SPC-2002055-CMC
Version 01.00
December 2002
Collaborative Tools Scenario for the Remote Worker
A Concept Paper
Collaborative Tools Scenario for the Remote Worker
A Concept Paper
SPC-2002055-CMC
Version 01.00
December 2002
Dana Dolan
Barbara Cavanaugh Phillips
Produced by the
SOFTWARE PRODUCTIVITY CONSORTIUM NFP, INC.
SPC Building
2214 Rock Hill Road
Herndon, Virginia 20170-4227
Copyright © 2002, Software Productivity Consortium NFP, Inc. Herndon, Virginia. Permission to use, copy modify, and distribute this material for any purpose and without fee is hereby granted consistent provided that the above copyright notice appears in all copies and that both this copyright notice and this permission notice appear in supporting documentation. The content does not necessarily reflect the position or the policy of the U.S. Government, and no official endorsement should be inferred. The name Software Productivity Consortium shall not be used in advertising or publicity pertaining to this material or otherwise without the prior written permission of Software Productivity Consortium NFP, Inc. SOFTWARE PRODUCTIVITY CONSORTIUM NFP, INC. MAKES NO REPRESENTATIONS OR WARRANTIES ABOUT THE SUITABILITY OF THIS MATERIAL FOR ANY PURPOSE OR ABOUT ANY OTHER MATTER, AND THIS MATERIAL IS PROVIDED WITHOUT EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTY OF ANY KIND.
______
As-OneTM is a trademark of As-One, Inc.
AOL Instant MessengerTM is a trademark of America Online, Inc.
Click to MeetTM is a trademark of First Virtual Communications.
Enterprise Private NetworkTM is a trademark of NetSilica, Inc.
eRoom® is a registered trademark of eRoom Technology, Inc.
GoToMyPCTM is a trademark of ExpertCity, Inc.
Groovesm is service mark of Grove Networks, Inc.
HorizonLive® is a registered trademark of HorizoneLive.com Inc.
Hub IM is a trademark of Communicator, Inc.
InfoWorkspaceTM is a trademark of Ezenia!
Jabber® is a registered trademark of Jabber, Inc.
The following are trademarks or registered trademarks of Microsoft Corporation:
Microsoft ® Conference XP
Microsoft ® MSN Messenger
Microsoft ® Netmeeting
Microsoft ® Project Server
Microsoft ® SharePoint
Pathlore Learning Management Systems is either a trademarks and/or registered trademark of Pathlore Software Corp.
PCAnyWhere® is a registered trademark of Symantec Corporation.
PlaceWare® is a registered trademark of PlaceWare, Inc.
PrimaveraTM is a trademark of Primavera Systems, Inc.
Saba Learning is either a trademark or registered trademark of Saba Software Inc.
Session TM is a trademark of Wave Three Software.
SourceCast TM is a trademark of CollabNet, Inc.
SourceForge ® is a registered trademark of VA Linux Systems.
SunForum 3.2TM is a trademark of Sun Microsystems.
TeamSourceTM is trademark of Borland Software Corporation
TeamSpaceTM is a trademark of FlypaperTM Inc.
TimbucktuTM is a trademark of Netopia, Inc.
TrainingServer® Learning Management System is a registered trademark of THINQ Learning Solutions, Inc.
ViaVideoTM is a trademark of PolyCom, Inc.
WebExTM is a trademark of WebEx Communications, Inc.
Other product names, company names, or names of platforms referenced herein may be service marks, trademarks or registered trademarks of their respective companies, and they are used for identification purposes only.
Contents
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS vi
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY vii
1. INTRODUCTION 1
1.1 The Collaborative Development Project 2
1.2 Goal and Scope 2
1.3 Audience 3
1.4 How to Read this Paper 4
1.5 Organization 4
1.6 Typographic Conventions 5
2. COLLABORATION AND THE REMOTE WORKER 6
2.1 Individual-to-Office Remote Workers 6
2.1.1 Home-Based Teleworker 6
2.1.2 Center-Based Teleworker 7
2.1.3 Mobile Worker 7
2.2 Office-to-Office Remote Workers 8
2.2.1 Remote Sister Division Team 8
2.2.2 Offshore Team 8
2.2.3 Cross-Organizational Team 9
2.3 Comparison of the Types of Remote Workers 9
3. A DAY IN THE LIFE OF A SOFTWARE DEVELOPER 11
4. MAPPING FUNDAMENTAL COLLABORATIVE TOOLS AND TASKS 14
4.1 Remote Desktop Access: Install and Configure Software 14
4.2 Learning Management Systems: Receive Just-in-Time Training 15
4.3 Electronic Whiteboards: Hold a Client Review 16
4.4 Application Sharing: Attend a Working Meeting 16
4.5 Virtual Workspace: Provide Team Status Report 17
4.6 Instant Messaging: Information Communication 18
4.7 Desktop Videoconferencing: Hold Project Review 19
4.8 Webcasting: Receiving Corporate Communications 20
5. MAPPING SPECIALIZED COLLABORATIVE TOOLS AND TASKS 21
5.1 Distributed Software Development 21
5.2 Distributed Project Management 22
5.3 Ultra-High-Quality Videoconferencing 22
6. NEXT STEPS 24
6.1 Collaborative Development Website 24
6.2 Tools Guide 24
6.3 Final Remarks 25
Appendix A. Collaborative Products and Vendor References 26
Appendix B: Commercial Sources for Software Reviews 29
List of Abbreviations and Acronyms 30
References 31
viii
Contents
FIGURES
Figure 1. Types of Distance Workers 9
Figure 2. Scenario Summary 12
TABLES
Table 1. Remote Desktop Access 14
Table 2. Learning Management Systems 15
Table 3. Electronic Whiteboards 16
Table 4. Application Sharing 17
Table 5. Virtual Workspace 18
Table 6. Instant Messaging 19
Table 7. Desktop Videoconferencing 19
Table 8. Webcasting 20
Table 9. Distributed Software Development Support 21
Table 10. Distributed Project Management 22
Table 11. Ultra-High-Quality Videoconferencing 23
Table 12. Collaborative Products and Vendor References 26
Table 13. Commercial Sources for Software Reviews 29
viii
Contents
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors of this technical report are Dana Dolan and Barbara Phillips. The authors wish to thank the following people for their contributions to this report:
· Internal Reviews: Bob Small and Terri Hamill
· Member Company reviewers: Ron Remy of Lockheed Martin Corp.; Jeanne Minahan Robinson, Ph.D., of BAE SYSTEMS; and William Cimino of BAE SYSTEMS
· Report Process and Production: Debbie Morgan and Bobbie Troy
viii
Executive Summary
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Collaborative technology will make a worker’s physical location irrelevant. Collaborative work can take place without collaborative technologies; however, their use can offer substantial benefits to organizations by increasing productivity and saving time and money. Email is the most successful collaborative technology to date, however this paper focuses on a number of emerging collaborative technologies that are not yet as widely accepted. This paper will:
· Discuss some issues facing the remote worker that impact tools selections
· Provide a scenario that acts as a framework for introducing collaborative tools
· Map specific tasks from the scenario to eight fundamental supporting tools
· Discuss three specialized collaborative tools
· Be a source of requirements for collaborative tool selection
Organizations involved in evaluating collaborative tools must consider the unique aspects of the remote workers that will use the tools. This paper takes a brief look at individual-to-office and office-to-office remote workers, defining frequently used labels and highlighting distinct characteristics relevant to tool selection. The authors use a comparison of remote workers in terms of temporal distance and organizational distance to point out some key aspects of collaborative tool selection, such as the need for synchronous versus asynchronous features and the ability of a tool to embrace multiple processes and traverse multiple firewalls.
This paper introduces readers to collaborative technologies in the form of scenario-based tasks. The scenario describes a teleworking software developer with a number of tasks to accomplish during the course of his day. The following list outlines the scenario approach:
· Each task describes a business need common to remote workers.
· A collaborative technology is described as a solution to help meet these needs.
· Each technology has a corresponding list of three to five desktop-accessible tools.
· Organizations can use the scenario and tasks to develop their collaborative tool selection criteria.
Issues such as bandwidth requirements, security features, vendor support and stability, ease of use, and interoperability are left for future investigation when they can be addressed within the scope of a specific tool.
The following describes a teleworking software developer, the collaborative tasks he must perform during the course of his day, and the technologies that offer assistance.
Assigned to a project to work a brand new requirement, the teleworking software developer familiarized himself with the project’s latest software release. He used a tool with remote access features to allow IT support staff to install and configure the software, and then used a learning management system to familiarize himself with the latest version. Next he reviewed the new requirement with the customer using an electronic whiteboard. He then collaborated with the project’s database administrator and lead developer to analyze various options for implementing the new requirement, using an application sharing tool so they could all manipulate the database design using the administrator’s advanced engineering software application. The agreed-upon course of action was formally communicated to the project manager in the form of a team status report, which was jointly authored using a tool with virtual workspace capability. The teleworker and his project manager used desktop videoconferencing to discuss the status of the new requirement in more detail, so that the project manager could confidently brief the customer’s organization and get an approval to proceed. Because the new requirement would have a major impact on the project as a whole, the entire staff was informed of the outcome of the customer briefing as soon as possible. The teleworker and the rest of the staff virtually attended the project manager’s webcast. The project manager announced that the customer had given the go ahead to implement the new requirement and answered a few questions from the staff. The staff was able to immediately begin making the changes needed to implement the new requirement.
The paper also describes three specialized collaborative capabilities: These tools provide support for distributed software development, distributed project management, and remote debugging via ultra-high-quality videoconferencing.
This paper and other deliverables of the Consortium’s Collaborative Development Project will be available soon on the Consortium’s public website at http://www.software.org/collab/. This includes the forthcoming Tools Guide; an online resource that members can use to kick-start their own collaboration tools requirements and selection efforts.
The paper offers a few final remarks for those introducing collaborative tools into their organizations. Users won’t adopt tools with a high degree of overhead. Training can reduce this overhead for users unfamiliar with these new technologies. Additionally, many of these tools only exhibit their worth when a large nucleus of users is established. A challenge area is creating the momentum needed for these tools to become widely accepted. Telephones, faxes, and of course email are examples of collaboration tools that have developed this momentum. Instant Messaging (IM) is fast approaching this level of acceptance in the business world, while other tools are beginning to enjoy pockets of success within specific environments and populations.
viii
1. Introduction
1. INTRODUCTION
Collaborative technology will make a worker’s physical location irrelevant. Workers engaged in collaborative software will interface with colleagues that may be in the next office, across the country, or on the other side of the world. As today’s workforce becomes more global and more mobile, face-to-face collaboration becomes increasingly difficult, and the demand for collaborative technologies grows. As collaborative technologies and processes improve, they enable workers to work more effectively at a distance for less cost and time. This distance, in turn, continues the cycle by encouraging the acceptance of remote work.
Certainly, collaborative work can take place without collaborative technologies. Face-to-face meetings are always an option, and they may be the most efficient solution for some collaborative tasks. Two disadvantages of collocated meetings include the need for artificial means of capturing records of these interchanges and the lack of facilities for asynchronous communication. The overriding advantage is the richness of communication possible with true face-to-face communication.
The most successful collaborative technology to date is email. An International Data Corporation (IDC) focus group found that when people collaborated, email was used 90 to 95% of the time (IDC 2002). This IDC white paper, There Should be More to Collaboration than Email, considers email a victim of its own success. Unmanageable volumes of email reduce worker productivity and increase storage and management costs for organizations. An additional criticism of email is its fundamental lack of security. These flaws of email are driving forces behind the growth of the collaborative technology market. From the opposite perspective, email’s ease of use and reliability for collaborating with both internal and external partners are key factors in its success. The emerging collaborative tools discussed in this paper need to exhibit these same success factors in order to gain widespread acceptance.
The Software Productivity Consortium (the Consortium) first addressed issues related to distributed development (DD) in its October 2001 report, Geographically Distributed Development (GDD) Interim Technical Report (Software Productivity Consortium 2001) by providing high-level guidance and practical advice for member companies that are contemplating or involved with large-scale GDD. The scenarios and tasks described in this concept paper provide a different focus, introducing readers to collaborative technologies by enabling them to envision specific uses of these technologies. Member companies should reference the GDD Interim Technical Report for information on the decision to distribute workers, GDD security considerations, human factors, distributed project engineering, collaborative environments, and other related topics.
1.1 The Collaborative Development Project
This paper sets the stage for future efforts related to collaborative tools within the Consortium’s recently initiated Collaborative Development Project. Within this project, the Consortium identified the following three tasks to date:
· Collaborative Development Checklists. As with any new technology or technique, telework or collaborative development projects yield benefits only when applied in the right circumstances and in the right way. This task presents a series of checklists that address issues to be considered in order to run a successful distributed program. The checklists provide how-to guidance in a format that is easy for project and process managers to use and adapt, as needed.
· Measurement for Distributed Teams. What problems must globally distributed teams manage that are not in collocated teams? What measures can be used to predict these problems and prevent their unmanaged growth? How are those measures used to make better decisions? This report discusses challenges encountered by globally distributed teams and provides guidelines for using standard measurement techniques to help recognize and mitigate problems before they become unmanageable. Successful management of global virtual teams must balance social and cultural issues along with technical issues involving network infrastructure and collaborative software. While the technical issues traditionally receive most of the attention, research for this report discovered that the top issues confronting managers of GDD teams are loss of communication richness, loss of teamness, and coordination breakdown. The report uses the Consortium's Integrated Measurement Series (Software Productivity Consortium 2001a) guidelines to define four indicators of schedule delay caused by coordination breakdown and loss of effective team relations caused by lack of rich communication. By integrating these indicators into an ongoing measurement program, project managers will be able to make better risk management and resource allocation decisions.