Page 192 - Sustainability Communication Interdisciplinary Perspectives and Theoritical Foundations

15 Computer Support for Cooperative Sustainability Communication 175

visualize conversations directly. Message archives consist of three panes: in a pane
on the left side all friends, on a top right pane the conversations with a selected
friend and on a bottom right pane a selected conversation. But instant messaging
does not support speech acts or other classes of utterances. Even if instant messag-
ing is a popular medium for both social and work-related communication (Avrahami
and Hudson 2006), effective communication is today not a purpose of instant mes-
saging programs. However, because of its group-oriented functionality (distributed
cooperative work, real-time communication, planning social events, socializing)
instant messaging supports teams in the workplace. Handel and Herbsleb have ana-
lyzed the content of chat and categorized chat content of instant messaging at work-
places. They found that 69% of conversations relates to specific work tasks (Handel
and Herbsleb 2002). Other reasons for chatting are negotiating availability (13%),
greeting (7%), humour (5%) and non-work (3%). Although work-related content
dominates instant messaging at workplaces, data exchange between decision mak-
ers does not play an important role. This was a result of sub-classifying ‘work’.
Handel and Herbsleb write: “We dropped ‘walkthrough’, ‘goal’, ‘digression’ and
‘clarification’ since we never observed them within the ‘work’ portion of our protocol”
(2002: 6). The most important subcategories were technical work, project manage-
ment and meeting management. Finally, Handel and Herbsleb pointed out that “chat
was used overwhelmingly for work discussions or for articulation work to coordinate
projects and meetings, and to negotiate availability” (2002: 8). After all, empirical
analyses show that today communication support systems play a critical role in
enhancing effective communication in organisations. Moreover, the fact that empirical
analyses are required to understand email and instant messaging in organisations
emphasizes the high flexibility of these support systems.
These findings are in line with Winograd and Flores’s understanding of manage-
ment beyond decision-making. “In understanding management as taking care of
articulation and activation of a network of commitments, produced primarily
through promises and requests, we cover many managerial activities. Nevertheless,
we also need to incorporate the most essential responsibilities of managers: to be
open, to listen, and to be an authority regarding what activities and commitments the
network will deal with. These can be characterized as participation in ‘conversa-
tions for possibilities’ that open new background for the conversation for action”
(1986: 151). The result that management is more than decision-making is important
with respect to corporate sustainability. What are the relationships to sustainability
in organisations? And why is this type of conversation necessary in organisations?

Traditional Generalized Action Orientations
and the Role of Communication

Even though the challenges of sustainable development have produced successful
new scientific communities, the success of these approaches in companies is quite
limited. Many companies are discussing concepts of corporate sustainability.