Curb Cuts in the Virtual Community Telework and Persons With Disabilities Hesse 1995

8/9/2019 Curb Cuts in the Virtual Community Telework and Persons With Disabilities Hesse 1995

1/8

Proceedings of the 28th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences - 1995

Curb Cuts in the Virtual Community: Telework and Persons with DisabilitiesBradford W. Hesse, PhD

American Institutes for ResearchAbstractCurb cuts are the mmps set into sidewalks to makebuildings more accessible to persons in wheelchairs. Withfowthought, they are easy to install, they provide access orpersons with physical impairmenti, and at the same time theymay be used by able-bodiedpersons for pushing strollers,shopping carts, and the like. Just like curb cuts in thephysical communily, telework in the virtual community may

be used to break down barriers of access for persons withdisabilities. This paper addresses how and why teleworkrnq be used as a work-place accommodation. It takes as apoint of illustration a program initiated by the U.S. Depart-ment ofDefense to extend telecommuting arrangements to itsemployees with short- and long-term disabilities. Recom-mendations are given for how to represent the needs ofpersons with disabilities in the design of telework enablingtechnologies.

1 The Virtual CommunityWith the onset and progression of the information revolu-tion, we are seeing the development of a new kind of workcommunity. This is a community that spans ime [8, l o] andgeography [9], a community that supplements buildings andstreets with personal computers and information superhigh-ways [2]. This is the virtual community [22] enabled bytechnologiesdesigned to move information rather than goodsand people [ 171. Life in this community is new, evolving, andrelatively unfettered by previous history. Decisions that wemake now, as charter members of that community, will leavea lasting impression on the norms, expectations, and moresthat will govern its life for decades o come.At the dawn of the virtual work community, there are a

number of questions we must ask ourselves. One of the firstis: How do we make this community equally accessible to allof its members? In our physical environments we havelearned that the way we design our structures may inadver-tently have an impact on who will use them. We havelearned, for example, that something as simple as a curb,designed to keep water off yards and sidewalks, can poseinsurmountableobstacles o those of our community members

who have physical disabilities, especially those who rely onwheelchairs to get around.The solution s to design our communities with features thatare equally usable by people with a wide r ange of physicalabilities, a principle referred to as universal design [ 141.Using the example of a curb, one of the most frequently citedillustrations of universal design is the curb cut. Curb cutsare the innocuous ramps set into the pathways outside ofpublic buildings. These ramps not only make the buildingsmore accessible to people with wheelchairs but they can alsobe used by anyone pushing a stroller, a shopping cart, or ahand ruck, or anyonewho may simply want to avoid the strainof stepping up over curbs. The design solution is the perfectcompromise. With forethought, curb cuts are easy to installand yet they are welcomed additions not just for people i nwheelchairs but for all community members.The purposeof this paper is to consider similar adaptations- curb cuts if you will-in the virtual community. It beginsby examining how telework itself may be considered a type ofcurb cut in the conventional organization; that is, how andwhy telework can be used as an adaptive tool to improveemployment options for persons with disabilities. It followsby presenting a case history of how telework was used toimprove the working conditions of civilian employees withdisabilities working for the U.S. Department of Defense(DOD). It concludes with recommendations for fi.n?heradapting he practice of telework to meet the needs of personswith disabilities.2 Telework as a Curb Cut

In this paper, telework is defined as the overarchingpractice of substituting communications technology and/orcomputer technology for actual travel to work or a centraloffice. The term encompasses he notion of telecommuting[18], home-based employment, flexiplace, work fromcommunity-based telework centers, remote work, and workconductedwhile traveling. There has been speculation amongorganizational researchers that, because of the nature oftelework and eleworkenabling technologies, the practice maybe usedas an adaptation o accommodate the needs of personswith disabilities. The argument begins with an examination ofchanges n the way people work.

4181060-3425/95$4.0001995 IEEEceedings of the 28th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS '95)0-3425/95 $10.00 1995 IEEE


2/8


3/8

Proceedings of the 28th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences - 1995

3.1 The Flexiplace Steering CommitteeTo supervise introduction of the flexiplace programdepartment wide, the DOD flexiplace coordinator formed asteering committee of Defense component representatives

who would work from the top down to support flexiplacethroughout each of their represented constituencies. Thesteeringcommittee was composed of representatives from theArmy, the Navy, the Air Force, and each of 17 independentdefense agencies. StatT from the American Institutes forResearch, a not-for-profit behavioral sci ence research insti-tute, served as facilitators on the project and worked with thecommittee to overs ee program implementation.The first goal of the project was to establish an informaldemonstration program by which the committee couldevaluate advantagesof, and obstacles to, using telework as aworkplace accommodation. During the demonstration phase,members of the flexiplace steering committee i dentifiedemployees who either had already been benefitting &urn theuse of flexible workplace arrangements to accommodate theirdisability or would be willing to begin using some form oftelework on a trial basis.The lexiplace steering committee met monthly during thedemonstration phase of the project. During that time itmonitored the progress of partici pant identification, identifiedand provided solutions to problems in the program, anddeveloped strategies for encouraging the programs widerdissemination. Guests were invited to attend meetings on anad hoc basis as the occasion warranted. Guests includedrepresentatives rom the Computer Electronics Accommoda-tions Program, invited to help overcome the logistical prob-lemswithcomputer acfzommcdations n the home; representa-tives from the Department of Labor, called in to help i dentifypotentially eligible participants from the workers compensa-tion rolls; and guests from the Office of Personnel Manage-ment, invited to share results of the Federal flexiplace pilotproject, In April 1994, work on the demonstration projectended and the program transitioned into an ongoing, sup-ported, work option. Following are results of the demonstra-tion project.3.2 Participant Characteristics

To be identified as part of the demonstration project,employees needed to be working in (or be eligible forworking in) a flexible workplace arrangement. Relevantflexible arrangements were those that were approved by asupervisor and in which some or all of the employees workweek was spent away rom the primary duty station. Employ-ees would quaI@ for inclusion if they worked from home,from a telework center, or from a nursing home or indepen-dent living center. Employees were not required to maintainspecialized telecommunications technologies away from theoffice other than a standard telephone. Not surprisingly,

though, many participants worked as information systemsspecialistsand maintained modem links to their offices maintixme or Local Area Network.In all, 34 employees registered for inclusion in the demon-stration project. To quality, employees needed only to obtainpermission iom their immediate supervisors after which theycompleted and submitted a participant inhormation form.Supetvisorswere instructed to extend flexiplace privileges toemployees who had obtained a performance review rating offully satisfactotyor better, since poor employees at the officewould make poor telecommuters. Participant informationforms were submitted to the American Institutes for Researchfor tabulation and analysis. Participant characteristics asobtained from the form are depicted in Table 1.From Table 1, the 34 employees in the demonstrationproject appeared to be primarily female (74%), workingprincipally under General Schedule (GS) pay plans, and withan average time on the ob of 7.69 years. It is unclear at thistime why a disproportionate number of females was in thegroup. One contributing factor was the high number ofemployeeson short-term disability who were working at hometo accommodate omplications in pregnancy. Approximately24% of those in the project indicated that they had beenreceiving workers compensation before starting flexiplace, astatistic with cost savings implications for DOD, and 6% (2employees) ndicated hat they had been considering disabilityretirement. About one fifth of the workforce (2 1%) indicatedthat they needed special computer adaptations to make theirhome work station compatible with their office computers in

Table 1. Descriptive Characteristics of Pilot GroupGenderMaleFemale

Pay PlanGeneral ScheduleGeneral ManagerOther

Time on JobNeeds adaptive computer equipmentWas on workers compensationConsidering disability retirementType of DisabilityDeafness

BlindnessMissing ExtremitiesParalysisMental IllnessShort-term disabilityOther

26%74%76%12%12%

7.69 yra.21%26%

6%0%3%0%

29%3%

24%41%

420

ceedings of the 28th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS '95)0-3425/95 $10.00 1995 IEEE


4/8

Proceedings of the 28th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences - 1995teims of eons for their disabilities (e.g., to includevoice recognition soi?ware or specialized keyboards).The most commonly reported disabling condition in theproject was paralysis; next was short-term disabilities. Bothare logical. For participants with paralysis, flexiplace re-moves he burden mposed by having to negotiate specializedtransportation needs. Moreover, persons with paralysisfrequently employ personal assistants to help them in theirwork at home or in supported living arrangements. Theseass&ants know the personal needs of the employee and havealready developed a very effective working relationship wi ththem. In some cases, personal assistants can be even moreeffective at helping t he employee stay productive than officestaffcan. Flexiplace allows employees with paralysis to makethe most of their personal assi stants along with specializedBccOmmOdatiollSn the home while forgoing the daily burdenof commuting to work.Personswith short-term disabilities are also well suited fortelework arrangements.As descri bed by Hesse and Grantham[4], fl exiplace does not always have to be considered a long-term arrangement to be highly effective. One of the greatadvantages of establishing a &commuting policy within anorganization is being able to give employees the flexibility tocope with short-term life disruptions.3.3 Qualitative Evaluations (Telephone Interviews)

To evaluate he effectiveness of fl exiplace, semi-structuredinterviews were conducted with all 34 participants in thedemonstration project and when feasible with participantssupervisors. Most interviews were conducted by telephone,but when pm&red by the respondent alternate means such asfacsimile transmission or electronic mail were used. In eachcase, an interviewer followed an 1 -page written protocoldesigned to elicit a full description of the telecommutingexperience Interviewers were given the discretion to followthe protocol exactly or to paraphrase, given the distinctivedemandsofeach session. Typical interviews lasted anywherefrom 10 to 45 minutes and were audiotaped for later review.Following the interviews, interviewers took the time tosummarize primary points and important quotes in a two- tothree-page ndividual synopsis. The audiotapes and synopseswere anal yzed with respect to (a) reasons for acceptingflexiplace as a work place alternative, (b) advantagesof thepractice, and (c) problems exper ienced. Each of these areasis described in greater breadth below.3.4 Reasons for Going on Flexiplace

Reasons for negotiating flexiplace opportunities differedsomewhat depending on whether the employee was dealingwith a short-term or long-term disability. In the DODdemonstrationproject, 24% report ed going on flexiplace workschedulestoaccommodateshort-term disabilities. Short-term

conditions ranged Corn complicated pregnancies to injuredlimbs. In each case, working at the O&X while recoveringfrom the disability was so prohibitive that working at homewas the only alternative to not working at all. These peoplech~fill-time telecommuting arrangements or a short-timeduration. As hll time telecommuters, they might be expectedto be prone to t he negative side effects of staying away tiomthe office for long periods of time: isolation, disent?anchise-ment i-am the WC& c4nrimunity,or missed opportunities [2 11.To t he contrary, employees with short-term disabilitiesreported being so grateful for not having to drain their sickleave accounts that they found the experience to be quitetolerable.For peopl e with long-term disabilities, reasons for tele-commuting were slightly different. These were people forwhom innovative work strategies in the face. of personalobstacles had become a way of life. Working remotely awayfrom the office had become a hard-won privilege bestowedthroughyearsof exemplary service and consistent negotiation.More often than not, these employees had created part-timetelecommuting arrangements for a long-time duration; theywould stay home as they needed to accommodate medicaldemands, o avoid dangerouscommuting conditions, or just toget more work done. For these people, telecommuting was anoptimizing strategy to be used as occasion permitted toreassert personal control. Their biggest and unfortunatelymost consistent obstacles were in fighting perennial battlesagainst egressivemanagers who believed that work not donein the office was work not done well.3.5 Advantages of Telework

The biggest advantage of flexiplace, both for persons withshort-term and long-term disabilities, was a sense of controlover adverse life events. Flexiplace, by its nature, incorpo-rates the best of two alternative work strategies: tele-commuting, where one s able to conduct work away Corn theoffice,and flexitime, where one is able to control t he hoursduring the day in which work is completed. Flexibility inwork environment allows employees to minimize disruptionscaused by lack of specialized transportation, needs forattendant care, need for medication, and so on. It also pro-vides them with the ability to minimize distractions, as s thecase when information workers need to get away fromtelephones to read, write, or concentrate in other ways.Flexibility in work schedule allows employees to work atthe times of day in which they are most productive. Thisadvantage was especially important for employees who,because of physical limitations or the side effects of medica-tions, might feel fatigued after working long stretches. Byworking at home, these employees could work for a shortstretch, rest, and then pick the work back up later in the daywhen they were feeling rejuvenated. Overwhelmingly,participants and supervisors noted that the increased control

421



5/8

Proceedings of the 28th Annual Hawaii International Conference on SystemSciences - 1995participants had over their lives led to greater productivity,better health, and increased morale.Other advantages expressed by intervi ewees included:feeling more relaxed about getting dressed (a big concern foremployees who were contin4 to bed part time or who foundthat BccoRlIILodatingasts,prostheses, or braces was fatiguingand time consuming); decreased apprehension over selfpresentation (people expressed relief in deali ng with remotecolleagues in such a way that the disability was not a salientissue); sensing an enhanced feeling of independence; andexperiencing a heightened sense of community. This lastadvantagemerits addedemphasis. Employees and supervisorsfelt that effective telework arrangements were not just theaccomplishmentof one person but the result of an entire workunit striving to improve in communication skills, trust, andcooperation.3.6 Problems with Telework

For most people, socialized by years of working on-site,flexible work ar rangementsare still a novel concept that takesgetting used to by employers and employees alike. Most ofthe participants in the flexiplace pilot project were earlyadopters of the practice. For these people, negotiating aworking flexiplace arrangement was a struggle, and one thatwas usually won only with the help of a compassionatechampion. Even once an employee had found a sympatheticear, processing the request for off-site work could drag on asthe anomalous request wound its way upward through layersof unsympathetic hierarchies.Another outcome of unfamiliarity is a generalized sense ofworry on the part of the employee that the telework arrange-ment might be perceived by others as an excuse for malinger-ing. As a result, flexiplace employees frequently reportedovmting. All too often they found themselves tryingto prove themselves by working longer hours and producingmore than their col leagues in the office. This t endency wasexacerbated by the fact that in the home there were no cleardemarcations between work time and personal time. Ifunattended, these unclear boundaries in conjunction withanxiety over personal acceptancecould set employees up forexploitation and burn-out.Other problems included missed opportunities, lack ofequipment and materials (especially over not having thesimple supplies, forms, books, or other materials needed tocomplete work away ?om the office), and disruptions at home.As an illustration of this last point, one employee withhyperocusis (an extreme sensitivity to sounds) found that thenoise of her refrigerator going on and off in her home wasmuch more aversive than the din of office noise at work. Inthose cases where telecommuting arrangements didnt work,most employees either returned to the office full time or elsemod&d therr arrangements o include more time in the officethan originally planned.

4 Implications for a Border-less Organizati onMuch enthusiasm s cutainly warranted about telework andabout how the technologies that support it have the potentialfor breaking down geographic barriers in the global organiza-tions of the 1990s and beyond. But just as much enthusiasmis warranted or how telework may have the capacity to bringdown barriers of access o persons of all nations with disabili-ties. From the Department of Defense pilot program, threeimplications metit emphasis.

4.1 Enhancing Personal ControlFirst, telework has the potential of enhancing personalcontrol. When implemented as part of a work policy inorganizations, telework frequently carries with it an elementof flexibility. Teleworkers have control over where they workand when they work, so long as they manage by objective and

goal rather than by process. It is this element of flexibility thatis especially suited for many employees with disabilities.Employees with mobility and profound sensory mpairmentsfind that commuting to a central offrce can be an unnecessaryburden, and a burden that is exacerbated by inclementweather, ratIic, or other obstacles. Telework gives employeesthe option of minimizing that burden associated with physicalcommuting when they perceive t as getting in the way of workor morale. Likewise, workers who suffer from a short-termdisability or who have been injured on the job find that full-time work at the office is prohibitively fatiguing and may beactually be forbidden by i nsurance or a physician. Temporarywork at home is an option that allows the injured employee towork as ong as hey are able, then to rest and resume work assoon as hey feel better. Even among nondisabled employees,many teleworkers have reported increased productivity byworking during peak performance times [ 131.It should be noted that if a telework program is incorrectlyadministered it may serve to defeat an employees perceptionof control and lexibility. Managers who made telecommutingcompulsoiy in the 1980sas a way of saving office costs did soat the expense of empl oyee morale and frequently incited thewrath of l abor unions [ 193. Likewise, employees who feelcompelled to work at home ml1 time without the option ofcoming into the office often report feeling isolated andexcluded from promotional opportunities [23]. With respectto employees with disabilities, managers who insist on fulltime telecommuting as a way of avoiding workpl ace accom-modation may be taking a social leap backwards from an eraof mainstreaming to a time of isolation and separation [ 121.What appears o be important is to provide employees with theflexibility of selecting their work environment, while encour-aging a mixed strategyof spending some days in the office andsomedays at home. From the social psychological literature,flexibility and control have the driving value of enhancing

422



6/8

Proceedings of the 28th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences - 199.5

resilience to aversive events and energizing self-determinedbehavior [ 11.4.2 Improving Quality of Life

Second, for persons with disabilities, telework has thepotential of improving quality of life. The disabilities commu-nity has been especially invested in the use of new technologyfor improving quality of life [ 111. Although new technologiesare arcane and remote for some people, many people withdisabilities are thoroughly accustomed to using them tocommunicatemore effectively with fiends and colleagues, tocoordinate their work in groups, and to learn new skills.Because these employees are accustomed to using hightechnologies,and because he virtual community relies on hightechnologies to mediate communication, telework may havethe particular benefit of enhanci ng personal outcomes forpersons with disabilities above and beyond enhancements oother groups.This may especiallybe the casewhen employees communi-cate through computer-mediated technologies such as elec-tronic mail and bulletin boards. Computer-mediated commu-nications are text-based n nature. Persons who are deaf havebeen communicating textually t hrough TDDs (Telecommuni-cationsDevices for the Deaf) for some time. As an organiza-tion moves internal discussions from the water cooler ontoelectronic networks, it levels the playing field for participantswith hearing impairments. Electronic mail colloquializes thepractice of communicating textually while it removes thedifficulty deaf employees have had in locating TDD servicesand using them effectively with nonimpaired others.

In some respects, similar benefits may accrue for personswith vision impairments. To read internally circulatedmaterials, employees who ar e blind must rely on externalreading devices to translate the printed word into synthesizedvoice. Although impressive advances have been made inOptical Character Recognition technology, the process is stillcumbersome and prone to error. On the other hand, sinceelectronic mail is text-based n nature and is already deliveredin a machine-readable format it i s, a relatively simple matterto convert incoming mail to synthesized speech. Puttingcompany memorandaon-line has he advantageof speeding upthe process by which persons with vision impairmentstranslate written memoranda into interpretable communica-tions.For employeeswho are home bound or who have mohilityimpairments, computer-mediatedcommunications remove thebarriers imposed by physical and temporal distance. In astudy of electronic network usage in science, Hesse and hiscolleagues [5] found that i ncreased network usage wasassociatedwith enhancedprofessional outcomes for scientistswho were geographically solated. In a study of network usagein a city government, Hti and his colleagues [lo] noted anincrease n organizationalcommitment from shift workers who

usedasynchronous communications to talk with colleaguesin other ime shifts. Olson [2 1 noted that telecommuters whoused electronic mail felt less isolated working at home thanthose who relied only on the telephone. Generalizing fromthese observations, it should be plausible to predict thatemployees who are home-bound due to a short-term or long-term disability should benefit directly from being able to usecomputer-mediatedcommunications for communicating withcolleagues at work.Other advantages o using telework enabling technologiesare more subtle in nature, but the effect may be just aspronounced. Because mediated communication is limited tothe textual channel, it l acks the nonverbal and social contextcues present in face-to-face interaction. As a result,computer-mediated ommunication limits the impact of socialstatuscues,physical posturing, and verbal dominance cues ndiscussions [24]. Participants i n these mediated interactionstend o contribute equally to discussions and decision-making.In a sense, he medium democratizes group discussions andwill minimize the stigma associated with physical disabilities.Taken together, he implications are that telework enablingtechnologiesmay have the potential of breaking down barriersfor somepeople with disabilities. Consider as an example thehearing-impaired employee who for the first time can partici-pate in a discussion of offlce politics on an equal level withnon-impaired coworkers because their communications aretextual and not aural. Or consider the employee who has beenma& timid throughyears of self-consciousnessover a visuallyapparentdisability and who t hrough electronic discussions cancontribute o discussionswith confidence and impact. (Not allmovement to computer-mediated communications is associ-ated with positive outcomes. Consider the case of flamingwhere participants in a computer-mediated interchangeexchange insults and aggressive abs precisely because theinhibitory quality of nonverbal cues is missing [6,24].)4.3 Recommendations for Design

Third, as telework becomes a more accepted businesspractice and more people participate in the virtual community,care must be taken o ensure hat the needs of individuals withdisabilities are included in the design of telework technolo-gies. We, as managers and engineers of information systems,must take care to build our own curb cuts into the world wecreate. Somethingas simple as a move t oward graphical userinterfaces in the design of front-end computer applicationsmay serve to exclude persons with blindness if thought is notgiven to how to provide access through voice synthesis ortactile transduction.Following are recommendations for using the promise oftelework to fulfill the vision of a fully inclusive and adaptedcommunity on-line.0 Design accessible on-ramps and off-ramps to the

information highway. Designers should work closely423



7/8

Proceedings of the 28th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences - 1995with human factors professionals to be sure that thetechnologies developed for the electronic organizationare compatible with the needs and limitations of personswith disabilities. This is the notion of universal design[ 141,which suggests hat information technology shouldbe designed t?om the start to be compatible with a fullspectrum of physical and cognitive abilities.

l Develop applicati ons that help specially challengedindividuals transcend their disabilities. Adaptivetechnologieshold great promise for helping individualsovercome he limitations of their disabilities. The imageof how the world has recovered through technology thethoughts and contributions of such talented individualsas Stephen Hawking is a motivating infiuence onengineers and developers. As dis cussed in this paper,telework itself is an adaptation that can be used to helpindividuals overcome he physical and social l imitationsof their disabilities.0 Implement the organizational infrastructure to supporta productive use of telewonk. Obstacles to the us e oftelework by employees with disabilities are frequentlymanagerial rather than technological. Recent efforts inthe United States, the United Kingdom, and WesternEurope have begun to wear away at industrial agemanagerial phil osophies and for the first time areopening telework as an option to a good number ofemployees with disabilities. These efforts should becontinued.l Support continuous learning with on-line resources.Just as world libraries have been he keystone to enlight-enedchange n previous eras, nformation on-line can be

the keystone to empowerment i n the information age.Examples of current and proposed resources for thedisabilities community include: (a) adaptive technolo-gies information for persons with disabilities and theircare providers, (b) i nstructional information on accessi-bility for teachers and employers; (c) employmentopportunities; (d) legislative and policy information; (e)educational information including adapted courseworkon-line; (r) medical information; and (g) professionaland popular j ournals, texts, and magazines.l Bolster community buildi ng through dedicated andinclusive discussion groups on-line. Electronic discus-sion groups can overcome boundaries by connecting

community members hr ough conversation, inquiry, andexploration rmspective of geogr aphy or time. Support-ing electronic discussion groups for employees withdisabilities will provide i mmediate access o the com-munitys knowledge and personal relationships.l Move toward international standards. As emphasizedby the World Institute on Disability [ 141, standards needto be developed to assure hat persons with disabilitieshave universal access o telecommunications and on-lineinformation regardlessof where they live or the products

they use. Although some progress has been made onthis front nationally, efforts should continue to work onnegotiating elecommunications and nformation systemsstandards or persons with disabilities internationally.5 Conclusion

Early formative feedback from the DOD flexiplace projectfor persons with disabilities suggests that telework c an beuseful for persons with disabilities across a wide range ofpractice. Successml telework can range from short-termsolutions, in which employees spend full time at home for ashort duration, to long-term solutions, in which employeesbalance work at home with work in the office. In fact, justhaving a flexiplace policy within an organization-just likehaving a short- or long-term sick policy-should serve as tsown employee benefit. Whether employees are reboundingfrom earthquakes in California or recovering from brokenankles in the DOD, flexiplace takes the stress out of theirpersonal emergencies.As organizations distribute themselves and improvementsare made in telecommunications technologies, telework isinevitable. As we move into a global, virtual community wemust take stock of how accessible we have made that commu-nity to persons with disabilities. Now, as we plan for theborderless organization, is the time to consider makingadaptations-curb cuts-for persons with disabilities in thevirtual community.

AcknowledgementsThe author gratefully acknowledges Judith Gilli om, RobertWeisgerber, Natalie Broomhall, Lea Stublarec, and CharlesGrantham for their collaboration on the Department ofDefense Flexiplace project and Deborah Kaplan who helpedpopularize he analogyof curb cuts as universal adaptations.

References1.2.3.4.

5.

Bmhm, S. S., & Brehm, J. W. (198 1). Psychological eactance:A theoryoffreedom and control. New York: Academic Press.Gore,A. (1991, September). nfrastructure for the Gl obal Village.Scientific American, 150-153.Grantham, C. E. & Nichols, L. D. (1993). The digitui work-place: Designing groupware platjbrms. New York, NY: VanNostrand Reinhold.Hesse, B. W., & Grantham, C. E. (1991). The emergence felectronically distributed work communities: Implications forresearch on telework. Electronic networks: Research pplica-tions, andpolicy , l(I), 4-17.Hesse,B. W., Sproull, L.S., Kiesler, S.B., & Walsh, J. P. (1993).Returns to science: Computer networks in oceanography.Communications f theACM, 36 (S), 90-101.

424



8/8

Proceedings of the 28th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences - 19956. Hesse, B. W., L Turner, C. W. (1991). The role of causalattributions in attenuating aggressive behavior within acomputer medium. Manuscript accepted for publication (Com-puters in Human Behavior).7. Hesse, B. W., L Weisgerber, R. A. (1994). The Department ofDefense jlexiplace pilot program: Final report (ReportNumber AIR-32301!94-FR). Palo Alto, CA: American Institutesfor Research.8. Hesse,B., Wemer, C., & Altman, I. (1988). Temporal aspectsofcomputer-mediated communication. Computers in HumanBehavior, 4, l-l!).9. Hiliz, S. R., & Turoff, M. (1978). The networknation: Humancommunication via computer. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.10. Huff, C., Sproull, L., t Kiesler, S. (1989). Computer communi-cation and organizational commitment: Tracing the relationshipin a city government. Journal of Applied Psychology, 19,1371-1391.11. Hunt, H. A., & J3erkowit~,M. (1992). New technologies and theemploytent of disabled persons. Geneva: International LabourOffICe.12. Joice,W. (1991). Home based employment: A consideration forpublic personnel management. Public Personnel Management,20,49-a.13. Joice,W. (1993). The Federaljlexible workplacepilotproject:Work-at-home component. (Report Number PRD 92-15).Washington, D.C.: The OffIce of Personnel Management.14. Kaplan, D., & De Witt, J. (1994). Telecommunications andpersons with disabilities: Building thefiamework. The secondreport of the blue ribbon panel on national telecommunicationspolicy. Oakland, CA: World Institute on Disability.15. Kling, R. (1987). Defining the boundaries of computing acrosscomplex organizations. In Boland & Hirscheim (Eds.), Criticalissues n information systems esearch (pp. 307-362). London:John Wiley and Sons.

16. Kling, R., & Sacchi, W. (1982). The web of computing: Com-puter echnologyas social organization. Advances in Computers,2J. New York: Academic Press.17. Mokhtarian, P. L. (1990). A typology of relationships betweentelecommunications nd transportation.Transportation Research24A (3), 231-242.18. Nilles, J. (1975). Telecommunications and organizationaldecentralization. IEEE Transactions on Communications, 10,1142-l 147.19. Office of Technology Assessment (1985). Automation ofAmericas ofice& J9&L2000 (OTA-CIT-287). Washington, DC:U.S. Government Printing Office.20. Office of Personnel Management, (1990). Guidelinesforpilotflexible workplace arrangements, Sponsored by PresidentsCouncil on Management Improvement, Human ResourcesCommittee.2l.Olson,M. H. (1987). Telework: Practical experience and futureprospects.n R. E. Kraut (Ed.), Technology and the transfonna-tion of white-colfar work (pp.135-152). Hillsdale, NJ:Lawerence Earlbaum.22. Rheingold, H. (1993). The virtual community: Homesteadingon the eIectronicfiontier. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.23. Shellenbarger, S. (December 14, 1993). Some thrive, but manywilt working at home. The WaN Street Journal, 13 .24. Sproull, L. & Kiesler, S. (1991). Connections: New ways ofworking in the networked organization. Cambridge, MA: TheMIT Press.25. Tennessee alley Authority, (1992). Handbook on home-basedemploymentforpeople with disabilities.26. TofIler, A. (1980). The third wave. New York: Morrow.27. Woelders, H. (1990). Telework: New opportunities for thehandicappedunemployed worker. The International Journal ofSociology and Social Policy, IO. 176-180.28.Zuboff, (1988). In the age of the smart machine: The uture andpower of work. New York: Basic Books.

425

ceedings of the 28th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS '95)

Curb Cuts in the Virtual Community Telework and Persons With Disabilities Hesse 1995

Documents

Transcript of Curb Cuts in the Virtual Community Telework and Persons With Disabilities Hesse 1995