Communication technology

Design team communication can be defined as interactions between senders and receivers, via information communication technology. Communication media exists to ensure the flow and to understand the meaning of communication. Two main types of communication media exist, namely synchronous and asynchronous interactions, and both provide different functions (Tseng & Abdalla, 2004). Synchronous and asynchronous interactions have developed with existing technology through the Internet, and affect collaborative design within different organisations and amongst diverse professionals. An exploration of these types of interactions highlights their differences, pros and cons.

Both synchronous and asynchronous interactions within communication media provide significant benefits to users, enabling communication and collaboration between all professionals in a team. Synchronous interactions occur in the ‘same-time-different place’ and confer the functional advantages of immediately facilitating the engagement of people, simultaneously and irrespective of distance. The drawbacks include the high cost requirement of bandwidth for an efficient outcome, and the difficulty in co-ordinating conflicting schedules to achieve ‘same-time’ interactions. Asynchronous interactions support communication and collaboration over an interrupted timeframe, through a ‘different time and place’ mode. These interactions possess the advantage of collecting knowledge that is easy to share, and contributes to the interaction of team members working at different times. The disadvantages are highlighted within groups of people who are no longer familiar with technology as ‘login’ and who are afraid to lose ‘the sense of privacy’.

There are six technical tools in existence within communication media which facilitate collaboration among design professionals. Applications for asynchronous interactions are conducted via e-mail and bulletin/message boards. Other shared application tools include

instant messaging, and online conferencing, which allow for synchronous interactions in real time (Tseng & Abdalla, 2004). Social media applications provide both synchronous and asynchronous interactions (Kask & Wood, 2009). These tools and their features are summarised in Table 3.1.

Table 3.1 Summary of the features of all communication media tools.

(Source: Modified from Tseng & Abdalla, 2004)

Technical tool Type Feature

1

Sharing applications

Synchronous Use of a 3D viewer to assist users, without CAD software.

2

Online conferencing

Synchronous Convergence of video, audio and real-time collaborative environments that support real-time communication.

3

Instant messaging Synchronous Information immediately received on the user’s computer, with an accompanying beep sound and pop-up window to alert the user; for example, Line, or participation and is free to users; for example, Facebook.

5

E-mail Asynchronous Automatic e-mail notification and automatic saving of e-mail data.

6

Bulletin board Message board

Asynchronous Allowing users to post, read, update, or respond to messages.

To evolve, collaborative-driven communication technology within the design process has incrementally changed from synchronous to de-synchronous collaboration. In the traditional design process, a meeting among specialists would take place around the conference table to exchange design information, deliver a presentation, agree common ground, and discuss issues, which may sometimes mean the creation of a schematic design to elaborate details after the meeting (Gross, Do, McCall, Citrin, Hamil, Warmack, & Kuczun, 1998). Gross et al. (1998) state that exchanging design information via technology was thought to create a meeting space

for synchronous collaboration through video teleconferencing, faxes, live boards, and the desktop computer.

At present, design collaboration is almost the same, but more difficult to achieve than in the past. Namely, the design process is characterised by specialists’ delocation or different workplaces. This is exacerbated by a now globalised society that is supported by ICT tools and in particular requires desynchronous or asynchronous information exchanges in which both delocation and desynchronisation pose more complex problems in ‘communication’ and in

‘interpreting and understanding the contents of complex information’. This resuls in misunderstanding and conflict (Carrara, 2012). In addition, there is still concern regarding the loss of information between designers during the collaborative design process, which requires amendments (Du, Jing, & Liu, 2012).

Moreover, problems in collaboration occur naturally as several specialists have unique experiences. Moreover, Carrara (2012), Sun et al. (2015) and Poole (2011) state that the main problems arise with communication, interpretation, and understanding. Problems with communication are, in part, caused by social problems or cultural boundaries that lead to issues with information exchange. This can be due to misinformation and the misunderstanding of messages and can result in conflict (Carrara, 2012; Poole, 2011 cited in Sun, Mollaoglu, Miller,

& Manata, 2015). Sun et al. (2015) demonstrate that specialists with different experiences create difficulties in the interpretation and understanding of collaborative design. Similarly, Carrara (2012) points out that, the different worldviews of specialists require a greater understanding of the language and conventions in each discipline, whilst Leon and Laing (2013a) agree that the various glossaries utilised by different AEC professionals need to be communicated to develop a common ground for sharing and understanding.

Moreover, both the misunderstanding and misinterpretation of information are problems described by Carrara (2012), who explained that professionals involved in collaboration processes use different methods and notational forms to communicate their work, such as different kinds of drawings, numbers, and shorthand references for standard materials.

Naturally, one professional discipline is not knowledgeable about another discipline’s representations; however, this creates difficulty when communicating and can perpetuate a lack of understanding which leads to misunderstandings and errors. However, this can be solved by

‘simplifying communication’, which means that the design representation of each professional must be included by other professionals during the information exchange (Carrara, 2012). Sun

et al. (2015) agree with Dossick and Neff (2011) who propose the use of ‘messy talk’ and informal communication to overcome the problem of communication among different professions; this can further contribute to project success by optimising complex-problem solving (Sun et al., 2015).

Du et al. (2012) raised the issue of lost information between professionals due to the collaborative nature of the design process; they argued that these professionals can usually exchange design information through video conferencing, audio talking, online chatting and e-mail. However, the information shared through these means can be disorganised, out of sequence, and full of digression. Email is a kind of text communication, which can confuse and distract users from their normal and automatic emails (Sharif, Matthews, & Lockley, 2012).

Therefore, there is a variety of channels of communication which can be used to work collaboratively. The contents of communication and collaboration are an important source of evidence and knowledge, which should be preserved and stored for future retrieval. Usually, design professionals use meetings as the main channel of communication, with instant messaging and social media applications adopted for only basic communication due to the complexity of design images and content. For in Thailand, multidisciplinary professionals use a variety of communication channels similarly appear in the findings of this research (see section 5.4.1.3).