4.3.1. Supporting tools and instruments for ‘processpatching’
The case studies discussed herein demonstrate a convincing picture that is useful for team members when commencing a collaborative project. To find out what the best method or set of methods for a specific project could be, the aRt&D Triangle is used as an instrument to inform the team members about one another’s background knowledge and work methods. The aRt&D triangle shows the disciplinary distance of the collaborators, and from there, the likeliness of shared knowledge and/or methods. The case studies show that successful interdisciplinary collaboration is mostly achieved by the collaborators whose backgrounds are closely positioned in between the disciplines (3.1.1, 3.1.2., 3.1.3., 3.2.1.). The same case studies illustrate that multidisciplinary collaboration is more likely to be successful among people who are positioned far away from each other in the aRt&D Triangle.
(fig.36. aRt&D Triangle)
The case studies show different approaches to bridging the distance between disciplinary knowledge and methods. Firstly it is investigated if the team members share knowledge or have a common background, as shared knowledge or shared backgrounds often provide fertile ground for mutual understanding and methodological matches. For example, artists collaborate more easily with software and hardware engineers or techno-scientists when they have technical know-how or common approaches (3.1.1, 3.1.2., 3.1.3., 3.3.1.). Software or shared platforms also work as common ground for collaboration. Although the team members might have different levels of programming skills, it surely helps if they work within the same software environment. When the shared knowledge or common background is missing, the concepts of a Third space and the boundary object are useful tools to support a neutral ground for collaboration among people with different backgrounds (3.4.).
Finally some recommendations for future collaborators:
I recommend studying each other’s working methods and knowledge fields, using the provided tools as outlined in this research, and investigating the most suitable working method for all involved, prior to the collaboration. Based on the investigated field studies and theory, I recommend fully analysing the planned workflow, and investigating the available technology and knowledge represented in the team. The field studies in this research show that rapid prototyping for testing purposes (here this was done according to a DIY or hacking approach) might save time, is more efficient and enables early user testing or participatory design sessions through which valuable information for future development, on both a conceptual and technical level, can be achieved. Do not hesitate to include various parallel or intersecting approaches and methods within one project, as this might optimise all available expertise and increase the enjoyment of collaboration! However, communicate this and plan this in advance with your team!
The concept of Third Space and boundary objects are recommended as tools for teams that consist of members from very remote disciplines where little or no knowledge is shared among the team members.
Use the aRt&D Matrix to indicate and refer to your own electronic art research and development approach and methods, as this offers a reference framework to compare it with other known methods and approaches. Feel free to extend the processpatching references in the aRt&D Matrix with your favourite methods and approaches!
