Written in 2000, this appears to be one of the earlier works on collaboratories, which makes sense given that the coining of the term is not much earlier (attributed to Wm. A Wulff 1989). I think collaboratories are particularly interesting, arising as they did at the intersection of new interests in interdisciplinary science, and new networking technology. One of my interests is in tracing how (or whether) collaborative processes were rethought as we developed collaboratories. Given that this book is decidedly directed toward technical issues and challenges, rather than behavioral issues, it seems that not much of the early work was concerned yet with these questions.

For example, the first chapter, written by leaders in this area Gary Olson, Tom Finholt, and Stephanie Teasley, claims that behavioral science involvement is important to help with design of the new technologies, and with longitudinal evaluation. In other words, concerns that are primarily outside of doing the science itself.

You can definitely get the sense that the authors here are hoping to help others responding more effectively to a new technology/context. There are chapters on handling intellectual property, forming shared databases, and capturing information and knowledge in formats that can be preserved and reused.

The only portion of the book that makes a sustained argument about the social aspects of work in collaboratories is in a chapter by Richard T. Kouzes, “Electronic collaboration in environmental and physical science research” (p 89-112). In a section on the sociology of collaboration, Kouzas repeats the oft-heard maxim that collaboration is at the heart of science, but (as other before him have as well) he means that discoveries of science build on each other and are cumulative. It would be too easy to miss an important point he makes (and that I agree with) that moving to online media makes apparent what we have taken for granted in face-to-face contexts, such as gesture and other nonverbals. Kouzas argues that most of the problems with adopting groupware and other collaboratory tools is that the technology is primitive and very different from face-to-face (which feels more natural and and allows us to interact in ways that we expect) .

Kouzas lists four psychosocial issues crucial to the success of a collaboratory: attention to ritual, autonomy, sense of trust, sense of place. Ritual allows for the required mechanisms of social interaction. Autonomy determines how an organization is governed or regulated. Sence of place allows people to feel comfortable in their surroundings. Sense of trust allows people to cooperatively interact.

His analysis of the affordances of co-location is astute: “Autonomy … is implemented through informal communications, acquaintances, and associations that occur in any organization. Autonomy within a collaboratory must be embedded in a considered matter into the virtual organization. Trust is established among collaborators through shared experience. A collaboratory will have to engage some special means to establish the sort of trust that coworkers normally develop over time through informal means by meeting face-to-face and working together in the same place. A sense of place allows people to feel comfortable in their surroundings, providing security in which to be creative. … if a collaboratory can harness some of the design strategies that have been so successful in physical group settings, it can also create a sense of place and purpose among its dispersed members that will engender an enduring sense of affiliation and cooperation toward its goals. A collaboratory environment must provide the richness of information to allow for such natural interactions among collaborators.” (p. 105)

The question of how to achieve effective online experiences, using face-to-face as a starting point, is a question also asked by several communication scholars (think of the research on media richness or on interactivity). The insights here are an interesting contribution to the discussion.