Researcher profile

Kiev Gama

Kiev Gama contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 13 - UnverifiedVerification L1Unclaimed author
2works
0followers
2topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Decide how to stay connected

Follow researcher0

Identity and collaboration

How to connect with this researcher

Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.

Log in to claim

Direct collaboration

Open a focused conversation when the fit is right

Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

2 published item(s)

preprint2022arXiv

Socio-technical constraints and affordances of virtual collaboration -- A study of four online hackathons

Hackathons and similar time-bounded events have become a popular form of collaboration. They are commonly organized as in-person events during which teams engage in intense collaboration over a short period of time to complete a project that is of interest to them. Most research to date has focused on studying how teams collaborate in a co-located setting, pointing towards the advantages of radical co-location. The global pandemic of 2020, however, has led to many hackathons moving online, which challenges our current understanding of how they function. In this paper, we address this gap by presenting findings from a multiple-case study of 10 hackathon teams that participated in 4 hackathons across two continents. By analyzing the collected data, we found that teams merged synchronous and asynchronous means of communication to maintain a common understanding of work progress as well as to maintain awareness of each other's tasks. Task division was self-assigned based on individual skills or interests, while leaders emerged from different strategies (e.g., participant experience, the responsibility of registering the team in an event). Some of the affordances of in-person hackathons, such as the radical co-location of team members, could be partially reproduced in teams that kept synchronous communication channels while working (i.e., shared audio territories), in a sort of "radical virtual co-location". However, others, such as interactions with other teams, easy access to mentors, and networking with other participants, decreased. In addition, the technical constraints of the different communication tools and platforms brought technical problems and were overwhelming to participants. Our work contributes to understanding the virtual collaboration of small teams in the context of online hackathons and how technologies and event structures proposed by organizers imply this collaboration.

preprint2022arXiv

The Developers' Design Thinking Toolbox in Hackathons: A Study on the Recurring Design Methods in Software Development Marathons

Hackathons are time-bounded collaborative events of intense teamwork to build prototypes usually in the form of software, aiming to specific challenges proposed by the organizers. These events became a widespread practice in the IT industry, universities and many other scenarios, as a result of a growing open-innovation trend in the last decade. Since the main deliverable of these events is a demonstrable version of an idea, such as early hardware or software prototypes, the short time frame requires participants to quickly understand the proposed challenge or even identify issues related to a given domain. To create solutions, teams follow an ad-hoc but effective design approach, that many times seems informal since the background of the participants is rather centered on technical aspects (e.g., web and mobile programming) and does not involve any training in Design Thinking. To understand this creative process, we conducted 37 interviews (32 hackathons winners and 5 hackathon organizers) with people from 16 countries. We aimed to identify the design processes and recurring design methods applied by winners in these events. Also, we conducted a focus group with 8 people experienced in hackathons (participants and organizers) to discuss our findings. Our analysis revealed that although hackathon winners with IT background have no formal training on Design Thinking, they are aware of many design methods, typically following a sequence of phases that involve divergent and convergent thinking to explore the problem space and propose alternatives in a solution space, which is the rationale behind Design Thinking. We derived a set of recommendations based on design strategies that seem to lead to successful hackathon participation. These recommendations can also be useful to organizers who intend to enhance the experience of newcomers in hackathons.