What does Nunamaker tell about the role of anonymity in groupware systems?
Traditionally the requirements gathering process documented each person’s contribution every step of the way. This stifles both innovation and criticism, since no one wanted to get a reputation for rocking the boat. To prevent this stifling of ideas Nunamker suggested anonymity during the idea-gathering phase of meetings. The anonymity was obtained by allowing each person the use of a computer during the meeting to type their contributions to the meeting, which appeared, anonymously, on everyone else’s screen.
This allowed people who tended to remain silent in meetings, from shyness or intimidation, could now share their ideas freely. It also avoided constant bickering and shooting down of hostile participants ideas.
The net effect of these meetings was to generate more and better ideas faster .
Traditionally the requirements gathering process documented each person’s contribution every step of the way. This stifles both innovation and criticism, since no one wanted to get a reputation for rocking the boat. To prevent this stifling of ideas Nunamker suggested anonymity during the idea-gathering phase of meetings. The anonymity was obtained by allowing each person the use of a computer during the meeting to type their contributions to the meeting, which appeared, anonymously, on everyone else’s screen.
This allowed people who tended to remain silent in meetings, from shyness or intimidation, could now share their ideas freely. It also avoided constant bickering and shooting down of hostile participants ideas.
The net effect of these meetings was to generate more and better ideas faster .
Unfortunately, the very anonymity that allows freedom of expression can also be abused. To avoid this type of chaos, the anonymity should be conditional. There are times when you want participants to be anonymous and times when you don’t.
No comments:
Post a Comment