Barker Chapter 10: Designing for Task Orientation

This chapter presents tools and techniques for responding to characteristics of software users.

Guidelines for designing documentation

Create a table of contents

Match the user analysis with information design strategies

Acknowledge production constraints in document design

Test and review the design

Follow a design process for online help

1. Create a Table of Contents

Think in the sequence of stages that begin with goals and end with solutions. The prior user analysis with suggest overall goals. The outline embodies your most innovative and user oriented ideas. Decide on the overall organization of the manual and how to design so the user can easily find information.

2. Match the user analysis with information design strategies

When designing for different groups consider the following:

· Navigational aids- Navigational aids make sure the user groups get to the information pertinent to their needs. These could include special statements, directing users to the sections of the documents, list of figures and tables, headers and footers.

· Scenarios- Scenarios give each group a role model.

· Icons- Icons identify information for each group.

· Metaphors-Metaphors make implicit relationships to the workplace so users can see and feel the document is familiar to them.

Design for a specific program issues:

· Job performance aids cover technically or repetitive tasks.

· Background information to meet special needs.

· Special forms can help users collect information in the field for later inclusion in the document.

Meet the user’s task needs

Illustrations, layout design, examples of usage, special document sections, and tips.

Meet the user’s information needs:

This requires you to understand how users manage information within a job setting. There are several strategies you can use:

· Explanation so the user understands their use and importance.

· Provide examples that illustrate workplace uses.

· Meet efficiency goals/command summaries for efficiency by providing things like shortcuts, macros, etc.

· Identify functions that relate to information management and communication work

Match the user’s computer experience –

There are different types of users like: novice, experienced, and expert.

Enhance the user’s subject-matter background:

Take advantage of the user’s knowledge of the subjects by doing the following:

· Special glossary of background terms

· Index entries linking background terminology to program functions

· Special booklets/sections describing background concepts

· Elaborate examples with explanations of key concepts

Leverage the user’s workplace

Try to incorporate the following to help new users:

Getting help from coworkers

Suggestions for support groups

Descriptions of network use

Meet the user’s learning preferences

Learning preferences are connected to the choice of media as well as design.

Instructor learning – For instructors use lesson plans, overheads, etc. For the learners use workbook, note pages, diskette.

Manual learning – Tutorial manual, list of learning objectives, samples files

Computer-based learning – Programmed computer-based training modules, etc.

Meet the user’s usage pattern

First determine which category is most appropriate: Regular usage, or Intermittent usage, or Casual usage.

3. Acknowledge production constraints in document design

Decide on what design features you would like to have and what you can afford to have. You need to know you limitations before planning. Some constraints are: Writing tools, Production tools, Human resources, Budget, and External considerations. See table 10.3 for further explanation of the constraints.

4. Test and review the design

In this phase you evaluate through reviews by clients and sponsors and test problematic areas in a lab or field test. To test your design you can follow these steps:

a. Mock up pages with access elements on them and field test them.

b. Consult the chapter on testing for was to do quick usability tests.

c. Decide on a design based on logic and experimentation.

5. Follow a design process for online help

The design of online help should parallel the process of designing for print; however the process must be adjusted to accommodate: technical differences between print documentation and online documentation, and the different features of online document versus pages.

Identify and list the online help topics

Topic is an identifiable body of usable information associated with a user activity.

The 7setps program identifies the following kinds of topics.

About – offers introductory information of the program

Module – describes the modules of an interface

Action – describes situation in which a user would use a part of the interface to achieve a workplace end

Problem – describes solutions to problems/bugs/errors

Questions – describe questions the user might ask

Task – identifies the workplace activities the program supports

Update – describe new features of a program or application to the users

User group – describe the types of users with similar ways of using the program.

The two types of automatic topics are:

“Best practices” – when the user has performed an operation that is potentially complicated and would need more guidance

Corrective – topics open when a user has reached a dead end

Determine the interconnected elements

Those interconnections among topics based on user activities make up the heart of a help system because they allow the users to follow familiar patters of activity.

Decide what design features to use

Design features are the software capabilities you can build into a help system and the electronic interface elements of a help system. Some features of the help systems are: Hypertext links, buttons, hot areas, browse controller, pop-ups, context sensitivity, and system affordances. See table 10.4 for detailed description of each.

Here are several areas to consider when designing for task orientation:

Accommodating groups of users

You must constantly consider the degrees of experience among the groups of users. You may have to write more than one manual to accommodate the different needs and expectations of the users.

Pay attention to users psychological differences as experienced users may have more patience and confidence with the program .Novices have less experience with manuals and online help and do not know the conventions of documentation thus can get lost looking for things in the wrong section. As a documents designer use a variety of features (glossaries, cuing, graphics etc) to help novices and get them on track.

Consider the roles based on computer experience and professional activities such as installers, operators, evaluators, decision makers and so on. Each of categories of users needs to use different functions of the program and need different level of support. Writer needs to use different cuing to make sure each user’s type can find appropriate section easily.

Matching the user’s problem-solving methods

There are several issues to consider:

• No one carefully reads more then 2 sentences at a time.
• Solution: Make paragraphs short. Include tables and lists whenever possible.
• Most users begin using the table of contents before they ready the manual.
• Solution: Make table of contents complete. Use abbreviated, complete and chapter-by-chapter table of contents.
• Most users go to the manual or help only after they have failed to perform tasks.
• Solution: Describe error recovery clearly and completely.
• Most readers do not read instruction first.
• Solution: Replace introduction with information about users needs, special documents features, or helpful routing information.
• Most readers do not read any sections in its entirety.
• Solution: Tell users which section to go for particular tasks/problems. Make sure all descriptions of tasks are complete for performing task. Repeat important information.

The Design Guide for Printed Documentation

Navigation

Navigational aids are elements of a document that tell the reader where to go next for what kind of information. Make sure you include navigating as organizing feature only after you have examined your user’s tasks carefully.

Cross-reference points to other sections of the chapters containing related information. Try to include the cross references and information that the users need at the point they need it.

Running header and footers - This may include: chapter and section names and numbers, book title, graphic cues and icons, task names, and color to indicate sections.

Layering – refers to having two versions of information on the page at once to satisfy more then one type of reader. Things like keyboard shortcuts on the side, use of columns for instructions, etc. You might have elaborate steps for novice user and abbreviated version of the steps for the experienced user.

Headings – All manual use heading, and all users expect them. Use short phrases to indicate contents of the section such as “Setting Margins” or “Saving a file”. Avoid making headings too short- “Margins”/”Save”. Headings also create visual part of the pages.

Advance organizers – tell the users the structure and organization of the information that will follow. Remember to put advance organizers in front of the information they reflect, use them consistently, make sure they relate to user’s work/tasks, and keep them short.

Document overview – Users need to be introduced to document’s setup and how to use it to find information. You can include things like: audience, content, organization, scope, and navigational information.

Parallel structures – There are two benefits of parallelism in software manuals. First parallelism reassures the user that the writer has sorted out the important information. Second, it creates pattern of expectations so the reader learns how to use the document.

Cuing – This refers to the technique of including visual patterns to make a certain kind of information memorable. You can cue with icons or rules, fonts, and caps.

Indexing and tables of contents – The two most important navigational and tracking devices in any manual. The table of contents describes the content of the document from a task perspective. The index provides a meeting place of all users of a program.

List of figures and tables – They make up the main element in the usability of a document and help users see quickly if they can find an example of a screen in a figure.

List of screens – This list works when you have program with easily recognizable screens. This list of screens should appear early in the manual or in the primary index screen of a help system.

Interrelated examples – These are examples when you follow the same example from one procedure to another. Doing so builds continuity into you document design.

Solutions to the design problem for online documentation

Here you face the same objectives as you do with the print document which is getting the user the right information.

Non-scrolling regions – regions that appear at the top of the screen and stay there while the user scrolls through the procedure or topic. This feature has advantage over the print document because user does not loose sight of the document.

Expanded text – Sometimes called “stretch text” allows you to embed more details into a topic so the user can click on the expanded text link to view details.

Keyword and whole text search – refer to the ability of a help system to electronically find topics and the user types into a keyword search box.

Indexes – shows an alphabetical view of all the important topics and terminology used in a help system. The author has to identify some terms for index to ignore when presenting the list to the user.

Links and Jumps – in a help system allow users to go directly from one topic to related topic. Here online system has definite advantage because user does not have to turn pages and can link topics and get back and forth between topics.

Pop-ups – provide a way to handle glossaries in an online system. User can click on the term in the topic window to see the definition.

Context sensitivity – With a print manual, the user goes through a chain of events between identifying a problem and finding the solution. With the online help system, user goes directly from a problem with a screen or a field to an appropriate help topic containing a solution. However the limitation is that you can’t guarantee that the user will get right information.

Histories – allow the users to trace their steps, save histories and refer back to them. This is advantage over using print material.

Browse Sequences – When you identify a series of related topics you cab easily include the relationship in the form of browse sequence. The system displays forward and backward arrows when moving from topic to topic using browse sequence which cannot be done as easily with the print material

Bookmarks/Annotation – With a book the user can easily mark a place in the book and then return to it as well as mark on the pages. Newer help systems also have incorporated bookmark options as well as annotation features.

The Politics of the Interface: Power and its Exercise in Electronic Contact Zones

We need to be technology critics as well as technology users…

Selfe, C.L., & Selfe, R.J. (1994). The politics of the interface: Power and its exercise in electronic contact zones. College Composition and Communication, 45(4), 480-504.

The borders of social power are so commonplace in society that they often remain invisible. Selfe and Selfe explore computer interfaces as a border that represents dominant tendencies in American culture, proposing that consumers should not only be technology users but also technology critics. They wrote this article in order to identify some of the effects of domination and colonialism associated with computer use to “establish a new discursive territory within which to understand the relationships between technology and education” (p. 482).

Computers have been used in the hopes to democratize the classroom and may be less systematically oppressive. However, this is a dangerous assumption—the belief that computers and networks are “the same for all players.” Rather, Selfe and Selfe evaluate and present that computer interfaces value “monoculturalism, capitalism, and phallologic thinking” (p. 486). Interfaces include icons orientated to the ideals of the white, male, middle- and upper-class professional (i.e. white pointer hand). English is also the default language of interfaces and many commercial items only come in English.

These primary interfaces do not provide evidence of different cultures, races, linguistic groups, or economic statuses. Interfaces exclude and marginalize Other perspectives, and in doing so, enact a gesture of colonialism. Interfaces, therefore, operate as a grand narrative where users must abandon their “own culture or gender to acknowledge the dominance of other groups” (p. 494).

The authors propose that users need to recognize these cultural and linguistic borders to reveal power differentials. Interfaces must also be revised to reflect a range of cultural, linguistic, and ideological perspectives to represent the “underrepresented”—non-white cultures, non-English speakers, and women. Users cannot be mere objective observers of these barriers.

Overall, Selfe and Selfe illustrate the computer as a gendered, classed, and racist technology in this critical essay.

Group #2: Jennifer and Gary

Essay 27 - Who "Owns" Electronic Texts?

Who “Owns” Electronic Texts? By Tharon W. Howard

In 1996, if you violated someone’s copyright you could be sued in civil court. Today, because of the “Digital Millennium Copyright Act of 1998” you may face up to a $500,000 fine or five years’ imprisonment for your first offense. Sonny Bono’s “Copyright Term Extension Act” in 1998 extended the length of an author’s copyright another twenty years and copyright is granted for seventy years after the death of an author and, in the case of “works for hire,” ninety-five years from publication or 120 years from creation.

Today, corporations like Disney, MGM, and A&M Records can force the public to pay for images of Mickey Mouse, video clips of King Kong, songs like “Happy Birthday,” and other cultural icons for up to 120 years. Remember the lawsuit against Napster in 2000? Lawsuits are continuing to define the limits of the peer-to-peer technologies and copyright laws.

Most writers, including practicing professionals and teachers don’t consider the issue of intellectual property as particularly problematic. Writers today do expect some sort of remuneration for their writing and control over how their texts will be used.

Recent trends toward more collaborative writing projects in the workplace, along with the use of online computer conferences, electronic discussion groups, hypertexts, multimedia presentations, groupware, and other computer technologies aimed at enhancing and promoting collaboration, are all seriously challenging the popular, romantic view that an author owns his or her text. With an increase of reliance of computers in the workplace, writers are finding themselves confronted with intellectual property and copyright issues.
Five scenarios were given with questions about workplace issues.

Scenario 1
While working for a large corporation in the document design department, which prides itself with producing dramatic covers for the company’s annual reports, your co-worker finds a photo that would be perfect for the cover. With a little cutting, pasting and a few other modifications the photo will work. The photo is famous and since only part of the photo is going to be used and the image will be modified and essentially new should you go ahead and scan it? Or do you first have to have permission from the magazine which first reproduced it, the publishing house which sells reproductions of it, or the photographer who originally took the photograph?

Scenario 2
You’ve just been hired by a desktop publishing company and have received a new computer with software that isn’t compatible with other employees’ software. Your boss tells to load your computer with the old software that the office has because they have already purchased the disks. Should you go ahead and copy the software since the office has already paid for it?


Scenario 3
You’re doing research on an article about usability testing for Technical Communication and, as part of your research you join an online discussion group where others are doing human-factors research exchange e-mail messages about their works-in-progress. Someone posts an e-mail that changes your way of thinking about your own thesis. These are unpublished results and you want to quote from the e-mail message in your article.

Can you legally and ethically quote from an e-mail message? Are you obligated to cite the message since it has had such a profound impact on your own thinking? If so, does anyone own the copyright on the message? Do you need to seek the author’s permission? Or, since the message was electronically published by an electronic discussion group, do you need to have the permission of the person(s) who created and operate the discussion group or the university or company which owns the computer that hosts the group?

Scenario 4
You work for a large corporation that uses e-mail throughout the company in lieu of paper correspondence. You have been keeping correspondence with another co-worker, who happens to be of the opposite sex, and keep this correspondence to breaks and lunch periods so that it does not interfere with business hours. Your supervisor is aware of this and agrees with the situation. However, you have found out that your e-mails have been monitored and the butt of jokes. You are furious and you report this to your supervisor. Your supervisor tells you that the company owns the computers and therefore, has the right to monitor their use.

Can you stop this monitoring of your e-mail? Who actually owns the messages you’ve been sending? Do you, as the author, own the messages? Does the addressee who received them? Or does the owner of the system on which the messages were produced? What rights does ownership of the messages entail?

Scenario 5
You are a placement director at a large university in the professional writing program. To help graduates find information about companies that hire writer you set up a HyperCard stack which allows students to click on a state on the U.S. map. This stack is located on computers at the university and from a book which provides an alphabetical list of national corporation, you select data on companies which you think might routinely hire technical writers. The hypertext is so popular that several publishers learn about it and want to publish it.

Can you publish your hypertext? Have you infringed on any copyrights by providing your students with your hypertext in the first place? If you can publish your text, are you legally obligated to pay any royalties to your university or to the publisher or author of the book from which you selected your data?

To understand the problems of ownership in the electronic workplace Howard offers a brief historical examination of the origins of U.S. copyright law. He explores why electronic publishing, electronic discussion groups, computer conferences, and other new information technologies represent such a challenge to current copyright law. A historical examination of the printing press will show that then, as now, the introduction of new technologies challenged existing systems for owning and controlling texts. The examination will show current copyright law reflects an interesting struggle among at least three historically distinct and competing theories of textual ownership. First, of course, the romantic and commonplace notion that authors have a “natural right” to the fruits of their intellectual labors. Second, there is the assertion that the public has a right to all knowledge since “Laws of Nature” and absolute truths cannot be the property of any one individual. And third, there is the view that all knowledge is socially constructed, that a text is a product of the community the writer inhabits, and that the text must therefore be communal, rather than individual, property.

A Historical Overview
Copyright can be defined as the “right to reproduce copies of a particular text” (400). It was not and still is not a “natural unlimited property right” (Beard). It is a limited privilege granted by the state, in that the government gives writers the license to “operate” texts in the public domain.

In the 15th and 16th centuries, before the invention of the printing press, the creation of books depended on the patronage of the Church or the Crown, who then were able to control the kinds of texts both produced and consumed. The printing press led to a radical reduction in production costs, but the limited number of popular and lucrative texts available for publication increased competition. This led to the creation of the Stationers’ Company, which was a voluntarily enforced form of copyright. Thus, the Church and Crown lost their control over the production and consumption of texts, which in turn led to the creation of “subversive” texts.

In 1566 Mary Tudor and Philip of Spain granted the Stationers a royal charter, and it became a firmly established principle that a copyright is not the natural, unlimited, or absolute property of any individual or company. It made it clear that to own a copyright is essentially to own limited license or privilege granted by the state to promote intellectual activities deemed by the government to be in the best interest of the state and its citizens.

In 1709 Parliament’s Statute of Anne provided the basis for Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution, which recognizes the rights of authors.
Major Principles of U.S. Copyright Law “Copyright law in the U.S. recognizes that in order to encourage authors to produce the texts which will lead to the artistic, scientific, and technological discoveries that drive business and industry, it is essential that authors be allowed to realize a profit from their texts” (402). Copyright law does not give authors and publishers the legal right to prevent the public from “fair use” of texts, according to Statute 17, Section 107 of the U.S. Code. It grants the public a right to copy a work “for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research” (402).
Factors to be considered to determine if the use of a work is fair include:
• The purpose and character of the use (is it of a commercial nature or for nonprofit educational purposes?)
• The nature of the copyrighted work
• The portion used in relation to the whole work, both in amount and substantiality
• The effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the work (17 U.S. Code, Sec. 107) (403)
Only the tangible expression of ideas belongs to the copyright holder, not the ideas themselves.
Copyrights in the Electronic Environment

Actual legal status of textual ownership does not match commonly held beliefs about
the copyright and “who own what” question. Authors own the text rights after text is produced and they are protected by copyright law with limited privileges granted by the State.

The professional communication fields in general and technical writers in particular need to understand the general principles of current copyright law. In addition it’s important to realize that some copyright principles do not always apply to electronic texts. Many professional writers are aware of “fair use” principle, and protection of form of expression but are unsure about copyright laws for particular electronic documents “since technological changes have historically, represented challenges for existing forms of copy protection” (Howard, 1996, p.404).

Nature of copyright laws makes it difficult to say if certain situation is or is not copyright infringement. However, copyright principles can serve as guidelines for professional communicators when dealing with copyright questions. For that let’s return to scenarios presented at the beginning of the chapter.

Scenario 1
Central Questions presented earlier were (1) does such a reproduction fall under the doctrine of fair use and (2) who owns the copyright on the image?
Answer: This case is not a case of ‘fair use” of the original work because reproduction is not being made and used for educational, news reporting, or critical purposes. Even thou original image was manipulated, it’s still be “legally considered a derivation of an original work”. The member of the documents design team should receive permission before reproducing and manipulating the photograph. He/she should contact publishing house which owns the copyright of the original rather than using the magazine’s reproduction.

Scenario 2
Central Question presented earlier was (1) should technical writer go ahead and copy the software since office has paid for the software?

Answer: There is twofold answer in this case:
A. If company has only limited license to copy (usually for purpose of creating backup copies during installation process) the program, copying the software would be a violation of the law. It’s a good idea to check exact terms of licensing agreement to avoid such violation.
B. If company owns “site license” rights to copy software on to several machines or install software on their networks, then software can be copied on to the second system. The exact number of copies that are allowed to be copied should be specified in the licensing agreement and followed accordingly.

Further explanation: Often there is misconception that if company or individual own a copy or software they can use them as they wish. However, according to the copyright principles “owning” a text is not the same as the right to copy the text. We may own an actual physical copy of a book, photograph, computer, disc etc but that does not give us right to copy unless we have purchased license to copy the item.

Scenario 3
Central Questions posed earlier were (1) whether use of quote passage from the e-mail message is protected by the fair use clause and (2) whether the author of the message, the owner of the discussion group or the university that hosts computer groups is the copyright holder for the message?

Answer: Quoting from the e-mail message would probably be fair use regardless of the type of group. If group has ISSN, the fair use conditions would apply. If group does not have ISSN then most secure and ethical would be obtain the permission of the e-mail author before quoting the message. Also it would be beneficial to contact discussion group owner in regards to the quoting practices.

Further explanation: Principle of fair use allows reproduction of short passages for new reporting or in the texts of academic journals such as Technical Communication. Situation here is complicated by the technology involved. According to fair use clause in addition to purpose and amount of work to be copied, “the effects of use” need to be taken into consideration. By using the e-mail message, the author might feel that she was not given the opportunity to publish the work through more traditional means where possibility of remuneration is much greater. On the other hand, sending an e-mail to an electronic discussion is also a form of publishing.
There is no clarity in copyright laws in regards to text sent and distributed in electronic format and it varies from case to case. If the discussion group has received ISSN number it has copyright status. Often, the discussion group’s owner states that copyright belongs to author of the postings or messages sent or group members might have agreement not to cite each other’s messages outside the discussion board.

Scenario 4
Central Questions presented earlier were (1) who “owns” the messages that employer sent? And (2) and what rights does ownership of the messages entail?

Answer: This is not a copy right violation because copyright law principle does not give author “…unlimited property right” to their texts (Beard, 1974, p.382)” (Howard, 1996, p.406). Usually company has sole copyright to the texts that employee produces while being employed by the organization. In this case, if the company’s resources were used to produce emails, the company has rights to use those messages. The above case addresses more issues of privacy than copyright infringement.

Further explanation: In some cases (particularly in university setting), an institution may only receive portion of the remuneration. This is due to the fact that work of the writer was done partly using institution’s resources and partly done on employees own time.

Scenario 5
Central Questions presented earlier were (1) whether the university is entitle to some royalties received for the stack’s publication and (2) whether using the data but not the organization or expression from another work constitutes a copyright infringement?

Answer: If university’s resources were used to develop the stack, the university should get remuneration for use of its facilities. The faculty member should agreed to share percentage of profit with the university. Answer to the question of whether reorganization of data complied in another source constitutes a copyright infringement is no. Faculty member’s use of information is not a copyright infringement because the original expression of data has been avoided. Copyright law also indicates that data are part of public domain. The safest way for the faculty member, however, would be to negotiate some kind of financial arrangement with the persons holding copyright to the reference materials.

Further explanation: Two fundamental principles of copyright law come into conflict in this scenario. One of the principles is that authors and publishers are expected to make profit from their publications, on the other hand there is principle that “ideas and knowledge cannot be the property of any one individual and that only the expression of the ideas belongs to the author or copyright holder” (Howard, 1996 p. 407).

As in many cases that involve electronic texts today there is ambiguity on how Congress and court will deal with changes to the current copyright law. It’s possible that due to hypertext and electronic databases it will allow users rather than authors to determine the ultimate organization and shape of these electronic texts This is fundamentally different from the present copyright law.

Conclusion
As the scenario showed, the new electronic environment in which writing professional must function makes intellectual property and copyright issues more a part of their everyday experience in the workplace. Writers must know the basis of the copyright laws better than ever. The scenarios do not offer how one might turn out in a court of law, but it should offer writers how to avoid copyright infringements.

Howard - Who Owns Electronic Texts

Introduction

At first glance, the title of the essay reviewed here Who “Owns” Electronic Texts doesn’t seem all that out of the ordinary in the year 2008. But that’s exactly the point of including the article in the collection Central Works. Tharon Howard, in the essay, is very forward looking in his assessments of the legalities of copyright and intellectual property rights of authors in the electronic age. One could say that the essay was just slightly “ahead of its time.”

Historical Context

In his review of the history of copyright laws, Howard sets out to discover how electronic means of communication such as digital imaging, software licensing, email communication, and hyper text language hold up to the letter of the law.

Historically, there are three theories of textual ownership that have pervaded for centuries:

1) Authors have a natural right to “own” their work
2) The laws of nature and absolute truths cannot be “owned”
3) Socially-constructed truths have no owner

These theories of ownership were really first challenged when the printing press was invented and books became inexpensive to make and distribute. Ironically, it really wasn’t the author’s ownership that brought about the first copyright laws but rather the publishers right to produce copies. The publishers banded together in a sort of loose union called the Stationers Company and attempted to enforce their own copyrights by allowing certain publishers unlimited rights to produce certain texts. They even established a sort of “book police” that searched out and destroyed all illegal copies of texts.

The U.S. Constitution addressed the issue of the unfair advantage that the Stationers tried to hold on to when it established copyrights that favored the author in Article 1, Section 8. This gave authors the exclusive right to their intellectual property – sort of. The ownership of authors was established for a certain amount of time after which the public then has broader use of texts. This in effect gave authors time to capitalize on their work both monetarily and by partnering with publishers and researchers to further their work.

Now, the laws of the United States in a few ways also address the concept of fair use:

o Texts may be reproduced in limited quantities for use in teaching, criticism, comment, news reporting, and in scholarship and research. Essentially, fair use allows copy of text insofar as it does not interfere with the commercial viability of the work. If a potential market is hindered due to copyright infringement problems will arise for the offender.

o Also laws protect the author’s expression of ideas. This means that, although certain universal truths may be found in scientific and math developments, it is right of the individual who arranged these truths in a formula to protect their intellectual property. i.e.) someone steals the code for a software program

The difficulty that we now experience is in the assignment of copyright and intellectual property laws to electronic forms of communication.

Examples of Electronic Copyright Questions

1) Photo reproduction – it is interesting that he was thinking about this twelve years ago as it is even more pertinent today in this age of digital photography. The verdict – always go to the publisher before using any portion of a photograph or image or better yet, purchase your images legally from iStock or some other image archive.
2) Software usage – always check the legal rights of the purchases before putting software that you did not purchase on your PC or Mac.
3) Quoting material from an email message – in general, check with the author of the message before using it. Many businesses and academic institutions have protected themselves by applying for an International Standard Serial Number (ISSN) number. The ISSN number identifies you as the owner of the text.
4) Private email message may be protected or they may not. Check the laws of the state you live in to see if your personal email is protected by privacy laws. I think we’ve learned since the writing of this article that nothing you do electronically is safe. In general, don’t put anything in an email that you wouldn’t want the whole world to see.
5) The fifth example involved something that I was not familiar with – Hyper Card stacks.
A hypertext programming environment for the Macintosh introduced by Apple in 1987. The HyperCard model consists of cards, and collections of cards, called stacks. You can connect the cards in various ways, and leaf through them the way you would with a set of Rolodex cards. In addition to data, each card can contain graphics and buttons that trigger other events, such as sound or video. Each object in a HyperCard system -- stack, card, text field, button, or background -- can have a script associated with it. A script is a set of instructions that specify what actions should take place when a user selects an object with the mouse or when some other event occurs. (from http://www.webopedia.com/TERM/H/HyperCard.htm)

This example really looks at the use of data owned by someone other than yourself and your rights to display the data in a way that is different than its original context. This, of course, is very pertinent in today’s world of instant information from the Web. The author’s advice – go to the source first and ask permission to use the data.

Conclusion

As technical communicators, we will collaborate frequently with other writers, engineers, developers and others. We need to be aware of the implications and consequences of the use of protected material. It is imperative that we keep informed of changes in copyright and intellectual property laws. If you have any doubt about the legality of what you are doing, stop and research the issue. One can never tell how a court will rule in these types of cases and it’s better to be safe than sorry.

Thank you, Vanda and Lance

"What Experienced Collaborators Say about Collaborative Writing" by Allen, Atkinson, Morgan, Moore, and Snow

Introduction

While attending a 2003 professional conference for technical writing instructors, the author noted a shift in attitude toward collaborative writing since her 1987 article had been written. At this point she was asked to reflect formally on the 1987 study.

Although “collaborative groups were taken for granted as part of teaching writing as a process” [351] in academic circles, employers viewed collaborative writing as merely a way to divide the writing workload and/or to provide input as subject matter experts. According to the author, the employers’ perspectives overlooked the value of collaborative writing, which is the increased depth of understanding that arises when co-authors share ideas and develop a common sense of purpose and respect.

In recent years, numerous studies have focused on professional on-the-job writing, but the process and value of collaborative writing was never the primary focus:

• A high frequency of professional collaborative writing exists (Faigley and Miller);


• Collaborative writing is described by the way a document “cycles” from a staff person who researches and drafts the article to the person who edits the draft (Paradis, Dobrin, and Miller)


• Collaborative writing can include a range of activities (Ede and Lunsford)




• Individual planning and drafting of a document that is revised collaboratively (Odell)


• A peer’s critiquing of a co-worker’s draft (Anderson)


• The coauthoring of a document (Ede and Lunsford)

The research returned limited information about the process of collaborative writing and “the special characteristics of collaboration involving group authorship” [354]. The author’s research sought to investigate collaboration as it exists on the job with professional people who work together to plan, draft, and revise a single document.

Research Methods

Participants. The study participants were recruited by the research team and included a wide range of collaborative settings and projects. A total of 20 respondents representing 14 projects were interviewed, and they represented a variety of professional areas: business, university teaching and research, corporate research, government, community service, and a legal firm.

Interview Form. In order to compare responses, a structured interview form was developed. Questions “concerned the membership of the collaborative group, the roles played and contributions made by various group members, the writing process used, and the nature and frequency of group interaction.” [354] The final interview questions evaluated the respondents’ opinions of the final document and the collaborative writing process.

Respondent Interviews. The interviews were performed by a pair of researchers and were recorded. The respondents were asked to describe a “particularly memorable” collaborative-writing experience. The term “particularly memorable” was not defined, and the respondents were not asked to define why the experience was memorable. During the interviews, the respondents were asked to describe as much detail as possible along with their observations and evaluations of the experience.

Analysis. The first stage of analysis involved the demographic information (who, what, where, when, why); the second stage provided information about the collaboration process.

Research Findings

Demographic Information. The author recognizes that although the small sample size does not answer all of the research questions, the results do allow some “tentative conclusions concerning the people, tasks, and processes involved in collaborative writing” to be drawn. [355]

The tasks respondents chose to report on included a wide range of projects: proposals, books, articles, goal statements, reports, and legal briefs. Of the 14 groups surveyed, nine were made up of people whose background, training, and specialties differed.

Information about the Collaborative Writing Process

Group Writing Processes. All groups reported planning the project as an entire group first, which was also reported as being the most satisfying part of the collaborative process. The planning process was most often followed by periods of independent writing. The draft stage was most often assigned to people according to areas of expertise. Interestingly, the two groups that attempted to draft as a group were unable to complete the task, and both groups ended up assigning the writing task to one of the team members. Only one group reported drafting together as a group “word by word, sentence by sentence,” [357] but it should be noted that this group has written collaboratively for 15 years. Like planning, revision was also widely reported to be a group process and caused group members to think of new ideas and perhaps change some old ideas.

Group Interaction. The groups met frequently during the planning phase and most often in a face-to-face manner. As previously mentioned, drafting was most often completed individually while the revision process brought the group together again. The authors found three characteristics of group interaction noteworthy: 1) group members “consciously or unconsciously assumed the role of audience”; [358] 2) conflict occurred in all of the groups with a varying range of tolerance among group members; and 3) three of the groups used computers versus meeting face to face.

Group Decision Making. Decision making was shared in two ways. First, any member was able to oppose any decision made by the group and was not affected by the leadership style of the group. Second, the decision-making power was shared within the context of the group and its related project and did not extend to other contexts. An important note, in my opinion, is that a member’s right to question a decision did not mean a change would be made: “the decisions made within these groups were ones that all members could accept, even though they might not entirely agree with them.” [359]

Group Leadership. Most of the groups were organized around a leader who primarily offered organizational assistance. In nine of the fourteen groups, leadership was established by seniority or rank.

Respondents’ Observations on Collaboration 

The writers interviewed for the study found the benefits of collaboration worth the costs; the costs most often mentioned were time and ego. All respondents felt the documents they produced were better than if they had been produced by an individual (particularly large, complex projects).

Discussion

Functions of Conflict. Although many group members were uncomfortable with conflict, the members nonetheless recognized that conflict contributed to creativity and to the quality of the document.  Irving Janis “found that failure to allow for the development of opposing views within the group could produce such defective decision making that the overall value of group effort was lost.” [360]

Distinguishing Shared-Document Collaboration. The collaborative writing process exhibited three distinguishing features. First, a single document emerged at the end of the collaborative writing process due to shared goals and a unity of purpose by group members. Second, communication is a two-way interactive process and is completely different than a supervisor/subordinate type of relationship. Third, all group members have decision-making power and share the responsibility for the final document.

Group Typology. The groups interviewed were brought together because the size of the task required extensive labor, and/or the size of the task required multiple areas of expertise, and/or one of the goals of the project was to unite opposing perspectives.

Questions

The authors recognize that since the sample size was small, only partial answers were provided. Furthermore, the authors identified numerous areas for future research:

• The respondents only reported on successful collaborative projects. Therefore, what are the aspects of “failed” collaborations


• What sort of leadership is the most productive in the collaborative-writing process?


• How does the type of task impact the collaborative process?


• How is technology impacting the collaborative process?


• A large percentage of groups had academic affiliations. What collaborative processes occur in other arenas?


• What is the interaction between the hierarchy of an organization and the hierarchy of individual group members?

Lori Hood and J.J. Carlson