it…out

We’re in KC again for the 2005 GPN- MIDnet Annual Conference. I have heard a few talks today, but the one that has stuck with me the most so far is one about a topic I know almost nothing about: Virtual Teams. I chose this talk out of the available breakout sessions because it brought to mind the process of developing software (frequently free/open source software) over the internet. It had very little to do with that, and I realized that people are using these kinds of things to work on just about anything, not just technical projects. In particular, this group (The Montreal Band), deals with Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW) and Computer Supported Cooperative Learning (CSCL). I really enjoyed hearing how their projects and groups grew of grassroots, community networks.

In true virtual team fashion, one portion of the presentation was made via speakerphone from California by Benay Dara-Abrams, and in true technology fashion, there were more than a few problems with the phone connection. I enjoyed looking around Benay’s homepage. Lindsey wants our family to be like hers.

A large portion of what they are working on uses what I might, if I knew anything about it, call groupware. To facilitate at-a-distance colla boration, they use some software called Groove. While it is not free software, it offers opportunities for both asynchronous (like a web forum) and synchronous (like instant messaging and chat) communication, shared file repository and synchronization, and a virtual whiteboard. There are some open source projects like opengroupware and dotproject, but they don’t seem quite as advanced yet. Now the fact that Sun has incorporated “collaboration software” (AKA instant messaging with code sharing) into Java Studio 7 doesn’t seem so strange.

In addition to the technical topics, I learned about the dynamics and the lifecycle of a virtual team, that rotating leadership is often useful, and that communication among people who have never met face to face (or F2F) is difficult, especially with technically-minded people.

That part made me think. While the technology isn’t perfect –nonverbal communication and social bonding may be lost–, it does succeed in (virtually) bringing together people who would otherwise never be able to collaborate. I think this is a strong argument that technology does not (have to) drive us apart into an impersonal society. Maybe technologically-limited communication and social interaction is better than none at all. Technology improves very quickly, and this is just the beginning.