Conversations in Context
A Twitter Case for Social Media Systems Design
Aldo de Moor
CommunitySense
the Netherlands
WWW.COMMUNITYSENSE.NL

Communication tools: then

Communication tools: now

Collaborative communities
Communities
Strong, lasting interactions
Bonds between members ?
Common space
Sense of community
Collaborative communities
Common goals
Effective/efficient communication
Perform/coordinate work
Community governance structures/processes
Common space = Internet + face-to-face
Prime examples in/between/around (multinational)
corporations, (government) bureaucracies, research
networks

Collaborative fragmentation
Paradox:
Never before so much need & potential for collaboration
Never before so much fragmentation of collaboration
Collaborative fragmentation
Organizations
Workflows
Technologies
Pragmatic errors abound
Breakdown of social and contextual components of a
discourse
Far beyond ICT

PragWeb to the rescue
Pragmatic Web perspective
How are communicative actions with a pragmatic context
performed via Web media?
How can mutual understanding and commitments to action
evolve in conversations?
Research question
How can social media (and other tools/information systems)
be put to effective use
In the goal-driven conversation context typical of
collaborative communities?

Outline
Conceptual model of collaborative communities
Conversations in socio-technical context
Communicative affordances/constraints of Twitter
Social media systems design perspective
Scenario

Collaborative communities –
usage context
Goals
Activities: operationalized goals, with deliverable
“writing a group report”
Aspects: abstract goals, across processes and structures
“legitimacy”, “efficiency”
Actors
Detailed role ontologies
“Administrator”, “Facilitator”, “Member”
“WikiChampion”, “WikiZenMaster”
“Position Defender”, “Argument Summarizer”, “Report Conclusion
Editor”
Domains
Professional culture, work practices, …

Collaborative communities –
tool system
Tool system
the system of integrated and customized information and
communication tools tailored to the specific information,
communication, and coordination requirements of a
collaborative community
Tool system levels
Systems: “group report writing system”
Tools: “blogs”, “courseware”, “authoring support tool”
Modules: “position definition/taking”, “argument creation”
Functions: “add argument pro”, “add argument con”

Collaboration patterns

Community = conversation
Conversations build the common ground of a community
Principle of least collaborative effort
depends on purpose and (costs of using) the medium
Language/Action Perspective
Conversations = set of communicative acts grounded in social
relationships and focused on organizational coordination
Conversations are back with a vengeance on the Internet
1960s-1980s: e-mail, mailing lists, Usenet (communication)
1990s-2000s: the Syntactic, early semantic Web (information)
2010s-…: Web 2.0, social media, Semantic Web++/Pragmatic
Web… (content + conversations + context = collaboration)

Socio-technical conversation
context

Conversation purposes
Information exchange
Coordination
Collaborative sensemaking
Relationship building

Twitter functions
• Self-contained
tweets
• Replies
• Retweets
• Links
• Topics (#)
• Lists

Twitter personal profiles
http://twitter.com/hrheingold

Twitter lists
http://twitter.com/hrheingold/journalism

Twitter topic conversations
#semanticweb
http://twitter.com/#search?q=%23semanticweb

Twitter use characteristics
• Twitter usage
– Information sharing, information seeking, maintaining
relationships (Java et al. 2007)
– Keeping in touch, drawing attention to info, gathering
useful info, seeking help and opinions, releasing
emotional stress (Zhao and Rosson 2009)
• Twitter users
– Broadcasters, acquaintances, miscreants/evangelists
(Krishnamurty et al. 2008)
– Information sources, friends, information seekers (Java
et al. 2007)

Tool comparison: conversation
functionality
Blogs Twitter
Conversation • Many blogs • One server
fragmentation
Conversation • Comment on • Tweet reply to
links post? + tweet? –
• Post on post? - • Tweeter has
replies? +
Conversation • Scattered: • Centralized:
tracking conversation replies, topics +
reconstruction - • Linear
presentation -

Tool comparison: conversation
practices
Blogs Twitter
“Conversational • Linking to • Replies, # topics +
glue” posts/comments +
Conversation • Tangential • Tangential
spawning conversations + conversations ++
Conversation with • Conversation with • Conversation with
self/others self + others +

Twitter in conversation context

Socio-technical systems design
Ecosystems of tools
Communityware = dinosaurs R.I.P.
Functionalities compete, evolve, are used, and replaced
Apps = essence of Pragmatic Web!
No generic solutions, always collaborative sensemaking
(of collaboration patterns?) needed by community for
selection, linking, configuring of tools
Socio-technical systems design
Collaborative communities need to evaluate the
functionalities in their unique usage context
Understand the purpose of the technologies in this context
Adopt a collaborative sensemaking process view with
stakeholders

Scenario: IPCC report review
International Panel on Climate Change
• Very complex assessment reports
• E.g. 5th report had 831 scientific contributors
• Results often controversial
• InterAcademy Council requested to do independent review
• But: quality/legitimacy requires input from multitude of
stakeholders
• How to scale their sufficient/timely input ?

Scenario: IPCC report review (1)
IPCC Report IPCC Report
Review Wiki Review
Mailing List
Write review Coordinate
review
Topic #1
Topic #1
Topic #11
View: world View: review committee
Edit: topic stewards Edit: review committee

Scenario: IPCC report review (2)
@ipcc_review #ipcc_t11 #ipcc_t11
account topic conv’n experts list
Solicit input Review input Use input
(public) (private)
• Requests
• Announcements
• @John: I know an expert
X #ipcc_t11 • @Jane: I know an expert Y
#ipcc_t11: Needed, expert • @Jane: I know an expert Y #ipcc_t11”
on polar ice cap melting #ipcc_t11”
View: world View: world View: review committee
Edit: review committee Edit: --- Edit: review committee

Conclusions
More communicative potential, but less of it used than ever
Collaborative communities analysis
socio-technical conversation contexts
Social media systems design
Collaborative sensemaking
Match communicative requirements with enabling (social
media) functionalities, e.g. Twitter
Directions
Ontologies for interaction
E.g. collaboration patterns
“Pragmatic bus”
Community lifecycle alignment
Socio-technical systems devt methodologies
Use social media systems lens to (re)gain collaborative focus