As the AusWeb 95 conference unfolds, it will be easier to assess whether among many possible uses for WWW, the research support activity is being undertaken. If not immediately, pressures for 'better' research performance especially in contract research, will soon thrust the question of WWW relevance to the fore. Either way, avoiding problems by being aware of past experiences with other generations of technological innovation, must be an advantage for project managers and system designers. With only WWW technology skills and no broader experience, proponents of these new ideas may be hard-pressed to convince academic researchers to change the way they do things. In that case it will be "all dressed up and no invitation to the party", an unfortunate outcome for a methodologies which show much high promise.
This paper aims to prepare those who feel WWW has a place as the preferred research support process for the day when its capabilities and capacity to sustain a project are being evaluated against traditional methods. Main section headings are:
A change in the research agenda beyond depth, to also encompass breadth will require some changes in research process. Some examples of new requirements are: (i) browsing to pick up the threads of connection between related or overlapping topics; (ii) communicating with others in specialist topics; (iii) exchanging and refining research viewpoints; (iv) mapping complex topics; (v) establishing dominant parameters; and (vi) understanding process dynamics. Most, if not all of these qualities, will be applicable at some stage of the research. Flowing from these activities are likely to be four general systems requirements:
This list of essential elements of a research support framework is not Utopian as most components can be provided by existing WWW and associated IT products.
A successful research support capability needs more than these systems components. What is needed is a work environment which recognises the balance between hard work and intuition, the need to bring together existing information and to push boundaries, unswerving discipline in the gathering and treatment of data, and the periodic need for freedom to step back from detail. Most of all, it is about people, and fostering commitment to working hard and staying with the project through difficult times.
Change agents who bring technological innovation to any group of researchers, need a very sound grasp of the research process at two levels at least. The more obvious of these can be labelled 'operational', which covers day to day realities of CSCW group activity, including having a sound grasp of things that work and ideas that are likely to fail. A second level of research process understanding is more theoretical and concentrates attention on the 'structural' aspects of the project or group of projects. Being theory driven, for those with a deeper interest in process, it provides opportunities for project monitoring and evaluation.
In the future, complex research projects of significant scale are likely to be 'multi-disciplinary and conducted from different, possibly transnational locations'. This raises a number of concerns for research project managers who find themselves having to put together new hybrid forms of organisation which "are organisation arrangements that use resources and/or governance structures from more than one existing organisation" [Borys and Jennison 1989, 235]. According to these authors, hybrid arrangements and associated research support systems need to deal with a number of special characteristics, in particular: (i) limited project life; (ii) commitment to research goals; (iii) value creation; and (iv) sorting out the parts of associated organisations which form the hybrid pool of resources.
As previously stated, the operational framework of a research project is not simply the advanced technology. Kramer and King [1988, 118], reviewed the range of computer-based systems for co-operative work and group decision making. They promoted the idea of a "sociotechnical 'package' comprised of (1) hardware, (2) software, (3) organisation-ware, and (4) people." An emphasis on 'people' is a thread which will run through the remainder of this section.
In the first place, many project managers and technology advisers tend to hold relatively simple viewpoints about technological change. This perspective echoes the conviction that the combination of their efforts and new technology is the paramount influences on organisational effectiveness, and in a unidirectional response assert that users have no impact. This view is being challenged, especially by Kraut et al [1989] who consider that the process is not only more complex, but is one in which workers using new technology are strong forces in shaping the work environment. Academic researchers are likely to make a forceful attempt to get any system to meet their needs, both real and imagined.
Another misconception which may need to be addressed when research projects are formed with transnational membership, is that cultural differences between researchers can be disregarded. Hofstede [1993] shows up the fallacy of this argument in a series of studies of employees in different countries. Although his work was not related to research workers, it is likely that individualistic tendencies will be greater amount academic than other knowledge workers. Research project managers will need to build safeguards into systems to minimise the impact of cultural factors.
As many research projects depend on specialist knowledge and skill, often in short supply, it is clearly important to be able to retain the services of key individuals. Unfortunately, projects are generally under funded, limiting the degrees of freedom to pay more for increases in performance. This places a heavy onus on research project management to create not only an effective technological environment, but one with work life qualities to ensure "satisfaction with the work itself, satisfaction with supervision and satisfaction with interpersonal relationships" [Nelson, 1990, 85].
The importance of financial management in research activity is very obvious. "On-time and on-budget' are minimum requirements imposed by most research sponsors, and accordingly goals energetically pursued by project management. With a focus on efficiency and economy, there is always a danger that equally important cost/benefit performance measures reflecting the efforts of individual researchers are not assessed.
Recognition should be given to the balance between those who benefit and others who do additional work to provide the outputs that give the advantages. As Markus and Connolly [1990, 379] emphasise, there is a clear need to "look carefully at real costs and benefits of CSCW applications, in the context of their use, with a particular eye to inter-dependencies among potential users".
Promoters of new technology for the research support process, as well as project managers, are all too easily swept along by a tide of innovation. References above to 'people impacts' have been provided as a reminder of an ongoing duty to understand what is happening, particularly in regard to 'people' who constitute the research teams. Neglect for whatever reason, could seriously weaken operational effectiveness and nullify outcomes.
Those at the forefront of IT change, especially with an academic orientation, can be expected to wish to understand overtime, what is happening to and within the project and how current experiences match or differ from the past. This interest in 'process' opens up opportunities for theory driven monitoring. In the case of research group activity, this would involve making a close study of the structure of the organisation and the processes which generate research outputs. the interplay of hardware, software, organisation-ware and 'people', will need to be understood, particularly in relation to the form of organisation chosen for the research project whether hybrid or traditional. This is the structural process level of understanding. A close study of key factors which impact on outcomes should throw light on many issues including the primacy of otherwise of IT.
The act of investigating a research support activity which is strongly orientated to information technology, is in itself quite a demanding task. To start with, the research enquiry needs to be built upon appropriate theory or paradigm. For example, contemporary commitment to applying market forces to the public sector, with strong adherence to the theories of agency and information economics, suggests that many accounting academics would see this as the theoretical route to follow. Given that the relative simplicity of these theories is in marked contrast to the complexity of hybrid forms of organisation and the technological background itself, an alternative theoretical direction is worth considering.
One such approach which could be used to better understand the way in which organisations encompass new information technologies is 'adaptive structuration theory' (AST). As outlined by DeSanctis and Poole [1994, 121], "AST examines the change process from two vantage points: (1) the types of structures that are provided by advanced technologies; and (2) the structures that actually merge in human action, as people interact with those technologies". The appeal of AST as a theoretical basis for this setting is that is has an explicit social structure focus which can illuminate complex relationships, both individual and for the organisation at large, between researchers and IT tools. This direction of understanding is also important in practice when incorporating new technology. (See [Lyytinen and Ngwenyama, 1992] [MacIntosh and Scapens, 1990.]
This acknowledgement of the importance of understanding the developments within a project from a theory base has been brief, but brevity should not be assumed to be lack of importance. Hugh investments in computing in times past which have not been able to demonstrate value- for-money are a luxury which public institutions, let alone universities, are unlikely to repeat. It is time to dress up for a purpose.
Being swept along by technology is no adequate excuse for taking a limited view. Too much information is available on the experiences of others becoming involved with technology. The critical human-technological and organisational linkages have been identified. Unidirectional planning has to be acknowledged to be sup-optimal.
The real challenges are to find ways of ensuring that users can play a part in choosing and fine- tuning new systems as well as applying theory testing disciplines to all future projects of any significance.
DeSanctis, G. and Gallupe, R.B. (1985) 'Group decision support systems: a new frontier', Database , 16 (1), 377-3 87.
DeSanctis, G. and Poole, M.S. (1994) 'Capturing the complexity in advanced technology use: adaptive structuration theory', Organisation Science, 5, 2, May, pp 121- 147.
Ellis, C.A., Gibbs, S.I. and Rein, G.L. (1991) 'Groupware - some issues and experiences', Communications of the ACM, 34 (1), pp 39-58.
Hofstede, G. (1993) 'Cultural constraints in management theories', Academy of Management Executives, 7, 1, pp 81-94.
Kraut, R., Dumab, S. and Kock, S. (1989) 'Computerization, productivity, and quality of work life', Communications of the ACM, 32, 2, pp 220-238.
Kraemer, K.L. and King, J.L. (1988) 'Computer-based systems for co-operative work and group decision making', ACM Computing Surveys, 20, 2, pp 115-146.
Lyytinen, K.J. and Ngwenyama, O.K. (1992) 'What does computer support for co-operative work mean? A structurational analysis of computer supported co-operative work', Accounting, Management & Information Technology, 2, 1, pp 19-37.
MacIntosh, N.B. and Scapens, R.W. (1990) 'Structuration theory in management accounting', Accounting, Organizations and Society, 15, 5, pp 455-477.
Markus, M.L. and Connolly, T. (1990) 'Why CSCW applications fail: problems in the adoption of interdependent work tools' in Proceedings CSCW '90 Conference on Computer Supported Co-operative Work, New York: ACM, pp 371-380.
Nelson, D.L. (1990) 'Individual adjustment to information-driven technologies: a critical review', MIS Quarterly, 1 4, pp 79-98.
AusWeb95 The First Australian WorldWideWeb Conference