Supporting Engineering DesignCommunication through a Social Media

ToolDESIGN 2014

James A. Gopsill

May, 2014

Introduction

“Communication is an essential part of any designprocess”

Clarkson and Eckert [2005]

“Numerous studies corroborate the claim thatengineers spend a majority of their time

communicating [Hailey, 2000]. Estimates usually rangefrom 40 to 60% of their work time [Hertzum and

Pejtersen, 2000], but may be as high as 75% [Nagle,1998].”

Tenopir and King [2004]

Supporting Engineering Design Communication through a Social Media Tool DESIGN 2014 James A. Gopsill 1 / 14

Research Gap - Descriptive Research

Research Data Captured Research

Structured Interviews Curtis et al. [1988]

Survey Kraut and Streeter [1995]

Observational Guinan [1986]

Video Recordings Walz [1988], Olson et al. [1992]

Audio Recordings Minneman [1991]

Observation & Interviews Sonnenwald [1996]

Examples of Empirical Research (Adapted from: Sonnenwald [1996])

Supporting Engineering Design Communication through a Social Media Tool DESIGN 2014 James A. Gopsill 2 / 14

Research Gap - Descriptive Research

Research Data Captured Research

Structured Interviews Curtis et al. [1988]

Survey Kraut and Streeter [1995]

Observational Guinan [1986]

Video Recordings Walz [1988], Olson et al. [1992]

Audio Recordings Minneman [1991]

Observation & Interviews Sonnenwald [1996]

Examples of Empirical Research (Adapted from: Sonnenwald [1996])

Little Prescriptive Research

Supporting Engineering Design Communication through a Social Media Tool DESIGN 2014 James A. Gopsill 2 / 14

Tool Development IDefine Engineering Design Communication

Understand the importance of Engineering Design Communica-tion in the context of Engineering Design

Define the concept of Social Media

Understand the technologies commonly associated with Social Media

Elicit the engineers requirements for supporting Engineering Design Communication in a comput-er-mediated environment

Elicit the best practice considera-tions when applying technologies in a Social Media manner.

Develop Social Media Approach

Instantiate within Social Media Tool

Validate the requirements and considerations from a use persepc-tive

Secondary analysis of user behav-iour to understand the impact the tool has made

Supporting Engineering Design Communication through a Social Media Tool DESIGN 2014 James A. Gopsill 3 / 14

Tool Development II

Supporting Engineering Design Communication through a Social Media Tool DESIGN 2014 James A. Gopsill 4 / 14

Generating a Communication

Supporting Engineering Design Communication through a Social Media Tool DESIGN 2014 James A. Gopsill 5 / 14

Generating a Communication

Supporting Engineering Design Communication through a Social Media Tool DESIGN 2014 James A. Gopsill 5 / 14

Generating a Communication

Supporting Engineering Design Communication through a Social Media Tool DESIGN 2014 James A. Gopsill 5 / 14

Generating a Communication

Supporting Engineering Design Communication through a Social Media Tool DESIGN 2014 James A. Gopsill 5 / 14

Generating a Communication

Supporting Engineering Design Communication through a Social Media Tool DESIGN 2014 James A. Gopsill 5 / 14

Generating a Communication

Supporting Engineering Design Communication through a Social Media Tool DESIGN 2014 James A. Gopsill 5 / 14

Generating a Communication

Supporting Engineering Design Communication through a Social Media Tool DESIGN 2014 James A. Gopsill 5 / 14

Generating a Communication

Supporting Engineering Design Communication through a Social Media Tool DESIGN 2014 James A. Gopsill 5 / 14

Study

I Formula StudentI 33 engineersI Multi-disciplinary projectI 11 Weeks

Course: No.

Mechanical Engineering 17

Automotive Engineering 13

Integrated Mechanical & Elec-trical Engineering (IME)

3

Supporting Engineering Design Communication through a Social Media Tool DESIGN 2014 James A. Gopsill 6 / 14

Dataset Overview

Summary Information Value

Total number of E-Mails 509

Total number of Social Media messages 2,441

Number of original E-Mail communications (i.e. no replies or forwards) 194

Number of original Social Media communications (i.e. no replies) 488

Supporting Engineering Design Communication through a Social Media Tool DESIGN 2014 James A. Gopsill 7 / 14

Insights - Communication Generation

I Little impact on the overalllevel of communication

I Creation of acommunication between2-4 mins

I Compared to 6 mins of ane-mail of the same length[Karat et al., 1999]

I Consistent level of creationtime

I Outliers due to creation ofthe image of the artefact

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 110

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

Week

Nu

mb

er

of

Co

mm

un

ica

tio

ns

Cre

ate

d

Original E−Mails Created

PartBook Communications Created

Week6 7 8 9 10 11

Tim

e Sp

ent

(min

s)

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

Supporting Engineering Design Communication through a Social Media Tool DESIGN 2014 James A. Gopsill 8 / 14

Insights - Communication Habits

Network analysis comparison between E-Mail and PartBook

Supporting Engineering Design Communication through a Social Media Tool DESIGN 2014 James A. Gopsill 9 / 14

Insights - Types of Communication

I Idea generation atthe early stages ofthe project

I Two humps ininformation request

I Decisions peak atweek 6

I Ideas tend to belonger conversations

I Observations tend tobe short but has along tail

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 110

5

10

15

20

25

Idea

Issue

Confirmation

Information Request

Decision

Action

Week

Count

Obs

erva

tion

Clar

ification

Idea

Prob

lem B

reak

down

Issue

Help

Projec

t Man

agem

ent*

Con

firmation

Info

rmation Req

uest

Disc

ussio

n*

Dec

ision

Projec

t Upd

ate*

Com

paris

on

Spon

sorship*

Action*

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Purpose of Communication

Num

ber

of R

eplie

s per

com

m

* Additional Purposes Added by the Engineers

[2.4] [2.3] [2.5] [2.1] [3] [2.4] [1.8] [2.6] [2.7] [2.4] [2.7] [3.4] [2.2] [1.5] [1.7]

Mean Average Engineers Involved in the Communications grouped by Purpose

Supporting Engineering Design Communication through a Social Media Tool DESIGN 2014 James A. Gopsill 10 / 14

Insights - Potential Implications on PM

I Differentiate engineersbased upon theircommunication behaviour

I Identification ofknowledgeable engineers

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Engineer

Discussion

Information Request

Idea

Clarification

Action Required

Observation

Help

Confirmation

Comparison

Issue

0

3

6

9

12

>15

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Engineer

Purpose of Communication Replies to Purposes of Communication

Disucssion in Discussion

Opinion in Information Requests

Opinion in Discussions

Observation in Discussions

Confirmation in Information Requests

Opinion in Ideas

Experience in Information Requests

Discussion in Information Requests

Opinion in Help

Confirmation in Discussion

Supporting Engineering Design Communication through a Social Media Tool DESIGN 2014 James A. Gopsill 11 / 14

Conclusion

I The overall communication workload between the engineersremained largely unaffected.

I The time taken to create an Engineering Design Communicationis reduced (compared to e-mail).

I A Social Media tool that has been built specifically to support thattype of Engineering Design Communication has the potential toprovide a more collaborative method of communication.

I Levels of normality could be defined for various purposes ofcommunication and deviation may indicate an area of potentialinterest for the Project Management Team.

I The levels of various purposes of communication over time mayindicate current stage of the project.

I Engineers can be differentiated from one another based onpurpose of communication, replies to communications andartefacts that are discussed, potentially leading toknowledgeable engineers being identified.

Supporting Engineering Design Communication through a Social Media Tool DESIGN 2014 James A. Gopsill 12 / 14

Conclusion

I The overall communication workload between the engineersremained largely unaffected.

I The time taken to create an Engineering Design Communicationis reduced (compared to e-mail).

I A Social Media tool that has been built specifically to support thattype of Engineering Design Communication has the potential toprovide a more collaborative method of communication.

I Levels of normality could be defined for various purposes ofcommunication and deviation may indicate an area of potentialinterest for the Project Management Team.

I The levels of various purposes of communication over time mayindicate current stage of the project.

I Engineers can be differentiated from one another based onpurpose of communication, replies to communications andartefacts that are discussed, potentially leading toknowledgeable engineers being identified.

Supporting Engineering Design Communication through a Social Media Tool DESIGN 2014 James A. Gopsill 12 / 14

Conclusion

I The overall communication workload between the engineersremained largely unaffected.

I The time taken to create an Engineering Design Communicationis reduced (compared to e-mail).

I A Social Media tool that has been built specifically to support thattype of Engineering Design Communication has the potential toprovide a more collaborative method of communication.

I Levels of normality could be defined for various purposes ofcommunication and deviation may indicate an area of potentialinterest for the Project Management Team.

I The levels of various purposes of communication over time mayindicate current stage of the project.

I Engineers can be differentiated from one another based onpurpose of communication, replies to communications andartefacts that are discussed, potentially leading toknowledgeable engineers being identified.

Supporting Engineering Design Communication through a Social Media Tool DESIGN 2014 James A. Gopsill 12 / 14

Conclusion

I The overall communication workload between the engineersremained largely unaffected.

I The time taken to create an Engineering Design Communicationis reduced (compared to e-mail).

I A Social Media tool that has been built specifically to support thattype of Engineering Design Communication has the potential toprovide a more collaborative method of communication.

I Levels of normality could be defined for various purposes ofcommunication and deviation may indicate an area of potentialinterest for the Project Management Team.

I The levels of various purposes of communication over time mayindicate current stage of the project.

I Engineers can be differentiated from one another based onpurpose of communication, replies to communications andartefacts that are discussed, potentially leading toknowledgeable engineers being identified.

Supporting Engineering Design Communication through a Social Media Tool DESIGN 2014 James A. Gopsill 12 / 14

Conclusion

I The overall communication workload between the engineersremained largely unaffected.

I The time taken to create an Engineering Design Communicationis reduced (compared to e-mail).

I A Social Media tool that has been built specifically to support thattype of Engineering Design Communication has the potential toprovide a more collaborative method of communication.

I Levels of normality could be defined for various purposes ofcommunication and deviation may indicate an area of potentialinterest for the Project Management Team.

I The levels of various purposes of communication over time mayindicate current stage of the project.

I Engineers can be differentiated from one another based onpurpose of communication, replies to communications andartefacts that are discussed, potentially leading toknowledgeable engineers being identified.

Supporting Engineering Design Communication through a Social Media Tool DESIGN 2014 James A. Gopsill 12 / 14

Conclusion

I The overall communication workload between the engineersremained largely unaffected.

I The time taken to create an Engineering Design Communicationis reduced (compared to e-mail).

I A Social Media tool that has been built specifically to support thattype of Engineering Design Communication has the potential toprovide a more collaborative method of communication.

I Levels of normality could be defined for various purposes ofcommunication and deviation may indicate an area of potentialinterest for the Project Management Team.

I The levels of various purposes of communication over time mayindicate current stage of the project.

I Engineers can be differentiated from one another based onpurpose of communication, replies to communications andartefacts that are discussed, potentially leading toknowledgeable engineers being identified.

Supporting Engineering Design Communication through a Social Media Tool DESIGN 2014 James A. Gopsill 12 / 14

Questions

Thank you for your attention

Supporting Engineering Design Communication through a Social Media Tool DESIGN 2014 James A. Gopsill 13 / 14

References

J. Clarkson and C. Eckert. Design process improvement: a review of current practice. Springer Verlag, 2005.

Bill Curtis, Herb Krasner, and Neil Iscoe. A field study of the software design process for large systems. Commun. ACM, 31(11):1268–1287, November 1988. ISSN 0001-0782. doi: 10.1145/50087.50089. URL http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/50087.50089.

Patricia J Guinan. Specialist-generalist communication competence: a field experiment investigating the communicationbehavior of information systems developers. PhD thesis, 1986.

J.C. Hailey. Effective communication for emc engineers. In Electromagnetic Compatibility, 2000. IEEE International Symposiumon, volume 1, pages 265 –268 vol.1, 2000. doi: 10.1109/ISEMC.2000.875575.

Morten Hertzum and Annelise Mark Pejtersen. The information-seeking practices of engineers: searching for documents as wellas for people. Information Processing & Management, 36(5):761 – 778, 2000. ISSN 0306-4573. doi:10.1016/S0306-4573(00)00011-X. URL http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S030645730000011X.

Clare-Marie Karat, Christine Halverson, Daniel Horn, and John Karat. Patterns of entry and correction in large vocabularycontinuous speech recognition systems. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in ComputingSystems, CHI ’99, pages 568–575, New York, NY, USA, 1999. ACM. ISBN 0-201-48559-1. doi: 10.1145/302979.303160. URLhttp://doi.acm.org/10.1145/302979.303160.

Robert E. Kraut and Lynn A. Streeter. Coordination in software development. Commun. ACM, 38(3):69–81, March 1995. ISSN0001-0782. doi: 10.1145/203330.203345. URL http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/203330.203345.

Scott L. Minneman. The social construction of a technical reality: Empirical Studies of Group Engineering Design Practice. PhDthesis, 1991.

J.G. Nagle. Communication in the profession. Today’s Engineer, 1(1), 1998.

Gary M. Olson, Judith S. Olson, Mark R. Carter, and Marianne Storrosten. Small group design meetings: An analysis ofcollaboration. Human Computer Interaction, 7(4):347–374, 1992. doi: 10.1207/s15327051hci0704 1. URLhttp://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1207/s15327051hci0704_1.

Diane H. Sonnenwald. Communication roles that support collaboration during the design process. Design Studies, 17(3):277 –301, 1996. ISSN 0142-694X. doi: 10.1016/0142-694X(96)00002-6. URLhttp://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0142694X96000026.

Carol Tenopir and Donald W. King. Communication Patterns of Engineers. Wiley-IEEE Computer Society Pr, 2004. ISBN047148492X.

Diane B. Walz. A longitudinal study of the group design process. PhD thesis, 1988.

Supporting Engineering Design Communication through a Social Media Tool DESIGN 2014 James A. Gopsill 14 / 14