skip to main content
10.1145/142750.142767acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PageschiConference Proceedingsconference-collections
Article
Free Access

Gardeners and gurus: patterns of cooperation among CAD users

Published:01 June 1992Publication History

ABSTRACT

We studied CAD system users to find out how they use the sophisticated customization and extension facilities offered by many CAD products. We found that users of varying levels of expertise collaborate to customize their CAD environments and to create programmatic extensions to their applications. Within a group of users, there is at least one local expert who provides support for other users. We call this person a local developer. The local developer is a fellow domain expert, not a professional programmer, outside technical consultant or MIS staff member. We found that in some CAD environments the support role has been formalized so that local developers are given official recognition, and time and resources to pursue local developer activities. In general, this formalization of the local developer role appears successful. We discuss the implications of our findings for work practices and for software design.

References

  1. 1.Badham, R. Computer-aided design, work organization and the integrated factory. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management 36, 3 (1989), 216-226.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  2. 2.Berardinis, L., Dibble, M., Dvorak, P., and Rouse, N. CAD/CAM industry report. Machine Design (May 23, 1991), 47-58.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.Bowen, W. The puny payoff from office computers. In Computers in the Human Context. T. Forester, Ed. Basil Blackwell, New York, 1989, 267-271. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. 4.Brooks, L., and Wells, C. Role conflict in design supervision. 1EEE Transactions on Engineering Management 36, 4 (1989), 271-281.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.Clement, A. Cooperative support for computer work: A social perspective on the empowering of end users. Proceedings CSCW'90. (Los Angeles, 5-7 October, 1990), 223-236. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. 6.Cuomo, D., and Sharit, J. A study of human performance of computer-aided architectural design. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction 1, 1 (1989), 69-107.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  7. 7.Dillon, A., and Sweeney, M. The application of cognitive psychology to CAD. People and Computers IV." Proceedings of the Fourth Conference of the British Computer Society Human-Computer Interaction Specialist Group. (University of Manchester, 5-9 September, 1988), 477-488. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. 8.DiSessa, A. A principled design for an integrated computational environment. Human-Computer Interaction 1, (1985), 1-47.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. 9.Encamacao, J., and Schlechtendahl, E. Computer AidedDesign: Fundamentals and System Architectures. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1983. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. 10.Forester, T. Computers in the Human Context. Basil Blackwell, New York, 1989.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. 11.Foundyller, C. CAD~CAM, CAE: The Contemporary Technology. Daratech Associates, Cambridge, Mass., 1984.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.Franke, R. Technological revolution and productivity decline: The case of US banks. In Computers in the Human Context. T. Forester, Ed. Basil BlackweU, New York, 1989, 281-290. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. 13.Graham, B. Applying software tools to enhance engineering group productivity. Proceedings of the Fifth Annual Applied Power Electronics Conference and Exposition. (Los Angeles, 11-16 March, 1990), 612-618.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  14. 14.Krouse, J., Mills, R., Beckert, B., and Dvorak, P. CAD/CAM planning: 1990 - Managing people and the technology. Industry Week 239, 13 (1990), CC4-CC10.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.Mackay, W. (1990). Patterns of sharing customizable software. Proceedings CSCW'90. (Los Angeles, 7-10 October, 1990), 209-221. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. 16.MacLean, A., Carter, K., Lovstrand, L., and Moran, T. User- tail orable systems: Pressing the issues with buttons. Proceedings, CHI'90. (Seattle, 1-5 April, 1990), 175-182. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. 17.Majchrzak, A., Chang, T., Barfield, W., Eberts, R., and Salvendy, G. Human Aspects of Computer-Aided Design. Taylor and Francis, Philadelphia, 1987. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. 18.Manske, F., and Wolf, H. Design work in change: Social conditions and results of CAD use in mechanical engineering. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management 36, 4 (1989), 282-292.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  19. 19.Maulsby, D., Witten, I., and Kittlitz, K. Metamouse: Specifying graphical procedures by example. Computer Graphics 23 (1989), 127-136. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. 20.Mayer, T. Social impacts of computer-aided architectural design. Design Studies 7, 4 (1986), 178-184.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.Myers, B. Text formatting by demonstration. Proceedings CH1'91. (New Orleans, 27 April- 2 May, 199 I), 251-256. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. 22.Nardi, B., and Miller, J. The spreadsheet interface: A basis for end user programming. Proceedings Interact'90. (Cambridge, England, 27-31 August, 1990), 977-983. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. 23.Nardi, B., and Miller, J. Twinkling lights and nested loops: Distributed problem solving and spreadsheet development. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies 34, (1991), 161-184. (Reprinted in Computer Supported Cooperative Work and Groupware, S. Greenberg, ed. Academic Press, London, 1991.) Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. 24.Panko, R. End User Computing: Management, Applications, and Technology. John WHey and Sons, New York, 1988. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. 25.Perzanowski, P. Scheduling CAD productivity. AACE Transactions (1991), 1.1.1-I.1.5.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.Petre, M., and Green, T.R.G. Requirements of graphical notations for professional users: Electronics CAD systems as a case study. In press. Le Travail Humain (1991).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.Pikaar, R. Situation analysis of design tasks for CAD systems. Behaviour and Information Technology 8, 3 (1989), 191-206.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  28. 28.Raths, D. Nurturing the flock: As the PC population grows, so does the burden on support staff. InfoWorld, 19 August, 1991, 38-40.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.Sebborn, M, Customising of a two-dimensional CAD system to service the needs of a small high technology company. Computer-Aided Engineering Journal (February, 1989), 13-15. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  30. 30.Shaiken, H. The automated factory: Vision and reality. In Computers in the Human Context. T. Forester, Ed. Basil Blackwell, New York, 1989, 291-300. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  31. 31.Sinclair, M., Siemieniuch, C., and John, P. A usercentered approach to define high-level requirements for next-generation CAD systems for mechanical engineering. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management 36, 4 (1989), 262-270.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  32. 32.Sutherland, I. SKETCHPAD: A Man-Machine Graphical Communication System. Proceedings of AFIPS 23, 329-346 (Detroit, May, 1963).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.Ullman, D., and Dietterich, T. Mechanical design methodology: implications on future developments of computer-aided design and knowledge-based systems. Engineering with Computers 2, 1 (1987), 21-29.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  34. 34.Ullman, D., Wood, S., and Craig, D. The importance of drawing in the mechanical design process. Computers and Graphics 14, 2 (1990), 263-274.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  35. 35.Warner, T. Information technology as a competitive burden. In Computers in the Human Context. T. Forester, Ed. Basil Blackwell, New York, 1989, 273-280. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  36. 36.Wolz, U. The impact of user modeling on text generation in task-centered settings. Proceedings Second International Conference on User Modeling (Honolulu, 29 March- 1 April, 1990).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Gardeners and gurus: patterns of cooperation among CAD users

          Recommendations

          Comments

          Login options

          Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

          Sign in
          • Published in

            cover image ACM Conferences
            CHI '92: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
            June 1992
            713 pages
            ISBN:0897915135
            DOI:10.1145/142750

            Copyright © 1992 ACM

            Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

            Publisher

            Association for Computing Machinery

            New York, NY, United States

            Publication History

            • Published: 1 June 1992

            Permissions

            Request permissions about this article.

            Request Permissions

            Check for updates

            Qualifiers

            • Article

            Acceptance Rates

            CHI '92 Paper Acceptance Rate67of216submissions,31%Overall Acceptance Rate6,199of26,314submissions,24%

          PDF Format

          View or Download as a PDF file.

          PDF

          eReader

          View online with eReader.

          eReader