The tempo and rhythm of the asynchronous chat were the slowest and most deliberate
The tempo and rhythm of the synchronous chat and the in person work were surprisingly similar. Rhythm and Tempo were rapid during planning, slowed during building, and increased during reflection. This cycle repeated.
Conclusions: Quality of Interactions, Asynchronous Chat
Quality of the writing was highest in the asynchronous chat. Each of us posted logical paragraphs and included thoughtful questions, but we felt as though we were working in isolation.
Conclusions: Quality of Interactions, Synchronous Chat
Written posts were clear and brief
We only interacted visually when we shared photos in the end
During the building phases, we felt as though we were working on our own
We did not modify Jamie’s design, but simply tried to replicate it
Conclusions: Quality of Interactions, face-to-face
The quality of the spoken interactions (analogous to the writing) was often low in the face-to-face work, but because of the combination with kinesthetic and visual communication our ideas genuinely developed and we made more innovations and design changes. Face-to-face work also required the most patience, since we had to share the structure.