228
A SOCIO-TECHNICAL FRAMEWORK FOR COLLABORATIVE SERVICES: DESIGNING A DIGITAL PLATFORM FOR COLLABORATIVE COMMUNITIES by Joon Sang Baek February 2011 © Copyright by Joon Sang Baek, 2011

[PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

Embed Size (px)

DESCRIPTION

Joon Sang Baek's PhD thesis on Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

Citation preview

Page 1: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

A SOCIO-TECHNICAL FRAMEWORK FOR COLLABORATIVE

SERVICES: DESIGNING A DIGITAL PLATFORM FOR

COLLABORATIVE COMMUNITIES

by Joon Sang Baek

February 2011 © Copyright by Joon Sang Baek, 2011

Page 2: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

2

Page 3: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

3

Politecnico di Milano

Dipartimento Indaco

Dottorato di Ricerca in Disegno Industriale e Comunicazione Multimediale

XXIII ciclo

A Socio-Technical Framework for Collaborative Services

Designing a digital platform for collaborative communities

PhD Candidate Joon Sang Baek

Tutor and relatore Ezio Manzini

Co-relatore Anatoliy Gruzd

Page 4: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

4

Page 5: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

5

Abstract

A collaborative service, which is defined as a service where final users are actively involved and

assume the role of service co-designer and co-producers based on peer-to-peer and collaborative

relationships, produces two elements – technical solutions to user needs and social relations

between people who collaborate. If designed successfully, a collaborative service can provide

solutions to contemporary social, economical and environmental problems and create social

fabrics and relational qualities essential to a sustainable society. The two elements of

collaborative service are in a virtuous cycle in which production of one element facilitates the

production of the other. Information communication technologies (ICTs) amplify the virtuous

cycle by providing technical support that empower people to fulfill their needs (technical

intervention); and by facilitating enrichment of social networks, mainly weak ties.

Democratization of ICTs has brought to collaborative individuals and communities ample

opportunities to enhance their collaborative services. Digital platforms that support social

innovations in both real and virtual spaces are rapidly increasing but there are few studies on

systematic use of them. Existing methods adopted from human-computer interaction and user-

centered tend to focus on providing technical intervention and consider the production of social

networks as a byproduct that can only be anticipated and not designed. However, several social

network studies demonstrate that social and technical intervention can facilitate formation of

social networks and stimulate their transformation (Haythornthwaite 2002, Kavanaugh 1999,

Wellman 2001).

In this context, a systematic approach to develop a digital platform that provides socio-technical

intervention for collaborative service and effectively addresses users’ social needs is proposed.

Based on the studies of existing collaborative services on digital platform and the analysis of the

process to design them, a methodology to investigate users’ social needs was developed. It was

applied to an ongoing project called ‘Nurire Milano’ which aims to create a sustainable food

network that connects local producers and consumers in Milan. The methodology includes three

methods – sense of community index, degree of collaboration analysis and social network

analysis – to analyze users’ implicit social needs. In the end, findings from the project were

applied to a wider framework and a socio-technical framework for collaborative service was

proposed. The framework integrates the development process of a digital platform into service

design process and provides service designers with a systematic approach to design a

collaborative service on digital platform that supports a collaborative community with socio-

technical intervention.

Keywords: service design, social innovation, sustainability, social networks, ICTs, socio-

technical intervention

Page 6: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

6

!"#

$%& '()*+ ,-. /0 12$ $%&3 4)+56 78)3 9:; <= &&>3 ?@A

BCDEFGH $%&A IJK ,-. $%&L MN. ,-. $%&H '() ?@A BCDOH PQ.

=RS+LT U V WHX +A <= ,-YH 'Z* [3 '\. /0LH ]8^+ _7MN.

`a.b> 4)cd ,-. $%&H ef'\3 gh.!'\.!ig. #hA =RYT jk l1GmM

'\2 n!M a-o3p; q`YHX PrMN. ,-. $%&3 s Gl Rt^, u PQ. =RSt

'\. /0H $>3 7`; vwDOH xyi /0+N. z)G ,-2 {|G }H !c; h~=

,-+ vw}� '\. /0G _7YT, +> c= Ä>Å ,-3 P\G _7YP Ç#+N. ÉÑT

+ÖM xyi /0H Üá<àPQ+LH âäoA <= ãåç V WN. !éf Üá<àPQè ,-2

n!M PQ. lê; ë (PQ. äí) t -D2 ìîïñó, jk Granovetter (1973) G òM "M

ôf/03 q`; vwDöb>õ ,-. $%&3 78; ãfDúN ('\. äí).

Üá<àPQ3 fùûH ,-. $%&3 '()*+ $%&A äx: V WH P\A haYü +> c=

'\†à; lêYH 4l° ¢£§+ •¶ß ãGYT WN. 4l° ¢£§ '(3 ãGH +A

®t.+T o0.b> '(: V WH ©™2 fM !™> +KlHX +ÖM ©™G ´l ¨è ≠+

eÆ+N. IØ.b> '\†à; ∞M ¢£§ h±2 '(}H ≤>≥&*è P¥3 HCI (c[ µ∂∑

c∑∏π human-computer interaction) +F '() ù∫ 4)c2$ '(YH ≠*>, +*; $%&3

PQ. lê, u $%&3 ƪ; äxYHX º> Ωæ; ø¿T WN. Ø�2 ,-. $%&2$ _7YH

'\. /0H $%&A ƪY�$ _7YH ]8^> [º}ü +A vwYH o0. ¡¬√+ ´l ¨N.

ÉÖF rÖ '\ƒ ©™*; <= ≈ V W∆+ ìîïñóè '\.!PQ. äí; <= q` « »ûG

GmYN (Haythornthwaite 2002, Kavanaugh 1999, Wellman 2001).

+ÖM … 2$ À ©™H '\PQ. äí; <= ,-. $%&A lêYT jk '()3 '\.

?@A ®t.b> BCDà V WH 4l° ¢£§3 ä_; Õ.b> MN. Œ œ0>, P¥2 4l°

¢£§; –(M ,-. $%&2 fM '—©™A wªY“T ,-. $%&A ∞M 4l° ¢£§3 ä_

≤>≥&A ”‘Y“N. +A ’÷b> ,-. '()3 '\. ?@A ”‘YH ¡¬√; ä_Y“N. +

¡¬√è e◊ wª ùc ‘Nutrire Milano (Nurture Milan)’ ≤>ÿñ2 .(}ŸN. À ≤>ÿñH $%&

4)c; <= ⁄L€3 ì%)6 ‹∫›fi 78)A ©Rëb>õ l1GmM fl~Ñ ïñó;

4)cYHX É Õ.+ WN. À ¡¬√è ≥Gl ¡¬ – a-o3p c‡& (Sense of community index),

,- V· ”‘, ìîïñó ”‘ – ; –(= 78)6 ì%)*3 /0. ?@A ‚„Y“N. ≤>ÿñ

RtA ’÷b> ‰Â.b>H ,-. $%&A lêYH '\PQ. ≤ÊÁó; hSY“N. À

≤ÊÁó3 jËè NÈt ÍN: ŒÎ, 4l° ¢£§ ä_ ≤>≥&6 $%& 4)c ≤>≥&A <ÏYT,

ÌÎ, '()3 /0. ?@A ”‘YH Ó; haëb>õ $%& 4)+5G ,-. $%&A ∞M

4l° ¢£§; ä_YP ∞M o0. Ô›¬; haMN.

!"#: $%&'(), *+,-, ./012, 34567, 89:-;<, *+;<= >?

Page 7: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

7

Abstract

Un servizio in collaborazione, ovvero un servizio dove gli utenti finali sono attivamente coinvolti e

assumono il ruolo di co-progettista e co-produttore del servzio sulla base di una logica peer-to-peer e

di rapporti di collaborazione, produce due elementi: soluzioni tecniche che rispondono ai bisogni

dell'utente e relazioni sociali tra le persone che collaborano. Se progettato correttamente, un servizio

collaborativo può fornire soluzioni ai problemi sociali contemporanei, economici e ambientali. Può

creare tessuti sociali e qualità relazionali essenziali per una società sostenibile. I due elementi del

servizio collaborativo fanno parte di un circolo virtuoso, nel quale la produzione di un elemento

facilita la produzione dell’altro. Le tecnologie di informazione e (ICT) amplificano questo ciclo

virtuoso, fornendo un supporto tecnico che consente agli utenti di soddisfare i propri bisogni

(intervento tecnico), e facilitando l'arricchimento delle reti sociali, soprattutto consolidando i legami

deboli.

La democratizzazione delle ICT ha portato agli individui e comunità collaborative ampie opportunità

per migliorare i propri servizi collaborativi. Le piattaforme digitali che supportano le innovazioni

sociali, sia in spazi reali e che virtuali, sono in rapido aumento. Eppure pochi sono gli studi sull'uso

sistematico di tali piattaforme. Gli attuali metodi adottati dall’interazione uomo-computer (HCI) e

user-centered design tendono a concentrarsi sulla fornitura di interventi tecnici e considerano la

produzione di reti sociali come un sottoprodotto che può essere anticipato e non progettato. Tuttavia,

diversi studi sulle reti sociali dimostrano che l' intervento sociale e tecnico può facilitare la

formazione di reti sociali e stimolare la loro trasformazione (Haythornthwaite 2002, Kavanaugh

1999, Wellman 2001).

A partire da questo contesto di riferimento, viene qui proposto un approccio sistematico per

sviluppare una piattaforma digitale che offra un intervento socio-tecnico per il servizio collaborativo

e affronti in modo efficace i bisogni sociali degli utenti. Sulla base dei casi studio relativi ai servizi

collaborativi esistenti su piattaforma digitale e l'analisi del loro processo di progettazione, è stata

sviluppata una metodologia per indagare i bisogni sociali degli utenti. Tale metodologia è stata

applicata a un progetto in corso chiamato 'Nurire Milano', che mira a creare una rete alimentare

sostenibile che colleghi i produttori locali e consumatori a Milano. La metodologia prevede tre

tecniche – l’indice del senso di comunità, il grado di collaborazione e l’analisi di rete sociale – con

l’obiettivo di analizzare i bisogni impliciti relazionali degli utenti '. Alla fine, i risultati del progetto

sono stati applicati a un contesto più ampio e a un quadro socio-tecnico per il quale il servizio di

collaborazione è stato proposto. Questo quadro di ricerca e intervento integra il processo di sviluppo

di una piattaforma digitale nel processo del design dei servizi e fornisce ai designer dei servizi, che

possiedono un approccio sistematico alla progettazione, un servizio collaborativo su piattaforma

digitale in grado di supportare una comunità collaborativa attraverso un intervento di tipo tecnico-

sociale.

Paroli chiavi: design sevizi, innovazione sociale, sostenibilità, rete sociale, ICTs, intervento socio-

tecnico

Page 8: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

8

Page 9: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

9

Table of Contents

!"#$%&'()*+#,-.#,$$%&,/0#""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""#1!!

!"!"#%)+),%/0#.)*,-.+#"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""#1!!!"1"#%)+),%/0#23)+45&-+6#07$&40)+)+#,-.#*)40&.+#""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""#11!!"8"#+59-5:5/,-/)#,-.#(5*54,45&-+#&:#40)#+43.7#"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""#18!!";"#+4%3/43%)#&:#40)#40)+5+#"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""#1;!

1"#%)<5)=+#&:#40)&%)45/,(#,-.#*)40&.&(&95/,(#%)+),%/0#""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""#1>!

1"!"#.)+59-#:&%#+&/5,(#5--&<,45&-#4&=,%.+#+3+4,5-,'5(547#"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""#1?!"#$#$#!%&'()*!(++&,)-(&+%.!%/%-)(+)0(*(-1!)+2!23%(4+!############################################################################!"5!"#$#"#!'&**)0&6)-(,3!%36,('3%!)+2!0/0367%!2()*&4(')*!86(+'(8*3!######################################################!"9!"#$#:#!('-%!)%!3+)0*(+4!%&*/-(&+%!;&6!'&**)0&6)-(,3!%36,('3%!##########################################################!:<!1"1"#+&/5,(#-)4=&%@#40)&%5)+#""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""#8!!"#"#$#!%-63+4-=!&;!>3)?!-(3%!)+2!2(;;/%(&+!&;!(+;&6@)-(&+!###############################################################!:$!"#"#"#!%-/2(3%!&+!%&'()*!+3->&6?%!)+2!('-%!##############################################################################################!:"!1"8"#/&**3-547#40)&%5)+#"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""#8>!"#:#$#!%3+%3!&;!'&@@/+(-1!#################################################################################################################################!:5!"#:#"#!,(6-/)*!%3--*3@3+-!#################################################################################################################################!:A!"#:#:#!'=)+4(+4!+&-(&+!&;!'&@@/+(-1!(+!)!+3->&6?32!%&'(3-1!##########################################################!:B!1";"#.5+/3++5&-#""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""#;A!"#C#$#!*(@(-)-(&+%!&;!-=3!'&**)0&6)-(,3!%36,('3!@&23*!0)%32!&+!2()*&4(')*!86(+'(8*3!##########!C<!"#C#"#!2()*&4(')*!86(+'(8*3!)+2!-=3&61!&;!-=3!%-63+4-=!&;!>3)?!-(3%!###########################################!C$!"#C#:#!)!+3>!@&23*!&;!'&**)0&6)-(,3!%36,('3!###########################################################################################!C"!

8"#/,+)#+43.5)+#&:#/&((,'&%,45<)#+)%<5/)#&-#.5954,(#$(,4:&%*#""""""""""""""""""""#;>!

8"!"#5-4%&.3/45&-#""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""#;?!:#$#$#!')%3!86&;(*3%!###############################################################################################################################################!C5!:#$#"#!@3-=&2%!########################################################################################################################################################!CA!8"1"#%)+3(4#"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""#;B!:#"#$#!*(4=-!;&6@)-!###############################################################################################################################################!CB!:#"#"#!(+D238-=!;&6@)-!########################################################################################################################################!EA!8"8"#.5+/3++5&-#""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""#?C!:#:#$#!2/)*!86&2/'-(&+!&;!'&**)0&6)-(,3!%36,('3%!#################################################################################!5A!

Page 10: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

10

;"#.)+59-#$%&/)++#&:#/&((,'&%,45<)#+)%<5/)+#&-#.5954,(#$(,4:&%*#""""""""""""#CD!

;"!"#',/@9%&3-.#""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""#BA!;"1"#/,+)#+43.7#5E#.)+59-#&:#/&((,'&%,45<)#+)%<5/)+#&-#.5954,(#$(,4:&%*#"""""""""""""""""""""""""#BA!C#"#$#!(+-6&2/'-(&+!##############################################################################################################################################!B<!C#"#"#!86&'3%%!##########################################################################################################################################################!B$!C#"#:#!63%/*-%!##########################################################################################################################################################!B5!;"8"#/,+)#+43.7#1E#5*$()*)-4,45&-#&:#.5954,(#$(,4:&%*+#:&%#/&((,'&%,45<)#+)%<5/)+#""#D1!C#:#$#!(+-6&2/'-(&+!##############################################################################################################################################!9"!C#:#"#!86&'3%%!##########################################################################################################################################################!9C!C#:#:#!63%/*-%!##########################################################################################################################################################!9A!;";"#.5+/3++5&-#""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""#!A8!C#C#$#!23%(4+!86&'3%%!)+2!-&&*%!###################################################################################################################!$<:!C#C#"#!3,)*/)-(&+!###############################################################################################################################################!$<A!

>"#,#*)40&.&(&97#:&%#5-<)+459,45-9#+&/5,(#-)).+#&:#,#/&**3-547#""""""""""#!!A!

>"!"#40)#-34%5%)#*5(,-&#$%&F)/4#""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""#!!!!E#$#$#!)(@%!)+2!%-6)-34(3%!##############################################################################################################################!$$"!E#$#"#!-=3!;(6%-!8(*&-!86&F3'-G!/846)2(+4!)!;)6@36%7!@)6?3-!(+!@(*)+!########################################!$$:!>"1"#*)40&.+#"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""#!!;!>"8"#%)+3(4#"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""#!!B!E#:#$#!23@&46)8=('!(+;&6@)-(&+!#################################################################################################################!$$B!E#:#"#!%3+%3!&;!'&@@/+(-1!##############################################################################################################################!$":!E#:#:#!%&'()*!+3->&6?!)+)*1%(%!####################################################################################################################!$"A!E#:#C#!-=3!234633!&;!'&**)0&6)-(&+!###########################################################################################################!$:$!>";"#.5+/3++5&-#""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""#!;A!E#C#$#!%3+%3!&;!'&@@/+(-1!##############################################################################################################################!$C<!E#C#"#!234633!&;!'&**)0&6)-(&+!###################################################################################################################!$C5!E#C#:#!%&'()*!+3->&6?!)+)*1%(%!####################################################################################################################!$CB!

?"#,#+&/5&G4)/0-5/,(#:%,*)=&%@#:&%#/&((,'&%,45<)#+)%<5/)#"""""""""""""""""""""""#!>!!

?"!"#',/@9%&3-.#""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""#!>1!?"1"#,#/&-/)$43,(#:%,*)=&%@#"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""#!>8!5#"#$#!86&46)@@(+4!###########################################################################################################################################!$EC!5#"#"#!2)-)!'&**3'-(&+!#####################################################################################################################################!$5<!

Page 11: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

11

5#"#:#!)+)*1%(%!#####################################################################################################################################################!$5:!5#"#C#!%1+-=3%(%!###################################################################################################################################################!$5E!

/0,$4)%#C"#/&-/(3+5&-#""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""#!C8!

'5'(5&9%,$07#"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""#!C?!

,$$)-.5H#"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""#!B>!

,"!"! +&/5,(#*).5,#$)%+&-,(5I,45&-6#&$)--)++#,-.#)H$&+3%)#"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""#!B>!,"1"! /,+)#+43.5)+#:&%*,4#"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""#!DA!,"8"! +3%<)7#:&%*,4+#""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""#1A!!

Page 12: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

12

List of figures

;(4/63!"#$!-=3!(+-36836%&+)*!)+2!&836)-(&+)*!2(@3+%(&+%!&;!%36,('3!H'(8&**).!"<<AI!##############################!"9!;(4/63!"#"!-=3!2(;;363+'3%!03->33+!-=3!J(D-=&/K!63*)-(&+!)+2!-=3!J(D(-K!3L836(3+'3!H'(8&**).!"<<AI

!###############################################################################################################################################################################################!:<!;(4/63!"#:!8&%(-(&+(+4!&;!%36,('3%!0)%32!&+!-(3!%-63+4-=!,%#!'&**)0&6)-(&+!###################################################!C:!;(4/63!:#$!)!@&&2!0&)62!&;!46&;/+!)'-(,(-(3%!H8)6?36.!"<<BI!##########################################################################!C9!;(4/63!:#"!=&>!8*32430)+?!>&6?%!##################################################################################################################################!E<!;(4/63!:#:!8*3243%!8&%-32!&+!-=3!>30%(-3!#####################################################################################################################!E$!;(4/63!:#C!)+!3L)@8*3!&;!)!,(6-/)*!%8)'3!;&6!)!@33-/8!46&/8!###############################################################################!E"!;(4/63!:#E!3L)@8*3%!&;!@33-/8!46&/8%!###########################################################################################################################!E:!;(4/63!:#5!-=3!=&@3!8)43!&;!M36&63*)-(,&!####################################################################################################################!EC!;(4/63!:#A!23%'6(8-(&+!&;!)!634(%-3632!(-3@!#################################################################################################################!EC!;(4/63!:#B!3L)@8*3%!&;!4633+!@)8%!###################################################################################################################################!E5!;(4/63!:#9!3L)@8*3%!&;!4633+!@)8%!(+!23-)(*!#################################################################################################################!E5!;(4/63!:#$<!46&;/+!(+!-=3!8=)%3!&;!)!*&')*!46&/8!###################################################################################################!EB!;(4/63!:#$$!46&;/+!(+!-=3!8=)%3!&;!3L8)+%(&+!###########################################################################################################!EB!;(4/63!:#$"!46&;/+!(+!-=3!8=)%3!&;!)!+3->&6?!#########################################################################################################!E9!;(4/63!:#$:!(+(-()*!8=)%3!&;!8*32430)+?!########################################################################################################################!E9!;(4/63!:#$C!8*32430)+?!46&/8%!03(+4!;&6@32!#############################################################################################################!5<!;(4/63!:#$E!8*3240)+?!)-!-=3!@)-/63!*3,3*!#################################################################################################################!5$!;(4/63!:#$5!@33-/8!46&/8!*3)236%!###################################################################################################################################!5$!;(4/63!:#$A!3)6*1!8=)%3!&;!@33-/8!46&/8%!####################################################################################################################!5$!;(4/63!:#$B!@33-/8!)-!-=3!@)-/63!*3,3*!########################################################################################################################!5"!;(4/63!:#$9!'&/'=%/6;(+4!;&/+236!)+2!=(%!'&**3)4/3%!############################################################################################!5"!;(4/63!:#"<!@/-/)*!-(3%!03->33+!'&/'=%/6;36%!########################################################################################################!5:!;(4/63!:#"$!'&/'=%/6;(+4!)-!-=3!@)-/63!*3,3*!###########################################################################################################!5:!;(4/63!:#""!'&/'=%/6;(+4!46&/8!(+!@(*)+!######################################################################################################################!5C!;(4/63!:#":!'&/'=%/6;(+4!46&/8!(+!*&+2&+!##################################################################################################################!5C!;(4/63!:#"C!-=3!;&/+2(+4!@3@036%!&;!4633@!@)8!%36,('3!######################################################################################!5E!;(4/63!:#"E!)+!3)6*1!8=)%3!&;!4633+!@)8!%36,('3!######################################################################################################!55!;(4/63!:#"5!4633+!@)8!%36,('3!(+!-=3!@)-/63!8=)%3!#################################################################################################!55!;(4/63!:#"A!)!,(6-/&/%!'(6'*3!03->33+!-=3!86&2/'-(&+!&;!%&*/-(&+%!)+2!-=)-!&;!%&'()*!+3->&6?%!######!5A!;(4/63!:#"B!-=3!,(6-/&/%!'1'*3!)@8*(;(32!01!('-%!#######################################################################################################!5A!;(4/63!:#"9!-=3!%-6/'-/6)*!%1%-3@!&;!'&**)0&6)-(,3!%36,('3!&+!2(4(-)*!8*)-;&6@!#####################################!5B!;(4/63!:#:<!@33-/8#'&@!(%!)!2(4(-)*!8*)-;&6@!-=)-!=&%-%!2(,36%3!@33-/8!46&/8%!H@33-/8.!"<$<I!######!59!;(4/63!:#:$!-3)@!;(4=-(+4!2()03-3%!@33-/8!46&/8!=&@38)43!H-3)@!;(4=-(+4!2()03-3%.!"<$<I!#############!59!;(4/63!:#:"!'&**)0&6)-(,3!%36,('3%!(+!@33-/8#'&@!H@33-/8.!"<$<I!##################################################################!A<!

Page 13: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

13

;(4/63!:#::!-3)@!;(4=-(+4!2()03-3%7!=(?(+4!2)1!H-3)@!;(4=-(+4!2()03-3%.!"<$<I!#########################################!A<!;(4/63!:#:C!4)%.!-=3!%&*(2)6(-1!8/6'=)%(+4!46&/8%!)+2!-=3!4)%!>30%(-3!H46/88(!2(!)'N/(%-&!%&*(2)*3.!

"<<9I!###################################################################################################################################################################################!A$!;(4/63!:#:E!4633+!@)8!@)?36%!)+2!-=3!4633+!@)8!>30%(-3!H4633+!@)8.!"<<BI!###########################################!A"!;(4/63!:#:5!-=3!8*32430)+?!>30%(-3!H8*32430)+?.!"<<9I!#####################################################################################!A"!;(4/63!:#:A!83*)23(6&!/%36%!)+2!-=3!83*)23(6&!>30%(-3!H83*)23(6&.!"<<9I!###################################################!A:!;(4/63!:#:B!)!*&')*!,&')*%!%(+4(+4!46&/8!@&0!)+2!-=3!)'-(,@&0!>30%(-3!H)'-(,@&0.!"<<9I!##################!A:!;(4/63!:#:9!!-=3!M36&63*)-(,&!>30%(-3!HM36&63*)-(,&.!"<<9I!###############################################################################!AC!;(4/63!:#C<!'&/'=!%/6;36%!)+2!-=3!'&/'=!%/6;(+4!>30%(-3!H'&/'=%/6;(+4.!"<<9I!######################################!AC!;(4/63! :#C$! %'633+%=&-%! &;! =(-'==(?36%#&64! 8*)-;&6@G! ;6&@! -&8! *3;-! -&! '*&'?>(%3! 2(63'-(&+G!

23,3*&836%!&;!-=3!8*)-;&6@.!)!0/**3-(+!0&)62!;&6!86&8&%(+4!)!=(-'==(?3.!-=3!634(%-6)-(&+!8)43O!)!')6!8)(+-32!>(-=!-=3!=(-'==(?36%#&64!*&4&!H=(-'==(?36%.!"<$<I!###############################################################!AA!

;(4/63!:#C"!)'-(,(-(3%!&64)+(M32!01!@)8&!2/63!##########################################################################################################!AB!;(4/63!:#C:!+)0//6!>30%(-3!)+2!&+3!&;! (-%!86&F3'-!&+!-=3!'&@0)-!;&6!@)*)6()! (+!>)?(-)?).!/4)+2)!

H+)0//6.!"<$<I!###############################################################################################################################################################!AB!;(4/63!C#$!)!63*)-(&+%=(8!03->33+!)+!3,3+-.!)!'&**)0&6)-(,3!%36,('3!)+2!)+!3+)0*(+4!%&*/-(&+!##########!B$!;(4/63!C#"!)+!3L)@8*3!&;!836%&+)%!(+!%36,('3!23%(4+!H>3-/+3%.!"<<9I!#############################################################!B"!;(4/63!C#:!)+!3L)@8*3!&;!)!@&-(,)-(&+!@)-6(L!H>3-/+3%.!"<<9I!#########################################################################!B:!;(4/63!C#C!)+!3L)@8*3!&;!)!%1%-3@!@)8!H>3-/+3%.!"<<9I!########################################################################################!BC!;(4/63!C#E!)+!3L)@8*3!&;!)!%-&610&)62!H'*&-=3%!8)6-1.!"<<9I!############################################################################!BC!;(4/63!C#5!)+!3L)@8*3!&;!)!;*&>!'=)6-!H)6'(%-&8836%.!"<<9I!###############################################################################!BE!;(4/63!C#A!)!2(4(-)*!8*)-;&6@!;&6!&64)+(M(+4!%&'()*!3,3+-%!-&!3L'=)+43!H'*&-=3%!8)6-1.!"<<9I!##########!B5!;(4/63!C#B!-=3!%1%-3@!@)8!&;!'*&-=3%!8)6-1!H'/@(-(+(.!,336)!P!M&'').!"<<9I!###############################################!BA!;(4/63!C#9!-=3!>30%(-3!&;!'*&-=3%!8)6-1!H'/@(-(+(.!,336)!P!M&'').!"<<9I!#####################################################!BA!;(4/63!C#$<!-=3!%1%-3@!@)8!&;!,()44()@&'(!H'3%)6)+&.!,(**(,)7.!4/-(3663M.!"<<9I!######################################!BB!;(4/63!C#$$!-=3!>30%(-3!&;!,()44()@&'(!H'3%)6)+&.!,(**(,)7!P!4/-(3663M.!"<<9I!##########################################!B9!;(4/63!C#$"!-=3!%1%-3@!@)8!&;!>3!4633+!H'6(%8&+(.!*&!@3*3!P!+&4/3%.!"<<9I!##############################################!B9!;(4/63!C#$:!-=3!>30%(-3!&;!>3!4633+!H'6(%8&+(.!*&!@3*3!P!+&4/3%.!"<<9I!#####################################################!9<!;(4/63!C#$C!-=3!%1%-3@!@)8!&;!>3-/+3%!H&+4.!*3&+.!;3663(6)!P!)6)/F&.!"<<9I!############################################!9<!;(4/63!C#$E!-=3!>30%(-3!&;!>3-/+3%!H&+4.!*3&+.!;3663(6)!P!)6)/F&.!"<<9I!##################################################!9$!;(4/63!C#$5!-=3!%1%-3@!@)8!&;!)6'(!%-&8836%!H%3@36)6&.!>/6M36.!>(**()@%!)+2!8/*(2&.!"<<9I!############!9"!;(4/63!C#$A!-=3!>30%(-3!&;!)6'(!%-&8836%!H%3@36)6&.!>/6M36.!>(**()@%!)+2!8/*(2&.!"<<9I!###################!9"!;(4/63!C#$B#!%&'()*!(++&,)-(&+!')@8!(+!%'&-*)+2!(+!F/+3!"<<B!H%&'()*!(++&,)-(&+!')@8.!"<$<I!###########!9:!;(4/63!C#$9 8)6-('(8)+-%!&;!-=3!%&'()*!(++&,)-(&+!')@8!H2)/@ '\a+ÒP.!"<$<I!########################!9C!;(4/63!C#"<!863%3+-)-(&+!&;!-=3!(23)%!2/6(+4!-=3!&6(3+-)-(&+!H%&'()*!(++&,)-(&+!')@8!:5.!"<$<I!####!9E!;(4/63!C#"$!8)6-('(8)+-%!2(%'/%%(+4!-=3! %&*/-(&+!'&+'38-!)-!-=3!46&/8!@33-(+4! ! H%&'()*! (++&,)-(&+!

')@8!:5.!"<$<I!################################################################################################################################################################!9E!

Page 14: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

14

;(4/63! C#""! 23,3*&836%! )-! -=3! ')@8!>(-=! -=3! 63@)(+(+4! -(@3! 2(%8*)132! (+! -=3! 0)'?46&/+2! H%&'()*!(++&,)-(&+!')@8!:5.!"<$<I!########################################################################################################################################!95!

;(4/63!C#":!23,3*&836%!=),(+4!)!2(%'/%%(&+!H%&'()*!(++&,)-(&+!')@8!:5.!"<$<I!##########################################!9A!;(4/63!C#"C!>(63;6)@3%!)+2!(+;&6@)-(&+!)6'=(-3'-/63!26)>+!01!23,3*&836%!H%&'()*!(++&,)-(&+!')@8!

:5.!"<$<I!###########################################################################################################################################################################!9A!;(4/63!C#"E!)!2(4(-)*!8*)-;&6@!;&6!?(+2!0/%!H?(+2!0/%.!"<$<I!############################################################################!9B!;(4/63!C#"5!)!2(4(-)*!8*)-;&6@!;&6!-=3!0)6)-(3G!;332!1&/6!83&8*3!H0)6)-(3G!;332!1&/6!83&8*3.!"<$<I

!###############################################################################################################################################################################################!9B!;(4/63!C#"A!)!2(4(-)*!8*)-;&6@!;&6!;/+!6(2(+4!H;/+!6(2(+4.!"<$<I!#####################################################################!99!;(4/63!C#"B!)!%'=3@)!&;!)!2(4(-)*!8*)-;&6@!;&6!@1!+3(4=0&6%!H%&'()*!(++&,)-(&+!')@8!:5.!"<$<I!##!$<<!;(4/63!C#"9!)!2(4(-)*!8*)-;&6@!;&6!&/6!;)6@!H&/6!;)6@.!"<$<I!######################################################################!$<<!;(4/63!C#:<!)!@&0(*3!8*)-;&6@!;&6!;(+2(+4!*&')*!-6)2(-(&+)*!@)6?3-%!H*3-Q%!@)6?3-.!"<$<I!##########!$<$!;(4/63!C#:$!)!2(4(-)*!8*)-;&6@!;&6!8&8!;/+2(+4!;&6!)6-(%-%!H)6-!;/+2.!"<$<I!#########################################!$<$!;(4/63!C#:"!)!2(4(-)*!8*)-;&6@!;&6!86&!0&+&!06(243!H86&!0&+&!06(243.!"<$<I!#########################################!$<"!;(4/63!C#::!)!2(4(-)*!8*)-;&6@!;&6!-633(+4!H-633(+4.!"<$<I!#############################################################################!$<"!;(4/63!C#:C!23%(4+!86&'3%%!&;!-=3!%&'()*!(++&,)-(&+!')@8!#################################################################################!$<E!;(4/63!C#:E!23%(4+!86&'3%%!&;!-=3!8%2!*)0!################################################################################################################!$<5!;(4/63!C#:5!-183%!&;!4&&2%!H'&&836.!"<<EI!################################################################################################################!$<B!;(4/63!E#$!86&'3%%!&;!+/-6(63!@(*)+&!86&F3'-!H+/-6(63!@(*)+&.!"<<9I!#######################################################!$$"!;(4/63!E#"!)!%'=3@)-('!86&'3%%!&;!23%(4+(+4!)!2(4(-)*!8*)-;&6@!;&6!'&**)0&6)-(,3!%36,('3%!################!$$E!;(4/63!E#:!)43!&;!-=3!86&2/'36%!(+!-=3!@)6?3-!########################################################################################################!$$9!;(4/63!E#C!2(%-)+'3!;6&@!-=3!86&2/'36%7!;)6@%!-&!@(*)+!####################################################################################!$$9!;(4/63!E#E!86&2/'-%!&;;3632!01!-=3!86&2/'36%!########################################################################################################!$$9!;(4/63!E#5!%36,('3%!&;;3632!01!-=3!86&2/'36%!###########################################################################################################!$"<!;(4/63!E#A!;63N/3+'1!&;!/%(+4!-=3!(+-36+3-!H86&2/'36%I!####################################################################################!$"<!;(4/63!E#B!8/68&%3!&;!/%(+4!-=3!(+-36+3-!H86&2/'36%I!##########################################################################################!$"$!;(4/63!E#9!)43!&;!-=3!'&+%/@36%!#####################################################################################################################################!$"$!;(4/63!E#$<!*&')-(&+!&;!-=3!'&+%/@36%!#######################################################################################################################!$""!;(4/63!E#$$!32/')-(&+!*3,3*!&;!-=3!'&+%/@36%!########################################################################################################!$""!;(4/63!E#$"!%&/6'3%!-&!0/1!46&'36(3%!H'&+%/@36%I!#################################################################################################!$":!;(4/63!E#$:!23%(632!;63N/3+'1!&;!-=3!;)6@36%7!@)6?3-!H'&+%/@36%I!#############################################################!$":!;(4/63!E#$C!8/68&%3!&;!-=3!(+-36+3-!/%3!H'&+%/@36%I!##########################################################################################!$":!;(4/63! E#$E! 3*3@3+-%! &;! %3+%3! &;! '&@@/+(-1! )+2! -=3(6! =18&-=3%(M32! 63*)-(&+%=(8%! H@'@(**)+! P!

'=),(%.!$9B5I!################################################################################################################################################################!$"E!;(4/63!E#$5!%&'()*!+3->&6?%!&;!86&2/'36%!)-!-=3!;)6@36%7!@)6?3-!H632!+&23%!)63!(%&*)-3%I!##############!$"B!;(4/63!E#$A!'&**)0&6)-(&+!03->33+!-=3!86&2/'36%!&;!-=3!%)@3!-183!&;!(-3@%!H(+!&6)+43!2&--32!*(+3I!

)+2!&;!%/88*3@3+-)61!(-3@%!H(+!4633+!%&*(2!*(+3I!##########################################################################################!$"9!

Page 15: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

15

;(4/63!E#$B!%&'()*!+3->&6?%!&;!86&2/'36%!)-!-=3!;)6@36%7!@)6?3-!*)03*32! (+!-=3!8&%-)*!'&23! ! H632!+&23%!)63!(%&*)-3%I!#####################################################################################################################################################!$:<!

;(4/63!E#$9!%&'()*!+3->&6?%!&;!86&2/'36%!)-!-=3!;)6@36%7!@)6?3-!*)03*32!(+!-=3!-183!&;!%36,('3%!-=31!&;;36!#################################################################################################################################################################################!$:$!

;(4/63!E#"<!-183%!&;!'&**)0&6)-(,3!)'-(,(-(3%!03->33+!-=3!86&2/'36%!(+!-=3!@)6?3-!#############################!$:"!;(4/63!E#"$!2/6)-(&+!&;!-=3!86&2/'36%7!'&**)0&6)-(,3!)'-(,(-(3%!###################################################################!$::!;(4/63!E#""!%(M3!&;!-=3!86&2/'36%7!'&**)0&6)-(,3!46&/8%!####################################################################################!$::!;(4/63!E#":!;63N/3+'1!&;!(+-36)'-(&+!(+!-=3!86&2/'36%7!'&**)0&6)-(,3!46&/8%!########################################!$:C!;(4/63!E#"C!%&'()*!@32()!/%32!01!-=3!86&2/'36%!(+!'&**)0&6)-(,3!)'-(,(-(3%!###############################################!$:C!;(4/63!E#"E!-183!&;!'&**)0&6)-(,3!)'-(,(-(3%!-=)-!-=3!86&2/'36%!)63!3+4)432!>(-=!-=3!'&+%/@36%!$:E!;(4/63!E#"5!%(M3!&;!46&/8%!(+!'&**)0&6)-(&+!03->33+!-=3!86&2/'36%!)+2!-=3!'&+%/@36%!######################!$:E!;(4/63!E#"A!*3+4-=!&;!'&**)0&6)-(&+!03->33+!-=3!86&2/'36%!)+2!-=3!'&+%/@36%!###################################!$:5!;(4/63!E#"B!;63N/3+'1!&;!(+-36)'-(&+!03->33+!-=3!86&2/'36%!)+2!-=3!'&+%/@36%!##################################!$:5!;(4/63!E#"9!%&'()*!@32()!-=)-!-=3!86&2/'36%!/%3!-&!'&**)0&6)-3!>(-=!-=3!'&+%/@36%!##########################!$:A!;(4/63!E#:<!-=3!86&2/'36%7!>(**(+4+3%%!-&!8)6-('(8)-3!(+!+3>!'&**)0&6)-(,3!%36,('3%!##########################!$:A!;(4/63!E#:$!-183!&;!'&**)0&6)-(&+!03->33+!-=3!'&+%/@36%!)+2!-=3!86&2/'36%!########################################!$:B!;(4/63!E#:"!%(M3!&;!46&/8!(+!'&**)0&6)-(&+!03->33+!-=3!'&+%/@36%!)+2!-=3!86&2/'36%!########################!$:B!;(4/63!E#::!*3+4-=!&;!'&**)0&6)-(&+!03->33+!-=3!'&+%/@36%!)+2!-=3!86&2/'36%!###################################!$:9!;(4/63!E#:C#!;63N/3+'1!&;!(+-36)'-(&+!03->33+!-=3!'&+%/@36%!)+2!-=3!86&2/'36%!#################################!$:9!;(4/63!E#:E!%&'()*!@32()!/%32!01!-=3!'&+%/@36%!-&!'&**)0&6)-3!######################################################################!$C<!;(4/63!E#:5!-)%-(+4!*)0&6)-&6(3%!&+!'/%'/%!;6&@!@&6&''&!###############################################################################!$C"!;(4/63!E#:A!23@&+%-6)-(&+!&;!@)?(+4!=&+31!01!)+!)8('/*-/6(%-!######################################################################!$C"!;(4/63!E#:B!83&8*3!=),(+4!)!06/+'=!)-!-=3!@)6?3-!################################################################################################!$C:!;(4/63!E#:9!(+%(23!-=3!=)*(;)L!%3)8&6-!;)6@36%7!@)6?3-!H=)*(;)L!;)6@36%7!@)6?3-.!"<$<I!##############!$CE!;(4/63!E#C<!-=3!63%&/6'3%!-=)-!-=3!86&2/'36%!>&/*2!*(?3!-&!2(%'/%%!>(-=!&-=36%!-&!%=)63!################!$CA!;(4/63!E#C$!(+%-6/@3+-%!)+2!(+;6)%-6/'-/63!-=)-!-=3!86&2/'36%!)63!>(**(+4!-&!%=)63!########################!$CA!;(4/63!E#C"!'&@83-3+'3%!-=)-!-=3!86&2/'36%!)63!>(**(+4!-&!%=)63!################################################################!$CB!;(4/63!E#C:!-=3!@)6?3-!)%!)!+3->&6?!&;!-(4=-*1!?+(-!46&/8%!############################################################################!$C9!;(4/63!E#CC!-=3!@)6?3-!)%!)!+3->&6?!&;!-(4=-*1!?+(-!46&/8%!)+2!(+2(,(2/)*%!############################################!$E<!;(4/63!5#$#!)!%'=3@)-('!@&23*!&;!23%(4+(+4!)!2(4(-)*!8*)-;&6@!;&6!'&**)0&6)-(,3!%36,('3%!##################!$E"!;(4/63!5#"!)!86&'3%%!&;!23%(4+(+4!)!'&**)0&6)-(,3!%36,('3!&+!2(4(-)*!8*)-;&6@!#########################################!$EC!;(4/63!5#:!86&46)@@(+4!8=)%3!########################################################################################################################################!$EE!;(4/63!5#C!2()46)@%!-=)-!(**/%-6)-3!'&**)0&6)-(,3!+3->&6?%!)-!-=3!@)6?3-!03;&63!H-&8I!)+2!);-36!

H0&--&@I!-=3!%&'(&D-3'=+(')*!(+-36,3+-(&+!####################################################################################################!$EA!;(4/63!5#E!2)-)!'&**3'-(&+!8=)%3!###################################################################################################################################!$5<!;(4/63!5#5!)+!3L'368-!;6&@!)!%/6,31!&+!-=3!3L'=)+43!&;!63%&/6'3%!)+2!'&@83-3+'3%!H0)3?.!'&6/0&*&.!

@36&+(!P!%(@3&+3.!"<$<I!#########################################################################################################################################!$5:!;(4/63!5#A!)+)*1%(%!8=)%3!##################################################################################################################################################!$5:!

Page 16: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

16

;(4/63!5#B!%1+-=3%(%!8=)%3!################################################################################################################################################!$5E!;(4/63!5#9!83&8*3!-61(+4!>(+3!2/6(+4!-=3!-)%-(+4!*)0&6)-&6(3%!#######################################################################!$55!;(4/63!5#$<!83&8*3!-61(+4!=&+31!&;;3632!01!)+!)8('/*-/6(%-!2/6(+4!-=3!=&+31!@)?(+4!23@&+%-6)-(&+

!############################################################################################################################################################################################!$55!;(4/63!5#$$!83&8*3!3)-(+4!-&43-=36!)-!)!%=)632!-)0*3!#########################################################################################!$55!;(4/63!5#$"!-=3!%-6/'-/63!&;!)!2(4(-)*!8*)-;&6@!;&6!'&**)0&6)-(,3!%36,('3%!############################################!$A<!;(4/63!5#$:!-=3!;/+'-(&+)*!'&+;(4/6)-(&+!&;!3+)0*(+4!%&*/-(&+!@&2/*3%!###################################################!$A$!;(4/63!5#$C!)!%-6/'-/6)*!%1%-3@!&;!'&**)0&6)-(,3!%36,('3%!&+!2(4(-)*!8*)-;&6@!#####################################!$A"!

Page 17: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

17

List of tables

-)0*3!"#$!'&@8)6(%&+!&;!%-6&+4!-(3%!)+2!>3)?!-(3%!###################################################################################################!:$!-)0*3!"#"!)+!3L)@8*3!&;!')*'/*)-(+4!-=3!%'(!###############################################################################################################!:A!-)0*3!:#$!')%3!*(%-!H2)-)!)''3%%32!;306/)61!"5.!"<<9I!###########################################################################################!CA!-)0*3! :#"! )! -18&*&41! &;! '&**)0&6)-(,3! %36,('3! &+! 2(4(-)*! 8*)-;&6@! 0)%32! &+! -=3! %&'()*! +3->&6?!

%-6/'-/63%!&;!/%36%!#######################################################################################################################################################!AE!-)0*3!C#$#!23%(4+!86&'3%%!&;!8%2!*)0!,%#!%&'()*!(++&,)-(&+!')@8!####################################################################!$<5!-)0*3!E#$!-=3!%'(!;&6!86&2/'36!)-!-=3!@)6?3-!#########################################################################################################!$$5!-)0*3!E#"!-=3!%'(!;&6!'&+%/@36!)-!-=3!@)6?3-!########################################################################################################!$$A!-)0*3!E#:!-183%!&;!'&**)0&6)-(,3!)'-(,(-(3%!##############################################################################################################!$$A!-)0*3!E#C!-=3!%3+%3!&;!'&@@/+(-1!*3,3*!&;!-=3!86&2/'36%!##################################################################################!$"C!-)0*3!E#E!-=3!%3+%3!&;!'&@@/+(-1!*3,3*!&;!-=3!'&+%/@36%!##################################################################################!$"C!-)0*3!E#5!86&2/'36%7!),36)43!%'&63%!&+!@3@036%=(8!#############################################################################################!$"E!-)0*3!E#A!'&+%/@36%7!),36)43!%'&63%!&+!@3@036%=(8!############################################################################################!$"E!-)0*3!E#B!86&2/'36%7!),36)43!%'&63%!&+!(+;*/3+'3!#################################################################################################!$"5!-)0*3!E#9!'&+%/@36%7!),36)43!%'&63%!&+!(+;*/3+'3!################################################################################################!$"5!-)0*3!E#$<!86&2/'36%7!),36)43!%'&63%!&+!(+-346)-(&+!)+2!;/*;(**@3+-!&;!+332%!#####################################!$"5!-)0*3!E#$$!'&+%/@36%7!),36)43!%'&63%!&+!(+-346)-(&+!)+2!;/*;(**@3+-!&;!+332%!#####################################!$"5!-)0*3!E#$"!86&2/'36%7!),36)43!%'&63%!&+!%=)632!3@&-(&+)*!'&++3'-(&+!#####################################################!$"A!-)0*3!E#$:!'&+%/@36%7!),36)43!%'&63%!&;!%=)632!3@&-(&+)*!'&++3'-(&+!#####################################################!$"A!-)0*3!E#$C!3L)@8*3%!&;!%36,('3!%-6)-34(3%!)+2!8*)-;&6@!;3)-/63%!#################################################################!$E<!-)0*3!5#$!)!'=3'?*(%-!-&!)6-('/*)-3!)!%36,('3!'&+'38-!##########################################################################################!$EA!-)0*3!5#"!')%3%!&;!'&**)0&6)-(,3!%36,('3%!&+!-=3!2(4(-)*!8*)-;&6@!0)%32!&+!-=3(6!-18&*&4(3%!###########!$E9!-)0*3!5#:!'&@8)6(%&+!&;!%'(.!%+)!)+2!2&'!################################################################################################################!$5"!-)0*3!5#C!)!63%&/6'3D86&0*3@!@)-6(L!;&6!06)(+%-&6@(+4!%&'(&D-3'=+(')*!(+-36,3+-(&+!######################!$5C!-)0*3!5#E!06)(+%-&6@32!%-6)-34(3%!@)8832!&+-&!-=3!-18&*&41!@)8!################################################################!$5B!-)0*3!5#5!)!63%&/6'3D86&0*3@!@)-6(L!>(-=!)!06)(+%-&6@(+4!63%/*-!###############################################################!$59!-)0*3!5#A!;3)-/63%!&;!3+)0*(+4!%&*/-(&+%!;&6!-=3!+/-6(63!@(*)+&!86&F3'-!################################################!$A$!

Page 18: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

18

Terminologies

Collaborative communities

Communities that are engaged in any form of collaborative services at the individual or

communal level.

Collaborative service

Services where final users are actively involved and assume the role of service co-designer and

co-producers based on peer-to-peer, collaborative relationships and, consequently, on a high

degree of mutual trust. Services where the produced values emerge out of relational qualities,

i.e. out of real and lively personal relationships (Jegou & Manzini, 2008, p32).

Services based on peer-to-peer, collaborative relationships and, consequently, on a high degree

of mutual trust. Services where the produced values emerge out of relational qualities, i.e. out of

real and lively personal relationships (Cipolla, 2008)

Community

Networks of interpersonal ties that provide sociability, support, information, a sense of

belonging, and social identity (Wellman, 2001).

Creative communities

Groups of entrepreneurial people who, without expecting to trigger general changes in the

system (economy, institutions, large infrastructures), manage to reorganize the existing state-of-

things producing something new, often innovative solutions that fulfill their individual interests

and at the same time social and environmental interests (Manzini in Meroni Ed. 2007).

Disabling systems

Systems that promote user passivity and ignorance. People and communities are less and less

able to solve problems by themselves.

Design for Social Innovation and Sustainability (DESIS)

A network of schools of design and other schools, institutions, companies and non-profit

organizations interested in promoting and supporting design for social innovation and

sustainability (www.desis-network.org).

Dual production of collaborative service

The production of technical solutions to user needs and social networks of individuals or

communities that are involved in a collaborative activity as a result of collaborative service.

Page 19: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

19

Enabling systems

Systems of products, services and organizational tools that enable individuals or communities to

achieve a result using at best their skills and abilities (Manzini, 2008).

Product-Service System (PSS)

A marketable set of products and services capable of jointly fulfilling a user's needs (Van Halen,

Vezzoli & Wimmer, 2005, p21). PSS promotes a focus shift from selling just products to selling

the utility, through a mix of products and services while fulfilling the same client demands with

less environmental impact. (Manzini & Vezzoli, 2002)

Peer to peer (P2P)

A specific form of relational dynamic and is based on the assumed equipotency of its

participants organized through the free cooperation of equals in view of the performance of a

common task for the creation of a common good, with forms of decision-making and autonomy

that are widely distributed throughout the network. (Bauwens, 2005)

Relational qualities

The expressions of the “genuine dialogue” established between the participants of collaborative

service and include trust, intimacy, friendship and a common identity (Cipolla, 2007)

Service

A useful performance, the values of which are recognized by one or more persons (DeMichelis,

1996)

Social capital

The collective value of all 'social networks' and the inclinations that arise from these networks to

do things for each other (Putnam, 2000)

Social innovation

New ideas that work in meeting social goals (Young Foundation, 2006, p.9)

A process of change where new ideas emerge from a variety of actors directly involved in the

problem to be solved: final users, grass roots technicians and entrepreneurs, local institutions

and civil society organizations (Manzini, 2009)

Social media

A group of Internet-based applications that build on the ideological and technological

foundations of Web 2.0, and that allow the creation and exchange of user-generated content

Page 20: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

20

(Kaplan, Haenlein, (2010)., Users of the world, unite! The challenges and opportunities of social

media, Business Horizons, Vol. 53, Issue 1, p. 59-68.)

Social needs

Needs relating to society or needs relating to individuals’ relations and activities with others. In

this thesis, the latter is used. Social needs are basic human needs and examples include sense of

community, friendship, family and intimacy.

A social network

A social network is a social structure made up of individuals (or organizations) called "nodes",

which are tied (connected) by one or more specific types of interdependency, such as friendship,

kinship, common interest, financial exchange, dislike, sexual relationships, or relationships of

beliefs, knowledge or prestige (Wikipedia, 2010).

Social network analysis

The mapping and measuring of relationships and flows between people, groups, organizations,

computers or other information/knowledge processing entities. The nodes in the network are

the people and groups while the links show relationships or flows between the nodes. SNA

provides both a visual and a mathematical analysis of complex human systems. (Social Network

Analysis, 2010)

Socio-technical framework

In the context of service design, A Socio-technical framework is an approach to address social

and technical needs of an individual or a community with service strategies that involve social

and technical intervention.

Socio-technical intervention for service

The combination of social and technical intervention. Social intervention in a service refers to

intervention to initiate and maintain the relations of stakeholders in a direction coherent with

the service goal. Technical intervention in a service is intervention to improve the performance

of a service with necessary tools and methods.

Virtual settlement

A cyber space of virtual communities. For a cyber space to be a virtual settlement, it needs to

meet the following 4 conditions: (1) a minimum level of interactivity; (2) a variety of

communicators; (3) a minimum level of sustained membership; and (4) a virtual common-

public-space where a significant portion of interactive group-CMCs (Computer-Mediated

Communications) occur (Jones, 1997).

Page 21: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

21

1. PROBLEMS AND APPROACH

This research proposes a socio-technical framework to design a digital platform for collaborative

service. Collaborative service is a grassroots social innovation. It is defined as a service where

final users play the role of service co-designer and co-producers to generate a solution for a

common need based on peer-to-peer, collaborative relationships and, consequently, on a high

degree of mutual trust (Jegou & Manzini, 2008). The proposed framework focuses on

addressing the social needs of collaborative communities and enriching their social networks

through socio-technical intervention.

1.1. Research demands

The research demands exist at two levels: At the macro level, there is a growing interest in social

innovations and in design for social innovations. Social innovations are emerging as alternative

solutions to economic, environmental and social problems of contemporary society. They are

defined as “new ideas that work in meeting social goals” (Young Foundation, 2006, p.9).

Social innovations tend to prevail when three conditions are met: discontent; awareness of the

gap between what people need and what is offered by governments, private firms and NGO’s;

and technologies that empower people to solve the problems (Ibid.). This makes the present a

timely moment for social innovations to prevail. In fact, social innovations have emerged as a

promising solution to reshape economies to foster sustained growth and to systematically solve

societal challenges since the global financial crisis in 2008. For example, EU President Barroso

(2009) signaled its importance for the future of Europe during the financial and economic crisis

in 2009, emphasizing its role to foster sustainable growth, secure jobs and boost

competitiveness. In US, President Obama launched the office of social innovation and civic

participation to support grassroots solutions to the nation’s challenges.

In this context, there is a growing interest in design for social innovation among social

innovators and designers. The former uses design thinking and methods to elicit user needs,

define problems, generate and present solution ideas. For the latter, it is an opportunity to

utilize their creativity and knowledge to tackle various social issues and to create a more

sustainable society. For example, designers can develop innovative product service systems that

are socially, environmentally and economically more sustainable than product-centered

business models; they can also design services that empower people to use their abilities at best

to fulfill their needs1; and design researchers can develop tools, methods and theoretical

knowledge for the practitioners. The last example leads to the research demand at the micro

level.

1 Hence such systems are called enabling systems (Manzini, 2005)

Page 22: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

22

With the introduction of technologies that empower users to interact, collaborate and innovate

(often represented by the term web 2.0), information communication technologies (ICTs) have

been widely adopted by social innovators to organize and support various collaborative

initiatives. Among them are collaborative services empowered by digital platforms, or simply

collaborative services on digital platform. A conventional approach to designing a digital

platform for a collaborative service employs methods and processes developed in human-

computer interaction and interaction design whose primary concerns are usability and

emotional satisfaction.

A platform thus designed may effectively deal with the technical dimension of a service which

relates to the performance of a service, but it hardly addresses the social dimension which

relates to creation and reinforcement of relations among individuals who collaborate. Social

relations generated through a collaborative activity are a unique characteristic of a collaborative

service and it is also essential to the diffusion of social innovations. If a digital platform can be

designed to fulfill social needs as well as technical needs of a collaborative community, a

collaborative service will be more likely to succeed and its impact greater.

1.2. Research questions, hypotheses and methods

The main research question of the thesis is as follows: How can ICTs be incorporated into a

design process to develop a service that facilitates the enrichment of social networks of

collaborative individuals and communities? This question can be further specified into three

questions: (1) how do ICTs influence the production and diffusion of collaborative services; (2)

how do collaborative communities use ICTs to fulfill their social needs; and (3) how do

designers and developers use ICTs in the design process of collaborative services?

The first question relates to the role of ICTs in the production of collaborative services.

According to the dual dimension of service (Cipolla, 2007), a collaborative service produces two

basic elements: a solution for a social need and social networks among those who collaborate.

The question thus inquires if ICTs contribute to facilitating the production of a solution and

social networks and if so, how. It is hypothesized the production of a solution facilitates that of

social networks and vice versa, creating a virtuous cycle. ICTs amplify this virtuous cycle by

providing tools for collaboration and contributing to creation of social networks that underpin

collaborative service. This hypothesis is verified through literature studies on social networks

and ICTs.

The second question relates to which ICTs collaborative communities use and for what

purposes. Empirical knowledge shows that when people develop a digital platform for a

collaborative service, they often benchmark cases of a similar goal and select technologies that

Page 23: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

23

serve their needs most effectively. This implies that there could be stereotypes of digital

platforms for collaborative service. Therefore, it is hypothesized that there exist a correlation

between a community’s use of ICTs and a solution and social networks it aims to produce. If

such a pattern exists and can be identified, it can be used as a reference for designers to design a

digital platform that serves best the specific needs of target users. This hypothesis is verified

through case studies of collaborative services on digital platform.

The third question concerns what kind of process do designers and engineers undergo to

develop collaborative services on digital platform and what are their needs related to this

process. It is hypothesized that considering the short history of design for collaborative service

on digital platform, there is no dedicated process and that designers and developers use

conventional approach used in interaction design and human-computer interaction. If that is

the case, their process will tend to focus on satisfying users’ cognitive and emotional needs

related to the technical aspect of a service and will lack a systematic approach addressing users’

social needs. This hypothesis is verified through investigation of two case studies conducted as

part of this thesis work.

1.3. Significance and limitations of the study

The significance of this research can summarized as the following: (1) It contemplates the notion

of collaborative service and redefines its theoretical model based on the theory of weak ties

(Granovetter, 1973). The new model is relevant in the emergence of ICTs as an enabling

solution2 for collaborative service and allows a quantitative assessment of an enabling solution;

(2) the research affirms the existence of collaborative service on digital platform and identifies

the use patterns of ICTs by collaborative communities in diverse contexts. Such patterns include

a structural system of collaborative service on digital platform and two typologies based on

service goal and social networks of users; (3) the research identifies the process of designing

collaborative service on digital platform along with methods used in each stage. It evaluates the

process from the perspective of addressing users’ technical and social needs; and (4) it proposes

a socio-technical framework for collaborative service, a systematic approach to designing a

digital platform for collaborative communities. This framework is integrated into service design

process and allows a designer to generate design strategies that responds to target user needs,

especially social ones, based on the analysis of their sense of community, degree of collaboration

and social network structure. The strategies are then fed into formulating the concept and

features of a digital platform.

2 A solution that enables individuals or communities to achieve a result using at best their skills and abilities (Manzini, 2008).

Page 24: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

24

The framework is based on an on-going project to aims to create a sustainable food network

between local producers and consumers in Milan. Collaborative services between producers and

consumers are being designed with the first pilot case being a farmers’ market. At the same

time, a digital platform that supports the services has launched in December 2010 with features

that support the first pilot case. Designed based on the framework, its structure can be

expanded to accommodate the new services to arrive. The effectiveness of the platform has not

been evaluated and consequently, the evaluation of the framework remains as a future work.

1.4. Structure of the thesis

This thesis has the following structure: Chapter 1 identifies research demands, research

questions, hypotheses and main contribution of this research. Chapter 2 introduces the

theoretical framework of collaborative service and discusses a virtuous cycle in the dual

production of collaborative service as well as how ICTs can amplify the cycle. Chapter 3

introduces the result of case studies on the existing collaborative services on digital platform

and reveals the ICT use patterns observed in them. Chapter 4 illustrates the current process of

designing a collaborative service on digital platform and discusses its strengths and weaknesses.

In chapter 5, a project to create a sustainable food network in Milan and to design a digital

platform to support collaborative services between local producers and consumers is described.

Chapter 6 introduces a socio-technical framework for designing a digital platform that fulfills

the social needs of collaborative communities. Chapter 7 concludes the research and proposes

future works.

Page 25: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

25

2. REVIEWS OF THEORETICAL AND METHODOLOGICAL RESEARCH

In this chapter, three research areas that constitute the theoretical and methodological base of

this research are introduced. The first area is design for social innovation towards sustainability.

The notion of collaborative service and enabling solution is introduced. The second one relates

to social network theories. Social network theories provide a reference to building the

conceptual model of collaborative service. They also provide methodologies to analyze and

visualize social networks of target users that are introduced in chapter 5. The third area is

community theories. They provide a theoretical framework to the notion of collaborative

community referred to in this research and metrics to measure the sense of community.

Page 26: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

26

2.1. Design for social innovation towards sustainability

2.1.1. Social innovations, sustainability and design

Social innovations are emerging as alternative solutions to contemporary economic, social and

environmental problems and a driver towards a sustainable society. They are moving from the

margins to the mainstream in the troubled time. EU President Barroso signaled its importance

for the future of Europe, saying that “[t]he financial and economic crisis makes creativity and

innovation in general and social innovation in particular even more important to foster

sustainable growth, secure jobs and boost competitiveness” (2009). In the White House,

President Obama created the office of social innovation and civic participation to support

grassroots solutions to the nation’s challenges.

Social innovations tend to prevail when three conditions are met: discontent; awareness of the

gap between what people need and what is offered by governments, private firms and NGO’s;

and availability of the technologies that empower people to generate solutions to their needs

(Mulgan, 2006). Arguably, the situations of the contemporary society makes now a likely

moment for social innovations to prevail: problems that people confront across diverse sectors

of society such as the climate change, economic downturn, energy crisis and social division have

led to distrust of the current socio-economic systems and created demands for alternative

solutions; there is increasing awareness of the urgent need for a sustainable growth at the global

scale; and diffused technologies are democratizing power and empower ordinary people to play

proactive roles to make changes and fulfill their needs.

Several scholars have asserted that the contemporary society is going through a transition at the

center of which lie socio-technological innovations that fundamentally change the way we live,

produce and consume. According to Murray (2010, p.4), “the early years of the 21st century are

witnessing the emergence of a new kind of economy that has profound implications for the

future of public services as well as for the daily life of citizens.” This emerging economy, which

the author calls a ‘social economy’, can be observed in many fields such as environment, care,

education, welfare, food and energy. The characteristics of a social economy are the following:

the intense use of distributed networks to sustain and manage relationships enhanced by

information communication technologies (ICTs); blurred boundaries between production and

consumption; an emphasis on collaboration and repeated interactions; and a strong role for

values and missions (Murray, 2010).

Bauwens described the changes that this society is undergoing as the emergence of a society

based on Peer-to-Peer (P2P) dynamic (or simply a P2P society). In a P2P society, equipotential

members cooperate for the performance of a common task and for the creation of a common

good based on a distributed network (Bauwens, 2005). The characteristics of a P2P society are

the following: free cooperation between members based on distributed networks, merit-based

Page 27: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

27

hierarchy and no prior selection to participation; production of use values; and participants’ free

access to the use values (Ibid.).

Lessig (2008) claimed that there are two types of economies – commercial and sharing – and

that the third type is emerging as the result of interaction between the first two types. He called

it hybrid economies. Despite seemingly contradicting concepts, commercial and sharing

economies can exist in parallel. For example in the music industry, the emergence of illegal file

sharing on p2p networks has dropped the profit of record companies by 31%, and not 100%.

What it means is that even if practically every piece of music on the market can be found on p2p

networks, some people continue to purchase music and therefore the parallel market exists

(Ibid.). According to Lessig, our economy will have more hybrids of commercial and sharing

economies in the future.

Manzini proposed that small, local, open and connected are key characters of an emergent

sustainable society (2008). The limited size of human beings – both physical and cognitive –

brings into the limited scale of a system that we can comprehend and control. Because a small

local system is easier to comprehend and control than a big centralized one, it is more

democratic. The diffusion of the Internet allows people to remain small and local while open

and connected to a bigger system where they all belong to, what he calls a ‘cosmopolitan

localism’. As the Internet has brought power back to people, grassroots social innovations will

bring more changes to our society than before in a sustainable direction.

Although the four theories come from different contexts, a social economy, a P2P society, hybrid

economies and a sustainable society share several characteristics in common: First of all, they

emphasize the rising power of small and local units in our society (e.g. individuals,

communities, SME’s) which are forming a bigger system based on a P2P or distributed network;

they often drive the innovations triggered by discontent of the current socio-economic systems

and empowered by technological innovations; ICTs, digital collaborative tools in particular,

provide an infrastructure for networking and collaboration among the small and local units; as a

result, the boundary between production and consumption is getting blurred; and finally, old

elements and new elements (e.g. market economy and social economy, P2P and centralized

network, commercial and sharing economy) coexist, implying that the contemporary society is

in a transition period.

In the center of the transition are social innovations that have expanded rapidly in the recent

years (Murray, 2010). What appear to be technological innovations – collaborative production

in the virtual space – are in fact rooted in a more fundamental change which Bauwens describes

as P2P dynamic. Due to the democratized ICTs, the virtual space has become the most vibrant

laboratory of social innovations and the result is also affecting the real world. As we will see in

Page 28: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

28

detail in chapter 3, the characteristics of social innovations in the virtual space coincide in many

aspects with those of a sustainable society proposed by Manzini.

Manzini (2007) argues that radical innovations from bottom-up that are often motivated by

personal needs and challenge traditional ways of doing things introduce a set of new, very

different and intrinsically more sustainable solutions and these micro-transformations become

the groundwork for a greater systemic change. Among these grassroots activities are a type

service in which the final users collaborate to produce solutions to a wide range of social needs

that have failed to be met by existing solutions. For this reason, they are called collaborative

services and the people who designed them are called collaborative organizations (Jegou &

Manzini, 2008).

Bridging design and social innovation has been practiced by both designers and social

innovators: On the one side, design approaches have been adopted and used by social

innovators in user studies, ideation, building prototypes and communication. For example,

user-centered design and participatory design are used to identify user needs and to evaluate

current innovation models in social innovation process 3 . In Silatech Foundation, an

international initiative to address rapidly growing unemployment in Arab countries, user-

centered design methods such as personas is used to study the lifestyle of unemployed youth. In

Seed Foundation, participatory design is used to co-create a housing system with residents in

London (SIX teleconference, 2009). Design methods and tools are also frequently used in

concept development and prototyping. For example, in Philips, scenario design is used to

synthesize a desired future and communicate it to the public. In Silatech Foundation, the vision

of how technologies will deliver the key services in a compelling and appropriate way is

visualized in an animation (ibid.).

On the other side, there has been a growing interest in social innovation among designers

although it has been mostly confined to the academic field until now. An exemplar is the Design

for Social Innovation and Sustainability (DESIS) Network, an international network of schools

of design and other schools, institutions, companies and non-profit organizations interested in

promoting and supporting design for social innovation and sustainability (Manzini, 2009). In

Politecnico di Milano, Design Innovation for Sustainability (DIS) research unit uses service and

strategic design as a tool to create product-service systems as alternative – and often radically

different – solutions for social needs of individuals and communities. In Malmo University, Ahn

and his colleagues have used participatory design approach to design a community workspace

(SIX teleconference 2009). Philips Design developed a low-tech and low-cost stove called

Chulha for safe and healthy indoor cooking for low-income rural households in India.

3 Mulgan (2006) described the process of social innovation in 4 stages: generating ideas by understanding needs and identifying potential solutions; developing, prototyping, and piloting ideas; assessing, scaling up, and diffusing good ideas; and learning and evolving.

Page 29: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

29

In short, there is an increasing demand among social innovators for design methods that can be

utilized at different stages of social innovation process and at the same time, social innovation is

emerging as a design topic mainly in academic institutes due to their growing significance in the

contemporary society. One approach to deal with social innovations in design is to use service

design as a tool to encourage and facilitate grassroots social innovations in a more systematic

way. In the next section, the notion of collaborative service and enabling solution is elaborated.

2.1.2. Collaborative services and Buber’s dialogical principle

Collaborative service is distinguished from other services in that it requires relational qualities

as a prerequisite to function. Relational qualities are defined as the expressions of the “genuine

dialogue” established between the participants of collaborative service and include trust,

intimacy, friendship and a common identity (Cipolla, 2007). Figure 2.1 is a diagram that

illustrates where collaborative service is positioned in relation to other services (Ibid.).

According to this model, service has two dimensions – the interpersonal and the operational –

and each dimension is polarized.

Figure 2.1 The interpersonal and operational dimensions of service (Cipolla, 2007)

Cipolla’s notion of collaborative services is based on Buber’s dialogical principle. At the

extremes of the interpersonal dimension are “I-Thou” and “I-It”. Buber defines I-Thou as a

“relation” which is unmediated and present as the interaction between them happens without

the intervention of any concept, purpose or anticipation. I-Thou relations can occur when all the

means have disintegrated (Ibid.). On the contrary, I-It is an “experience” and it is anticipated by

preconceptions and classifications that each one has established in the past. “…[I]nsofar as a

Page 30: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

30

human being makes do with the things that he experiences and uses, he lives in the past and his

moment has no presence” (Buber as cited in Ibid., p.85).

Figure 2.2 The differences between the “I-THOU” relation and the “I-IT” experience (Cipolla, 2007)

The operational dimension of a service is defined as its manner of functioning and two polar

variables exist – “collaborative” and “professional” (Cipolla, 2007). A professional service

operates based on qualified intervention. The service flows one-way from a professional to a

client. On the other hand, a collaborative service is operated by stakeholders who work together

for a common goal.

As in Figure 2.1, a service that is collaborative based on I-Thou relations is thus called a

collaborative relational service or a community-based service4. A service that is professional and

based on I-It experiences is called a standard service. Collaborative relational service or

community-based service is also called collaborative service by Cipolla and this research uses

the term collaborative service in the same manner.

2.1.3. ICTs as enabling solutions for collaborative services

One of the roles that design can play to support social innovations is to design innovative

product-service systems that empower users to use their skills and talents at best to collaborate

and generate solutions to their problems at the grassroots level. Such a system is called an

enabling solution (Manzini, 2005). The role of an enabling solution is summarized in the

famous proverb: “Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day; teach a man to fish and you feed

him for a lifetime.”

An enabling solution can be any product, service or technology that support individuals or

communities to achieve a result. In the recent years, digital platforms that incorporate

collaborative social tools have emerged as an enabling solution to promote social innovations

and sustainable lifestyles. For example, KIVA is an online microcredit system that connects 4 Cipolla’s definition of community is based on Buber’s dialogic principle, i.e., a group of people connected through I-Thou relations is a community. In this research, however, this definition is replaced with the Sense of Community theory (McMillan and Chavis, 1983).

Page 31: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

31

investors with entrepreneurs in the developing nations. Since it was established in 2005, it has

funded over $150 million in loans to over 400000 entrepreneurs (as of August 2009); ZOES is a

social networking platform that promotes solidarity economy in Italy; and mySociety is a non-

profit organization that builds various enabling solutions through which citizens can participate

in creating democratic society in UK.

ICTs can support collaborative services in several ways: for example, they can increase the

accessibility and replicability of services, making them available to people of wider social and

economical status; they can enhance communication between service stakeholders, thereby

strengthening social fabric and making services more resilient; and ICTs, collective knowledge

and innovative business models in an open networked platform can reduce the technological,

bureaucratic and economical burden of creating and supplying collaborative services

respectively.

2.2. Social network theories

Social network theories contribute to this research by providing a reference to the social

dimension of collaborative service and diffusion of innovation. In this section, Granovetter’s

strength of weak ties and studies on ICTs and social networks are introduced.

2.2.1. Strength of weak ties and diffusion of information

Strength of weak ties theory relates to how innovations diffuse through social networks,

especially through a specific typology of interpersonal ties. Granovetter (1973) who first

introduced this concept proposed three types of interpersonal ties: strong, weak and absent. The

tie strength can be measured in combination of the amount of time, the emotional intensity, the

intimacy (mutual confiding), and the reciprocal services which characterize the tie. Strong ties

arguably takes decades to be formed and are observed in intimate relations such as families and

cliques. On the other hand, weak ties take relatively shorter time to be formed and are observed

among friends, colleagues and acquaintances (Table 2.1).

Table 2.1 Comparison of strong ties and weak ties

Strong tie Weak tie • Formed between families, cliques, relatives • Takes arguably decades to be formed • Observed in a group • Information is self-contained

• Formed by any kind of interaction • Takes relatively short time to be formed • Observed in a network • Information diffuses

Haythornthwaite (2002) added another category called latent ties which exist technically but

have not yet been activated and are often observed among individuals connected via new media.

Page 32: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

32

According to Granovetter, information tends to remain isolated in a group formed by strong ties

whereas it tends to diffuse through weak ties. It is because people connected through strong ties

share a large part of their social network and therefore form an isolated group. In such a group,

information is likely to be self-contained and inaccessible by those outside the group. On the

other hand, people with many weak ties often play a role of bridges that connect groups and it is

through these bridges that information, including difficult innovations, diffuses (Granovetter,

1973). As a result, the social network of an organization whose members are connected mainly

through weak ties forms an open network where information is widely shared among the

members while an organization whose dominant ties are strong turns into fragmented cliques.

Empirical studies of collaborative organizations reveal that the weak ties and strong ties in an

organization play distinct roles in the development process of collaborative services (Baek,

2009). The strong ties are useful when collaboration initiates and is incubated. Given its

inherent dependency on relational qualities, a collaborative service cannot exist without a group

of people who share the same value. They are usually friends, family members or long-time

neighbors. They are the ones who endure the hardship of incubating a social innovation and

strive to maintain the core values as the service grows. On the other hand, the weak ties

maintain a collaborative organization open and connected, i.e., they allow innovations to diffuse

and replicate between different organizations or within one large organization. As the

innovation diffuses through the weak ties, the collaborative organization may develop into a

network of organizations with similar a motive and a philosophy. The impact of the innovation

is thus amplified. As the innovation is adopted to a new context and incubation process begins,

strong ties are needed and the whole process repeats. In short, the diffusion of collaborative

services is an iterative process where the generation and incubation of an innovation are mainly

achieved through strong ties and the development and the diffusion are achieved through weak

ties.

2.2.2. Studies on social networks and ICTs

With the emergence of computer-supported social networks, researchers in various disciplines

including sociology, communications, media, information and computer science have studied

how ICTs, especially the Internet, have transformed people’s social networks and social capital,

the collective value of the social networks (Putnam, 2000). There are three major positions:

• The Internet increases social capital and expands people’s relationships;

• The Internet decreases social capital and shrinks people’s relationships; and

• The Internet increases social capital and supplements people’s relationships.

Wellman (2001) takes the third position and argues that the Internet supplements social capital

by reinforcing as well as creating weak ties. When computer networks, such as the Internet, link

people as well as machines, they become social networks. Behind his argument, there is a

Page 33: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

33

hypothesis that people’s communities are transforming from tightly-knit, clearly-bounded

groups to sparsely-knit and loosely-bounded networks. This is what he terms as networked

individualism. “Rather than relying on a single community for social capital, individuals often

must actively seek out a variety of appropriate people and resources for different situations. …

The Internet promotes “networked individualism” by allowing people to seek out a variety of

appropriate people and resources.” (Boase, Horrigan, Wellman & Rainie, 2006, p.ii) Such

networks build trust among members. “Social trust, also a feature of social capital, increases as

people get to know each other … through experience doing things together.” (Kavanaugh, 1999,

p.4)

Kavanaugh (1999) makes a similar argument based on her case study in Blacksburg Electronic

Village and claims that ICTs not only reinforce the existing weak ties within a local community

but also contribute to building trust among the members by allowing them to get to know each

other and to do things together. She reports that ICTs has increased communication among

members of the overall town. Trust in social networks can be divided into three categories: thick

trust, thin trust (Williams, 1988; Newton 1977 in Kavanaugh, 1999) and abstract trust

(Wellman, 1996 in in Kavanaugh, 1999). Thick trust is generated by intensive, daily contact

between people often in socially homogeneous and exclusive communities. It is the product of

strong ties. Thin trust is less personal, based on indirect, secondary social relations and is the

product of weak ties. It is also the basis for social integration in modern, large-scale society.

Abstract trust is generated when people extend trust to others who are distant and unknown,

but share similar values or beliefs. (Wellman, 1996)

If innovations diffuse through weak ties and ICTs reinforce and creates social networks that are

mainly weak ties, it leads to a conclusion that ICTs contribute to the diffusion of innovations.

This conclusion is supported by the findings from empirical studies that collaborative

organizations that use ICTs as a platform to communicate and collaborate tend to remain at the

national or international scale while ones that are passive in the use of ICTs have a tendency to

remain at the local scale (Baek, 2009; Franquiera, 2008; Manzini & Jegou, 2007; Meroni Ed.,

2007). A collaborative organization that is passive in adopting ICTs has a limited range of

communication and the members collaborate mainly through face-to-face interaction. This

leads to strong ties and thick trust in their relations and their initiatve is contained at the local

scale. On the contrary, a collaborative organization that actively adopts ICTs is able to connect

and maintain relationships with distantly placed people. Some of them can play the role of a

local bridge and diffuse the collaborative initiative to a wider audience.

There are several reasons why some organizations are reluctant to employ ICTs and to scale up

their organization: they may not aware of the benefits ICTs can bring to them; they may not

have time, resources or knowledge to adopt technologies; they may not have access to

Page 34: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

34

technologies at all; they may not want to accept modernity as often observed in hermetic

religious groups; or they simply work best at a small and local scale. In Franquiera’s study of

what she calls ‘creative places’5 (2008, p.149), she reports that the size of a collaborative

organization matters to the maintenance of core values and relational qualities.

“Regarding Creative Places, … most cases are small entities, with small-enterprises and

small groups of people, even if they are connected with several similar places, thus

creating a diffused knowledge. As they work based in physical peer-to-peer interaction

and local collaborative relationships, the bigger they are, the more unmanageable they

become as the number of links between people rises much faster than the number of

people themselves. … So, as groups grow it becomes impossible for everyone to interact

directly with everyone else.”

The difficulty of scaling up a creative place described above has to do with human’s cognitive

capacity to handle the complexitities a large social group. As Dunbar (1998) claims, there is a

theoretical limit to the number of people with whom on can maintain stable social relationships

(between 100 and 230) and as a group gets bigger, it can no longer be managed and the social

relationships no longer maintained in the ways it used to be.

“This problem can never be solved, only managed and in modern life the solution has

been gathering people together into organizations (Shirky, 2008). … Working together

takes time, effort and know-how, and balancing all these is the cornerstone of Creative

places, as its effectiveness is largely conditioned by the relational qualities of each

concrete initiative, which cannot be dissociated from their size.”

Therefore, new strategies are needed for a collaborative organization to remain small,

sustainable and at the same time, diffuse and connected. Manzini (2008) argues an enabling

system based on distributed network can help a collaborative organization remain small and

replicate at the same time. An enabling system is composed of a set of tangible and intangible

instruments designed to make a specific task easier in the local context. The IT industries are by

far the most dynamic environment where socio-technical innovations driven by enabling

solutions take place. Open platforms equipped with standard development toolkits for

individual designers and developers to develop and trade software have emerged as a robust

business model that is replacing a centralized and closed production platform. A similar success

can happen in the field of social innovations.

5 Creative places are defined as new type of urban spaces where groups of people collaboratively promote and manage a mix of creative initiatives in the fields of art and culture, economy and production, social services and urban regeneration (Ibid. p36).

Page 35: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

35

In short, ICTs facilitate the creation and reinforcement of weak ties and with the aid of ICTs,

innovations that would otherwise remain at the local level can diffuse to a wider context. A

locally spread innovation can be connected with similar initiatives to form a network through

which information, knowledge and activities can be shared, thereby making it more robust and

accessible. In this process, social networks are formed among collaborative individuals and

communities and these networks provide a favorable condition for new collaborations is

created. At the same time, ICTs support the operation of collaborative service. As an enabling

system, ICTs can provide collaborative service with technical solutions that make the operation

of a service competitive and efficient – especially cost-wise – as we have seen in the case of

KIVA. By enriching of social networks and supporting operation of collaborative service, ICTs

become a catalyst in the production of collaborative service. This proposition is elaborated in the

discussion of dual production of collaborative services in chapter 3.

2.3. Community theories

This research aims to serve the needs of a community rather than individual users by providing

a framework that a designer or a community itself can use to design a digital platform for a

product-service system that function based on collaboration of the community members. Such

an approach is called community-centered design (Meroni, 2008). Meroni claims that

community-centered design is an emerging approach in design discipline as the value of a

community is being recognized as an agent of revitalizing local economies creating a sustainable

society, which is in line with the characteristics of a sustainable society (Manzini, 2008) and the

rise of the households (and a network of households) in the new social economy (Murray, 2010).

Briceno and Stagl (2004, p.167) argue that activities at the community level are most effective in

changing behaviors including unsustainable consumption.

“… [B]ehavioural changes are most effectively achieved through initiatives delivered at

the community level as they help remove the structural barriers to change and enhance

the benefits derived. In addition, social interaction has been found to exert the most

influence on attitudes and behaviour.” (Ibid.)

The importance of community in design for social innovations and sustainability is hence not

argued. What can be argued is the definition of community as there are many different versions

including the rather recent definitions that encompass the new type of communities emerging in

the digital era. For this reason, the notion of community referred to in this research is discussed

in this section.

Three community studies were adopted in this research: sense of community theory (McMillan

& Chavis, 1986), virtual settlement (Jones, 1997) and networked individualism (Wellman,

2001A; 2001B). The first one provides a definition to conditions that make an organization a

Page 36: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

36

community and metrics of the perceived sense of community; the second one focuses on virtual

communities, the space they reside – what the author calls virtual settlement – and the

conditions for a cyber space to become a virtual settlement; the last one addresses the

emergence of a new type communities in the networked and individualized society.

2.3.1. Sense of community

The authors define sense of community as “a feeling that members have of belonging, a feeling

that members matter to one another and to the group, and a shared faith that members’ needs

will be met through their commitment to be together” (McMillan, 1976, p.9). Sense of

community is composed of four elements: membership, influence, reinforcement (integration

and fulfillment of needs) and shared emotional connection. Membership is “the feeling of

belonging or of sharing a sense of personal relatedness”; influence is “a sense of mattering, of

making a difference to a group and of the group mattering to its members”; reinforcement is

“the feeling that members’ needs will be met by the resources received through their

membership in the group”; and finally, shared emotional connection is “the commitment and

belief that members have shared and will share history, common places, time together, and

similar experiences” (Ibid., p.9).

The sense of community index (SCI) is a quantitative measure of sense of community. It is based

on the theory of sense of community and composed of 12 items that inquire respondents’

perception towards their communities. 12 items are divided into 4 subgroups that measure the 4

elements: Items 1~3 are related to integration and fulfillment of needs; items 4~6 to

membership; items 7~9 to influence; and item 9~12 to shared emotional connection. Below is

the SCI format (Chavis, n.d).

Q1. I think my [block] is a good place for me to live.

Q2. People on this [block] do not share the same values.

Q3. My [neighbors] and I want the same things from the [block].

Q4. I can recognize most of the people who live on my [block].

Q5. I feel at home on this [block].

Q6. Very few of my [neighbors] know me.

Q7. I care about what my [neighbors] think of my actions.

Q8. I have no influence over what this [block] is like.

Q9. If there is a problem on this [block] people who live here can get it solved.

Q10. It is very important to me to live on this particular [block].

Q11. People on this [block] generally don't get along with each other.

Q12. I expect to live on this [block] for a long time.

Page 37: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

37

The SCI is calculated by converting the responses into scores. For each item, true scores 1 and

false scores 0. However, false scores 1 and true scores 0 for Q2, Q6, Q8, Q11 because they are

negative questions. The average score of an item equals to the total score divided by the number

of respondents. The level of SoC is the sum of the scores of 12 items. The level of four elements

of SoC is obtained by averaging the scores of the corresponding items. Table 2.2 is an example of

calculating the SCI.

Table 2.2 An example of calculating the SCI

Items True False Average score (items) Average score (element)

1. I think this farmers’ market is a good place for me to sell my produces. 40 0 0.98

0.80 (integration and fulfillment of needs)

2. Farmers in this farmers’ market do not share the same values. 8 28 0.68

3. Other farmers and I want the same thing from this farmers’ market. 31 7 0.76

4. I can recognize most of the farmers in the farmers’ market. 27 12 0.66

0.70 (membership) 5. I feel at home in the farmers’ market. 36 2 0.88 6. Very few of farmers in the farmers’ market know me. 15 23 0.56

7. I care about what other farmers think of my actions. 26 13 0.63

0.72 (influence) 8. I have no influence over what the farmers’ market is like. 13 26 0.63

9. If there is a problem related to the market, farmers can get it solved. 37 3 0.90

10. It is very important to me to sell my produces in this market. 36 4 0.88

0.91 (shared emotional connection)

11. Farmers in this market generally do not get along with one another. 0 38 0.93

12. I expect to sell my produces in this market for a long time. 38 1 0.93

Results of prior studies have demonstrated that the SCI has been a strong predicator of

behaviors (such as participation) and a valid measurement instrument (Chavis, Lee & Acosta,

2008).

2.3.2. Virtual settlement

While the sense of community theory is valid for both territorial and relational community

(without reference to location), the study on virtual settlement focuses on communities that are

formed around shared values and interests in the virtual space. So-called virtual communities

are exploding in the virtual space with the diffusion of information communication

technologies. A virtual community is defined as “social relationships forged in cyberspace

through repeated contact within a specified boundary or place (e.g. a conference or chat line)

that is symbolically delineated by topic of interest” (Fernback & Thompson, 1995).

Jones (1997) distinguishes a cyber place within which a virtual community operates from the

community itself and calls such a place a virtual settlement. The boundary of virtual settlements

Page 38: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

38

can be delineated by topic of interest and interactive communication. For a cyber place to be a

virtual settlement, it needs to meet the following 4 conditions: (1) a minimum level of

interactivity6; (2) a variety of communicators; (3) a minimum level of sustained membership;

and (4) a virtual common-public-space where a significant portion of interactive group-CMCs

occur.

Messages in virtual publics can be classified as broadcast, two-way, reactive, or interactive. A

virtual community is distinguished from other categories of CMC (computer-mediated

communication) without virtual settlement such as private communication where postings go

directly from one individual to another without common virtual space or an email list where

subscribers receive news and information but are not able to conduct interactive discussions

with fellow subscribers.

Virtual settlement is an evidence of the existence of virtual communities but does not determine

their existence. Jones avoids technological determinism by standing in the position that various

technologies as prerequisites for certain social formations rather than as their determinants

(Fletcher, 1995 in Jones, 1997). In virtual communities, various features of social and

collaborative tools on the Internet are prerequisites for the stable existence of certain social

structures in cyberspace.

Jones’ 4 conditions of a virtual settlement provide a reference to designing a digital platform

that reinforces the sense of community. However, they are too general to be used as a design

guideline. What is most relevant to this research is Jones’ position of viewing technologies as

prerequisites for social formations rather than determinants. A successful virtual settlement

needs have not only technical infrastructure for social interaction but also social intervention

that triggers interaction. Haythornthwaite (2002, p.393) points out that both a technical and a

social implementation are needed to bring into life a social network on the computer network.

“… a technical implementation needs to be matched with a social implementation in

order to effect connection among as yet unconnected others, and to gain a critical mass

of communications and users so that connectivity is perceived to exist.”

2.3.3. Changing notion of community in a networked society

Communities have evolved from tightly knit and clearly bounded groups to sparsely knit and

loosely bounded networks, rendering more complex social network structures than before. The

former is a door-to-door and place-to-place community while the latter is a person-to-person

and role-to-role community (Wellman, 2001A). In other words, communities are becoming less 6 Jones uses the concept of interactivity defined Rafaeli by which is the extent to which messages in a sequence relate to each other, and especially the extent to which later messages recount the relatedness of earlier messages (Rafaeli 1984, 1988, 1990; Sudweeks and Rafaeli 1994 in Jones 1997).

Page 39: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

39

location-based and more often formed around personal interest and value. Such transformation

is partly driven by social affordances of computer supported social networks due to

advancement and diffusion of technologies such as broader bandwidth, wireless and portable

devices, ubiquitous computing environment and personalization (Ibid.) and partly by

individualization of modern society although they are not unrelated. Wellman (2001B) titles this

emerging society as ‘a networked society’.

Characteristics of a networked society are as follows: boundaries are permeable, interactions are

with diverse people, connections switch between multiple networks, and hierarchies can be

flatter and recursive. Communities are becoming more and more far-flung and fragmented as

many people operate in multiple and weakly connected communities (Ibid.). Consequently

social network structures of a networked society are more complex than in the past when

communities were clearly bounded and less diverse and computer networks support them.

In a globalized society where a nation’s population moves dynamically and is spread across the

world, the traditional sense of location-based community is fading away. Wellman states that

community has been rarely a neighborhood phenomenon even before the introduction of

computer-mediated communities (CMC) and especially so in a networked society. He thus

expands the definition of community from a location-based social group to the networks of

interpersonal ties that provide sociability, support, information, a sense of belonging, and social

identity (2001A).

Some of the characteristics of Wellman’s networked society are as follows (Ibid.):

• The ability to connect with multiple social milieus, with limited involvement in each

milieu.

• The decreased control over inhabitants’ behavior that each milieu has.

• The decreased commitment of each milieu to its inhabitants’ wellbeing.

• Fostering “cross-cutting” ties that link and integrate social milieus, instead of such

groups being isolated and tightly-bounded.

• Increased choices in milieus in which to get involved.

• Reduced sense of palpable group memberships that provide a sense of belonging.

• Reduced identity and pressures of belonging to groups.

• Increased opportunity, contingency, globalization, and uncertainty through

participation in social networks.

• Increased emphasis on structural position in different networks—such as brokerage ties

that connect multiple networks—and decreased emphasis on group membership. Active

networking is more important than going along with the group.

Page 40: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

40

Studies on the changing notion of community in a networked society contribute to broadening

the scope of community-centered design and collaborative service. Incorporating milieus that

are loosely knit and vaguely bounded into the definition of community expands the scope of

design activities concerning community and therefore, more people’s needs can be addressed in

design. In addition, it recognizes of the value collaborative activities based on weak ties and

triggers an effort to use ICTs to enable and enhance such activities through design intervention.

2.4. Discussion

2.4.1. Limitations of the collaborative service model based on dialogical principle

Cipolla’s collaborative service model (Figure 2.1) based on Buber’s dialogical principle has

limitations in the following aspects: first, its limited scope of collaborative service fails to

address numerous collaborative schemes proliferating in communities that are not necessarily

composed of I-Thou relation; and second, it is difficult to validate the model.

According to Cipolla’s model, I-Thou relation is a necessary condition for collaborative service,

i.e., any collaboration based on I-It is precluded from the scope of research. This proposition

raises an argument that such self-constraint may not be relevant to deal with numerous

collaborative initiatives in contemporary society where people are more individualized, have less

commitment to the communities they belong to, and are less vulnerable to strangers than in the

past but still have a big impact on society and sustainability. I-Thou is an intimate relation

(Beziehung) between two individuals characterized by total vulnerability and the absence of

preconception. For this reason, Friedman (1955) claimed that full I-Thou relationship could

only mean love. I-Thou relation is not everlasting just as genuine contemplation is not. “Every

Thou in the world is by its nature fated to become a thing, or continually to re-enter into the

condition of things. In objective speech it would be said that everything in the world, either

before or after becoming a thing, is able to appear to I as its Thou (Buber, 2008, p.17).” Besides,

I-Thou and I-It do not occur in clear succession but “often there is a happening profoundly

twofold, confusedly entangled. (Ibid., p.18)” In other words, I-Thou and I-It are a typology to

describe a momentary state of a relationship rather than a relationship as a whole. Given such

an intimate nature of I-Thou, collaborative service based on Buber’s dialogical principle is likely

to restricted to an environment where trust prevails and encounters happen face-to-face. In

other words, such a definition is sensitive to cultural (e.g. rural vs. urban or Latin America vs.

Asia), spatial (e.g. physical vs. virtual space) and chronological (e.g. ancient vs. contemporary)

contexts and it needs to be challenged if the research scope is to be broadened.

Another limitation of Cipolla’s model is that it is difficult to validate the model, i.e., to measure

if an outcome produced from a controlled environment (or an enabling system) meets the

criteria of collaborative service defined. It is difficult to measure where on the spectrum of I-

Thou or I-It lies a relationship to be defined because the dialogical principle is a religious and

Page 41: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

41

philosophical study and there is no scientific way to measure it. If the result cannot be

measured, an enabling system that supports it cannot be assessed.

For these reasons, a new model of collaborative service is proposed. In the new model, the

dialogical principle that underpins the interpersonal dimension of service has been replaced by

the theory of the strength of weak ties. In the next section, the two theoretical models are

compared.

2.4.2. Dialogical principle and theory of the strength of weak ties

Although Buber’s dialogical principle and Granovetter’s strength of weak ties share similarities

in a sense that they use a bipolar system to describe an interpersonal relation, they have a

fundamental difference as one is rooted in religion and the other in science.

Beginning with the similarities, both models describe interpersonal relationship although the

dialogical principle is not restricted to human relation but extends to all forms of “between”, i.e.,

between human and non-human. Second, they use a continuous bipolar system to describe a

relationship and the boundary between the polarities is ambiguous. In the strength of weak ties

theory, the strength of ties is not strictly defined although some of the parameters are proposed

by the author such as the amount of time, the emotional intensity, the intimacy, and the

reciprocal services which characterize the tie (Granovetter, 1973). Thus how strong are strong

ties and how weak are weak ties depend on the definition given by a researcher in a given

context. In any case, three types of ties – strong, weak and absent – lie on a linear spectrum. In

the dialogical principle, I-Thou and I-It compose a dichotomy, i.e., there is a clear distinction

between the two situations, but I-Thou and I-It do not represent a singular state of a relation but

a spectrum of states. For example, in I-Thou, there is a continuous spectrum of relations and the

highest form is love between God and humans.

Despite similarities, there is a fundamental difference between the two models and the

difference lies in the criteria that distinguishes on polarity from the other: In the strength of

weak ties theory, weak ties develop into strong ones arguably through shared experiences

whereas in the dialogical principle, experiences does not play such a role but one’s attitude

towards another human being does. The strength of tie is determined by a combination of the

amount of time, the emotional intensity, the intimacy, and the reciprocal services that

characterize the tie (Granovetter, 1973), which can be summed up into a word ‘experience’.

Whether a relation is I-Thou or I-It depends on the amount of relational qualities or the

expressions of genuine dialogue such as trust, intimacy, friendship and a common identity

(Cipolla, 2007). The amount of relational qualities seems to be more related with the attitude of

persons subject to a relation than the experiences they share. If we trust someone because we

know that he is a reliable person from our experience or his reputation, if we formed a

Page 42: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

42

friendship with someone because of a series of incidents that brought us closer, such a relation

is not I-Thou because it is based on experiences or preconceptions of that person. On the other

hand, if we trust someone or accept him or her as a friend regardless of who that person is but

because of our belief in another human being, the relation is I-Thou.

Then it needs to be asked if artificial intervention, or an enabling system, can be designed to

influence one’s attitude towards another and therefore create I-Thou relation. As Cipolla

claimed (Ibid.), a favorable condition can be designed for I-Thou relation to form but a relation

itself cannot be designed because a relation depends on factors inherent to the individuals

subject to a relation such as personal characters and cultural backgrounds. On the other hand,

weak and strong interpersonal ties can be created through design intervention with a higher

confidence than I-Thou relations if the tie strength is defined in a way to be less influenced by

individual characters and more by external factors such as the amount of time and the

reciprocal services.

2.4.3. A new model of collaborative service

Hence a new model of collaborative service is proposed (Figure 2.3). In this model, the dual

dimension of service is maintained but the dialogical principle that underpins the interpersonal

dimension is replaced with the strength of weak ties theory.

Adoption of a social network theory brings two preeminent benefits to the research on

collaborative service. First, the measurement of the interpersonal dimension becomes possible

using social network analysis. The measurement includes both quality of relations, i.e., how

strong/weak relations are, and quantity of relations, i.e., how many people are connected to one

another. Second, social network theories are especially useful in dealing with ICT-enhanced

collaborative services. In the field of social network research, there is a body of knowledge on

how ICTs influence individuals’ social networks and on how information diffuses through

different types of social networks. This allows one to identify the role of ICTs on the diffusion of

collaborative services and the formation of social networks around them in both qualitative and

quantitative ways.

Page 43: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

43

Figure 2.3 Positioning of services based on tie strength vs. collaboration

This model categorizes services based on two variables: the strength of personal ties between

service providers and users (x-axis) and the degree of collaboration (y-axis). On the x-axis, there

are four types of tie strength – no, latent, weak and strong (Granovetter, 1973; Haythornthwaite,

2002). On the y-axis, there are two degrees of collaboration – collaborative or non-

collaborative. In a collaborative service, there is no boundary between producers and

Page 44: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

44

consumers: Consumers are actively involved and assume the role of service co-designer and co-

producers (active). Besides, consumers work together for a common task in equipotential state

(P2P) and the common task is to generate values for their own needs (enabling) (Manzini,

2008).

Collaborative services are positioned in the green area where a service is implemented through

collaboration and involves interpersonal networks which is latent or stronger. Examples of

collaborative services based on the latent ties include flash mobs or collaborative map-making

processes such as Green Map7 or Open Map8 where participants collaborate to achieve a

common task whether it be awakening public attention or creating maps. The participants are

visible on their web-based platforms and hence potentially connected. Among collaborative

services based on the weak ties is Vicini Vicini, neighborhood parties whose aim is to promote

social conviviality of local communities and overcome individualism in cities9. Another example

is Hitchhikers.org, an initiative that promotes hitchhiking to create social networks among

travelers and to reduce their carbon footprints. Collaborative services based on the strong ties

include cohousing groups whose members live in community residences for as long as decades;

and neighborhood urban gardening in which neighbors cultivate their gardens together, share

information on urban farming and permaculture, share produce and eat together. In such cases,

strong ties are formed through long-term face-to-face interaction, common goals and tasks.

The proposed model redefines the notion of collaborative service to be dealt with in this

research. In the next chapter, cases of collaborative service on digital platform that are based

mainly on latent and weak ties are introduced. They are the examples of modern communities in

the networked society whose collaborations are empowered by digital platforms. The design of

virtual settlement plays a critical role in the success of their activities. In the end, a framework

to develop a digital platform for collaborative service is proposed. A platform thus designed is

expected to facilitate creation and reinforceent of weak ties in a collaborative community.

7 www.greenmap.org 8 www.openmap.org 9 Vicini Vicini was organized by Comune di Roma to promote social conviviality of communities in Rome by providing people with a guideline and kits to organize neighborhood parties.

Page 45: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

45

3. CASE STUDIES OF COLLABORATIVE SERVICE ON DIGITAL PLATFORM

Chapter 3 introduces the case studies of existing collaborative services on digital platform. The

studies aimed at exploring the increasing use of ICTs in grassroots social innovation. The

studies affirmed the hypothesis that ICTs are used in collaborative services on a wide range of

topics such as health, welfare, food, transportation and politics. It also revealed patterns in the

way collaborative communities use ICTs. Based on the findings, a structural system of

collaborative services on digital platform was identified and 2 typologies of collaborative service

on digital platform were proposed in respect to the service goal and the social network structure

of users.

Page 46: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

46

3.1. Introduction

In the last decade, peer-to-peer and collaborative production has emerged as a powerful trend in

the digital, networked industries. Just to mention a few, Wikipedia, an archive of distributed

knowledge; Google and Amazon which provide a peer-to-peer platform for sharing information

and trading products; various open-source software projects based on Creative Commons

licenses. Exhibiting characteristics of anti-rivalry and inclusiveness (Cooper, 2005),

collaborative production in digital world is distinguished from traditional ways of production in

the market economy in that it is more democratic in political aspect and more efficient in

economical aspect (Benkler, 2006). They are examples of socio-technological innovation that

are changing our ways of production and living and show possibilities that technologies,

especially ICTs, can be used an enabling solution to promote social innovation at the grassroots

level.

Collaborative service shares several aspects in common with digital collaborative production.

Both of them require collaboration rather than competition, inclusiveness rather than

exclusiveness and are based on a platform that is decentralized rather than centralized. They

also aim to improve the quality of the commons rather than privatized goods. Digital

collaborative production aims to expand the repository of digital commons that are mainly

information whereas collaborative service focuses on improving social commons such as

relational qualities and social network.

Because of the similarities between them, it can be assumed that there exist a hybrid of the two,

i.e., services designed and implemented by final users whose collaboration to fulfill their needs

is enhanced by diffused ICTs or simply collaborative services on digital platform. As the first

step to validate the assumption, case studies were conducted. The aim of the case studies was

further specified into investigating the followings aspects of ICTs: as an enabling solution for

operation of collaborative services, and as a medium for connecting individuals and

communities and diffusing social innovations. The case studies were conducted from November

2008 to July 2009.

3.1.1. Case profiles

In order to select the cases that satisfy the definition of collaborative service, over 100 cases

were reviewed based on the following criteria:

1. A service uses ICTS to promote itself and enhance communication within community.

2. A service requires collaboration in both physical and digital spheres.

3. A service must be designed and provided by users with an intention to satisfy their

unmet social needs.

Page 47: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

47

In addition, the service area, age of service, organizational size, aim and type of the services

were also taken into consideration to give diversity to the cases. As a result, 30 cases of diverse

locations, ages and sizes were selected (Table 3.1).

Table 3.1 Case list (data accessed February 26, 2009)

Case Service area Since Size Hitchhikers Mainly Europe 1999 Unknown

Social invention center South Korea 2006 3365 ideas

Peladeiro Brazil 2001 32250 users

Vicini vicini Rome, Italy 1999 Not known

Green map Worldwide 1995 400 cities, 51 countries

Open green map Worldwide 2008 + 4000 sites

Grofun Bristol, UK 2007 10 people

Couch surfing Worldwide 2004 + 950000 users

Meetup Worldwide 2001 4700000 users

Pledgebank UK and 12 other countries 2005 91625 users

Katrinalist.net US 2005 4000 users

Shelfari Worldwide 2006 Six digits (confidential)

Bookcrossing Worldwide 2001 740000 users

Mapo dure South Korea 1997 + 2500 members

Activmob Kent, UK 2008 + 20 mobs

Aka aki Germany 2008 1494926 encounters

Carrotmob US 2008 Not yet launched

Economia solidale Italy 1994 4736 users No 10 Petitions UK 2006 + 5000000 participants

FixMyStreet UK Unknown 31628 problems reported

WiserEarth Worldwide 2007 Unknown Solidarius Brazil 2008 22319 users

mySociety.org Worldwide 2003 1000 users

Sistema FBES Brazil Unknown Unknown

RED Open Health Project UK 2004 509 users

Diabetics' meetup US 2009 55 users

Zerorelativo Italy 2006 217 users

Timebanks Worldwide 1980's Unknown Nabuur Worldwide 2001 36190 Neighbours, 292 Villages

Cascina Cornale Italy 1997 Unknown

3.1.2. Methods

Case studies consisted of two stages: in the first stage, 30 cases were selected from different

parts of the world and analyzed using a ‘light format’. The aim of the light analysis was

threefold: to affirm the existence of collaborative services on digital platform; to understand the

contexts and contents of the services – both qualitative and quantitative; and to investigate how

people use technologies to collaborate and to achieve their goals. The format was developed

based on a material developed by Meroni (2007) and it is included in the appendix. In the

Page 48: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

48

second stage, 10 cases were selected from the light case studies looked in depth for the role of

ICTs in creation of social networks and diffusion of social innovations.

Methods used for the case studies were mainly content analysis. The service platforms, online

communities, social media and collaborative tools used in collaborative services were analyzed.

If necessary, the author participated in the services as a user to understand how the services

function and what is the actual user experience. Interviews were conducted selectively for

additional information and other case studies of grassroots social innovations were also used as

a reference.

3.2. Result

Due to a limited space, 5 cases are described in detail in this section: GROFUN (Growing Real

Organic Food in Urban Neigbourhoods), Pledgebank, Meetup.com, Green Map and

Zerorelativo. A full version of the case studies report is available at http://www.sustainable-

everyday.net/codi.

3.2.1. Light format

Case 1. GROFUN

Type A cooperative urban gardening group Service area (since) Bristol, UK (2007) Website http://www.grofun.org.uk/ Aim To strengthen the resilience of communities to withstand food

shortages of the future and to respond to the climate change Activity Urban gardening, permaculture, shared dinners

Background

GROFUN is a grassroots project started by Nadia Hillman in Bristol in 2007, in response to the

challenges of climate change, a series of food crises and environmental impact of industrialized

food production. It aims to strengthen the resilience of communities to withstand food

shortages of the future, as oil prices and grocery bills rise and to address problems relating to

the air miles and carbon emissions inherent in our largely imported food culture.

Service description and the aim

GROFUN describes themselves as groups of neighbors in communities to cooperatively grow

food in their own back gardens, sharing labor, skills, resources and last but not least-the

delicious home-grown produce itself (GROFUN, 2010). It wants to create a working model

which can be adopted by more communities in the future that empowers people to sustain

themselves and their families with healthy, fresh food in an ever more energy-scarce future.

Page 49: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

49

Figure 3.1 A mood board of GROFUN activities (Parker, 2008)

Solution description

Anyone can join GROFUN if they contribute 10 hours of work to the project first by, for

example, taking part in one or more Action Days, collect compost, or deliver flyers. In return

they gain 10 ‘Greenie Points’, which can be used to book their own Action Day, and a team of

GROFUNNIES will come to transform their garden. Action Days can be easily booked via a diary

included on the project’s online Yahoo! group. On-going support is provided for thus created

gardens including watering crops while people are on holiday. All of the produce grown must be

shared amongst the group members by posting a message on the group website or arranging a

shared meal for the members. Members also have a shared library of gardening books listed on

the Yahoo group with descriptions. As of 2008, there are 10 gardens actively involved in

GROFUN, of around 25 gardens created in total, after some participants have moved house.

Although the main objective of GROFUN is to support people to grow organic food in their own

place of living, the project is evolving to offer other benefits to the community. For example,

they started a so-called ‘Learning by Growing’ scheme, for which they run gardening workshops

with primary aged children in 2 Bristol schools.

The success of GROFUN lies in the leadership of Nadia Hillman and her creative idea of

exchanging of time and agricultural produce at a community level to change unsustainable

lifestyles and to improve social conviviality.

Social, economical and environmental benefits if any

• Social benefits: GROFUN connects neighbors through collaboration that let them share

agricultural knowledge and cultivate gardens together. As the group name indicates, the

members gain pleasure from sharing their produce with other members often through a

social dinner.

Page 50: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

50

• Economical benefits: The members save substantial amount money that goes to buying

groceries as they produce food for themselves.

• Environmental benefits: The organic gardens increase biodiversity and provide homes

for wildlife. The members also reduce the carbon footprint of the food they consume

and eliminate the need for plastic packaging.

Enabling technologies

GROFUN uses a web platform to promote the initiative and to create a virtual space for the

members to send messages, share information on the forum, organize events and make

decisions through online poll.

Case 2. PledgeBank

Type An online pledging system Where (since) Worldwide (2005) Website http://www.PledgeBank.com/ Aim To makes an idea come true with web technologies Activity Getting things done through collective efforts

Background

In many cases, good ideas do not blossom into actions because there are not enough organized

people to carry them out. PledgeBank help people get things done, especially things that require

a collective effort.

Solution description

PledgeBank is a system that allows people to make pledges that require other people’s support

to be accomplished. A pledge is a statement of the form ‘I will do something, if a certain number

of people will help me do it’. The pledger then publicizes his or her pledge and encourages

people to sign up. Two outcomes are possible: either the pledge fails to get enough subscribers

before it expires or, the better possibility, the pledge attracts enough supporters (Figure 3.2).

Figure 3.3 is an example of the pledges posted on the website.

Figure 3.2 How PledgeBank works

Page 51: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

51

Figure 3.3 Pledges posted on the website

Pledgebank is a service that makes an idea come true with web technologies. The software

behind the service is open source so one can participate in developing the service or make his or

her own service based on it (and, according to General Public License (GNU), publish the result

with others).

Social, economical and environmental benefits if any

• Social benefits: Only the pledges with benign intentions are selected. People with good

ideas can find a way to implement them thanks to aggregate power and in some cases

make a significant impact on society.

• Economical benefits: By sharing the cost as well as the benefit of a pledge, the financial

burden to the implementation of the idea is reduced.

Enabling technologies

PledgeBank is an open source platform and allows the service concept to easily replicate.

Case 3. Meetup.com

Type A social networking service Service area (since) Worldwide (2001) Website http://www.meetup.com/ Aim To facilitates offline group meetings in various localities

around the world. Activity Creating and joining groups based on interest and location

Background

Meetup was inspired by the book ‘Bowling Alone’, a work by Robert Putnam about the decline of

community in America and how people do not know their neighbors anymore. Scott Heiferman,

one of the founders, emphasized the value of local communities: “The Internet does a number of

Page 52: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

52

wonderful things, but it treats geography as irrelevant. We still live in a world where the local

level is extremely important. … We are providing a service that revitalizes the Internet for local

communities.” (Wikipedia, 2009, para. 3)

Service description and the aim

Meetup.com is the world’s largest network of local groups. It allows users to organize locale-

based groups or join existing ones in which members interact not only in the virtually space

(Figure 3.4) but also face-to-face on a regular basis (Figure 3.5). More than 2000 groups get

together each day. Meetup’s mission is to revitalize local communities and help people around

the world self-organize. It believes that people can change their personal world, or the whole

world, by organizing themselves into groups that are powerful enough to make a difference.

(Meetup, 2009)

Figure 3.4 An example of a virtual space for a meetup group

Page 53: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

53

Figure 3.5 Examples of Meetup groups

Solution description

Meetup allows members to find and join groups unified by a common interest, such as politics,

books, games, movies, health, pets, careers or hobbies. Users enter their ZIP code (or their city

outside the United States) and the topic they want to meet about, and once they are a member,

they can arrange a place and time to meet.

Social, economical and environmental benefits if any

• Social benefits: Meetup promotes local community-based activities by providing a

platform for people to meet, communicate and act together with their neighbors and, in

the long run, revitalizes local communities.

Enabling technologies

Meetup uses a web-based platform to provide uses with a set of features to organize meetings

and events such as calendar, online poll, blog, bulletin board, mailing list and file sharing.

Case 4. Zerorelativo

Type Online bartering community Service area (since) Italy (2006) Website http://www.zerorelativo.it Aim To promote economic activities based on exchange and not

money, thereby reducing the environmental impact caused by artificial consumption!

Activity Exchange and sharing of used products, networking

Background

Economy of scale driven by technological innovations allows industries to produce products at

dramatically low prices and using highly developed marketing techniques, companies sustain

their growth by making people consume relentlessly. Zerorelativo warns the consequences of

this consumption-led lifestyle and promotes an alternative way of consuming, barter.

Service description and the aim

Zerorelativo is the first Italian online community for bartering. The name was chosen because

each object has its own value, apart from that given by the market. The main service of

Zerorelativo is bartering but it also promotes sharing not-frequently-used products (“Il prestito

gratuito”) such as textbooks, cd/dvd players and beam projectors). Its aim is to promote

economic activities based on exchange and not money, thereby reducing the environmental

impact caused by artificial consumption.

Solution description

Page 54: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

54

Zerorelativo is basically an e-commerce system without monetary transaction (Figure 3.6).

Users are required to register their items to exchange in order to use the service. Registered

products are shown in a separate page (Figure 3.7) where an offer for an exchange can be left.

Figure 3.6 The home page of Zerorelativo

Figure 3.7 Description of a registered item

Social, economical and environmental benefits if any

• Environmental Benefits: Less products are wasted by prolonging products’ lifecycle.

• Economical Benefits: From microeconomic perspective, users save money by not

purchasing new products.

• Social Benefits: Zerorelativo is designed to provide users with playful, active and

sensible experiences in bartering.

Page 55: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

55

Enabling technologies

For its service, Zerorelativo uses an e-commerce platform, a blog, a calendar, a search engine, a

web radio, Facebook, Twitter and Skype.

Case 5. Green Map Service (GMS)

Type A collaborative mapmaking community Service area (since) Worldwide (1995) Website http://www.greenmap.org Aim To serve as a guide for sustainable living and to help

everyone get involved with their community’s natural and built environment.!

Activity Collaborative mapmaking, selling mapmaking tools, information sharing, socializing

Background

Green Map Service (GMS) was conceived by Wendy E. Brawer of Modern World Design who

charted NYC Green Apple Map in 1992. Stemming from experience in charting New York City’s

environment, the original Green Map concept focused on charting beneficial ‘green’ sites along

with challenging ‘toxic hot spots’ in cities and towns.

Service description and the aim

The aim of the GMS is to serve as a guide for sustainable living and to help everyone get

involved with their community’s natural and built environment. Using mapmaking as a

medium, Green Map System encourages involvement in cultivating more sustainable

communities around the world. By highlighting a community’s special places as well as its

natural, cultural and sustainability resources, Green Map expects to help local citizens

understand their community’s interdependent environmental, social and economic systems.

Green Maps provide residents, newcomers and visitors a guide to local green options; and they

also bring attention to the negative sites that challenge community wellbeing. Mapmakers share

adaptable mapmaking resources and universal icons. (Green Map, 2009)

Page 56: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

56

Figure 3.8 Examples of green maps

Figure 3.9 Examples of green maps in detail

Solution description

Although GMS authorizes local mapmakers to use its Green Mapmaking icons and tools, every

project is independent and locally led. Grassroots and established non-profits, universities and

schools, governmental and tourism agencies use the icons and adaptable methodologies to

develop and publish their own community’s Green Map in a way that meets the needs of

residents and visitors. (Green Map, 2009)

GMS is the first endeavor to chart a sustainable map of the world through crowdsourcing and it

accomplishes its mission by providing participants with a toolkit for mapmaking. In 2009, GMS

launched a digital version of the Green Map called Open Green Map using Google Map®.

Social, economical and environmental benefits if any

• Social benefits: Social activities naturally become a part of mapmaking process. Some

Green Maps address to the climate change, disasters and healthy mobility. For example,

after the hurricane Katrina, a green map that charts different places on nourishment in

New Orleans was created. The green mapmaking is used as a didactic exercise in many

schools and as corporate social responsibility in the industries.

• Environmental benefits: Through mapmaking, participants as well as readers become

more knowledgeable local (un)sustainable sites and events.

Enabling technologies

For its service, GMS uses a blog, a forum, a map mashup and an e-commerce platform.

Page 57: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

57

3.2.2. In-depth format

Followed by the light-format case studies, in-depth case studies were conducted, focusing on

identifying how the collaborative organizations are structured, what kind of information is

exchanged among the participants and which medium is used for their communication. As a

result, the social network structures of the cases were produced and the cases were categorized

accordingly.

Instead of the conventional social network analysis methods developed in sociology, a

qualitative method to analyze social network structures in a quick and rough way was invented

for the following reasons:

• Given the schedule and the number of cases to analyze, a quick-and-rough method to

analyze social networks was needed.

• In every case, the participants used a variety of media to communicate in addition to the

web-based platforms dedicated for this purpose. These media included mobile phone

(both voice calls and text messages), private emails, social networking services,

telephone and face-to-face meetings.

• The aim of the analysis was not only to analyze the current state of the social network

structure but also to describe its transformation over time.

The result was a hypothetical visualization of the social network structures of the selected cases.

According to this method, social networks were analyzed based on information obtained from

the case studies such as the organizational structures, service activities and the flow of

information between the stakeholders. The analysis process involved several steps as below:

1. Identify the users of a service to be analyzed.

2. Identify the activities that take place between them. Who interact with whom and what

kind of information and resources are shared in this process?

3. Identify the ICTs used by them in the process. Which social media do they use to

communicate and to collaborate?

4. Estimate the strength of ties between the users based on relevant information such as

the population size, the type of their activities, the amount of time spent together, the

type of social media used and the geographical proximity.

Using this approach, the social network structures of the cases were analyzed and visualized.

The analysis also took into consideration the change of the social network structure over time if

the relevant information was available. The result was presented in a form of a narrative.

Case 1. GROFUN

Page 58: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

58

GROFUN is an urban gardening initiative in UK. In 2007, Nadia, a pioneering leader with a

vision of permaculture in the urban context started an innovative idea called ‘GROFUN’ with

her neighbors in Bristol. She was connected with them via strong and weak ties. GROFUN

started as a local group (Figure 3.10).

Figure 3.10 GROFUN in the phase of a local group

GROFUN members liked their idea and decided to do it in a larger scale. In order to diffuse their

initiative and to communicate with existing members more efficiently, Nadia launched an

official website and also created a Yahoo! Group called GROFUN. People started joining the

group from other areas of UK and even abroad. Some of them were not able to participate in the

gardening but they advocated the mission of GROFUN which is “to create a working model

which can be adopted by more communities in the future and give the people at the grass roots

the power back to sustain themselves and their families with healthy, fresh food in an ever more

energy-scarce future” (GROFUN, 2007, para. 3). As a result, GROFUN grew from a group of 10

people who garden together to a network of 120 people who shared the same value and interest

(Figure 3.11).

Figure 3.11 GROFUN in the phase of expansion

The weak ties formed in the virtual space will facilitate the diffusion of GROFUN and connect

groups with similar initiatives. As people inspired by GROFUN start new urban gardening clubs

Page 59: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

59

in their communities and share their stories and stayed connected with other groups, a network

of urban gardening clubs will be formed. (Figure 3.12)

Figure 3.12 GROFUN in the phase of a network

Case 2. PledgeBank

PledgeBank allows users to set up pledges and then encourages other people to sign up to them.

With the slogan of “I’ll do it, but only if you’ll help”, it helps connect people who have good ideas

for society and people who are willing to participate in these ideas.

Figure 3.13 illustrates the initial phase of the service where there are not yet enough

participants. Therefore only the pledgers are shown.

Figure 3.13 Initial phase of Pledgebank

As people started joining PledgeBank, they made pledges as well as followed other people’s

pledges (Figure 3.14). In some cases, pledges required some degree of interaction between a

Page 60: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

60

pledger and the followers, implying that weak exists between them. In the figure, each pledge is

described by a central node (a pledger) surrounded by peripheral nodes (the followers) and

dotted lines that occasionally connect them (weak ties).

Figure 3.14 PledgeBank groups being formed

As PledgeBank becomes popular, more pledges will be made and more people will follow them

(Figure 3.15). The fact that PledgeBank is an open-sourced solution and was designed to serve

local needs (e.g. offered in different languages and local pledges can be searched) will facilitate

its diffusion. So far over 100000 people from all over the world use this site (estimated in

September 2010) and similar solutions have sprouted from it.

Page 61: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

61

Figure 3.15 Pledgbank at the mature level

Case 3. Meetup.com

Meetup is the world’s largest network of local groups. It offers a virtual space for anyone to

organize a local group or find one of the thousands already meeting up face-to-face. More than

2,000 groups get together in local communities each day, each one with the goal of improving

themselves or their communities (Meetup, 2010). The goals of Meetup groups vary from making

friends to fighting a chronic disease. But one thing they share in common is that there is a leader

who manages a group and organizes meetups and that people interact in the physical space as

well as the virtual space on a regular basis.

Figure 3.16 shows the early phase of Meetup when groups just started to form and there were

not many members yet.

Figure 3.16 Meetup group leaders

As people start to join the service, groups grew in number as well as in size (Figure 3.17). In each

group, members are connected through strong and weak ties – mostly weak ties.

Figure 3.17 Early phase of Meetup groups

Page 62: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

62

In Meetup.com, a user can search groups based on location and topic. If one is already a

member of a group, it recommends groups that he or she may be interested in. This improves

the visibility of groups to users and thus increases chances for them to join new groups. As the

service becomes mature, more groups will be formed, more users will join groups and the

number of inter-group ties will increase (Figure 3.18).

Figure 3.18 Meetup at the mature level

Case 4. Couchsurfing

Couchsurfing was developed by Casey Fenton and three other colleagues with an aim to create

an international network of people and places through mutual sharing of time and houses

(Figure 3.19).

Figure 3.19 Couchsurfing founder and his colleagues

In Couchsurfing, collaboration is mutual as it takes place between two parties: a host and a

visitor(s). Figure 3.20 describes this mutual relationship. Such a relationship based on weak ties

with a potential to develop into strong ones because hosting usually lasts from a couple of days

to no more than a week and there are ample opportunities for the two parties to develop their

friendship depending on their willingness to do so. The relationship can continue on the

platform after the visit.

Casey Fenton

Page 63: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

63

Figure 3.20 Mutual ties between Couchsurfers

As the service becomes mature, more mutual ties are expected to form. If it becomes successful,

it may induce the creation of similar services or replicate itself in a form of franchise. These

communities then will be connected to one another and form a network of Couchsurfing

communities (Figure 3.21).

Figure 3.21 Couchsurfing at the mature level

In order to verify how much the hypothetical social network structures convey the reality, a case

was selected and its social network structure was analyzed using SNA software. Then it was

visualized for comparison. Below is the visualization of the actual social network structures of

Couchsurfing groups in Milan and London. The data were collected for 3 months from May to

Page 64: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

64

August 2010 and were analyzed using Internet Community Text Analyzer (ICTA) beta (Gruzd,

2009). Figure 3.21, Figure 3.22 and Figure 3.23 are similar in several aspects. Both have many

paired nodes indicating the mutual relationships typically observed in this service. Then there

are cliques in which all nodes are connected to the other nodes. They represent a group

composed of hosts and guests. Finally, there are active users represented by centralized nodes.

They form multiple connections with other users indicating that they actively host or visit other

Couchsurfers.

Figure 3.22 Couchsurfing group in Milan

Figure 3.23 Couchsurfing group in London

Page 65: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

65

Other cases could not be verified likewise due to a lack of data or a lack of resources to analyze

the data. A verification of Couchsurfing suggests that the hypothetical social network structure

does not describe quantitative characteristics of actual social networks but it does convey some

of the key attributes qualitatively.

Case 5. Green Map Service (GMS)

Wendy Brawer started a Green Apple Map in 1992 and launched a worldwide Green Map

Service in 1995. GMS uses its website (Greenmap, 2008) as a platform to scale up and diffuse

the service. On the platform, users can download the toolkit to make a map, ask for advice from

or exchange information with other map makers. Figure 3.24 illustrates the group who founded

the service.

Figure 3.24 The founding members of Greem Map Service

Once the service was launched, people could start their own Green Map Projects by

downloading the toolkit. They often collaborated with their neighbors, colleagues or students10.

If anyone has already started a Green Map Project in their town, they could propose

collaboration. This is why there exists a mixture of strong and weak ties in the project groups

(Figure 3.25). GMS organized various events to connect map makers such as workshops and

tutorials. It also created a blog for map makers to exchange information and to be connected.

This effort resulted in weak ties between the project groups.

10 Many Green Map Projects were conducted in didactic environment (Green Map, 2008).

Page 66: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

66

Figure 3.25 An early phase of Green Map Service

As the service continues to grow (and it has been), more communities will participate in map

making and the existing groups will find new people to collaborate. As a result, a network of

Green Map communities will be formed (Figure 3.26).

Figure 3.26 Green Map Service in the mature phase

There are both strength and weakness in this approach. The strength is that the pattern of

information flow can be identified in a quick-and-dirty way thus saving time and money; it can

Page 67: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

67

be done without expert knowledge on SNA and therefore can be used by designers; it extracts

only the information necessary for discovering the pattern thus saving the resource for the

analysis. On the other hand, the weakness is that the result is subject to an error and it needs to

be verified how accurate this method is compared to the quantitative measure.

3.3. Discussion

3.3.1. Dual production of collaborative services

By definition, collaborative service results in the production of two essential elements: technical

solutions to user needs and social networks of target users. These two elements are interlinked

and support the production of each other thereby creating a virtuous cycle: In the process of

collaboration, social networks are formed and reinforced among users. Social networks, in turn,

create a favorable environment to induce new collaborations (Figure 3.27).

Figure 3.27 A virtuous circle between the production of solutions and that of social networks

In chapter 2, literature studies showed that ICTs contribute to creation and reinforcement of

weak ties and that it is the weak ties that social innovations diffuse. Case studies of collaborative

services on digital platform demonstrated that democratized ICTs, more specifically web

platforms, are an integral part of delivering solutions to various needs such as a need for

democratized society, a need for sharing mobility, a need for creating a world map of sustainable

sites or a need for revitalizing local communities. Enhanced production of social networks and

solutions through ICTs implies the facilitation of the virtuous cycle and therefore the production

of collaborative service (Figure 3.28).

Figure 3.28 The virtuous cycle amplified by ICTs

Production of solutions

Production of social networks

Production of solutions

Production of social networks

Page 68: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

68

The following question is if there exists a pattern in the way ICTs support the dual production of

collaborative service. If there is and if it can be identified, it can be incorporated into the design

process of collaborative service on digital platform and guide designers and developers how to

design an effective enabling system. Therefore, the following questions were formulated and

answers were sought through analysis of the cases:

1. How do ICTs11 support the functioning of collaborative services?

2. How do ICTs enrich the social networks of collaborative individuals and communities?

The results were threefold: First, despite the diversity in nature and context of the cases, a

pattern existed in the way collaborative services are structured on digital platforms; second, the

cases were categorized into 7 types based on the meta-objective of the services; and finally, the

cases were categorized into 6 types based on the social network structures of the users.

3.3.1.1. The structural system of collaborative services on digital platform

The investigated cases have a common characteristic regarding the environment where they are

formed and develop – the structural system of collaborative service on the digital platform. It

consists of 4 elements: a platform, an enabling solution, a collaborative service and an event

(Figure 3.29).

Figure 3.29 The structural system of collaborative service on digital platform

1. A platform. A platform is a base of the structure that hosts multiple enabling solutions. It is

what Jones (197) calls a cyber region/locale that contains many virtual communities. An

example of a platform is Meetup.com, a social networking service that provides a set of tools to

organize local gatherings across the world (Figure 3.30). On the Meetup platform, there are over

79000 enabling solutions for collaborative communities (as of January 2011) such as Team

Fighting Diabetes, a community of diabetics and their families in San Jose, California.

11 This research focuses on democratized ICTs, particularly, web and mobile platform.

!"#$%&"'()*%+,*"((An enabling solution motivates and empowers people to

create collaborative services e.g.) Meetup Group Page

-*%%#$*.#,/0()0./&10(

Collaborative services are developed by users to accomplish common goals and to build relations

e.g.) Team Fighting Diabetes

!/0"2(An event is produced as an outcome of collaboration in the

physical or the virtual space. e.g.) Team Fighting Diabetes hiking day

3%#4*.5( A platform hosts multiple enabling solutions e.g.) Meetup.com

Page 69: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

69

Figure 3.30 Meetup.com is a digital platform that hosts diverse Meetup Groups (Meetup, 2010)

2. An enabling solution. An enabling solution is a system of products, services and

communications that empower people to collaborate, meet their needs and diffuse their

solutions (Manzini, 2005). Democratization of ICTs has empowered people to organize, manage

and participate in collaborative services efficiently. For example, a diabetic can easily find a

community with the same illness to share information and participate in social events using a

service such as Meetup.com. Team Fighting Diabetes was thus created (Figure 3.31). Using tools

featured in the enabling solution, this group organize various collaborative activities such as a

hiking day for diabetes.

Figure 3.31 Team Fighting Diabetes Meetup Group homepage (Team Fighting Diabetes, 2010)

3. Collaborative services. Although an enabling solution alone does not guarantee collaborative

services, a well designed enabling solution is a necessary condition for collaborative services,

i.e., people will start organizing collaborative services on a platform that provides necessary

tools for them to accomplish their goals in a usable and pleasant way as in the case of

Page 70: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

70

Meetup.com (Figure 3.32). As it was discussed earlier in this chapter, social networks formed

through a collaborative service becomes a favorable environment for further collaborations. It

implies that collaborative services are more easily organized on a platform that has already

accomplished a critical mass.

Figure 3.32 Collaborative services in Meetup.com (Meetup, 2010)

4. An event. An event is an outcome of a collaborative service in the physical or the virtual space.

Manzini (2009B) argues that an event may vary in the size of participants, the degree of

interaction and the knowledge or physical assets required by the participants. These variables

need to be considered when designing a collaborative service and an enabling solution. Figure

3.33 illustrates a scene from a hiking day organized by Team Fighting Diabetes Group where the

members – diabetics and their families – exercise together and promote a healthy lifestyle.

Figure 3.33 Team Fighting Diabetes’ hiking day (Team Fighting Diabetes, 2010)

Page 71: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

71

3.3.1.2. A typology of collaborative services on digital platform based on meta-service objectives

Every investigated case had a specific goal it needed to acheive in a form of service (e.g. to

purchase high-quality agricultural produces directly from the local producers, to exchange used

books). These goals can be grouped into more generalized meta-goals. The 30 cases were

categorized into 7 types based on their meta-goals:

Producer/consumer network. In this typology, producers and consumers pursue mutual

benefits by establishing a direct network. It is often found in the food industry where producers

and consumers create networks to solve problems caused by long supply chains such carbon

emission and degeneration of local food industries and to promote critical and responsible

consumption.

Examples include Mapo Dure, a food cooperative in Mapo district of Seoul, South Korea; GAS

(Gruppi di Aquisto Solidale), a food purchasing group in Italy (Figure 3.34); Solidarius and

Sistema FBES (Fórum Brasileiro de Economia Solidária) both of which are digital platforms to

promote solidarity economy in Brazil.

Figure 3.34 GAS, the solidarity purchasing groups and the GAS website (Gruppi di Acquisto Solidale,

2009)

Mapping diffused information. In this typology, users collaborate to map diffused locational

information.

Examples include Green Map and Open Green Map which aim to create a global map of

sustainable sites and events through grassroots collaboration (Figure 3.35); and FixMyStreet, an

open-source project that reports, views, or discusses local problems like graffiti, fly tipping,

broken paving slabs, or street lighting which can then be solved by the local councils.

Page 72: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

72

Figure 3.35 Green Map makers and the Green Map website (Green Map, 2008)

Aggregate social action. In this typology, people act together and use their collective power to

achieve certain social goals.

Cases that belong to this category are Pledgebank, a website that enables people to achieve their

goals by asking other people to do the same (Figure 3.36); No 10 petition, an e-petition solution

in UK that delivers people’s petitions to the Prime Minister; Carrot mob, a network of

consumers who buy products in a form of a mob in order to reward businesses who are making

the most socially responsible decisions. Its goal is to leverages consumer power to make the

most socially-responsible business practices also the most profitable choices.

Figure 3.36 The Pledgebank website (Pledgebank, 2009)

Creating networks for social conviviality. In this typology, the primary goal is to improve social

conviviality by forming and reinforcing a social networks. Users are often from the same locality

and interact face-to-face and virtually on a regular basis.

Examples include Meetup, an enabling solution that allows people to form a network of local

groups hosts numerous collaborative services, i.e., individual meetups. Among them ones that

Page 73: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

73

are organized by users in a specific region for socialization such as Milano meetup; Peladeiro is a

solution in Brazil that helps people organize soccer matches (Figure 3.37); Vicini Vicini is a

service initiated by the Municipality of Rome to promote social conviviality of the community. It

provides people with tools to organize neighboring parties.

Figure 3.37 Peladeiro users and the Peladeiro website (Peladeiro, 2009)

Mutual support circle. In this typology, users provide mutual support to one another in order to

solve problems that they have in common.

Collaborative services that belong to this type include Open Health project by the Design

Council of UK intends to empower patients of chronic disease and their family members to

support themselves and those who have the same problem. One result of this project is

Activmob, a service organized by people in Kent to do physical activities together (Figure 3.38).

Figure 3.38 A Local Vocals Singing Group mob and the activmob website (Activmob, 2009)

Competences, time and products exchange. In this typology, people collaborate through the

exchange of competences, time and products.

Examples include Time bank, a reciprocal service exchange based on a time-based currency in

which community members exchange their time to satisfy their needs; and Zerorelativo, an

Page 74: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

74

online bartering system in Italy which allows people to exchange secondhand products (Figure

3.39).

Figure 3.39 The Zerorelativo website (zerorelativo, 2009)

Products, places and knowledge sharing. In this typology, people collaborate through sharing

products, places and knowledge.

Examples are: Hitchhikers, an online service that connects people in need of rides and people

who have empty seats in their cars; Couch surfing, a global initiative of sharing couches between

travelers while exchanging different cultures and creating social networks (Figure 3.40); and

Bookcrossing, a global book sharing scheme in which one leaves a book in a public place to be

picked up and read by others, who then do the same.

Figure 3.40 Couch surfers and the Couch Surfing website (CouchSurfing, 2009)

Page 75: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

75

3.3.1.3. A typology of collaborative services on digital platform based on social network

structure

From the in-depth case studies that aimed to analyze how ICTs influence social network

structures of individuals and communities involved in collaborative services, another typology

was drawn. The typology consists of 6 types of collaborative services on digital platform based

on the social network structures of users: a tightly knit group, networked individuals, a tightly

knit group(s) and networked individuals, a network of tightly knit groups and a network of

loosely knit groups, a network of tightly knit and loosely knit groups (Table 3.2).

Table 3.2 A typology of collaborative service on digital platform based on the social network structures of

users

Type Characteristic Example

1. A tightly knit group

• A closed group in which members are connected via strong ties

• No interaction with the outside

2. Networked individuals

• Members connected via weak or latent ties

• Intermittent or one-time interaction • Members bounded by common values

and interests but not necessarily by location

Fix My Street Pledgebank No. 10 Petition Social Invention Center Zerorelativo Couchsurfing Hitchhikers.org Bookcrossing

3. A tightly knit group(s) and networked individuals

• Driven by a group of tightly knit members who share values and interests and often bounded by location

• Supported and endorsed by individuals who are weakly connected to the core group and within themselves

GROFUN

4. A network of tightly knit groups

• Composed of multiple groups of tightly knit members who share values and interests and often geographically bounded

• Groups weakly or latently tied to other groups

Meetup.com GAS Mapo Dure Activmob Timebanks Peladeiro

Page 76: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

76

5. A network of loosely knit groups

• Composed of multiple groups • Group members are loosely knit and

bounded by common values and interests and but not necessarily by location

• Intermittent or one-time interaction • Groups weakly or latently connected

Carrot Mob Shelfari

6. A network of tightly knit and loosely knit groups

• A mixture of type 4 and 5

WiserEarth Green Map Open green map Nabuur Vicini Vicini

Type 1 is ‘a tightly knit group’ which is a closed group whose members are tightly knit via strong

ties and often bounded by geographic location as well as common values and interests. Its

members meet on a regular basis and tend to collaborate within the group. There is no example

of the first type among the investigated cases because it is a hypothetical type that was

extrapolated from the result of case studies. However, numerous examples can be easily found

elsewhere: a class of an online education course, a group of scholars conducting a collaborative

project using digital tools and a local community independently running a time bank.

Type 2, ‘networked individuals’ is more loosely knit and vaguely bounded than the first type

because its members are connected via weak or latent ties. They are bounded by common values

and interests but not necessary by location. Their interaction takes place intermittently or even

once. Examples include Fix My Street, a service that allows users to report problems on the local

streets; Social invention center, an initiative run by Hope Institute, a social innovation think

tank in South Korea, that is similar to Fix My Street but extends the scope of service to any

social problems; Couchsurfing, a service to share couches and get together among travellers;

Hitchhikers.org, a service that connects people with empty seats in their cars and people who

need a ride; Zerorelativo, an bartering service in Italy; Pledgebank, a service that connects

people with good ideas and people who want to support them; and No. 10 petition, an online

petition service run by the Premier of UK.

Page 77: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

77

Figure 3.41 Screenshots of Hitchhikers.org platform: from top left to clockwise direction: developers of the

platform, a bulletin board for proposing a hitchhike, the registration page; a car painted with the

hitchhikers.org logo (Hitchhikers, 2010)

Type 3, ‘a tightly knit group(s) and networked individuals’ is the combination of the first and the

second type. It is driven by a group of tightly knit members who share values and interests and

often bounded by location and supported by individuals who are weakly connected to other

members. The first type may evolve into the third type over time as it opens up itself. An

example is GROFUN, an urban gardening group in Bristol, UK (Figure 3.1).

Type 4, ‘a network of tightly knit groups’ and type 5, ‘a network of loosely knit groups’ are the

extension of the type 1 and 2 respectively. Type 1 and 2 may evolve into type 4 and 5 as they start

replicating and creating a network of franchises. They are similar to what Jones (1997) called a

cyber region/locale that contains many virtual communities. The difference is that the users of

these types also collaborate face-to-face. Examples of type 4 is Meetup.com, a network of local

community groups; Green Map, a worldwide green mapmaking project based on

crowdsourcing; Mapo Dure, a local branch of a food cooperative network in South Korea; and

GAS, a network of solidarity purchasing groups in Italy. Examples of type 5 include Carrot Mob,

a network of consumers who buy products in a flashmob-like manner to reward businesses that

make the most socially responsible decisions and Shelfari, an online community for book lovers.

Page 78: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

78

Figure 3.42 Activities organized by Mapo Dure

Type 6, ‘a network of tightly knit and loosely knit groups’ is a network of both tightly knit and

loosely knit groups. Examples include WiserEarth, a social networking service focusing on the

theme of sustainability; Open Green Map, a digital version of Green Map; and Nabuur, an

online volunteering platform that links online volunteers with local communities in Africa, Asia

and Latin America.

Figure 3.43 Nabuur website and one of its project on the combat for Malaria in Wakitaka, Uganda

(Nabuur, 2010)

Page 79: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

79

4. DESIGN PROCESS OF COLLABORATIVE SERVICES ON DIGITAL PLATFORM

In this chapter, the process of designing collaborative services on digital platform is analyzed

based on two case studies. The first case study is the Product-System Development Laboratory

(PSD Lab) at Politecnico di Milano. This class aimed to provide students with a holistic

approach to develop collaborative service on digital platform that contributes to building

sustainable local communities in Milan. The second case study is an event called Social

Innovation Camp, a global initiative that experiments on developing digital solutions for social

innovations. The process and the output of the two cases are described and analyzed in terms of

their effectiveness in addressing social and technical needs of target users.

Page 80: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

80

4.1. Background

In this chapter, two case studies on design and implementation of collaborative services on

digital platform are introduced. In the previous chapters, a conceptual model of collaborative

service on digital platform was proposed and cases of grassroots social innovations enhanced by

diffused ICTs were observed through case studies. The studies observed the potential of ICTs as

an effective enabling solution for collaborative services. The next step is to understand the

current approach to designing a collaborative service on digital platform from developers’

perspective, i.e., what process do designers and engineers undergo and what methods and tools

do they use in different stages of the process; and to assess if the dual elements – solutions and

social networks – of collaborative services can be effectively produced under the current

process.

4.2. Case study I: Design of collaborative services on digital platform

4.2.1. Introduction

The Product-System Development Laboratory was a class for the 1st year master students in the

department of industrial design at Politecnico di Milano. It was one of several classes on service

design and was held from 9 AM to 6 PM, once a week from March to June in 2009. The class

was sponsored by and partnered with the Fondazione Culturale Responsabilità Etica, a non-for-

profit organization (NPO) based in Toscana, Italy that promotes at the national and

international level the diffusion of ethically oriented finance and responsibility of economic

activities on non-economic consequences (Banca Etica, 2010). The aim of the course was to

design collaborative services and their enabling solutions that could be integrated into the

Foundation’s web platform called ZOES12 (an acronym for la Zona Equosostenibile meaning the

fair and sustainable zone). ZOES is a social-network-based platform that aimed to promote

socially and environmentally responsible economic activities and diffuse sustainable lifestyles.

Collaborative services among various actors of solidarity economy were precisely what ZOES

intended to support. From the instructors’ point of view, ZOES was an optimal project to work

on as it provided the students with an opportunity to apply their ideas to the real context

without altering the aim of the class. From the Fondazione’s point of view, the output of the

class played a role of pilot projects that could test the platform and bring a critical mass, and a

source of inspiration for the future direction of the project.

The class was composed of three professors who were specialized in service design, interaction

design, and design for sustainability; three teaching staffs who were all PhD candidates; and 16

students from 6 different countries who were divided into five groups. The official language of

the class was Italian and English translation was provided when needed. The class was

12 www.zoes.it

Page 81: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

81

composed of the following phases: introduction to service design, idea generation, concept

development, development and communication. Each phase is explained in the next section.

4.2.2. Process

4.2.2.1. Introduction to service design

The PSD Lab is an introductory class on service design for students whose background is in

product design. Since the students have no previous experience on designing services,

introductory lectures were provided to help them understand the basic notion of service design.

The lectures addressed the following topics: what is a service, what is service design, how to

design human-to-human interaction as well as man-machine interaction, case studies of

collaborative service on digital platform, the use of digital collaborative tools and the

background of the ZOES project.

4.2.2.2. Idea generation

At the beginning of idea generation phase, design specifications that described the partner’s

demand as well as the didactic goals was delivered to the students: first, the five groups were

asked to choose five topics from the ten business areas of the ZOES – housing, food, finance,

energy, politics, health, social networks, communication, travel and responsibility; second, a

service to be designed must involve interaction in both virtual and real worlds; third, a service

should target a local community in Milan; and finally a service should address both social and

economical issues while being economically feasible.

Based on the specifications, the students brainstormed ideas and refined them through

revisions with the instructors until the most promising ideas were selected. For the selected

ideas, targeting events13, enabling solutions and main stakeholders were identified (Figure 4.1).

Figure 4.1 A relationship between an event, a collaborative service and an enabling solution

13 As it was discussed in chapter 3, events are social activities that take place in the real or virtual space as the result of a collaborative service. For example, it can be a flash mob to clean a river or a concert where musicians and their fans get together.

!"#$%&"'()*%+,*"((An enabling solution motivates and empowers people to

create collaborative services To be designed by students

-*%%#$*.#,/0()0./&10(

Collaborative services are developed by users to accomplish common goals and to build relations

To be designed by students

!/0"2(An event is produced as an outcome of collaboration in the

physical or the virtual space. To be organized by the final users

3%#4*.5($#)0(678!9:( A platform base hosts multiple enabling solutions ZOES.it

Page 82: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

82

4.2.2.3. Concept development

In concept development phase, service stakeholders were articulated using personas (Figure

4.2) and their motivations were defined using the motivation matrix (Figure 4.3). Personas are a

tool of market segmentation used to consider the goals, desires, and limitations of users and

therefore help guide decisions about a service or a product. In the context of service design, it is

used to define and articulate service stakeholders by creating fictional characters that represent

the goals and behavior of a real group of stakeholders, thereby turning the users into identifiable

human beings.

Figure 4.2 An example of personas in service design (WeTunes, 2009)

Motivation matrix allows defining the stakeholders’ motivation to participate in a service and

understanding their interests to other stakeholders (Service design tools, 2010). The students

contacted the potential service stakeholders to verify their assumptions on their motivations to

participate in the services.

Page 83: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

83

Figure 4.3 An example of a motivation matrix (WeTunes, 2009)

Events and enabling solutions of the conceived services were also articulated in this phase. By

defining physical components of the services and main features of digital services, the students

articulated the specification of enabling solutions that will support their services.

Relations between stakeholders were identified using a system map. A system map shows the

solution form the point of view of the organization of the partnership providing the solution.

The map includes the main stakeholders and the relationships between them in terms of the

material, financial and information flows. Figure 4.4 is a system map created by the students

that describes a service to organize an indie music band.

Page 84: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

84

Figure 4.4 An example of a system map (WeTunes, 2009)

Once the students have identified the service stakeholders and articulated their motivations,

they simulated the service experience using the interaction storyboard. Interaction storyboard is

a tool that shows the solution performance along the horizontal time line. It is the translation of

an event, which takes place in space and time, into a sequence of static images and explanatory

captions that represent the significant interactions between the user(s) and the provider(s) of a

product-service (Cipolla, 2009). Figure 4.5 is an example of storyboard created by the students.

It describes the process of participating in a bartering party where the participant exchanges her

used clothes with others’ in an entertaining atmosphere.

Figure 4.5 An example of a storyboard (Clothes Party, 2009)

7

Page 85: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

85

Finally, the students were guided to elaborate operative procedure of their services. They broke

down a service into action sequences and arranged them in a chronological order using a flow

chart (Figure 4.6).

Figure 4.6 An example of a flow chart (Arcistoppers, 2009)

4.2.2.4. Design of enabling solutions

Based on the concepts of digital services, i.e., a part of services that are operated using digital

tools, developed in the previous phases, enabling solutions were designed. This phase was

further specified into the following stages: setting the goal of the enabling solutions, defining

features, selecting digital tools for collaboration, designing information architecture and

wireframes.

Students naturally integrated the results from the previous phases into designing their enabling

solutions, suggesting that articulation of a service concept is a precedent step to design an

enabling solution. For example, the result of personas was used to define user profiles of a

digital service; a service process described in a storyboard and detailed in a flow chart became a

reference to define features and to design information architecture of a digital platform.

Due to the limited time span and resources invested in the class, the enabling solutions were not

implemented. Instead, the final outcome was the screen images of digital platforms and the

demonstration of how the platforms work. Figure 4.7 is one of the digital platforms developed

by the students. It is called Clothes Party, a service for organizing social events to exchange used

clothes.

Page 86: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

86

Figure 4.7 A digital platform for organizing social events to exchange (Clothes Party, 2009)

4.2.2.5. Communication

In the final stage of the class, strategies to present and communicate the developed collaborative

services and enabling solutions to the client, users and potential partners were delivered to the

students. Due to the complex and intangible nature of a service, it required a different approach

to presenting the final output from presenting tangible objects such as a product or space. The

students were thus provided with a presentation format which guides them to describe the

process, the output of each stage, and the final outcome. The final presentation included the

following materials: a mood board, a poster, personas, a system map, a motivation matrix, a

timeline, flow charts, storyboards, description of a digital platform and communication

strategies. At the end of the class, the client was invited to the presentation and evaluated the

final outcomes together with the instructors.

4.2.3. Results

5 collaborative services on digital platform were proposed at the end of the class. The service

concepts and their enabling solutions are described below.

Clothes Party is a social bartering service that allows people to exchange used clothes and at

the same time to socialize with others in a joyful atmosphere. The event of this service is a

bartering party where people bring their clothes, exchange them, meet new people and enjoy

with music and food. The service involves the following stakeholders: ZOES provides a platform

base on which to build an enabling solution, i.e., a website for Clothes Party. It offers API’s of

various collaborative tools that can be adopted to the enabling solution; the Milan Municipality

provides a physical space to organize the events; Esterni, a magazine publisher, promotes the

service; I Love Shopping, a company currently offering a service of bartering used clothes in

Page 87: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

87

Bergamo and wants to organize an event like Clothes Party, is the service provider; and finally

there are users who exchange their used clothes at the party (Figure 4.8).

Figure 4.8 The system map of Clothes Party (Cumitini, Veera & Zocca, 2009)

The website of Clothes Party is a virtual space for users to organize an event and to

communicate with other users (Figure 4.9). A user can become a registered member by joing

ZOES. During the registration process, a user is asked to register his or her clothes to exchange.

On the website, she can organize a bartering party, get information about the upcoming parties

and check if there is any clothes that she is interested in. She can also communicate with other

users on a blog.

Figure 4.9 The website of Clothes Party (Cumitini, Veera & Zocca, 2009)

Page 88: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

88

Viaggiamoci is a service that aims to promote community-based tourism (CBT). CBT is a

form of tourism created by the demand of travelling in a more sustainable way, both socially and

environmentally, and having more authentic experiences on one side and of protecting the local

cultures, environment and economies on the other side. In CBT, local communities are the main

actors in the planning and managing a service and hence the economic benefits go directly to the

local communities through micro and small businesses owned by them (Bursztyn, 2010). The

event in Viaggiamoci is a tour and the service stakeholders include local communities that

provide CBT, tourists, a travel agency that promote CBT and connects users and local

communities, and ZOES (Cesarano, Villiva’, Gutierrez, 2009).

Figure 4.10 The system map of Viaggiamoci (Cesarano, Villiva’, Gutierrez, 2009)

The website of Viaggiamoci prmotes CBT, offers a marketplace where CBTs can be purchased,

and a virtual settlement for users to share experiences, information and multimedia data

(Figure 4.11).

Page 89: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

89

Figure 4.11 The website of Viaggiamoci (Cesarano, Villiva’ & Gutierrez, 2009)

We Green is a service that aims to advocate a green lifestyle through flash mob. The event is a

flash mob where a multitude of people assemble in a public space and shout out in one voice

“We Green!”, an expression of a desire to have more sustainable and lively areas in cities. The

event is characterized by a graphic identity, the green t-shirts that participants wear (Crisponi,

Lo Mele & Nogues, 2009). The service stakeholders include Esterni which provides expertise in

organizing cultural events and promotes the events; Sorgenia, an energy company that sponsors

the events; and users who participate in flash mobs (Figure 4.12).

Figure 4.12 The system map of We Green (Crisponi, Lo Mele & Nogues, 2009)

The website of We Green provides information on the upcoming flash mobs and it empowers

one to organize a flash mob by providing necessary tools to achieve a critical mass of

participants. Such tools include a map mashup, calendar, message and forum (Figure 4.13).

Page 90: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

90

Figure 4.13 The website of We Green (Crisponi, Lo Mele & Nogues, 2009)

WeTunes aims to promote indie music culture in the short run and to create a vibrant

community in the long run by bringing musicians together and connecting them with people

who appreciate their music. The service provides indie musicians with a virtual space where

they can find partners to form a band, organize a live concert in collaboration with a local bar.

The main service stakeholders include indie musicians; ZOES; fnac, an international

entertainment retail chain that sponsors the concerts; a music studios where bands practice;

and local bars where they perform (Figure 4.14).

Figure 4.14 The system map of WeTunes (Ong, Leon, Ferreira & Araujo, 2009)

Page 91: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

91

The website of WeTunes is a social networking space where musicians can be connected to other

musicians, fans and promoters. The platform has a database of musicians’ profiles including

peer-reviewed rating of their musical competence, which makes it possible for a musician to find

partners of a desired level to form a band (Figure 4.15).

Figure 4.15 The website of WeTunes (Ong, Leon, Ferreira & Araujo, 2009)

Arci stoppers is a carpooling service for clubbers. The service concept comes from the need of

clubbers in Milan to have a means of transportation after 1 AM when the public transportation

service stops. The service name comes from Arci, an association of nightclubs in Italy. A

registered user can search on the website of Arci Stoppers for someone to share a ride to a

nightclub. Once he or she finds a carpooler, the website calculates the ideal meeting point and a

shortest path to a club. The driver gets a free drink from the club for participating in the service

(Semeraro, Wurzer, Williams and Pulido, 2009). The service stakeholders include Arci; ATM,

the department of public transportation in Milan, which provides meeting points for carpooling;

and carpoolers (Figure 4.16).

Page 92: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

92

Figure 4.16 The system map of Arci stoppers (Semeraro, Wurzer, Williams and Pulido, 2009)

On the website, a user can search for a ride using a search engine. He enters the necessary data

for carpooling such as his depature, destination, number of passengers, departure and arrival

time. The search result is displayed on a map, i.e., the locations of people who are willing to offer

him a ride (Figure 4.17). On the left column is a list of events for clubbers organized by Arci.

Figure 4.17 The website of Arci stoppers (Semeraro, Wurzer, Williams and Pulido, 2009)

4.3. Case study 2: Implementation of digital platforms for collaborative services

4.3.1. Introduction

Social Innovation Camp is an event where social innovators, software developers and designers

gather voluntarily to build web-based solutions to real social problems (Social Innovation Camp,

Page 93: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

93

2010). It was founded by Christian Ahlert, Dan McQuillan and Paul Miller in 2008, with

support from the Young Foundation.

It aimed to create a space where people with ideas to make society better could meet people with

talents to realize them with technologies. The idea was inspired by already successful initiatives

in the technology world such as Barcamp unconferences where people get together to share

skills and knowledge and the Hackday model where software developers code for 24 hours

straight (Social Innovation Camp, 2010). The Camps are organized in the weekend, from Friday

afternoon to Sunday morning. They consist of two main events: a competition to find the best

ideas for web tools to create social change and a race to implement them over a weekend. The

final outcome is working prototypes of web-based solutions for social innovations (Ibid.). The

prototypes are available under creative commons to those who are willing to develop them into

real solutions. In short, Social Innovation Camp is a creative way to utilize democratized

technologies and the collaborative culture in the digital space to solve social problems in the real

world.

The first event was held in UK in January 2008 with backing from NESTA, the Young

Foundation, the Office of the Third Sector, the Guardian and Yahoo!. The result was a success

and since then it has been held twice a year and has spread to different parts of the world such

as Scotland, Australia, Slovakia, New Zealand and Gruzia (Ibid.).

Figure 4.18. Social Innovation Camp in Scotland in June 2008 (Social Innovation Camp, 2010)

In June 2010, Social Innovation Camp was held for the first time in South Korea organized by

the Hope Institute14, Daum Foundation15 and Happy Bean16 and sponsored by Microsoft and

two major IT service providers in South Korea – Daum and NHN. Prior to the camp, a

competition was held to select ideas to be implemented. 9 ideas were selected and implemented

14 The Hope Institute is a private think tank focusing on social innovations. 15 Daum Foundation is a non-profit organization established by shareholders and employees of Daum Communications Corporation. 16 Happy Bean is a non-profit organization established by Naver Corporation.

Page 94: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

94

into prototypes at the camp which lasted for 36 hours (Figure 4.19). The entire process form the

idea competition to the final outcome is described in the next section.

Figure 4.19 Participants of the Social Innovation Camp (Daum '\a+ÒP, 2010)

4.3.2. Process

4.3.2.1. Competition

In April 2010, an announcement for the first Social Innovation Camp in South Korea was made.

Total 192 ideas of social innovations were submitted online and the juries selected 9 best ones

based on the following criteria: first, contribution to the common good; second, feasibility to

achieve the aimed goals; and third, creativity in tackling the targeting problems. The first

criterion assessed the ideas in terms of the urgency and their impact to the contemporary

society. The second criterion looked at whether the proposed ideas could indeed solve the

targeting problems and whether the ideas could be implemented in a given period of time. The

third criterion concerned the novelty and innovativeness of the ideas as well as the copyright

issue (Ibid.). The selected ideas were published online17.

Simultaneously, volunteers to implement solutions were recruited online. Total 61 volunteers

were selected from outnumbering applicants. They were composed of software engineers (50%),

web planners (25%) and designers (25%) (Kim Lee, 2010). The volunteers came from various IT

companies including NHN, Daum and Microsoft, the sponsors of the event.

4.3.2.2. Orientation

The orientation was held in May 2010, one month before the Camp started. The purposes of the

orientation were threefold: to present the ideas to the volunteers; to discuss the feasibility of

implementation; and to form groups who will implement the ideas during the camp. Idea

17 http://2010.sicamp36.org/idea/select_list

Page 95: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

95

proposers presented their ideas to the developers and the Q&A session followed. After the

presentation, the participants were divided into groups, which consisted of an idea proposer,

planners, designers and software engineers, and group meetings were held.

Figure 4.20 Presentation of the ideas during the orientation (Social Innovation Camp 36, 2010)

At the group meeting, each team discussed detailed issues regarding the implementation of the

solution and made a working plan for preparing the camp: The members discussed a platform

concept, identified features, defined tasks and assigned them to each member. One thing that

the camp organizers did not anticipate was that many participants utilized two weeks of time

between the orientation and the camp to make a progress in developing the solutions. For

example, one team finished more or less everything except for the coding during this period

including the wireframe design, graphic works, building a database and beta-testing it. To

enhance communication and collaboration in distance, many teams used digital collaborative

tools such as web documentation tools.

Figure 4.21 Participants discussing the solution concept at the group meeting (Social Innovation Camp 36,

2010)

Page 96: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

96

Time constraint was the biggest challenge to the participants and it often led to conflicts

between idea proposers and developers. For example, engineers would insist to reduce the scope

of a solution to shorten the development period and this would often come into conflict with a

proposer who wanted to maintain the original concept as much as possible in order to fulfill the

social, environmental and economic needs that motivated his idea in the first place. On the

other hand, the engineers wanted to produce a working prototype within the deadline. Such

conflicts were resolved sometimes through compromising and other times through giving up

from one side.

4.3.2.3. The camp

The camp was held in Hwasung, Kyoungki-do from June 18th to the 20th. The participants were

given 36 hours – from Friday midnight to Sunday morning – to produce technical solutions to

the social innovation ideas. The idea proposers were not invited to the camp. The camp was

highly laissez-faire: to a large extent organized and driven by the participants. Members of each

team sat around a table and spent most of their time working on the task assigned to them

(Figure 4.22). The overall development process at the camp was reportedly highly specialized

because most of the decisions were made prior to the camp and the 36 hours were dedicated to

coding. However, the participants did have occasional discussions to solve unexpected problems

or to make decisions on the platform concept (Figure 4.23).

Figure 4.22 Developers at the camp with the remaining time displayed in the background (Social

Innovation Camp 36, 2010)

Page 97: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

97

Figure 4.23 Developers having a discussion (Social Innovation Camp 36, 2010)

The participants used a whiteboard provided to each team as a space to post the wireframes and

information architecture of a digital platform, to list up features, and even to leave messages to

their teammates in case they had to leave the table (Figure 4.24).

Figure 4.24 Wireframes and information architecture drawn by developers (Social Innovation Camp 36,

2010)

At the end of the camp, 9 working prototypes of digital platform were produced as the final

outcome. The results were presented to the juries for evaluation.

4.3.3. Results

Below is a brief description of the final result. Despite the limited time, the participants

successfully developed working prototypes. Reflecting the recent explosion of the smartphone

users, several teams developed both mobile and web platforms.

Page 98: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

98

Kind Bus: Finding the best bus drivers. This is both a web and mobile platform that uses

a carrot rather than a stick to improve the quality of public bus service in Seoul: It allows

passengers to praise good bus drivers rather than to complain about bad ones. The platform

provides the following features: a virtual space for passengers to praise the best bus drivers and

to share with other passengers stories on the public bus service; a text message service that

automatically informs passengers’ whereabouts to their friends or families (Figure 4.25).

Figure 4.25 A digital platform for Kind Bus (Kind Bus, 2010)

Baratie: Feed Your People. This mobile solution aims to promote the culture of charity

through a system in which a portion of people’s spending at restaurants goes to charity (Figure

4.26). In this system, restaurants register with a pledge that they will donate to charities a

portion of their profit if a critical mass of customers is achieved via the platform. Registered

customers can see the registered restaurants on the platform and whenever they order

something from the listed restaurants, they are donating to charities.

Figure 4.26 A digital platform for the Baratie: Feed Your People (Baratie: Feed Your People, 2010)

Page 99: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

99

Fun Riding. This web and mobile solution promotes bike riding by providing a collaborative

tool to co-create biking maps. This solution has a navigation function and offers useful tips for

cycling such as good bicycle routes, traffic condition, toilet location and roads condition, all of

which are contributed by users (Figure 4.27). In addition, its social networking feature allows

users to form social networks and to bike together. Lastly, it contributes to creating a better

condition for biking by establishing a communication channel that delivers users’ voices to

policy makers.

Figure 4.27 A digital platform for Fun Riding (Fun Riding, 2010)

My Neighbors. My Neighbors is a web-based solution that aims to connect neighbors, enrich

their relationship and thus create a convivial society. This social platform is expected to

facilitate mutual collaboration in local communities in Seoul, a highly individualized city. Using

social network service and map mashup, one can initiate interaction with their neighbors in a

virtual space and find people to exchange time and competences18 (Figure 4.28).

18 A screen shot of the platform was replaced with the solution schema because the website was not accessible.

Page 100: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

100

Figure 4.28 A schema of a digital platform for My Neighbors (Social Innovation Camp 36, 2010)

Our Farm. This web-based solution promotes sustainable food production and consumption

and promotes local economies by connecting local producers in the urban and peri-urban areas

with consumers in the cities. Using social media, search engine and map mashup, consumers

have direct access to local producers; they interact with one another to share information and

make collective purchases; and they discover how the foods they consume are produced and by

whom (Figure 4.29). In addition, by connecting schools with local farms, it promotes utilization

of local environmental and agricultural resources for didactic purposes.

Figure 4.29 A digital platform for Our Farm (Our Farm, 2010)

Finding Local Traditional Markets. This mobile solution contributes to protecting and

promoting local traditional markets which are disappearing with the emergence of

Page 101: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

101

supermarkets and shopping malls. By doing so, it not only secures numerous local jobs but also

preserves rich tradition and culture that these markets have inherited. Using the database of

local markets, a wiki and maps, this solution provides information on local traditional markets

such as the locations, events, products and recipes of the traditional food (Figure 4.30).

Figure 4.30 A mobile platform for Finding Local Traditional Markets (Let's Market, 2010)

Pop Funding for Artists. This web-based solution is based on an idea to support local artists

through micro financing. On the platform, artists propose a plan and the amount of fund they

want to receive (Figure 4.31). Investors can navigate through a list of proposed ideas on artistic

works, performances and exhibitions and invest online. Artists receive money only if they

accomplish their plans. The profit returns to artists and investors.

Figure 4.31 A digital platform for Pop Funding for Artists (Art Fund, 2010)

Pro Bono Bridge. This solution aims to promote pro bono services in which professionals

with specific skills use their talents for those who cannot afford them. In other words, it

connects people who are willing to use their skills (e.g. speaking foreign language, teaching,

singing, etc.) for others with NGOs and NPOs. On one side, there is a bulletin board that NGOs

Page 102: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

102

and NPOs can use to ask for specific services they need. On the other side is a list of volunteers

with their basic information (Figure 4.32).

Figure 4.32 A digital platform for Pro Bono Bridge (Pro Bono Bridge, 2010)

Treeing. With this web solution, people can participate with a little effort in turning barrens

green, sequestering carbon dioxide through planting trees or donating money to an agency that

plant for them. Every time a tree is planted, its virtual avatar appears on the platform providing

information related to the status of the tree as well as arousing emotional affection. The

platform has two main features: a virtual space for people to organize planting trees and a

charity space to donate money to support tree planting (Figure 4.33).

Figure 4.33 A digital platform for Treeing (Treeing, 2010)

Page 103: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

103

4.4. Discussion

In this section, the design process of the PSD Lab and the Social Innovation Camp are compared

and evaluated in terms of their effectiveness in addressing the dual production of collaborative

service.

4.4.1. Design process and tools

Although the motivation was similar, the PSD Lab and the Social Innovation Camp laid their

focus on different aspects of designing collaborative service on digital platform – the former on

a systematic approach and the latter on the implementation of solutions – and thus the final

outcomes were also different. In this section, the two cases are analyzed and compared in terms

of the process and tools used to produce the final results. The strengths and weaknesses of each

case are identified and the need for a novel approach to designing digital platforms for

collaborative services is proposed.

The PSD Lab had its focus on teaching students a systematic approach to design product-service

systems. Due to a limited period of time, the output remained at the conceptual level, both the

collaborative services and the enabling solutions. On the other hand, the Social Innovation

Camp focused on the implementation of technical solutions for collaborative services while it

lacked the consideration of services as a system consisting of various stakeholders of their own

interests. Consequently, the digital platforms – the visible part – were almost ready but the

services – the intangible part – were not.

This makes neither of the two cases a good example of a design process of collaborative service

on digital platform but, at the first glance, they have the parts the others are missing, i.e., the

systematic approach to service design in PSD Lab and the innovative approach to develop digital

solutions in the Social Innovation Camp can merge to form a complete process of designing

collaborative service on digital platform.

At the same time, the two cases represent a conventional approach to designing collaborative

services on digital platform, i.e., a process where service designers, graphic designers,

interaction designers, software planners and engineers play specialized roles in creating a

service using methods and tools that are widely used in the field: The process and tools used in

the PSD Lab are also used by designers in the field and the academic environment to develop

product service systems (Service design tools, 2010) and the Camp is a condensed version of

platform development process in the IT industry. Therefore, analyzing the two cases will help

understand the conventional approach to designing collaborative services on digital platform

and how effective it is in terms of facilitating the dual production of collaborative service.

Page 104: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

104

Programming. In the PSD Lab, the objective of the class and the design specifications were

defined by the instructors and delivered to the students during this phase. A series of

introductory lectures on service design, interaction design and related methods were provided

to compensate for the students’ lack of knowledge in these areas. The students started

brainstorming the ideas of collaborative services targeting the Milan City.

In the case of the Social Innovation Camp, a competition for social innovation ideas was held

online. The organizing committee led by the Hope Institute defined design specifications and

the juries selected the 9 best ideas. During the orientation, the selected ideas were delivered to

the volunteers and design specifications were defined at the group meeting. Each group started

brainstorming the ideas, mostly technical issues related to implementation.

Data collection. In the PSD Lab, students conducted user studies to collect the data on their

target users’ needs. They benchmarked existing social innovation cases similar to their ideas,

interviewed potential service stakeholders, and referred to secondary sources to investigate the

target markets. For example, students who worked on the idea of Clothes Party interviewed the

owner of a store in Bologna whose service is dedicated to bartering used clothes to understand

how the business works and if it can benefit from the use of ICTs. Students also reflected their

personal experiences on their service concepts. For example, students who came up with

WeTunes were all exchange students who were visiting Milan for a semester. They experienced

difficulties adapting to the new environment as a foreigner in Milan and this became a

motivation to develop a service that connects people across the barriers of nationality and

language. One of them played the guitar and he proposed the idea of WeTunes based on his

experience as a band guitarist.

In the Social Innovation Camp, the selected ideas often lacked a rigorous study of target users

and markets. They came from personal experiences or, in one occasion, a group discussion and

were supported by the statistical data and/or benchmarking of similar solutions. The statistical

data were all from the secondary sources and although they successfully addressed problems

that needed to be solved, they lacked specificity. For example, a person who proposed Fun

Riding, a web and mobile platform for bike riders referred to a single source, a government-

issued report that estimated the percentages of transportation through bicycle in year 2013 and

2020. A person who proposed Treeing, a web solution that promotes tree planting referred to

the statistical data on the area of the green per person in Seoul and the rate of deforestation in

the same place. In any case, both data collection and analysis were done individually and lacked

the factual rigor. To compensate for the limitation, the Camp used the juries’ judgement.

Page 105: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

105

Analysis. In this phase, students analyzed the data to identify the target users’ needs and to

define design problems. They focused on problems related to the social and environmental

aspect of sustainability in the context of local communities which was the theme of the class.

In the social innovation camp, the analysis phase was not a part of the camp and thus cannot be

described. However, given the amount and simplicity of the data presented by the idea

proposers, its weight in the overall process seems insignificant.

Synthesis. In the PSD Lab, students were guided to use a series of design tools to develop

service concepts. These concepts were refined through revisions with the instructors until they

were socially and environmentally sustainable and economically viable. As they identified

detailed service features using task analysis, flow chart and time line, they simultaneously

configured the features of the digital platform. In other words, the boundary between service

design and digital platform design became blurred at some point and there was a synergy effect

in running the two design processes in parallel.

In the Camp, synthesis phase began at the group meeting in the orientation. The digital platform

concepts were elaborated through discussion between idea proposers and developers.

Sometimes there were conflicts between the idea proposers and the developers regarding the

scope of the features and negotiations had to be made. In this phase, the developers defined the

features of their platform, decided which solutions to use to implement them and even designed

information architecture and wireframes of the platform.

Development (implementation). The implementation of the services and the platforms was

beyond the scope of the class and thus the final result was the conceptual product service

systems supported by digital platforms. In the Camp, 36 hours were devoted to implementing

the digital platforms. During this period, graphic images were designed based on the wireframe

and coding was done. By the end of the camp, 9 web and/or mobile platforms were produced.

However, they were not ready to function because the backstage services were not ready. The

Hope Institute reportedly had a plan to support the incubation of services and maintenance of

the platforms after the official camp was over. This makes the order of design process reversed

from that of the PSD Lab (Figure 4.34; Figure 4.35) and it is not as efficient as the latter because

the platform design may have to be modified as service concept is articulated.

Figure 4.34 Design process of the Social Innovation Camp

Service development

Platform development User needs

Page 106: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

106

Figure 4.35 Design process of the PSD Lab

Communication. In the PSD Lab, a booklet that introduces the process and the outcome of

the class was published for dissemination. In the Social Innovation Camp, the final prototypes

were made accessible to the public and the entire process of the event – from idea competition

to the evaluation of the prototypes – was introduced on the official website. At the same time,

the event was promoted through the mass media and social media.

Table 4.1 summarizes the design process of PSD Lab vs. the Social Innovation Camp.

Table 4.1. Design process of PSD Lab vs. Social Innovation Camp

Platform development

Service development User needs

PSD Lab Social Innovation Camp

Programming

The instructors set an objective and design specifications. The students are instructed in service design, interaction design, and related methods and tools. Students brainstorm service ideas. The most promising ones are selected through a revision process.

The Hope Institute, the orgnizer of the camp, sets an objective and design specifications. The participants propose ideas based on their experiences and knowledge. The ideas are selected through a competition.

Volunteers to develop the ideas into working prototypes are recruited.

Data collection

Data on user needs are collected through interviews, case studies and secondary research methods. Students also refer to their own experiences of living in Milan.

Statistical data and benchmarking of similar cases are used to support the

validity of the proposed ideas.

Analysis Data are analyzed to identify user needs. Design problems are defined.

Unknown

Synthesis

Service ideas are developed using various service design tools and refined through revisions with the instructors.

The following tools are used to design services: persona, system map, motivation matrix, task analysis, flow chart, timeline, storyboard.

The information architecture and the layout of platforms are determined.

Service ideas are articulated at the group meetings. Negotiations are made between idea proposers and developers in the case of conflicts. The scope of platforms is redefined if necessary. The information architecture and the wireframe of digital platform are designed.

Development X

Developers gather at the Camp and work intensively for 36 hours to produce the prototypes of digital solutions for social innovations. During this period, UI/GUI of the platforms are designed and the coding is done.

CommunicationA booklet that introduces the process and the outcome of the class is published.

The prototypes are made accessible by the public. The result of the camp is promoted via mass media and social media.

Page 107: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

107

4.4.2. Evaluation

4.4.2.1. Addressing technical needs

Despite its limitation, the idea behind the social innovation camp cannot be underrated as it

sheds light on the power of democratized technologies and more importantly, democratized

creativity. When the technologies to make changes to our society were in the hands of a few

people and could be used by them only, the speed of innovations was slow and the cost was high.

This made the vast majority of the society, those at the bottom of the socio-political structure,

the passive subject to innovations. As the technologies became cheaper and made available to

more people, they transformed into active innovators. The emergence of pre-fabricated digital

platforms and digital collaborative tools dramatically shortened the time to develop digital

solutions as it is well demonstrated in the social innovation camp. There are even user-friendly

development kits which allow a layman to develop software for himself (e.g. Android App

Inventor). Empowerment platforms such as Nabuur19, OpenIDEO20 and KIVA21 use collective

knowledge, skills and financing to help individuals fulfill their needs, thereby opening up

opportunities for people with innovative ideas to change their life and society. In short,

democratization of technologies have not only enabled laymen to use the technologies at hand to

fulfill their needs, but also empowered them to help others who are in even greater need,

thereby creating a collaboration chain that accelerates the diffusion of social innovations.

Coming back to the social innovation camp, its innovative approach to producing solutions for

social innovations can improve if it is combined with a systematic process to design

collaborative services demonstrated in the PSD Lab. In other words, a systematic approach can

be proposed such that it makes use of democratized creativity to generate solution ideas, uses

various service design tools to develop such ideas into robust service concepts, and uses

democratized technologies to implement enabling solutions.

4.4.2.2. Addressing social needs

The case studies revealed that both the PSD Lab and the Social Innovation Camp did not

address target users’ needs at the full scope, focusing on the technical dimension of collaborative

service and ignoring the social dimension. To be more specific, methods used in the data

collection, analysis and synthesis focused on addressing users’ technical needs and designing

technical solutions. The production of social networks, on the other hand, was viewed as a

byproduct of the solutions.

19 Nabuur is an online volunteering platform that links online volunteers with local communities in Africa, Asia and Latin America. 20 OpenIDEO is an online platform where the challenges posted by people are solved by volunteers through a collaborative design process. 21 KIVA is an online microcredit system that connects investors with entrepreneurs in the developing nations

Page 108: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

108

According to the hypothesis of dual production of collaborative services, the synergistic

relationship between the production of solutions and that of social networks is mutual, forming

a virtuous cycle (see chapter 2). Therefore, design intervention on both elements will surpass

design intervention on either solutions or social networks in terms of facilitating the production

of collaborative services. This raises a need for a systematic approach to address users’ social

needs, i.e., a framework that supports enrichment of social networks that underpin collaborative

services.

A collaborative service is triggered by a shared need and driven by social networks. It is different

from collaborative production in the spectrum commons such as open source software projects

or creation of knowledge database: the latter involves collaborative goods – goods produced in

an environment that exhibits antirivalry 22 and inclusiveness 23 – which induces voluntary

participation of users (Cooper, 2005) but not necessarily with relational qualities among users;

the former on the other hand often involves private goods – goods produced in an environment

that exhibits rivalry24 and exclusiveness25 – such as food, mobility or houses. It also involves

face-to-face interaction among users and thus requires social networks and a certain degree of

relational qualities such as trust or respect. In short, the initial success of a collaborative service

depends on the existence of social networks and a digital platform that enables users to find,

establish and maintain new social connections.

Figure 4.36 Types of goods (Cooper, 2005)

22 Antirivalry is a situation in which increased use/production of the good by a person increases the amount/value of the good available to others. 23 Inclusiveness is a situation in which the value or amount of a good available for use/production increases as the number of people using/producing the good increases. 24 A good is rival if consumption by one person reduces the quantity that can be consumed by another person (Cooper, 2005). 25 A good is exclusive if consumers can be denied access.

Page 109: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

109

Several studies on social network studies report that relations of community members can be

influenced by their use of ICTs (Kavanaugh, 1999; Wellman, 1999; 2001B; Haythornthwaite,

2002; Gruzd, 2009) and that combination of social and technical implementation can effect

connection among unconnected people (Haythornthwaite, 2002). If social networks are subject

to change through social and technical intervention, a collaborative service and its enabling

solution can be designed in such a way to affect social networks of collaborative communities to

develop in a desired direction. The question is how.

In the next chapter, a methodology to investigate social needs of a community is introduced in

the context of a project that aims to develop a series of collaborative services between local

agricultural producers and consumers in Milan. A digital platform was developed as an enabling

solution to support the collaborative services and one of its roles was to enrich the social

networks of the producers. The starting point was to identify their social needs by analyzing

their social relations. Based on the analysis of the social needs, obstacles to initiate collaborative

services were identified and service strategies and digital platform concepts were proposed. The

strategies involve socio-technical intervention to transform the social relations of the producers

towards a more sustainable direction, i.e., small, local, open and connected (Manzini, 2008).

Page 110: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

110

5. A METHODOLOGY FOR INVESTIGATING SOCIAL NEEDS OF A COMMUNITY

Chapter 5 introduces a methodology for investigating social needs of a community in the context

of an ongoing project called ‘Nutrire Milano (Feeding Milan)’. The project is led by a consortium

of Politecnico di Milano, Slow Food and the University of Gastronomic Science and it aims to

revitalize the peri-urban region surrounding Milan and to create a sustainable food network that

brings together local producers and consumers through various collaborative services. Three

pilot cases of service system that support local producers are currently in progress – a farmers’

market in Milan, a bread production system and a vegetable garden. A digital platform for the

collaborative services was designed, with a special focus on addressing social needs of the target

users, thereby contributing to creating a resilient and convivial community. Thus a new

approach was adopted to investigate users’ social needs and to generate design strategies from

them. The results are fed into developing a socio-technical framework for collaborative service

that is introduced in chapter 6.

Page 111: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

111

5.1. The Nutrire Milano Project

The background of this project is the dissipation of a vast agricultural area surrounding Milan

due to urban expansion and the jeopardy of losing local communities, their culture and

businesses and as a consequence. Meroni (2008, p.14) emphasizes the importance and potential

of peri-urban areas as below:

“It is the periurban area that lies between a town or city and its rural surroundings, and

is a critical context for the sustainable development of any urban area. … These areas

are currently subject to urban expansion where formerly separate cities and towns

merge into vast urbanised zones: the way this comes about is crucial for the

development of a region. It is here that urban and rural dynamics meet, creating unique

opportunities (or risks) to improve the quality of everyday life and make a decisive step

towards sustainable territorial development.”

The area surrounding Milan is called the Agricultural South Park or Parco Agricolo Sud Milano

(or Parco Sud) in Italian. It is a territory of 470 km2 surrounding the southern part of the Milan

city, in the region of Lombardy and its main utility is agricultural. It is partially owned by

farmers and partly rented out to farmers by the local authority. It is facing multiple problems

such as a decline of small farmers, overexploitation of the land due to agro-industrial

production and a lack of investment that results in decreased economic profitability of the area

other than the land itself (Ibid.).

In 2010, a project26 was launched by a consortium of Politecnico di Milano, Slow Food Italia and

Universita’ degli Studi di Scienze Gastroniche with an aim to create a sustainable food network

in the Parco Sud and to support local producers by providing them with economically viable and

environmentally sustainable service models. Over the next 5 years, the consortium will design

service scenarios, conduct territorial analyses, develop service ideas and implement the most

promising ideas into pilot projects, i.e., working prototypes and finally develop a digital

platform that support the services.

The project will proceed in 5 steps (Figure 5.1): In step 1, scenarios of a sustainable food network

in Milan and the peri-urban area are designed. Based on the territorial analyses (step 2),

services that can transform the Parco Sud into a sustainable agricultural space and promote

sustainable food consumption in Milan will be proposed (step 3) and implemented (step 4). The

final result will be communicated through various media and exhibited at the Milan Expo 2015

(step 5).

26 The Nutrire Milano Project was funded by the Fondazione Cariplo.

Page 112: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

112

Figure 5.1 Process of Nutrire Milano Project (Nutrire Milano, 2009)

5.1.1. Aims and strategies

Facing globalization of food industry and consolidation of the market, small local producers are

loosing the ground and producers in the Parco Sud are no exception. In order to revitalize the

region, the first priority of the project was to improve their economic condition through robust

business strategies. The project team proposed two strategies: direct sales to consumers and

multifunctional farm.

In food industry, small and medium local producers use direct sales strategy to differentiate

themselves from large industrialized farms. Eliminating intermediate agents in food supply

chain and establishing a direct network with consumers create several economic, environmental

and social benefits to producers and consumers such as acquisition of high quality products

from consumers perspective and increased profit by saving marketing and distribution cost

from producers perspective; less dependence on fossil fuels and reduced CO2 emission; inducing

responsible production consumption behaviors; strengthening the relationships between rural

and urban areas; and inspiring new urban lifestyles such as urban farming and guerilla

gardening (Meroni, 2008).

The concept of multifunctionality in agriculture offers farms the opportunity to diversify their

sources of income by supplying other, non-commodity outputs alongside their primary function

of producing food and fiber, thus contributing to the socio-economic viability of many rural

areas (OECD, 2001). These non-commodity outputs can be seen as services linked to the

environment, territory and people; landscape preservation; and proximity tourism. A synergy

TERRITORIAL ANALYSES

SERVICE DESIGN

PILOT PROJECTS

COMMUNICATION

YEAR 1 (2010) YEAR 2 YEAR 3 YEAR 4 YEAR 5

Page 113: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

113

effect is produced when the second strategy can be linked to the first strategy, i.e., connection

created from direct sales of commodity outputs can be used to provide non-commodity outputs.

5.1.2. The first pilot project: upgrading a farmers’ market in Milan

The first pilot project is to upgrade a farmers’ market in Milan using service design. This market

is a Milan version of an international network of farmers’ market called the Mercati della Terra

(the Earth Markets). Mercati della Terra were organized by the Slow Food with an aim to create

a place where producers and consumers interact; to provide educational opportunities for

consumers; and to promote culture, history, identity and health of the local community (I

Mercati della Terra, 2010). Currently 16 markets are run in 5 countries – Italy, Israel, Latvia,

Lebanon and Romania. The Milan edition was launched in December 12th, 2009 and since then

it has been held once a month in a public park called Giardini Largo Marinai d’Italia. About 70

producers of local producers qualified by the Slow Food and mostly located within 40 km from

Milan sell their products at the market. The products include vegetables, fruits, dairy products,

processed foods, meat, wines, beers, breads, plants, honey and many others.

The Mercato della Terra in Milan is not the only farmers’ market in Milan. The Farmers’

Cooperative and Coldiretti, an organization that supports agriculture and protects farmers’

rights, launched the first farmers’ market in Milan in 2008. It is held once a week in the venue

of Farmers' Cooperative of Milan and Lodi in Ripamonti Street.

Despite the high quality of products and their sustainable nature, farmers’ markets have

remained marginal in Milan for several reasons: firstly, the prices are generally higher or

perceived to be higher than other food sources. Many consumers expect the farmers’ market to

be less an expensive place to shop than or at least competitive to other food sources (e.g.

supermarkets) as they purchase directly from producers. However, depending on the type of

products, the prices can be quite higher than ones in the supermarkets. Secondly, access to the

markets is limited. The Mercato della Terra is held only once a month and in one venue. The

Coldiretti Farmers’ Market is held once a week in two venues. Neither of them provides a

delivery service. Thirdly, the variety and quantity of products are limited compared to

supermarkets since the markets only deal with seasonal produce from local regions. For

consumers who are used to buying year-round vegetables and fruits, farmers’ markets are an

inconvenient choice. Ironically, despite a lack of variety of products and inconvenience, the

demand exceeds the supply. In the recent years, a rising attention to food safety and food

security in Italy has led to an increasing demand for quality agricultural products such as

organic products (Euromonitor International, 2006). However, the number small local farms

has been decreasing and hence there are not enough local products to meet the rising demand of

sustainable consumption. Lastly, the farmers’ markets are not widely known among the citizens

due to a lack of marketing strategies.

Page 114: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

114

In this context, the first pilot project aims to upgrade the Mercato della Terra in Milan into an

event that is socially, environmentally and economically more sustainable. This transformation

will be realized through design intervention, more specifically using design for social innovation

as a theoretical framework and service design as a methodological framework.

The role of a digital platform is threefold: to promote the Nutrire Milano project, to enhance

communication among the consortium partners, and most importantly, to support the pilot

projects with socio-technical intervention. It means that the platform will be designed to

facilitate social relations of the producers and the consumers and simultaneously to provide

solutions to improve technical aspect of the services to be designed, starting with the farmers’

market.

5.2. Methods

As discussed in chapter 3, a collaborative service produces two elements essential to a

sustainable society: a solution to users’ technical needs and social networks among collaborative

individuals. The platform aims to amplify the production of solutions and social networks with

through socio-technical intervention. Socio-technical intervention is the implementation of

design strategies to facilitate the dual production of collaborative service. The strategies, in turn,

are developed based on user needs – technical and social – that are identified through user

studies. Figure 5.2 is the schematic process of designing a digital platform for collaborative

services.

Page 115: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

115

Figure 5.2 A schematic process of designing a digital platform for collaborative services

To collect data related user needs on the farmers’ market, surveys and interviews were

conducted for producers and consumers at the market. The data were collected for 3 months

from August to October 2010. It aimed to collect the following data: basic user information, the

extent to which they perceive the market as a community, how producers and consumers are

connected, how they collaborate using which technologies, and what kind of new services they

want to participate in the future. The survey was conducted both online and offline. The online

version was distributed through email, the website of Mercati della Terra, the Facebook page of

the market and printouts that include the link to the survey. The offline version was distributed

at the marketplace.

The survey was conducted online based on the fact that target respondents had access to the

Internet. According to the Global City Report (2010), Milan is one of the most technologically

advanced cities in Italy with its excellence in the construction of optical fiber network

throughout the city (Gianasso & Tiano, 2010). The average Internet usage rate in Italy is

approximately 50% (Ibid.) but the rate is higher in the northwest part where the industrialized

cities such as Milan and Turin are located. In addition, the rate is higher among people with the

level of education above high school and the level of income above average (Livraghi, 2010).

Given that more than 95% of the consumers in the market have completed high schools (see the

Page 116: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

116

survey result), it is reasonable to conclude that the majority of consumers in the market have

access to the Internet.

In the case of the producers, the survey forms were distributed through email to those who had

access to the Internet and paper copies were handed out to those who did not have access to the

Internet at the market. 43 producers and 111 consumers responded to the survey during this

period (estimated on October 22nd). The response rate for the producers was 91% with margin of

error 5% and confidence rate 95%. The response rate for the consumers could not be calculated

since the population size is unknown. The surveys were designed using Google® docs.

Separate questionnaires were designed for the producers and the consumers. The survey for the

producers consisted of 75 questions and the survey for consumers consisted of 82 questions.

The questionnaires were composed of 5 parts:

• Basic information of users

• Sense of community in the market

• Social networks of producers

• Description of collaborative activities

• Feedbacks to new services proposed for the market

Questions on basic information of users included the name and location of farm (producers),

user’s age, gender, income level, education level, items produced and services offered

(producers), places for shopping (consumers), the number of visits to this market and the use

ICTs in daily life.

The SCI was used to measure the sense of community of producers and consumers at the

farmers’ market. Thus two sets of 12 questions were developed: The SCI for producer aimed to

measure the sense of community among the producers at the market and therefore inquired

their perception towards the market and other producers (Table 5.2). The SCI for consumer

aimed to measure the sense of community among consumers at the market and therefore

inquired their perception towards the market and the producers (Table 5.2).

Table 5.1 The SCI for producer at the market

Items Yes No

1. I think this farmers’ market is a good place for me to sell my produce. ! "

2. Producers in this farmers’ market do not share the same values. " " 3. Other producers and I want the same thing from this farmers’ market. " " 4. I can recognize most of the producers in the farmers’ market. " " 5. I feel at home in the farmers’ market. " " 6. Very few of producers in the farmers’ market know me. " " 7. I care about what other producers think of my actions. " "

Page 117: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

117

8. I have no influence over what the farmers’ market is like. " " 9. If there is a problem related to the market, producers can get it solved. " " 10. It is very important to me to sell my produce in this market. " " 11. Producers in this market generally do not get along with one another. " " 12. I expect to sell my produce in this market for a long time. " "

Table 5.2 The SCI for consumer at the market

Items Yes No

1. I think this farmers’ market is a good place for me to shop. ! "

2. Consumers and producers in this farmers’ market do not share the same values. " "

3. Producers and I want the same thing from this farmers’ market. " " 4. I can recognize most of producers that I buy products from in the farmers’ market. " "

5. I feel at home in the farmers’ market. " " 6. Very few of producers in the farmers’ market know me. " " 7. I care about what producers think of my actions. " " 8. I have no influence over what the farmers’ market is like. " " 9. If there is a problem related to the market, farmers and consumers can get it solved. " "

10. It is very important to me to shop in this market. " " 11. Producers and consumers in this market generally don’t get along with one another. " "

12. I expect to shop in this market for a long time. " "

Followed by the sense of community, the producers and the consumers were inquired of their

current collaborative activities with other producers and consumers in the market. They were

asked what type of collaborative activity they are involved; with whom they collaborate; how

long they have collaborate; how many people are involved in the activity; how frequently they

get in contact with others to collaborate; and what technologies they used to collaborate. The

type of collaborative activity was defined based on the result of case studies on collaborative

services (see chapter 3) and it was given as a multiple-choice question. The defined types are as

follows:

Table 5.3 Types of collaborative activities

Producers Consumers Producers • Creating/managing a direct network with

consumers • Aggregate social actions • Socializing • Providing mutual support to solve

common problems • Exchanging competences, time and

products • Sharing products, places and knowledge • Others

• Community-supported agriculture • Direct selling • Food box delivery service • Didactic activities (e.g. Urban farming

class) • Farm visits • Agritourism • Others

Consumers

• Community-supported agriculture • Direct purchase • Food box delivery service

• Creating/managing a direct network with consumers

• Aggregate social actions

Page 118: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

118

• Didactic activities (e.g. Urban farming class)

• Farm visits • Agritourism • Others

• Socializing • Providing mutual support to solve

common problems • Exchanging competences, time and

products • Sharing products, places and knowledge • Others

Among the inquired attributes of collaborative activities, duration, frequency and group size are

the factors that influence the strength of personal ties and are expected to provide data on the

strength of social networks in the existent collaborative groups. The questions were given as a

multiple-choice question.

The names of producers in collaboration were collected in order to analyze the social network

structure of producers in collaboration. The data were then analyzed and visualized using social

network analysis software.

The results of the SCI, the degree of collaboration and social network analysis were analyzed to

identify needs related users’ social relations, and they fed into developing strategies to reinforce

their relations.

5.3. Result

5.3.1. Demographic information

5.3.1.1. Producers

The age of the producers was distributed from thirties to over sixties (Figure 5.3). Producers at

thirties composed of one-third of the total population (33%), followed by those older than sixties

(23%), younger than thirties (8%), forties (16%) and fifties (9%). This demographic composition

is considerably different from that of the average Italian farmers. As of 2005, the percentage of

farmers under 35 ranges from 2.3 to 5.2% and the percentage of over-65s is more than ten times

greater than that of under-35s, making the average Italian farmer one of the eldest in Europe

(AGRESTE, 2008).

!"#$"%&'"

#$(#&"##'")$()&"

%*'"

+$(+&"&'"

,"*$"-#'"

Page 119: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

119

Figure 5.3 Age of the producers in the market

74% of the total respondents were male and 26% female. 65% had a farm within 40km from

Milan and 23% in Lombardy region (Figure 5.4).

Figure 5.4 Distance from the producers’ farms to Milan

The producers produced various items including crops, dairy products, processed foods (e.g.

sausages), vegetables, fruits, meat, bread, fruit juice, sweets, plants, flowers others (Figure 5.5).

Other items included aromatic products, rice, milk, pies, cookies, chocolates, prosciutto crudo,

beer, wine and honey.

Figure 5.5 Products offered by the producers

Services offered by the producers varied from direct sales, didactic farm, courses/laboratories,

farm visits, courses on the land use, agritourism, restaurants, organic certification, tour guide

(Park point) and others (Figure 5.6). More than 90% sold their products through direct sales,

about 60% offered farm visits.

!"#$%&'()*+&,-."/)#*).$#&

0$.1&234&

5"*+"%&67&18&9.(8&!"#$%&:!"#$%&()*&(9&*+;&,-."/)#*).$#&0$.1&'()*+<&

674&

!(.;&*+$%&67&18&9.(8&!"#$%&:"%&=(8>$.?@<&

2A4&

!(.;&*+$%&67&18&9.(8&!"#$%&

:"%&(*+;.&.;-"(%B<&

24&C*+;.B&D4&

!"# $"# %!"# %$"# &!"# &$"# '!"# '$"# (!"#

)*+*,-./*0#

1234,0#

52670#

8-429#726:3;,0#

<*-,#

=*-#>66:0#

?26;*00*:#>66:0#@*A+A#0-30-+*0B#

C2*-:#

824DE0F#0G**,0#

?/-D,0F#H6G*20#

I,J*20#

Page 120: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

120

Figure 5.6 Services offered by the producers

The period of the Internet use varied from less than one year to lifetime. All the producers had

access to the Internet on a daily basis or a weekly basis (Figure 5.7).

Figure 5.7 Frequency of using the Internet (producers)

The respondents used the Internet for a variety of purposes – to connect with other people,

entertainment, work/study, e-commerce (for private use), e-commerce (for work) and other

(Figure 5.8). More than 50% were using e-commerce platforms in their businesses.

!"# $!"# %!"# &!"# '!"# (!"# )!"# *!"# +!"# ,!"# $!!"#

-./012#3044.56#

-.78191#:8/;#

<=>/303#857#?=/@3A=B3#

:8/;#C.3.23#

D=>203#E=/#2A0#>30#=E#4857#

F=3B.284.2GH#86/.2=>/3.;#

D0328>/852#

I/685.1#<0/9J189=5#

K8/@#B=.52#L.5E=/;89=5#30/C.103M#

I2A0/3#

!"#$

%&#$

'#$'#$

()*+,$

-../+,$

01234+,$

5)5.+,$

Page 121: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

121

Figure 5.8 Purpose of using the Internet (producers)

5.3.1.2. Consumers

The age of the consumers was distributed from less than 30 to more than 60 (Figure 5.9). The

largest age group was people in their 40s (29%), followed by 30s (26%), 50s (21%), over-60s

(12%) and under-30s (12%).

Figure 5.9 Age of the consumers

62% of the consumer respondents were female and 37% were male. Over 90% of the people who

visit the farmers’ market were the residents of the Province of Milan. 3% were from other

provinces of Lombardy region, and 5% were from other regions (Figure 5.10).

!"# $!"# %!"# &!"# '!"# (!"# )!"# *!"# +!"# ,!"#

-.//012/3#4567#.67089#

:/6086;5/<0/6#

=.8>#?#96@AB#

0C1.<<0810#DE85F;60#@90G#

0C1.<<0810#DH@95/099#@90G#

I67089#

!"#$"%&'"

#$(#)"&*'"

+$(+)"&)'"

,$(,)"&%'"

-"*$"%&'"

Page 122: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

122

Figure 5.10 Location of the consumers

97% of the respondents completed tertiary education. More than 52% had a bachelor’s degree

and 6% had a PhD (Figure 5.11). The education level of the consumers was considerably higher

than that of Italian average: only 67% of Italians enroll in tertiary school (UNESCO Institute for

Statistics, 2008).

Figure 5.11 Education level of the consumers

The consumers answered that they acquire food from various sources with the most popular

choice being supermarkets (85%), followed by farmers’ markets (57%), local markets (29%),

small neighborhood shops (23%), superstores (19%), farms (12%) and others (15%) (Figure

5.12).

!"#$%&'(")*+&,,-&

!"#$%&'./01"%23+&

45-&

6078$/9*&:-&

;)<3/=&5-&

!"##$%&'()**$&+,&

-".)&'()**$&/0,&

12#%3.34#546%&/7,&

8)9&7,&

:6)%3'&/,&

!"# $!"# %!"# &!"# '!"# (!"# )!"# *!"# +!"# ,!"#

-./00#123456785779#:57;:#

-<;28./8=2>#

?@;28./8=2>#

A7B/0#./8=2>#

C879<B28:D#./8=2>##

E/8.#

F>528:#

Page 123: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

123

Figure 5.12 Sources to buy groceries (consumers)

90% of the consumers wanted to have the farmers’ market more frequently held than once a

month as it currently is. The majority wanted once a week while only 10% were satisfied with

once a week (Figure 5.13).

Figure 5.13 Desired frequency of the farmers’ market (consumers)

Almost every respondent used the Internet on a daily basis and for various purposes. 59% used

the Internet to create and maintain social networks and 45% purchased goods through e-

commerce (Figure 5.14).

Figure 5.14 Purpose of the Internet use (consumers)

5.3.2. Sense of community

41 producers (response rate 91%) and 86 consumers (response rate unknown) responded to the

SCI questionnaire. Overall the sense of community in the farmers’ market in Milan was higher

than the average. Looking into the subgroups of the SCI, the analysis revealed that the level of

shared emotional connection and integration and fulfillment of needs were high in both

producers and consumers while membership and influence were relatively low in both groups.

!"#$%&%'$$(%)*+%

!"#$%$,$-.%/%'$$(0%12+%

!"#$%&%34"56%7+%

!##&084"&99.%%/+%

!"# $!"# %!"# &!"# '!"# (!"# )!"# *!"# +!"# ,!"#

-.//012/3#4567#.67089#

:/6086;5/<0/6#

=.8>#?#96@AB#

0C1.<<0810#DE85F;60#@90G#

0C1.<<0810#DH@95/099#@90G#

I67089#

Page 124: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

124

Comparing the two groups, the sense of community level of the producers (9.41) was higher

than that of the consumers (8.03). The former scored higher than the latter in the following

elements: membership, influence and shared emotional connection. Integration and fulfillment

of needs was higher among the consumers than the producers.

The sense of community among the producers (9.41) was 56% higher than the average (6.00)

(Table 5.4). Shared emotional connection scored the highest among the four elements (2.73),

followed by integration and fulfillment of needs (2.41), influence (2.17) and membership (2.10).

All four elements scored higher than the average (1.50).

Table 5.4 The sense of community level of the producers

Subgroup Average Average (item)

Minimum value

Maximum value

Theoretical average

Integration and fulfillment of needs

2.41 0.80 0.00 3.00 1.50

Membership 2.10 0.70 0.00 3.00 1.50 Influence 2.17 0.72 0.00 3.00 1.50 Shared emotional connection

2.73 0.91 0.00 3.00 1.50

Sense of community 9.41 0.78 0.00 12.00 6.00

The sense of community of the consumers scored 8.03, which is 33% higher than the average of

6.00 (Table 5.5). The integration and fulfillment of needs was the highest among the four

elements scoring 2.57, followed by shared emotional connection (2.47), influence (1.64) and

membership (1.36). All the elements except membership scored higher than the average (1.50).

In the next section, the result of each element is explained.

Table 5.5 The sense of community level of the consumers

Subgroup Average Average (item)

Minimum value

Maximum value

Theoretical average

Integration and fulfillment of needs

2.57 0.86 0.00 3.00 1.50

Membership 1.36 0.45 0.00 3.00 1.50 Influence 1.64 0.55 0.00 3.00 1.50 Shared emotional connection

2.47 0.82 0.00 3.00 1.50

Sense of community 8.03 0.67 0.00 12.00 6.00

5.3.2.1. Membership

In both producers and consumers, the lowest score came from the membership category. This

implies that improvement in this category will substantially increase the overall sense of

community. According to McMillan and Chavis (1986), membership is determined by sub-

factors including community boundaries, emotional safety, personal investment, sense of

belonging and identification and common symbol system (Figure 5.15), which are

interconnected. In the case of both producers and consumers, the low membership is due to

Page 125: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

125

their inability to recognize other people at the market (Q4) and the perception that others do not

know them (Q6) (Table 5.6, Table 5.7).

Table 5.6 Producers’ average scores on membership

Sense of community index Average score 4. I can recognize most of the farmers in the farmers’ market. 0.66

5. I feel at home in the farmers’ market. 0.88

6. Very few of farmers in the farmers’ market know me. 0.56

Table 5.7 Consumers’ average scores on membership

Sense of community index Average score 4. I can recognize most of producers that I buy products from in the farmers’ market. 0.50

5. I feel at home in the farmers’ market. 0.67

6. Very few of producers in the farmers’ market know me. 0.19

The sub-elements of membership are interconnected: a lack of identification in a community

weakens one’s perception that he or she is “part of the group”, or a sense of belonging, and also

prevents the community boundary to be formed (Figure 5.15).

Figure 5.15 Elements of Sense of Community and Their Hypothesized Relationships (McMillan & Chavis,

1986)

5.3.2.2. Influence

The level of influence perceived by the producers and the consumers was the second lowest of

the four elements of SoC. Influence is a bidirectional concept according to McMillan and Chavis

(1986) and one is attracted to a community when he or she has some influence to what the

Page 126: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

126

community does and at the same time is open to influence by other community members. In the

farmers’ market, approximately 40% of producers and 60% of consumers answered that they

had no influence over what the farmers’ market is like at the individual level. However, 90% of

the producers and 80% of the consumers believed that they could together solve a problem

related to the market (Table 5.7, Table 5.8).

Table 5.8 Producers’ average scores on influence

Sense of community index Average score 7. I care about what other producers think of my actions. 0.63

8. I have no influence over what the producers’ market is like. 0.63

9. If there is a problem related to the market, producers can get it solved. 0.90

Table 5.9 Consumers’ average scores on influence

Sense of community index Average score 7. I care about what producers think of my actions. 0.44 8. I have no influence over what the farmers’ market is like. 0.38 9. If there is a problem related to the market, producers and consumers can get it solved. 0.81

5.3.2.3. Integration and fulfillment of needs

The level of integration and fulfillment of needs was high in both producers (0.80) and

consumers (0.86) (Table 5.4, Table 5.5). In fact, it was the only element where the consumers

scored higher than the producers. It indicates that both the consumers and the producers are

highly satisfied with the market in terms of fulfilling their needs.

There was almost unanimous agreement that the market fulfills the needs of sellers and buyers

in general (Q1 in Table 5.10 and Table 5.11). 68% of the producers believed that the producers at

the market share the same values and 76% said that they want the same thing from the market.

76% of the consumers believed that consumers and producers at the market share the same

value and 84% said that they want the same thing from the market as the producers.

Table 5.10 Producers’ average scores on integration and fulfillment of needs

Sense of community index Average score 1. I think this farmers’ market is a good place for me to sell my produces. 0.98

2. Producers in this farmers’ market do not share the same values. 0.68

3. Other producers and I want the same thing from this farmers’ market. 0.76

Table 5.11 Consumers’ average scores on integration and fulfillment of needs

Sense of community index Average score 1. I think this farmers’ market is a good place for me to shop. 0.98

2. Consumers and producers in this farmers’ market do not share the same values. 0.76

3. Producers and I want the same thing from this farmers’ market. 0.84

Page 127: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

127

5.3.2.4. Shared emotional connection

The level of shared emotional connection was high among both producers and consumers at the

market, scoring 2.73 and 2.47 respectively (maximum 3.00) (Table 5.4, Table 5.5). Most of the

respondents considered it to be very important to go to the market (Q10 in Table 5.12 and Table

5.13). More than 90% of the producers perceived that producers in the market get along with

other producers (0.93) and about 70% of consumers stated that producers and consumers in the

market get along with one another (0.72) (Q11). Most producers and consumers said that they

expect to sell or shop at the market for a long time (Q 12).

Table 5.12 Producers’ average scores on shared emotional connection

Sense of community index Average score 10. It is very important to me to sell my produces in this market. 0.88

11. Producers in this market generally do not get along with one another. 0.93 12. I expect to sell my produces in this market for a long time. 0.93

Table 5.13 Consumers’ average scores of shared emotional connection

Sense of community index Average score 10. It is very important to me to shop in this market. 0.78 11. Producers and consumers in this market generally don’t get along with one another. 0.72

12. I expect to shop in this market for a long time. 0.97

5.3.3. Social network analysis

The social network of the producers in the farmers’ market was obtained by analyzing their

description of collaboration partners. The producers were asked to identify who among the

producers in the market they collaboration with and to describe their collaborative activity. The

UCINET 6 was used to analyze the network structures and Netdraw was used to visualize them.

Out of 43 respondents, 2 responded twice and therefore the total number of valid responses was

41. Although 28 producers responded that they were involved in collaboration with other

producers, only 16 of them identified the names of their collaborators. The rest 25 producers

were thus treated as isolates. 4 producers did not identify their names and were marked as X,

XX, XXX and XXXX.

Figure 5.16 illustrates the social networks of producers in the farmers' market. The nodes

indicate the producers and the arrows indicate collaborative relationships. A ! B means that

producer A claims to collaborates with producer B but not vice versa. A "# B means that both A

and B claims collaborate with each other.

Page 128: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

128

Figure 5.16 Social networks of producers at the farmers’ market (red nodes are isolates)

The social network diagram reveals that the producers’ social network structure is fragmented,

consisting of isolated groups and many isolates. In order to identify the nature of the

collaborative groups, additional information of the producers obtained from the survey was

utilized. Figure 5.17 is a network structure of the producers with each node indicating the type of

their products instead. 5 producers did not identify the type of their products and thus were

marked as a question mark. The majority of the nodes have the identical or related type of

products with their neighboring nodes, supporting the survey result that the exchange of

competence, time and products frequently take place among producers of the same product

type. Another type of collaborative service shown in the figure is mutual support. For example, a

bread maker and a jam maker collaborate because they produce pies together.

Producer M1

Producer M2

Producer L

Producer C

Producer M3

Producer A

Producer F1

Producer G

Producer P1

Producer U

Producer L

Producer S

Producer Z Producer P2

Producer F2

X

Page 129: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

129

Figure 5.17 Collaboration between the producers of the same type of items (in orange dotted line) and of

supplementary items (in green solid line)

Likewise, the postal codes of the producers were mapped onto the nodes to identify a correlation

between the location of the producers and collaboration. The result showed that the producers’

collaborative groups are often based on geographic location. Most of the producers were

collaborating with partners within 30km. Exceptions were a network between the producer M3

and the producer A who were 50 km away and a network between the producer L1 and the

producer P which were 210 km far away. Both M3 and A produce dairy products. L1 produces

milk, cheese, beef and salami while P produces olive oil. The result indicates that the producers’

social networks are fragmented into groups based on locality.

Crops

Dairy products

Dairy products, salami

Bread

Bread – processed foods

Bread – processed foods

!"#$%&'()*+&),#-&%.#%$"#+*/%+#-$%

!"#$%&'()*+&),#-&%.#%$"#+*/%0)&1*%.#%1&"*-2*-&/%34,$%.#%5*3#"#0$/%3*"3*%.#%6&6&)$-#%

Olive oil

Page 130: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

130

Figure 5.18 Social networks of producers at the farmers’ market labeled in the postal code (red nodes are

isolates)

In addition, the producers’ social networks were visualized with each node representing the type

of services they offer (Figure 5.19). There was much homogeneity in service type among the

producers in the same group. On average, 57% of the service types in a group were offered by

every member of the group. It seemed that producers who produce the same product have a

similar business model based on multifunctional farm. For example, crop producers commonly

offered direct sales, didactic farm and farm visit; olive oil producers offered direct sales, farm

visit, and organic certification; and dairy producers offered direct sales (service types in the red

box in Figure 5.19). However, such similarities seemed to be partly due to an overall

homogeneity in the services provided by the producers at the market.

26 km

50 km

210 km

6 km

0 km

0 km

20 km

0 km 0 km

5 km 10 km

Page 131: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

131

Figure 5.19 Social networks of producers at the farmers’ market labeled in the type of services they offer

5.3.4. The degree of collaboration

5.3.4.1. Producers

65% of the producers reported that they were already engaged in some type of collaboration

with other producers. The most frequent type of collaborative activities was ‘exchange of

exchanging competences, time and products’ (e.g. time banking, selling other producers’

products in farm stores) (54%). It was followed by ‘creation and management of a direct

network with consumers’ (e.g. solidarity purchasing groups) (29%); ‘provision of mutual

support to solve common problems’ (21%); ‘socialization’ (18%); ‘sharing products, places and

knowledge’ (14%); and ‘others’ (18%) (Figure 5.20). In selecting the type of collaborative

activities, the respondents were guided with examples.

Crops

Dairy products

Dairy products, salami

Olive oil

Bread

Page 132: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

132

Figure 5.20 Types of collaborative activities between the producers in the market

Other collaborative activities included collaboration between producers of the same item (e.g.

plant producers sharing pollens for pollination, rice producers helping each other in husking,

collaboration between beer producers), collaboration between producers of supplementary

items, i.e., different parts of a product or a service (e.g. a jam producers and a baker collaborate

to produce a tart) and collaboration between producers in the same region (e.g. a consortium of

the producers of the Parco del Ticino).

To measure the tie strength of collaborative groups, factors such as duration of their activities,

frequency of interaction, types and reciprocity of collaboration, and the size of collaborative

groups were inquired.

Although the duration of collaborative services varied according to the type of services, the

majority of the producers’ collaborative groups have lasted from 1 to 9 years. This was followed

by ‘more than 20 years’; ‘less than 1 year’; and ‘from 10 to 19 years’. In fact, 90% of all

collaborative groups have lasted for at least 1 year (Figure 5.21) indicating that their tie

strengths are both strong and weak .

!"# $!"# %!"# &!"# '!"# (!"# )!"#

*+,-./0#-01#2-0-3,2,04#/5#16+,74#7/04-748#964:#7/08;2,+8#<,=3=#>;+7:-8603#3+/;>8?#

@/76-A6B-./0#

C;4;-A#8;>>/+4#5/+#82-AA#7/22/0#>+/DA,28#<,=3=#2,,.038#-01#1687;886/08#/0#2;4;-A#

EF7:-03,#/5#,F>,+.8,G#.2,G#>+/1;748#<,=3=#8,AA603#>+/1;748#5+/2#/4:,+#2-0;5-74;+,+8#60#

@:-+603#>+/1;748G#8>-7,#-01#H0/9A,13,#<,=3=#8:-+603#-#I-0#/+#,J;6>2,04?#

K4:,+8#

Page 133: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

133

Figure 5.21 Duration of the producers’ collaborative activities

The size of collaborative groups differed from one type of collaboration to another. Groups for

socialization was relatively bigger than other type of groups with the majority having more than

50 members. Groups for sharing products, places and knowledge and exchanging competences,

time and products, on the other hand, were more evenly distributed in terms of the size with a

slightly larger number of groups under-10 or above-50 members. (Figure 5.22).

Figure 5.22 Size of the producers’ collaborative groups

The frequency of interaction varied in the type of collaborative activities. Groups for

socialization had more frequent interaction among members than any other types, followed by

creating direct networks with consumers and exchanging competences, time and products.

Throughout all types, 60% of the respondents met at least once a month (Figure 5.23).

!"

!"

!"

#"

$"

%"

&&"

#%"

$'"

%$"

%!"

%#"

#"

("

!"

#"

'"

'"

("

%#"

)"

&"

$"

$"

'"

("

("

$"

&"

*"

'+" %'+" #'+" $'+" &'+" !'+" *'+" ('+" ,'+" )'+" %''+"

-./0123450203623"0"76./89"2/9:;.<":69="8;2>?5/.>"

@;860A6B623"

C.;D67623"5?9?0A">?EE;.9"9;">;AD/"8;55;2"E.;FA/5>"

GH8=023623"8;5E/9/28/>I"15/"027"E.;7?89>"

@=0.623"E.;7?89>I"EA08/>"027"<2;:A/73/"

J9=/.>"

K%" L.;5"%"9;")" L.;5"%'"9;"%)" M"#'" N;"2;9"<2;:"

!"

#$"

%"

#&"

#&"

'"

%"

#$"

$"

!"

!"

'"

("

'"

'"

("

!"

'"

%"

)'"

%"

#$"

#&"

$"

$#"

$"

$*"

#$"

%"

("

'+" #'+" $'+" )'+" &'+" %'+" *'+" ('+" ,'+" !'+" #''+"

-./0123450203623"0"76./89"2/9:;.<":69="8;2>?5/.>"

@;860A6B623"

C.;D67623"5?9?0A">?EE;.9"9;">;AD/"8;55;2"E.;FA/5>"

GH8=023623"8;5E/9/28/>I"15/"027"E.;7?89>"

@=0.623"E.;7?89>I"EA08/>"027"<2;:A/73/"

J9=/.>"

K#'" L.;5"#'"9;"$!" L.;5")'"9;"%'" M"%'" N../3?A0.";."7;"2;9"<2;:"

Page 134: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

134

Figure 5.23 Frequency of interaction in the producers’ collaborative groups

The producers were using various ICTs to collaborate with one another. The most favored one

was face-to-face meeting (86%), followed by mobile phone (75%), telephone (57%) and email

(54%). 18% used website/e-commerce platforms and other media such as blog, mailing list and

newsletter were used by few (Figure 5.24).

Figure 5.24 Social media used by the producers in collaborative activities

The producers reported that about a half of them were currently engaged in collaboration with

consumers in the market. Such collaborations included direct selling (50%), community-

supported agriculture (CSA) (35%), farm visits (20%), didactic activities (15%), agritourism

(10%), and food box delivery service (5%) (Figure 5.25).

!"

#"

#"

#"

$"

%"

&'"

&'"

("

&!"

#"

%"

&!"

&("

&("

!&"

("

%"

&("

#"

&("

("

("

%"

#"

%"

!"

$"

&)"

*"

%+" &%+" !%+" *%+" )%+" $%+" '%+" #%+" ,%+" (%+" &%%+"

-./0123450203623"0"76./89"2/9:;.<":69="8;2>?5/.>"

@;860A6B623"

C.;D67623"5?9?0A">?EE;.9"9;">;AD/"8;55;2"E.;FA/5>"

GH8=023623"8;5E/9/28/>I"15/"027"E.;7?89>"

@=0.623"E.;7?89>I"EA08/>"027"<2;:A/73/"

J9=/.>"

K06AL" M//<AL" N;29=AL" .0./AL" O../3?A0.";."7;"2;9"<2;:"

!"# $!"# %!"# &!"# '!"# (!"# )!"# *!"# +!"# ,!"# $!!"#

-./01231-./0#400567#

89360#

43:;<0#

04.;<#

4.;<;67#<;=2#

60>=<0?0@#

:<37#

>0:=;20#A#01/3440@/0#8<.B3@4#

=3/;.<#602>3@C;67#=0@D;/0=#E0F7F#G./0:33CH#I>;?0@J#

36<;60#K;=/L==;36#-3@L4#

20<0/36-0@06/0#

3290@=#

Page 135: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

135

Figure 5.25 Type of collaborative activities that the producers are engaged with the consumers

The number of consumers that the producers collaborate with varied in the type of activities.

Farm visits, didactic activities and direct sales were among the bigger groups as they tend to be

organized by consumer organizations such as GAS or schools. In agritourism and food box

delivery service, groups were smaller, irregular or not known (Figure 5.26).

Figure 5.26 Size of groups in collaboration between the producers and the consumers

The length of collaboration also varied depending on the type of activities with almost the

majority of groups having lasted for 1-9 years. Direct sales, didactic activities and farm visits had

longer histories than other types of activities while food box deliver services had a relatively

short history (Figure 5.27). 15% of all the collaborative groups have lasted for less than 1 year

while another 15% have lasted for more than 10 years.

!"# $!"# %!"# &!"# '!"# (!"# )!"#

*+,,-./0123-44+5067#895/:-;0-56#

</56:0#38;63##

<6;/=651#365=/:6#+>#3683+.8;#>5-/03#8.7#=69608?;63#

</78:@:#8:@=/@63#A#B+5C3D+43#

E85,#=/3/03#

F95/0+-5/3,#

G0D653#

!"

#"

!"

!"

$"

#"

$"

%"

#"

!"

#"

#"

#"

$"

$"

&$"

$"

&#"

&'"

$"

$"

#"

#"

$"

$"

#"

#"

$"

&#"

#"

&'"

#"

!"

&#"

!"

$(" &$(" #$(" )$(" '$(" !$(" *$(" %$(" +$(" ,$(" &$$("

-.//0123456077.839:";<82=0>3089"

?289=3"6;>96"

@..:"A.B":9>2C984"698C2=9"

?2:;=D=";=DC2D96"

@;8/"C26236"

E<823.0826/"

F3G986"

H&$" @8./"&$"3."#," @8./")$"3."!$" I"!$" J889<0>;8".8":."1.3"K1.L"

Page 136: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

136

Figure 5.27 Length of collaboration between the producers and the consumers

Regarding the frequency of collaboration, almost 70% of the producers got in contact with

consumers on a regular basis with 25% meeting monthly, 19% rarely, 18% monthly and 9%

daily. The producers met consumers daily through agritourism and direct sales; weekly through

direct sales, food box delivery service and CSA; monthly through farm visits, agritourism, food

box delivery and CSA (Figure 5.28). Direct sales happened most frequently and didactic

activities happened least frequently.

Figure 5.28 Frequency of interaction between the producers and the consumers

The ICTs use pattern of the producers in communicating with consumers was similar to their

pattern in communicating with other producers. Face-to-face meeting (78%) and email were

most often used (72%), followed by mobile phone, telephone, website/e-commerce platform and

mailing list (Figure 5.29). However, a slight difference was observed in the use of social media.

!"

!"

#"

$"

$"

!"

%"

&"

$'"

%"

'#"

$'"

&"

$"

$"

!"

%"

%"

%"

$"

%"

!"

&"

%"

$"

!"

%"

%"

'$"

$"

'("

$"

!"

'$"

!"

%)" '%)" $%)" *%)" (%)" !%)" +%)" &%)" ,%)" #%)" '%%)"

-.//0123456077.839:";<82=0>3089"

?289=3"6;>96"

@..:"A.B":9>2C984"698C2=9"

?2:;=D=";=DC2D96"

@;8/"C26236"

E<823.0826/"

F3G986"

H'" @8./"'"3."#" @8./"'%"3."'#" I"$%" ?."1.3"J1.K"

!"

#"

!"

!"

!"

$"

!"

%"

&'"

$"

!"

%"

%"

!"

$"

%"

%"

#"

&("

$"

!"

%"

%"

!"

&("

#"

%"

!"

#"

%"

#"

%"

$"

&%"

$"

!)" &!)" %!)" *!)" (!)" $!)" '!)" +!)" ,!)" #!)" &!!)"

-.//0123456077.839:";<82=0>3089"

?289=3"6;>96"

@..:"A.B":9>2C984"698C2=9"

?2:;=D=";=DC2D96"

@;8/"C26236"

E<823.0826/"

F3G986"

?;2>4" H99I>4" J.13G>4" 8;89>4" K889<0>;8".8":."1.3"I1.L"

Page 137: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

137

More people used social networking services such as Facebook or Twitter, blog, online forum

and website/e-commerce platform.

Figure 5.29 Social media that the producers use to collaborate with the consumers

When the producers were asked if they were interested in participating in new collaborative

services to facilitate the organization of the farmers’ market and to improve the quality of its

services, more than 70% responded that they would be interested in using a digital platform to

inform consumers what they will bring to the next market, 50% said they are willing to advise

consumers on urban farming and 30% answered they are interested in car pooling with other

producers to come to the market (Figure 5.30).

Figure 5.30 The producers’ willingness to participate in new collaborative services

5.3.4.2. Consumers

Contrast to the producers, the level of collaboration among the consumers was much lower. 19%

of total respondents answered that they were involved in some kind of collaboration with the

producers and 11% said they collaborate with other consumers who come to the market.

!"# $!"# %!"# &!"# '!"# (!"# )!"# *!"# +!"# ,!"#

-./01231-./0#400567#

89360#

43:;<0#

04.;<#

4.;<;67#<;=2#

60>=<0?0@#

:<37#

>0:=;20#A#01/3440@/0#8<.B3@4#

=3/;.<#602>3@C;67#=0@D;/0=#E0F7F#G./0:33CH#I>;?0@J#

36<;60#K;=/L==;36#-3@L4#

20<0/36-0@06/0#

3290@=#

!"# $!"# %!"# &!"# '!"# (!"# )!"# *!"# +!"#

,-#./-.-01#234#523261#7-8829-/2:;1#01/;<710#=-#0>..-/=#=?1#8-6<0:70#@-/#=?1#=/230.-/=#-@#6--40#234#1A><.513=B#

,-#0?2/1#C->/#;23#D<=?#-=?1/#./-4>71/0#=-#=/230.-/=#6--40#=-#=?1#52/E1=#

,-#523261#2#98-6#414<72=14#=-#C->/#@2/5#234#/16>82/8C#>.42=1#=?1#<=150#C->#D<88#9/<36#=-#=?1#52/E1=#

,-#0.2/1#C->/#:51#4>/<36#=?1#52/E1=#=-#7-30>8=#7-30>51/0#-3#>/923#@2/5<36#=17?3<A>10##

F=?1/0#

Page 138: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

138

The type of collaboration with the producers varied from direct purchase (82%), farm visit

(45%), food box delivery service (23%), agritourism (18%), community-supported agriculture

(5%), didactic activities (5%) and others (5%)27 (Figure 5.31). The reason why direct purchase

and farm visit are higher than others is possibly related to the diffusion of GAS (solidary

purchasing groups) in Milan. There are also half a dozen food box delivery services currently

available to the Milanese.

Figure 5.31 Type of collaboration between the consumers and the producers

Regarding the size of group in the consumers’ collaboration with the producers, 44% responded

that their groups are smaller than 10 people, 13% said there groups had more than 50 people,

12% between 10 and 29 people. (Figure 5.32).

Figure 5.32 Size of group in collaboration between the consumers and the producers

The majority of the consumers have been engaged in collaborative activities with the producers

for 1~9 years (51%), followed by 10~19 years (13%) and less than 1 year (4%) (Figure 5.33).

Direct sales, farm visits and agritourism were the types with longer histories than others while

food box delivery service, CSA and didactic activities had relatively short histories.

27 The respondents were allowed to select multiple activities and therefore the total sum amounts to more than 100%.

!"# $!"# %!"# &!"# '!"# (!"# )!"# *!"# +!"# ,!"#

-.//0123456077.839:#;<82=0>3089#?;110;>#

@289=3#708=A;69#B8./#78.:0=986#?9C<C#B;8/#6A.7D#

E..:#F.G#:9>2H984#698H2=9#

:2:;=I=#;=IH2I96#

E;8/#H26236#

J<823.0826/#

K3A986#

!"#$"%%&"

'()*"#$"+)",-"#,&"'()*".$"

+)"/$"#&"

0"/$"#.&"

1((23456(")("7)"8)+"98):".$&"

Page 139: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

139

Figure 5.33 Length of collaboration between the consumers and the producers

Although the frequency of interaction between consumers and producers varied in the type of

collaboration, the majority of the respondents interacted with the producers at least once a

month: 19% contacted the producers weekly and 33% contacted them monthly. 18% replied that

they rarely contact the producers and 30% answered that the interaction occurred irregularly

(Figure 5.34). CSA and food box delivery service were the types that involved more weekly

interaction than the others. In direct purchase, didactic activity and farm visit, the rate was

slightly lower but still the majority interacted at least monthly. In agritourism, the interaction

frequency was mostly rare.

Figure 5.34. Frequency of interaction between the consumers and the producers

The consumers were using diverse social media to communicate with the producers and other

members of their collaborative groups. The three most often used media were email, face-to-

face meeting and cellular phone (Figure 5.35).

!"#"$%"

&'()"#"*("+",#%"&'()"#-"

*("#+"#.%"

/"0-"-%"

1("2(*"32(4".0%"

!"#$%&'(&

)**+$%&,-(&

./012$%&33(&4"4*$%&

,5(&

644*78$"4&/4&!/&0/1&+0/)&3'(&

Page 140: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

140

Figure 5.35 Social media used by the consumers to collaborate

5.4. Discussion

5.4.1. Sense of community

Although the sense of community in the market is expected to increase over time as people get

to know one another better, socio-technical intervention can facilitate this change. In this

section, strategies to transform the market into a better community both in the real world and

on the digital platform are discussed.

5.4.1.1. Membership

Both the producers and the consumers had a relatively low level of membership compared to

other elements of SoC. Considering membership as a relational quality in a community, it can be

posited according to the dual production of collaborative service that a collaboration involving

personal investment, sense of belonging, identification, emotional safety or common symbol

system (Figure 5.15) can induce relations such as membership. Therefore, one way to improve

membership in the farmers’ market is to engage the producers and the consumers in

collaborative activities that require membership. For example, community-supported

agriculture (CSA) based on micro financing asks for personal investment on the consumers’ side

and provides emotional safety to the producers, thereby stimulating membership among them.

Another example is a carpooling service for the producers. The producers need to bring a large

quantity of items to the marketplace early in the morning and fresh items need to be kept at a

low temperature during the trip. Sharing vehicles including fridge trucks to come to the market

will not only save the fuel but also create new connections among the producers.

A digital platform can contribute to improving membership by providing technical support for

services like CSA or carpooling. In the case of CSA, a platform will feature tools necessary to

operate CSA such as an e-commerce system, a blog and an email. A platform can also make

!"#$%&'%!"#$()$$*+,(-.'+$()'/01$($)"01(

)"010+,(102&(+$321$4$5(

/1',(3$/20&$(6($%#'))$5#$(-1"7'5)(

2'#0"1(+$&3'580+,(2$590#$2(:$;,;(<"#$/''8=(>304$5?('+10+$(@02#A220'+(!'5A)(

&$1$#'+!$5$+#$('&.$52(

BC( DBC( EBC( FBC( GBC( HBC( IBC( JBC( KBC(

Page 141: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

141

contribution by promoting the common symbol system of the market or by providing services

dedicated to the market users thereby creating boundaries around the community.

5.4.1.2. Influence

The level of influence in a community is proportional to the degree of empowerment and

openness of the members (McMillan & Chavis, 1986). The SCI results show that about 65% of

the producers and 40% of the consumers feel empowered to influence others. Currently the

market is coordinated and managed by the Slow Food but the long-term goal is to make it an

autonomous and self-sustained event organized and managed by users. Therefore,

empowerment of users and creation of a system that is self-governed, resilient and democratic

are an upcoming step of this pilot project.

About 65% of the producers and 40% of the consumers responded that they cared about what

other people think of their actions, indicating how much they are susceptible to an influence

from the community. Mercati della Terra is not just a marketplace but also a means to promote

the philosophy of Slow Food and sustainable lifestyle28. In this context, a series of events were

organized to promote responsible and sustainable production and consumption. An example is

laboratori del gusto (tasting laboratories), an educational program where consumers meet the

producers; listen to their stories of how they produce, process and cook their products; taste

them; and get to know one another (Figure 5.36). Another example is a demonstration by

producers of how organic foods are produced (Figure 5.37). By educating the consumers where

foods come from, how they are made and what is their impact on the environment, the market

aims to change their consumption behaviors towards a more sustainable direction. An

atmosphere of openness in the community is essential to the success of these events and a

continuous effort to educate the consumers and connect them with the producers and with one

another will improve the level of influence.

28 With the vision of creating a world in which all people can access and enjoy food that is good for them, good for those who grow it and good for the planet, Slow Food has three interconnected principles: fresh, flavorsome and seasonal diet that is part of our local culture; clean food production and consumption that does not harm the environment, animal welfare or our health; and fair, accessible prices for consumers and fair conditions and pay for small-scale producers (Slow Food ‘Our Philosophy’, 2010).

Page 142: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

142

Figure 5.36 Tasting Laboratories on cuscus from Morocco

Figure 5.37 Demonstration of making honey by an apiculturist

A digital platform can empower users by providing an infrastructure for an equal access to

information, an equal opportunity to contribute to the market and an equal right to participate

in a decision making process. The platform based on a distributed network and governance tools

can create a democratic environment for grassroots initiatives. An exemplar is Carrotmob, a

form of consumer activism and also the name of a digital platform for organizing such

campaigns where a community buys goods collectively from one company to reward a business's

commitment to making a socially responsible change to their operations (Wikipedia, 2010). Just

as consumers organize a campaign to support sustainable producers on Carrotmob, the digital

platform for the Nutrire Milano can provide an environment for consumers in Milan to support

their local producers through various initiatives.

5.4.1.3. Integration and fulfillment of needs

The SCI results indicate that the farmers’ market successfully integrates and fulfills the needs of

users. Several reasons exist: First of all, people who come to the market are not any producers or

consumers. Instead, they share the value of sustainable production and consumption and

believe in the value of small and local. According to the authors of SoC, integration and

fulfillment of needs is high when community members share values, needs, priorities and goals

with other members.

Page 143: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

143

Secondly, buying and selling at the market creates values – economic, nutritional or emotional –

for the consumers and the producers. The market is an economically attractive solution

especially for the producers. Direct sales methods such as farmers’ market or farm stand are

emerging as a promising business model among small local producers (Goodhue et al., 2008).

In addition, the producers sold their products in the market for free until the end of 2010 when

the Slow Food started to charge them 40 euro of a fixed commission. This made the market a

very attractive sales channel for the producers as compared to the conventional retail stores. For

consumers, many products in the market are of equal prices or reasonably more expensive than

organic products in supermarkets while their qualities are considerably better.

Finally, a lively and convivial atmosphere of the marketplace provides the emotional satisfaction

to the visitors. The market is characterized by its conviviality. Consumers have a plenty of

opportunities to interact with producers, listen to their stories and taste their products. The

market is also utilized as a space for socialization. It provides a public space called ‘shared

tables’ for people to eat and socialize (Figure 5.38). Social events connect them together and

make the market more than just a place for shopping. As the authors of SoC claims, integration

and fulfillment of needs is related to one’s capacity to communicate with others in a community.

Figure 5.38 People having a brunch at the market

In short, farmers’ market successfully integrates and fulfills the user needs, especially of

consumers. It may continue to do so if it remains at the current scale targeting the same people,

i.e., a market of 60 or more producers, held occasionally targeting a specific demographic of the

city population: mid-class, well-educated people who are aware of the value of sustainable

consumption. If, however, the market wants to grow in scale and diversity by reaching out for

producers and consumers who may have different values or are in different sectors of the

population, it needs to confront and deal with its potential limitations. The most eminent ones

include: a lack of diversity and quantity of the products, high prices (for low income families),

limited access to the market, and a lack of communication and marketing. Until now, the value

created from sustainable consumption is insignificant compared to value of the overall

Page 144: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

144

consumption29 and efforts to increase the size of the pie are needed. In the farmers’ market, too,

the needs of potential users should be considered and integrated if the market wants to have a

greater impact to society.

5.4.1.4. Shared emotional connection

The level of shared emotional connection in a community depends on various factors such as a

shared history; social events to interact and resolve common challenges in a positive way;

satisfaction of being a member; opportunities to invest in the community; perceived future of

the community; and mutual care and support among the members (McMillan & Chavis, 1986).

In the case of the farmers’ market, the level of shared emotional connection was very high: both

the produces and the consumers considered the market an important part of their life; they

perceived that people in the market get along with one another; and they were willing to come to

the market for a long time.

The high level of shared emotional connection is attributed to several factors: shared values and

interests among the producers and the consumers; high quality of products that give a pride to

the producers and satisfaction to the consumers; social events at create positive experiences at

the marketplace; and an effective management by the Slow Food.

In order for the market to continue its initial success and to last long, it needs to establish

shared emotional connection not only within the organization but also with a larger community

it belongs to, i.e., the Milan city. It means to be appreciated by the citizens – both those who

come to the market and those who do not – and accepted as a valuable asset to the city. A small-

scale local community is not a requirement for shared emotional connection (McMillan &

Chavis, 1986). In other words, shared emotional connection to the farmers’ market can be

formed across a populated city like Milan.

A good example is the Halifax Seaport Farmers’ Market in Canada. It is the oldest and arguably

one of the most successful farmers’ market in the North America. It has a history of over 250

years; over 200 producers sell at the market; it is held everyday in an eco-friendly building

(Figure 5.39). But apart from the history and size, it competitiveness lies in its effort to connect

itself to the local community. In 2009, the farmers’ market published a report on how the

market could connect to the community and vice versa (Wilkinson et. al, 2009). The report

proposed four strategies: to connect the arts, cultural communities, environmental issues, and

health to the farmers’ market.

29 In 2000, $888 million spent on farmers’ markets in US compared to $800 billion spent on total food and beverage purchases according to the United States Department of Agriculture (Grace et al., 2005)

Page 145: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

145

Figure 5.39 Inside the Halifax Seaport Farmers’ Market (Halifax Farmers’ Market, 2010)

The first strategy aims to transform the market into a more culturally diverse, exciting and

desirable venue for shoppers and, at the same time, a place for local artists, artisans and

musicians to exhibit their works. This is a win-win strategy as the market attracts more

customers and supports the local arts while the local artists have an opportunity to perform and

sell their works to the community. The second strategy aims to harness cultural diversity in the

community to the market by supporting food cultures of immigrants and bringing their food to

the market through local farms. Over 50000 immigrants live in Nova Scotia and many of them

come from a rich and old food culture. Integrating their culture into the market means more

diversity of products, more customers to the market and increased wellbeing of the local

community. The third strategy is about making the marketplace an example of best practices in

waste diversion through both waste management and promotion of local products which tend to

produce minimal waste relative to supermarket products. It also includes connecting the market

to the environmental communities such as offering the marketplace as a venue for their events.

The fourth strategy aims to connect the market with various interest groups and agencies

related to health and to promote healthy local food through communications and actions

concerning health and wellbeing in partnership with them. They include organizing a food

conference, collaborating with universities in the community and allocating a community booth

for seniors.

Some of the aforementioned strategies are already implemented in the farmers’ market in Milan

or may not be relevant to the local context. On the other hand, others can be used as a reference

to generate ideas customized to the needs of the community. For example, the market currently

Page 146: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

146

lacks an element of arts. The market could invite local artists and buskers to perform at the

marketplace and support their works. The market could also collaborate with the fine arts or

music schools in the city and organize an exhibition or concerts next to the marketplace. In

short, efforts to create shared emotional connection with the local community is a win-win

strategy that benefits the market and contribute to the betterment of community’s health and

well being.

5.4.2. Degree of collaboration

Analysis of the degree of collaboration provides the following information about target users:

the attributes of their collaboration, the technologies they use to collaborate, and the strength of

their ties. This information contributes to revealing the state of social infrastructure to start

collaborative services and how it can be improved.

The fact that the majority of the producers are currently engaged in some type of collaboration

with consumers and other producers at the market indicates that there already exist social

relations necessary to initiate collaborative services among them. Provided that their social

relations are mostly built upon face-to-face interaction on a regular basis for at least 1 year (in

some cases more than 20 years), a significant part of their relations are likely to be based on

strong ties. Their interaction is reinforced by a few ICTs such as mobile phone and email while

social media contribute little to widening and reinforcing their networks.

Collaboration patterns between the producers and consumers are in many ways similar to those

between the producers. Social relations already exist between them although to a less extent –

47% of the producers and only 19% of the consumers – and the relations are based on regular

face-to-face interaction. Most of their relations have lasted for at least 1 year and as long as 20

years. Their interaction is reinforced by a number of ICTs such as email, mobile phone and

social media. It leads to a conclusion that the social networks in the existing producer-consumer

collaborative groups tend to be both strong and weak.

There is little social interaction taking place among the consumers at the market. Only 11% of

the total respondents collaborate with other consumers and their activities are mainly related to

GAS which have existed long before the market was launched.

An observation of users’ collaborative activities also provides insights on what kind of services to

design in order to effectively fulfill users’ social needs. The fact that certain types of

collaboration proliferate than others implies that users need them more than others. For

example, the producers have a high demand for the exchange of expertise, time and products

(xxx). The next step is to identify the type of resources they need and to develop services that

support the producers to exchange the needed resources more efficiently and effectively. This

Page 147: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

147

motivated the second survey which was conducted two months after the first one to discover

which tools, infrastructures and competences the producers need and are willing to share with

others.

Regarding the resources they would like to discuss with others to share, the first priority was a

service to organize a shared distribution channel in the city and to manage logistics for the

service (55%), followed by a counseling on technical and fiscal issues related to their businesses

(29%), financial resources to transform a conventional farm to an organic one (4%), solutions to

agronomic and technical problems (3%) and collaborative restaurants (3%) (Figure 5.40).

Figure 5.40 The resources that the producers would like to discuss with others to share

The tools and infrastructures that the producers are willing to share with others included store

in the farm (26%), a meeting space (17%), transportation to the market including a fridge van

(17%), store in the city (11%), tractor (9%), warehouse (6%) and workshop (3%) (Figure 5.41).

Figure 5.41 Instruments and infrastructure that the producers are willing to share

!"#$#%&'(%)'*+#$,+'$#%)'%$-&'#)."'%/-",%&%!"'*+'."'&0%/&-,%$"%

&'%"-1&')!%"'+%23%

"-1&')4&."'%"/%&%5()1)$&06%70&8"-,%$"%,&'&1+%0"1)#.!#%/"-%&%#+-*)!+%"'%#9&-+(%()#$-):;."'%"/%

7-"(;!$#%)'%$9+%!)$<%==3%

>+!9')!&0?@#!&0%)##;+#%-+0&$+(%$"%<";-%:;#)'+##%

AB3%

!"00&:"-&.*+%-+#$&;-&'$#%

C3%

"$9+-#%C3%

&1-)!;0$;-&0%+(;!&."'%/"-%$+&!9+-#%

C3%

&1-"'",)!%&'(%$+!9')!&0%7-":0+,#%

C3%

!"#$!%"&'(&

)#"*+%,-*&.(&

/**012&-3#$*&45(&

6"782*&9#1&.(&

9#1&44(&

-3*$7#:7;*8&-!#<&&44(&

-!%"*&71&!+*&6#"/&=.(&

-!%"*&71&!+*&$7!>&44(&

)%"?-+%3&@(&

Page 148: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

148

The competences that they wanted to share with other producers included stock breeding

(33%), alternative cultivation techniques (29%), knowledge on horticulture (17%), specialized

staff (17%) and sales staff (4%) (Figure 5.42).

Figure 5.42 Competences that the producers are willing to share

Based on the identified needs and resources of the producers, ideas to facilitate the exchange of

their expertise, time and products was generated. One of them is an organization of shared

transportation of their goods to the market. The producers arrive at the market with the goods

to sell by their vans in the early morning and leave the market around 5 PM. Carpools can be

organized with a support of the digital platform. The platform provides necessary tools to

organize carpooling such as a map to identify the locations of farms; a carpooling software that

makes carpooling easy and efficient; a database that contains information relating to carpoolers

such as who they are, how much products they need to bring to the market, the type of products,

and if they need special assistance (e.g. fresh items need a fridge van).

5.4.3. Social network analysis

Social network analysis was conducted only for the producers. In the case of consumers, there

was currently too little collaboration going on. Most consumers reported that they were not

involved in any collaborative activities. Those who were collaborating (19% with the producers

and 11% with other consumers), almost all the activities were either GAS or food box deliver

service. GAS is a network of purchasing groups and a group size varies from 10 to 40 members.

Food box delivery service often requires collaboration between producers but not so much on

the side of consumers. In short, only a small portion of consumers in the market interacts with

one another and it takes place mostly through an existing initiative called GAS.

Although the majority of producers in the market answered that they collaborate with other

producers, their network structure showed that only 40% of the respondents were connected to

other producers and that the network structure consists of disconnected groups. Looking inside

!"#$%&'())*+,-.//0.

1#(2$34"3().560.

74")(,728).$342872#,.")$1,+93)!.

:;0.

)<=)(2!).+,."7<.>0.

!74)!.!"7?.@0. !=)$+74+A)*.!"7?.

560.

Page 149: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

149

the groups, the members were connected via both strong and weak ties and what hold them

together seemed to be mainly two factors: product type and geographic location. For example, a

baker collaborated with other bakers but also with preserved food producer; and there is a

consortium of producers from the Parco del Ticino. In summary, the producers’ collaborative

network structure is composed of clearly bounded groups based on shared interest and locality.

Outside these collaborative groups are individual producers (35%) and consumers (80%) who

are not involved in any collaboration. Figure 5.43 illustrates in a simplified diagram how the

users of the farmers market currently interact with one another.

Figure 5.43 The market as a network of tightly knit groups

To transform the social relations of producers and consumers into a sustainable community,

socio-technical intervention is needed. By a sustainable community, it refers to the definition of

a sustainable society by Manzini (2005), a society that exhibits four attributes – small, local,

open and connected. In the context of Nutrire Milan, it implies reinforcing existing social

relations and at the same time, creating weak ties that connect isolated individuals and groups

thereby creating a structure that resembles a sustainable society. A community thus built is

open to new members and actively reaches out for them with promotion and communication

strategies (Figure 5.44).

FARMERS’ MARKET

COLLABORATIVE GROUPS COLLABORATIVE GROUPS

COMMUNITY

Producer groups

Individual producers Individual consumers

Consumer groups

Page 150: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

150

Figure 5.44 The market as a network of tightly knit groups and individuals

This can be achieved through development of service strategies around the farmers’ market and

an enabling solution that stimulates new collaborative groups and supports the needs of current

collaborative groups. Table 5.14 lists examples of service strategies and corresponding platform

features generated during the project.

Table 5.14 Examples of service strategies and platform features

Service strategy Platform feature Social events at the market such as tasting laboratories, demonstrations by producers, shared tables

A multimedia repository to share the records of events at the market

Shared logistics for producers to bring their products to the market

An online carpooling system to support organization of shared logistics among the producers

A neighborhood dinner club for producers to get to know one another and to share information, competences and resources.

An online community for producers to continue discussions at the neighborhood dinner club.

Occasional GAS An online community to organize occasional GAS

GAS extended (for large organizations such as schools, offices or apartment houses)

A social commerce platform for GAS extended

A food box delivery service An e-commerce system for a food box delivery service

A voluntary counseling service for producers who need fiscal and technical advice for their business

An online crowdsourcing platform to discuss and solve fiscal and technical issues

The methodology to investigate social needs of a community can be incorporated into a service

design process to develop a service that effectively addresses users’ social needs. The findings

from this chapter are applied to a wider framework in chapter 6, and a systematic approach to

design a digital platform for collaborative service is introduced.

COMMUNITY

Producer groups

Individual producersIndividual consumersConsumer

groups

FARMERS’ MARKET

Page 151: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

151

6. A SOCIO-TECHNICAL FRAMEWORK FOR COLLABORATIVE SERVICE

Chapter 6 introduces a socio-technical framework for collaborative service by expanding the

experience of Nutrire Milano Project into a wider context. The framework is a systematic

approach to designing a digital platform for collaborative communities with a focus on

addressing users’ social needs. The framework has the following characteristics: (1) it integrates

the development process of a digital platform into service design process; (2) it provides

designers with a systematic approach to design a platform that supports a collaborative service

with socio-technical intervention; (3) it focuses on facilitating the production of social networks

of collaborative communities by analyzing their implicit social needs.

Page 152: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

152

6.1. Background

Despite the essential role of social networks in the production and diffusion of collaborative

services, a systematic effort to foster social networks of collaborative communities has been

limited. In this chapter, a novel framework to develop a digital platform for collaborative service

is proposed. It aims to facilitate the production of social networks – both weak and strong ties –

through socio-technical intervention. This framework is designed to be integrated into a

conventional service design process and used in parallel with service design tools to guide

designers to develop a digital platform that addresses both technical and social needs of

collaborative communities. Hence an eligible user of this framework would be a service

designer who is also knowledgeable in developing a digital platform.

A digital platform designed through this framework empowers individuals and communities to

organize collaborative services through socio-technical intervention. Socio-technical

intervention in this context is service strategies to improve the dual dimension of collaborative

service. Service strategies are based on a design objective, and target users’ social and technical

needs. User needs are in turn elicited through user studies (Figure 6.1). The social needs are

often implicit and cannot be elicited through verbal protocols. Therefore, a method that

indirectly analyzes users’ relations is needed.

Figure 6.1. A schematic model of designing a digital platform for collaborative services

Production of a solution

An enabling system that supports collaborative ser-vices through socio-technical intervention

Strategies to improve the performance of a

solution

Strategies to create and reinforce social net-

works

Production of social networks

ICTs

ICTs

User needs related to the performance of a

solution

User needs related to creating and reinforcing

social networks

User studies User studies

Page 153: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

153

This chapter describes a conceptual framework to develop a digital platform for collaborative

service step by step starting with methods to identify users’ social needs; analysis of the

collected data; identification of user needs and resources; defining design problems; design of

service strategies; and finally design of a digital platform for collaborative services.

6.2. A conceptual framework

Figure 6.2 describes a design process of a collaborative service on digital platform based on

Archer’s prescriptive model of design process (1984). The light green area indicates a service

design process and the light blue area indicates a process of designing a digital platform. The

service design process described in this chapter refers to a process developed in service design

curriculum at Politecnico di Milano. Inside the red-dotted box is the socio-technical framework

for developing a digital platform for collaborative service.

Page 154: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

154

Figure 6.2 A process of designing a collaborative service on digital platform

6.2.1. Programming

Analysis Program

ming

Data collection Com

munication

Development

Synthesis

Setting target users

Setting meta

objective of a service

Setting the goal of a service

Promoting and

comm

unicating a digital platform

Digital platform

prototyping:

Refining prototype

Usability testing, etc.

Evaluating prototype:

Programm

ing

GUI design

UI design

Developing a service idea using:

Collaborative service design

Interpreting the data lead to:

interviews, surveys, focus

group interviews, participatory

design, context inquiries, etc.

Conducting user studies to identify

design problems and

resources:

A socio-technical framework for collaborative services

Service prototyping

Understanding the functional/relational

dimension of a service

Service prototyping tools

Promoting and

comm

unicating a service

Mood board,

poster, persona, system

map,

motivation m

atrix, tim

eline, task analysis, flow

chart, storyboard (scenario

building), etc.

Interviews, surveys, etc.

Sense of com

munity

Social network structure

Degree of collaboration

Interview and survey results

Sense of com

munity index

Social network analysis

Degree of collaboration

analysis

Defining platform

concept and features

Digital platform design

Identifying users’ relational needs from

:

Setting the goal of a digital platform

Collecting data related to users’ relational needs:

Understanding the conceptual m

odel of collaborative

service Enabling system

structure

Information

architecture

Generating design

strategies!

Resource identification!

Problem definition!

Page 155: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

155

Figure 6.3 Programming phase

In programming phase, the concept of a service and a digital platform is defined (Figure 6.3). It

means that, first of all, the notion of collaborative service and enabling system is comprehended

and their relationship is clarified. In chapter 3, case studies revealed that a collaborative service

on digital platform is not a single entity but in fact, it consists of four components: a platform

base, an enabling solution, a collaborative service, and an event. This relationship is often

unclear to people who do not have sufficient knowledge on service design. In both the PSD

Laboratory and the Social Innovation Camp, participants often approached a service and its

enabling solution as one design object. This raises potential problems: Firstly, people may fall

into technological determinism, i.e., the invention and adoption of a particular technology will

lead to a particular set of outcomes (Jones 1997). Technological determinism is often

accompanied by a weakly defined service concept that lacks a strong causal relationship between

service input and output, and leads to a mistaken belief that collaboration will somehow occur

because of the digital platform; secondly, technologies available at hand or known to designers

become a precondition for service ideas and consequently, restrain designers’ creativity. A

digital platform thus formed tends to be banal and exhibits similar features regardless of its

goal; thirdly, the social dimension of collaborative service is ignored throughout the design

process. Relations among users are left as a byproduct of a service rather than a product.

Analysis Programming Data collection Communication Development Synthesis

Setting target users

Setting meta objective of a service

Setting the goal of a service

Promoting and communicating a digital platform

Digital platform prototyping:

Refining prototype

Usability testing, etc.

Evaluating prototype:

Programming

GUI design

UI design

Developing a service idea using:

Colla

bora

tive

serv

ice d

esig

n

Interpreting the data lead to:

interviews, surveys, focus

group interviews, participatory

design, context inquiries, etc.

Conducting user studies to identify

design problems and resources:

A socio-technical framework for collaborative services

Service prototyping

Understanding the functional/relational

dimension of a service

Service prototyping tools

Promoting and communicating a

service

Mood board, poster, persona,

system map, motivation matrix,

timeline, task analysis, flow

chart, storyboard (scenario

building), etc.

Interviews, surveys, etc.

Sense of community

Social network structure

Degree of collaboration

Interview and survey results

Sense of community index Social network

analysis Degree of

collaboration analysis

Defining platform concept and

features

Digi

tal p

latfo

rm d

esig

n

Identifying users’ relational needs from:

Setting the goal of a digital platform

Collecting data related to users’ relational needs:

Understanding the conceptual model

of collaborative service Enabling system

structure

Information architecture

Generating design strategies!

Resource identification!

Problem definition!

Page 156: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

156

Once a clear distinction between service and enabling system has been made, the next step is to

articulate their concepts. Issues to be articulated in this stage are provided as a checklist in

Table 6.1. The first item inquires a designer if his or her service concept is a collaborative

service. Based on the theoretical model of collaborative service provided in chapter 2, a designer

can clarify the role of users as co-designer and co-producer of a service in fulfilling their needs

and position his concept on the matrix of collaborative service.

The second item asks for clarification of the service goal and to specify it in terms of technical

and social ones. For a first-time user, it may be difficult to specify the social goal. However, the

framework is an iterative process and once the target users’ needs have been identified in the

analysis phase, one can come back to articulate the goals. For example, in the Nutrire Milano

Project, the goal of a digital platform was to support collaborative services between local

producers and consumers in Milan. The first service to be implemented was a farmers’ market

and the social goal of the digital platform was set to connect producers and consumers at the

market. As the user study was conducted, the data revealed that the majority of the producers

already collaborate with one another and their collaborations tend to occur in densely knit and

closed groups. This led to the revision of the goal into the following: (1) to reinforce the social

networks of existing collaborative groups of the producers; (2) to facilitate creation of new

collaborative groups that involve exchange of time, competences and knowledge. Figure 6.4

illustrates this goal.

FARMERS’ MARKET

COLLABORATIVE GROUPS COLLABORATIVE GROUPS

COMMUNITY

Producer groups

Individual producers Individual consumers

Consumer groups

Page 157: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

157

Figure 6.4 Diagrams that illustrate collaborative networks at the market before (top) and after (bottom) the

socio-technical intervention

The third and fourth items ask a designer to define the meta-objective of his service using the

typology proposed in chapter 3. This step helps him to do the benchmarking of similar cases

introduced in chapter 3 as it narrows down the scope of search. Benchmarking can save time

and cost of a project: with the explosion of collaborative platforms nowadays, one can find a

platform that provide the features necessary for implementing his collaborative service without

developing ones own; one may also find platforms are open source and can be customized for

his project.

Table 6.1 A checklist to articulate a service concept

# Is your idea a collaborative service, i.e., do the final users play a role of co-designer and

co-producer in fulfilling their needs? Does it involve collaboration of the final users and

a certain degree of interaction between them? Use the conceptual model of collaborative

service in chapter 2 (Figure 2.3) to position your idea and see which category it belongs

to.

# What are the target users’ needs? Categorize them into the technical and social needs.

# What do you aim to achieve through your collaborative service? Specify them into

technical and social dimension goals. Technical goals are related to improving the

technical quality of a service and social goals are concerned with connecting people and

enriching their relations. Try to make them specific (e.g. to create a network of

exchanging time, competences and resources among the producers in the farmers’

market).

# What is the meta-objective of your collaborative service? What is the desired social

COMMUNITY

Producer groups

Individual producersIndividual consumersConsumer

groups

FARMERS’ MARKET

Page 158: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

158

network structure of your collaborative community? Use the typologies provided in

chapter 3 as a reference to map your service on the service typology matrix (Table 6.2).

If your service does not belong to any of these types, you can add a new one.

# Case studies in chapter 3 provide some of the existing cases of collaborative services on

digital platforms. They can be used as a reference to designing your platform or can be a

solution for your service. Among these cases, are there solutions that are similar to

yours? If so, can they be adopted to meet your needs instead of creating your own?

Page 159: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

159

Table 6.2 Cases of collaborative services on the digital platform based on their typologies

Once the service concept has been articulated, the next step is to collect data on the target users’

social needs at personal and communal level.

A tightly knit groupN

etworked

individuals

A tightly knit group(s) and netw

orked

A network of tightly-

knit groupsA netw

ork of loosely-knit groups

A network of tightly-knit

and loosely-knit groups

Producer/consum

er netw

ork

Farmfoody

Cascina C

ornaleFarm

sReach

Mapo D

ureG

AS

Mapping diffused inform

ationFix m

y streetG

reen map

Open green m

ap

Aggregate social action

Pledgebank

No. 10 petition

Social invention

center

Carrot m

ob

Creating social netw

ork for conviviality

Meetup

Peladeiros

Vicini ViciniW

iserEarth

Mutual support circle

GR

OFU

NA

ctivmob

Com

petences, time and

products exchangeZerorelativo

Timebanks

Products, places and know

ledge sharing

Couchsurfing

Hitchhikers.org

Bookcrossing

Shelfari

Nabuur

(Add a new

type if necessary)

(Add a new

type if necessary)

Typology based on

social network

structure

Typology based on

meta-objective of services

Page 160: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

160

6.2.2. Data collection

Figure 6.5 Data collection phase

In data collection phase, user studies are conducted to understand user needs (Figure 6.5). The

socio-technical framework for collaborative services focuses on identifying user’s social needs,

i.e., needs related to one’s social relationships in the community he or she belongs to.

Relational qualities are valuable byproducts of collaborative service and at the same time

preconditions for its success (Jeguo & Manzini, 2008). As it was discussed in chapter 3, the

basic elements of collaborative service – solutions and social networks –facilitate the production

of each other and thus form a virtuous cycle. Socio-technical intervention that facilitates the

production of both elements will increase the overall production of collaborative service (Table

6.1). Hence it is equally important in designing a digital platform for collaborative service to

identify user needs in the social dimension as to identify ones in the technical dimension.

When users’ social needs are implicit, i.e., target users do not perceive their social relations to be

problematic, it is difficult to elicit the needs using methods dependent on verbal protocols. This

is typically the case in design for social changes. According to Manzini (2010B), design for social

innovation can be divided into design for social problems and design for social changes. The

former aims to solve specific, difficult conditions (e.g. poverty, diseases, fragile social groups)

and is motivated by ethical reasons such as social and environmental responsibilities. The latter,

Analysis Programming Data collection Communication Development Synthesis

Setting target users

Setting meta objective of a service

Setting the goal of a service

Promoting and communicating a digital platform

Digital platform prototyping:

Refining prototype

Usability testing, etc.

Evaluating prototype:

Programming

GUI design

UI design

Developing a service idea using:

Colla

bora

tive

serv

ice d

esig

n

Interpreting the data lead to:

interviews, surveys, focus

group interviews, participatory

design, context inquiries, etc.

Conducting user studies to identify

design problems and resources:

A socio-technical framework for collaborative services

Service prototyping

Understanding the functional/relational

dimension of a service

Service prototyping tools

Promoting and communicating a

service

Mood board, poster, persona,

system map, motivation matrix,

timeline, task analysis, flow

chart, storyboard (scenario

building), etc.

Interviews, surveys, etc.

Sense of community

Social network structure

Degree of collaboration

Interview and survey results

Sense of community index Social network

analysis Degree of

collaboration analysis

Defining platform concept and

features

Digi

tal p

latfo

rm d

esig

n

Identifying users’ relational needs from:

Setting the goal of a digital platform

Collecting data related to users’ relational needs:

Understanding the conceptual model

of collaborative service Enabling system

structure

Information architecture

Generating design strategies!

Resource identification!

Problem definition!

Page 161: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

161

on the other hand, relates to major trends that affect the whole society (e.g. demographic

evolution, urbanization, increasing connectivity, and more in general transition towards a

sustainable society) and it is often motivated by the search for emerging opportunities as well as

solutions to urgent needs. Such opportunities relate to solutions and business models that can

enhance radical changes in the mainstream models of living and producing. Innovations in the

early phase are not recognized by the mainstream and so are designs for social changes. This is

why user needs relating to them cannot be explicitly expressed. Therefore in this framework,

social needs are elicited by analyzing target users’ social network structures, degree of their

collaboration and the level of sense of community.

Social network analysis renders social relationships of service actors and provides data to

identify their implicit social needs. Social networks play a critical role in determining the way

problems are solved, organizations are run, and the degree to which individuals succeed in

achieving their goals. Therefore, their analysis becomes a reference to problematic and

successful aspects of current collaborative activities and setting a direction for change in the

social network structure can help a designer formulate a service concept and develop strategies.

Analyzing degree of collaboration serves two purposes: to understand the details of target users’

collaborative activities and to estimate the strength of ties. Tie strength is a (linear) combination

of the amount of time, the emotional intensity, mutual trust and the reciprocal services that

characterize the tie (Granovetter, 1973). Hence, the more collaborative activities a group

organizes, the stronger the tie strength would be because it will create more reciprocal services

and more opportunities to interact among group members; the older a group is and the more

frequently its members meet, the stronger the tie strength would be; the smaller a group is, the

more intimate the relations would to be30. Therefore it is used as a tool to supplement social

network analysis. Degree of collaboration is composed of a set of questions that inquire the

attributes of collaborative activities such as the type of an activity31, the size of a collaborative

group, the duration of an activity, frequency of getting into contacts with other members, and

ICTs used in the activity (see appendix A.2).

While social network analysis describes social relationships of service actors, sense of

community reveals their qualities. SoC addresses four distinct qualities – membership,

influence, reinforcement, and shared emotional connection – and they can be measured using

the SCI. The SCI results can be used as a reference to develop service concepts and strategies to

improve specific qualities in a community. If one intends to measure the SoC of a virtual

30 Dunbar states that there is a theoretical limit to the number of people with whom one can maintain stable social relationships. The number is called Dunbar’s number named after a British anthropologist Robin Dunbar who first proposed the concept and it lies between 100 and 230 (most commonly described as 150) (Wikipedia, 2010). 31 To ask the type of a collaborative activity, a respondent was given a typology of collaborative services based on meta-goal introduced in chapter 3 and asked to select ones that he or she was engaged in.

Page 162: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

162

collaborative organization, the SCI may not be the right model because it was designed to

measure the SoC of face-to-face communities. Researchers such as Blanchard (2004) have

discovered that virtual communities perceive the sense of community, tools and methods to

measure the sense of virtual communities (SOVC) are available (Koh & Kim, 2003; Blancard,

2007).

Table 6.3 summarizes the characteristics of the three methods in terms of the obtained data,

diagnosed problems and identified needs.

Table 6.3 Comparison of SCI, SNA and DoC

Sense of community index Social network analysis Degree of collaboration analysis

Measured data

SCI scores in overall sense of community and its elements

A social network structure of service actors, their characteristics and visualization

Quantitative and qualitative details of collaborations

Possible problems

Low SCI score and a low level of the elements of SoC

A lack of qualities that define a sustainable society community, i.e., small, open, local and connected.

Unbalanced composition of strong and weak ties in an organization

Possible strategies

Strategies to improve the four relational qualities in SoC

Strategies to transform the social network structure of an organization towards a desired direction

Strategies to organize collaborative activities that reinforce the type of ties that an organization needs

SNA, DoC and SCI do not explicitly elicit user needs nor do they reveal individual user needs.

They produce that data from which problems in target users’ social relations can be unveil and

improved through design intervention. However, interpreting user needs from the data is often

tricky. To lessen the problem, the obtained data can be supplemented by employing additional

methods if necessary. For example, after the DoC of producers at the farmers’ market in Milan

was investigated, the data revealed that exchange of time, competence and products was

outstandingly popular among the producers compared to other types. However, it was unknown

what kind of resources they were exchanging and how they could be supported. Therefore, the

second survey was conducted to get additional information on their activities and needs (Figure

6.6). The result showed that the majority were interested in sharing logistics to distribute their

products in the city. The resources they could share included agricultural tools, meeting space,

sustainable cultivation knowhow and animals for breeding.

Page 163: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

163

Figure 6.6 An excerpt from a survey on the exchange of resources and competences (Baek, Corubolo,

Meroni & Simeone, 2010)

6.2.3. Analysis

Figure 6.7 Analysis phase

In the analysis phase, the data collected from the previous phase are interpreted to identify user

needs, which lead to defining design problems (Figure 6.7). (For information on the methods to

interpret the data, see chapter 5.) Another information obtained from the data is the type of

Analysis Programming Data collection Communication Development Synthesis

Setting target users

Setting meta objective of a service

Setting the goal of a service

Promoting and communicating a digital platform

Digital platform prototyping:

Refining prototype

Usability testing, etc.

Evaluating prototype:

Programming

GUI design

UI design

Developing a service idea using:

Colla

bora

tive

serv

ice d

esig

n

Interpreting the data lead to:

interviews, surveys, focus

group interviews, participatory

design, context inquiries, etc.

Conducting user studies to identify

design problems and resources:

A socio-technical framework for collaborative services

Service prototyping

Understanding the functional/relational

dimension of a service

Service prototyping tools

Promoting and communicating a

service

Mood board, poster, persona,

system map, motivation matrix,

timeline, task analysis, flow

chart, storyboard (scenario

building), etc.

Interviews, surveys, etc.

Sense of community

Social network structure

Degree of collaboration

Interview and survey results

Sense of community index Social network

analysis Degree of

collaboration analysis

Defining platform concept and

features

Digi

tal p

latfo

rm d

esig

n

Identifying users’ relational needs from:

Setting the goal of a digital platform

Collecting data related to users’ relational needs:

Understanding the conceptual model

of collaborative service Enabling system

structure

Information architecture

Generating design strategies!

Resource identification!

Problem definition!

Page 164: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

164

resources users possess – natural, social, technological and etc. The resources of target users

and design problems are an input to generate socio-technical intervention or simply service

strategies that successfully fulfill user needs. During the Nutrire Milano Project, a resource-

problem matrix was used to facilitate idea generation of socio-technical intervention to support

dual production of collaborative services (Table 6.4). The matrix has the design problems in the

column, and the resources in the row. In the synthesis phase, the blanks are filled with strategies

to solve the defined problems.

Table 6.4 A resource-problem matrix for brainstorming socio-technical intervention

A fragmented collaborative network among producersMany isolated individuals

Low level of membership due to inability to recognize other people

Low level of influence…The market is held only once a month.The market is held in only one place in the city.Many people do not know about the market and the promotion efforts are limited.Many people believe that the prices are unaffordable.The products lack diversity and quantity.Management of the market heavily depends on the Slow Food.A lack of information on fiscal and technical issues of business…

Problems relating to the social

dimension of a service

Problems relating to

the techincal dimension

Exi

stin

g co

nsum

er

netw

orks

Exi

stin

g pr

oduc

er

netw

orks

Shar

ed v

alue

s an

d in

tere

sts

amon

g co

nsum

ers

and

prod

ucer

sH

igh

leve

l of S

oC

amon

g pr

oduc

ers

Hig

h le

vel o

f SoC

am

ong

cons

umer

sM

apO

nlin

e co

mm

unit

yFo

rum

Em

ail

Blo

ge-

com

mer

ce

Sync

wit

h ot

her

Social resources Technological resources(Joomla CMS)

Page 165: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

165

6.2.4. Synthesis

6.2.4.1. Developing service strategies

In synthesis phase of service design process, a service concept and strategies are developed using service

design tools, which are then used to define the platform concept and features (Figure 6.8). Strategies that

aim to facilitate the dual production of collaborative service using social and technical resources are called

socio-technical intervention.

Figure 6.8 Synthesis phase

Socio-technical intervention is the combination of social and technical intervention. Social

intervention in the context of collaborative service refers to intervention to reinforce and

maintain the social relations of users in a direction coherent with the service goal. Under the

goal of creating a sustainable community that is small, local, open and connected (Manzini,

2008), social intervention includes a series of social activities that aim to achieve a balanced

composition of strong and weak ties in a community. It means to create a network of local

collaborative groups that are open to new innovations, connected to one another through weak

ties and at the same time maintain their local values and strong interconnection between

members. In the farmers’ market in Milan, social intervention includes events such as the

tasting laboratories (Figure 6.9), demonstrations by producers (Figure 6.10) and shared tables

for people to eat and socialize (Figure 6.11). They contribute to making the market a convivial

community by creating opportunities for social interaction among the producers and the

consumers.

Analysis Programming Data collection Communication Development Synthesis

Setting target users

Setting meta objective of a service

Setting the goal of a service

Promoting and communicating a digital platform

Digital platform prototyping:

Refining prototype

Usability testing, etc.

Evaluating prototype:

Programming

GUI design

UI design

Developing a service idea using:

Colla

bora

tive

serv

ice d

esig

n

Interpreting the data lead to:

interviews, surveys, focus

group interviews, participatory

design, context inquiries, etc.

Conducting user studies to identify

design problems and resources:

A socio-technical framework for collaborative services

Service prototyping

Understanding the functional/relational

dimension of a service

Service prototyping tools

Promoting and communicating a

service

Mood board, poster, persona,

system map, motivation matrix,

timeline, task analysis, flow

chart, storyboard (scenario

building), etc.

Interviews, surveys, etc.

Sense of community

Social network structure

Degree of collaboration

Interview and survey results

Sense of community index Social network

analysis Degree of

collaboration analysis

Defining platform concept and

features

Digi

tal p

latfo

rm d

esig

n

Identifying users’ relational needs from:

Setting the goal of a digital platform

Collecting data related to users’ relational needs:

Understanding the conceptual model

of collaborative service Enabling system

structure

Information architecture

Generating design strategies!

Resource identification!

Problem definition!

Page 166: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

166

Figure 6.9 People trying wine during the tasting laboratories

Figure 6.10 People trying honey offered by an apiculturist during the honey making demonstration

Figure 6.11 People eating together at a shared table

Technical intervention on the other hand is intervention to improve the performance of a service

is related to the production of a solution. With technical intervention, a service becomes more

efficient and effective in fulfilling users’ needs. Enabling solution modules on a digital platform

is an example of technical intervention.

Page 167: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

167

In Table 6.5, socio-technical intervention is mapped onto the typology map to forecast impact of

such intervention on the social network structure of collaborative communities. For example, (1)

social events at the farmers’ market will contribute to bringing together the producers and

consumers in the market, creating weak ties to the existing structure which is composed of

closed collaborative groups; (3) a neighborhood dinner club for the producers will give them an

opportunity to meet other producers in the neighborhood and make a groundwork to initiate

new collaborations; and (8) a voluntary counseling service for producers in need of fiscal and

technical advice related to their business is an opportunity not only to use collective intelligence

of volunteers to support local economy but also to connect producers with volunteers who can

be their future customers.

Page 168: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

168

Table 6.5 Brainstormed strategies mapped onto the typology map

A tightly knit groupN

etworked

individuals

A tightly knit group(s) and netw

orked

A network of tightly-

knit groupsA netw

ork of loosely-knit groups

A network of tightly-knit

and loosely-knit groups

Producer/consum

er netw

ork

Farmfoody

Cascina C

ornaleFarm

sReach

Mapo D

ureG

AS

Mapping diffused inform

ationFix m

y streetG

reen map

Open green m

ap

Aggregate social action

Pledgebank

No. 10 petition

Social invention

center

Carrot m

ob

Creating social netw

ork for conviviality

Meetup

Peladeiros

Vicini ViciniW

iserEarth

Mutual support circle

GR

OFU

NA

ctivmob

Com

petences, time and

products exchangeZerorelativo

Timebanks

Products, places and know

ledge sharing

Couchsurfing

Hitchhikers.org

Bookcrossing

Shelfari

Nabuur

(Add a new

type if necessary)

(Add a new

type if necessary)

Typology based on

social network

structure

Typology based on

meta-objective of services

!"#$%&#'($#%

1 3

!"#$%&#'($#%

8

!"#$%2

!"#$%4

&#'($#%5

6

&#'($#%7

Page 169: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

169

Articulation of service concepts and strategies lead to defining a platform concept and features.

In Table 6.6, service strategies were generated using a resource-problem matrix and then

corresponding platform concepts were brainstormed.

Table 6.6 A resource-problem matrix with a brainstorming result

6.2.4.2. Designing platform concept and features

Case studies of collaborative services on digital platform in chapter 3 revealed that despite their

diverse contexts, they exhibit a common structural system which is composed of four elements:

A fragmented collaborative network among producersMany isolated individuals

Low level of membership due to inability to recognize other people

Low level of influence…The market is held only once a month.The market is held in only one place in the city.Many people do not know about the market and the promotion efforts are limited.Many people believe that the prices are unaffordable.The products lack diversity and quantity.Management of the market heavily depends on the Slow Food.A lack of information on fiscal and technical issues of business…

Problems relating to

the techincal dimension

Problems relating to the social

dimension of a service

Exi

stin

g co

nsum

er

netw

orks

Exi

stin

g pr

oduc

er

netw

orks

Shar

ed v

alue

s an

d in

tere

sts

amon

g co

nsum

ers

and

prod

ucer

sH

igh

leve

l of S

oC

amon

g pr

oduc

ers

Hig

h le

vel o

f SoC

am

ong

cons

umer

s

Map

Onl

ine

com

mun

ity

Foru

mE

mai

lB

log

e-co

mm

erce

pl

atfo

rm

Sync

wit

h ot

her

SNS'

s

Technological resources(Joomla CMS)Social resources

Service strategies

1. Social events at the market such as tasting laboratories, demonstrations by producers, shared tables 2. Brand Identity (BI) design of the market to improve the level of membership and to use it in promoting the market to the public. 3. A neighborhood dinner club for producers to get to know one another and to share information, competences and resources. 4. Community supported agriculture through micro-financing. 5. GAS extended (for large organizations such as schools, offices or apartment houses) 6. Shared logistics for producers to bring their products to the market 7. A food box delivery service 8. A voluntary counseling service for producers who need fiscal and technical advice for their business

Platform concepts

1'. A multimedia repository to share the records of events at the market 2'. An online competition of the BI design 3'. An online community that supports the exchange of time, products and competences among the producers 4'. An online microfinancing platform that connects individual lendors (citizens) with small local producers. 5'. A collaborative commerce platform for GAS extended 6'. A platform to support organization of carpooling among the producers 7'. An e-commerce platform for a food box delivery service. 8'. An online forum to discuss fiscal and technical issues and to receive advice from volunteers (e.g. Nabuur)

Page 170: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

170

a platform base, an enabling solution, a collaborative service, and an event. Thinking reversely,

it implies that a common structural system can be proposed as an archetype for designers to

conceptualize a schematic structure for their digital platforms. This archetype describes the

composition of the four elements and configuration of digital tools to facilitate the production of

collaborative services. The structure of a digital platform for collaborative services is composed

of two layers: a platform base and an enabling solution module (Figure 6.12).

Figure 6.12 The structure of a digital platform for collaborative services

A platform base is a repository of digital tools and a user profile database that are used as

building blocks of an enabling solution module. The digital tools are divided into

communication tools and non-communication tools. Communication tools include social media,

multimedia and online broadcasting. Non-communication tools include map, Global

Positioning System (GPS), e-commerce system and search engine. A user profile database stores

information of users relevant to the collaborative services hosted on the platform. For example,

in the Nutrire Milano project, a database will eventually include information on the producers’

location, items they produce, skills, tools, knowledge, interests, financial information and

animals they raise.

An enabling solution module features tools that address the technical and social needs relating

to a collaborative service. Enabling solutions on a platform base can share a tool repository and

a user profile database (Figure 6.13). As more enabling solutions are added, a platform base will

be equipped with more tools. And as a platform gets equipped with more tools and achieves a

critical mass of users, a wider variety of services can be supported and the maturation of

services will accelerate.

comunication tools(e.g. social media)

New modulescan be added.

non- comunication tools(e.g. map)

a database of user profiles

BASE

ENABLING SOLUTION MODULE

DIGITALENABLINGSYSTEM

an enabling solution forfarmers’ market

an enabling solution forfood box delivery

Page 171: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

171

Figure 6.13 The functional configuration of enabling solution modules

In the synthesis phase of the Nutrire Milano Project, several collaborative services to address

the producers’ social and technical needs were designed. They include a project lab, time bank,

took bank, CSA, food box delivery service, and carpooling to the market. The following step was

to define the concept and features of enabling solution modules that support them. Their

specifications were defined as shown in Table 6.7.

As an example, an enabling solution for a food box delivery has features that the service needs in

order to supplement the farmers’ market: the market is currently held only once a month near

the city center due to a bureaucratic reason and the limited number of visitors partly ascribes to

a difficult access to the market. A food box delivery service was proposed to target consumers

who are willing to consume local produce but cannot come to the market. It aimed to meet the

consumers’ demands for a more frequent and easier access to the local seasonal diet and a food

box scheme with a more affordable price range and more diverse items than the existing ones.

Its enabling solution is thus composed of an e-commerce system where a consumer can choose a

food box among different types; a blog where producers and consumers can communicate; an

online supply management system; and a map to show the location of producers; and a search

engine to search producers, products, price range and location (Table 6.7).

Table 6.7 Features of enabling solutions for the Nutrire Milano Project

comunication tools(e.g. social media)

New modulescan be added.

non- comunication tools(e.g. map)

a database of user profiles

BASE

ENABLING SOLUTION MODULE

DIGITALENABLINGSYSTEM

an enabling solution forfarmers’ market

an enabling solution forfood box delivery

Page 172: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

172

A platform base and enabling solution modules constitute a digital platform for collaborative

service. If designed successfully, it will be used to create and manage collaborative services.

These services in turn will result in events that a designer anticipated (Figure 6.14).

Figure 6.14 A structural system of collaborative services on digital platform

collaborative servicesX X X X X X X X X project lab

X X X X X X X X time bankX X X X X X X X tool bank

X X X X X X X CSAX X X X X X X X X X X food box delivery

X X X X X X carpoolingX X X X X X X X X neighbors' dinner club

X X X X X X X X X X didactic farms!

onlin

e gr

oup

blog

foru

mte

xt m

essa

ging

emai

lbu

lletin

boa

rdne

wsl

ette

rR

SS

SN

S s

ync

onlin

e po

ll! e-

com

mer

cem

ap m

asup

pers

onal

info

rmat

ion

man

agem

ent s

yste

mca

lend

arse

arch

eng

ine

! skill

sto

ols

prod

ucts

know

ledg

ean

imal

sin

tere

sts

finan

cial

info

rmat

ion

!

a database of user profiles

communication tools non-communication tools

comunication tools(e.g. social media)

New modulescan be added.

non- comunication tools(e.g. map)

a user profilesdatabase

PLATFORM BASE

ENABLING SOLUTION MODULE

an enabling solution forfarmers’ market

an enabling solution forfood box delivery

COLLABORATIVE SERVICE

EVENT

Page 173: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

173

CHAPTER 7. CONCLUSION

The main contribution of this thesis is the development of a socio-technical framework for

collaborative services, a systematic approach to design a digital platform for collaborative

communities. The following demands motivated this research: (1) social innovations are

emerging from the margins to the mainstream as alternative solutions to contemporary

economic, environmental and social problems; (2) there is a growing interest in design for social

innovation towards sustainability and consequently an increasing demand for new tools,

methods and theoretical knowledge concerning this topic; (3) in a conventional process to

design a digital platform for collaborative service, investigation of user needs concerning their

social relations tend to be neglected compared to the technical needs; and (4) in order to design

a collaborative service that effectively produces a solution and social networks, a systematic

approach to design a digital platform through socio-technical intervention is needed;

The development of a socio-technical framework starts with redefining the theoretical model of

collaborative service. The original model proposed by Cipolla (2007) is based on Buber’s

dialogic principle and has limitations in dealing with collaborative service on digital platform for

two reasons: (1) its limited scope fails to address collaborations that proliferate in communities

that are not necessarily composed of I-Thou relation; (2) and it is difficult to validate the model.

The new model has two dimensions of service: the degree of collaboration and the interpersonal

tie strength. A collaborative service is defined as a service implemented through collaboration of

the final users who act as co-designers and co-producers of a service based on latent, weak or

strong ties. As a result of a collaborative service, two basic elements are produced: a technical

solution to user needs and social networks among collaborative individuals. The production of a

solution facilitates the production of social networks and vice versa, thus forming a virtuous

cycle. ICTs amplify this virtuous cycle by providing tools for collaboration and contributing to

creation of social networks, mainly weak ties, which underpin collaborative service.

The next step was to collect existing cases of collaborative service on digital platform and to

identify their characteristics. 40 cases were collected on various topics such as health, welfare,

food, transportation and entertainment. The case studies led to the following findings: (1) the

cases exhibit a common structural system which consists of 4 elements: a platform, an enabling

solution, a collaborative service and an event; (2) a typology of collaborative service based on

the meta-objective of service was drawn: producer/consumer network, mapping diffused

information; aggregate social action; creating social network for conviviality; mutual support

circle; competences, time and products exchange; and products, places and knowledge sharing;

(3) a typology of collaborative service based on users’ social network structures was drawn: a

tightly knit group, networked individuals, a tightly knit group and networked individuals, a

Page 174: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

174

network of tightly knit groups and a network of loosely knit groups, a network of tightly knit and

loosely knit groups.

A collaborative service aims to serve user needs with an innovative solution that typically

accompanies certain types of relational quality such as friendship, trust or conviviality. In order

to understand how designers and engineers develop collaborative services and their digital

platforms and how they address technical and social needs of target users in the design process,

two case studies were conducted. The studies revealed that both the Product System Design

Laboratory and the Social Innovation Camp did not provide a process and methods that address

target users’ needs at the full scope, focusing on the technical dimension of collaborative service

while neglecting the social dimension. Social relations and relational qualities were treated as a

byproduct of collaboration that can be only anticipated but not designed. This raises a need for a

systematic approach to design a collaborative service and its enabling solution that facilitates

the production of social networks through social and technical intervention.

Therefore, a new methodology to investigate social needs of users was proposed in the context of

a project to create a sustainable food network in Milan. The methodology involved the use of

three methods – sense of community index, degree of collaboration analysis and social network

analysis – to analyze problems concerning the social needs of producers in a peri-urban area

and consumers in Milan. In the SCI, the producers scored higher (9.41) than the consumers

(8.03), indicating that the former had a stronger sense of community than the latter. SNA

revealed that the social network structure of the producers was fragmented into collaborative

groups whose members were connected via strong and weak ties. Based on the result, strategies

for designing services and a digital platform were proposed.

In the end, findings from the project were applied to a wider framework and a socio-technical

framework for collaborative service was introduced. The framework has the following

characteristics: (1) it integrates the development process of a digital platform into service design

process; (2) it provides designers with a systematic approach to design a platform that supports

a collaborative service with socio-technical intervention; (3) it focuses on facilitating the

production of social networks of collaborative communities by analyzing their implicit social

needs.

Since the outcome to verify the validity of the framework is not yet available, it remains

unanswered for the moment if a digital platform produced based on the proposed framework

will be original. For example, how will the platform thus designed be different from the

Facebook or a conventional website dedicated a community? The originality of the framework

lies in the process of analyzing users’ social needs and applying the result to generate strategies

for a service and its enabling solution. Therefore, a successful outcome of the framework would

Page 175: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

175

be a digital platform that effectively responds to users’ social needs. Whether the platform is

original in any sense is another issue that this research does not address.

The validity of the framework can be assessed based on the performance of a platform with

respect to achieving its goal. For example, the Nutrire Milano Platform can be evaluated in the

following aspects: (1) If the number of collaborative groups increased after the use of a platform;

(2) If the SoC level increased; (3) if the social networks of the community changed from densely-

knit and disconnected groups to a network of small groups connected via weak ties; (4) if the

economic performance of the producers improved. This remains as a future work to be done

when the platform development is complete. Applying the framework to different contexts will

further improve the framework and validate its effectiveness.

Regarding the methodology, there is a gap between the SCI results and elicitation of user needs.

The SCI results provide the level of SoC and its elements but do not explain the specific causes.

This makes it difficult for a designer to reflect the results in developing design strategies. One

way to fill this gap is to develop a tool that measures the level of relational qualities of a

community such as SoC based on questions that address specific issues that a designers wants to

explorer.

Page 176: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

176

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Gruppi di Acquisto Solidale (1994). Retrieved May 1st, 2009, from http://www.economia-solidale.org/

Green Map (1995). Retrieved September 22nd, 2008, from http://www.greenmap.org

Meetup (2001). Retrieved July 2nd, 2010, from http://www.meetup.com/

Peladeiro (2001). Retrieved May 2nd, 2009, from http://www.peladeiro.com.br

Solution Oriented Partnership. How to Design Industrialised Sustainable Solutions (2004). UK:

European commission GROWTH programme.

CouchSurfing (2004). Retrieved May 3rd, 2009, from http://www.couchsurfing.org

ShareIdeas.org (2005). Retrieved March 1, 2008, from http://www.shareideas.org

Pledgebank (2005). Retrieved May 2nd, 2009, from http://www.pledgebank.com

Consumer Lifestyles - Italy (2006). Euromonitor International.

zerorelativo (2006). Retrieved May 3rd, 2009, from http://www.zerorelativo.it

GROFUN (2007). Retrieved July 2nd, 2008, from http://www.grofun.org.uk/

Zoes: Zona Equosostenibile (2008). Retrieved June 29th, 2010, from www.zoes.it

Innovative Study Examines Farmers’ Market Shoppers (2008). Market Thymes Special Edition

Activmob (2008). Retrieved May 2nd, 2009, from http://www.activmob.com/

Nutrire Milano Energie per il cambiamento. Il progetto dei nuovi connotati territoriali milanesi (2009,

June 11th). from

http://content.slowfood.it/upload/3E6E345B11c691AE9Bxmj23B9997/files/progetto_15.06.2009.

pdf

Team Fighting Diabetes (2009). Retrieved July 2nd, 2009, from http://www.fightingdiabetes.org/

Social Innovation Camp (2010). Retrieved July 22nd, 2010, from http://www.sicamp.org/about/

2010 Social Innovation Camp 365 (2010). Retrieved July 22nd, 2010, from http://2010.sicamp36.org/

Daum '\a+ÒP (2010). Retrieved September 5th, 2010, from

http://blog.daum.net/hyphen/8669870

Kind Bus (2010). Retrieved August 25th, 2010, from http://www.theroad.co.kr

Baratie: Feed Your People (2010). Retrieved August 25th, 2010, from http://10spoons.com

Fun Riding (2010). Retrieved August 25th, 2010, from httP://funriding.org

My Neighbors (2010). Retrieved August 25th, 2010, from http://2010.sicamp36.org/content/entry/40-

1

Our Farm (2010). Retrieved August 25th, 2010, from http://ourfarm.co.kr

Let's Market (2010). Retrieved August 25th, 2010, from http://letsmarket.kr

Art Funding (2010). Retrieved August 25th, 2010, from http://dev.naver.com/projects/artfund

Pro Bono Bridge (2010). Retrieved August 25th, 2010, from http://socialin.org

Treeing (2010). Retrieved October 22nd, 2010, from http://www.treeing.co.kr/

Halifax Seaport Farmers’ Market (2010). Retrieved December 28th, 2010, from

http://halifaxfarmersmarket.com/

I Mercati della Terra (n.d.). Retrieved October 1st, 2010, from http://www.mercatidellaterra.it/

Page 177: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

177

AGRESTE (2008). The age distribution of farmers & growers: Ministère de l'agriculture, de

l'alimentation, de la pêche, de la ruralité et de l'aménagement du territoire.

Archer, L. B. (1984). Systematic Method for Designers. In N. Cross (Ed.), Developments in Design

Methodology. Chichester: Wiley.

Baek, J. S. (2009). Case studies of collaborative service on digital platform Retrieved July 4th, 2009,

from http://www.sustainable-everyday.net/codi/?cat=1

Baek, J. S. (2010). Crises, Social innovations and ICT: How can we overcome the contemporary crises

through the diffusion of social innovation and strengthening the social network of the engaged

communities? Paper presented at the Culture and the Making of Worlds, the 3rd edition of the ESA

Research Network Sociology of Culture mid-term Conference, Milan.

Baek, J. S. (2010). How does ICT facilitate the diffusion of grassroots social innovation and reinforce the

social network of the engaged communities? With a focus on how ICTs can support sustainable

food production and consumption in Milan. Zoes Report Retrieved October 11th, 2010, from

www.sustainable-everyday.net/codi

Baek, J. S., Simeone, G., Meroni, A., & Corubolo, M. (2010). The second survey on collaborative

producers. Unpublished Survey. DIS, Politecnico di Milano.

Barrett, M., Grant, D., & Wailes, N. (2006). ICT and Organizational Change: Introduction to the Special

Issue. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 42(6), 6-22.

Bauwens, M. (2005, July 3, 2005). Peer to peer and human evolution - On "the P2P relational dynamic"

as the premise of the next civilizational stage Retrieved June 18, 2009, from

http://www.networkcultures.org/weblog/archives/P2P_essay.pdf

Bauwens, M. (2005). The Foundation for P2P Alternatives Retrieved May 28, 2008, from

http://www.p2pfoundation.net

Bauwens, M. (2006). The Political Economy of Peer Production. Post-autistic economics review(37).

Benkler, Y. (2006). The wealth of networks: How social production transforms markets and freedom.

New Haven and London: Yale University Press.

Bernard, J. (1973). The sociology of community. Glenview, IL: Scott Foresman.

Blanchard, A. L. (2007). Testing a model of sense of virtual community. Computers in Human Behavior,

24(2008), 2107–2123.

Boase, J., Horrigan, J. B., Wellman, B., & Rainie, L. (2006). The Strength of Internet Ties. Washington

D.C.: The Pew Internet Project.

Brawer, W. (1992). Green Map, from www.greenmap.org

Brezet, H., & Hemel, C. (1997). A promising approach to sustainable production and consumption.

Paris: UNEP.

Briceno, T., & Stagl, S. (2004, 5th – 6th March). Examining the Social Aspect of Sustainable

Consumption. Paper presented at the International Workshop on Driving Forces of and Barriers to

sustainable Consumption, Leeds, UK.

Buber, M. (2008). I and Thou: Hesperides Press.

Buganza, T., Marchesi, A., & Verganti, R. (2004). Corporate strategies. In E. Manzini, L. Collina & S.

Page 178: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

178

Evans (Eds.), Solution oriented partnership. How to design industrialised sustainable solutions (pp.

21-31). UK: European commission GROWTH programme.

Burns, C., Cottam, H., Vanstone, C., & Winhall, J. (2006). RED Paper 02. Transformation Design.

London: British Council.

Cachia, R., Kluzer, S., Cabrera, M., Centeno, C., & Punie, Y. (2007). ICT, Social Capital and Cultural

Diversity. Istanbul, Turkey: Joint Research Centre.

Canavari (2002). Food safety and organic fruit demand in Italy: a survey. British Food Journal,

104(3/4/5), 220-232.

Casalegno, F., & Susani, M. (2005). An Atlas of Aural Knowledge.

Chavis, D. M. (n.d.). Sense of Community Index Retrieved October 22nd, 2010, from

http://www.activeguidellc.com/cmi/comm_soc_soci_scale.htm

Chavis, D. M., Lee, K. S., & Acosta, J. D. (2008). The Sense of Community (SCI) Revised: The Reliability

and Validity of the SCI-2. Paper presented at the 2nd International Community Psychology

Conference.

Chipuer, H. M., & Pretty, G. M. H. (1999). A review of the Sense of Community Index: Current uses,

factor structure, reliability, and further development. Journal of Community Psychology. Journal of

Community Psychology, 27(6), 643-658.

Cipolla, C. (2007). Designing for interpersonal relational qualities in services: A model for Service

Design theory and practice. Unpublished PhD Thesis, Politecnicdo di Milano, Milano.

Cipolla, C. (2008). Creative communities as “relational” innovations: a service design approach.

Collaborative services: social innovation and design for sustainability.

Cooper, M. (2005). The economics of collaborative production in the spectrum commons. IEEE, 379-

400.

Corbett, S. (2008, April 13, 2008). Can the Cellphone Help End Global Poverty? The New York Times.

Cottam, H., & Leadbeater, C. (2004). Health. Co-creating Services. London: Design Council.

Cottam, H., & Leadbeater, C. (2004). RED Paper 01. HEALTH: Co-creating Services. London: British

Council.

Crul, M. R. M., & Diehl, J. C. (2006). Design for Sustainability a practical approach for Developing

Economies. Delft, The Netherlands: Delft University of Technology.

Csikszent, M. (2008). Flow: The Psychology of Optimal Experience: Harper Perennial Modern Classics.

Daft, R. L., & Lengel, R. H. (1987). Media Richness Theory Retrieved October 2nd, 2010, from

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Media_Richness_Theory_Diagram_PNG.png

Doreian, P., & Stokman, F. N. (1997). Evolution of Social Networks: Processes and Principles:

Routledge.

Ellis, J., Halverson, C., & Erickson, T. (2005). Sustaining Community – Incentive Mechanisms in Online

Systems: Final Report of the Group 2005 Workshop Organizers. USA: IBM T. J. Watson Research

Center.

Evans, S. (2004). Getting the best from globalisation, localisation and industrialisation. In E. Manzini,

L. Collina & S. Evans (Eds.), Solution oriented partnership. How to design industrialised

Page 179: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

179

sustainable solutions (pp. 16-20). UK: European commission GROWTH programme.

Florida, R. (2002). The Rise of the Creative Class Retrieved November 21, 2008, from

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2001/0205.florida.html

Fournier, S., & Lee, L. (2009). Getting Brand Communities Right: Embrace conflict, resist the urge to

control, forget opinion leaders and build your brand. Harvard Business Review, 07-05-2009, p.105-

111.

Franke, S. (2005). Measurement of Social Capital. Reference Document for Public Policy Research,

Development, and Evaluation.

Franqueira, T. (2009). Creative Places for Collaborative Cities: Strategies to enable the convergence of

groups of people and organizations for a sustainable urban reactivation. Politecnicdo di Milano,

Milano.

Fullerton, D., & Stavins, R. N. (1998). How Do Economists Really Think About the Environment?

Resources for the Future Discussion.

Gaag, M. V. d., & Snijders, T. (2004). Proposals for the measurement of individual social capital. In H.

D. Flap & V. B. (Eds.), Creation and returns of Social Capital (pp. 199-218). London: Routledge.

Gianasso, P., & Tiano, M. (2010). Le Città Innovative Nel Mondo: Scenari Immobiliari. Istituto

Indipendente di Studi e Ricerche, Generali Immobiliare Italia SGR.

Goodhue, R. E., Green, R. D., Heien, D. M., & Martin, P. L. (2008). Current Economic Trends in the

California Wine Industry. California: University of California.

Grace, C., Grace, T., Becker, N., & Lyden, J. (2005). Barriers to Using Urban Farmers’ Market: An

Investigation of Food Stamp Clients’ Perception: Oregon Food Bank.

Granovetter, M. (1973). The Strength of Weak Ties. American Journal of Sociology, 78(6), 1360-1380.

Granovetter, M. (1983). The strength of weak ties: A network theory revisited Sociological Theory (Vol.

Volume 1, pp. 201-233).

Gruzd, A. (2009). Automated Discovery of Social Networks in Online Learning Communities.

Unpublished PhD, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, IL.

Gruzd, A. (2009). Studying Collaborative Learning using Name Networks. Journal of Education for

Library and Information Science, 50(4), 243-253.

Gruzd, A. (2009, October 7-11, 2009). Automated Discovery of Emerging Online Communities Among

Blog Readers: A Case Study of a Canadian Real Estate Blog. Paper presented at the Internet

Research 10.0 Conference, Milwaukee, WI, USA.

Gruzd, A., Wellman, B., & Takhteyev, Y. (2011). Imagining Twitter as an Imagined Community. Special

issue of the American Behavioral Scientist on Imagined Communities.

Hahn, R. W., & Stavins, R. N. (1992). Economic Incentives for Environmental Protection: Integrating

Theory and Practice. American Economic Review, 82, 464-468.

Halen, C., Vezzoli, C., & Wimmer, R. (2005). Methodology for product service system innovation. The

Netherlands: Koninklijke Van Gorcum.

Halme, M. (2005). Sustainable consumer services: Business solutions for household markets. London:

Earthscan.

Page 180: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

180

Hanks, K., Odom, W., Roedl, D., & Blevis, E. (2008). Sustainable Millennials: Attitudes towards

Sustainability and the Material Effects of Interactive Technologies. Paper presented at the CHI

2008, Florence, Italy.

Haythornthwaite, C. (2001). Exploring Multiplexity: Social Network Structures in a Computer-

Supported Distance Learning Class. The Information Society, 17, 211–226.

Haythornthwaite, C. (2002). Strong, Weak, and Latent Ties and the Impact of New Media. The

Information Society, 18, 385–401.

Hempel, J. (2006). Designed in China. BusinessWeek Retrieved October 20, 2009, from

www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/06_41/b4004412.htm

Hippel, E. V. (2005). Decmocratizing innovation. Cambridge, Massacusetts: The MIT Press.

Hockerts, K. (1998). Eco-Efficient Service Innovation: Increasing Business-Ecological Efficiency of

Products and Services. In M. Charter (Ed.), Greener Marketing: A Global Perspective on Greener

Marketing Practice (pp. 95-108). Sheffield, UK: Greenleaf publishing.

Huang, E. M., & Truong, K. N. (2008). Breaking the Disposable Technology Paradigm: Opportunities for

Sustainable. Paper presented at the CHI 2008, Florence, Italy.

Jasper, & others (1999). Hitchhikers Retrieved December 28th, 2008, from www.hitchhikers.org

Jegou, F., & Manzini, E. (2008). Collaborative services: Social innovation and design for sustainability.

Milano: Edizioni Poli.design.

Jégou, F., Manzini, E., & Meroni, A. (2002). Design plan, a tool for organising the design activities

oriented to generate sustainable solutions. Paper presented at the SusProNet.

Jones, Q. (1997). Virtual-Communities, Virtual Settlements & Cyber-Archaeology: A Theoretical Outline.

Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 3(3).

Kahn, L., Ali, R., Buonfino, A., Leadbeater, C., & Mulgan, G. (2009). breakthrough cities: how cities can

mobilise creativity and knowledge to tackle compelling social challenges. London: The Young

Foundation, British Council.

Kavanaugh, A. (1999). The Impact of Computer Networking on Community: A Social Network Analysis

Approach. Paper presented at the Telecommunications Policy Research Conference 1999.

Kavanaugh, A. (2001). Civic Engagement among Community Computer Network Users: Trend or

Phase? Paper presented at the Telecommunications Policy Research Conference 2001.

Kim, K. J. (1998). A study on the residents' sense of community Korea. Unpublished PhD thesis, Seoul

National University, Seou.

Kim Lee, H. (2010). Survey on the social innovation camp. Unpublished Survey. Hope Institute.

Koh, J., Kim, Y.-G., & Kim, Y.-G. (2003). Sense of Virtual Community: A Conceptual Framework and

Empirical Validation. International Journal of Electronic Commerce, 8(2), 75-94.

Krishna, A., & Shrader, E. (1999). Social capital assessment tool. Paper presented at the Conference on

Social Capital and Poverty Reduction.

Lan, L. (2009). Case study of Couch Surfing. Milan: Politecnico di Milano.

Lessig, L. (2008). Remix: Making Art and Commerce Thrive in the Hybrid Economy. London:

Bloomsbury.

Page 181: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

181

Livraghi, G. (2010). Dati sull’internet in Italia Retrieved October 6th, 2010, from

http://web.mclink.it/MC8216/dati/dati3.htm

Maier, L., & Shobayashi, M. (2001). Multifunctionality: TOWARDS AN ANALYTICAL FRAMEWORK.

Paris: OECD.

Manzini, E. (2004). Scenarios of sustainable ways of living - Local and global visions. INDACO,

Politecnico di Milano.

Manzini, E. (2005). Towards a New Ecology of the Artificial Environment. Design within the limits of

possibilities and the possibilities of limits.

Manzini, E. (2005). A cosmopolitan localism - Prospects for a sustainable local development and the

possible role of design. INDACO, Politecnico di Milano.

Manzini, E. (2005). Enabling solutions - Social innovation, creative communities and strategic design.

INDACO, Politecnico di Milano.

Manzini, E. (2005). Distributed systems - Promising models for a sustainable development. INDACO,

Politecnico di Milano.

Manzini, E. (2006). Design for sustainability - How to design sustainable solutions. INDACO,

Politecnico di Milano.

Manzini, E. (2007). A laboratory of ideas. Diffuse creativity and new ways of doing. In A. Meroni (Ed.),

Creative communities: People inventing sustainable ways of living (pp. 13-15). Milan: Edizioni

POLI.design.

Manzini, E. (2008). Collaborative services and enabling solutions: Social innovation and design for

sustainability.

Manzini, E. (2008). Design, ethics and sustainability - Guidelines for a transition phase.

Manzini, E. (2008). Design Research Agenda for Sustainability(DRAS): An open and collaborative

program. Unpublished Research agenda. Politecnico di Milano.

Manzini, E. (2008). Small, local, open and connected. Learning lessons about sustainability and design.

Observatorio del Diseño y la Arquitectura.

Manzini, E. (2009A). DESIS-International. A network on Design for Social Innovation and

Sustainability. DESIS-International.

Manzini, E. (2009B). Allegato 1.1 Casi e tipologie di incontro from course materials for Servic Design

Lab Sintesi 2009. Politecnico di Milano.

Manzini, E. (2010B). Social innovation and design. Some background notes. Politecnico di Milano.

Manzini, E., & Jegou, F. (2003). Sustainable everyday. Scenarios of Urban Life. Milano: Edizioni

Ambiente.

Manzini, E., & Jègou, F. (2007). Report of Contributions from the Government or the Government

Offices of Sweden, Ministry of Sustainable Development: INDACO - Politecnico di Milano, SDS

(Strategic Design Scenarios).

Manzini, E., & Jègou, F. (2007). Creative communities for sustainable lifestyles (CCSL). Milano:

Politecnico di Milano & Strategic Design Scenarios.

Manzini, E., Pillan, M., & Cipolla, C. (2010A). Servizi Digitali e Reti Collaborative: Incontri per fare.

Page 182: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

182

Milan: Politecnico di Milano.

Manzini, E., & Vezzoli, C. (2002). Product-Service Systems and Sustainability - Opportunities for

sustainable solutions. MIlano: Interdepartmental Research Centre. Innovation for the

Environmental Sustainability. Politecnico di Milano University.

Maslow, A. H. (1943). A Theory of Human Motivation. Psychological Review, 50(4), 370-396.

McMillan, D. W., & Chavis, D. M. (1986). Sense of Community: A definition and theory. Journal of

Psychology, 14(January), 6-23.

Meltzer, G. (2005). Sustainable Community, Learning from the cohousing model. Canada: Trafford.

Meroni, A. (Ed.). (2007). Creative communities: People inventing sustainable ways of living. Italy:

Edizioni POLI.design.

Meroni, A. (2008). Strategic Design to take care of the territory. Networking Creative Communities to

link people and places in a scenario of sustainable development. Paper presented at the P&D

Design 2008 - 8º Congresso Brasileiro de Pesquisa e Desenvolvimento em Design, São Paulo,

Brazil.

Mont, O. (2005). Sustainable consumption - Research and Policies. Bromma, Sweden: The Swedish

Environmental Protection Agency.

Mulgan, G. (2006). Social Silicon Valleys: A manifesto for social innovation. What is it, why it matters,

how it can be accelerated. London: The Young Foundation.

Mulgan, G. (2006). The Process of Social Innovation. Innovations(Spring), 145-162.

Mulgan, G., Steinberg, T., & Salem, O. (2005). Wide Open: Open source methods and their future

potential. In Demos (Ed.). London: Demos.

Mulgan, G., Tucker, S., Ali, R., & Sanders, B. (2007). Social innovation: what it is, why it matters and

how it can be accelerated. London: Young Foundation.

Murray, R. (2010). Danger and opportunity. Crisis and the new social economy. London: NESTA.

Murray, R., Mulgan, G., & Caulier!Grice, J. (2008). How to Innovate: The tools for social innovation.

London: The Young Foundation.

Myers, D. G. (2000). The Funds, Friends, and Faith of Happy People. American Psychologist, 55(1), 56-

67.

Nascimento, F. (2000). Peladeiros Retrieved December 28th, 2008, from www.peladeiros.com.br

Organisciak, P. (2008). Motivation of Crowds: The Incentives That Make Crowdsourcing Work

Retrieved May 5, 2008, from http://crowdstorming.wordpress.com/2008/01/31/motivation-of-

crowds-the-incentives-that-make-crowdsourcing-work/

Pacenti, E., & Sangiorgi, D. (2010). Service design research pioneers: An overview of Service Design

research developed in Italy since the ‘90s. Design Research Journal, Ges Ut Av Svid, Stiftelsen

Svensk Industridesign, 1(10), 26-33.

Paldam, M. (2000). Social Capital: One or Many? Definition and measurement. Journal of Economic

Surveys.

Papanek, V. (1995). The green imperative. Singapore: Thames and hudson.

Parkers, J. (2009). Case study of G.R.O.F.U.N. Milan: Politecnico di Milano.

Page 183: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

183

Pine, B. J., & Gilmore, J. H. (1999). The Experience Economy: Work Is Theater & Every Business a

Stage: Harvard Business School Press.

Putnam, R. D. (1995). Bowling Alone: America’s Declining Social Capital. Journal of Democracy, 6(1),

65-78.

Putnam, R. D. (1996). The Strange Disappearance of Civic America. The American Prospect, Winter(24).

Quan-Haase, A., & Wellman, B. (2002). How does the Internet Affect Social Capital. In M. Huysman &

V. Wulf (Eds.), IT and Social Capital.

Rheingold, H. (1993). The Virtual Community: Homesteading on the Electronic Frontier. Reading, MA:

Addison-Wesley Publishing Company.

Rheingold, H. (2002). Smart Mobs: The Next Social Revolution. New York: Basic Books.

Roma, C. d. (1999). Vicini Vicini Retrieved December 28th, 2008, from www.festadeivicinidicasa.it

Sabatini, F. (2005). An Inquiry into the Empirics of Social Capital and Economic Development.

Unpublished PhD Thesis, University of Rome La Sapienza, Rome.

Sangiorgi, D. (2003). Design dei servizi come design dei sistemi di attivita: la teoria dell'Attivita

applicata alla progettazione dei servizi. Unpublished PhD Thesis, Politecnicdo di Milano, Milano.

Seligman, M. E. P., & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2000). Positive Psychology: An Introduction. American

Psychologist, 55(5-14).

Sen, A. (2004). Why We Should Preserve the Spotted Owl. London Review of Books, 26(3).

Simpson, J., & Weiner, E. (Eds.). (2004) The Concise Oxford Dictionary. Oxford: Oxford University

Press.

Smoreda, Z., & Thomas, F. (2001). Social networks and residential ICT adoption and use. Paper

presented at the Eurescom Summit, Heidelberg.

Snyder, C. R., & Lopez, S. J. (2005). Handbook of Positive Psychology: Oxford University Press, USA.

Stalder, F., & Hirsh, J. (2002). Open Source Intelligence. First Monday, 7(6).

Stanoevska-Slabeva, K., & Schmid, B. F. (2001). A Typology of Online Communities and Community

Supporting Platforms. Paper presented at the the 34th Hawaii International Conference on System

Sciences.

Tapscott, D., & Williams, A. D. (2006). Wikinomics (Y. Mina, Trans.): 21 Century Books.

Thackara, J. (2005). In the bubble: Designing in a complex world. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The MIT

Press.

UNEP, U.-. (2002). youthxchange. training kit on responsible consumption - THE GUIDE: A United

Nations Publication.

Unknown (2006). Social Silicon Valleys - A manifesto for social innovation. What it is, why it matters

and how it can be accelerated.: The Young Foundation.

Unknown (2006). Internet serves as ‘social glue’. BBC NEWS Retrieved September 1, 2009, from

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/4644666.stm

Unknown (2009). Social innovation wins the backing of President Obama and Barroso Retrieved June

24, 2009, from http://www.youngfoundation.org.uk/social-innovation/news/social-innovation-

wins-backing-president-obama-and-barroso

Page 184: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

184

Unknown (2009). Fixing the future. Innovating more effective responses to recession. London: The

Young Foundation.

Valente, T. W. (1996). Social network thresholds in the diffusion of innovations. Social Networks,

18(1996), 69-89.

Valente, T. W., & DAVIS, R. L. (1999). Accelerating the Diffusion of Innovations Using Opinion Leaders.

THE ANNALS OF THE AMERICAN ACADEMY, 566(November), 55-67.

Vezzoli, C. (2007). System design for sustainability. Italy: Maggioli Editore.

Wellman, B. (1996). For a social network analysis of computer networks: A Sociological Perspective on

Collaborative Work and Virtual Community. Paper presented at the SIGCPR/ SIGMIS '96.

Wellman, B. (1999). Living Networked in a Wired World. In M. Hears & D. Price (Eds.), Trends and

Controversies: IEEE Intelligent Systems.

Wellman, B. (2001A). The Rise (and Possible Fall) of Networked Individualism. In L. Keeble (Ed.),

Community Networks Online. London: Taylor & Francis.

Wellman, B. (2001B). Physical Place and Cyber Place: The Rise of Personalized Networking.

International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 25(Special Issue on “Networks, Class and

Place”).

Wellman, B., Boase, J., Chen, W., Hampton, K., Quan-Haase, A., & Isl, I. D. d. (2002). Networking

Community: The Internet in Everyday Life. Paper presented at the Euricom Conference on e-

Democracy, Nijmegen, Netherlands.

Wellman, B., Haase, A. Q., Witte, J., & Hampton, K. (2001). Does the Internet Increase, Decrease, or

Supplement Social Capital?: Social Networks, Participation, and Community Commitment.

American Behavioral Scientist, 45(436).

Wellman, B., Salaff, J., Dimitrova, D., Garton, L., Gulia, M., & Haythornthwaite, C. (1996). COMPUTER

NETWORKS AS SOCIAL NETWORKS: Collaborative Work, Telework, and Virtual Community.

Annual Reviews Sociology(22), 213–238.

Wilkinson, N., Savoie, L., Crawford, L., & Rice, K. (2009). Community Connectors Program. Halifax:

Halifax Farmers' Market.

Williams, B. (2000). Formal Structures and Social Reality. In G. Diego (Ed.), Trust: Making and

Breaking Cooperative Relations (pp. 3-13): Department of Sociology, University of Oxford.

Woodruff, A., Hasbrouck, J., & Augustin, S. (2008). A Bright Green Perspective on Sustainable Choices.

Paper presented at the CHI 2008, Florence, Italy.

Yang, S., Lee, H., & Kurnia, S. (2007). Understanding the Relationship between Information and

Communication Technology (ICT) and Social Capital: A Conceptual Framework. Paper presented at

the 13th Asia Pacific Management Conference, Melbourne, Australia.

Page 185: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

185

APPENDIX

A.1. Social media personalization, openness and exposure

Looking into the ICTs used by the cases, some patterns emerge in the way people select ICTs to

perform their tasks. For example, consumers use voice calls or emails to contact farmers and

make reservations to their visit but do not use their blogs or newsletter for the same purpose;

producers send news of the farms to consumers via blogs, newsletter or social networking

services but not via voice calls or internet forum. In other words, empirical findings show that

despite some overlapping, there may exist certain social media that fit for certain tasks than

others. If this is the case and if the implicit correlation can be identified, it can guide people to

selecting a right medium for a task will help collaborative organizations communicate more

effectively and diffuse their ideas more efficiently. As the first step to identify the correlation

between social media and the tasks, a set of variables to differentiate social media were

extracted. Then the social media used by the five groups of cases were mapped accordingly,

visualized into a map and the result was interpreted in relation to the case analysis. But prior to

this, literature studies on previous researches to classify social media were conducted.

The framework

Three attributes of information were selected as variables to compare social media:

personalization, openness and exposure.

Personalization of information. A piece of information is personalized if it is produced and

addressed to a particular individual. The opposite concept of personalization would be general.

The degree of personalization is inversely proportional to the number of recipients.

Case studies show that, though not always, some media suit a personalized message more than

others. For example, face-to-face conversation, voice calls and 1:1 emails are mainly used to

send personalized messages. On the contrary, a blog, internet forum and SNS are often used to

send information addressed to a defined group and therefore less personalized. Collaborative

tools such as social library, social bookmarking and wiki are used to send information addressed

to an undefined group and therefore they are general. Table 6 illustrates the hierarchy of media

according to their personalization.

Table 1. The hierarchy of personalization of social media

Degree of personalization Social media

Page 186: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

186

Highly personalized Rarely personalized

1 to 1 conversation Voice calls 1 to 1 email Comments on blogs and SNS Instant messaging IRC (Internet Relay Chat) Blogs SNS Internet forum Newsletters Social bookmarking Social libraries Wiki

Openness of information. Openness of information means an availability of access to a piece of

information. The more open a piece of information is, the more people it will be available to.

Like the personalization, openness of information is related to the media type. Some media by

their nature permit more opportunity of access than others. For example, blogs allow their

contents to be accessed by anyone32 whereas voice calls limit the access of its content to

transmitters and recipients. Table 7 illustrates the hierarchy of media according to their

openness.

Table 2. The hierarchy of openness of social media

Degree of openness Social media Rarely open Highly open

Voice calls Face-to-face conversation Emails Newsletters SNS posting SNS group Social libraries Social bookmarking Internet forum (some are closed) Blogs (some are closed) Wiki

The degree of openness not only varies among different media types but also within the same

media type. For example, Facebook is less open than blogs because its contents are available

only to the members whereas blogs in general are not. However, Facebook is more open than A

Small World, another SNS that, as the name implies, is an exclusive community for culturally

influential people. One can join A Small World only by getting invited by existing members and

therefore the opportunity of having an access to its contents is less than that of Facebook.

Within Facebook, openness of a message varies depending on where it is posted. A message

posted on a personal wall is less open than a message posted on a group wall because the former

is only visible to friends whereas the latter is visible to any member of Facebook.

Openness should not be confused with the exposure of information which is related to the

number of people who actually access information. Open information may not necessarily be

32 Some blogs are available only to selected members but in general, most blogs are open to visitors.

Page 187: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

187

exposed to a larger group of people than a closed information. For example, a message on

Facebook may be accessed by more people than the same message posted on a blog.

Exposure of information. Exposure of information means the degree of which a piece of

information is exposed to people and it is directly proportional to the size of people who have

access to that information. The more exposed a piece of information is, the more likely it is to

diffuse. Like personalization or openness, it is related to media type – but not only – because

some media by nature are more effective for group communication than others and therefore

more people in these media. If a public message is to be delivered through media of low

exposure, the delivery can be inefficient. (Imagine delivering news to 1000 members via phone

call as opposed to a newsletter). Likewise, if a private message is to be delivered through media

of high exposure, the delivery can be ineffective. (For example, people do not use a blog to

deliver a personal message because there is no guarantee that the message will be securely

delivered to a recipient).

The degree of exposure is relatively higher in new media such as blogs, SNS33, wiki and social

collaborative tools because these media were designed exactly for this purpose: to support

people to aggregate and collaborate. On the other hand, media such as face-to-face

conversation, voice calls and emails have a less degree of exposure because they suit one-to-one

or small group communication.

Media type is not the only factor that determines the exposure of information. There are other

factors such as the popularity of a transmitter, a content and a platform. Therefore the

comparison of exposure based on the media type may vary case by case. However, based on the

empirical data from the case studies and assuming the most likely context of use, a hierarchy is

proposed as below (table 8).

Table 3. The hierarchy of exposure of social media

Degree of exposure Social media Highly exposed Rarely exposed

Wiki SNS Social bookmarking / social libraries Email IRC IM Face-to-face conversation Voice calls

In summary, the three attributes of information can be described simply as below:

• Personalized information: information delivered to a specific person or group

33 An average Facebook user has about 130 friends. So whenever one writes something on his or her wall, it has an average exposure of 130 people.

Page 188: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

188

• Depersonalized information: information that is delivered to a undefined group

• Open information: information in an open space

• Closed information: information in a closed space

• Exposed information: information in a crowded (virtual) space

• Unexposed information: information in an empty (virtual) space

Comparison of social media

Based on the framework of the personalization, openness and exposure of information, a set of

social media were evaluated in 3-point rating scale (table 9) and mapped onto 3 x 3 matrices

(figure 7-1, 7-2). The most confusing part of evaluating media is that people use them in

different ways in diverse contexts. For example, a voice call is normally between two people but

it can also be a conference call between many participants or a broadcasted interview over the

phone. So is a face-to-face interaction. It may be between a private conversation between two

people or a public speech for a large group of audience in an open space. In the case of

Facebook, there are even more diverse situations as it is a service composed of a set of different

social media to support social networking rather than of a single medium. Therefore, to avoid

such confusion, specific contexts were defined within each medium.

Table 4. Comparison of different media (in the descending order of the sum of openness and

exposure)

[3-point rating scale] In personalization, 1: low (1000 or more people), 2: mid (10~1000 people), 3: high

(less than 10 people); in openness, 1: only available to a limited group of people, 2: available to anyone who

register, 3: available to anyone without registering; in exposure, 1: low (less than 10 people), 2: mid

(10~1000 people), 3: high (1000 or more people)

Media Personalization Openness Exposure Openness +

exposure

A message from the president broadcasted on TV

1 3 3 6

Wikipedia 1 3 3 6 Internet forum at the global level (e.g. IBM global Jam)

1~3 2 3 5

Blogs 1~3 3 2 5 Comments on a blog 3 3 2 5 Facebook group page 1~3 2 3 5 Social collaborative tools (e.g. social libraries, social bookmarking)

1 2 3 5

A group conversation (size >10) 2 2 2 4 Newsletters from a farm in APSM 2~3 2 2 4 A spam 1 1 3 4 Flickr album 1~3 2 2 4 Internet relay chat in an online lecture (size 50) 2 1 2 3

Facebook comments 3 1 2 3 Facebook personal page (average 130 friends) 2 1 2 3

1:1 voice call 3 1 1 2

Page 189: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

189

1:1 conversation 3 1 1 2 1:1 email 3 1 1 2 Instant messaging 3 1 1 2

Figure 13 is the visualization of table 9. The social media are mapped on a 2-dimensional space where the

x-axis represents the exposure and the y-axis represents the openness. The size of dots represent the

degree of personalization.

Figure 1. Mapping of social media in table 9

A message delivered through the media of high exposure and high openness, i.e., in the upper

right, is potentially highly diffusive whereas a message delivered through the media of low

exposure and low openness, i.e., in the left bottom is private and closed and therefore likely to

circulate inside a closed circle.

Page 190: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

190

A.2. Case studies format

This template is based on the template developed by Anna Meroni for her Strategic design class

to analyze collaborative services. Use this template to describe a service. For the definitions of a

service and a platform, please refer to the page of the template.

Author of the case research

Country: __________ Step 1. identity card (Light analysis)

Objectives of step 1: To provide a complete but synthetic overview of the case. To classify the case according with the main criteria and key words adopted to evaluate sustainable and innovative solutions. Title. Also include the link to the service. __________ Formal name of the solution, name used by the people, significant title given by the researchers. e.g. Vegetable Gardens in Parco Nord (www.parconord.it) Sub title __________ Formal subtitle of the solution or used by the people (max 150 characters) e.g. (ref. case: Vegetable Gardens in Parco Nord, Milan) Raising fruits and vegetables in town City, Country __________ e.g. Milan, Italy When was it launched? __________ e.g. 1997 Source __________

Page 191: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

191

Where the info comes from. Persons (the people you contacted):

_(on the provider/promoter side) name, surname, job description, company/organisation, tel/e-mail, etc. _(on the user side) name, surname, work, tel/e-mail, etc.

Internet URL, newspaper or magazine references, etc. Existence of a platform (Platform here is defined as a system that provides a series of services that includes the very case being analyzed.) Key-words Words people would use to search for the solution: they refer to the "organisational key ideas” supporting the solutions. They define "how" the function is performed. Choose one option among the following list, or "propose" a new one whether really-really no-one match with your case : • Exchanging • Sharing • Networking • Empowering/enabling • Promoting user participation • Promoting mutual help • Integrating functions • Connecting local-global Service type Check the corresponding type in each variable ! Producers/consumers networks (e.g. purchasing groups; local markets, etc.) ! Community-based initiatives (e.g. community-based tourism, community based agriculture, etc.) ! Result-oriented encounters (e.g. car pooling, street games organizations, etc.) ! Mutual-support circles (e.g. circle of care for diabetic, allergic, obese people, etc.) ! Caring and support activities (e.g. support elderly people at home, mobility in isolated places, etc.) ! Competences, time and products exchange (e.g. time banks, sharing tasks, etc.) ! Products and places sharing (e.g. car sharing, co-housing, community services, etc.) ! Mapping diffused information (e.g. city maintenance, local resources availability, etc.) Type of collaborative digital service provided (check the corresponding type in each variable)

Variables Types Relationship of interaction

! community – community ! individual – community ! community – individual ! individual – individual

Activitiy ! to co-create ! to share ! to exchange ! to buy and/or sell ! to entertain ! to educate and learn ! to care ! to help

Page 192: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

192

! to participate in political activities ! others:

Objective ! to improve welfare ! to improve safety ! to improve productivity ! to improve social conviviality ! to reduce environmental impact ! to disseminate ideas ! to have economical benefits ! others:

Service description and the aim (in brief) __________ e.g. Meetup is the world’s largest network of local groups. Meetup makes it easy for anyone to organize a local group or find one of the thousands already meeting up face-to-face. More than 2,000 groups get together in local communities each day, each one with the goal of improving themselves or their communities. Meetup’s mission is to revitalize local community and help people around the world self-organize. Meetup believes that people can change their personal world, or the whole world, by organizing themselves into groups that are powerful enough to make a difference. Service promoter/provider __________ The actor providing/organising or promoting solution. Select one option in the following list: • Big enterprise • Small Medium enterprise • NGO • Cooperative • Association • International organisation • Academic institution • Government • Municipality • Add

e.g. (ref. case: Vegetable Gardens in Parco Nord, Milan) Consortium Parco Nord, Milano • Association Target user __________ e.g. Drivers who have empty seats and need a company to travel with and travellers who need a ride. Image Add one image: the best and most meaningful image among the pictures you have.

Page 193: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

193

e.g.:

Problematic background and context (in brief) __________ Description of the context where the solution has been developed: historical background of the solution and situation where the it takes place: it is the geographical area and the social/economic fabric where the demand of this service has emerged. (max 350 characters). e.g.: (ref. case: Vegetable Gardens in Parco Nord, Milan) “Parco Nord” is a big semi-urban park in the Milanese hinterland very close to peripheral residential areas. As many other parks, it suffers for carelessness and have huge spare spaces that could instead be devoted to many other uses. (ref. case: Ateliers Avelo. Workshop facilities for environmental friendly commuters. Brussels) An association, Les Ateliers de la Rue Voot, is the frame within Ateliers Avelo has been originated. It is a multi-activity association aiming at proposing activities through direct participation of the user: it is located in a popular residential suburb of the city suffering for typical problems such as people isolation and car based mobility. Solution description __________ Description of the solution that is being provided to users. Be sure to cover the following points: - What is the aim of the solution and to what need does it address? - How does the solution work in brief? - To what personal and societal values does it address? (max 500 characters) e.g.: (ref. case: Vegetable Gardens in Parco Nord, Milan) Vegetable Gardens is a service provided by a consortium of 6 municipalities around the park “Parco Nord” in the Milanese hinterland. Applying to the Vegetable Gardens scheme means to have the possibility to rent an allotment where to raise your own fruits and vegetables. Allotments are very close to residential areas. The service is open to pensioners, housewives or

Page 194: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

194

unemployed, who are older than 60-years-old: it gives them the possibility to socialise and to enjoy out-door activities. (ref. case: Ateliers Avelo. Workshop facilities for environmental friendly commuters. Brussels) Ateliers Avelo aims at changing commuting attitude in a city area where people use a lot their car. It does so by promoting the use of bikes and empowering individuals to take care and maintain them. It provides spaces, infrastructures and qualified personnel to whoever wants to repair the bike: people can find pieces to be reused and to substitute, working tools and any kind of support they might need. They can also participate to the reparation of old bikes that will be offered to charities. Key-Innovation __________ Synthetic description in one sentence of the key innovation and distinctive value of the solution. (max 150 characters) e.g.: (ref. case: House sharing between students and pensioners, Milan) Accommodation of students at lonely pensioners (ref. case: Vegetable Gardens in Parco Nord, Milan) Allotment of spare spaces to elderly in a semi-urban park, to raise vegetable and fruits in town. (ref. case: Ateliers Avelo. Workshop facilities for environmental friendly commuters. Brussels) Enabling individuals to take care of, and maintain, their own bike. Who are the partners? __________ List the partners involved in establishment and management of the platform if there is any. e.g. Commune di Milano Social, economical and environmental benefits if any (in brief) __________ Why the solution seems to be promising in terms of sustainability. What is the benefit of this solution? (max 350 characters) e.g.: (ref. case: Vegetable Gardens in Parco Nord, Milan) Caring for their own garden the involved people generate individual and social advantages. In addition the solution generates a well kept green area near, or in-between, the city. It produces some vegetables for local consumption and, doing so, it reduces the demand for food coming form far away.

To what extent do users participate in providing the service? __________ e.g. The platform of One Life Japan is a blog with its major goal of delivering information on the services it provides. On this platform, users play a role of no more than readers. In order to get

Page 195: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

195

additional information or make reservations, they are asked to send an email or make a call to a person in charge. Describe positive qualities that this service creates to the members and to society. __________ A platform for collaborative services is open (or is called an open platform) if it allows users meet their own needs by creating services that the service provider does not provide yet or provides but has failed to do well. e.g. Zoes platform is open because it provides a service called ‘Zoes in action’ in which users can create their own collaborative services using open-source toolkits provided by Zoes. Enabling technologies. If applicable, describe the technologies and their roles in the collaboration. __________

e.g. Mobile SMS is used to make a reservation and confirm it. It also employed e-commerce system with geographic data of users so that people can purchase products from the producers located nearest to them.

Step 2. case description (In-depth analysis)

Objectives of step 2: To provide a deep description of the solution, of the way it works and of its level of development. Problematic background and context __________ Extended presentation of the context where the solution has been developed: historical background of the solution and situation where it takes place: it is the geographical area and the social/economic fabric where the demand of this service has emerged. Be sure to cover the following topics: - What are the characteristics of the geographical place, the inhabitants and the activities (business, social, etc.) in the area? - Why did the solution come to life? - What are the drivers of the solution (e.g. economic, security, necessity, lifestyle driven, etc.)? - What are the personal motivations to start or to join the solution? (max 1000 characters) e.g.: (ref. case: Vegetable Gardens in Parco Nord, Milan) “Parco Nord” is a big semi-urban park in the Milanese hinterland very close to peripheral residential areas. As many other parks, it suffers for carelessness and have huge spare spaces that could instead be devoted to many other uses. The Consortium that manages the park wanted to provide services in order to face the above problem but also to find solutions to the common isolation many people, especially pensioners, go through. Such peripheral residential areas suffer also for the lack of public spaces where people can meet and of entertaining services for children, teens and elderly. In the recent past (and, in some cases, also in the present) the ground alongside the railway paths was given to retired people to be farmed: from this solution derives the idea to divide in allotment some parts of the park to be farmed and raised by those who want to join the scheme and are eligible.

Page 196: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

196

Solution description __________ Extended description of the solution that is being provided to users. Be sure to cover the following points: - What is the aim of the solution and to what need does it address? - How does the solution work in detail? - Why is the innovation interesting? - To what value (positive qualities) does it address (both societal and personal value)? (max 1000 characters) e.g.: (ref. case: Vegetable Gardens in Parco Nord, Milan) Vegetable Gardens is a service provided by a consortium of 6 municipalities around the park “Parco Nord” in the Milanese hinterland. Starting from the traditional idea of the “railway vegetable gardens”, the park proposes the ‘rent’ of vegetable gardens to pensioners, housewives or unemployed, who are older than 60-years-old. Users can farm and grow up whatever they wish, but they have to assure a regular maintenance and to demonstrate to take care of it. Further, they are requested to look after common spaces. Once in a while they are asked to participate to meetings and training seminars. The rental process include a 6-years renewable contract and the following facilities for farming: _ the chest for recovering the equipment _ the concrete tiles for the paths _ postal costs and secretariat _ water for minimum 3 half-days per week _ disposal of non-compostable waste Besides raising fruits and vegetables the solution gives the possibility to people to socialise and to enjoy out-door activities Timeframe __________ Indicate from when the solution is, or will be, viable. (year and month) Digital and physical activities Digital activities (pay attention to the required physical assets, type of interaction, size of community) Physical activities (pay attention to the required knowledge competence, type of interaction, , size of community) Formalization What rules does it have that members have to abide by? Step 3. solution elements and technologies Objectives of step 3: To understand and describe the complexity of the solution in terms of it components (products and services): what and who is needed to get that result. Solution Elements __________ __________

Page 197: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

197

__________ List the main/key elements of the solution. Elements are the products (included some specific places as shops, equipped corners, etc.) and the services that enable the solution to be provided Technologies __________ __________ __________ List the key technologies used in the solution: they can be ICT technologies, mechanical technologies, electronic technologies, etc.. Development and management of an enabling solution 1. Who developed the website (the promoters themselves, professional freelancers, external software company...) 2. Was it a volunteer or paid work? 3. Who pays for the maintenance? 4. What economic model to develop/maintain (membership, project, ad hoc fundraising, etc.) 5. Is it released in open source / free software; if yes, where? Features What kind of features does the service have? _ e-commerce _ Blog _ Wiki _ Newsletter _ RSS _ Search _ Geo-reference _ Open source _ Multilingual service _ Multimedia contents _ Upload & download files (e.g. images, movies, documents) _ Money transfer _ Online poll _ Bulletin board _ Appointment & calendar _ Use of tagging systems _ Social networking (profiles/groups, etc.) _ Widgets and other “external” web applications (plugins to other apps) _ Else:

Step 4. system actors

Objectives of step 4: To understand and describe the complexity of he solution in terms of the actors involved in its performance and development. System actors name description role name description role name description role ..... .... ..... ..... .... .....

Page 198: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

198

System actors are the different stakeholders taking part in the solution. They can be associations, institutions, companies, group of people, individuals including the users performing specific tasks and roles in the system. e.g.: (ref. case: Vegetable Gardens in Parco Nord, Milan) Giovanni He is one of the urban farmer who has joined

the solution. He is 73 years old and lives with the wife close to the area of the vegetable gardens.

Active user

Consortium Parco Nord

It is the organisation managing the entire Parco Nord. The 6 municipalities around the park take part into the Consortium: Milano, Sesto San Giovanni, Cinisello Balsamo, Bresso, Cusano, Cormano. And also the District of Milano.

Promoter and provider

AMSA Agenzia Milanese Servizi Ambientali

Public company which collect the waste Service Supplier

Chest producer Equipment provider selected by the Consortium through public competition on the base of the best economic offer.

Product Supplier

Maintenance provider

Service provider selected by the Consortium through public competition on the base of the best economic offer.

Service Supplier

Step 5. Case evaluation

Objectives of step 8: To make the effort to draw some first conclusions from the case. To give a qualitative view of the benefits provided by the solution and to highlight its most promising features. Society __________ Values and benefits for society on a collective and individual basis. Add critical points. (max. 600 characters) e.g.: (ref. case: Vegetable Gardens in Parco Nord, Milan) Caring for their own garden the involved people generate individual and social advantages. The individual ones are: entertainment, improvement of the family economy (thanks to the auto-production of vegetables) and, for the elderly, the opportunity to remain active and to perceive themselves as useful. The social advantages are the city re-vitalisation (by introducing new day-to-day activities) and the public space regeneration (by managing the public area where the vegetable gardens are in). A limit of this program is that it is dedicated only to the elderly people. Environment __________

Page 199: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

199

Values and benefits for environment. Eventual critical points. (max. 600 characters) e.g.: (ref. case: Vegetable Gardens in Parco Nord, Milan) It generates a well kept green area near, or in-between, the city. It produces some vegetables for local consumption (no transport and no package is needed) and, doing so, it reduces the demand for food coming form far away. It offers the possibility to use the organic home wastes as compost in the garden. It promotes a culture of gardening and of natural food. Economy __________ Economic values and benefits for individuals and families, society and business. Eventual critical points (max. 600 characters) e.g.: (ref. case: Vegetable Gardens in Parco Nord, Milan) It improves the family economy (not only for the people that directly take care of the garden). It improves and maintains the quality of a green area in a very economic way. It may stimulate some little local economic enterprise: gardening shops, selling or renting of gardening tools, professional gardeners cooperatives, etc.). Perspectives and reproducibility __________ Cover the following topics: _Why the case seems to be promising in terms of sustainability? _Which are the success factors and possible risks of failure in the short and in the long term? _Is the solution potentially reproducible or context specific? Which are the other potential application areas of the solution or of the approach proposed by the solution? (max. 600 characters) e.g.: (ref. case: Vegetable Gardens in Parco Nord, Milan) It promotes positive behaviors and cultural attitude: a new relationship with nature, through the culture of the garden. A new relationship with food, trough the auto-production of vegetable. A new relationship between personal and common interest. It reinforces an idea of self-sufficiency, an one hand, and of cooperation, on the other. It increases the urban (or suburban) green and, in perspective, a new idea of the relation between urban and green spaces..

Possible improvements __________ Could the solution be improved from a designer point of view? Is there a demand for new products and/or services? (max 350 characters) e.g.: (ref. case: Vegetable Gardens in Parco Nord, Milan) The solution could be improved by providing the urban farmers with more useful tools (even in common) to cultivate the garden and to storage their own stuff. In addition, a more affective teaching service about farming techniques and garden diseases is needed.

Step 6. Researcher’s comments

Page 200: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

200

__________ Personal comments from the interviewers, interpretation of the results, points of view, open questions, difficulties encountered in the work, a lack of reliability of the information should be added here. (max. 1000 characters)

Page 201: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

201

A.3. Survey formats

A survey for producers (in English)

https://spreadsheets.google.com/viewform?formkey=dDIwMk8td2tQQUswYlMyWV9JYXBoR

Gc6MA

Earth Market Survey - questionnaire for producers Hello and welcome by the project team in Feeding Milan. Energy for change. (Www.nutriremilano.it). The questionnaire that we propose is aimed at understanding how the producers participating in the Earth Market cooperate with each other and / or consumers and which technologies they use. Thank you for your willingness to participate and we hope to help make the market more effectively. The questionnaire will take about 10 min. To complete. Thanks. For any questions about the questionnaire can be obtained from: Joon Sang Baek, e-mail: [email protected] Dario Cantu, e-mail: daria.cantu @ polimi.it Politecnico di Milano - Department INDIGO Via Durando 38 A DIS-Indigo, 2 Floor, 20158 Milan, Italy Tel: 02 2399 5967, Fax: 02 2399 7280

Page 202: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

202

Basic information 1. What is the title of your farm? Enter your name if your farm does not have any title. ( ) 2. How old are you?

" <30 " 30 ~ 39 " 40 ~ 49 " 50 ~ 59 " > 60

3. You are:

" Women " Men

4. Where is your farm? " Milan South Agricultural Park " Within 40 km from Milan (Milan out of the Agricultural Park South) " More than 40 km from Milan (Lombardy) " More than 40 miles from London (other regions) " Other:

5. Postal Code ( ) 6. What do you produce? Use the comma (,) to add more choices in 'Other'

# Vegetable # Fruit # Agricultural products # Dairy products # Meat # Fish # Manufactured products (e.g. sausages) # Bread # Juice, fresh # Plants and flowers # Other:

7. What services does it offer? Use the comma (,) to add more choices in ‘Other’.

# Direct sales company # Teaching Farm # Courses / workshops # Company visits # Routes for the use of land # Hospitality / farm # Food # Organic Certification # Point Park (information services) # Other:

8. How many editions of the Earth Market have you attended? ( )

Page 203: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

203

9. How long have you used the Internet? In years. (If the period is less than a year, put '0 ') ( ) 10. How often do you use the Internet?

" daily " weekly " monthly " rarely

11. Why do you use the Internet? Use the comma (,) to add more choices in ‘Other’

# To be in touch with people alter # Entertainment # Work / study # e-commerce (private use) # e-commerce (business use) # Other:

12. Please indicate your feelings with respect to the following statements relating to the Earth Market with 'yes' or 'no'. Yes No 1. I believe that the Earth Market is a good place to sell my products. " " 2. The producers in this market do not share the same values. " " 3. I and the other producers want the same things from the market. " " 4. I can recognize most of the producers participating in the market. " " 5. The Earth Market I feel at home. " " 6. A few producers in the market I know. " " 7. I'm interested in what other vendors think of my behavior. " " 8. I have no influence on how the Earth Market. " " 9. If there is a problem with the market, manufacturers can fix it. " " 10. To me it is very important to sell my products in this market. " " 11. The producers in this market generally do not get along. " " 12. I expect to sell my products in this market for a long time. " "

13. Are you involved in any collaborative activities with other producers in the market?

" Yes " No

Collaborative activities with other producers in the market. 14. If so, what?

# Creation / management of direct contacts with consumers (e.g. purchasing groups) # Socialization # Mutual support for small common problems (e.g. meetings / discussions on mutual

activities) # Exchange of expertise, time, products (e.g. selling products from other manufacturers in

their store in the company) # Sharing products, space and knowledge (e.g. sharing a forgone / equipment) # Other

15. If you chose other, please tell us more about your contacts with other producers in the market. ( )

Page 204: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

204

16. Who are the producers you work with most? ( ) 17. How long have you been involved in these activities? in years <1 1 to 9 10 to

19 > 20 not

applicable (n/a)

Creation & management of direct network with consumers (e.g. purchasing groups)

" " " " "

Socialization " " " " " Mutual support for common problems (e.g. meetings and discussions on mutual activities)

" " " " "

Exchange of expertise, time and products (e.g. selling other producers’ products in your shop and vice versa)

" " " " "

Sharing products, space and knowledge (e.g. sharing farming tools)

" " " " "

Others " " " " "

18. How many people do you collaborate with? <10 10 to

29 30 to 50

> 50 not applicable (n/a)

Creation & management of direct network with consumers (e.g. purchasing groups)

" " " " "

Socialization " " " " " Mutual support for common problems (e.g. meetings and discussions on mutual activities)

" " " " "

Exchange of expertise, time and products (e.g. selling other producers’ products in your shop and vice versa)

" " " " "

Sharing products, space and knowledge (e.g. sharing farming tools)

" " " " "

Others " " " " "

19. On average, how often it comes into contact with other producers to pursue them / manage them? daily weekly monthly rarely n/a Creation & management of direct network with consumers (e.g. purchasing groups)

" " " " "

Socialization " " " " " Mutual support for common problems (e.g. meetings and discussions on mutual activities)

" " " " "

Exchange of expertise, time and products (e.g. selling other producers’ products in your shop and vice versa)

" " " " "

Sharing products, space and knowledge (e.g. sharing farming tools)

" " " " "

Others " " " " "

20. Select three technologies that you use more frequently to the activities listed above. Use the comma (,) to add more choices in ‘Other’

# face-to-face # Phone # Mobile # email # mailing list # newsletter

Page 205: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

205

# Blog # and website / e-commerce platform # Social networking services (e.g. Facebook, Twitter) # online discussion forum # teleconference # Other:

21. Are you involved in any collaborative activities already with the consumers of the market?

" Yes " No

Collaborative activities with market consumers. 22. If so, what?

# Community-supported agriculture # Direct sales # Delivery service of seasonal fruits and vegetables # Educational activities / workshops # Farm visits # Agritourism # Other

23. If you chose other, he wants to tell us more about his contacts with the users of the market? ( ) 24. How many people come into contact? <10 10 to 29 30 to

50 > 50 not

applicable (n/a)

Community-supported agriculture " " " " " Direct Sales " " " " " Food box delivery service " " " " " Educational activities / workshops " " " " " Farm visits " " " " " Agritourism activities " " " " " Other " " " " "

25. Its customers are individuals or groups (e.g. associations, gas)? # Individuals # Groups

26. How long have you carry out these activities? In years <1 1 to 9 10 to 19 > 20 not

applicable (n/a)

Community-supported agriculture " " " " " Direct Sales " " " " " Food box delivery service " " " " " Educational activities / workshops " " " " " Farm visits " " " " " Agritourism activities " " " " " Other " " " " "

Page 206: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

206

27. On average, how often it comes into contact with users to perform them / manage them? In years daily weekly monthly rarely n/a Community-supported agriculture " " " " " Direct Sales " " " " " Food box delivery service " " " " " Educational activities / workshops " " " " " Farm visits " " " " " Agritourism activities " " " " " Other " " " " "

28. Select three technologies that you use more frequently to the activities listed above. Use the comma (,) to add more choices in ‘Other’

# face-to-face # Phone # Mobile # email # mailing list # newsletter # Blog # and website / e-commerce platform # Social networking services (e.g. Facebook, Twitter) # online discussion forum # teleconference # Other:

Page 207: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

207

Any idea ... 29. The interest to participate in a support service to the logistics that would provide a platform for the collection and distribution of local products?

" Yes " No

30. If you would be willing to share facilities / tools? What? ( ) 31. To facilitate the organization of the market and improve the service would be willing to:

# To propose and manage collaborative services to support the logistics for the transport of goods and equipment.

# To share your van with other producers to transport goods to the market # To manage a blog dedicated to your farm and regularly update the items you will bring

to the market # To spare your time during the market to consult consumers on urban farming

techniques # Other

Thank you for your cooperation

Page 208: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

208

A survey for consumers (in English)

https://spreadsheets.google.com/viewform?formkey=dDIwMk8td2tQQUswYlMyWV9JYXBoR

Gc6MA

Earth Market Survey - questionnaire for users Hello and welcome by the project team in Feeding Milan. Energy for change. (Www.nutriremilano.it). The questionnaire that we propose aims to understand how consumers participating in the Earth Market cooperate with each other and / or with manufacturers and technology use. Thank you for your willingness to participate and we hope to help make the market more effectively. The questionnaire will take approximately 10 minutes to complete. Thanks. For any questions about the questionnaire can be obtained from: Joon Sang Baek, e-mail: [email protected] Dario Cantu, e-mail: daria.cantu @ polimi.it Politecnico di Milano - Department INDIGO Via Durando 38 A DIS-Indigo, 2 Floor, 20158 Milan, Italy Tel: 02 2399 5967, Fax: 02 2399 7280

Page 209: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

209

Basic information 1. How old are you?

" <30 " 30 ~ 39 " 40 ~ 49 " 50 ~ 59 " > 60

2. You are: Indicate sex

" Women " Men

3. Where do you live? " Milan (City) " Milan (Province) " Lombardy " Other:

4. Postal Code 5. What level of education achieved?

" Middle school " High school " Undergraduate " PhD " Other:

5. Which is part of the annual income bracket? per household in !

" <18000 " from 18000 to 27000 " from 27000 to 36000 " from 36000 to 54000 " from 54000 to 72000 " 72000 " Other:

6. Where does the shopping for food normally? # Small neighborhood shops # Supermarket # Hypermarket # Local market # Producers' market (ex. Earth Market, Market Coldiretti, etc.) # Farm # Other:

7. How many times has already come to Earth Market in Milan? in times ( ) 8. How would you like to be able to shop at the farmers' market?

" Once a week " Once every 2 weeks " Once a month " Occasionally

Page 210: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

210

9. How long have you use the Internet? In years. (If the period is less than a year, put '0 ') ( ) 10. How often do you use the Internet?

" daily " weekly " monthly " rarely

11. Why use the Internet? It can use a comma (,) to add more choices '(Other) Other'

# To be in touch with other people # Entertainment # Work / study # e-commerce (private use) # e-commerce (business use) # Other:

12. Please indicate your feelings with respect to the following statements relating to the Earth Market with 'yes' or 'no'. Yes No 1. I believe that the Earth Market is a good place to shop. " " 2. Consumers and producers in this market do not share the same values. " " 3. The producers and I want the same things from this market. " " 4. I can recognize most of the companies from which I make purchases. " " 5. The Earth Market I feel at home. " " 6. A few producers in the market I know. " " 7. I'm interested in what the producers think of my behavior. " " 8. I have no influence on how the Earth Market. " " 9. If there is a market issue, the producers and consumers can fix it. " " 10. To me it is very important to make shopping at the market. " " 11. Producers and Consumers in this market generally do not get along. " " 12. I expect to make purchases in this market for a long time. " "

13. Activities already taking place in contact with the producers? e.g. Community support agriculture, buying direct from manufacturers, service delivery of the food box, company visits, etc..

" Yes " No

Collaborative activities with the producers of the market. 14. If so, what?

# Community support agriculture (annual subscriptions for products from a farmer engaged in collection, cultivation of vegetable gardens on the farm, etc.).

# Direct purchase from producers (e.g. farm shop, market, etc..) # Food box delivery service # Educational activities # Farm visits # Agritourism # Others

15. If you chose other, he wants to tell us more about his contacts with the producers of the market? ( )

Page 211: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

211

16. How many people? <10 10 to 29 30 to 50 > 50 not applic

able (n/a) Community Support Agriculture " " " " " Buy direct from producers " " " " " Delivery service of food box " " " " " Educational Activities " " " " " Company visits " " " " " Agritourism activities " " " " " more " " " " "

17. How long the place? in years <1 1 to 9 10 to 19 > 20 not applic

able (n/a) Community Support Agriculture " " " " " Buy direct from producers " " " " " Delivery service of food box " " " " " Educational Activities " " " " " Company visits " " " " " Agritourism activities " " " " " Other " " " " " 18. On average, how often it comes into contact with the producers to do it? daily weekly monthly rarely n/a Community Support Agriculture " " " " " Buy direct from producers " " " " " Delivery service of food box " " " " " Educational Activities " " " " " Company visits " " " " " Agritourism activities " " " " " Other " " " " "

19. What are the names of groups that participate in it? Leave blank if the communities to which it belongs have not been named. ( ) 20. Which works more farms? Give the name of reference person or the name of the farm. ( ) 21. Select three technologies that you use more frequently to the activities listed above. Use the comma (,) to write multiple items in Other.

# face-to-face # Phone # Mobile # email # mailing list # newsletter # Blog # website / e-commerce platform # Social networking services (e.g. Facebook, Twitter) # online discussion forum # teleconference # Other:

Page 212: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

212

22. He contributes regularly or carrying on activities with other users in the market? e.g. Creation / management of a network directly with producers, creating a critical mass, socializing, exchange of expertise, time, products, etc..

" Yes " No

Collaborative activities with other market users. 23. If so, what?

# Creation / management of a network directly with the producers (e.g. purchasing groups)

# Creating critical mass (e.g. participation in a movement of social interest) # Socialization (e.g. parties of the neighbors, etc.) # Mutual support for small common problems (e.g. sharing garden tools) # Exchange of expertise, time, products (e.g. bank of the time) # Sharing products, space and knowledge (e.g. carpooling) # more

24. If you chose other, he wants to tell us more about his contacts with others in the market? ( ) 25. How many people? <10 10 to 29 30 to 50 > 50 Not

applicable (n/a)

Creation / management of a network directly with manufacturers

" " " " "

Creating critical mass " " " " " Socialization " " " " " Mutual support for common problems small " " " " " Exchange of expertise, time, products " " " " " Sharing products, space and knowledge " " " " " more " " " " "

26. How long the place? in years <1 1 to9 10 to1

9 > 20 n/a

Creation / management of a network directly with manufacturers

" " " " "

Creating critical mass " " " " " Socialization " " " " " Mutual support for common problems small " " " " " Exchange of expertise, time, products " " " " " Sharing products, space and knowledge " " " " " more " " " " "

27. On average, how often it comes into contact with others to pursue them / manage them? daily weekly monthl

y rarely n/a

Creation / management of a network directly with manufacturers

" " " " "

Creating critical mass " " " " " Socialization " " " " " Mutual support for common problems small " " " " " Exchange of expertise, time, products " " " " " Sharing products, space and knowledge " " " " "

Page 213: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

213

more " " " " "

28. What are the names of groups that participate in it? Leave blank if the communities to which it belongs have not been named. ( ) 29. Select three technologies that you use more frequently to the activities listed above. Use the comma (,) to write multiple items in Other.

# face-to-face # Phone # Mobile # email # mailing list # newsletter # Blog # website / e-commerce platform # Social networking services (e.g. Facebook, Twitter) # online discussion forum # teleconference # Other:

Any ideas for the market ... Would you be interested to participate in: 30. The tape of the peasant: a weekly delivery service of fresh territory, delivered to the market or directly to your house?

" Yes " No

31. Basket making: a rental service for bike racks (both for the bike-sharing and for your bike) to comfortably carry the shopping back home, with the ability to return them to the market after use or buy.

" Yes " No

32. The carpooling Market: a carpooling service to carry the cost of the market, allowing those who do not have a car with someone else to agree to go to market and carry the shopping back home.

" Yes " No

33. If you would be willing to part with his car? " Yes " No " I can not

34. The tables Neighbourhood forums for discussion of issues related to the neighborhood, or activities proposed by the groups / associations to which it belongs, to be implemented in conjunction with the market in areas specifically made available?

" Yes " No

35. If yes, what kind of activities would you propose?

Page 214: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

214

( ) Thank you for your cooperation.

Page 215: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

215

A survey for producers (in Italian)

https://spreadsheets.google.com/viewform?formkey=dDIwMk8td2tQQUswYlMyWV9JYXBoRGc6MA Indagine sul Mercato della Terra - questionario per gli utenti Buongiorno e benvenuto dal gruppo di progetto di Nutrire Milano. Energie per il cambiamento. (www.nutriremilano.it). Il questionario che le proponiamo ha lo scopo di capire come i consumatori che partecipano al Mercato della Terra collaborano tra di loro e/o con i produttori e che tecnologie usano. La ringraziamo per la sua disponibilità a partecipare e speriamo di poter contribuire a rendere il mercato sempre più efficace. Il questionario le richiederà circa 10 min. per essere completato. Grazie. Per qualsiasi domanda relativa al questionario può rivolgersi a: Joon Sang Baek, e-mail: [email protected] Daria Cantù, e-mail: [email protected] Politecnico di Milano - dipartimento INDACO Via Durando 38 A, DIS-INDACO, 2 Piano, 20158 Milan, Italy Tel.: 02 2399 5967, Fax: 02 2399 7280

Page 216: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

216

Qualche informazione su di lei 1. Quanti anni ha?

" < 30 " 30~39 " 40~49 " 50~59 " 60

2. Lei è Indicare il sesso

" Donna " Uomo

3. Dove vive?

" Milano (città) " Milano (provincia) " Lombardia " Other:

4. Codice postale ( ) 5. Quale titolo di studio ha conseguito?

" Scuola media " Diploma di maturità " Laurea " PhD " Other:

5. In quale fascia di reddito annuale si inserisce? per famiglia in euro

" < 18000 " da 18000 a 27000 " da 27000 a 36000 " da 36000 a 54000 " da 54000 a 72000 " 72000 " Other:

6. Dove fa la spesa di prodotti alimentari abitualmente?

# Piccolo negozio di quartiere # Supermercato # Ipermercato # Mercato rionale # Mercato dei produttori (es. Mercato della Terra, Mercato Coldiretti, ecc) # in fattoria # Other:

7. Quante volte è gia venuto al Mercato della Terra di Milano? in volte ( ) 8. Ogni quanto le piacerebbe poter fare la spesa al mercato dei produttori?

Page 217: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

217

" 1 volta a settimana " 1 volta ogni 2 settimane " 1 volta al mense " saltuariamente

9. Da quanto tempo usa internet? In anni. (Se il periodo è meno di un anno, metta ’0’) ( ) 10. Con che frequenza usa internet?

" giornalmente " settimanalmente " mensilmente " raramente

3. 11. Per quale motivo usa internet?

# Può usare la virgola (,) per aggiungere più scelte in ‘(Other)altro’ # Essere in contatto con alter persone # Divertimento # Lavoro/studio # e-commerce (uso privato) # e-commerce (uso lavorativo) # Other:

12. Indichi le sue sensazioni rispetto alle seguenti affermazioni relative al Mercato della Terra con ‘si’ o ‘no’. Si No 1. Credo che il Mercato della Terra sia un buon posto per fare acquisti. " " 2. I consumatori e I produttori in questo mercato non condividono gli stessi valori. " " 3. I produttori ed io vogliamo le stesse cose da questo mercato. " " 4. Sono in grado di riconoscere la maggior parte dei produttori da cui faccio acquisti.

" "

5. Al Mercato della Terra mi sento a casa. " " 6. Pochi produttori del mercato mi conoscono. " " 7. Mi interessa quello che i produttori pensano del mio comportamento. " " 8. Non ho nessuna influenza su com’è il Mercato della Terra. " " 9. Se c’è un problema relativo al mercato, i produttori e i consumatori possono risolverlo.

" "

10. Per me è molto importante fare la spesa al mercato. " " 11. I produttori ed I consumatori in questo mercato generalmente non vanno d’accordo.

" "

12. Mi aspetto di fare acquisti in questo mercato per lungo tempo. " " 13. Svolge già delle attività a contatto con i produttori? es. Comunità di supporto agricolo, acquisto diretto dai produttori, servizio di consegna della cassetta alimentare, visite in azienda, ecc.

" Si " No

Attività collaborative con i produttori del mercato. 14. Se si, quali?

# Comunità di supporto agricolo (abbonamenti annuali ai prodotti di un contadino,

Page 218: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

218

partecipazione ad attività di raccolta, coltivazione di orti in fattoria, ecc.) # Acquisto diretto dai produttori (es. negozio in fattoria, mercato, ecc.) # Servizio di consegna della cassetta alimentare # Attività didattiche # Visite in azienda # Attività agrituristiche # Altro

15. Se ha scelto altro, vuole raccontarci altro sui suoi contatti con i produttori del mercato? ( ) 16. Con quante persone? < 10 da 10 a

30 da 30 a 50

> 50 non applicabile (n.a.)

Comunità di supporto agricolo " " " " " Acquisto diretto dai produttori " " " " " Servizio di consegna della cassetta alimentare

" " " " "

Attività didattiche " " " " " Visite in azienda " " " " " Attività agrituristiche " " " " " altro " " " " " 17. Da quanto tempo le svolge? in anni < 1 da 1 a 9 da 10 a 19 > 20 non

applicabile (n.a.)

Comunità di supporto agricolo " " " " " Acquisto diretto dai produttori " " " " " Servizio di consegna della cassetta alimentare

" " " " "

Attività didattiche " " " " " Visite in azienda " " " " " Attività agrituristiche " " " " " Altro " " " " " 18. Mediamente con che frequenza entra in contatto con i produttori per svolgerle? giornalm

ente settimanalmente

mensilmente

raramente

n.a.

Comunità di supporto agricolo " " " " " Acquisto diretto dai produttori " " " " " Servizio di consegna della cassetta alimentare

" " " " "

Attività didattiche " " " " " Visite in azienda " " " " " Attività agrituristiche " " " " " Altro " " " " " 19. Quali sono i nomi dei gruppi a cui partecipa? Lasci vuoto se le comunità di cui fa parte non hanno un nome. ( ) 20. Con quali aziende agricole collabora maggiormente?

Page 219: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

219

Indicare il nominativo della persona di riferimento o il nome dell’azienda agricola. ( ) 21. Selezioni 3 tecnologie che usa più di frequente per le attività di cui sopra. You can use comma(,) to write multiple items in Other.

# incontri faccia-a-faccia # telefono # cellulare # email # mailing list # newsletter # blog # sito web / e-commerce platform # servizi di social networking (e.g. Facebook, Twitter) # forum di discussione online # teleconferenza # Other:

22. Collabora regolarmente o svolge già delle attività insieme ad altri utenti del mercato? es. Creazione/gestione di una rete diretta con i produttori, creazione di massa critica, socializzazione, scambio di competenze, tempo, prodotti, ecc.

" Si " No

Attività collaborative con gli altri utenti del mercato. 23. Se si, quali?

# Creazione/gestione di una rete diretta con i produttori (es. gruppo d’acquisto solidale) # Creazione di massa critica (es. partecipazione in un movimento di interesse sociale) # Socializzazione (es. feste dei vicini di casa, ecc) # Mutuo supporto per piccolo problemi comuni (es. condivisione attrezzi per il

giardinaggio) # Scambio di competenze, tempo, prodotti (es. banca del tempo) # Condivisione prodotti, spazi e conoscenze (es. carpooling) # Altro

24. Se ha scelto altro, vuole raccontarci altro sui suoi contatti con gli altri utenti del mercato? ( ) 25. Con quante persone? < 10 da 10

a 30 da 30 a 50

> 50 non applicabile (n.a.)

Creazione/gestione di una rete diretta con i produttori Creazione di massa critica Socializzazione Mutuo supporto per piccolo problemi comuni Scambio di competenze, tempo, prodotti Condivisione prodotti, spazi e conoscenze altro

Page 220: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

220

26. Da quanto tempo le svolge? in anni < 1 da 1 a

9 da 10 a 19

> 20 n.a.

Creazione/gestione di una rete diretta con i produttori Creazione di massa critica Socializzazione Mutuo supporto per piccolo problemi comuni Scambio di competenze, tempo, prodotti Condivisione prodotti, spazi e conoscenze altro 27. Mediamente con che frequenza entra in contatto con gli altri utenti per svolgerle/gestirle? giornal

mente settimanalmente

mensilmente

raramente

n.a.

Creazione/gestione di una rete diretta con i produttori

Creazione di massa critica Socializzazione Mutuo supporto per piccolo problemi comuni

Scambio di competenze, tempo, prodotti

Condivisione prodotti, spazi e conoscenze

altro 28. Quali sono I nomi dei gruppi a cui partecipa? Lasci vuoto se le comunità di cui fa parte non hanno un nome. ( ) 29. Selezioni 3 tecnologie che usa più di frequente per le attività di cui sopra. You can use comma(,) to write multiple items in Other.

# incontri faccia-a-faccia # telefono # cellulare # email # mailing list # newsletter # blog # sito web / e-commerce platform # servizi di social networking (e.g. Facebook, Twitter) # forum di discussione online # teleconferenza # Other:

Qualche idea per il mercato... Le interesserebbe partecipare a: 30. La cassetta del contadino: un servizio di consegna settimanale di prodotti freschi del territorio, consegnato al mercato o direttamente a casa sua?

" Si " No

Page 221: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

221

31. Cestello a rendere: un servizio di noleggio di cestelli per le biciclette (sia per il bike-sharing sia per la propria bici) per trasportare comodamente la spesa fino a casa, conla possibilità di riconsegnarli al mercato dopo l’uso o acquistarli.

" Si " No

32. Il carpooling del Mercato: un servizio di carpooling per trasportare la spesa del mercato, che permetta a chi non ha la macchina di accordarsi con qualcun altro per recarsi al mercato e trasportare la spesa fino a casa.

" Si " No

33. Se si, sarebbe disposto a partecipare con la sua vettura?

" Si " No " Non posso

34. I tavoli del quartiere: spazi di discussione di questioni legate al quartiere, o attività proposte dai gruppi/associazioni di cui fa parte, da realizzare in concomitanza del mercato in spazi appositamente messi a disposizione?

" Si " No

35. Se si, che tipo di attività proporrebbe? ( ) Grazie per la gentile collaborazione.

Page 222: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

222

A survey for consumers (in Italian)

https://spreadsheets.google.com/viewform?formkey=dDIwMk8td2tQQUswYlMyWV9JYXBoRGc6MA Indagine sul Mercato della Terra - questionario per gli utenti Buongiorno e benvenuto dal gruppo di progetto di Nutrire Milano. Energie per il cambiamento. (www.nutriremilano.it). Il questionario che le proponiamo ha lo scopo di capire come i consumatori che partecipano al Mercato della Terra collaborano tra di loro e/o con i produttori e che tecnologie usano. La ringraziamo per la sua disponibilità a partecipare e speriamo di poter contribuire a rendere il mercato sempre più efficace. Il questionario le richiederà circa 10 min. per essere completato. Grazie. Per qualsiasi domanda relativa al questionario può rivolgersi a: Joon Sang Baek, e-mail: [email protected] Daria Cantù, e-mail: [email protected] Politecnico di Milano - dipartimento INDACO Via Durando 38 A, DIS-INDACO, 2 Piano, 20158 Milan, Italy Tel.: 02 2399 5967, Fax: 02 2399 7280

Page 223: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

223

Qualche informazione su di lei 1. Quanti anni ha?

" < 30 " 30~39 " 40~49 " 50~59 " > 60

2. Lei è Indicare il sesso

" Donna " Uomo

3. Dove vive?

" Milano (città) " Milano (provincia) " Lombardia " Other:

4. Codice postale 5. Quale titolo di studio ha conseguito?

" Scuola media " Diploma di maturità " Laurea " PhD " Other:

5. In quale fascia di reddito annuale si inserisce? per famiglia in euro

" < 18000 " da 18000 a 27000 " da 27000 a 36000 " da 36000 a 54000 " da 54000 a 72000 " 72000 " Other:

6. Dove fa la spesa di prodotti alimentari abitualmente?

# Piccolo negozio di quartiere # Supermercato # Ipermercato # Mercato rionale # Mercato dei produttori (es. Mercato della Terra, Mercato Coldiretti, ecc) # in fattoria # Other:

7. Quante volte è gia venuto al Mercato della Terra di Milano? in volte ( ) 8. Ogni quanto le piacerebbe poter fare la spesa al mercato dei produttori?

Page 224: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

224

" 1 volta a settimana " 1 volta ogni 2 settimane " 1 volta al mense " saltuariamente

9. Da quanto tempo usa internet? In anni. (Se il periodo è meno di un anno, metta ’0’) ( ) 10. Con che frequenza usa internet?

" giornalmente " settimanalmente " mensilmente " raramente

4. 11. Per quale motivo usa internet? Può usare la virgola (,) per aggiungere più scelte in ‘(Other)altro’

# Essere in contatto con alter persone # Divertimento # Lavoro/studio # e-commerce (uso privato) # e-commerce (uso lavorativo) # Other:

12. Indichi le sue sensazioni rispetto alle seguenti affermazioni relative al Mercato della Terra con ‘si’ o ‘no’. Si No 1. Credo che il Mercato della Terra sia un buon posto per fare acquisti. " " 2. I consumatori e I produttori in questo mercato non condividono gli stessi valori. " " 3. I produttori ed io vogliamo le stesse cose da questo mercato. " " 4. Sono in grado di riconoscere la maggior parte dei produttori da cui faccio acquisti.

" "

5. Al Mercato della Terra mi sento a casa. " " 6. Pochi produttori del mercato mi conoscono. " " 7. Mi interessa quello che i produttori pensano del mio comportamento. " " 8. Non ho nessuna influenza su com’è il Mercato della Terra. " " 9. Se c’è un problema relativo al mercato, i produttori e i consumatori possono risolverlo.

" "

10. Per me è molto importante fare la spesa al mercato. " " 11. I produttori ed I consumatori in questo mercato generalmente non vanno d’accordo.

" "

12. Mi aspetto di fare acquisti in questo mercato per lungo tempo. " " 13. Svolge già delle attività a contatto con i produttori? es. Comunità di supporto agricolo, acquisto diretto dai produttori, servizio di consegna della cassetta alimentare, visite in azienda, ecc.

" Si " No

Attività collaborative con i produttori del mercato. 14. Se si, quali?

# Comunità di supporto agricolo (abbonamenti annuali ai prodotti di un contadino, partecipazione ad attività di raccolta, coltivazione di orti in fattoria, ecc.)

Page 225: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

225

# Acquisto diretto dai produttori (es. negozio in fattoria, mercato, ecc.) # Servizio di consegna della cassetta alimentare # Attività didattiche # Visite in azienda # Attività agrituristiche # altro

15. Se ha scelto altro, vuole raccontarci altro sui suoi contatti con i produttori del mercato? ( ) 16. Con quante persone? < 10 da 10 a

30 da 30 a 50

> 50 non applicabile (n.a.)

Comunità di supporto agricolo " " " " " Acquisto diretto dai produttori " " " " " Servizio di consegna della cassetta alimentare

" " " " "

Attività didattiche " " " " " Visite in azienda " " " " " Attività agrituristiche " " " " " altro " " " " " 17. Da quanto tempo le svolge? in anni < 1 da 1 a 9 da 10 a 19 > 20 non

applicabile (n.a.)

Comunità di supporto agricolo " " " " " Acquisto diretto dai produttori " " " " " Servizio di consegna della cassetta alimentare

" " " " "

Attività didattiche " " " " " Visite in azienda " " " " " Attività agrituristiche " " " " " Altro " " " " " 18. Mediamente con che frequenza entra in contatto con i produttori per svolgerle? giornalme

nte settimanalmente

mensilmente

raramente n.a.

Comunità di supporto agricolo " " " " " Acquisto diretto dai produttori " " " " " Servizio di consegna della cassetta alimentare

" " " " "

Attività didattiche " " " " " Visite in azienda " " " " " Attività agrituristiche " " " " " Altro " " " " " 19. Quali sono i nomi dei gruppi a cui partecipa? Lasci vuoto se le comunità di cui fa parte non hanno un nome. ( )

Page 226: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

226

20. Con quali aziende agricole collabora maggiormente? Indicare il nominativo della persona di riferimento o il nome dell’azienda agricola. ( ) 21. Selezioni 3 tecnologie che usa più di frequente per le attività di cui sopra. You can use comma(,) to write multiple items in Other.

# incontri faccia-a-faccia # telefono # cellulare # email # mailing list # newsletter # blog # sito web / e-commerce platform # servizi di social networking (e.g. Facebook, Twitter) # forum di discussione online # teleconferenza # Other:

22. Collabora regolarmente o svolge già delle attività insieme ad altri utenti del mercato? es. Creazione/gestione di una rete diretta con i produttori, creazione di massa critica, socializzazione, scambio di competenze, tempo, prodotti, ecc.

" Si " No

Attività collaborative con gli altri utenti del mercato. 23. Se si, quali?

# Creazione/gestione di una rete diretta con i produttori (es. gruppo d’acquisto solidale) # Creazione di massa critica (es. partecipazione in un movimento di interesse sociale) # Socializzazione (es. feste dei vicini di casa, ecc) # Mutuo supporto per piccolo problemi comuni (es. condivisione attrezzi per il

giardinaggio) # Scambio di competenze, tempo, prodotti (es. banca del tempo) # Condivisione prodotti, spazi e conoscenze (es. carpooling) # altro

24. Se ha scelto altro, vuole raccontarci altro sui suoi contatti con gli altri utenti del mercato? ( ) 25. Con quante persone? < 10 da 10 a 30 da 30 a

50 > 50 non

applicabile (n.a.)

Creazione/gestione di una rete diretta con i produttori

" " " " "

Creazione di massa critica " " " " " Socializzazione " " " " " Mutuo supporto per piccolo problemi comuni

" " " " "

Scambio di competenze, tempo, " " " " "

Page 227: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

227

prodotti Condivisione prodotti, spazi e conoscenze

" " " " "

altro " " " " " 26. Da quanto tempo le svolge? in anni < 1 da 1 a 9 da 10 a 19 > 20 n.a. Creazione/gestione di una rete diretta con i produttori

" " " " "

Creazione di massa critica " " " " " Socializzazione " " " " " Mutuo supporto per piccolo problemi comuni

" " " " "

Scambio di competenze, tempo, prodotti

" " " " "

Condivisione prodotti, spazi e conoscenze

" " " " "

altro " " " " " 27. Mediamente con che frequenza entra in contatto con gli altri utenti per svolgerle/gestirle? giornalme

nte settimanalmente

mensilmente

raramente

n.a.

Creazione/gestione di una rete diretta con i produttori

" " " " "

Creazione di massa critica " " " " " Socializzazione " " " " " Mutuo supporto per piccolo problemi comuni

" " " " "

Scambio di competenze, tempo, prodotti

" " " " "

Condivisione prodotti, spazi e conoscenze

" " " " "

altro " " " " " 28. Quali sono I nomi dei gruppi a cui partecipa? Lasci vuoto se le comunità di cui fa parte non hanno un nome. ( ) 29. Selezioni 3 tecnologie che usa più di frequente per le attività di cui sopra. You can use comma(,) to write multiple items in Other.

# incontri faccia-a-faccia # telefono # cellulare # email # mailing list # newsletter # blog # sito web / e-commerce platform # servizi di social networking (e.g. Facebook, Twitter) # forum di discussione online # teleconferenza # Other:

Qualche idea per il mercato...

Page 228: [PhD thesis] Socio-technical framework for collaborative services

228

Le interesserebbe partecipare a: 30. La cassetta del contadino: un servizio di consegna settimanale di prodotti freschi del territorio, consegnato al mercato o direttamente a casa sua?

" Si " No

31. Cestello a rendere: un servizio di noleggio di cestelli per le biciclette (sia per il bike-sharing sia per la propria bici) per trasportare comodamente la spesa fino a casa, con la possibilità di riconsegnarli al mercato dopo l’uso o acquistarli.

" Si " No

32. Il carpooling del Mercato: un servizio di carpooling per trasportare la spesa del mercato, che permetta a chi non ha la macchina di accordarsi con qualcun altro per recarsi al mercato e trasportare la spesa fino a casa.

" Si " No

33. Se si, sarebbe disposto a partecipare con la sua vettura?

" Si " No " Non posso

34. I tavoli del quartiere: spazi di discussione di questioni legate al quartiere, o attività proposte dai gruppi/associazioni di cui fa parte, da realizzare in concomitanza del mercato in spazi appositamente messi a disposizione?

" Si " No

35. Se si, che tipo di attività proporrebbe? ( ) Grazie per la gentile collaborazione.