Using technology to support sensitive group processes:

an ethical retrospective

David A. Banks and Shirley Wheeler University of South Australia

COMPUTATIONAL TURN IN

COMPUTER ETHICS

• draws upon the systematic approaches ofcomputer technology (Dorbolo 2000)

• means the development of computer-modelledethical theories and decision-making products

• improves the efficiency of ethicaldeliberations

• implies a predominately systematic ‘hard’approach to ethics

OTHER POPULAR ‘TURNS’

• linguistic turn

• cognitive/psychological turn

• interactive turn

• socio-technical turn

• informational turn

SOME CHALLENGES FOR A

COMPUTATIONAL APPROACH

TO COMPUTER ETHICS

• human aspects

• need for comprehensive support processes

THE ‘SOFT SYSTEMS’ CASE

• client is not-for-profit group of UKcommunity leaders

• group has goal to develop a city-wide website

• IS facilitator asked to assist group to moveahead

IS Facilitator Goals

1. ‘re-visioning’ the group2. reducing group tensions3. helping the group to develop an action plan

Overall intervention• Non-participant observation of group• Egan Skilled Helper Model: provides guiding

philosophy• Simon’s model: problem solving structure that

has some alignment with Egan• Heron: modes and dimensions• DeBono: structured spaces for thinking• Audience Response Technology: support tool

Skilled Helper Model (Egan)

STAGE 1

      

STAGE 2

      

STAGE 3

Current Scenario Preferred Scenario Action Strategies1a - The story (What's

going on?)2a - Possibilities (Ideally ,what

do I want instead?)3a - Possible actions (How

many ways are there?)

                                                                 

1b - Blind spots (What's really going on?)

2b - Change Agenda (SMART goals)

3b - Best fit strategies (What will work for me?)

                                                                 

1c - Leverage (Focussing/prioritisin

g)

2c - Commitment (Check goals are right)

3c - Plan (What next and when?)

Action Leading to Valued Outcomes

Simon’s decision making model

• Identify all the possible alternatives• Determine all the possible consequences

of these alternatives• Evaluate all the possible consequences

Heron – one mode of facilitation• The co-operative mode. Here you share your power over

the learning process and manage the different dimensions with the group. You enable and guide the group to become more self-directing in the various forms of learning by conferring with them and prompting them. You work with group members to decide on the programme, to give meaning to experiences, to confront resistances, and so on. In this process, you share your own view which, though influential, is not final but one among many. Outcomes are always negotiated. You collaborate with the members of the group in devising the learning process: your facilitation is co-operative

Heron – one dimension of facilitation

• The confronting dimension. This is the challenge aspect of facilitation. It is to do with raising consciousness about the group's resistances to and avoidances of things it needs to face and deal with. The facilitative question is: how shall the group's consciousness be raised about these matters?

Six Thinking Hats• This tool was created by Edward de Bono in his

book '6 Thinking Hats'.• Many successful people think from a very

rational, positive viewpoint. This is part of the reason that they are successful.

• Often, though, they may fail to look at a problem from an emotional, intuitive, creative or negative viewpoint.

• This group clearly had problems dealing with the emotional aspects of the process and the Red hat was considered to be potentially useful

Red Hat thinking

• Red Hat:'Wearing' the red hat, you look at problems using intuition, gut reaction, and emotion. Also try to think how other people will react emotionally. Try to understand the responses of people who do not fully know your reasoning.

Facilitator manages with Blue Hat

• Blue Hat:The Blue Hat stands for process control. This is the hat worn by people chairing meetings. When running into difficulties because ideas are running dry, they may direct activity into Green Hat thinking. When contingency plans are needed, they will ask for Black Hat thinking, etc.

(Early) wired system packed to go

Early Wired system set up

A variety of modern keypad (‘audience response’) systems

‘Hard’ versus ‘Soft’ traditions inInformation Systems

The ‘Hard’ Tradition(Simon)

The ‘Soft’ Tradition(Vickers)

Concept of organization Social entities which are setup and seek to achieve goals

Social entities which seek tomanage relationships

Concept of informationsystem

An aid to decision making inpursuit of goals

A part of interpreting theworld, sense making withrespect to it, in relation tomanaging relationships

Underlying systems thinking ‘Hard’ systems thinking: theworld assumed to be systemic

‘Soft’ systems thinking: theprocess of inquiry into theworld assumed to be capableof being organized as asystem

Process of research andinquiry

Predicated upon hypothesistesting: quantitative ifpossible

Predicated upon gaininginsight and understanding:qualitative

Social Theory Functionalism (stemmingfrom Durkheim)

Interpretative (stemming fromWeber)

Philosophy Positivism Phenomenology