No Clock is Lenient

A rather different approach, this proposal was based on the idea of disengaging the notion of being on-time for work with the login process. As we mentioned in the previous chapter, the login of an employee on their workstation, is not only a trivial process of authentication, but also signifies the employee‘s working hours, overloading the process with additional characterization; being on-time, or being late for work. We view this additive significance as a source of friction since its serious consequences can be at conflict with its trivial nature.

This collision between the trivialness of the process and the seriousness of its consequences is abrogating any possibility for playful mappings. We argue that it is this ―external‖ authority (the

Chapter:5. Assessment: Evaluating with(out) Points

1 2 1

algorithm, or supervisor that judges if the login and consequently the employer is on time for work) that acts as a negating agent for any explorative or playful attitude of the user.

Thus with this proposal, we tried to reshape the seriousness of the action of logging in on-time.

Of course, being on-time in a workspace environment is important and very much a serious matter for managers and work coordinators, but individuals will always, either by circumstance or just nonchalance, ignore it and be late. Instead of punishing/non-rewarding them, perhaps we could refute the importance/seriousness of the idea/notion of being on time.

By allowing the user to adjust the time settings, so that he can always logon on-time, we are essentially turning the whole notion on its own head, but not in order to legitimize the belatedness, but rather to create a space where the authority in question is absent, so that the user can then reflect on his own behavior. In that sense, we designed the solution instrumentally in order to become a vehicle for reflection, thus the experimentation with the clock settings take up the form an exploratory process where the user is seeking meaning, or:

―a mechanism for developing new values and goals, for learning new things and for achieving new understandings‖ (Bartle, 2003)

Consequently, we view this proposal as an instrumental approach towards forcing a reflective process; by allowing the user to be curious and explore the possibilities of adjusting the time settings, the process attempts to be a pivotal point of reflection of the overall idea of work, working hours and being on-time. As such though, we believe that an objective assessment of this solution‘s efficiency and viability is rather unfeasible. The aim of it, is neither to be used in the long term, neither to adjust the users‘ actions; it is rather to make them be reflective of their actions and raise their awareness during work time.

5.1.4 “/worked” (Works?)

As we mentioned in the previous chapter this version was inspired by World of Warcraft‘s

―played‖ macro command. It is rather obvious here that both Virtual World software and automated time and attendance systems share the feature of tracking and logging the exact

Chapter:5. Assessment: Evaluating with(out) Points

1 2 2

use time of their users, which represents a strict, absolute measurement stored in digital form.

This hard data is most often dismissed, it may exist in absolute terms only in data centers and timesheets, but in the users‘ minds it exists as relative measure⁶².

We believe that is not only the volume of data itself, but the overall trivialization process that enforces this macro reading; as a process, or a behavior becomes more and more mundane, the outcomes of that process become less scrutinized, and the distance between them and the subject of the process grows larger⁶³.

Thus, with this solution, we attempted to reshape this data and present it in an informative manner. The application is neither over nor under stating information, but is rather affording a micro reading by extensive detailing.

As such, we foresee a clash between the perceived, relative measure of working hours and the enforced micro reading of the hard data that the logging on process records. Our aim is precisely this clash of the perceived relative and the recorded absolute; the dynamics of such an impact can provide the distance required between the user and the action of logging on for the instantiation of a reflective process.

The desired outcome of such a process is for the user to discover new meanings in the notion of work and working hours. Through that we hope that new understandings of the role of work and its overall significance in one‘s everyday life will arise, and that new attitudes and stances will emerge towards one‘s commitment and consistency towards it. Thus, once more, we view the assessment of this solution problematic; its efficiency and viability are not relevant with its goals. However, in comparison to our previous approach we see a greater flexibility here;

whereas in our ―lenient clock‖ solution the reflective process is driven by the application, in this case, the application is only providing the lens with which the user can initiate it.

62 A typical example of this would be an answer to the question ―How long have you been working on this post?‖ which most commonly will come in format of ―Almost two years now‖ or ―It‘s been four months now.‖ etc.

63 It couldn‘t be otherwise, in the previous example, consider someone returning an answer like

―31.556.926 seconds overall‖, it would sound rather obscene.

Chapter:5. Assessment: Evaluating with(out) Points

1

2

3