P- MANAGER: ACTIONS VS. MESSAGES

Carlos J. Costa

Departamento de Ciências e Tecnologias de Informação, ISCTE, Portugal

J. Paulo Costa

LusoCrédito, Lda. Lisboa. Portugal

Manuela Aparício

LusoCrédito, Lda. Lisboa. Portugal

Key

words: Handheld Computing, Coordination, System integration

Abstract: The use of tools to support management and coordination among workers is a subject of important effort

performed by researchers in several fields of computer science and information systems. But here we stress the

importance of integrating a perspective based in actions and a perspective based in messages as way to achieve

coordination. In this context, we propose a system used to support planning, organisation and control of

operations. This system also intends to be enhanced with functionalities supported by mobile and wireless

technology.

1 INTRODUCTION

The work we report here has as main purpose the

development of tools to support people in the

coordination of their work. In this context, it is our

intent to improve coordination by using handhelds

that can communicate to each other through infrared,

bluetooth or wireless, or with other computers.

Mobile computing has, as support technology

PDA (Personal Digital Assistant) as well as mobile

phones and notebooks with wireless. But, here we

are interested only in the PDA technology. This does

not correspond exactly to the handhelds. In fact, in

the handheld technology, we may find other devices

that are not even “palm or pocket size”. So, we use

the word P-Manager: P of Palm, Pocket or PDA.

In the following section, we present the previous

work. Then, we confront approaches based in

messages and acts. A system is then proposed, while

implementation strategies in Palm is discussed.

2 PREVIOUS WORKS

The work reported here corresponds to the development

of pervious works. (Costa et al. 2003, Aparicio et al.

2003, Costa and Aparício 2003)

In those studies we started by carry out a literature

review in the area of management theories (Costa et al.

2003). Then, we developed an initial prototype and we

performed a preliminary evaluation (Costa et al. 2003).

This system was also compared with other systems

(Aparicio et al. 2003). Meanwhile, we identified the

need of incorporating the concepts of authority and

responsibility (Costa and Aparício 2003).

3 MESSAGES VS. ACTS

The previous work emphasis the performance of acts by

agents related to an operation. Based in the traditional

literature of management, the following acts were

643

J. Costa C., Paulo Costa J. and Aparício M. (2004).

P- MANAGER: ACTIONS VS. MESSAGES.

In Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems, pages 643-646

DOI: 10.5220/0002612806430646

 SciTePress

identified (Costa and Aparicio, 2003): plans,

performs and controls.

Another perspective consists of emphasising the

messages. Examples of messages are the following:

asking permission to do, giving orders, accepting or

rejecting.

“May I perform” <Operation> “?”

“Do” <Operation> “!”

“I Accept” <Operation>”.”

“I do not accept” <Operation>”.”

Those perspectives may be incorporated in the

same system. In fact, although being two different

perspectives, they may be complementary.

4 PROPOSING A SYSTEM

Director is responsible by a project or process, which

is not important to store information about.

This project or process is composed of tasks,

which are under the responsibility of a chief. It is the

director who defines those tasks and assigns the tasks

to each chief. In a task it is important to store the title

of the task, its goal, starting and ending date and

time.

The chief decomposes the talks in operations. It is

important storing the title and priority.

Each operation is planned, performed or

controlled by a executive in a specific date and time.

The executive must put his signature attesting that he

performed this action.

An executive may send messages to other

executives ordering, “asking to do” an operation.

When the message is sent, it must be identified what

operation it is. An executive may “ask to do” an

operation “till a certain date”. On the other hand, the

answer may be an “acceptance” or “refusal”.

Compo

0..1

0..

Coordina

1..1

0..

Integrat

Is responsi

0..1

0..

Perfor

Send

0..1

0..

Is related

0..1

0..

Person

Name

Function

Department

Contact

: Strin

Performance

Date

Time

Signature

PerformaceType

: Date

: int

: Strin

Operation

Title

Priority

: String

: boolea

Message

Date

MessageType

Content

DataPerformance

TypePerformance

: Date

: Strin

: Date

: Strin

Task

Title

Goal

Starting Date

End Date

Sarting Time

End Time

: Strin

: Date

: int

Chief

Subordin

Team

+ Name: Strin

PerformanceType={Plans, Performs, Controls}

MessageType={AskToDo, Orders, Accepts, DoNoAccets}

Figure 1: Class Diagram

In the following paragraphs we present the system

implemented in Windows.

The access is controlled through login and

password.

Figure 2: Entrance screen

Then, the user may access to his menu, where he

may see his profile. Through the menu he may access to

the task he manages, the operations he develop and the

messages he sends and receives.

ICEIS 2004 - INFORMATION SYSTEMS ANALYSIS AND SPECIFICATION

644

Figure 3: User menu and profile

In this screen, the user may see all the tasks for

what he is responsible for, as well as the operations

resulting from the decomposition of those tasks.

Figure 4: Task Screen

The executive may also manage his

“performance” by registering what he plans, performs

and controls.

Figure 5: Operation Screen.

In the following screen, the user may see the

messages that she/he sends to other people involved

in the task or in a set of tasks (project or process).

Figure 6: Messages Screen

The message component needs to be improved, as

long as it does not allow showing in the same screen

either the sent messages and received messages.

Forwarding and reply is not yet developed. The

implementation of forwarding and reply is fundamental

for a satisfactory analyse of flow of messages.

5 PALM IMPLEMENTATION

The implementation of the system in a Palm device may

follow one of the following strategies:

Web Application.

Java Application

Palm Application (Costa et al. 2003, Aparicio et al.

2003, Costa & Aparício 2003);

The Web application needs a link to Internet (e.g.

through Wi-Fi). The production of a Web interface to

the Windows Application allows profiting from the

Windows application already developed. It consists of

incorporating a business rules in the business layer of

the CGI program developed. It is also necessary to

adjust web pages to low resolution screen.

A Java application allows incorporating some of the

control in the client’s application. It allows the

possibility of storing some date in the handheld. But, it

has de disadvantage of producing a very slow

application.

The production of a palm application was already

partially developed (Costa et al. 2003, Aparicio et al.

2003, Costa & Aparício 2003). It is a more independent

perspective. It is more difficult to incorporate rules. It is

more difficult to control communication (beam).

6 DISCUSSION

The implementation of Palm system is just one of the

components that are being developed. In fact, the

incorporation of coordination rules in the system is also

being discussed.

Relational schema of some of the tables

implemented may be represented as followed:

P- MANAGER: ACTIONS VS. MESSAGES

645

Performance(IdPerformance,

IdPerson,IdOperation, Date,Time, Signature,

PerformanceTipe)

Message(IdMessage, IdPersonO,IdPersonD

MessageType, Content, Dateperformance,

TypePerformance, IdOperation)

In order to control and improve coordination

process, several rules must be incorporated in the

system. Those rules are based in some assumption.

For example, the identification of who is the superior

or subordinate was implemented though sorting of

the rank of the executives. This process was very

simplistic, but corresponded just a preliminary phase.

IdPersonO>IdPersonD communication

Superior/Subordinate or peer to peer.

IdPersonO<IdPersonD communication

Subordinate/Superior or peer to peer.

The identification of the flow of messages (e.g.

Costa & Costa, 2002) and its connection with the

performance of the operations must be analysed in

detail.

7 CONCLUSION

In this paper we highlight the importance of

integrating a perspective based in actions and a

perspective based in messages as way to achieve

coordination. Based in a previous work (Costa et al.

2003, Aparicio et al. 2003, Costa & Aparício 2003)

we propose a system used to support planning,

organisation and control of operations that

incorporate a perspective based in a paradigm of

activities management integrated with a perspective

based in messages. This system also intends to be

enhanced with functionalities supported by mobile

and wireless technology.

The research developed here it is supported in the

assumption that IT alone is not responsible by

improving coordination. In fact, IT may facilitate in

the process of control and reporting or may help the

coordination by automating some rules. But,

coordinating people is impossible of being done just

by using technology. If people do not feel

responsible, if they do not feel compelled (or even

forced) to do a work, or if they do not feel rewarded

by doing the work, probably they do not do this work

in the right time and with the adequate quality.

Consequently, those technologies are just a tool to

serve a strategy and a culture and organization. The

strategy is composed of a set of objectives and goals.

The culture and organization may be repressive or

based in responsibility.

REFERENCES

Aparício, M., J. Costa and C. Costa “P- Manager: Um

Sistema de Apoio ao Gestor” Workshop de Sistemas de

Informação Multimédia e Cooperativos, COOP-MEDIA

Porto 8 Outubro 2003

Costa C. and J. Costa, "Proposing a new EMS based in the

IPA System", in N.Mastorakis & V. Mladenov (Eds.)

Recent Advances in Computers, Computing and

Communications., WSEAS, 2002, pp. 180- 184.

Costa, C., J. Costa and M. Aparicio, “P-Manager: A system to

Support Managers” WESEAS Trasactions on Computers;

Issue 1, Volume 2, January 2003. pp. 58 - 63..

Costa C. and M. Aparicio, “P-Manager: The Importance of

Authority and Responsibility” Proceedings of the 6th

International Multi-Conference Information Society IS

2003, Collaborative and Information Society, Ljubljana,

Solvenia, pp. 207-211.

ICEIS 2004 - INFORMATION SYSTEMS ANALYSIS AND SPECIFICATION

646