Backchannel communication, like whispering or instant messaging, is common in meetings and holds significant value. However, it remains largely unexplored in the context of hybrid meetings with co-located and remote participants. To address this gap, we derived unique challenges of backchannel communication in hybrid meetings through an interview study. These challenges inspired a new voice-based backchannel communication system, WhisperChannel, aimed to be inclusive and low effort. WhisperChannel enables users to whisper remotely to anyone in the meeting — similar to whispering to co-located seat neighbors. In a user study with three groups, each having two sessions of hybrid meetings, we investigated the inclusiveness and effort of WhisperChannel for both co-located and remote participants. We provide insights into the benefits and limitations of using remote whispering. We show that WhisperChannel helped remote and co-located participants feel more included while requiring low effort to use, however, also introduced new challenges in backchannel communication.

The material qualities of technological mediators are vital to collaborative activity, but current paradigms for collaboration support leave the potential of material mediation largely untapped. The HCI literature addresses both material mediation for individuals and coordination between collaborators - but rarely does it discuss the more direct role of the material as standing between people: its communicative role. This paper unfolds a material/linguistic analysis of four empirical examples from previous work on collaborative writing to showcase how material qualities of both tools and the text-in-progress, used in both planned and improvised manners, help co-authors shift between levels of collaboration, from independent co-ordinated activity to highly collaborative co-constructive activity. On one hand, we see co-authors successfully collaborating through material means; on the other, we see frustrations resulting from limited material expressivity in current tools. This duality between the significance of material mediation and obstacles to drawing on its potential makes clear that our conception of materiality needs elaboration. We point to multimodality as one opportunity for this.

Being unemployed is, by definition, someone without a job, but is it somebody without work? This paper presents an empirical study of unemployed job seekers and the work they do in connection with upholding their everyday life, job search, technology use, and the necessary connections with the public unemployment office (job center). Within the country where the research is conducted, the activities of the unemployed involve balancing formal legal requirements and procedures (to secure unemployment benefits, etc.) with informal navigation of the rules and regulations, networks and activities directed towards employment. The activities are mediated by digital platforms, e.g. job search, accountability, documentation, and, as a consequence, job seekers largely have to depend on their technologies and experiences to manage these processes. We present a study of interviews with job seekers (n=10) with an average age of 60, and two Participatory Design workshops with a total of 15 participants. Our analysis shows that the unemployed carry out work towards fulfilling formal requirements posed by the unemployment office, as well as setting up their daily, computer-supported routines, and a significant amount of unrecognized hidden work navigating rules, status and informal networks.

Designing new technologies to support synchronous interaction across distances has for many years focused on creating symmetry for participation between geographically distributed actors. Symmetry in synchronous interaction has, to some extent, been achieved technologically (while multiple social, historical, political, and hierarchical concerns continue to exist) and proven empirically in the increased use of remote-work technologies that were used during the pandemic. However, synchronous interaction in hybrid work is achieved differently, since the asymmetry produced by some participants being collocated while others geographically distributed introduces increased complexities for such interactions. Focusing on this challenge, we ask: To what extent can symmetry in cooperative work engagements be achieved in hybrid work contexts? We explore this question by interrogating multiple different empirical examples of synchronous hybrid interaction collected across different organizations, activities, and events. We found that the effort required to accomplish hybrid work includes additional articulation work necessary for bounding multiple intertwined artefacts across sites, devices, and applications. Further, the multiple artefacts setup across sites, combined with asymmetric collocation across participants, produce incongruence in technological frames of reference for each participant. All participants in hybrid work have only partial access to the hybrid setup, and no single person has access to the complete setup. The incongruence in technological frames produces insurmountable gaps in collaboration, causing all hybrid work situations to be characterized fundamentally by asymmetric relationships. We argue that symmetry in hybrid synchronous interaction is impossible to attain in attempts to solve this problem through design. Instead, we propose that designers of cooperative technologies for hybrid work shift towards developing artefact-ecologies supporting hybrid work, focusing on asymmetry as a necessary feature. Fundamentally, the design strategy should explore novel ways of taking advantage of the multiple different artefact-ecologies which serve as the foundation for the hybrid collaboration. Instead of striving for symmetry, we propose to feature asymmetric conditions in future technology designs for hybrid interaction.

This special issue builds on and expands HCI’s engagement with historical approaches, questioning our field’s ontological orientations and offering new methods for examining the past. The set of articles featured reinvigorates questions on whose technological labor matters, how we might challenge the racist and misogynistic consequences of HCI’s inter-disciplinary inheritances, and offer new modes of liberatory world-making. Taken together, this collection serves as an act of reclamation of the lineage of our field, providing resources and guidance for a more just present and future.

Computing today happens across multiple devices, applications, users, organizational units, and in the rest of the world outside. Groups and communities come together for different reasons and operate within contexts that may differ from dominant modes of production and consumption. With a foundation in activity theoretical HCI, we develop the concept of collective artifact ecologies. This concept enables us to identify struggles of collective use of computational devices today, delimiting collective artifact ecologies in order to study and explain how they develop and overlap. Through an analysis of three empirical cases, we illustrate the notion of collectives and how they face challenges in establishing, maintaining and negotiating their artifact ecologies. This paper, therefore, contributes a theoretical foundation for analyzing groups and communities as collectives, with a particular emphasis on the multiple tools and artifacts they use. To serve as a starting point for further engagement with these concepts, we provide guiding questions to support the understanding of collective artifact ecologies.

In this paper we activate theoretical principles for HCI and CSCW in analysis and design of collaborative technologies. We critically evaluate theoretical principles about how technologies mediate collaborative activities through two empirical cases regarding smart speakers and collaborative writing, respectively. Common to them is that both common objects and mediating artifacts are set in a mixed virtual and physical setting. Principles from activity theory are examined, specifically with a focus on how people use artifacts and objects as mediators to collaborate in joint activity. As part of questioning the cases, we also position collaborative affordances in relation to the principles. We engage with the cases by using the theoretical principles both analytically and constructively. Our analysis specifically targets traces as a possible construct that has potential to constructively aid collaboration across the two cases. We explore what seems to be a lack of support, and in particular theoretical framing, of traces of past activities, connected objects, other users, etc. With an initial hypothesis that traces could be a mechanism that would support these two kinds of collaborative activities better in a future redesign, we set out to further explore the cases and their future possibilities, and how they could be conceptually grounded and supported. We present a set of analytically and constructively oriented questions to help researchers and designers of artifacts identify mediators for and instances of collaboration.

This paper illustrates the multifaceted aspects of caring practices, and the ways they are entangled with the organizing of community-driven initiatives. Highlighting the situated inter-dependencies between concerns for care and efficiency, and considering caring practices as essential to the practical work that makes communities work, we reflect on how caring and efficiency rationalities frame the use, and scope the design of digital technologies. Drawing on two cases, the analysis shows the ways in which digital technologies oftentimes overshadow communities' key concerns for care, and how attempts to design for community settings can result in anti-designs, that is sociotechnical configurations that can disrupt caring practices. The contribution of the paper is twofold: first, an analysis of the different configurations of caring and efficiency and, second, a focus on care in the design and appropriation of technologies into this space.

Although Human–Computer Interaction research has developed various theories and frameworks for analyzing new and existing interactive systems, few address thegenerationof novel technological solutions, and new technologies often lack theoretical foundations. We introduceGenerative Theories of Interaction, which draw insights from empirical theories about human behavior in order to define specific concepts and actionable principles, which, in turn, serve as guidelines for analyzing, critiquing, and constructing new technological artifacts. After introducing and defining Generative Theories of Interaction, we present three detailed examples from our own work: Instrumental Interaction, Human–Computer Partnerships, and Communities & Common Objects. Each example describes the underlying scientific theory and how we derived and applied HCI-relevant concepts and principles to the design of innovative interactive technologies. Summary tables offer sample questions that help analyze existing technology with respect to a specific theory, critique both positive and negative aspects, and inspire new ideas for constructing novel interactive systems.

We set out to explore the role of prototypes as instruments of knowledge for HCI research. We pursue an epistemological inquiry on 'how' prototypes can be used when users, designers and researchers work in common on the development of future technological objects. First, we offer critical commentary on prototypes as instruments of knowledge by engaging with existing literature. Under-explored themes are developed to argue for approaching prototypes as objects of desire. Desires are different from needs and requirements and ought to be considered more directly in research prototyping processes. We identify five roles for prototypes as objects of desire for research and articulate four seeding dynamics that govern exploration of future use. These are exemplified through analysis of two cases where groups of people were working in common around designing interactive objects. We conclude that prototypes as objects of desire allow exploration of 'yet-to-be-known' shared technology beyond needs and requirements.

Research focusing on how collaborative writing takes place across multiple applications and devices and over longer projects is sparse. We respond to this gap by presenting the results of a qualitative study of longer-term academic writing projects, showing how co-writers employ multiple tools when working on a common text. We identify three patterns of multi-application collaboration as well as four common types of motivations for transitions between applications. We also extend existing taxonomies of collaborative writing by proposing a categorization of the functions served by the text as object and backbone of the collaboration. Together, these contributions offer a framing for understanding transitions within and across artifact ecologies in work around a common object. Our findings highlight ways in which features like concurrent editing may in fact challenge the collaborative writing process, and we point to opportunities for alternative application models.

Sticky notes are ubiquitous in design processes because of their tangibility and ease of use. Yet, they have well-known limitations in professional design processes, as documentation and distribution are cumbersome at best. This paper compares the use of sticky notes in ideation with a remediated digital sticky notes setup. The paper contributes with a nuanced understanding of what happens when remediating a physical design tool into digital space, by emphasizing focus shifts and breakdowns caused by the technology, but also benefits and promises inherent in the digital media. Despite users' preference for creating physical notes, handling digital notes on boards was easier and the potential of proper documentation make the digital setup a possible alternative. While the analogy in our remediation supported a transfer of learned handling, the users' experiences across technological setups impact their use and understanding, yielding new concerns regarding cross-device transfer and collaboration.

In this paper, we compare the use of physical and digital sticky notes in collaborative ideation. Inspired by a case study in a design company, we focus on a collaborative ideation task, which is often part of pair-wise brainstorming in design. For comparison and to focus on the different materiality, we developed a digital sticky notes setup designed to be as close to the physical setup as possible, not adding any advanced digital features, even though technology has reached a stage where more sophisticated use of digital sticky notes on digital boards is possible. In this paper, we present a study of ideation among pairs of experienced sticky note users. The ideation sessions were video recorded and analyzed to focus on how collaboration is supported across the two setups. Based on quantitative analyses of the participants’ interactions with the artefacts, talking patterns, position and attention during the sessions, we qualify how the differences and similarities between the 2 setups have an impact on note handling, ideation techniques, group dynamics and socio-spatial configuration, e.g. the use of the room, the boards and tables. We conclude that, while the physical setup seems more appropriate for creating notes and posting notes, the digital setup invites more note interaction. Nevertheless, we did not find significant differences in the ideation outcome (e.g., number of notes created) or how participants collaborated between the 2 setups. Hence, we argue that collaborative ideation can successfully be supported in a digital setup as well. Consequently, we believe that the next step in a technological setup is not an either or, but should bring the best of the two worlds together.

In this Introduction to the Special Issue on Re-Imagining Participatory Design, we wish to provide a context for the following papers by elucidating some of the themes that have helped shape the field of participatory design as well as touch on some emerging issues.We do not attempt a formal historical review of the participatory design field, nor examine the ongoing debates about the concept of participation, as these have been discussed elsewhere.

At a time where computer technology is putting human lives and work under pressure, we discuss how to provide alternatives. We look back at Participatory Design (PD) which was originally about possibilities and alternatives as much as it was about specific solutions. The paper aims to revitalize and revise PD to help people influence big issues . The agenda for this is set through proposing a set of key elements for realizing new, important possibilities. We discuss the possible changes of partnership with users, call for a new role of researchers as activists, debate how to work with demanding visions for lasting impact, and democratic control. We focus on high technological ambitions, on deployment of working prototypes, on alliances, and on scaling up, all seen as important for a PD that matters. We conclude the paper with an invitation to participate in the continued discussion, codesign, and realization of a PD that matters.

Today, most design projects are infrastructuring projects, because they build on technologies, competencies and practices that already exist. While infrastructuring was originally seen as being full of conflicts and contradictions with what is already present, we find that many contemporary reports seem to mainly address participatory infrastructuring as horizontal co-design and local, mutual learning processes in which people attempt to make the most out of available technology. In this paper we expand our view of design activities in three dimensions: First, how participatory processes play out vertically in different political and practical arenas; second, on the back stage of design, the messy activities that occur before, between and after the participatory workshops. And third, on their reach; how they tie into existing networks across organizations, and how agency and initiatives become dispersed within these networks. To illustrate and discuss the process of participatory infrastructuring we use a case study from an educational context. This particular project contains a diverse set of design activities at many organizational levels revolving around technology, decision-making, competence-building, commitment and policy-making. The project highlights these complexities, and our discussions lead to a vocabulary for participatory infrastructuring that focuses on knotworking, rather than structure, and on both horizontal and vertical reach and sustainability. This vocabulary is grounded in the meeting of the literature on infrastructuring, participatory design, and activity theory, and leads to a revised understanding of, for example, learning and conflicts in participatory infrastructuring.

Discussions on what makes user interfaces "natural" or "intuitive" have led researchers to apply Fauconnier and Turner's theory of Conceptual Blends to explain how users rely on familiar and real-world concepts when they learn to use new digital technologies -- as a blend of experiences from the --physical and the "digital" world. This pursuit has multiple challenges of which we address four: The continuous dynamic development of experiences; the multiplicity and complexity involved; the distinction between "real" and "virtual" experiences, and finally applying descriptive concepts predictively. Based on our background in activity theoretical HCI we discuss two cases to nuance the discussion of conceptual blends and HCI. We provide an understanding of conceptual blends beyond one-to-one static blends, and immediately recognizable concepts. We focus on multiplicity, dynamics and learning, and in that we provide a more advanced methodological scaffolding of analyses of conceptual blends, hence we propose that designers need to seed blends in design.

In this paper, we present a case study of an urban organic food community and examine the way the community shapes its artifact ecology through a combination of appropriation of freely or cheaply available tools, and the long-term effort of building the community's own website. Based on participatory observation, content analysis of communication documents, and a series of interviews, we see how the collection of artifacts that a community uses to support their practice form what we refer to as their community artifact ecology. A community artifact ecology is multifaceted, dynamic and pending on what the members bring to the table, as well as on particular situations of use. The community artifact ecology concept is important for CSCW as it enables framing of the relationship between communities and technologies beyond the single artifact and beyond a static view of a dedicated technology.

Technology is often seen as seamless, or making (life/work) boundaries go away. Ubicomp designs for that and for seamlessness in general. However, there may be better ways of understanding boundaries, as to design technologies in the space of changing work/life boundaries, which is the topic of this special issue. This paper makes a theoretical argument to insist that boundaries are not fixed, neither can or should they be made away with technologically, through seamless technologies. Based on this argument, it discusses various presumed technology-mediated boundaries of work and home, life, etc., as they can be found in the Ubicomp, CSCW and HCI literature: The ways in which work and work technologies are stereotypically connected to effectiveness and hard labor, and non-work technologies to fun and enjoyment; the ways in which technologies move back and forth between mediating work activity and non-work; the role of place and time boundaries in relation to the ability to work any time, anywhere and the metaphors used to address these boundaries; and the perceived boundaries of private versus public, and the new boundaries created by technologies in and across our lives and work. Using an empirical case, the paper offers an alternative use of boundaries as resources to be activated and used in design. It suggests that we need to more carefully design technologies that provide seamfulness on these specific and dynamic boundaries.

In this paper we introduce the notion of techsona, as a possible counterpart design instrument to personas. We use a case study to illustrate a design process where techsonas help pinpoint technological ideas and alternatives and analyze these systematically. While a persona captures “imagine a user…”, a scenario “imagine a situation…” the techsona gives the missing piece of “imagine a technology…” We show how a recently developed activity theoretical model can serve both as a framing for techsonas and as an analytical interface between personas and techsonas. The paper discusses the potentials and problems of the techsona and concludes that the techsona truly helps with a missing piece in persona and scenario-based design.

Since Blevis's seminal paper [Blevis 2007] in 2007, environmental sustainability has established itself as a mainstream concern for HCI. After an initial flurry of excitement about the potential for existing HCI techniques, such as persuasive computing and interaction design, to contributemeaningfully to increasing sustainability, we have begun to recognize that the complexity and apparent intractability of working towards sustainability is providing serious challenges to current HCI ways of approaching problems. For example, some are working to deepen the engagement between HCI and established approaches of environmental psychology [Froehlich et al. 2010] and behavioral theory [Hekler et al. 2013] in order to develop more rigorous methods and theoretical connections for pursuing sustainability. Others are deploying and evaluating eco-feedback technologies at a scale not yet common in HCI [Erickson et al. 2013] to get a better sense of their effects and potentialities. Thus, sustainability is becoming not simply a problem that HCI can contribute to solving, but also an opportunity to understand the limits of HCI as it is currently constituted and to develop new possibilities for the discipline.

We investigate in which forms field trials are a workable model as part of an exploratory design process for sporadic, mobile, non-work settings. A major concern of evaluating ubicomp systems is to study how practices and context of use emerge and develop over time when new technology is introduced. To introduce a sophisticated version of our own prototype in the course of an iterative design process, we conducted a public field trial of the system---a new platform for mobile democratic discussions in municipal planning---that we distributed via the Android Market. However, it turned out to be surprisingly difficult to evaluate our design in a setting that stretches over time, place, and without a preselected set of users. Analyzing our difficulties, we develop a general model for methods studying ubicomp systems. On the basis of this model, we characterize an openly interactive approach to field trials in order to look ahead rather than back.

Security is experienced differently in different contexts. This paper argues that in everyday situations, users base their security decisions on a mix of prior experiences. When approaching security and interaction design from an experience approach, tools that help bring out such relevant experiences for design are needed. This paper reports on how Prompted exploration workshops and Acting out security were developed to target such experiences when iteratively designing a mobile digital signature solution in a participatory design process. We discuss how these tools helped the design process and illustrate how the tangibility of such tools matters. We further demonstrate how the approach grants access to non-trivial insights into people's security experience. We point out how the specific context is essential for exploring the space between experience and expectations, and we illustrate how people activate their collections of security experiences rather than deploying one security strategy in all situations.

This paper discusses the challenge of supporting digitally mediated citizengovernment collaboration in public service provision. With a vantage point in activity theory and the empirical data from three exploratory design cases, we derive a theoretical framework for understanding the way in which citizens share information with government. Through the proposed framework and the notion of Participatory Citizenship, we propose a set of central design challenges to supporting collaboration within this setting. We argue that civil servants and citizens have inherently different foci in the service provision process. Hence, we conclude that the focus of design should not be to support a shared motive for the overall service delivery, but to support a better common understanding of the case process in itself, i.e. the involved actors, their motives, and their mediating artifacts. Moreover, we argue that the aim of technological support for complex collaboration should not be leaner, more rational case processes, but improved citizen involvement in the configuration of service provision and the alignment of actor motives. Lastly, we exemplify how these design challenges can be met by discussing how a concrete exploratory prototype in the form of a web-based timeline addresses collaboration within a complex service provision setting. These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Although devices of all shapes and sizes currently dominate the technological landscape, human–computer interaction (HCI) as a field is not yet theoretically equipped to match this reality. In this article we develop the human–artifact model, which has its roots in activity theoretical HCI. By reinterpreting the activity theoretical foundation, we present a framework that helps addressing the analysis of individual interactive artifacts while embracing that they are part of a larger ecology of artifacts. We show how the human–artifact model helps structuring the understanding of an artifact's action-possibilities in relation to the artifact ecology surrounding it. Essential to the model is that it provides four interconnected levels of analysis and addresses the possibilities and problems at these four levels. Artifacts and their use are constantly developing, and we address development in, and of, use. The framework needs to support such development through concepts and methods. This leads to a methodological approach that focuses on new artifacts to supplement and substitute existing artifacts. Through a design case, we develop the methodological approach and illustrate how the human–artifact model can be applied to analyze present artifacts and to design future ones. The model is used to structure such analysis and to reason about findings while providing leverage from activity theoretical insights on mediation, dialectics, and levels of activity.

This paper explores timelines as a web-based tool for collaboration between citizens and municipal caseworkers. The paper takes its outset in a case study of planning and control of parental leave; a process that may involve surprisingly many actors. As part of the case study, a web-based timeline, CaseLine, was designed. This design crosses the boundaries between leisure and work, in ways that are different from what is often seen in current HCI. The timeline has several roles on these boundaries: It is a shared planning and visualization tool that may be used by parents and caseworkers alone or together, it serves as a contract and a sandbox, as a record and a plan, as inspiration for planning and an authoritative road, as a common information space and a fragmented exchange. Serving all these roles does not happen smoothly, and the paper discusses the challenges of such timeline interaction in, and beyond this case.

Computer use and interaction possibilities are changing quickly, while use contexts and application types are radically broadening. Technology no longer consists of static tools belonging only to the workplace but permeates work on the move, homes and everyday lives. Pervasive technologies, augmented reality, small interfaces, tangible interfaces, etc. are dramatically changing the nature of HCI (human–computer interaction). We witness the creation of ad hoc configurations of large and small user interfaces. The new interfaces are moveable and used in changing locations and contexts; different tasks are done through a combination of specialized technologies. A wider repertoire of physical instruments is available than the keyboard and the mouse. Based on examples from recent research projects and a collage of concepts and solutions, we discuss how these recent developments challenge our understanding of usability and interaction design. In particular, we discuss how the Scandinavian tradition of user involvement in development is facing up with the challenges of new work and of non-work contexts. There is a tendency that much recent investigations into non-work settings get stuck in a divide between work on the one hand, and leisure, arts, and home on the other; between rationality on the hand, and emotion on the other. The Scandinavian tradition can be developed to embrace people's whole lives and transcend the dichotomies between work, rationality, etc. and their negations and a Scandinavian perspective should and could move the current co-determination framework outside of work.

The new usability agenda is driving empirical and experimental studies into a growing range of quality criteria such as engagement, user experience, and aesthetics. Some see this as a positive move to theorise about the nature of good design qualities, and to objectively test such hypotheses on the new usability theme. However, others (e.g. [1], [2]) have argued for interpretation-based inquiry into user engagement and experience on the grounds that such phenomena can only be understood by investigations into contexts of use which defy quantitative approaches. Many in the design community would agree with them and go further to argue that quality in design is a matter of creativity and can not be measured or theorised per se; instead, research should focus on understanding and improving the process of design. This panel will debate the tensions between these positions and explore possible common ground between them as a contribution towards the research agenda that is being debated in the DIS conference series.

In this poster we present a study of cross-media challenges for an organization that has recently moved from traditional newspaper production to production involving the integrated digital production of newspaper, TV, radio and web-news. The poster shows problems of integrating work pace and contents of the different media. In this poster we will focus on how the rhythms of different media work together and apart and how these rhythms can be supported by different coordinating and planning tools.

This article has its starting point in a large number of empirical findings regarding computer-mediated work. These empirical findings have challenged our understanding of the role of mediation in such work; on the one hand as an aspect of communication and cooperation at work and on the other hand as an aspect of human engagement with instruments of work. On the basis of previous work in activity-theoretical and semiotic human—computer interaction, we propose a model to encompass both of these aspects. In a dialogue with our empirical findings we move on to propose a number of types of mediation that have helped to enrich our understanding of mediated work and the design of computer mediation for such work.

As a context for IT design, flexible work presents a new challenge. Ways of working tend to be prototypical, habits are forming slowly and work is carried out everywhere. Even when applying ethnographic methods, it is difficult to capture the ephemerality and prototypicality of cooperative work that Grudin claims must be preserved through design. Through a discussion of a design project dedicated to the design of support for social awareness, we reflect on the means of design - scenarios and prototypes, and their ability to support design for ephemerality and prototypicality. Our conclusion is that by using scenarios as boundary objects, in multiple prototyping experiments, they support the negotiation and boundary understanding of design ideas, rather than one or more solutions. Hence it becomes possible to design to preserve ephemerality and prototypicality.

This paper presents a study of an organisation, which is undergoing a process transforming organisational and technological boundaries. In particular, we shall look at three kinds of boundaries: the work to maintain and change the boundary between the organisation and its customers; boundaries between competencies within the organisation; and boundaries between various physical locations of work, in particular between what is done in the office and what is done on site. Maintaining and changing boundaries are the processes through which a particular community sustains its identity and practice on the one hand, and where it is confronted with the identity and practices on the other.The organisation being studied employs a multitude of IT systems that support and maintain these boundaries in a particular manner that are in many ways inappropriate to the current needs of the organisation.After analysing the history and the current boundary work, the paper will propose new technological support for boundary work. In particular the paper will suggest means of supporting boundaries when these are productive and for changing boundaries when this seems more appropriate. In total, flexible technologies seem a core issue when dealing with technology for boundaries.

The "design collaboratorium" is a new usability practice that has been developed in an action research project between three industrial usability labs and a university. The design collaboratorium has been developed as a reaction to the failing capabilities of classical usability methods to cope with ubiquitous technologies. It has borrowed elements from participatory design and developed them further to become useful in large-scale industrial development organizations. The design collaboratorium will be presented through examples from a joint project: a vision project concerning wastewater treatment technology. In light of the case, we will discuss the philosophy underlying the design collaboratorium in further detail: the collaboration between active participants, the role of design artifacts, and the room as a meeting ground. Finally we lay out the working method and propose directions for future usability competencies.

Common information spaces are often, implicitly or explicitly, viewed as something that can be accessed in toto from one (of many) location. Our studies of wastewater treatment plants show how such massively distributed spaces challenge many of the ways that CSCW view common information spaces. The studies fundamentally challenge the idea that common information spaces are about access to everything, everywhere. Participation in optimisation is introduced as an important feature of work tied to the moving around in physical space. In the CSCW literature, peripheral awareness and at a glance overview are mostly connected with the coordination of activities within a control room or in similar co-located circumstances. It is concluded that this focus on shoulder to shoulder cooperation has to be supplemented with studies of cooperation through massively distributed information spaces.

This paper discusses three examples of use of scenarios in user-centred design. Common to the examples are the use of scenarios to support the tensions between reflection and action, between typical and critical situations, and between plus and minus situations. The paper illustrates how a variety of more specific scenarios emphasising, e.g. critical situations, or even caricatures of situations are very useful for helping groups of users and designers being creative in design. Emphasising creativity in design is a very different view on the design process than normally represented in usability work or software/requirement engineering, where generalising users’ actions are much more important than, in this paper, the suggested richness of and contradiction between actual use situations. In general the paper proposes to attune scenarios to the particular purposes of the situations they are to be used in, and to be very selective based on these purposes.

Representing computer applications and their use is an important aspect of design. In various ways, designers need to externalize design proposals and present them to other designers, users, or managers. This article deals with understanding design representations and the work they do in design. The article is based on a series of theoretical concepts coming out of studies of scientific and other work practices and on practical experiences from design of computer applications. The article presents alternatives to the ideas that design representations are mappings of present or future work situations and computer applications. It suggests that representations are primarily containers of ideas and that representation is situated at the same time as representations are crossing boundaries between various design and use activities. As such, representations should be carriers of their own contexts regarding use and design. The article proposes that abstraction, elevating the representation from the situation, is not the only way to do this, and it proposes alternatives.

User participation has been recognized as a way of gaining more knowledge about work and improving the quality of the computer application to be designed. Often the problems of user participation have been discussed from the point of view of researchers getting access to the users. Yet user participation should also be seen from the point of view of the conditions of the participation process-that is, how the conditions are set for the users to participate with designers (and managers). Experiences from participatory design projects show problems that participatory design research needs to deal with. This article suggests that the Scandinavian collective resource projects can help research in this process. However, these projects were carried out under circumstances quite different from those of corporations in the 1990s, and this fact must certainly be considered when investigating the creation of conditions for participation. The article presents a recent project, AT project, to discuss the concerns and conditions of participatory design projects today. In the AT project, the actors differed from the collective resource projects in that the actors included several different groups of workers as well as management. This caused the project to focus on resource acquisition for the whole organization as well as groups within it. Part of the idea was to utilize standard technology; at the same time, the project was to develop and implement overall visions about the use of computer technology in the organization. Inspired by philosophical approaches to human development, this article reconsiders the resources acquired in such settings and juxtaposes the work of setting up a technical platform for everyday use with the expansive codevelopment of accompanying visions. The article goes on to suggest that new alliances between groups in organizations-with due concern for their diversity of resources, and with constructive use of the conflicts inherent in the organization-can be a way forward in empowering organizations, making room for groups and individuals within them to act.

In this paper, we look at how people working in a governmental labor inspection agency tailor their shared PC environment. Starting with standard off-the-shelf software, the tailors adapt that software to the particular workplace in which they are embedded, at the same time that they modify and extend the practices of that workplace. Over time, their adaptations and the tailoring processes themselves become structured and systematized within the organization. This tendency toward systematization is in part a response to the requirement that the results of tailoring be sharable across groups of users. Our study focuses on several dimensions of the work of tailoring: construction, organizational change, learning, and politics. We draw two kinds of lessons for system development: how better to support the work of tailors, and how system developers can learn from and cooperate with tailors.

How can we understand why a bank teller has different needs for a user interface than those of casual users of a machine teller, or why a graphic designer needs a different user interface than a secretary? This article presents a framework for the design of user interfaces that originates from the work situations in which computer-based artifacts are used: The framework deals with the role of the user interface in purposeful human work. Human activity theory is used in this analysis. The purpose of this article is to make the reader curious and hopefully open his or her eyes to a somewhat different way of thinking about the user interface. The article applies examples of real-life interfaces to support this process, but it does not include a systematic presentation of empirical results. I focus on the role of the computer application in use. Thus, it is necessary to consider human-computer interaction and other related work conditions. I deal with human experience and competence as being rooted in the practice of the group that conducts the specific work activity. The main conclusions are: The user interface cannot be seen independently of the use activity (i.e., the professional, socially organized practice of the users and the material conditions for the activity, including the object of the activity). The standard view in these situations is to deduce an ultimate set of operations from an abstract use activity and apply these to design and analysis. This article argues that the user interface fully reveals itself to us only when in use. What is a good user interface for those with a certain degree of competence may not be efficient for those with different levels of competence. I give certain general recommendations for the user interface, but I have no guarantee that such recommendations are applicable to the specific case wherein these concerns may be overruled by specific social or material concerns.

Computer support for design as cooperative work is the subject of our discussion in the context of our research program on Computer Support in Cooperative Design and Communication. We outline our theoretical perspective on design as cooperative work, and we exemplify our approach with reflections from a project on computer support for envisionment in design — the APLEX and its use. We see envisionment facilities as support for both experiments with and communication about the future use situation. As a background we sketch the historical roots of our program — the Scandinavian collective resource approach to design and use of computer artifacts, and make some critical reflections on the rationality of computer support for cooperative work.