Degree project
Usability of Different Features in Communication Tools and Platforms
A Qualitative Research in Remote Work Settings
Author: Tina Bilus
Supervisor: Elissavet Kartaloglou and Despina Fyntanoglou Examiner: Associate Professor Päivi Jokela
Date: 2020-10-01
Course Code:4IK50E, 15 credits
Abstract
This qualitative study is constructive in its nature and it aims to find how remote workers perceive usability of communication features across different tools and platforms. Answering two main research questions; How do remote users perceive usability of communication features across different communication tools and platforms? and How, according to users, that features can be improved?, this research aims to link them with scholarly literature, find potential knowledge gaps and highlight improvement areas. Learnability, efficiency, universality and general satisfaction are researched within five participants, coming from different sectors and occupations. Usability in IS context connects ICT with HCI. Trends, challenges and solutions in remote work field lead us to different practices in work and knowledge sharing. Thematic analysis brings seven main themes that show satisfactory results in general. However, dissatisfaction is addressed to efficiency and universality with functionality of communication tools and platforms which falls within ICT, and learnability within its human component, HCI. Furthermore, three step solution is proposed: organizational readiness, standards in communication practice and soft skills. Contributions of this research confirm importance of human component that defines usability in remote field. General usability and satisfaction with ICT and its components is confirmed and improvement areas are addressed within HCI. This research serves as a good base for research of usability of same communication features across different channels however, comparing on-site and remote workers within specific fields.
Keywords
Communication, Collaboration, Remote working, Usability, ICT, HCI
Abbreviations
IS – Information Systems
ICT – Information and Communication Technology IT – Information Technology
UI – User Interface DN – Digital Nomad AR – Augmented Reality VC – Video Calling
HCI – Human Computer Interaction
GDPR – General Data Protection Regulations
ISO/IEC – International organization for Standardization/International Electrotechnical Commission
HR – Human Resources
List of Tables
Table 1: Summary of the Participants (source: Author’s Creation) ... 16
Table 2 Summary of the Interviews (source: Author’s Creation) ... 17
Table 3: Seven Steps for Data Analysis (Adapted from Creswell and Creswell 2018) ... 19
Table 4: Seven Validity Strategies (source: Author’s Creation, adapted from Silverman 2013 and Creswell and Creswell 2018) ... 20
Table 5: Two Reliability Strategies (Adapted from Creswell and Creswell, 2018)... 21
Table 6: Five steps for Ethical Research (Adopted from Silverman 2013) ... 22
Table 7: Summary of the Seven Main Themes (source: Author’s Creation) ... 24
List of Figures
Figure 1: The major roles of IS in organizations (Adapted from Wallace, 2015, p.4) ... 2Table of Contents
Abstract ______________________________________________________ i Keywords ____________________________________________________ii Abbreviations _________________________________________________ii List of Tables _________________________________________________ iii List of Figures ________________________________________________ iii 1. Introduction _________________________________________________ 1
1.1 Introduction and Research Settings _________________________________________ 1 1.2 Purpose Statement and Research Questions __________________________________ 4 1.3 Topic Justification ______________________________________________________ 4 1.4 Scope and Limitations ___________________________________________________ 5 1.5 Thesis Organization _____________________________________________________ 5 2. Review of Literature __________________________________________ 6
2.1 Usability in Information Systems Context ___________________________________ 6 2.2 Communication Tools, Platforms and Their Features in Human-Computer Interaction 8 2.3 Trends, Challenges and Solutions in Remote Field ____________________________ 8 2.4 Knowledge Sharing ____________________________________________________ 10 2.5 Summary of the Review ________________________________________________ 11 3. Methodology _______________________________________________ 13
3.1 Methodological Tradition _______________________________________________ 13 3.2 Methodological Approach _______________________________________________ 13 3.3 Methods for Data Collection _____________________________________________ 15 3.4 Participants and Interviewing Process ______________________________________ 16 3.5 Method for Data Analysis _______________________________________________ 18 3.6 Qualitative Validity and Reliability _______________________________________ 19 3.6.1 Validity __________________________________________________________ 20 3.6.2 Reliability ________________________________________________________ 21 3.7 Ethical Consideration __________________________________________________ 21 4. Empirical Findings __________________________________________ 24
4.1 Themes _____________________________________________________________ 24 4.1.1 Separate Communication Tools are Used Before Communication Features in Collaboration Tools and Platforms _________________________________________ 24 4.1.2 Written Communication Methods are Preferred for History, Evidence or Timeline Reasons ______________________________________________________________ 25 4.1.3 After Email, Chat and Audio Calls are Mostly Used Features in Formal
Communication ________________________________________________________ 25 4.1.4 There is Usually None or Very Poor Informal Communication ______________ 26 4.1.5 Those That Communicate Informally Prefer To Use Audio Calls or Chat ______ 27 4.1.6 Simple Solution for Sending Large Files is Needed _______________________ 28
4.1.7 Remote Workers Doing a Job That Requires More Collaboration With Clients and Colleagues Prefer Communication Over Audio or Video Call ____________________ 29 4.2 Summary of Themes ___________________________________________________ 30 5. Discussion _________________________________________________ 31
5.1 Answers to the Research Questions _______________________________________ 31 5.1.1 Answer to the research question one: How do remote users perceive usability of communication features across different communication tools and platforms? _______ 31 5.1.2 Answer to the research question two: How, according to users, that features can be improved? ____________________________________________________________ 31 5.2 Discussion on Perceived Usability ________________________________________ 31 5.3 Proposed Solutions ____________________________________________________ 33 5.3.1 Organizational Readiness ____________________________________________ 34 5.3.2 Standards in Communication Practice for Using Different Communication Features _____________________________________________________________________ 34 5.3.3 Soft Skills ________________________________________________________ 34 6. Conclusions ________________________________________________ 35
6.1 Conclusion ___________________________________________________________ 35 6.2 Contributions _________________________________________________________ 35 6.3 Future Research _______________________________________________________ 36 References ___________________________________________________ 37
Appendices __________________________________________________ 40
A Example How Literature Was Analysed For Review ___________________________ 40 B Statement About Principles of Ethics and Data Protection _______________________ 40 C Semi-structured Interview Questionnaire ____________________________________ 41
1. Introduction
This chapter presents overall review of research itself. Starting with research settings where basic approach of research is shown through Information Systems lenses. Following purpose statement and research questions bring reader closer to research starting point that is justified in next subchapter. Scope and limitations define total overhead view and constraints that form boundaries. Finally, thesis organization is presented giving reader an idea of what to expect throughout this paper.
1.1 Introduction and Research Settings
Torkaman (2018) says that human beings have passed through different technological ages, from the Agricultural Age to the Industrial Age and finally to the Information Age. “Conceptual Age” is new paradigm being developed, which is known as the last technological age. In Information Age, an industrialised society cannot only be considered with regard to its industrial activities but should also be considered with regard to the spirit of intellect and high performance that is evidenced in most people. In Information Age where we emphasised on thinking as computers, Conceptual Age brings artistic view. Work is changing, digital communications have made remote work commonplace. Gig economy is growing and advances in artificial intelligence (AI) and robotics could upend the conventional workplace.
Connection to all the dots between humans, technology and behaviours that link them lies in information systems. “Information Systems (IS) can be described as a system of communication between people. Thus, Information and communication technology (ICT) system is a system of data representation and processing. It consists of hardware, software, data management and communication technology” (Beynon-Davies, 2013, p. 6). Valacich (2018, p. 45) defines IS as
“a combination of people and information technology that create, collect, process, store and distribute useful data”. Wallace (2015, p. 13, 4) says that “ICT term encompasses the broad collection of information processing and communication technologies, emphasising that telecommunication technology is a significant feature of IS”. According to Valacic (2018) IS plays critical roles in six major organizational areas: making decisions, collaborating on teams, gaining competitive advantage, improving individual productivity, managing operations, supporting customer interactions. Access devices, such as PC, laptop, smartphone or tablet, are used to enable access to organization ICT system (Beynon-Davies, 2013).
Figure 1 presents the six major roles of IS in organizations. Adapted from Wallace (2015, p. 4), it shows how supporting customer interaction, decision making, team collaboration, gaining competitive advantage, improving individual productivity and managing operations serve organizations using IS. This approach sees IS as organizational backbone or enabler. Same figure shows how IS, using ICT, serves as an organizational foundation. Communication practice supported with communication tools and platforms is object of this research. As we witness changes in work arrangements, following paragraphs will present trends we can see and justify choice for this research settings.
Figure 1: The major roles of IS in organizations (Adapted from Wallace, 2015, p.4)
Future of organizations is in looking for new innovative ways to produce, sell and recycle their products and services. In terms of optimisation of resources, human labour, work force itself will have to be treated differently as well. Patrignani and Whitehouse (2015) have presented new approach, Slow Tech. According to authors, Slow Tech is a proposed form of twenty-first century quest. It can be pursued by companies in the ICT industry to achieve ICT that is good, clean and fair. Its core premise is to articulate approach that focuses on all stages of the ICT value chain, the material sources, the hardware produced, efficient operation and the end of life of the equipment used. Good ICT is based around notions of human-centeredness, user involvement, participatory design, enjoyment, aesthetic, and the creation of the balance between work and home life. Clean ICT means taking into consideration environmental impacts (from material production, energy consumption to e-waste). Fair ICT implies taking into account the conditions of workers throughout the entire supply chain. In other words, this approach is one step forward for workers, to more flexibility and freedom to arrange their own time.
Remote work is more common name for business services provided at a distance, using ICT.
Essentially, remote work is a synonym for IT enabled services (Messenger and Ghosheh, 2010).
From the point of view of organisation, Beynon-Davies (2013, p. 265) states that “remote working demands significant investment in and managing of information and communication technology infrastructure”. Also, it demands a certain degree of organizational culture change.
Many common synonyms are in use, from work at home, mobile working, virtual work, teleworking, to distance working. Remote work can be named differently by different people however, they all come back to the same points. Remote workers can work from any place, the only limits are ICT availability and possible location restrictions from employer or country of residence for taxation purposes.
IS and, IT in particular and its flexibility as enabler to achieve the desired competitive advantages, are considered by several researchers as a crucial support to operational and strategic business decisions (Yassien et al. 2017). According to authors, many scholars emphasise the need for large organizations to integrate their IT systems with their knowledge
The six major roles of IS Supporting
customer interactions
Decision making
Team collaboration
Gaining competitive
advantage Improving
individual productivity
Managing operations
management strategies and processes in order to survive in their highly competitive business environments, which in turn could accelerate the managerial decisions as well. Also, usability of same systems is becoming an issue and considered as success factor. Furthermore, European Parliament and the council of the European community’s has initiated a directive that forces employers to adapt usability in software development. (Yassien et al. 2017).
According to Beynon-Davies (2013, p. 141), an ICT system is one major agent in the wider information system: the other major agent is human being. The interaction between the two is usually judged in terms of the usability of the ICT system. Therefore, usability concerns how easy an ICT system is to use within its wider information system. In other words, it is concerned with how easy a system is to use for the purpose for which it has been constructed. It covers satisfaction as well and it represents connection point, where user interacts with the ICT system.
Usability is referred to as mediating feature between the technical system (ICT) and the social system (the activity system), and it is evident at the user interface (UI).
Usability feature is a very critical factor that affects success of software; it is studied as the most effective factor in Human Computer Interaction (HCI) knowledge area and it is also defined as an important quality attribute by ISO/IEC 9126. Usability of communication tools and their features affects acceptance from a different interest groups, which affects acceptance of project itself. It affects implementation of software and hardware solutions, products or services.
(Yassien et al. 2017). In remote work context, research of usability of communication tools and their features could be significant since communication tools are remote workers only communication option, and the same solutions are available and in use by onsite workers as well. In terms of use and satisfaction remote workers depend on available tools and their features more than if they were onsite.
Albers and Still (2011, p. 8) cite Quesenbery (2003) defining usability of a system as “how well a person can use the system to accomplish his or her task” saying that usability consists of 5 elements: effective, efficient, engaging, error tolerant and easy to learn.
Usability refers to the ease with which a person can accomplish a goal using some tool, such as a website, mobile phone or a kiosk. It relies partly on clear information architecture and, also on the user interface design (Wallace, 2015, p. 172). Website usability elements can be observed with usability of website interface design to serve in accessing usability of communication tools and platforms. Wallace (2015) highlighted five elements of website usability which are: ease of learning, efficiency, memorability, error rates and satisfaction levels. Wallace (2015) also presents tips for effective user interface design which are: keep it structured, keep it simple, keep users informed, be forgiving of errors and avoid distractions.
Valacich, (2018, p. 53) argues that usability is software criteria, a system’s quality of being easy to use and aesthetically pleasing. It can decrease error rates, increase efficiency or customer satisfaction, in example of customer-facing system.
Summing up all definitions and views presented, four main usability elements: learnability, efficiency and universality, closing with satisfaction in general, will be questioned throughout this research.
Platforms like G Suite and Microsoft Teams and tools for communication like Skype or Slack, offer different communication features. Those are usually video calling, audio calling, chat or email. This is where remote settings might show different results, in terms of usability, simply
because remote workers do not have any communication alternative. Remote workers are enabled or limited to perform their job by characteristics of ICT system, and all of its components used by them, their colleagues or clients and customers. In other words, how useful remote workers perceive and how satisfied are they with communication systems and their features they use is researched.
1.2 Purpose Statement and Research Questions
Research questions should give reader understanding of usability of different features offered across communication tools and platforms in remote work settings. How do remote workers like to communicate, what makes them choose preferred communication method and which features satisfy their communication needs in optimal way. With remote work in rising, research of usability of features across different communication systems should give answers that can be analysed aiming for improvements to make communication more user-friendly.
Purpose of this research is to find how remote workers perceive different features offered within communication tools and platforms they use. Analysing reasons for choosing different tools or platforms and their features, this research aims to link them with scholarly literature, find potential knowledge gaps and highlight improvement areas.
How do remote users perceive usability of communication features across different communication tools and platforms? How, according to users, that features can be improved?
1.3 Topic Justification
Trends in change of a workforce and challenges on managerial levels will be forcing leaders to think technologically visionary and adapt to digitalization of processes, especially communication. Combination of human/machine intelligence requires approach that challenges traditional ways of communication, especially in corporate environments with scripted standards and procedures. With workforce that can be dispersed, multicultural, remote and on- site, usability of communication tools and practices has never been more important. As flexible working impacts traditional working patterns and structures, and leaders contend with competing priorities and growing complexity of processes and systems, even basic leadership tasks can be difficult to perform. Digital is no longer an emerging concept, it is an embedded business practice – requiring companies to identify leaders with the abilities to navigate in an online world, and that is something far easier to say than to be done. (Watson, 2017)
According to Yassien et al. (2017) usability impacts productivity positively, and decreases user support, training cost and overall cost. The emerging and changing environment is reflected highly on usability requirements needed for software in order to reach its objectives. Usability is a quality requirement, non-functional requirement, quality attribute, listed in several classifications of quality requirements based on different characteristics (Joshi et al. 2019).
Karis, et al. (2016) analysed more than 200 organizations that work remotely and addressed five challenges for remote collaboration. Those are:
1) Alignment of incentives and goals 2) Trust is more difficult to establish
3) Awareness of colleagues and their context 4) No motivational sense of presence of others 5) The need of explicit management
Awareness of colleagues and their context and no motivational sense and presence of others are challenges that are directly linked with communication. Communication could be a starting point, a reason or consequence for challenges in remote settings.
According to Yassien et al. (2017) and their communication research in Google, many of the early video conferencing systems were somewhat effective in providing awareness of remote colleagues but were failures in promoting informal communication because they were so inferior to face-to-face interaction. In addition, they required some effort, and in some cases degree of interruption similar to placing a phone call. This research included video communication and was limited to Google’s platforms and their tools. To question that specific research findings, different environments and different tools are researched in formal and informal context, looking for any support for informal communication and its importance in remote context.
Research of best practices from different industries, required minimum of communication supporting different types of remote work and, usability and satisfaction that come from organizational readiness in terms of ICT infrastructure and managerial support, should give us better understanding of what do remote workers require, how satisfied are they with what they have available and what can be improved. Considering technological and organizational trends, next step is looking into practical implications. Possible improvements in IS field can come from technological point of view and ICT infrastructure, to knowledge sharing, collaboration and communication best practice. In that context, learnability, efficiency, universality and satisfaction represent general characteristics for basic understanding that can serve well for further research that would go more specific, considering type of remote work, sector, organizational structure, knowledge sharing or communication practices.
1.4 Scope and Limitations
Considering variety of communication platforms and applications to choose, remote workers very often have experience in using not just one of them. Scope of this qualitative research is to find how useful remote workers perceive communication features offered in different tools and platforms they use. How easy are they to understand and start using, how efficient are they and, do they need more tools for different actions and tasks. Furthermore, focus is on how those can be improved.
Research is limited to small number of participants working in different sectors, with different education, work background and, with different knowledge on technology. With open questions and in-depth analysis of gathered results, this research does not intend to draw any generalisations.
1.5 Thesis Organization
Review of the literature in chapter two brings reader closer to the research field and relevance of research itself within IS field. Findings from different researches considering usability in remote work field, highlight importance of different approaches to the same phenomena.
Chapter three presents methodology and theoretical framework of research itself which is followed with empirical findings in chapter four. Chapter five presents discussion and oppose it to literature in chapter two. Concluding chapter six is opposed to introducing chapter one, closing with contributions and future research.
2. Review of Literature
This chapter starts with definitions theories and practice covering usability in Information Systems domain. Following subchapters will expand starting point and present trending communication tools, platforms and their features in Human-Computer Interaction, support researchers in remote work field and knowledge sharing domain. Carefully selected literature brings reader closer to the topic and picture complexity of observed phenomena.
2.1 Usability in Information Systems Context
“IS is a set of interrelated components that connect, manipulate, store and disseminate data and information and provide a feedback mechanism that meets an objective”. (Stair and Reynolds, 2016, p. 4). In that context, authors define networks as “computers and equipment that are connected in a building, around the country or, around the world to enable electronic communication”. IS workers are usually part of the fast-paced, dynamic environment where technology they use, directly or indirectly, changes constantly. They need good communication skills and often serve as translators between business needs and technology-based solutions.
They must have strong analytical and decision-making skills and be able to translate ill-defined business problems and opportunities into effective technology-based solutions. They must develop effective leadership and team skills and be adept at implementing organizational change. Lastly, they need to be prepared to engage in life-long learning in a rapidly changing field. Organizations are using unified communication to support group decision making, and this means tying and integrating various communication systems including traditional phones, mobile phones, email, text messages and the Internet (Stair and Reynolds, 2016).
User understanding of the system can affect both, user’s attitude toward the system and the user’s feedback. When the system behaves in ways the user does not expect, the user might find the system unpredictable and unreliable. If the user has inaccurate mental model of the way the system learns he or she might also change his or her feedback toward the system in such a way that performance decreases (Babuska and Groen, 2010).
Bevan et al. (2016) explained new ISO 9241-11 that defines usability as “the extent to which a system, product or service, can be used by specified users to achieve specified goals with effectiveness, efficiency and satisfaction in a specified context of use”. Authors state that context in definition has been extended to include current approaches to usability and user experience.
Albers and Still (2011) argue that usability of a system means how well a person can use a system to accomplish his or her task, and describe the 5E of usability: effective, efficient, engaging, error tolerant and easy to learn. Beynon-Davies (2013) argues that IS mediates in between technology and activity and describes usability of IS in DeLone and McLean model (1992, cited in Beynon-Davies 2013, p.275-277) where usability consists of use and satisfaction. Definition of usability hinges on the activity system and its meant to serve.
Bruun et al. (2017) researched primary focus of the last decade of tabletop research that has been to develop new technologies. Authors argue that the recent drop in research is not caused by lack of challenges, but in a shift of challenges toward real world use and impact of tabletop technology. Learning from other emerging technologies, they argue that “escaping the trough”
for tabletop technologies require research that focuses not so much on technical issues but more of issues of real-world use and utility.
Social interaction is mostly supported by different categories of collaborative systems and social software. Those systems have to fulfil multiuser requirements and are consequently characterised by complex scenarios supporting these requirements in the respective domain.
Often, this complexity is reflexed in the UI which has advanced from command line interfaces to the established and approved use of direct manipulation techniques of windows, icons, menus and pointing (Bourimi et al. 2012). According to authors, a cooperative system providing shared environments/workspaces equipped with different coordination, cooperation and communication means could ease collaboration. Enhanced interaction facilities built into those environments for the manipulation of shared artifacts could substantially support fast and efficient decision making in these knowledge intense situations, especially for geographically distributed cooperating teams. Furthermore, sensitive information belonging to the participating organizations/individuals has to be shared in a common workspace/environment, which requires different handling, according to the different roles in order to ensure respecting security and privacy requirement to all partners.
According to Joshi et al. (2019) to shorten response time to market demands, companies can benefit the use of IS, which is related to both, system performance and user performance. This can be achieved by designs that takes into account the physical and physiological characteristics of users and the tasks they are likely to accomplish, and the environments in which they work.
As a result, usability directly or indirectly, influences and determines the time users take to make a decision or take an action. Joshi et al. (2019) argue that it is important to value usability factors and concentrate on learnability and memorability, efficiency of use, ability to avoid and manage user errors and, user satisfaction to shorten the lead time in their design and development process.
Information system usage involves a wide range of risks: from intentional to unintentional IS misuse; from malware to human errors; etc. (Suduc et al. 2010). Authors state that most of these risks can be mitigated or even eliminated by providing an adequate level of IS usability. When IS includes advanced tailoring features, main risk is to obtain an end-user tailored system which is lacking of usability. Results of their research show necessity to pay more attention in the IS design, to the UI response time, error messages and, to personal data protection.
Karis, et al. (2016) have researched usability of communication tools and communication improvements using video conferencing and video portals in Google. This research is limited to organisation with a strong technical infrastructure, availability of equipment, resources and technical knowledge of its employees. Also, research was conducted only on Google’s platform. However, two findings are particularly interesting. Video calling (VC) completely replaced audio conferencing for internal communications in organisation and, video portals (always-on video connection between two or more locations) have sprung up spontaneously through Google. With technical requirements and user’s readiness for remote collaboration, in terms of technical knowledge level, research showed that Google’s employees still preferred at least one physical meeting and constant video conferencing. Research showed that remote workers perceived all the tools and resources useful however, felt better to work remotely after getting to know each other in person. Also, team bonding was stronger, there was higher level of trust, less communication because of “having an idea” what other person means and better results. Despite of high usability of all tools available and being satisfied with them, meeting ICT requirements and technical knowledge. Furthermore, this research showed how modern organisations can apply Google’s approach in their remote strategy, in terms of organizational readiness and application of communication standards and procedures.
2.2 Communication Tools, Platforms and Their Features in Human-Computer Interaction
According to Filimowicz and Tzankova (2018), we are in the “Third Wave” of human – computer interaction, triggered by the expanding context of HCI far beyond the workplace.
Expansion is resulting from increasingly pervasive and ubiquitous essence of computation in everyday life. The Third Wave places stronger emphasis on human values, meaning making, situated knowledge and experience. Comparing to Second Wave, where collaborative, mediated and distributed applications within work settings involved higher degree of participation from users of systems. First Wave was based on model-driven cognitive science and human factors methods and focusing on strict, formal guidelines, grounded in systematic study and testing.
Third Wave is characterised by growing interest in design that takes into account the full and messy context of socially situated and embodied action which introduces humanistic and social science considerations into design research. The earliest HCI work was strongly based on the concept of human-machine coupling, which expanded to workplace collaboration as computers came into mainstream professional use. Today HCI can connect to increasingly more sides of human experience because we can find apps for almost any aspect of daily life. (Filimowicz and Tzankova 2018)
Communication tools, like Slack, Web Ex or Skype offer different features, like instant messaging or chat, audio and video calling. Very often, communication tools are already integrated in collaboration platforms like G Suite or Microsoft Teams, where they offer email and chat, audio or video calling. Depending on organizational choices, for everyday work- related tasks employees use those different technologies. Availability of cheap microphones, webcams and cameras now embedded as a default in tablets, laptops and phones has greatly helped in making conferencing mainstream. Many videoconferencing apps (for example Zoom or Meeting Owl) also allow multiple people on different sites to connect synchronously (Sharp et al. 2019).
Communication and collaboration tools that designers create shape the ability to work and accomplish shared goals within team, organization or any other peers. Degree of interactivity, social cues present in the interface and the mobility of communication technology are just few of design dimensions that affect use in different context. Design is often start point for behaviour and often people will quickly repurpose communication technologies to accommodate their specific needs. The social shaping of technology perspective reflects the idea that the tools that designers craft do not precisely determine how people use them, but rather interact with human goals as technology co-evolves (Shneiderman et al. 2018).
Computing devices are expected to be connected wirelessly and computing power is distributed in the cloud. We expect to be able to use communication channels open for us for virtually no payment, at any time of the day or night, and we expect to be able to keep them in our pockets or purses. VR, AR and location services are fundamental to this generation while we use them for social purposes, for reaching out and making contacts with other humans (Norman and Kirakowski 2018).
2.3 Trends, Challenges and Solutions in Remote Field
Remote working can be found in different arrangements. According to Jeske and Ruwe (2019) co-working is a shared work environment in which people with potentially different professions and from different companies work alongside each other, using the shared space to work but
also finding opportunities for social support and networking which arise in diverse community of people. With slightly informal arrangement, co-working spaces offer office infrastructure where remote workers or freelancers can work daily, weekly or with membership. Co-working spaces or remote hubs as well appear to be quite popular because of infrastructure, equipment, networking and socialisation opportunities or additional contents they offer. In this context, they offer more flexibility for workers but also, potentials for local community since co- working spaces are often place where networking creates new opportunities for individuals or society, in terms of local projects and communal actions.
One group of remote workers stands out for location independence, however other than home.
They can be usually found in hotels, hostels, internet café’s, co-living or co-working spaces, often not staying on one place for too long, Lee et al. (2019). They are usually freelancers and entrepreneurs and they like to work from any place in the world, where they can connect their laptops to the internet. Term “digital nomad” (DN) was coined from the title of the book that presented how future technologies would change people’s lifestyles, facilitating separations from specific times and locations. This type of work style offers an escape, from traditional office cubicles that constrain people’s work routines to one physical location with their colleagues and become DN as remote workers, location independent workers, or self-employed workers who are able to choose where and when to work. DN are not limited with space and traditional work arrangements, they are free to explore different cities, countries or continents.
Only limit to their work-life balance is nature of work itself and collaboration with individuals, teams or clients that can often be in different location or even different time zone.
Smart working takes this concept one step further, embracing broader concept of flexibility.
Errichiello and Pianese (2019) state that adoption of smart working implies that employees can choose when and where to work and select among various workspaces, both outside (like home or coffee shop) or inside (open spaces and concentration areas) the organizations. Coherently, smart working underlies a holistic approach for managing flexibility that ideally includes three levels, i.e. the redesign of physical workspaces (“bricks”) along with ICT for employees (“bytes”) and substantial changes in employees’ work routines and traditional managerial practices (“behaviours”). Referring to physical, technological and managerial dimensions, smart working concept empowers employees to choose arrangement that works the best for them. Furthermore, it addresses all the reasons for support of this arrangement in terms of modern organisations and competitiveness.
One of the factors that is driving remote work is increasing preponderance of analytics work using software tools that are often available through Internet or Cloud based services. Also, it stimulates freelance opportunities even though many employers restrict number of their work force, improving the quality and productivity of many collaborative projects (Hunter, 2019).
We can see trends in detachment of work from a place. According to Felstead and Henseke (2017), one of the downsides of remote work is that chances of promotion were reduced. Also, according to Sharda et al. (2015), geolocation data analytics from sensors that on-site employees wore on their badges, showed that employees who move about and interact with each other are more likely to progress and move up the corporate ladder, comparing to those employees who would usually spend their day in the work place. In other words, communication in remote settings is more important comparing to traditional work arrangements. Remote workers communication habits could also be linked with progress up the corporate ladders, if tools they use are perceived useful and satisfy their communication needs, in formal and informal context.
By nature of work itself, communication between remote workers is lacking non-verbal part like gestures, cues and body language. Chai and Tanaka (2019) have explored how to convey a mutual gesture cue in remote collaboration and how it affects amount of communication efficiency. They have found that mutual gesture interactions led to higher accuracy rate, more user confidence, and it could operate with speech interactions. Research aimed to understand communication in remote settings. New dimension in remote collaboration comes with augmented reality (AR) and virtual navigation. Gauglitz et al. (2014) presented a touchscreen interface for creating freehand drawings as world-stabilised annotations and for virtually navigating a scene reconstructed live in 3D, all in the context of the live remote collaboration.
This concept is developed for industrial environment however, research is significant in terms of remote communication effectiveness and usability of communication tools and their features.
Authors contributed offering more features to standard communication tools in remote settings, that might be applicable in different environments. Same principle can be used in learning and knowledge sharing context of remote working.
Although globalisation and mobility of workforce empowered employees it caused many issues with employers trying to keep their talents. Diversity, inclusion and flexible work arrangements are becoming main pillars in HR policies as many companies compete to find, hire and retain talents. Eckhardt et al. (2019) say that many companies that have tried to transition to a virtual workforce have failed because they do not understand the social and knowledge networks of remote workers. They identified two common reasons why:
1) There was a lack of understanding on how best to engage with virtual workers, given worker’s individual characteristics and,
2) There was a lack of understanding of how best to integrate virtual and in-office workers.
Remote work does not bring challenges just in ICT infrastructure, practical knowledge sharing, collaboration and social component play a significant role in terms of changing status quo.
Investigating remote circumstances in organizations with remote workforce structure, Eckhardt et al. (2019) identified preparation of mental readiness, implementation of technology readiness and virtualisation of relationship readiness in their virtual work stage model that prepares companies for remote shift.
2.4 Knowledge Sharing
Remote workers rely solely on ICT to communicate with each other, their business partners and management, clients or customers. Remote workers depend on ICT to access their knowledge base and learning portals. As well to deal with questions in knowledge sharing domain, even those questions that would be asked, usually in traditional office environment, face to face or by simply turning over to a colleague.
The role of technology in organizations evolved from helping in expertise sharing to becoming its enabler. Ackerman et al. (2002) argue that expertise is largely tacit and embedded in the context in which is being used. According to authors, systems that purport to capture expertise for later perusal by those in need often fall short of the goal. Partially because it is difficult to capture the knowledge of experts in such a form and in part because users find it difficult to absorb expertise from such a system. In this research context, remote workers rely solely on ICT from the initial onboarding and training, to work with their colleagues, clients or customers.
Knowledge and expertise sharing appear to be challenging in remote work only by the simple start point, that are differences in technical knowledge of remote workers which may prolong learning process. Authors state that sharing knowledge even within an organization is often difficult and not always successfully accomplished and this difficulty arises from both cognitive and motivational issues. Organizations that successfully transfer knowledge and share expertise are better at building structures and sets of management practices that overcome these barriers.
In all this, technology may play an enabling role but it is not critical factor either in the origination of the cognitive and motivational problems or in the solution. Ackerman et al.
(2002)
According to Pereira et al. (2015) and their research of virtual learning environments, respondents are willing to do more courses, based on a positive relationship between satisfaction and performance. The results also show that performance exceeds expectations, being more decisive for satisfaction. Authors state that usability and quality are key constructs for satisfaction. Thus, managers should consider student’s learning process in the tool, compatibility of resources and activities with the form of their learning and, tool quality to increase student’s satisfaction of the course. Virtual learning environment research relates to onboarding and training part of the employees’ experience in remote environment. Also, it indicates that perceived usability and quality of communication systems and their features might yield more satisfied users, which will be further investigated in this research.
Contemporary modern organizations have access to different technologies that can enable market competence and leverage their intellectual capital. Considering availability of different collaboration and communication solutions and that it is how technology is used that makes a difference, IS play important role. (Bergeron, 2003) Collaborative tools that involve sharing information between departments and especially between company and external customers require complete cooperation with IS department. Knowledge management draws on technologies and approaches developed in virtually every field of computer science. Bergeron (2013) defines groupware as any software that enables group collaboration over network, like sharing authoring tools, electronic whiteboards, videoconferencing tools, online forums, e-mail, online screen sharing and multimodal conferencing. Collaboration softwares often offer already integrated communication tools. As well, there are plenty of them available as single products, for business or personal use.
2.5 Summary of the Review
With flexible work arrangements arising and relatively long time for organizational structure, procedures and processes to keep up with them, not all the organisations have management prepared to lead remote teams or IS that can manage on-site and remote employees in optimal way. Also, not all employees are equally prepared for remote work, when it comes to technical knowledge. Not all employees have equal ICT infrastructure or environment, beside equipment that might be owned by employer. In relatively new work arrangements, there might be no wide accepted standards in terms of best practice of using given resources, because remote worker is treated the same way as on-site worker and it is assumed that remote worker will behave the same way as on-site worker.
Remote working emerged and appears to be trending across different industries. With different platforms, tools and their features available, remote workers have experience using more than one collaboration and communication alternative. Theoretical framework gave us an idea of what is relevant in the research ahead, in terms of scientific scope. Communication tools,
platforms and their features have been introduced as part of the HCI. Types of remote work and their arrangements narrowed it down elaborating differences and specifications in the field.
Furthermore, relevance of usability research in remote settings is supported by examples of usability of tools and platforms in different industrial settings and their effects on communication. Trends and expectations for future are guidelines for where struggles can come from and how to prevent them. In other words, what could be more important than setting up future expectations and preventing practical struggles.
Review of the relevant literature shows how complex approach to remote work is, in terms of remote work arrangement, infrastructural organizational challenges, onboarding and knowledge sharing, managerial and basic communication practice. With different remote work arrangements, nature of work itself and platforms and tools being used, it is worth investigating if different communication habits may occur. Answers to questions on perceived usability and improvement areas are researched in terms of learnability, efficiency, universality and satisfaction. They are elaborated in following chapters.
3. Methodology
This chapter gives theoretical overview of methodological tradition and approach, methods for data collection, analysis, qualitative reliability and validity and ethical consideration. Along with the theory, participants and interviewing process are introduced and practical overview of conducted research is elaborated.
3.1 Methodological Tradition
Constructivism, or social constructivism often gets combined with interpretivism and, is typically seen as an approach to qualitative research (Creswell and Creswell, 2018). Previously called naturalistic inquiry became constructivist inquiry or paradigm. It stands for multiple realities, value-bound research, limit to time and context specific findings and, irrelevance of cause–effect investigation (Yin, 2016). Constructivist paradigm assumes a relativist ontology saying there are multiple realities, a subjectivist epistemology saying knower and co-respondent co-create understandings and, a naturalistic set of methodological procedures (Denzin and Lincoln, 2018).
This paradigm is explained through individuals understanding of researched phenomena.
Usually, individuals try to understand the world they live and work in. They develop subjective meanings of their experiences, directed towards certain objects or things. Researcher is looking for complexity of the views rather than narrowing meanings into few categories or ideas, as meanings are varied and multiple. Researcher tries to rely as much as possible on the participants view of the situation. Open, broad and general questions guide participant to construct the meaning of a situation, typically forged in discussion or interactions with other persons. Researcher listens carefully to what participant does or says in their life settings. These subjective meanings are formed through interactions with others and through historical and cultural norms that operate in individual’s lives. Thus, researchers usually focus on specific context in which people live and work in order to understand the historical and cultural settings of the participants. Researchers shape interpretation according to background and participant’s position in it following personal, cultural and historical experiences. The researcher’s intention is to interpret or make sense of the meaning others have about the world. Rather than starting with a theory as in postpositivism, inquirers generate or inductively develop a theory or pattern of meaning (Creswell and Creswell 2018).
Research of usability of communication platforms, tools and their features in remote work settings, reflects perfectly to constructivist worldview or paradigm. Each participant has her or his own reality and understanding of researched phenomena and, this research tries to understand participants view through their individual experiences. How useful do they perceive communication tools and features across different platforms they use and how could they be improved. Research tries to find a root cause for enablement or limitations that come from communication practices. Through interviewing process, participants are guided with open questions, in order to present how they perceive reality they live in.
3.2 Methodological Approach
Decision on methodological approach involves plans and procedures for research that narrows steps from broad assumptions to detailed methods of data collection, analysis and interpretation.
This plan involves several decisions and, they need to be taken in the order in which they make sense to us and the order of their presentation (Creswell and Creswell, 2018).
Qualitative methods rely on text and image data, have unique steps in data analysis and draw on diverse designs. By the nature of approach itself, qualitative methods for data collection require educating readers about intent of qualitative research, mentioning specific designs, reflecting on the role researcher plays in the study, drawing from expanding list of types of data sources, using specific protocols for recording data, multiple steps for information analysis and, mentoring approaches for documenting the methodological integrity, accuracy or validity of the collected data (Creswell and Creswell, 2018).
Silverman (2013) says that qualitative research consists of many different endeavours, many of which are concerned with the “objective” (i.e. scientific) study of realities which in some sense are “objective” (e.g. How culture works, the logic of conversation).
Inductive approach is supported with open end questions and responses, individual meanings and the importance of reporting a complexity of situation are encouraged. There is no strong structure. In contrary, exploring and understanding of the meaning individuals or groups attach to a social human problem are approach in qualitative research. Creswell and Creswell (2018) define qualitative approach as process of research that involves emerging questions and procedures, data typically collected in the participant’s settings, data analysis inductively building from particulars to general themes, and the researcher making interpretations of the meaning of the data.
Yin (2016) argues that qualitative researchers offer greater latitude in selecting topics of interest because other research methods are likely to be constrained by:
1) The inability to establish the necessary research conditions (e.g. as in experiment)
2) The unavailability of sufficient data series or lack of coverage of sufficient variables (e.g. as in economic or political science study)
3) The difficulty in drawing an adequate sample of respondents and obtaining a sufficiently high response rate (e.g. as in survey) or,
4) Other limitations such as being devoted to studying the past but not ongoing events (e.g. as in a history).
According to four types of objective study defined by Kumar (2011), this study or research is descriptive. It attempts to describe systematically a situation, problem, phenomena, service or program, provide information about the living conditions of a community or to describe attitudes towards an issue. The main purpose of such study is to describe what is prevalent with respect to the issue or problem under study.
In that context, approach to enquiry is semi-structured, as it is appropriate to determine the extent of the researched phenomena. Objective, design, sample of participants and research questions are predetermined.
This research tends to understand how participants cope with their communication challenges in remote settings, using different tools and their features within their real-life situations. Picture of their reality will bring different perspectives closer and enable in-depth study and comparison of broad situations. Characteristics of qualitative approach form this research, starting from an inductive approach that encourages discovery of unknown, specific to participant, his or her worldview and circumstances.
3.3 Methods for Data Collection
In qualitative interviews, according to Creswell and Creswell (2018), the researcher conducts interview with participants and these interviews involve unstructured and generally open-ended questions that are few in number and intended to elicit views and opinions from the participants.
This is useful when participants cannot be directly observed. It allows researcher to control over the line of questioning and get historical information from participants. However, there are couple of limitations. Indirect information could be filtered through the views of interviewees, information can come from designated place rather than from the natural field settings. Not all participants could be equally perceptive and articulate and, biased responses could come from researcher’s presence.
In some aspects, doing an interview appears to be a natural thing to do as interviews seem not to have predominant pattern (as in survey for e.g.) and, are fairly free-flowing and open ended (as in qualitative research for e.g.) (Silverman, 2013).
Yin (2016) defined two types of interviews, structured and qualitative, that usually get combined in practice. Relationship between researcher and interviewee is not strictly scripted, there is no list with definite questions, they serve as base and wary from interview to interview, depending on interviewee descriptions and details provided. A qualitative interview follows a conversational mode, and the interview itself will lead to a social relationship of sorts, with the quality of the relationship individualised to every participant. Most importantly, questions are open ended and, researcher tries to have participants use their own words and to engage in topical discussion. One of the main objectives of qualitative interviews is to depict a complex social world from a participant’s perspective and, this goes along with what qualitative interview aims, to understand participants in their own explanations.
Kumar (2011, p. 144) defines interview as “any person to person interaction, either face to face or otherwise, between two or more individuals with a specific purpose in mind”. Interviewer usually has freedom to decide on format and content of questions, choose how to form same and choose in which way to ask them. Kumar (2011) differentiates structured and unstructured interviews from questionnaires, where interviewee records answers. Kumar (2011, p. 144) also defines interview schedule as “a written list of questions, open ended or closed, prepared for use by an interviewer in a person-to-person (face-by-face, telephone or any other electronic media) interaction”. He argues that one of the main advantages of the structured interview is that it provides uniformed information, which assures comparability of data.
Denzin and Lincoln (2018) define three types of interviews, in structured, unstructured and semi-structured form. Also, they state there is no such thing as completely structured or unstructured interview. It is not possible to avoid structure in human encounters, it is certainly possible to provide a conversational structure that is flexible enough for interviewees to be able to raise questions and concerns in their own words and from their own perspectives. Therefore, interviews tend to be semi-structured and relatively unstructured. Denzin and Lincoln (2018, p.
1002) define semi-structured interviews as “interviews with the purpose of obtaining descriptions of the life world of the interviewee in order to interpret the meaning of the described phenomena”.
For the purpose of this research, semi-structured interviews have been identified as the most appropriate, with predetermined set of questions, using the same wording and order or questions as specified in the interview schedule. Structure of questions has been designed in order to
create a story that has a natural flow. In cases where participants answered open ended questions providing answers for more than one question, answers have been matched with relevant questions. Therefore, not all questions have been asked, questions have been adapted to answers participants provided.
3.4 Participants and Interviewing Process
Five interviewed participants are all employed for company or organization. They are friends of the author of this research. Occasionally, they would meet in person or over audio and video call and talk about benefits that remote work brings them, as well as the struggles and challenges they deal with every day. They have been selected for this research since they were available for research in given moment and, diversity in their occupations with background formed appropriate heterogenous research sample. Participants 1, 2 and 4 live in Republic of Ireland, Participant 3 lives in Germany and, Participant 5 in United Kingdom. For the purpose of this research, they have been selected to cover different industries, From IT, Medical Technology, Public service, Localization and Translation to Non-profits. Their occupations are; Senior Software Engineer, Process Development Manager, Social Worker, Vendor Project Manager and Career Coach. They have experience working on-site just as they have remote experience.
Two of the five participants started working remotely due to COVID-19 shift. Participant 5 six and Participant 2 nine weeks ago, at the time when interviews were conducted (mid of May 2020). Other three participants have been working remotely for years. Three participants have home office set up and two of them work from improvised living room / kitchen home office.
Furthermore, Table 1 presents all participants, in summary.
Table 1: Summary of the Participants (source: Author’s Creation)
Participant 1 Participant 2 Participant 3 Participant 4 Participant 5 Employment
type
Employee Employee Employee Employee Employee
Industry IT Medical
Technology
Public Service / Social Care
Translation and
Localization
Non-profit / Third Sector Occupation Senior
Software Engineer
Process Development Manager
Social Worker
Vendor Project Manager
Career Coach Worked
remotely for…
8 years 6 weeks Always,
approximately 80% of time (for 10 years roughly)
2 years 9 weeks
Worked on- site for…
Approximately 3 years all together
Always, full time as blue and white- collar worker (for 18 years roughly)
Always, approximately 20% of time (for 10 years roughly)
16 years 3 years
Remote work
arrangement
Home office Improvised home office, living room
Home office Home office Improvised home office, living room and kitchen
Five participants live in three countries. Three of them in same country however on two different locations. Furthermore, WhatsApp one-on-one audio interviews appeared to be the most appropriate way to gather data for three participants and interview in person for other two participants, since two of them have been available for conducting an interview in person. At the very beginning, prior to Demographic questions part of the Questionnaire, Statement About Principles of Ethics and Data Protection has been read out loud and participants agreed to it verbally. Full Statement can be found in Appendices B. Following each question, answers have been written in Word document, while participants were giving answers. After each question, participants took a small break to think about answers and, interviewer used that time to make sure everything that was previously mentioned has been captured. Semi structured interview guide was used and can be found in appendices, section C. Interviews were prepared to be more like a flexible conversation with open end questions. Interviewer was asking questions allowing participants to finish question and adapt it if necessary. This way participants were constructing conversation, often giving answers to multiple questions at once. In that case, answers to each question were assigned later in transcription. Interview was designed to guide participants in telling their story, in their own way.
Interview in person was conducted on May 10th 2020 with Participant 1 and 2. As two of participants are partners, interview was more like a conversation, guided with questionnaire.
One question has been asked and participants answered one after another, sometimes referring to each other. They would give answers in English or sometimes in their native language, Croatian. Interviews were transcribed and adapted at the same day, right after interview, to assure everything was noted.
Following three interviews were conducted over WhatsApp audio call, with Participant 3 on May 12th, Participant 4 on May 13th and Participant 5 on May 14th. Using the same method, questions have been asked, participants were giving answers and interviewer was making notes in a Word document. Interviews were in English however, participants would sometimes answer using few words or more in their native language, which is Croatian as well. After the interview occurred, later same day, each interview was transcribed and adapted just as first two interviews.
Table 2 summarises all interviews with date, arrangement and duration.
Table 2 Summary of the Interviews (source: Author’s Creation)
Participant 1 Participant 2 Participant 3 Participant 4 Participant 5
Date May 10th
2020
May 10th 2020
May 12th 2020
May 13th 2020
May 14th 2020
Arrangement Interview in person
Interview in person
WhatsApp audio call
WhatsApp audio call
WhatsApp audio call Duration 70 minutes,
interviewed together with Participant 2
70 minutes, interviewed together with Participant 1
45 minutes 30 minutes 50 minutes
3.5 Method for Data Analysis
The research interviewer, as the one who analyses and interprets data, has a privilege to interpret and report what the interviewee really meant (Denzin and Lincoln, 2018). The most popular approach in open-ended interviews is to treat respondent’s answers as descriptions of their external reality or their internal experience. Silverman (2013) explains constructionist approach as treating interview data as if researcher is accessing various stories or narratives through which participants describe their world. Abandoning the attempt to treat respondent’s answers as potentially true explanations of reality, we open up for the analysis of richer explanation of the respondent’s reality.
Yin (2016) defined five phases for analysing qualitative data; compiling, disassembling, reassembling, interpreting and concluding. Also, author states three strategies to follow during analysis, which have been followed in this research as well.
1. Checking and rechecking accuracy of data.
2. Making analysis as thorough and complete as possible, avoid cutting corners.
3. Continually acknowledging any unwanted biases imposed by researchers own values when analysing her or his own data.
After interviews were conducted, all the information from notes in Word document was transcribed into Excel document, matching questions from questionnaire with answers provided by participants. Data from each participant was entered in real time, right after interview, in details and with all additional explanations that participants mentioned.
Kumar (2011) described two ways and, one additional way, in which data can be described.
Second and additional third are serving as guidance for this research analysis:
1. Developing a narrative to describe a situation, episode, event or instance.
2. Identifying main themes that emerge from field notes or transcription of in-depth interviews and writing about them, quoting excessively in verbatim format.
i) Quantify main themes in order to provide their prevalence and significance.
Qualitative data analysis means making sense out of data by taking it apart and pulling it back together. Creswell and Creswell (2018) recommended steps to follow in qualitative data analysis and, they are presented further. Five collected interviews have been analysed one by one, using same principle. Each interview has been completed with all the notes that go with it, forming the interview into picture with beginning, body and end, divided into parts that go along with groups of questions. That way, each final interview structure was equal and appropriate for comparison and, coding in later stage. Furthermore, data was aggregated so that themes could be isolated and described.
Creswell and Creswell (2018) summarised steps for analysis that are adapted for this research and presented in Table 3. First step was collecting data during interview by writing notes in Word document. Second step represents data transcription, which occurred right after interview into separate Word document for each participant and one Excel table for comparison. Third step was reading through all data in Excel table and leaving just relevant information. Coding occurred to isolate relevant events for further comparison. After coding was completed in separate table, step five defined themes and their descriptions. Step six support themes with
