Modelling Cooperative Work: Chances and Risks of Structuring Thomas Herrmann, Marcel Hoffmann, Gabriele Kunau, Kai-Uwe Loser Informatics & Society , University of Dortmund, Germany {herrmann, hoffmann, kunau, loser}@iug.cs.uni-dortmund.de Abstract. We found evidence in several cases that semi-structured modelling methods are quite helpful to model cooperative work. How can our positive findings with modelling be related to those publications which emphasize a sceptical view on representing work with models and list a number of problems, risks and inappropriatenesses with respect to the explicit representation of cooperative work? In this paper we evaluate the chances and risks of modelling based on three case studies. Various arguments about impacts of modelling are assigned to a framework differentiating the following three levels: A) perceiving and reflecting of structure, B) explicating, articulating and negotiating structures and C) contributing to the developing of structures. Within this framework we discuss possible chances and risks from literature and from our case studies. We argue that improved methods, notations and tools can help to reduce or even avoid the risks and use the chances for cooperative work. 1 Introduction We found evidence in several cases that semi-structured modelling methods are quite helpful to model cooperative work [10]. This semi-structured method avoids the equalization of modelling and formalization (e.g. [3], referring to [15]). However there remain some central questions: How can our positive findings with modelling be related to those parts of the literature which emphasize a sceptical view on representing work with models (e.g.[14]) and list a number of problems, risks and inappropriateness with respect to the explicit representation of cooperative work. And furthermore, if the answer about the usefulness of explicit representations is not just “yes” or “no”, what are the criteria according to which we can compare the benefits with the risks and costs of developing explicit models of cooperative work – and how relate these criteria to the literature as well as to empirical case studies. To answer these questions in this paper, we start with a framework (fig. 1) which differentiates between three levels of structuring. The three levels are helpful to assign the different orientations of the arguments on explicit representation of cooperative work which are given in the discourse: A. Individual mental models are developed in interaction with the perception of the structure of parts of the reality (such as work processes, organizational units) B. Mental models are made explicit and structure is developed in interrelation with the method of representation and by combining the viewpoints of different individuals C. Implicitly and explicitly represented structures are reproduced or reformulated in practice and, on the other hand, guide and constrain practice, too. Purposefully attempting to shape reality with recourse to an explicit model gives rise to special chances and risks. Herrmann, Thomas; Hoffmann, Marcel; Kunau, Gabriele; Loser, Kai-Uwe (2002): Modelling Cooperative Work: Chances and Risks of Structuring. In: {M. Blay-Fornarino et al. (Eds.): Cooperative Systems Design, A Challenge of the Mobility Age (Coop 2002). Amsterdam: IOS Press, S. 53-70.