Communication

1.Comunication scholars have examined the role of the Internet within organizations from early in its existence, particularly after the deregulation and commercialization of the Web in the mid-1990s. Morris and Ogan (1996) briefly raise questions about who sets the agenda on a Web site. More importantly, Pickering and King (1995) reference Perin (1991) when they point out that computer mediated communication (CMC) technologies like email, when used in communities of users made up of members of a related occupation but employed by different organizations, create potential rivals to managerial control (p. 482). Unlike email, Websites are more managed channels of communication within an organization. But many Websites, especially forums and message boards, facilitate the same type of weak tie networks (p. 480) via interorganizational computer mediated communication (ICMC).

2.In an essay designed to challenge traditional modes of approaching organizational studies, Schein (1996) points out the ways in which technological advances, particularly those in information technology, have made it possible to conceive of new kinds of organizing principles that do not depend on co-location in time or space (p. 235). These changes, according to Schein, necessitate learning a great deal:

• methods of collaboration,
• open and trusting communication,
• dependency issues in ambiguous hierarchies,
• changing tensions between power and loyalty,
• and new organizational design tactics, to name a few (p. 235)

Pickering and King (1995) agree about these changes, and characterize the transformation as one of hierarchy giving way to market modes of coordination (p. 484-485).

3.Only one year separates Pickering and King (1995) from December (1996) or Morris and Ogan (1996), but Pickering & King differ from the others in their characterization of CMC as one-to-one communication vs. one-to-many, many-to-many, and many-to-one. Identification of the number of participants in online communication is vital for the conception of Web communication as based in community rather than as a Consensus of individuals. Pickering and King identify email as one-to-one communication, and by that characterization, they limit their study of Internet communication in a way similar to Schein's criticism of his own study of organizations (p. 230-231) and Johnson's (1998) conception of human-computer interaction as "user-centered" with culture [r]esiding on the outer edges of the complex (p.39). Kalmbach (2001), writing about Web design for fluid page transformation, agrees when he asserts that

a range of sizes must be considered when developing Web pages. In a time when "one-to-one" is all the rage, it doesn't make sense to create "one-to-many" layouts. In the end, the entire user experience should be one-to-one at all times. (The Myth of 800x600)

4.The primary tension for designers building websites that facilitate communication of F2F communities is that Consensus would call for Kalmbach's one-to-one at all times. But Compromise requires discretion, knowing when one-to-many will be sufficient. Kalmbach sets up a false binary by not including every option. Compromise involves exploring ways to push for many-to-many options, too. Even the blogosphere "gets it" now, as evidenced in "Many 2 Many: a group weblog on social software." The irony is that the Many 2 Many bloggers are tapping into the ritual nature of communication and the role of communication in the development of cultural ties--"community"--even as they make a meta-exploration of tools facilitating social interaction.

5.Gunkel (2000) asserts that a ritual view of communication

is not concerned with how much information may be sent over what channels to how many people for what effect. It is interested in the way in which communicative events are employed to create, sustain, and transform specific social traditions and affiliations. As a result, the ritual approach provides for an understanding of communication that is not so much concerned with the traditional issues of clarity, speed, and efficiency but is interested in intentionally repetitious, highly inefficient, and at times noisy performances that produce and reproduce specific communal structures. (Hacking Cyberspace p. 79)

He goes on to point out that transmission concerns and perspectives are not negated. Importantly, Gunkel reinforces that both the transmission view and the ritual view of communication are perspectives, and offer different lenses for understanding techniques and technologies for communicating. But the cultural role of communication is a vital perspective for designers seeking to promote and enhance F2F communities via Web tools and interfaces. Similarly, designers must understand and explore the existing traditions and affiliations of users before implementing interfaces to develop that culture further.