Conflitos entre usuários e desenvolvedores de soluções informatizadas
Carregando...
Arquivos
Data
2015
Tipo de documento
Tese
Título da Revista
ISSN da Revista
Título de Volume
Área do conhecimento
Linguística, Letras e Artes
Modalidade de acesso
Acesso aberto
Editora
Autores
Vieira, Sandra
Orientador
Rauen, Fábio José
Coorientador
Resumo
Nesta tese, abordam-se conflitos entre usuários e desenvolvedores, gerados por soluções informatizadas que não atendem às expectativas do usuário, partindo do pressuposto de que esses conflitos decorrem de dificuldades comunicacionais em etapas que antecedem à elaboração da solução. Posto isso, propõe-se, como hipótese de trabalho, que a teoria de conciliação de metas de Rauen (2014), baseada em relações de relevância (SPERBER; WILSON, 1986, 1995), permite descrever e explicar processos interacionais abdutivo/dedutivos entre usuários e desenvolvedores e, deste modo, contribuir para a minimização desses conflitos. Para dar conta dessa demanda, analisou-se um caso de help desk publicado para estigmatizar o papel do usuário, no qual o usuário questiona por que os produtos de sua empresa não foram cadastrados na solução informatizada. Os resultados sugerem que a ausência de esclarecimentos na fase de levantamento e análise de requisitos gera uma representação equivocada da meta final do usuário pelo desenvolvedor. Apesar de principal responsável pelo equívoco, o desenvolvedor: atribui a falha ao usuário; assume postura assimétrica de poder, prevalecendo sua interpretação da meta final sobre a interpretação original do usuário; e publica o conflito como exemplo de inabilidade do usuário. Essa assimetria de poder poderia ser evitada se o desenvolvedor possuísse uma formação mais completa que incluísse competências e habilidades comunicacionais, de modo que, nas interações, preferencialmente orais e presenciais, o desenvolvedor se dispusesse a ouvir as necessidades do usuário, esclarecer a ele o que está propondo como solução e produzir interfaces de boa qualidade. O desenvolvedor é o principal responsável pela qualidade do serviço contratado. Ao inferir que o usuário foi responsável pelo conflito, ele expõe o usuário. Contudo, e paradoxalmente, o que se registra é a inabilidade do desenvolvedor. Ele não foi capaz de compreender as necessidades do usuário. Ele não esclareceu o usuário sobre o que estava propondo. Ele não interagiu com o usuário presencialmente, pois comunicou a entrega do sistema por telefone. E, finalmente, ele não foi capaz de explicitar as responsabilidades do usuário na transação.
This thesis covers the conflicts between users and developers, generated by computerized solutions that do not meet the user expectations, on the assumption that these conflicts result from communication difficulties on stages that precede the development of the solution. That said, a hypothesis is proposed that Rauen¿s (2014) goal conciliation theory, based on relevance relations (SPERBER; WILSON, 1986, 1995), allows describing and explaining abductive/deductive interactional processes between users and developers and, therefore, contributes to minimize these conflicts. To keep up with this demand, a published help desk case has been analyzed to stigmatize the user¿s role, on which the user inquires why the products of his or her company have not been registered in the computerized solution. The results suggest that the lack of clarifications on the requisites analysis stage generates a mistaken representation of the user¿s ultimate goal by the developer. Despite of being responsible for this inaccuracy, the developer: blames the user; takes an asymmetric power position, prevailing his or her interpretation towards the ultimate goal over the user¿s original interpretation; and announces the conflict as an example of the user¿s inability. This power asymmetry could be avoided if the developer had a more complete qualification that included communication skills, so that on either oral or face-to-face interactions, the developer could listen to the user¿s demands and clear to him or her what is being proposed as a solution and produce good interfaces. The developer is responsible for the quality of the contracted service. By deducing that the user might have been responsible for the conflict, he or she makes a mockery of the user. However, and paradoxically, what is registered is the inability of the developer, who has not been able to understand the user¿s demands. The developer has not elucidated the user about what was being proposed, has not interacted face-to-face with the user, for the fact that the system was delivered by telephone. Finally, the developer has not been able to demonstrate the user¿s responsibilities on the transaction.
This thesis covers the conflicts between users and developers, generated by computerized solutions that do not meet the user expectations, on the assumption that these conflicts result from communication difficulties on stages that precede the development of the solution. That said, a hypothesis is proposed that Rauen¿s (2014) goal conciliation theory, based on relevance relations (SPERBER; WILSON, 1986, 1995), allows describing and explaining abductive/deductive interactional processes between users and developers and, therefore, contributes to minimize these conflicts. To keep up with this demand, a published help desk case has been analyzed to stigmatize the user¿s role, on which the user inquires why the products of his or her company have not been registered in the computerized solution. The results suggest that the lack of clarifications on the requisites analysis stage generates a mistaken representation of the user¿s ultimate goal by the developer. Despite of being responsible for this inaccuracy, the developer: blames the user; takes an asymmetric power position, prevailing his or her interpretation towards the ultimate goal over the user¿s original interpretation; and announces the conflict as an example of the user¿s inability. This power asymmetry could be avoided if the developer had a more complete qualification that included communication skills, so that on either oral or face-to-face interactions, the developer could listen to the user¿s demands and clear to him or her what is being proposed as a solution and produce good interfaces. The developer is responsible for the quality of the contracted service. By deducing that the user might have been responsible for the conflict, he or she makes a mockery of the user. However, and paradoxically, what is registered is the inability of the developer, who has not been able to understand the user¿s demands. The developer has not elucidated the user about what was being proposed, has not interacted face-to-face with the user, for the fact that the system was delivered by telephone. Finally, the developer has not been able to demonstrate the user¿s responsibilities on the transaction.
Palavras-chave
Comunicação, Semiótica, Arquitetura de redes de computadores, Interação homem-máquina, Software - Desenvolvimento