录、调查回复和工作工件,以了解工人如何制定和适应众包工作流程。我们的结果表明工作流作为有用的协调工件,但是在许多情况下,严重地抑制了人群工作者对他们的工作计划进行实时调整。然而,CSCW和组织行为学文献认为,所有足够复杂的目标都需要开放式适应。如果复杂的工作需要适应,但传统的静态众包工作流不能支持它,我们的研究结果表明,复杂的工作可能仍然是基于工作流的众包基础设施的一个基本限制。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
No Workflow Can Ever Be Enough: How Crowdsourcing Workflows Constrain Complex Work
The dominant crowdsourcing infrastructure today is the workflow, which decomposes goals into small independent tasks. However, complex goals such as design and engineering have remained stubbornly difficult to achieve with crowdsourcing workflows. Is this due to a lack of imagination, or a more fundamental limit? This paper explores this question through in-depth case studies of 22 workers across six workflow-based crowd teams, each pursuing a complex and interdependent web development goal. We used an inductive mixed method approach to analyze behavior trace data, chat logs, survey responses and work artifacts to understand how workers enacted and adapted the crowdsourcing workflows. Our results indicate that workflows served as useful coordination artifacts, but in many cases critically inhibited crowd workers from pursuing real-time adaptations to their work plans. However, the CSCW and organizational behavior literature argues that all sufficiently complex goals require open-ended adaptation. If complex work requires adaptation but traditional static crowdsourcing workflows can't support it, our results suggest that complex work may remain a fundamental limitation of workflow-based crowdsourcing infrastructures.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信