Issue
Article
Vol.28 No.1, January 1996
Article
Issue
Issue |
Article |
Vol.28 No.1, January 1996 |
Article |
Issue |
Since its name change in 1982, the SIGCHI Bulletin has had 4 editors (with Lorraine Borman as acting editor for one issue):
14.1 (Jul 82)-16.4 (Apr 85) Ann Janda
17.1 (Jul 85) Lorraine Borman (acting)
17.2 (Oct 85)-22.1 (Jul 90) Peter Orbeton
22.2 (Oct 90)-25.4 (Oct 93) Bill Hefley
26.1 (Jan 94)-present Steven Pemberton
To get an idea of how the Bulletin had developed over the years, I contacted all of them, and put a few questions.
How did you come to get involved?
In 1982, Lorraine Borman was my manager at Northwestern University's Vogelback Computing Center, and we worked closely as we shared a suite of offices. Lorraine was planning to re-focus the organization from SIGSOC to SIGCHI, and she asked whether I'd be interested in taking on the editorship of the SIGSOC Bulletin. As a relative neophyte to the computing scene, I was surprised but pleased to take on the responsibility. By then, my second year of work at the computing center, I had already developed as strong sense of indignation and impatience with cantankerous systems and non-descriptive error messages such as SYSTEM ABORT and KILL JOB. I was ready to buy in to helping promote user-friendly interfaces and people-oriented systems.
What was the state of the Bulletin and SIGCHI when you started?
The first issue I edited was the final issue of the SIGSOC Bulletin, April 1982. On the front cover, the issue announced that SIGSOC submitted a request to ACM to change the name of the group to SIGCHI and that formal approval was expected in June 1982.
Early issues of the newly named SIGCHI Bulletin averaged about 28 pages per issue and still looked like the old SIGSOC Bulletin with its pterodactyl-like 1950's-modern logo running atop the cover. Lorraine showed me the art of layout, and with student help we cut, pasted, and hand-produced pages of the Bulletin -- the text for which was formatted in the word processor RUNOFF and then printed on a letter-quality line printer. The standard layout sheets provided by ACM, as I recall, were geared to a double-column format -- and that was the look of the Bulletin. It was completely an in-house production until the copy pages were sent to ACM for review and printing.
What was your vision for the Bulletin?
In my first issue I wrote, "In order to provide a truly useful service for our readers, I would like to develop a strong section reviewing current literature and research efforts. Some of this information can be acquired through regular published bibliographic and professional channels. However, some of it is `fugitive' material, i.e., ongoing unreported research, new developments from unexpected sources, relevant Ph.D. theses, etc. The latter information probably constitutes a small percentage of the whole, but may yield some valuable and productive material."
I felt a strong need to keep abreast of latest developments and literature -- and so, a good part of my energy went into developing the section "Publication Notes" as I culled and abstracted information from primary and secondary sources. The publication notes were kept in a database that eventually yielded a modest bibliography on CHI literature for the July 1983 Bulletin. I envisioned publishing periodic bibliographies and indexes from this database.
I also tried to stimulate discussion on controversial topics such as the use of sexist language (as in Man-Machine Interface). This resulted in several "letters to the Editor" over a couple of issues.
What changes if any did you bring about?
What was your experience as a whole?
It was a tremendous growth and learning experience for me. It was great fun and challenging to work with Lorraine who provided the experience, impetus, and complete dedication to SIGCHI goals. She was involved in Bulletin activities every step of the way. I was fortunate to be next-door and to be part of this exciting on-site collaboration that saw the growth of an organization.
What would you have done differently?
I really don't know. As I think back, we worked hard and explored many avenues. We did the best we could at the time.
What are you doing now?
I moved from the computing center at Northwestern to the university library, where I am in charge of Data Services. I continue to provide access to social science datasets for faculty and student research. I am more deeply involved than ever before in working with end users in an environment that recognizes the importance of user interfaces in an information society.
How did you come to get involved and/or be taken on?
In the early 80's I attended CHI conferences and made acquaintances with several members of the Executive Committee. Coincidently, the position of Bulletin Editor was open, and I was asked to fill it
What was the state of the Bulletin and SIGCHI when you started?
The Bulletin had three issues per year and there wasn't a consistent format. It was more of a newsletter. The annual conference proceedings was the main publication. SIGCHI was emerging as a organization beyond its initial boundaries of an academic subdiscipline. The theories offered by Card, Newell, and others were being evangelized by Norman, Shneiderman, and many others. The PC was just emerging, and Apple was commercializing the Xerox PARC developed UI. It was a very exciting place to be.
What was your vision for the Bulletin?
The Bulletin needed upgrading to follow the changes in the field itself. With more wide acceptance of HCI principles and attention to them, the Bulletin needed a more polished look.
What changes if any did you bring about?
A consistent format was established, along with regular columnists. Also, poster session papers from the conference were published as they were not included in the conference proceedings, and were seen as important research. The number of issues went from three per year to four per year. Submissions remained unrefereed, but there was screening of articles. Because of the workload, the position of Assistant Editor came about.
At some point, and I'm not certain when, we (the Executive Committee) started discussions about the Bulletin's future. It was obvious that the Bulletin was an important source of communication to the membership, but that the next step needed to be taken -- a magazine. After putting together the editorial and business plan for interactions, I stepped down. I was involved at the early stages with a commercial product called Lotus Notes, and it demanded all of my energy.
How did you produce each issue?
Submissions were either electronic or camera-ready. I formatted the electronic submissions, which were then printed as camera-ready copy. An agency handled the production work, as well as taking care of the standard material -- ACM ads and the calendar.
What was your experience as a whole?
It was an opportunity and experience that I look back on quite fondly (although not the late night hours spent finalizing an issue). It was a chance to see a discipline emerge, to see theories be put into practice, to see widespread acceptance of HCI, and to make many friends. The facts speak for themselves -- membership increased by over 100%; institutional subscriptions by 150%, making it the fastest growing SIG within ACM at the time.
What would you have done differently?
After stepping down as Editor, I also basically checked out of involvement with CHI. While still keeping up with the field, I regret not staying more active.
What are you doing now?
Lotus Notes -- I'm responsible for several groups. One designs and writes Notes User Assistance (documentation, Help, Guide Me, etc.), and other provides internal training and application development in support of Notes Product Development.
It was a concern that CSCW would split off from CHI, which would have been a detriment to both. Products like Lotus Notes and technology such as the World Wide Web show how CSCW and CHI are intertwined. Also, it's also very interesting to see how CSCW has been somewhat commercialized (such as the Groupware conference), but CHI hasn't for the most part. Also from the corporate perspective (and my involvement in deploying a corporate-wide Lotus Notes-based authoring and translation environment), it's heartening to see the technology succeed in spite of organizational barriers and individual resistance. I'm surprised Change (yes, a capital C) is so darn hard, and SIGCHI has an important role to play in helping us know when, where, why, and how.
How did you come to get involved and/or be taken on?
Peter Orbeton had asked for volunteers to help with Bulletin in one of the issues. I responded asking what it was he needed help with, as I might be able to help a bit (key words "a bit".) As the planning for the magazine (interactions) began to take shape, Peter was looking for someone to take over the Bulletin, so he, Rod Owen (our Associate Editor) and myself later met during CHI'90 in Seattle to talk about the possibility/likelihood of my taking on the entire Bulletin. Rod wasn't in a position where he could take it on, but was very willing to stay on and help. It was the start of a great team. Rod continued on with me through my years as Editor-in-Chief. I attended my first EEC meeting following Interact'90 in Cambridge, UK, and began producing issues around the same time.
What was the state of the Bulletin and SIGCHI when you started?
The SIGCHI Bulletin was in a state of transition. For some time, it had published unrefereed short papers and lots of supplemental materials from the CHI conferences -- things that you now find in the Conference Companion volume. The EC had set a policy that we were to focus the Bulletin on news (see some of my columns on this....) to try and force papers to the eventual magazine, TOCHI and the conference. The Bulletin was supposed to be transitioning towards being more of being the member's newsletter, providing highlights of current events, workshop and trip reports, etc.
What was your vision for the Bulletin?
I tried to carry out the EC's vision. Peter, Rod, I and others involved with the magazine planning had several meetings to try and evolve the role of the Bulletin, so that it stayed timely and relevant for all of our members. We wanted to keep the Bulletin useful and relevant in light of the changes we hoped were coming -- the launching of both a UI magazine and Transactions on CHI.
What changes if any did you bring about?
Gradually, I shifted content to be more in line with the EC policy, and we modified the existing graphic design and layout to emphasize the various columns and departments. Adding regular columns was a major change and one that I think has proven to be quite good for the organization and the Bulletin.
How did you produce each issue?
Originally, we asked for all materials to come to us typed in columns, and then we sent everything to an outside contractor who laid out the issues and manually made a paste-up master of the entire book. We were spending hours and hours and hours and several thousands of dollars each issue paying for this outside service and working with them. We later shifted to a desktop publishing arrangement where we sent almost all of every issue directly to the printers as PostScript files. This was in some ways more work on the Editor, and in other ways was a great deal easier than dealing with the rework cycles of a remote, outside vendor.
What was your experience as a whole?
It was wonderful. I felt like I was somehow contributing to all of us with each issue. I had a wonderful opportunity to meet and interact with many, many SIGCHI members and colleagues, and tremendously enjoyed those opportunities.
What would you have done differently?
I'm not sure -- remaining on as Editor-in-Chief of the Bulletin until we finished the studies and proposals for the new magazine certainly was double duty, but it was borne of necessity. I can still pick up a Bulletin today, and see "my baby" but I gratefully notice the improvements that have come about.
What are you doing now?
Since Peter stepped down as the Adjunct Chair for the UI magazine, I've been filling that role. First, as Adjunct Chair, and more recently as Associate editor-in-chief for interactions. interactions was ACM's first magazine to be targeted at the needs of the practitioner -- the working engineer, designer, and programmer -- and was a major step forward for the Society. SIGCHI should be proud of our contributions not only to ourselves, but also in blazing a trail and setting a standard of excellence for the other ACM magazines to follow.
How did you come to get involved and/or be taken on?
I had been a passive SIGCHI watcher for awhile, and had gone to my first CHI conference in New Orleans in 1991 -- actually the first time I had been to the USA, which made it an interesting year for me, because I also went to the first EWHCI conference in Moscow, still the Soviet Union then, later that year (and got to see the tanks on the street during the coup).
A year later, just before CHI '92, Gerrit van der Veer, with whom I had been working on a Dutch nationally-funded project, phoned me up and said that INTERCHI was coming to Amsterdam in 1993 (he was one of the conference co-chairs for it), and they were looking for someone who knew the conference, knew the city, and would like to be Local Arrangements Chair. I jumped at the chance. So after CHI '92 at Monterey I went to my first meeting, and loved it! I really liked the people and really got on with them well: no nerds here!
The other meetings leading up to INTERCHI '93 were just as good, and so I decided I'd like to get more involved. As it happened at around that time Bill Hefley announced that SIGCHI was looking for a new Bulletin editor, as he was leaving for interactions. When I read the call, it fitted me perfectly: I could do all the things they asked for: I had edited a (small) newsletter before, and had edited large publications, and so on, and my employers would support me doing it. So I applied. It took longer than I had expected (than anyone expected I think), so that when the phone call finally came, congratulating me and asking if I could come to a meeting in Los Angeles (the next day!), I was in a cabin in the middle of a forest in Sweden, half way on an overland trip to Moscow for the 3rd EWHCI conference. So I didn't go to that meeting.
What was the state of the Bulletin and SIGCHI when you started?
I started at a moment of change: after all the planning interactions had just started, directed at the practitioner, TOCHI had just started, directed at the academic, so the question was Whither the Bulletin? Membership was buoyant, at around its peak then I think, there was a new Executive Committee, and in the light of the number of plans that had recently come to fruition, there was generally a feeling of What shall we do next? which was very exciting.
What was your vision for the Bulletin?
Firstly I had to find a place for it in the new range of publications, without getting in the way of interactions and TOCHI. I thought the Bulletin could remain an important resource for the field.
I did an informal survey of some colleagues who were members, to find out what was important to them, not only in SIGCHI but also in any other SIGs they were members of. One of the interesting things about SIGCHI is that it is very active in building a community. This has made my life much easier by having a group of people I can call on when there's work to be done.
I wanted to make the Bulletin a publication that you would immediately open when you received it, rather than putting it on a pile of things you had to read this month.
What changes if any did you bring about?
In terms of content: I have added a touch of humour in the Views and Feelings page and the Luke and Ophelia cartoon (by the way, has anyone spotted yet why they're called Luke and Ophelia?); two columns have been added as part of the community-building side: Local SIGs, and the Students column. These have turned out to be very good ways to get people more involved with the Bulletin. Finally there is the Real World column and the idea of the occasional Special Feature.
On the cosmetic side: I added some colour and pictures on the cover, because I wanted each issue to have an identity. Some people wanted me to take the table of contents off the cover, while others wanted me to keep it on, so I left it the way it was: in any case it's more ergonomic that way.
The pages have been redesigned a little, the footers have been made more ergonomic, the headings are in a slightly more interesting font.
The body font (Garamond) has been retained since it is readable and efficient in the use of page real-estate. It has also been important that the Bulletin still remains recognisably the Bulletin (and besides ACM have put the fear of the US Post Office into me, lest we lose our preferential postal status, which saves us thousand of dollars a year).
The last change so far is of course the online Bulletin which starts this month.
How do you produce each issue?
A month before the issue deadline I email all the regular contributors to remind them that there is an issue coming up. Other contributions arrive at various times, but most come flooding in at the deadline.
Almost everything comes to me electronically. The moment it arrives I convert it to Frame Maker, which is the DTP package we use for the Bulletin, which luckily has a lot of filters for converting varying types of documents, or I send it out to one of the team of editorial assistants. Then I check the most important things, like that the diagrams are there, and the contact address and biography, and if not get straight back to the author. I enter the details, including the number of pages, in a tracking document for the issue, and then I get on with my other work.
When the deadline comes around, I assemble all the articles in a Frame Maker Book document, which does all the page numbering for me, and creates the table of contents. I email all the people who have missed the deadline, and get a promise from them for a drop-dead date, and a page estimate, so I can leave the space for them. Then I look to see how far over the page limit we are. I have tricks for squeezing articles into just one less page; only very rarely do I have to hold something over to the next issue. There is some leeway in my budget to increase the number of pages if there is really no other alternative.
Then I spell check, and do all those other pedantic editor things, print it to a 600 dpi laser printer, take it home and proof read it over the weekend. After correcting it, I send it to the 2400 dpi typesetter here, and then express mail it to New York, where they add the ads, and send it to the printer.
There's a lot to do, but I use a thick application of the 80/20 rule: 80% of the result is reached with 20% of the effort, and I leave it at that.
What has been your experience as a whole?
Still ongoing. In general an exciting experience, that I still enjoy very much, and from which I'm learning a lot. If I stopped enjoying it I'd give it up, because I'm sure it would show through in the content.
The only part I don't enjoy is the proof-reading. Boring!
What would you have done differently?
I think the thing I would most like to have done in an ideal world was increase the Bulletin to six issues per year of 64 pages, instead of the current 4 issues of 96 pages. It would cost more, but it would make the Bulletin more `timely'. I would be a bit nervous for extra work though. I still want to develop even more of a team around the Bulletin to distribute the work as thinly as possible.
What are you doing otherwise?
Well, I've been selected as Conference Co-chair for CHI '97, along with Alan Edwards, so I'm trying to organise some associate editors to take some of the work off my hands in the coming time, maybe with the aim of growing a new editor eventually.
Along with that I'm chair of a European World Wide Web Working Group which meets twice a year, and in the time left me from all that I'm doing research in architectural solutions to user-interface problems, at the moment applied to interactive books.
In my spare time I sing in a choir that performs 20th century classical music: we've just cut a CD of a piece composed for us, and performed a major concert in Prague. I don't watch TV.
Issue |
Article |
Vol.28 No.1, January 1996 |
Article |
Issue |