Group items tagged

My topic is the collaboration practices of open source software development. OVERVIEW: This article compiles data taken from online OSS-management tool SourceForge, and provides an excellent overview of the features, advantages, and limitations of this particular tool. SourceForge (http://sourceforge.net/) is an online tool that facilitates collaboration on Open Source Software (OSS) projects. Among the most significant tools that SourceForge provides are forums discussing each project, a file-release tool, a basic task management system, the ability to post documentation (eg. instruction manuals) online, and the all-important Concurrent Versions System (CVS). This article goes into satisfying detail of how CVS works and why it is advantageous to software developers, explaining the CVS process as follows: 1. CVS holds the current version of a program's source code, and allows developers to 'check out' (i.e. download) this source code so that they have their own version to play around with. 2. Once done, developers can 'commit' (or upload) their changes. If possible, the CVS automatically merges this code with any other changes that have been made since the code was checked out. 3. The CVS system retains a copy of all previous versions of the code, and thus allows reversion to previous versions, as well as the existence of multiple 'branches' of the same source code. The main advantage of the CVS tool is that it "[allows] multiple developers to be working on the source code at the same time without conflict" (p. 6), although teams are may be limited slightly by SourceForge's basic task management system which "lacks capabilities for resource and personnel management" (p. 4). SourceForge is one online tool that greatly aids in the co-ordination of open-source projects. Any software developer considering the use of a pre-made online tool for collaboration would bene

This article elaborates some overviews about data SourceForge which is from online OSS-management tool, with its characters, advantages, and limitations. SourceForge is a very altruistic platform to benefit people for the development of software tools. It is good example of a social networking platform that is geared towards producing collaborative work, which is productive. Its purpose is not entertainment or socializing, but its about bringing together people with specialized skills and providing the framework and tools to allow people to work on a product in a virtual workplace. I don't totally agree by collecting statistics on the software development process,especially one that is non-commercial and can potentially be worked on by any member of the public to be a totally useful study. Software was development which is not a static work flow. There are many standards, development methodologies, languages, platforms, not to mention the human factor that can make interpolation results of the data difficult. However, I strongly believe the success of SourceForge Projects is not the collaborative effort that causes success, but those developers to press ahead and work on their masterpiece. There are some projects that are very successful, but on the whole a majority of the projects are half started and incomplete. There have been many studies in the past to try to quantify the efficiency of Software Engineering and to date. There is no ideal solution to completing a Software Engineering Project. It is still a maturing engineering discipline.

This article reviews SourceForge (http://sourceforge.net/) which is an Open Source software (OSS) development tool and provides free services to Open Source developers. By explaining how SourceForge collect, manage and apply activity data, this article points out the strengths and weaknesses of SourceForge as an online collaboration tool. An (2011) comments that the purpose of SourceForge is to bring "together people with specialized skills and [to provide] the framework and tools to allow people to work on a product in a virtual workplace". This feature is similar to Optimize Solutions which is mentioned in one of my selected articles: Optimize Solutions launches to help professional services organizations better manage - projects, resources, expenses. Both SourceForge and Optimize Solutions are collaboration tools with powerful functions for data management and user communication. With their network-based interface, distance is no longer an issue for collaboration and interaction among users. SourceForge deals with data and statistic; and Optimize Solutions manage various business resources, such as documents, images, and spreadsheet. While SourceForge is open for users to develop softwares, Optimize Solutions is used within an organization and external clients for business purposes. Although these two applications offer services in different fields, they both aim at enabling global collaboration and improving processing efficiency. I believe that with the development of information technology, especially online collaboration, such applications will be widely used in most organizations and for personal use. Reference: An, R (2011). Comment on Collection of Activity Data for SourceForge Projects. Retrieve from http://groups.diigo.com/group/curtin_net308?view=recent&page_num=1

My topic is the collaboration practices of open source software development. You can access this article by logging into ACM via the Curtin Library website. OVERVIEW: Because the production of Open Source Software (OSS) relies heavily on the work of volunteers, the motivation of those volunteers is imperative to the success of any OSS development. Recognising this, this paper seeks to explain the motivations of those who work on OSS projects, using the learning theory of Legitimate Peripheral Participation (Lave & Wenger, 1991) as a guide. Building on this theory, the authors assert that the transient and open nature of an OSS development community appeals to user/developers as an environment to learn and hone their skills through 'legitimate participation'. Having identified the desire to learn as a key motivation for participants, the authors suggest that to attract more users to become OSS developers, leaders of OSS projects should create a list of progressively difficult tasks to foster the learning process and "enable newcomers to move toward the center of the community through continual contributions" (p. 9). Although this paper focuses on learning as a motivation, the authors acknowledge that because OSS is "a very complicated phenomenon" (p. 10), other motivations no doubt play a part. Informed by this and other articles, I would postulate that these other motivations include dissatisfaction with current software options (because "the best hacks start out as personal solutions to the author's everyday problems" (Raymond, 1999)), the desire for participants to gain reputation within the community, and the egoistic benefits of contributing to a program with a flatteringly large population of users. Raymond (1999) recognises the importance of satisfying the egos of "hacker/users" by providing them with a "piece of the action" (p. 29), while an internet-based survey (Hertel et al., 2003) has found that activities within OSS te

determined by participants' own "perceived indispensability and self-efficacy" (p. 1159). Overall, I believe that the community surrounding any given OSS-development is a key factor in the production of motivation, as it provides participants with the opportunity to gain reputation, satisfy one's own ego, and learn through legitimate participation in a project that the participants are personally interested in. References: Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Raymond, E. (1999). The Cathedral and the Bazaar. Knowledge, Technology & Policy, 12(3), p. 23-49. Hertel, G., Nieder, S., & Herrmann, S. (2003). Motivation of software developers in Open Source projects: an Internet-based survey of contributors to the Linux kernel. Research Policy 32(7), p. 1159-1177.

Topic : How internet technology has shaped collaboration within organisations. Analyzing collaborative networks emerging in Enterprise 2.0: the Taolin Platform http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/B9853-524PR0D-G/2/30d3637587514757e7ea1c6dbb1afcae This working paper was presented at the 4th and 5th UK Social Networks Conference and was a summary of a study whose goal was to identify how online interactions between users changed with the introduction of the social networking platform in a commercial environment. It reviews the deployment of an Enterprise 2.0 piece of Open Source software (Taolin) into Fondazione Bruno Kessler (FBK), a research organisation (FBK) with 400 staff and discusses how the technology was used by the research staff and the communications patterns that developed throughout the study. In addition the paper identifies the different types of ties or relationships an individual user could have, and points out that if these ties were more visible it would enable people to tap into a much larger network than their immediate peers or basic social network. Given there were so many discreet groups of researchers at FBK the plan was to try and leverage off learnings that could be applied to more than one research area. From a technology perspective FBK always stated that the Taolin platform was in beta, meaning that it was never finished or as others might comment, constantly being improved. The platform was rolled out to a group that was approximately 10% of the organisation, and usage increased with each release through the involvement of champions who recruited more champions through word of mouth, instead of going with a top down approach from management. The paper concludes with learnings from the study stating that further research needs to be completed in certain areas to continue to improve the progressive enhancement of the Taolin social networking platform. Reference

This article, posted on TechCrunch, discusses the release of a report from Nielsen, a worldwide market research firm, based in the US, perhaps best known for the ACNielsen Poll and Television ratings survey (Nielsen, 2011). Wauters here discusses the outcome and conclusions of research conducted by Nielsen into the effectiveness of social media advertising on Facebook. Wauters states, 'the report leverages six months of research consisting of surveys of more than 800,000 Facebook users and more than 125 individual Facebook ad campaigns from some 70 brand advertisers." Mangold & Faulds argue that by "enabling customers to talk to one another" social media is effectively "an extension of traditional word-of-mouth communication"(Mangold & Fauld, 2009). With traditional advertising rates and audiences falling, advertisers are keen to seek ways to reach new markets. Being able to leverage users social media networks can provide an important tool to reach a wider audience. Wauters suggests, according to surveys conducted by Nielsen, advertising recall on Facebook jumped between 16% and 30% when adverts mentioned friends or were featured in friends newsfeeds. Statistics here strongly suggest advertising is more likely to be noticed, and acted upon, if it seen to be 'recommended' by someone consumers know. --- It is interesting also to note Nielsen and Facebook are themselves engaged in a collaborative project to study social media advertising. Wauters points out: "Nielsen and Facebook recently joined forces to develop ad effectiveness solutions to determine consumer attitudes, brand perception and purchase intent from social media advertising." With this in mind, perhaps Wauters is correct to sound a note of caution: "we're not saying the report is bogus, but it's something to keep in mind if you decide to download it for yourself." References: Mangold, W. & Faulds, D. (2009, July-August). Social Media: The New Hybrid Ele

Belinda, This article was particularly of interest to me as I have used Facebook advertising platform both for work and my online business. Social Media advertising to me is different to other online and offline advertising. Having used Facebook as a medium to advertise my business, I can conclude that it's not the best medium to advertise. The conversion rates on the campaigns were low, that is the conversion of clicking and purchase. I accept that there might have been other factors that influenced the data. Comparing my Facebook campaign to my Google Campaign, it showed that campaigns through search i.e. user searches for your service or product is more effective. There is also the probability that campaigns may not reach the right demographic. In 2007, Vodafone suspended advertising on Facebook after its ads appeared on the profile page of a British right-wing Party. This prompted a flurry of other advertisers, including the AA, COI and Virgin Media, to follow suit (Clark, 2007). Facebook cannot effectively measure that the campaign is reaching the right audience. If I am allowed to, can I boldly state that Social Media campaigns are only effective when free or user generated. I applaud the article for questioning the release of such data by Nielsen. The question is, are social media networks the correct channel to advertise when users may be more interested in connecting than buying your product or service? Social Brands perform better on Facebook because most people on Social Networking sites are there for fun so it makes logical sense that industries such as tabloids and blogs (Bullas, 2011). Reference: Bullas, J. (2011). How Effective Are Facebook Ads? Retrieved from JeffBullas.com website: http://www.jeffbullas.com/2011/02/25/how-effective-are-facebook-ads/ Clark, N. (2007). Storm over ads on social sites. Marketing, 1. Retrieved from http://proquest.umi.com.dbgw.lis.curtin.edu.au/pqdweb?index=0&did=1326449831&SrchMode=1&sid=1&Fmt=3&VInst=PROD&

I certainly agree with the article. With mass consumed site like Facebook there should be advantages that give opportunity to certain business. The detail profile users made, can a kind of mass database that marketer can access. Collaborate the business with Facebook may allow company to get broader publication. But in Yu (2010) article, "The Most Powerful Secret in Facebook Ads", he mentioned that only certain business type that can get the best result. Local business will be the one who get most advantages because in Facebook you can have detail specification of where your ad will appear (the reason why it's effective) (Agarwal, 2010). This local business is easier to share among friend because they have likelihood in geographical aspect. Consumer product and entertainment also will get a good publication through Facebook ad. Users interest that provide in Facebook profile will give you opportunity to reach the main target audience of your product. But still the interesting fact that found by Nielsen will affect how business sees social media website. They will think about it straight away to use this kind of advertising methods that will lead them to higher profit (although the marketing teams need to have a complete plan before rather than just follow the trend). Agarwal, A. (2010). How Effective is Advertising on Facebook?. Retrieved from http://www.labnol.org/internet/are-facebook-ads-effective/13957/ Yu, D. (2010). The Most Powerful Secret in Facebook Ads. Retrieved from http://www.allfacebook.com/facebook-ads-secret-2010-06

This is an analytical article in which the writer, Elisha Peterson, discusses the use of Wiki's in her mathmatical undergraduate course. The wiki-based software, wikidot, allowed her students to post questions as well as work collaboratively on assignments. In the article the author outlines the ways in which the wiki was specifically helpful for her class. She believes that it helped to improve participation by her students. This nturn helped students to feel more at ease when they saw what other students assignments were about. She also talks about their collaborative glossary of terms, in which each student had to post two definitions. She found that because of the collaborative nature, the students posted more than the required. It was also interesting to note that students were able to comment and correct other students work, which in turn ensured they werent studying the wrong material. However it seems that what was the most important for her class was the the compatibility wikidot had with their typesetting tool LaTeX. This made typing out mathematical equations an ease instead of students having to scan written material to the site. it seems that another positive of the site is the fact that it shows the logged time of each student, and therefore shows how much time they spent online either merely reading or perhaps editing (and what they edited was shown as well). I feel the most important part of her analysis is the feedback from her students. When examining the feedback it was obvious to see that many students believed that the online collaboration helped them when it came to studying for exams. I believe this would be a great way to get help from other students; you are able to address your question to a whole group of people instead of just one person (the teacher) this way students will get answers much quicker. It seems that the only issue behind the use of a wiki is the fact that students are unable to edit a page at the same time, however it s

Online collaboration has already proved its worth in software production and in the business models of various websites and organisations (eg. Wikipedia). This article provides a good example of how online collaboration can be worthy of inclusion into course material. In this example, students in the author's maths class benefited from extending their small community into an online space because students could correct each other's glossary entries and gain guidance by looking at other students' projects online. While it would have been possible for these students to collaborate offline as well, I found it interesting that various properties of the Internet seemingly made online collaboration easier than offline collaboration. For example, students could access the Wikidot page even outside of class time. Built-in features of the wiki such as forums, syntax for 'definition lists', hyperlinks, and LaTeX further assisted communication online. Having completed units involving the use of online collaboration tools (including Wikidot), I've observed that the usefulness of online tools is inevitably limited by how many students actually participate. While Ye and Kishida (2003) postulate that a 'community of practice' motivates participants to learn through participation, I would theorise that the allocation of marks to collaborative tasks is the most effective motivation for students to participate. Indeed, the author finds that tasks to which marks are allocated had excellent participation rates, while the forum, for which use was not compulsory, was used by only a few students. References: Ye, Y. & Kishida, K. (2003). Toward an Understanding of the Motivation of Open Source Software Developers. Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Software Engineering. Accessed April 15, 2011, from http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=776867

This article discusses the author, Elishia Peterson's experience in creating and maintaining a wiki for her mathematics students to use during their semester. Peterson describes the tasks and activities she assigned the students in order to utilise the online collaboration tool that is Wikidot and was satisfied with the level of student involvement. (2009). Peterson is also forthcoming in any negatives and shortfalls she experienced during the course of the semester period, including the issue of more than one person working on the page at a time (which locks the other out and they are thus required to wait their 'turn') and that having to learn how to use the Wiki properly also took up a little extra time. Despite these minor issues, Peterson explains that the wiki created a more "streamlined student - instructor" relationship and that the communication kept the students engaged. The ability to post course material and answer questions on the wiki, along with the activities assigned to the students, created an environment where the students were able to work together. Peterson does mention that the use of the discussion board may have further enhanced the experience for her students but she found the board largely ignored perhaps as there was no grade requirement to utilise that specific tool. This reminds me of Broomhall's (2009) observation that just because a collaboration tool is available, does not mean it will be used. References: Broomhall, A (2009) No collaboration without communications Retrieved from http://www.steptwo.com.au/papers/cmb_nocollaboration/index.html Peterson, E.. (2009). Using a Wiki to Enhance Cooperative Learning in a Real Analysis Course. Primus : Problems, Resources, and Issues in Mathematics Undergraduate Studies, 19(1), 18-28. Retrieved April 17, 2011, from ProQuest Education Journals. (Document ID: 1642644011). Retrieved from http://proquest.umi.com.dbgw.lis.curtin.edu.au/pqdweb?index=1&did=1642644011&SrchMode=1&sid=10&Fmt=4&VI

This article is a testimony on how Delicious site is a useful and precious to be treasure as one of the online collaboration tools. The use of Delicious site has become one of author habits in the use of bookmarked stuff that related to usability, social media, collaboration and the like. As one of Delicious user, Smith felt that he was building up a useful resource online, as listed in his blogs, Delicious definitely useful for retrieving items we are looking for or rummaging around other users bookmarks. In relating to RSS feeds, Delicious as well has potential to be an RSS news reader, it is a personal taxonomy which helped users to organize other items such as subscription and connection to other site, as for examples Delicious as well connected and collaborates with hashtags on Twitter. There is one concrete example the use of Delicious, named Horizon Report as a way of working where a group of people share interesting stuff with tags label on short-term, mid-term and long-term, then everyone need to votes on what is been collected. Thus is an interesting way of what kind of aspect organization must focus on in the future. What is more Delicious as well integrates into people's everyday work, with the use of bookmarkets, plugins and so forth, every individual able to mark things of interest and collectively build up useful archive. By looking at this article and author opinions, we have kind of information and other people opinion on how useful Delicious site is. Reference: Smith, T. (2011). The Death of Delicious. Retrieved April 10, 2011, from http://www.theotherblog.com/Articles/2011/01/02/the-death-of-delicious/

Personally, I found that delicious is useful tool to use. Maybe I didn't found that bookmarking is important after I entered university and has a lot of reading to do. You can bookmark an article and read it anytime you want. Also it's easy to shared to others. The tagging also make your bookmarks arrange well and easy to access. That why I'm disagree with Smith (2011) when he said that he didn't found that the tagging will encourage people to explore more. Tagging makes everything simpler, in my perspective. You don't have to search around any search engine for particular article that you want, you can go to Delicious and sees the available tags. Wouldn't it be easy? I also think that Delicious would be a good collaboration tools, especially in education sectors. Students can exchange information and article, sees how different people have different sources to a specific topic. The closing down of Delicious will be unpleasant thing to have. It means that we going to lose one of the most common bookmarking website that have certain advantages for people. Smith, T. (2011). The Death of Delicious. Retrieved from http://www.theotherblog.com/Articles/2011/01/02/the-death-of-delicious/

This article mainly highlighting and discuss about the reason and the use of Del.icio.us in terms of social-bookmarking sites, which is called as Del.icio.us lesson. This article mention on how Delicious creates framework named folksonomy - to redefine web navigation, this folksonomy consist of users could tag (their own bookmarks) and navigate them by using direct tag-based interface, hence Delicious will come up with folksonomy for every user on the occasion that Delicious able to aggregate the bookmarks over all users. Potter stated that, "One of the hardest problems in web design is to speak the user's language", therefore by using Delicious along with the folksonomies and tagging features, the web site might be designed and evolved with user's own words. As for the lesson, Potter mentions out a value called personal value precedes network, whereas means as users by the time we build networks of value, as each person on the network we need to find value for ourselves before we contribute to the network, likewise in Delicious where people find their value first and end up with saving their personal bookmarks, in order to find it later they use tags as a patch to their resources and as easy way to locate it. In addition, Delicious able to aggregate tags in terms of find out how worth or value inside other people content. Again, this article has mentioned out one of Delicious specialty, is Del.icio.us tags which provide personal value by the time users uses them to recall back their bookmark links. Furthermore, Potter also commenting and comparing on how Del.icio.us are not the same compare to other sites feature in tags such as Flickr, Danny Sullivan or Search Engine Watch. This article discusses about the specialty of Delicious in terms of sharing and behind the reason of why people chose it. Porter, J. (2006). The Del.icio.us Lesson. Retrieved April 10, 2011, from http://bokardo.com/archives/the-delicious-lesson/

This is a comprehensive blog entry introduction to the potential of Google Docs as a collaborative tool for students. These potential uses are also valuable in work places or other group work. The value of this resource is the well-written way Wetzel articulates the advantages of Google Docs for collaborative practice. His argument is that such a system, aside from being free, is valuable to go beyond the e-mail sharing culture to a full real-time collaborative environment. Wetzel then proceeds to give examples of the potential for the application of Google Docs in education contexts and classrooms. To summarise, he argues three main points in using Google Docs for collaboration:  The ability for Google Docs to provide instant feedback to students on their work  To conserve expenses on school projects such as printing costs  Encouraging the working together of students on a projects in a systematic and orderly manner The tone of the article is clearly very much in favour of using Google Docs for collaborative practice in educational settings. However, though this may not be an issue in educational contexts, there are disadvantages using Google Docs that are not reported. Two bloggers highlight those weaknesses which may be of concern when trying to use more features in Google Docs that are not there but are part of the Microsoft Office Suite:  The speed of internet connection is vital; if it is slow the collaborator may not be able to keep up with others' postings (Bukisa, 2011)  Most of the time you cannot work offline with Google Docs, you must be online to create and update documents (Creative Marketing Solutions, n.d.) However, the article does put a compelling list of features that make Google Docs a good system to use for educational collaboration.

References Bukisa. (2011). Google Docs review. Retrieved April 13, 2011, from http://www.bukisa.com/articles/480255_google-docs-review Creative Marketing Solutions. (n.d.). How to use Google Docs. Retrieved April 13, 2011, from http://knolt.com/creative-marketing-solutions/2010/10/20/heading-2/ Wetzel, D. R. (2009). Google Docs are a free online educational tool: Web-based productivity software for teacher or student collaboration. Suite101.com. Retrieved April 2, 2011, from http://www.suite101.com/content/google-docs-are-a-free-online-educational-tool-a105900

The article, Google Docs are a Free Online Educational Tool Written by David R. Wetzel gives a comprehensive overview of the benefits of Google docs specifically in relation to education. The article outlines these positives a few of these include (but are not limited to) the ability to secure the websites content, making it a safe place to upload work, the ability to comment and give almost instant feedback, the ability to update students on deadlines, information, and helpful tools and also to keep course content. It seems that these positives are quite a universal thing as Keith McPherson (2007) explored all of these benefits in his article new online technologies for new literacy instruction. This reminds me of the use of wiki's in education, a tool that is explored by Elisha Petersen (2009) in which the tool is used to do the same. This brings me to question, which is better? Why use one over the other, if they achieve the exact same thing? Wetzel's article doesn't seem to give any suggestion that the tool has anything wrong with it. Something that, in technology, is hard to believe. Keith McPherson, However, outlines a few limitations of the program. He states "the conversion of graphics and tables from a Word document to a Google document is not reliable and Google Docs does not run on older browsers and Safari or Opera" (McPherson, 2007). Ryan Spoon a Principal at Polaris Venture Partners writes in his blog that he decided to use Wikidot (a wiki platform) instead of Google docs, he believes that although Google docs are great for specific documents they "don't scale over time well… more importantly the documents are treated distinctly and ultimately get as cluttered as your computer desktop" so although two tools (wiki and Google docs) can inevitably achieve the same thing, they still work in very different ways, and one has to evaluate the finer details. References Peterson, E.. (2009). Using a Wiki to Enhance Cooperative Learning in

The idea of collaborative video creation and crowdsourcing

This was an engaging article that provided an insight into collaborative video platform Stroome by interviewing its co-founder. Stroom is a relatively new platform that allows individuals to upload video and edit it with multiple individuals from around the world. Stroom is essentially focused on providing a platform for crowdsourced video. Individuals can work on an editing project by themselves or with others. In a nutshell Stroome can be defined as a "collaborative video editing service" (Scott, 2011). This article links well to my topic of crowdsourcing. I am interested in discovering new tools which draw on 'the wisdom of the crowds' and encourage collaboration between individuals from around the world in new and interesting ways. This article interviews the co-founder of Stroome and provides us with an insight into what stroome is about, how crowdsourcing can be utilised through Stroome, and what the future of video uploading and editing is. It is a reliable and useful source if you were interested in Stroome, crowd sourcing, and the potential path video and crowdsourcing are heading towards. Since this tool is relatively new, it provides us with insights into future trends and how crowdsourcing is evolving online and taking advantage of different media forms for a wide range of purposes. According to the article Crowdsourced videos are just beginning to flourish, however they do have a huge potential and provide great opportunities for areas such as citizen journalism. Most recently, "Stroome was used by protesters in Egypt when the government blocked Twitter and Facebook" (Scott, 2011). This quote from the company's co-founder suggests that this platform is also about liberation and spreading details through viral platforms such as Stroome. Overall a useful source in relation to crowdsourcing, citizen journalism, and online collaboration through interactive media platforms. References Scott, J. (2011). Can collaborative online video creation go mainstre

This news article introduces us to a new visual online collaboration called SyncSpace. According to the article, SyncSpace provides real time remote collaboration. The idea behind the application is to connect people remotely to brainstorm and share ideas in a way that can't be done with traditional modes of communicating. The notion that an organisation constantly has to share ideas in a collaborative way is what SyncSpace core functions are based on. In a true collaboration sense, employees in different cities can now use the app to work together on a variety of projects. The app among other things permits multiple users to view and edit the same document in real time from anywhere in the world ("SyncSpace for Android and iPad Revolutionizes Visual Online Collaboration," 2011). As well as working online, SyncSpace provides the functionality to work offline. Working with other online tools, SyncSpace also allows the user to share their documents on Twitter, Facebook and email. This new application will provide small scale organisations the ability to collaborate and share ideas in real time whilst on the move. In the fast paced business world, remote networking is favourable. SyncSpace is part of a new breed of tools created to aid organisations collaborate effectively. Reference: SyncSpace for Android and iPad Revolutionizes Visual Online Collaboration. (2011). Retrieved from Sfgate.com website: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/g/a/2011/04/13/prweb8296303.DTL

In today's competitive business environment the difficulties linked to keeping up with new and innovative technologies are momentous. 'ERA Real Estate Launches Technology offering that Mirrors Its Culture of Collaboration' article proves just that by demonstrating how a real estate company is using online technology to communicate and collaborate. The article introduces us to the launch of a new intranet solution by ERA Real Estate. The intranet as stated by the article provides significant corporate social networking functionality that links agents, brokers and companies across America and around the globe to collaborate and share knowledge of the 30,000 members they have so far. One of the features on the intranet is the ability to connect with colleagues within the same environment or different locations. The organisation must have other mobile collaborating tools such as smart phones to track or update listings, managing leads and other tasks commonly associated with Real Estate organisations. The new online intranet provides this functionality as well. This article is among a number of great examples of industries communicating and collaborating online as the means to share knowledge. The new organisation social media website by ERA Real Estate will no doubt open the gate to more innovation and the sharing of knowledge. Reference: ERA Real Estate Launches Technology Offering that Mirrors Its Culture of Collaboration. (2011). 1. Retrieved from RISMedia website: http://rismedia.com/2011-04-13/era-real-estate-launches-technology-offering-that-mirrors-its-culture-of-collaboration/

My topic is the collaboration practices of open source software development. OVERVIEW: Open source software has popularised the concept of free, open collaboration through the huge success of projects such as Linux, Apache, and Mozilla. This article from Wired Magazine explores how the concept of open source, propelled by the success of OSS projects, is being applied to all aspects of information compilation, from free scientific journals, to liberally-licensed gene-transfer technology, to freely-editable encyclopaedia Wikipedia. Although this article takes a somewhat liberal interpretation of 'open source', it does a good job of explaining the origins and future of the open source ethos. It also pinpoints two factors behind open source's success: the rise of the Internet, and general exasperation with stifling intellectual property laws. By concentrating on open source as "a broad body of collaborators ... whose every contribution builds on those before" (p. 1), this article successfully links the concept of open source with the broader theme of online collaboration. Open source software developments, along with other incarnations of open source such as Wikipedia, are prime examples of the power of online collaboration. Relying on the work of semi-anonymous participants and loose organisational mechanisms, open source projects create something of value without many of the restrictions of intellectual property. As exemplified in this article, all kinds of organisations can learn from the success of open source's collaborative online approach.

I wanted to comment Emily on what a fascinating example of collaboration this is and a good resource to share. The open source software movement, particularly Linux, was one of the first online examples of the gift economy at work as identified by many anthropologists. Indeed, what makes some scratch their heads when trying to get others to collaborate on projects is the eagerness of those to contribute without reward to the programming process. Much has been made of the fact that niceties are attended to in the community, such as making sure the other programmers know what you did on the code. Anthropologist Coleman (2004) commenting on Project Muse shows not only the power of collaboration practices, but also how political they can get. For example to clarify this point, Zeitlyn (2003) studied the motivations of programmers who get involved in such collaborations. Much open source work is built on an ideal and goal, it is just that the sheer size of these collaborations make them very interesting in the way they are organised and executed. I do think mass scale collaborations such as Red Hat are different to Wikipedia. To me Wikipedia is somewhat anarchistic. There are rules but there is no actual valued goal; not everyone is out improve Wikipedia, whereas Linux has a greater degree of concern for the end goal, which is often being the alternative to Windows. I enjoyed reading all your postings on this issue and it seems that both Zeitlyn and Hertel et al did a lot of work to try to understand open source software and collaboration practices. References Coleman, G. (2004). The Political Agnosticism of Free and Open Source Software and the Inadvertent Politics of Contrast. Anthropological Quarterly, 77(3), 507-519. Zeitlyn, D. (2003). Gift economies in the development of open source software: Anthropological reflections. Research Policy, 32(7), 1287-1291.

In 2006, IBM was responsible for hosting possibly the largest online collaborative brainstorming session known as the IBM InnovationJam. The idea grew from earlier innovation jams held internally and hosted through their intranet. The first one held in 2003 focussed on the launch of new corporate values. The jams were driven by the IBM chairman "who personally participated by typing his thoughts into the jam forums and reading literally thousands of comments." (Transforming your intranet, 2008) This use of the tool and therefore public commitment from senior management to the jams would have undoubtedly helped with staff engagement and participation in the jam. Thousands of suggestions were received from staff covering IBM operations, workplace policies and how to improve relationships. Staff then voted for the best 35 ideas which were then implemented. (S. Musselwhite, 2007) The jamming sessions also sped up the implementation of ideas - partly because the consultation, staff buy-in and testing, and pre-socialisation have already been done. Interestingly, research showed IBM staff trusted the information on their intranet more than the information they got from their managers or even on the informal 'grapevine'. Similar to IKEA and their approach (see other article Inside IKEA's Human Intranet Approach), IBM used an already existing framework or business feature to help technology work. IBM capitalised on the trust in and use of intranet to host a 'jam' - a new medium IBMers created that went "beyond online communities, brainstorming sessions, or traditional suggestion systems." (A Global Innovation Jam, 2011) References: A Global Innovation Jam (2011) Retrieved from http://www.ibm.com/ibm100/us/en/icons/innovationjam/words/ Musselwhite, S (2007) Intranet Strategy and Management London: Ark Group Transforming your intranet (2008) Sydney: Melcrum Publishing

This article brings online collaboration to a new height. Without internet and intranet technology an event of this size spanning 104 countries would not have been possible. Imagine assembling 150,000 participants in a venue and being able to do something with all the information being passed back and forth. Not withstanding the cost to assemble an audience of this size, the level of moderation would slow the collaboration process down, thus reducing the effectiveness of the session. In contrast, the IBM Jam sessions are delivered via a web platform which allows for accountability through personalisation that self regulates what users will and will not post. It provides an audit trail and recognition of great ideas so even the most junior staff member can receive global recognition and kudos for an idea that might have otherwise been misrepresented. The Jams are an effective way of performing an organisation pulse check in a global setting in a very small amount of time as they move at such a rapid pace (Feder, 2001). Further they allow the employees to recognise and drive change from the bottom up instead of just top down as management recognises that you cannot force a "command and control" culture for a workforce. Reference Feder, B.J., (2001). I.B.M. Meets With 52,600, Virtually. Retrieved April 10, 2011 from http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9F06E4DD143CF93BA15756C0A9679C8B63&pagewanted=1

Howard Rheingold is one, if not the most, interesting writer and theorist about collaboration and the use of new participatory media literacy in the framework of Flash Mobs. Cited in almost all the papers, studies and blog posts I have read, he certainly represents a respected thinker and is a reliable author of a number of books on this topic, including Smart Mobs: The Next Social Revolution (2002) and The Virtual Community: Homesteading on the Electronic Frontier (2000), which establish and explain the relationship between social, cultural and new digital communication mediums. In this video in particular, Rheingold talks about the relationships between communication, Medias (as communication mediums) and collective actions. He argues that our communication means, the way we use them, how they are developed and the ways in which we organise socially have been co-evolving since the beginning of human interaction (2005). He also states that this mutual evolution has conveyed new social interactions, and one perfect example to illustrate this theory is certainly the Flash Mob phenomenon. It is just a new way to interact, made possible by online collaboration of humans expressing their natural need to socialise. This reference in my bookmark list represents a valuable piece of information as it describes the historic bond between communication, collaboration and our social development. Indeed, Rheingold emphasises the fact that collaboration, as a vital question of survival, has naturally emerged between humans. REFERENCES Rheingold, H. (2000). The Virtual Community: Homesteading on the Electronic Frontier. MIT Press. And (2002) Smart Mobs: The Next Social Revolution. New-York: Basic Books. And (2005) Howard Rheingold on Collaboration [video streaming], accessible from http://www.ted.com/talks/howard_rheingold_on_collaboration.html (accessed on 10th April, 2011)

Augar, Raitman and Zhou discuss the benefits of using wikis and online collaboration in teaching and learning. In this article, the authors describe what a wiki is, and how it is used. Originating from the Hawaiian word for quick, (Augar, Raitman & Zhou, 2004, p. 95.) wikis are fully editable websites where content can be edited and added by users. This can also be referred to as "open editing" (Leuf and Cunningham, 2001.) and is a great tool for online collaboration. Wikipedia, an online encyclopedia of information is a popular example of a wiki. It is possible for users to edit and add to the content of Wikipedia allowing knowledge and content to come from many sources. Augar, Raitman and Zhou provide a comparison of a few different wikis and their functionality, including the ability to upload images (not all wikis support this) and their method of tracking users and their contributions to the wiki. This particular function is useful to guage participation of students in an educational sense. As Augar, Raitman and Zhou have concluded through a survey of university students at Deakin, for one particular class, 50% of students were not satisfied with the completely online learning experience (2004, p.98) and in order to foster a more positive learning environment with a higher level of satisfaction for students, an ice breaker acitivity has been employed using an onine wiki to improve participation and collaboration. The ice breaker activity took place over two weeks and required students to answer a series of questions designed to help them get to know their fellow students on a more personal level and to introduce them to how to use the wiki properly. Augar, Raitman and Zhou claim the ice breaker activity was successful is accomplishing this. References: Augar, N., Raitman, R. & Zhou, W. (2004). Teaching and learning online with wikis. In R. Atkinson, C. McBeath, D. Jonas-Dwyer & R. Phillips (Eds), Beyond the comf

Wikis is a truly tools for online collaboration, whereas we as users would be able to visit the page we looking for, able to read it, re-organize and even update the structure or content inside, which is in other words, we would be able to collaborate each other in terms of creating one documents with contributing our thought and list out information inside. This article is one from a good example, it's really focus on how wikis can be use in terms of facilitating online education, the article itself I found it as a credible resource which is based on report from School of Information Technology, It is useful and really explaining on how wikis can be use as online education tools. By looking at the value for the project, we can use wikis as one of the online collaboration tools whenever we need to sharing contents as well as adjusting the content, hence we would be able to contribute our part equally and accessible at all times in any occasion. By relating this article with my article - which is talk about the use and features of social bookmarking site (delicious), wikis as well provides special features in terms of facilitating online collaboration which is same as delicious sites, it is useful, support communication and collaboration among users, accessible and convenient. References: Augar, N., Raitman, R. & Zhou, W. (2004). Teaching and learning online with wikis. In R. Atkinson, C. McBeath, D. Jonas-Dwyer & R. Phillips (Eds), Beyond the comfort zone: Proceedings of the 21st ASCILIT

Augar, N., Raitman, R. & Zhou, W. (2004). Teaching and learning online with wikis. In R. Atkinson, C. McBeath, D. Jonas-Dwyer & R. Phillips (Eds), Beyond the comfort zone: Proceedings of the 21st ASCILITE Conference (pp. 95-104). Perth, 5-8 December. http://www.ascilite.org.au/conferences/perth04/procs/augar.html

Instant Messaging (IM) applications, such as AOL Instant Messaging (AIM), MSN Messenger and Yahoo! Messenger, have become very popular in the last decade. This paper by de Vos et al. (2004) investigates the adaption of Instant Messaging (IM) by individual users and pairs of users within a mid-size organization. This paper is important as it examines employees' willingness to adapt to instant messaging tools within an organization. The findings from the research showed a fourfold increase in IM use after the introduction, both in terms of users and the number of conversations. The findings are interesting as it has been argued that the main problem companies experience when implementing online collaboration tools is the objections many employees have when introduced to these new tools (Foster, 2009). The main limitation of the paper is that the authors' research sample was restricted to only one organisation. The period of research was four months before and three months after introduction of IM in an organisation, thus the authors indicate that further research needs to be undertaken to see how usage patterns develop over a longer period of time. de Vos et al found that business mobile phones users don't seem to benefit from IM. However, this finding is not applicable anymore as smartphones with IM applications have been introduced after the paper was written in 2004. References de Vos, H., ter Hofte, H. & de Poot, H. (2004). IM [@Work] Adoption of Instant Messaging in a Knowledge Worker Organisation. Retrieved from https://doc.telin.nl/dsweb/Get/Document-30163/205610019a.pdf Foster, D. (2009). Collaboration Technology and Organisational Change. Retrieved from http://gigaom.com/collaboration/collaboration-technologies-and-organizational-change/

I think the rapid adoption of instant messaging software in the workplace could be due to the trend of consumerisation of products prior to businesses adopting them (Flinley, 2010). Many employees would have been exposed to instant messaging through Skype, Microsoft Messanger etc in their personal use of the Internet (Flinley, 2010). When businesses implement this software into the workplace, they are already aware of the benefits and they are familiar with the how the software is used so this would lead to the employee adopting this software quicker. Instant Messaging is also available in the free download of Skype. Skype provides users with the ability to instant message but also gives users the ability to videoconference, audio calls, file sharing and screen sharing. These are important factors when considering which program to download to implement instant messaging software. By providing staff with instant messaging software that can also provide a variety of tasks saves the company money and provides employees with a variety of ways to communicate and to collaborate with one another. One of the great features of Skype that was updated in their most recent version is screen sharing. Screen sharing is often restricted to the IT department of businesses but Skype gives this functionality to basic users. Allowing people to see each other screens, increases users ability to share information with one another. References: Flinely, K. (2010). Consumerization of IT: 95% of Information Workers Use Self-Purchased Technology for Work. Readwriteweb. Retrieved on 16 April 2011 from http://www.readwriteweb.com/enterprise/2011/03/consumerization-of-it-95-of-in.php Finley, K. (2010). Four Trends in Enterprise Video Conferencing. Read Write Web. Retrieved on 12 April 2011 from http://www.readwriteweb.com/enterprise/2010/10/trends-in-enterprise-video-conferencing.php

I think we should concern about is how to capture and manage the useful knowledge from Instant Messaging (IM). IM helps staffs share knowledge in organisations. de Vos et al. (2004) wanted to find out in the research that IM supports quick question and clarification, keeping touch with friends and families. This is a common situation nowadays. I have an experience that my friends at Hong Kong always discuss their questions of study or work with me with Windows massager. My friend who work at school library often ask me about cataloguing problem when she is working. IM not only allows transferring knowledge within organisations, it also allows staffs interacting with people outside organisations. Therefore, the first issue of manage knowledge is separated the useful message out. It is not useful of private message. IM sharing is not a formal knowledge sharing method. Nevertheless, it place important role in organisations. Caruso (2010) pointed out in his article that organisations must able to understand some of the tools that can utilize to knowledge sharing all among the organisation. Meanwhile, Caruso (2010) also indicated that "80 percent of organisational knowledge exists exclusively within an individual." Although IM is usual in the organisation, but the information is only store in staffs' brain, not in the organisation. We should think an appropriate way to manage the information in IM. Reference Caruso, S. (2010). Informal Workplace Learning and Knowledge Sharing. Retrieved from http://www.eadulteducation.org/adult-learning/informal-workplace-learning-and-knowledge-sharing/ Caruso, S. (2010). Informal Workplace Learning and Knowledge Sharing. Retrieved from http://www.eadulteducation.org/adult-learning/informal-workplace-learning-and-knowledge-sharing/

Subject: How online collaboration has affected the software development industry Reference 4 Shared Waypoints and Social Tagging to Support Collaboration in Software Development By Margaret-Anne Storey, Li-Te Cheng, Ian Bull, Peter Rigby (2006) ABSTRACT This paper presents the conceptual design of TagSEA, a collaborative tool to support asynchronous software development. Our goal is to develop a lightweight source code annotation tool that enhances navigation, coordination, and capture of knowledge relevant to a software development team. Our design is inspired by combining "waypoints" from geographical navigation with "social tagging" from social bookmarking software to support coordination and communication among software developers. We describe the motivation behind this work, walk through the design and implementation, and report early feedback on how this lightweight tool supports collaborative software engineering activities. Finally, we suggest a number of new research directions that this topic exposes. (Rigby, 2006) Full document available from http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.136.3988&rep=rep1&type=pdf TagSEA software/code available from http://tagsea.sourceforge.net/download.html Bibliography Rigby, P. S., Margaret-Anne; Cheng, Li-Te; Bull,Ian. (2006). Shared waypoints and social tagging to support collaboration in software development. Paper presented at the CSCW'06, ACM http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.136.3988&rep=rep1&type=pdf

Review of article - Shared Waypoints and Social Tagging to Support Collaboration in Software Development This article reviews the development and purpose of TagSEA and gives us an understanding of the technology and why it is useful for software development collaboration. This is software that is designed to allow developers to place collaborative annotations attached to specific locations in source code. This is a professionally written article that looks at both why the software was developed and how it works, including a trial evaluation of the software. It also includes information on what it is written in (java) and what it works as part of (eclipse IDE). The article reviews what it can be used for and includes images displaying the look and feel of the software but does not explain how to use the software itself or provide a link to further information. However research on the internet has provided a link http://tagsea.sourceforge.net to where the software is available. The site where the software is located provides further information on how to use the software and links for downloading it as well as information about further developments. Both the article "Shared Waypoints and Social Tagging to Support Collaboration in Software Development" and the website appear to be written/designed to be read/used by people with technical skills i.e. developers and tends to use a significant amount of specialised terminology. Rigby, P. S., Margaret-Anne; Cheng, Li-Te; Bull,Ian. (2006). Shared waypoints and social tagging to support collaboration in software development. Paper presented at the CSCW'06, ACM Retrieved from http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.136.3988&rep=rep1&type=pdf