Visualizing communication at scad school of design

557 views

Published on

Published in: Design, Education, Technology
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Visualizing communication at scad school of design

  1. 1. VISUALIZING THE COMMUNICATION AT SCAD LIFE RESEARCH TEAM: SAAD AQEEL Z. (DESIGN MANAGEMENT, SCAD) AMIT BAPAT (INDUSTRIAL DESIGN, SCAD)SEBASTIAN BURCHERT (UNIVERSITY OF COLOGNE) ALEXANDER LIEDER (UNIVERSITY OF COLOGNE) YILMAZ YESILIRMAK (UNIVERSITY OF COLOGNE)
  2. 2. Research Team:Saad Aqeel (MFA Candidate-Design Management, SCAD)Amit Bapat (MFA Candidate-Industrial Design, SCAD)Sebastian Burchert (Student ID: 3637239, University ofCologne) Alexander Lieder (Student ID: 4023099,University of Cologne) Yilmaz Yesilirmak (Student ID:3967530, University of Cologne)
  3. 3. AGENDA:1. Introduction2. Motivation3. Purpose4. Research Question5. Research Method & Data6. Results7. Lessons Learned
  4. 4. 1. Introduction• In today’s businesses environment, efficiency and productivity depend not only on properly structured processes and effective IT support• Increasingly also on the communication between teams and groups• In this context, Social network analysis can be a very effective tool for promoting collaboration and knowledge sharing within important groups in organizations
  5. 5. 2. Motivation• Identify collaborative networks within and between SCAD’s Schools of Design, and with external partners• Collaboration in the field of arts and design is recognized as a necessary indicator of innovation, and has been identified as a strategic initiative for SCAD’s five-year QEP
  6. 6. 3. Purpose• Create visual representations of social networks• Prediction where collaborative networks are or can be formed by using three most popular network measures: • degree centrality • closeness centrality • betweeness centrality
  7. 7. 4. Research Question1. What communication and collaboration patterns are identifiable within the School of Design at SCAD?2. How transparent is collaboration and communication between individuals, departments and external entities?3. To what extent are collaboration networks reflected among individuals, departments and external entities within the School of Design?4. What are the major obstacles facing collaborative communication among different individuals, department and external entities within the School of Design?
  8. 8. 4. Research QuestionLimitations:• Unable to analyze real data from SCAD to answer research questions• IT-Department not providing us with SCAD data because of privacy issues• Low response rate
  9. 9. 5. Research Method and Data Collection1. SNA Tool (Condor)2. Online Survey (Zoomerang)3. Face to face interview4. WORDiJ Software5. SQL-Dumps as a base for the visualization
  10. 10. 5. Research Method and Data Collection 1. Condor• Used to analyze the social network• Developed from the MIT, to analyze email archives, etc• Once the data is loaded into Condor, you can create graphs to visualize the communication within a group
  11. 11. 5. Research Method and Data Collection 2. Online Survey• Purpose: • To investigate the potential of using SNA at SCAD’s school of design • Gain a holistic overview of the faculty’s experience in building collaborative relationships• Data Collection: • The primary motivation for using the online web- based approach was to collect and process data quickly. In conducting this part, we used zoomerang.com
  12. 12. 5. Research Method and Data Collection 2. Online Survey• The main challenge: • To gain a representative sample of faculty and staff members participating in the survey• Problem: • The response rate was very low. Total number of visitors was twenty five; only eight respondents completed the survey
  13. 13. 5. Research Method and Data Collection 3. Interview• The goal: • Gather information about current communication networks and the informal structure of School of Design as represented in ongoing patterns of interaction• Data Collection: • Interviews were conducted with two faculty members from School of Design
  14. 14. 5. Research Method and Data Collection 3. Interview• Approach: • Interviews consisted of an introduction • Questions covering themes related to information networks and collaborative relationships in organizations • Despite the structural nature of the interview, interviewees were encouraged to discuss in an open way about their experiences and views
  15. 15. 5. Research Method and Data Collection 4. WORDij SoftwareExtensive help provided by: Dr. James Danowski A WORD-PAIR APPROACH TO INFORMATION RETRIEVAL University of Illinois, Chicago • system based on a linkage or network model for representing textual information. • fundamental unit of analysis is the word pair, rather than the individual Dr. Ken Riopelle term. Wayne State University, Detroit •http://trec.nist.gov/pubs/trec1/papers/10.txt
  16. 16. • How is WORDij different than Condor? both represent a social network. condor: node to node wordij: database using selected key terms. • wordij is more flexible than condor. Utilizes other nodes besides email. Advantage over condor. Words are nodes and word linkages depicted while condor has people as nodes and words shared by the people are depicted. • condor is for analysis of email and WORDij is for analysis of data.• Why use WORDij? Nature of the research demanded capabilities not provided by condor.
  17. 17. Search Process• Lexis Nexis Database• over 2000 articles scanned• optimal search term:Savannah w/1 College w/1 of Art w/1 Design (power search)• period of 4 years: Jan 25th 2005 to Jan 25th 2009• all articles extracted in .txt format
  18. 18. Department of Advertising and Design / Advertising & Design Department/ Adler Hall/ Morris HallDepartment of Accessory Design/ Eckberg hallDepartment of Animation/ Montgomery HallDepartment of Architectural History/ Arnold HallDepartment of Architecture/ Eichberg HallDepartment of Art History/ Arnold HallDepartment of Arts Administration/ Arnold HallDepartment of Broadcast Design and Motion Graphics /Montgomery HallDepartment of Cinema Studies/ Hamilton HallDepartment of Design Management/ Gulfstream Center for Furniture and Industrial Design/ Clifford HallDepartment of Fashion/ Henry Hall/ Eckberg hall Department of Fibers/ Gordon HallDepartment of Film and Television/ Adler Hall/ Hamilton HallDepartment of Furniture Design/ Gulfstream Center for Furniture and Industrial Design/ Clifford HallDepartment of Graphic Design/ Poetter HallDepartment of Historic Preservation/ Eichberg HallDepartment of Illustration/ Morris HallDepartment of Industrial Design/ Gulfstream Center for Furniture and Industrial Design/ Clifford Hall/ Fahm Hall/ Eichberg HallDepartment of Interactive Design and Game Development/ Montgomery HallDepartment of Interior Design/ Eichberg HallDepartment of Metals and Jewelry/ Fahm HallDepartment of Painting/ Alexander HallDepartment of Media and Performing Arts/ Crites HallDepartment of Photography/ Bergen HallDepartment of Printmaking/ Alexander Hall Scad_dept.txtDepartment of Production Design/ Crites Hall 34 SCAD DepartmentsDepartment of Professional Writing/ Arnold HallDepartment of Sculpture/ Boundary Hall with respective buildingsDepartment of Sequential Art/ Norris HallDepartment of Sound Design/ Hamilton HallDepartment of Teaching/ Wallin HallDepartment of Television Producing/ Crites HallDepartment of Urban Design/ Eichberg HallDepartment of Visual Effects/ Montgomery HallDepartment of Foundation Studies/ Anderson Hall/ Boundary Hall/ Wallin Hall
  19. 19. • Node size is a sign of network centrality • Thickness of line represents frequency of contact • Dept appearing first in article points to the other dept following in the article. • Placement of nodes based on optimal representation which minimizes cross linkages.2005-2006
  20. 20. 2006-2007
  21. 21. 2007-2008
  22. 22. 2008-2009
  23. 23. HOW TO MEASURE COLLABORATION: • count total number of links/ number of nodes -- should increase over the years.2005-2009 • also count the number of thick lines, which depict an increase in degree of linkage.
  24. 24. • Conclusion • Research accesses free information on the web. • Task was to find what the press knows about these relationships among departments. “Collaboration as seen through the eyes of the press.” condor could not be used as it cannot parse words • If the press are mentioning the 2 departments within an article: then there is a better chance of collaboration • Interpretation on collaboration? dramatic increase in last 2 yrs. i.e. increase in the number of nodes that are linked and that links are darker and stronger • What is the pattern of communication? something is definitely increasing not decreasing over time. Credibility in findings as data is accessed through a public resource which is not internal • How does scad use internal media to report collaboration? Strength of this research lies in the ability to analyze how well SCAD is communicating with the outside world on publicity and collaboration. Data gathered could be used for coolhunting purposes: federal grants, potential areas/depts to develop etc.
  25. 25. 6. Technical results:
  26. 26. 6. Technical results: Screenshots of our Visualization Application Limitations/Drawbacks: - graph has to be completely connected - edge length has no semantic meaning - looks quite poor with too many egdes
  27. 27. 7. Lessons LearnedSuccess Rates of IT ProjectsResolution Type A, or project success:The project is completed on-time and on-budget, with allfeatures and functions as initially specified. (34%)Resolution Type B, or project challenged:The project is completed and operational but over-budget,over the time estimate, and offers fewer features andfunctions than originally specified. (51%)Resolution Type C,or project impaired:The project is cancelled atsome point during thedevelopment cycle. (15%)
  28. 28. 7. Lessons LearnedEssential Factors for Successful Projects► Clearly Defined Project Goal(s)It took us very long to define realistic project goals.We lost much time "running into wrong directions".► Top Level Management SupportWe were supposed to visualize & analyze communicationdata from SCAD, but we have never had access to suchdata. We had to use a dummy-mailbox as a temporarysolution for getting any data at all.
  29. 29. 7. Lessons LearnedEssential Factors for Successful Projects► Expertise of Project MembersThis was mainly an implementation project, but there wasno top-notch programmer in our team. We could not implement most of our ideas; those wecould implement were very time-consuming.► Intense communication within the Group We underestimated the language barrier
  30. 30. 7. Lessons Learned 1. Condor

×