Transcript of "Is Information Systems Research on Collaborative Systems Relevant? 
April 13, 21:00 UTC (5pm EDT, 2pm PDT) (orientation session at 20:30 UTC)
Paul Gray, Claremont Graduate University
Site: VMC @ Temple University

The contents of this transcript may be further 
distributed if the complete transcript 
is kept together including this message. The 
contents many not be analyzed, quoted,
reported or otherwise disseminated without the 
explicit permission of the VMC 

This conference was sponsored by the 
ISWorld Net Virtual Meeting Center (VMC)
http://www.isworld.org/vmc

The slides associated with this transcript are the 
full record of this conference. The slides
are available from the VMC web site. 

Participants
Jill Slater, University of Denver, USA, jislater@du.edu
Lee Allen, NTT Multimedia Communications Laboratories, USA, lee@nttlabs.com
Elizabeth Churchill, FX Palo Alto Laboratory Inc, USA, churchill@pal.xerox.com
Daniel Mittleman, DePaul University, USA, danny@cs.depaul.edu
Kregg Aytes, Idaho State University, USA, aytekreg@isu.edu
Paulo Nunes de Abreu, groupVision Portugal, Portugal, groupvision@ip.pt
Rahmat M.Samik-Ibrahim, VLSM-TJT, Singapore, rms46@geocities.com
Astrid Lipp, Georgia State University (and students), alipp@cis.gsu.edu
Anat Hovav, Claremont Graduate University, USA, anat.hovav@cgu.edu
Francis Lau, University of Alberta, Canada, flau@gpu.srv.ualberta.ca
Jean Scholtz, NIST, USA, jean.scholtz@nist.gov
Ira Monarch Software Engineering Institute (CMU), USA, iam@sei.cmu.edu
Arvind	Malhotra, USC, USA, amalhot@bus.usc.edu
Kelly Hilmer, University of Georgia, USA, khilmer@blaze.cba.uga.edu
Munir Mandviwalla, Temple University, USA (and students), mandviwm@thunder.ocis.temple.edu

ORIENTATION SESSION
3:53:05 PM Elizabeth Churchill entered the room.:
3:54:43 PM Elizabeth Churchill:Hello there
3:56:49 PM Elizabeth Churchill:Just getting my head round the technology
3:58:57 PM Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim:helo
3:59:05 PM Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim:helo
4:03:31 PM Elizabeth Churchill:Ooh testing testing
4:03:50 PM Elizabeth Churchill:Ok, many ways to send messages. Good.
4:03:51 PM Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim:It is 04:00 am here ... I will take a cup of cofee first ...
4:04:11 PM Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim:BRB
4:04:40 PM Elizabeth Churchill:I am off for tea too
4:04:55 PM Elizabeth Churchill:Back in 20 minutes for a trial run
4:05:18 PM Elizabeth Churchill:4 am !!!! Wow..
4:06:15 PM Paulo Nunes de Abreu entered the room.:
4:06:44 PM Paulo Nunes de Abreu:Hi There! Sorry I am late...
4:07:41 PM Paulo Nunes de Abreu:Hi Paul, glad to read your presentation... Can I ask a few questions?
4:08:53 PM Elizabeth Churchill:Don't think you are late....
4:09:12 PM Elizabeth Churchill:I am very excited about this
4:11:36 PM Paulo Nunes de Abreu:That's normal... I am spending 40% of my professinal life planning and running electronic meetings and the other 60% preparing a PhD dissertation
4:13:02 PM Munir Mandviwalla entered the room.:
4:13:40 PM Munir Mandviwalla:hello from philly
4:13:42 PM Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim:good morning everyone ....
4:13:54 PM Elizabeth Churchill:Paulo, was that last comment to me? Or am I missing something.
4:14:24 PM Munir Mandviwalla:the formal session will start at 5pm local time -- which is what you see on the screen
4:14:33 PM Elizabeth Churchill:Hi Munir, Good to meet you virtually.
4:14:50 PM Munir Mandviwalla:Hi Elizabeth
4:14:53 PM Paulo Nunes de Abreu:Any comments on special JMIS issue on GSS... I think some of the work there captures Gray's vision to rethink GSS research but I still think there is a clear "Ivory tower" among academics... I mean most of managers I know do not read those Academic articles... I guess that we need to address the communication between Academic and practicioners.
4:15:00 PM Munir Mandviwalla:Hi Paulo, Rahmat
4:15:32 PM Elizabeth Churchill:HI Munir
4:15:49 PM Munir Mandviwalla:Re special issue: I have not seen the special issue -- can you summarize
4:16:14 PM Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim:hello all: I do not see any prerequisite for this meeting ....
4:16:17 PM Elizabeth Churchill:I agree Paulo - about getting more communication channels opened. Various people at CH I have been wrestling with this
4:16:25 PM Paulo Nunes de Abreu:Ups... I am working on a different time lenght. I forgot that in Portugal we have changed 1- UTC!!!
4:16:42 PM Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim:I am a layperson, do not realy know what GSS is
4:17:21 PM Elizabeth Churchill:Me too Rahmat. This is going to be very interesting.
4:17:46 PM Paulo Nunes de Abreu:JMIS GSS issue: I am so sorry left it at my research centre. Nunamaker and others wrote the opening article 1001 unaswered research questions on GSS
4:18:46 PM Munir Mandviwalla:Thanks Paulo. I think the GSS field will need a paradigm change if we are successfully going to change our ways
4:19:15 PM Munir Mandviwalla:by the way, I want to make sure all of you who are here can use the refresh command (see next)
4:20:22 PM Munir Mandviwalla:When there are a lot of people online,setting the refresh rate to your preference will makes things less jumpy -- back to GSS
4:20:26 PM Elizabeth Churchill:Ok.
4:21:25 PM Munir Mandviwalla:re special issue: do you think that GSS research can successfully change?
4:21:30 PM Elizabeth Churchill:I am assuming 10 or 15 is good - being new to the technology I was following your lead :-)
4:21:47 PM Paulo Nunes de Abreu:That's a good example of electronic facilitation Munir... Thanks.What rate do you recommend?
4:22:26 PM Munir Mandviwalla:re refresh: it depends on your computer, network connection, and so on. Sorry no magic number. Most people find 10 or 15 comfortable.
4:22:44 PM Paulo Nunes de Abreu:GSS research needs to change! otherwise who will care about it?
4:24:08 PM Paulo Nunes de Abreu:Yes, I agree. In Portugal I am trying collaborative research!
4:24:09 PM Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim:Munir: would you please inform me a quick GSS-101 ? what is it ? is email included ? lotus notes ? VMC ?
4:25:54 PM Munir Mandviwalla:rahmat, yes to all, the phrase gss in MIS usually means structured face to face meetings using computer support
4:26:00 PM Elizabeth Churchill:Great questions....was about to compose same myself.
4:26:15 PM Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim:synchronous only ?
4:27:07 PM Munir Mandviwalla:Traditional GSS research started from face to face meeting facilitation -- so it started from synchronous -- now the term is diluted and some use it as equivalent to groupware
4:27:35 PM Elizabeth Churchill:Ah, that makes sense.
4:28:05 PM Daniel Mittleman entered the room.:
4:28:12 PM Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim:Thank you: but, is there any GSS out side there ? Lotus Notes ? IRC ?
4:28:17 PM Munir Mandviwalla:Hi Daniel
4:28:36 PM Elizabeth Churchill:But there is also support for reviewing work and discussions?
4:28:40 PM Munir Mandviwalla:Rahmat, don't understand the question
4:29:09 PM Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim:Munir: I mean GSS in real life .. or in real business
4:29:22 PM Munir Mandviwalla:Elizabeth, yes -- some would say that is outside GSS or better yet GDSS -- others would say it is part of the original vision
4:29:33 PM Francis Lau entered the room.:
4:29:42 PM Munir Mandviwalla:Hi Francis!
4:30:06 PM Francis Lau:Hello folks
4:30:13 PM Munir Mandviwalla:Rahmat: last I heard Notes had 20 million seats though that sounds very high
4:31:01 PM Elizabeth Churchill:Thanks Munir - I must get this special issue that was mentioned earlier.
4:31:03 PM Ira Monarch entered the room.:
4:31:29 PM Munir Mandviwalla:Francis and Daniel, we are just chatting about defintions, please feel free to jump in
4:31:32 PM Elizabeth Churchill:GDSS - Group Decision Support Systems?
4:31:35 PM Munir Mandviwalla:Hi Ira
4:32:45 PM Ira Monarch:Whatever the number of Notes seats, how much do we know about what's going on in organizations that are using it?
4:33:19 PM Paulo Nunes de Abreu:On GSS in real-life. I don't think we should get to much restricted here. An excell spreadsheet can be made as a GSS tool in chaufered mode... I think GroupSystems offers a great support for GSS computer support but there are many instances when i use only the shared screen on meetings.
4:33:20 PM Munir Mandviwalla:Ira, good point. What do you think is going on? Others?
4:33:35 PM Francis Lau:I have been asked by my European colleagues to look at CSCW instead of GDSS, what do you think?
4:34:55 PM Elizabeth Churchill:Hi Ira, great question. There seems to be a lot of hype, but I have seen very few good field studies. Perhaps I am looking in the wrong places?
4:34:58 PM Francis Lau:Hello, where's everybody? something I said?
4:35:06 PM Munir Mandviwalla:Francis, sometimes the distinctions are meaningless - I think I personally am happy to be in all camps. Each has something to offer.
4:35:06 PM Munir Mandviwalla:Francis, sometimes the distinctions are meaningless - I think I personally am happy to be in all camps. Each has something to offer.
4:35:14 PM Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim:Hello all: for myself, I realy need two portable things: - a ticketing and tracking system - a searching engine for mail mail folder It has to be portable at office, home, notebook, etc ....
4:35:14 PM Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim:Hello all: for myself, I realy need two portable things: - a ticketing and tracking system - a searching engine for mail mail folder It has to be portable at office, home, notebook, etc ....
4:35:34 PM Paulo Nunes de Abreu:personally I would like to here about differences between CSCW and GDSS...
4:35:42 PM Elizabeth Churchill:Hi Francis.......
4:35:46 PM Francis Lau:But I was told there are distinct bodies of literature from CSCW that are different from GDSS studies
4:35:59 PM Ira Monarch:Our experience at SEI has been to purchase Notes and then try to figure out how to use it -- sometimes finding out that it can't provide what was expected e.g., enough programmability in email.
4:36:05 PM Francis Lau:Hi Elizabeth
4:36:42 PM Daniel Mittleman:Very frustrating chat feature. I am trying to catch up on the discussion by reading from the beginning and every 10 seconds the screen refreshes and bumps me to the current comments. I think I will give up
4:37:13 PM Ira Monarch:If anyone knows of Notes field studies aside from the Orlikowski ones, I'd appreciate hearing about it.
4:37:50 PM Daniel Mittleman:thakns
4:38:06 PM Munir Mandviwalla:Daniel, the refresh can be frustrating. Please set it to your preference. Reading the history will be annoying. To do that set it zero.
4:38:13 PM Paulo Nunes de Abreu:Ira, I am working with the second largest Portuguese company. They have Notes...
4:38:13 PM Paulo Nunes de Abreu:Ira, I am working with the second largest Portuguese company. They have Notes...
4:40:05 PM Paulo Nunes de Abreu:This company I am involved with, an major utilities corporation. They have a funny story. Notes started hapzardly in several different departments and now they are trying to create a big picture for it. on thing is granted. the quality of the technology has nothing to do with the success of it...
4:40:48 PM Daniel Mittleman:Frances, yes there is a different body of literature for CSCW (though some overlap). The literature is very valuable (as are the conferences). But I find the conferences tend to focus more on building fancy toys and less on understanding the social-psych implications of their use.
4:41:01 PM Munir Mandviwalla:Paulo and Ira: I think Notes is on the way out -- too much complexity -- internet based products provide 80% of the functionality for 10% of the effort
4:41:07 PM Ira Monarch:Paulo, what problems are you running into?
4:41:56 PM Paulo Nunes de Abreu:well, to tell you a long story short... the usual patterns found in literature but...
4:42:05 PM Elizabeth Churchill:...well the success of technology may have *something* to do with the technology itself, but it is certainly true that the social psychological and managerial aspects are too often under estimated.
4:42:10 PM Ira Monarch:Munir, What about shared informatin spaces? Do you think BSCW provides a large percentage of what Notes provides?
4:42:25 PM Daniel Mittleman:Munir, please remember that Notes is a development platform not an end user product. Notes enables fairly easy coding of a wide array of groupware applications. This will have continuing value
4:42:46 PM Paulo Nunes de Abreu:We have found that 'conceptualizing the organization' is the key element.
4:42:58 PM Jill Slater entered the room.:
4:43:10 PM Munir Mandviwalla:Hi Jill
4:43:38 PM Elizabeth Churchill:I agree Daniel - about the fancy toys. Bells and whistles technologies. There are vyer interesting field work reports by people like Christian Heath and Paul Luff on technologies and how they change the ways in which people interact.
4:43:56 PM Ira Monarch:Paulo, What's involved in conceptualizing the organization?
4:44:07 PM Paulo Nunes de Abreu:Daniel, 100% true. I believe Notes is more like orgware, not groupware
4:45:00 PM Francis Lau:Is Lotus Notes moving toward a thin client
4:45:12 PM Paul Gray entered the room.:
4:45:21 PM Munir Mandviwalla:As all of you can see, this medium has no structure. To make it work we need to cooperate so lets address all the existing issues before we move to new ones. I am not in control here so please feel free to jump in to address a question
4:45:40 PM Ira Monarch:Liz, aren't the studies by Heath and Luff primarily on air traffic control and synchronous communication?
4:45:40 PM Ira Monarch:Liz, aren't the studies by Heath and Luff primarily on air traffic control and synchronous communication?
4:47:13 PM Daniel Mittleman entered the room.:
4:47:42 PM Munir Mandviwalla:Liz, did we address your question about GDSS - CSCW?
4:48:00 PM Elizabeth Churchill:Hi Ira, Yes they have done some studies on that but Christian (and I think Paul) also looked at how video changes communications. Some of their ideas are interesting, although not necessarily directly transferable (I would never suggest that) to other technologies which support comunication at distance. I just like the focus on the user end of things - users andf their work practices.
4:48:02 PM Munir Mandviwalla:GDSS is more business school and more interested in meetings and decision making
4:48:23 PM Daniel Mittleman:Frances, The Notes Domino server (a web server) supports thin client (web browser client) of Notes.
4:48:59 PM Francis Lau:But if we are broadening GDSS then surely CSCW should be part of it?
4:49:01 PM Elizabeth Churchill:Hi Munir, I am getting a better sense of it - carry on with the matter at hand and I will do the recommended reading of the special issue. Thanks!
4:49:26 PM Paulo Nunes de Abreu:I can live with the notion that GDSS is an whole inside a bigger whole: CSCW
4:49:36 PM Munir Mandviwalla:Francis -- as they would say that is the 64000 dollar question
4:49:54 PM Munir Mandviwalla:Hi Paul, we are as you see in the thick of it
4:50:21 PM Ira Monarch:Liz, yes I agree that the their focus on the user end of things and work practices is the right way to go.
4:50:27 PM Daniel Mittleman:Paulo, I tend to think of GDSS being inside GSS which in turn is inside of Groupware. I place CSCW somewhere overlapping but don't directly address the term.
4:51:06 PM Paul Gray:Checking the Users list, I see we have atg least 8 people already here. Good. Paul
4:51:47 PM Paulo Nunes de Abreu:Daniel: 100% agree. I don't think too much of the notion of CSCW either...
4:51:58 PM Elizabeth Churchill:Hello Paul. Welcome.
4:52:25 PM Ira Monarch:Daniel, doesn't CSCW pay more attention to the social aspects of collaboration which is important, no?
4:52:56 PM Francis Lau:The challenge with GDSS, GSS and CSCW is that I am currently studying a system that has features for collaboration, communication, etc. but which literature do you draw on when writing up your paper? I submitted one paper using GSS literature but was told I should have included CSCW .....
4:52:57 PM Astrid Lipp entered the room.:
4:53:27 PM Daniel Mittleman:I have been taught that, but my experience at the CSCW conferences has been the opposite. Just lots of tool building within a void of understanding.
4:53:39 PM Daniel Mittleman:Hi Astrid
4:53:59 PM Jill Slater:I have a question about the reference disciplines. Paul, you mentioned that GSS is at the intersection of computer science, behavioral science, and management science. Why limit the reference disciplines? I am very interested in organizational science, especially the relationship between the culture of the organization and its acceptance/use of groupware.
4:54:14 PM Paulo Nunes de Abreu:CSCW, it is a computer centring designation: Computer Support for... instead of Cooperative Work with Support of Cmputers!
4:54:22 PM Ira Monarch:Daniel, what about the Suchmann debates with workflow technologists?
4:54:34 PM Paul Gray:I am so pleased to see the international character of this meeting.
4:54:54 PM Kregg Aytes entered the room.:
4:55:16 PM Daniel Mittleman:Frances, maybe the answer lies in a good typology of groupware and gss. Then the literature would shape to the typology. I think there is a typology out there. But it shows up in different peoples works under different labelling so it has been lost. (I can expand if anyone is interested.)
4:55:31 PM Paul Gray:If you have not yet seen the input for this meeting, you should have an e-mail message from me pointing you to the right URL's.
4:55:42 PM Astrid Lipp:Hi, Danny, and everyone else!
4:56:04 PM Daniel Mittleman:Ira, I am not familiar with that. Clearly there is very good work in the CSCW community. I have always been impressed
4:56:22 PM Daniel Mittleman:Hi Kregg
4:57:30 PM Arvind Malhotra entered the room.:
4:57:39 PM Munir Mandviwalla:Hi, folks, before we start please pay attention to the following (with apologies to the people who have been here a while)
4:58:12 PM Munir Mandviwalla:To read the history set the refresh rate to zero and scroll down
4:58:34 PM Munir Mandviwalla:if the screen is jumping too much set the refresh rate high -- e.g., 20 seconds
4:58:37 PM Paulo Nunes de Abreu:Paul: I would like to hear your comments on the "ivory tower" where most academic literature rests and the need to communicate with managers who likely to use GSS in the first place and don't know how to?



MAIN SESSION
4:58:45 PM Paul Gray:It is now 2:00PM PDT, so we can begin. Our first agenda item is: What have we missed that is relevant, needs to be done.
4:59:25 PM Jean Scholtz entered the room.:
4:59:45 PM Daniel Mittleman:Paul, do you mean what was missed in the planning for this meeting, or what was missed in GSS research over the last decade?
4:59:50 PM Astrid Lipp:One question one might ask is who is using which type of groupware.
4:59:50 PM Astrid Lipp:One question one might ask is who is using which type of groupware.
5:00:21 PM Ira Monarch:Or even who is using any type of groupware?
5:00:52 PM Jill Slater:I believe that we need to expand the study of how groupware is used in an organization. That may mean we have to change the emphasis from synchronous to asynchronous use, (e.g. Lotus Notes).
5:00:59 PM Francis Lau:I wonder our earlier discussion about GDSS, GSS and CSCW can be included
5:01:00 PM Astrid Lipp:The result of answering my question and Ira's might show us which niches are not filled.
5:01:25 PM Paul Gray:I'm not sure that we have enough at this time that managers haven't seen. If we invent new things, then we can use the Computer press (Computerworld, etc.) to trumpet our results.
5:01:31 PM Kregg Aytes:Yes, I agree with Jill - we need to see how the technology is used in the context of other group work.
5:01:39 PM Ira Monarch:Paulo not just to communicate with managers but interact with them -- a sort of participatory action research.
5:02:03 PM Paulo Nunes de Abreu:paul: Do you believe managers read Computerworld? I mean CEOs?
5:02:26 PM Paul Gray:Dan: The issue is what was missed over the last decade--and what we can do moving forward.
5:02:36 PM Paulo Nunes de Abreu:Ira: 100% agree with you... that's what we are trying to do in Portugal
5:02:39 PM Jean Scholtz:I'm currently involved in setting up some groupware for manufacturing groups. And I'm curious about what others have found about differences between groups
5:03:13 PM Daniel Mittleman:One major issues missed has been a solid grounding in theory, me thinks.
5:03:22 PM Kregg Aytes:Jean - in what sense do you mean "differences between groups?"
5:03:24 PM Paul Gray:Paulo: If it's in Computerworld and similar journals, Business Week and Fortune and the Economist pick it up. They are part of the computer press
5:04:09 PM Arvind Malhotra:I think that Paul has pointed out the three theoretical aspects to studying GDSS.
5:04:29 PM Daniel Mittleman:Arvind, please expand.
5:04:51 PM Paul Gray:I agree that there is little theory. Theory is much harder.
5:05:01 PM Paulo Nunes de Abreu:Yes Paul: How many articles on GSS in the Economist?
5:05:16 PM Arvind Malhotra:Dan - the three aspects that need to be considered concurrently are behavioral, computer science, and management science
5:05:49 PM Jill Slater:The study of groupware meshes well with the work of organizational learning although I know of little integrated work. If work is distributed nationally or globally, then communication must often be electronic. Thus, exploration of work-related issues might be done electronically. I realize that Lotus Notes allows this and people use the tool for this purpose, but I do not know of any situations where people use the tool to share and learn new information.
5:06:27 PM Paulo Nunes de Abreu:On theoretical background: I suggest the post-modernist reading of organizations.
5:06:52 PM Jill Slater:Arvind -- why not organizational science too?
5:06:58 PM Arvind Malhotra:We are currently trying to study use of collaborative systems for virtual interorganizational teams.
5:07:24 PM Ira Monarch:Jill I don't think we know nearly enough how Notes is being used period.
5:07:36 PM Paul Gray:Jill: Part of my argument on relevance is that there is so little published in the IS academic literature on Notes and even less on Domino.
5:07:46 PM Daniel Mittleman:We are currently studying the use of collaborative systems by the US Navy on ships at sea.
5:08:05 PM Arvind Malhotra:Jill I agree that Org Scie aspects are equally important (if not the most)
5:08:05 PM Arvind Malhotra:Jill I agree that Org Scie aspects are equally important (if not the most)
5:08:15 PM Ira Monarch:Paulo, who have you found interesting of the post modernists -- I like Latour and Callon.
5:08:32 PM Daniel Mittleman:Paul, the bigger issue (that probably can't be fixed) is that technology is evolving faster than our ability to study it.
5:08:51 PM Jill Slater:Paul, I agree. Long-term case studies seem appropriate to understand evolving use.
5:09:08 PM Paul Gray:Can I ask people to send messages on research projects they need done? A list based on current work was included in the recent special issue of JMIS
5:09:28 PM Kregg Aytes:To the question "What have we missed?" I would say that we have spent much of our effort "justifying" the use of GSS. Now, maybe it's time to move to some descriptive research that looks at groupware use in context. From that, we will certainly be able to pose further new and interesting questions.
5:09:28 PM Paulo Nunes de Abreu:Ira: post modernist thinking is refreshing with many different insights on organizational life...
5:09:42 PM Ira Monarch:Daniel which group is studying Navy collaborative systems?
5:09:44 PM Arvind Malhotra:Paul I think I agree with Dan.. we cant study what is moving so far ahead of us. Unless of course we adopt the Arizona model and build the collaborative system
5:10:24 PM Daniel Mittleman:I agree with Kregg. One issue that needs more research attention is: diffusion of groupware in organizations. How does it happen? How can it be made to happen more effectively?
5:10:38 PM Ira Monarch:Or use the collaborative systems that are readily available like BSCW or NetMeeting.
5:10:52 PM Astrid Lipp:IS research would not be possible if people weren't willing to take snapshots of moving targets.
5:11:01 PM Daniel Mittleman:Ira, it is the CMI group of out Arizona. Bob Briggs, Mark Adkins, Jay Nunamaker, and I have all published on it in varying combinations.
5:11:06 PM Munir Mandviwalla:as i was telling my students, by the time a researcher figures out that a technology needs to be studied and then gets it published, the technology is obsolete
5:11:06 PM Paulo Nunes de Abreu:I agree with Kregg: it is important to move forward a bit form justification
5:11:42 PM Paul Gray:Arvind has put his finger on it. We have been too reactive. We have 3 year lead times to publication plus a couple of years for a project. By the time we publish we study history.
5:11:48 PM Astrid Lipp:Practitioners such as Coleman have set up models to predict groupware implementation success. I don't know of any empirical testing of such models to see if they're actually valid.
5:11:49 PM Daniel Mittleman:Arvind. It turns out that Arizona is finding even building the system doesn't let you stay ahead.
5:12:07 PM Arvind Malhotra:The technology might evolve but theimplications of the tech. can be studied for a long time. Comments?
5:12:23 PM Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim:I am currently involved in a real virtual organization pushing a national public policy by using 6 levels of electronic mailing lists. It is a real thing, and I am not do it as a participant or a researcher.
5:12:34 PM Jill Slater:Arvind and all. What about the idea that people use a small porportion of available capabilities. The organization I am studying has evolved little beyond discussion databases in two years.
5:12:35 PM Paulo Nunes de Abreu:Paul: this poses the problem of the academic ivory tower again...
5:12:36 PM Kregg Aytes:So if we start looking at groupware in context, it seems that we may be even farther behind - even though I think we need to study it in context.
5:13:27 PM Arvind Malhotra:Jill I have found the smae thing.. the orgs. I am studying are hi-tech and they havent even gotten to good ol discussion databases
5:13:34 PM Ira Monarch:I think Jill makes the right point. We are not making use of the technology that has been available for some time.
5:14:16 PM Kelly Hilmer entered the room.:
5:14:20 PM Daniel Mittleman:Arvind, in theory what you say makes sense. But the technology is developing epochally (if that is a word). Each generation is so different from the previous it is unclear whether we can generalize across generations. Further, we are getting so much more sophisticated in our ability to use groupware that software features we thought were ineffective a few years ago we are now finding out are effective.
5:14:32 PM Paulo Nunes de Abreu:The manager needs to know how to use GSS
5:14:41 PM Paul Gray:Are several of you arguing that the reality of use lags the capabilities the vendors are putting out there?
5:14:52 PM Daniel Mittleman:Hey Kelly
5:15:00 PM Francis Lau:The community health research training program that I am studying has the same problem not being able to move beyond communication, sharing of information to the next steps of knowledge creation. To me, the challenge is how they can move to the next stage?
5:15:00 PM Jill Slater:What haven't we done in groupware? I think we need to understand why existing technology is used minimally.
5:15:20 PM Anat Hovav entered the room.:
5:15:32 PM Ira Monarch:Daniel, who is the we that is getting so much more sophisticated and with what technologies?
5:15:32 PM Ira Monarch:Daniel, who is the we that is getting so much more sophisticated and with what technologies?
5:15:50 PM Jean Scholtz:I think that there are some real issues in trying to do long term studies in organizations - even if you are a member of that organization. IT's also difficult to distinguish between users adapting to the software and what they'd really like to use groupware for.
5:15:50 PM Jean Scholtz:I think that there are some real issues in trying to do long term studies in organizations - even if you are a member of that organization. IT's also difficult to distinguish between users adapting to the software and what they'd really like to use groupware for.
5:16:29 PM Kregg Aytes:I have been teaching an MBA class on groupware for several years now. What the managers that come into my class want to know (after they learn what groupware is), is: 1) when should I use it, 2) how do I make it successful, and 3) what do I need to look out for (i.e., how will it change how my teams work).
5:16:40 PM Jill Slater:Francis, about knowledge creation -- existing cultural norms do not support this (at least in U.S.)
5:16:50 PM Ira Monarch:Paul, not just lag but very little use period.
5:17:16 PM Arvind Malhotra:It seems that it is more important to study the organization issues around a technology rather than the technology itself.
5:17:58 PM Jill Slater:Arvind, I agree wholeheartedly!
5:18:01 PM Ira Monarch:Arvind, both need to be studied because the technology does open up new possibilities.
5:18:31 PM Paul Gray:Ira's comment of little use may imply that we have not created something people want. Here is a major research problem--how do you move people so they get benefits?
5:18:36 PM Daniel Mittleman:Ira, well I guess the "we" is "me"  I know that as a GSS facilitator I can do a lot more things with the software (usually I use GroupSystems). And I teach these more sophisticated techniques at workshops and conferences. In the early Groupsystems days, facilitators were taught to brainstorm, categorize, vote, explore. Now we know there is much much more possible.
5:18:45 PM Jean Scholtz:Kregg - I think the questions your managers ask are quite valid and issues that we should be looking at.
5:18:46 PM Arvind Malhotra:Jill I would disagree some of the organizations are using very creatively to caoture share and generate knowledge in the US (Buckman, E&Y etc.)
5:19:20 PM Elizabeth Churchill:I agree with Ira that both need to be studied. The technology can (and usually) does change the work practices.
5:19:26 PM Daniel Mittleman:Kregg, many of my masters students this quarter are doing projects on building a business case for implementing groupware. That topics seemed to have caught their attention when I mentioned it.
5:19:53 PM Francis Lau:Seems like the area of knowledge creation through GSS should be explored then?
5:20:28 PM Ira Monarch:Daniel, there's a kind of chicken and egg problem with building a business case.
5:20:30 PM Paul Gray:The trick is to devise technology that is matched to use. We talk about evangelizing for implementation of IS systems. Do we know how to do that for groupware?
5:20:42 PM Arvind Malhotra:Francis we are studying a GSS type system for interorganizational knowledge sharing and reuse
5:20:59 PM Daniel Mittleman:Ira, how do you mean chicken and egg? Seems fairly straight forward to me.
5:21:24 PM Astrid Lipp:I'm teaching a master's course on collaborative technology this quarter. Students may write a case study of how a particular organization is using coll. technology. I am looking forward to reading
5:21:26 PM Paul Gray:Let's turn to the next item--Needed GSS capabilities
5:21:36 PM Ira Monarch:But Paul, technology has the capability of inventing new uses or at least co-evolving new uses with organizational innovation.
5:22:12 PM Daniel Mittleman:Paul, Bob Briggs current research is on the topic of evangelizing. Our HICSS 98 paper touched on it. It is a variation of the executive and operational sponser concept.
5:22:23 PM Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim:I need two things: (1) a searching engine for my mail box (2) a tracking and followup system
5:22:26 PM Kregg Aytes:Ahh... building a business case for groupware. That's a project I also use in my class. However, when the proposed system is going to make changes to the organization if it's successfully implemented, implemementing groupware becomes somewhat of an act of faith, at least at this point. That's why I think that research will need to move into descriptive mode for a while until we better understand the issues.
5:22:35 PM Jill Slater:Paul, there is much talk in the organization I am studying about potential uses -- very little happens. Research questions stem around why. What do we need to know about group use versus individual?
5:23:32 PM Daniel Mittleman:GSS capabilities: in the same place arena we are in fairly good shape. In the different place arena, we are still in primary school
5:24:04 PM Paul Gray:When thinking about what what needs to be done, we should be able to come up with concepts and try them out by inventing software and testing it inhouse. Many of us have Groupsystems or Lotus or ...
5:24:14 PM Jill Slater:Why are there few GDSS tools in commercial groupware (lotus notes?)
5:24:21 PM Daniel Mittleman:Paulo, I'd love to. But I am struggling to keep up with this conversation.  I have it on line from my web site (I think). Send me email after the conference and I will give you the pointer to it.
5:24:44 PM Paulo Nunes de Abreu:Yes: the face to face is still crucial for knowledge exchnage
5:25:15 PM Arvind Malhotra:We have studied a great deal about the uses of GSS as a decision making tool but very little as a sense-making tool i.e. knowledge sharing and creating
5:25:15 PM Munir Mandviwalla:I think the face to face concept needs to re-enginereed
5:25:37 PM Ira Monarch:Paul I agree but getting an organization to try things for almost real is difficult.
5:25:49 PM Daniel Mittleman:Jill,. my theory on this is that we have been forcing people to exit what they normally use and come use our groupware. When we change our model and embed groupware into regularly used software (eg MS-Office) then it will catch on big.
5:26:13 PM Paulo Nunes de Abreu:Arvind: that's true
5:26:16 PM Paul Gray:In our briefing charts, we included a list of 'innovative' uses. Are these good ones? Are there better ones. Do you have comments?
5:26:45 PM Paulo Nunes de Abreu:Ira: That's the point for collaborative research!
5:26:54 PM Daniel Mittleman:Munir, I agree that there is room to reengineer ftf gss. But if we reengineer it, we probably should make the software anytime/anyplace.
5:27:05 PM Arvind Malhotra:Munir weve been struggling weith the same issue - conceptualization of face-to-face. How do you perceive the reconceptualization?
5:27:21 PM Ira Monarch:Paul what is meant by intercultural meetings?
5:27:33 PM Paul Gray:I like Dan's comment about building it into existing software. Again, therfe is an education task to get people to use it.
5:28:32 PM Daniel Mittleman:Paul, When the software solves a real problem for people, they seem to take the effort to learn it. That said, the military concept of "exercises" is a great idea for groupware.
5:28:33 PM Francis Lau:I agree with Dan's comment about regular use. The virtual groups I have been studying use whatever technologies that suit them to communicate and collaborate and share knowledge including phone, fax, email, webboard, etc. they don't really distinguish between GSS vs. office tools that much as long as they can get on with their work. so we need to integrate GSS into the main office tools to get greater diffusion
5:28:35 PM Paul Gray:Follow up on previous message: Most people still use Microsoft Word at its version 2 level. So the task is big.
5:29:29 PM Ira Monarch:Daniel, can the military notion of exercises by applied in other kinds of organizations?
5:29:36 PM Kregg Aytes:About building group functions into existing software - that's certainly Microsoft's stated strategy! And I'm finding some uses of their tools (e.g., "comment" function in Word) to be highly useful.
5:29:37 PM Elizabeth Churchill:I am having trouble with the concept of "re-engineering" face to face communication. What is meant by this term exactly?
5:29:51 PM Paul Gray:Ira: An intercultural meeting, for example, is a meeting between U.S., Korean, and Brazilian businesses. Each comes from a different meeting culture.
5:30:03 PM Daniel Mittleman:Given Frances's statement. I see lots of value in building collaborative DCOM or CORBA objects that can be embedded into other software. I see that as the software engineering way to go with groupware.
5:30:16 PM Paulo Nunes de Abreu:francis: Do you thing that would solve it?
5:30:29 PM Daniel Mittleman:Ira, I am not sure.
5:30:49 PM Elizabeth Churchill:I also agree with Francis - that peole tend to use what is available - patching together tools that work.
5:31:05 PM Kelly Hilmer:I have seen and done studies that show the obvious that we can with GSS groups can exchange a lot of info, but how well is the info processing done to help with decision making?
5:31:08 PM Francis Lau:Dan's suggestion can solve the problem as long as users don't have to learn different conventions ie. standardized interfaces ...
5:31:33 PM Paulo Nunes de Abreu:Most of technologies features are not used by regular users...
5:31:35 PM Ira Monarch:Paul, there are more local intercultural meetings in design and development projects in the clash of experise and disciplines involved.
5:31:41 PM Munir Mandviwalla:No re-engineer ftf conversation, re-engineer our view of it to go beyond decision making such as sense making, socialization, political goals, and so on
5:32:09 PM Daniel Mittleman:Munir, excellent point.
5:32:17 PM Paulo Nunes de Abreu:Munir: you got it!
5:32:23 PM Arvind Malhotra:Bingo Munir
5:32:33 PM Paul Gray:The next topic on the agend is tying to practice. Part of this is the communication between academics and non-academics. A couple of you are in industry. Your comments?
5:33:03 PM Daniel Mittleman:one fascinating aspect of intercultural is that decision making paradigms are so different. And much gdss software has American rational decision making assumptions built in
5:35:43 PM Paulo Nunes de Abreu:Collaboarative set up: we have to give up control
5:36:04 PM Jill Slater:I do not believe in the "build it and they will come" strategy. Technology has to fit an existing need or one that the culture can discover and apply. As organizations become more interested in tapping into knowlege in all corners (anti-hierarchy) groupware may be perceived as useful for sharing, spreading, creating knowledge. Organizational learning and systems perspective may be a new avenue for GSS research.
5:36:05 PM Daniel Mittleman:Elizabeth, when we started doing distributed facilitation using GroupSystems we began to realize how much process communication had been happening outside the tools in a ftf environment that we had never realized before. Take away those channels and the absense of the communicaiton was obvious.
5:36:07 PM Jill Slater:I do not believe in the "build it and they will come" strategy. Technology has to fit an existing need or one that the culture can discover and apply. As organizations become more interested in tapping into knowlege in all corners (anti-hierarchy) groupware may be perceived as useful for sharing, spreading, creating knowledge. Organizational learning and systems perspective may be a new avenue for GSS research.
5:36:17 PM Ira Monarch:But what are the negotiations like then?
5:36:43 PM Kregg Aytes:Paulo - so it sounds like you're "collaborative research" is consistent with my "descriptive research?"
5:36:53 PM Paulo Nunes de Abreu:Collaborative research: roots in cooperative inquiry: Researcher and subject do not exist as such. Only co-reseracher and co-subjects
5:37:16 PM Daniel Mittleman:I agree with Jill (re: non build it and they will come comment)
5:37:27 PM Francis Lau:Ah, the collaborative approach leads to action research, which is a methodological issue not discussed much in GSS literature; some claimed they do action research but not explained how or what they had done. Some reviewers complained AR complicates ressearch findings. Any comments?
5:38:04 PM Ira Monarch:Paulo I would still like to know more about the actual experiences along with the theory.
5:38:26 PM Daniel Mittleman:Our Navy work is action research. I get queasy whenever I think about having to write up the methodology section of papers about it.
5:38:31 PM Ira Monarch:Agreed Francis.
5:38:51 PM Paulo Nunes de Abreu:Action research could be used as a good excuse for bad research. it is difficult to do it!
5:39:22 PM Jill Slater:Threads would be great, or break-out rooms.
5:39:38 PM Jean Scholtz:I'm not that familiar with action research - could someone expand a little on that
5:39:52 PM Daniel Mittleman:Jill, we have break out rooms but it is tough enough to follow this. Threads would be great.
5:40:01 PM Munir Mandviwalla:Break out rooms are available -- look at the list of rooms
5:40:03 PM Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim:jill: email (async) will be greater!
5:40:14 PM Kelly Hilmer:Action research may complicate findings. I've been "taught" the lab experiment way. But does not the facilitator cause changes in action.
5:40:58 PM Daniel Mittleman:Action research comes out of the education literature (they do it in studying schools). It is the researcher going in to the envrionment and implementing a change and then observing the impacts of the implementation. (One sentence definition of a very complex subject)
5:41:00 PM Ira Monarch:Maybe we need to think of what has been started here in more asynchronous terms, then threads and breakout conversations become more doable.
5:41:14 PM Francis Lau:We all acknowledge the importance of facilitators in GDSS. We found that role becomes critical with our virtual teams, but again, that is really getting into action research which many reviewers frown on as muddling up the results. I don't know how else one can do it .... suggestions?
5:41:17 PM Astrid Lipp:Action research (applied research) can be used like a case study to identify variables to study later empirically.
5:41:24 PM Paulo Nunes de Abreu:the theory behind action. That's the difficult part. hence the need to conceptualize what we are addressing and what we are trying to do...
5:42:24 PM Paul Gray:If you read the papers that started this session, you will find that our lab research doesn't tie to practice. How can we improve our relevance?
5:42:34 PM Jill Slater:Ira, that sound good, plenty of ideas for follow-up asyncronously.
5:42:44 PM Astrid Lipp:There is an excellent website on action research. Michael Myers contributed an online MISQ article to it.
5:43:05 PM Ira Monarch:Action research does tie to the relevance question -- that's why we have to give it a shot.
5:44:06 PM Francis Lau:Anyone came across papers on GSS studies using action research and explicitly mentioned facilitators as action researchers (or interventions)?
5:44:14 PM Paul Gray:Particpants: Let's get out of discussing details and start getting to the isse of this form: Is GSS relevant?
5:44:44 PM Ira Monarch:Is it GSS vs action research?
5:45:01 PM Daniel Mittleman:Of course GSS is relevant. I was surprised you put together a slide suggesting otherwise
5:45:09 PM Jill Slater:Paul, relevance mandates moving from the lab to the organization. Question appears to be how to study GSS in org. context.
5:45:33 PM Daniel Mittleman:Jill, action research is a very good answer to that question.
5:45:37 PM Elizabeth Churchill:Let me know (by email) if/how I should send feedback.
5:46:11 PM Arvind Malhotra:Relevance lies in the eyes of the beholder
5:46:37 PM Ira Monarch:That is action research vs the traditional way gss research has been done?
5:46:45 PM Daniel Mittleman:Maybe we can draw from the lessons of the environmental psychologists who both do lab studies to test the impact of environmental variables, do surveys of people in environments, do observations of people in environments, and do action research where they manipulate the environment and try to discern what they see from a Hawthorne effect.
5:46:51 PM Francis Lau:To make it relevant we need to (a) move to the field (b) use different intensive methods (c) be action
5:46:51 PM Francis Lau:To make it relevant we need to (a) move to the field (b) use different intensive methods (c) be action oriented (d) may be even critical in perspective ...
5:46:54 PM Paulo Nunes de Abreu:I agree: maybe we need to go and work as managers in real organizations
5:46:54 PM Paulo Nunes de Abreu:I agree: maybe we need to go and work as managers in real organizations
5:47:01 PM Astrid Lipp:Relevance can also be achieved by examining practice and practitioner writings for questions to study empirically.
5:47:01 PM Astrid Lipp:Relevance can also be achieved by examining practice and practitioner writings for questions to study empirically.
5:48:26 PM Jill Slater:Daniel, I agree -- as long as the people in organization context maintains a systems perspective (culture, environment).
5:48:30 PM Astrid Lipp:Perhaps relevance can also involve moving from the organization back to the lab, Jill.
5:48:56 PM Arvind Malhotra:I rely heavily of Info.Week, Datamation etc. to frame my research, hoping that it would make my research relevant.
5:49:00 PM Kelly Hilmer:Yes, GSS is relevant. (It better be, since my dissertation is going to be based on it (g)) Just think how many organizations (including schools) use it. But like was mentioned in the article, we (the researchers) need to focus on organizations (not lab rats) and GSS that is used in these organizations.
5:49:04 PM Ira Monarch:But doesn't the question of relevance fly in the face of the way gss research has been done? A sort of a Kuhnian revolution?
5:49:05 PM Kregg Aytes:I sense that we agree that groupware research needs to move to the organizational context. But if we move there, what questions should we be answering? How about what groupware "does" to the organization?
5:49:21 PM Daniel Mittleman:Obviously we have to do both lab and field work. Maybe the better question is how do we ourselves bridge between the two?
5:49:22 PM Munir Mandviwalla:Astrid, please elaborate -- lab work if it is not cumulative will not be relevant
5:49:39 PM Paulo Nunes de Abreu:Dany: Don't thing that's parctical with GSS
5:50:16 PM Astrid Lipp:My guess is that some of the same variable studied by GSS research may need to be studied in the field and with new groupware products.
5:50:23 PM Ira Monarch:Astrid or creating collaboratories inside the organization.
5:50:35 PM Munir Mandviwalla:Ira, we are trying to legislate a kuhnian revolution
5:51:03 PM Paulo Nunes de Abreu:can we honestly thing that a group event can be replicated (validly) in two different moments in tme?
5:51:05 PM Daniel Mittleman:Paulo, you don't think that lab, survey, observation, and action research are practical in GSS? I think it is important that as a community we be doing all of these. Maybe one researcher can't to them all...
5:51:29 PM Arvind Malhotra:Overheard at one of my company visits: Gartner Group does a better job at telling us the implications of a technology than you guys @ Univs.
5:51:59 PM Daniel Mittleman:Astrid, you provoke a thought. I don't get the sense that the research I see in GSS is in many ways connected to the commercial software that is hitting the market.
5:52:16 PM Ira Monarch:Munir, setting up labs inside organizations is possible with th new groupware technologies and results can be made cumulative.
5:52:30 PM Paulo Nunes de Abreu:yes: but bridging yourselve. You have to be commited to your research. Research is a human endeavour
5:52:52 PM Daniel Mittleman:Arvind, I believe you. We gotta find a better was of doing tech transfer of what we are learning.
5:53:26 PM Astrid Lipp:One kind of action research includes the subjects as researchers. You seem to be suggesting this, Ira.
5:53:29 PM Daniel Mittleman:Kelly, the software knows when you are being sarcastic. Its part of the AI engine
5:53:38 PM Paul Gray:Ira's comment opens up new lines of research. Most experiments are one shot, not longitudinal. Much of it is with inexperienced users. THe Navy experiment is important because it is done over time.
5:54:23 PM Ira Monarch:Astrid yes the subjects are also researchers and they might even enjoy it.
5:54:48 PM Jean Scholtz:Tech transfer is difficult when it crosses disciplines - much research software is being built by people who are researching technology, not organizational issues and behavior.
5:54:49 PM Jill Slater:Ira, labs may be feasible, but aren't we really interested in what is intenalized long-term?
5:54:53 PM Daniel Mittleman:Another interface problem. I don't notice the whisper logo and I keep responding to Kelly's whispers with public comments
5:55:12 PM Astrid Lipp:Typically, of course, not every subject, but some managers would know which variables are being studied.
5:55:38 PM Arvind Malhotra:We have worked with 3 companies using Collaborative technology to toegether design a product over a period of 7 months.. very tought but very enlightening.
5:55:41 PM Jill Slater:Jean, why not collaborate with those studying org. issues?
5:55:43 PM Paul Gray:We are nearing the end of our hour. Would each of you add a final thought and give me your input on is GBSS Research Relevant on a 1-5 scale, where 1 is very good and 5 is very bad?
5:56:09 PM Paulo Nunes de Abreu:Ira: I agree, co-researching with managers is great!
5:56:14 PM Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim:3
5:56:17 PM Ira Monarch:Jill, yse I agree. I'm using the word collaboratory metaphoricall, but inside an organization infuzed wiht collaborative technology internalization and experimentation might go hand-in-hand.
5:56:27 PM Daniel Mittleman:Paul, yes our Navy work (if that is what you are referring to) is an implementation and observation over a year in duration. It has allowed us to impact and observe the diffusion of groupware into their organization. It also has allowed us to pull from their actual needs over a dozen ideas for new GSS software (anyone want to help code?)
5:56:58 PM Elizabeth Churchill:4
5:57:18 PM Daniel Mittleman:I know how to do it. But I keep missing the whisper icon on the right margin. Why couldn't they have put the whisper icon over on the left?
5:57:28 PM Kregg Aytes:I need to go, but I'd say that much GSS research to date would rate about a 3.
5:57:34 PM Arvind Malhotra:4
5:57:39 PM Denise Haskins:entered the room.
5:57:39 PM Francis Lau:2
5:57:46 PM Jill Slater:Final thought: Very interesting brainstorming session. Would like to carry on conversations asynchronously with participants. Would like to delve deeper. Is GSS research relevant? I would give it a 2. This has been fun!!
5:57:48 PM Kregg Aytes exited chat.:
5:57:55 PM Daniel Mittleman:2
5:57:55 PM Jean Scholtz:I'd give GSS research a 3 also
5:57:56 PM Paulo Nunes de Abreu:Paul: Your work is very relevant: 2
5:57:59 PM Paul Gray:Go ahead with your feedback item whenever you want.
5:58:07 PM Kelly Hilmer:3
5:58:25 PM Astrid Lipp:Collaborative work is becoming increasingly important, and that is the focus of GSS. After year 2000 has come, it may shift to the forefront. Web interfaces will help. 4 predicted for next 5 years.
5:58:34 PM Munir Mandviwalla:Hi, before people go, please fill out the feedback form on http://ww2.cis.temple.edu/isworld/vmc/feedback.htm
5:58:35 PM Ira Monarch:Paul and Munir you're on the right track -- really enjoyed this like to keep going asychronously.
5:58:41 PM Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim:if we do not know what to do, why not use grounded theory methodology ?
5:59:45 PM Paul Gray:My clock shows 6PM. Thank you all for coming. It has been stimulating. Please fill in Munir's feedback orm. Regards Paul
5:59:47 PM Arvind Malhotra:Paul and Munir.. thanx a ton for this opportunity
5:59:58 PM Ira Monarch:I'm not sure frustrating is the right word perhaps challenging.
6:00:12 PM Munir Mandviwalla:There will be a transcript on the VMC site
6:00:43 PM Elizabeth Churchill:Challenging is a good word. So much different from ftf :-)
6:00:45 PM Daniel Mittleman:Good bye all. Am willing to continue this via a listserv or some other similar technology. Interface is frustrating, but I've enjoyed the interaction and have learned. - danny
6:00:55 PM Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim:bye
6:00:56 PM Paulo Nunes de Abreu:Appologise: Paul and Munir, your work is great!
6:01:00 PM Elizabeth Churchill:Thanks Paul. Thanks Munir.
6:01:10 PM Jean Scholtz:Thanks - have to leave. INteresting session
6:01:23 PM Kelly Hilmer:There's always the GSS-L listserv for more discussion.
6:01:27 PM Elizabeth Churchill:Bye. Very interesting.
6:01:29 PM Francis Lau:Thanks - good session
6:03:33 PM Munir Mandviwalla:Thanks for coming to philly! (virtually)