Way of Working

The core activity of Collaboration Engineering is the design of collaborative work practices. In the context of Collaboration Engineering, to design (verb) means to create, document and validate a prescription for a collaborative work practice. The Collaboration Engineering method of working describes the steps needed to design collaboration processes (Briggs and Vreede 2005). It defines the design activities of the Collaboration Engineering approach. Firstly, the best practices for a given task are identified. Then, using the information from the best practices and based on his own reference knowledge, the collaboration engineer creates a prototype collaborations process. Finally the process is executed, tested, evaluated and refined.

Based on the above mentioned overview of the ways of working, the design activities according to “Collaboration Engineering: Designing Repeatable Processes for High-Value Collaborative Tasks” (Briggs and Vreede 2005) are:

 Define the goal(s) of the people for whom the process is to be implemented.

 Negotiate the content, structure, and packaging of deliverables.

 Define data and data transformations required to achieve deliverables.

 Design process in terms of steps.

 Design process in terms of patterns.

 Designs process in terms of thinkLets.

 Implement thinkLet and transition capabilities & script.

 Pilot the collaboration process.

 Refine the collaboration process.

 Train practitioners.

 Monitor & update collaboration process designs. The cited paper also mentions that this design, although depicted linearly is actually executed in an iterative and incremental fashion. These design activities are a set of building blocks which can help build processes depending on the type and scope of collaboration task at hand. You are able to alter or even remove steps to better fit the group’s needs in the attainment of its goals.

Way of Modeling

Different aspect models have been developed based on the elements of collaboration design process. These aspect models represent the modeling deliverables obtained from the collaboration process way of working. While several different modeling conventions have been developed to support these deliverables, one of the most relevant and most used foundation models is that created by Kolfschoten et al. (Kolfshoten et al. 2006). Each model highlights different parts of the collaboration process design. From these models, one can gain a multi-perspective view on how the collaboration process works as a whole.

The ThinkLet Description Document ThinkLet Description Document is just what one would gather from the name - a description of a document that is a thinkLet. Briggs et al. has introduced a formal documentation method for thinkLets named, ThinkLet Description Documents (TDD) (Briggs and de Vreede,2001). A TDD is a text-based template model that presents following content:

 ThinkLet Name: Name given to the thinkLet that is either descriptive or metaphoric to the pattern the thinkLet creates. Example: In the thinkLet known as “Leafhopper,” participants start with one page for each of several discussion topics and then “hop” from page to page at will, making contributions as needed (Briggs and Vreede 2005). The name should be an expressive word or phrase as this will help in remembering what the thinkLet is and how it is used.

 Choose this thinkLet: Criteria for deciding which thinkLet to use. This part should provide enough information to convey the pattern(s) the thinkLet produces and to distinguish itself from others that may create the same pattern. Example: the thinkLet known as “FreeBrainstorm,” has selection criteria, “Choose this thinkLet when it is important to create a shared understanding of the problem among people with different perspectives, expertise, or background” (Briggs 2005).  Do not choose this thinkLet: Criteria for deciding against using the thinkLet. Example: “Do not choose this thinkLet to maximize the number of creative ideas a group produces” (Briggs 2005).  Overview: Paints a picture of what the thinkLet will do and what outcomes it will produce.  Inputs: Variables that must be applied at the time the thinkLet is to be used. Some thinkLets may require a whiteboard, polling methods, ballot items, post-it notes, and other items necessary to carry out the thinkLet objective.  Outputs: Lists and gives characteristics of the deliverables that will be created by using a certain kind of thinkLet.  Setup: Describes what is needed to setup and effectively use a certain kind of thinkLet. Some technological capabilities may be required by individuals contributing to the thinkLet; these kinds of requirements will also be listed under the setup content.  Steps: This part gives a clear, concise order of operations. A list of what participants must say, do, decide, and remember during the execution of the thinkLet to produce the desired pattern of collaboration (Briggs and Vreede 2005).  Insights: A list of helpful tips and tricks to use during the use of the thinkLet to make its use easier or more effective, along with general observations about the nature of the thinkLet.  Success Stories: Real life stories of the thinkLet in action and the results it produces to aid a process designer in understanding the utility the thinkLet offers.  What’s in a name: A simple explanation of why the thinkLet is named as it is.

The ThinkLets Notation Model The ThinkLets Notation Model is a formal textual method for documenting and communicating group process designs (Briggs and Vreede 2005). Instead of having a long and extensive list like the ThinkLet Description Model, the ThinkLets Notation Model has a list of criteria that best resembles an agenda. For every step in the process, a ThinkLet Notation Model includes:

 Step Name: A descriptive phrase that describes what the team will accomplish in the step.  ThinkLet Name: Lists what thinkLet is to be used. There could potentially be several thinkLets listed for any given step.  Parameters: Similar to the Inputs of the ThinkLet Description Model, the parameters specify what criteria must be used at the time the thinkLet is being used to assure consistent results.  Duration: The amount of time that will be devoted to the execution of the thinkLet.

While the ThinkLet Notation Model is very effective and useful, it is only useful for individuals who are familiar with the thinkLets that are referenced within the design. Therefore, before using the Thinklet Notation Model in a group setting, it is important to first train the practitioners on how to effectively use the thinkLets that comprise the design. Below is an example of how a process design can be laid out using the ThinkLets Notation Model. As you can see, it is very similar to what an agenda looks like.

Figure 9.4: A process design in ThinkLets Notation (Briggs and Vreede 2005)

1 Welcome and introductions . 2 Identify impediments . 40 Minutes – (FreeBrainstorm) Brainstorming question: “What are the impediments that prevent IT managers from becoming business leaders?” 30 Minutes – Converge on a list of about 8 impediments to IT managers becoming business leaders using two ThinkLets simultaneously: (ThemeSeeker) to elicit new contributions: “Please browse through your brainstorming comments and tell me what are the key themes that have emerged in your brainstorming?” (RichRelations) to reduce the size of the list: “Please look at this list of impediments that keep IT managers from becoming business leaders. See if you can find two items on this list that are related and tell me how they are related.” 3 15 Minute break . 4 Propose Solutions . 40 Minutes – (LeafHopper) “Here is the list of impediments that prevent IT managers from becoming business leaders. What strategies could be used to mitigate and overcome these impediments?” 5 Wrap-up review . 15 Minutes – (LeafHopper) “What did you like about the things we did today?” “What would you change in the future?” The Facilitation Process Model The Facilitation Process Model uses three symbols to illustrate the flow from thinkLet to thinkLet. The symbols are: Activity, Decision, and Flow Direction. The symbols look like this:

Figure 9.5: The Facilitation Process Model (Briggs and Vreede 2005)

Activity: Decision:

Pattern of Collaboration

Within the Activity shape, the activity name contains a descriptive name for the activity that conveys what the team is supposed to do (Briggs and Vreede 2005). The area on the left describes what pattern is to be accomplished and the thinkLet name appears in the area at the top. Transitions are represented as flow arrows. Decision points in transitions are represented as circles.

Example of Risk Identification using Facilitation Process Model: The figure includes four activities and one decision point. The FPM focuses attention on the logic of the flow of the process from activity to activity.

It is particularly useful because it allows the collaboration engineer to move in a logical fashion through the top three layers of the layers model, starting with steps in the process, moving to the patterns and then the thinkLets.

Figure 9.6: Risk Identification (Briggs and Vreede 2005) Way of Controlling

Standard project management principles and techniques work well for Collaboration Engineering projects. The assessment techniques of the Collaboration Engineering approach measure and monitor the degree to which projects are on time and under budget as well as customer satisfaction.

To measure quality of the Collaboration Engineering design object, the following indicators can be assessed (Briggs and Vreede 2005):

• Satisfaction of process owner

• Satisfaction of participants

• Perceived ease-of-use of practitioner who facilitates

• Organizational adoption rate

• Quality of results of the collaboration process

• Quantity of results of the collaboration process

• Perceived gain in collaboration process’ efficiency

• Perceived gain in collaboration process’ effectiveness

• Perceived gain in collaboration process’ productivity

• Reusability of the collaboration process

• Predictability of the collaboration process

• Transferability of the collaboration process

In terms of the design process itself, the following indicators can be assessed:

• Length of design process in person hours

• Length of design process in calendar days

• Number of iterations / process versions • Satisfaction of customer