Communities & Technologies finally meeting Community Informatics

workshopI’m currently in Siegen, Germany. attending the Communities & Technologies Future Vision workshop. A main goal of the workshop is to build more common ground between the two very related fields of Communities & Technologies (C&T) and Community Informatics. We’re having very positive, fruitful discussions. To give you a flavor, here are the notes I just took of the discussion about the possible points of intersection in a breakout group consisting of Volker Wulf, Michael Gurstein, Susanne Bødker, Marcus Foth, and Aldo de Moor.

Common research themes
  • Societal role: the roles of communities in their various forms in society.
  • Common goals & Institutions. Community norms sometimes translate into goals, institutions.
  • “The Other”: Communities can also be against something, working on the boundaries, The Other.
  • Emergence of communities: the potential of communities to take a form and articulate itself, often in response to an external opportunity or threat. The time dimension is very important.
  • Context of communities: Is the goal to study communities or communities in a particular context? The latter: we should not just look at the narrow direct context of immediate users, but the broader (institutional) context and ecology. Essential in complex domains like health. E.g. the institutional sponsors.  Then you can also better tie in with practitioner communities, governance, etc.
  • Ecosystems of tools: communities do not just use one tool, they live in a whole ecosystem, a rich space of physical and online tools.
  • (At least in in the CI) it’s not so much about the development of new technologies but about how the effective use and appropriation of community technologies. How can we model and use rich, situated context that informs socio-technical systems design without constraining community behaviors?
  • (C&T) Explore new technologies and try them out in new communities. Make the opportunities that these tools offer available to communities. In an ethnographic way try to find the ways to help them transform communities.
  • In CI: the interesting problem is identified by the community, the socio-technical systems solution emerges in the collaborative response to the problem CT: the interesting problem is in the tool community potential.
  • The common theme is really about how the larger societal context meets the relevant community technologies.
Key research questions in the next 10 years:
  • The Surveillance Society, how the net is turning into a Societal Control Device. What are alternatives?
  • Governance: how do you govern systems, disaggregate governance of systems so that communities can be empowered. Is the local level accountable to the higher level, or the higher level accountable to the lower level? It’s a systems design question
  • Employment and wealth distribution
  • Put the local back in communities.
  • Inter-community issues: networks of communities, collaborating/intersecting/mashing/clashing communities
  • Make technological power (such as Big Data (and “tinkering technologies” such as 3D printing, Raspberry Pie) available to and usable by the people. How does it affect communities?
  • The notion of citizenship, not just users/consumers is key.
  • Migration, urbanization, depopulation: how can technologies strengthen sense of community?
  • Political activism, new ways of shaping democracy
Organization
  • Thematic conferences: more context-awareness should lead to more thematic conferences. Risk is that it scares away people working on other topics. There are all kinds of ways to deal with these, e.g. separate slots
  • Conference attendants could meet members of specific communities, and e.g. work with them in separate community-driven workshops. Could be too optimistic given the complexities of trying to ground academic discourse in practice. A workable approach could be to have sesssions where community members present their communities and their issues in very rich, informal ways, and have a well-facilitated discussion with the attending academics about some possible directions for addressing these issues. At the next edition of the conference, academics could then (also) present their follow-up (action) research jointly done with these communities on these cases in the more academically oriented slots, while continuing to give useful feedback in comprehensible and acceptable ways to the communities they have started to work with.
  • Turning it around: having “academic streams” in practitioner-oriented conferences.
  • Hybrid approaches are necessary in terms of different participants having different motivations needing different kinds of outcomes for the conference to be rewarding for them.
  • NB such innovative approaches are a lot of work, there is often a language barrier to be overcome, etc.
  • The range of potential funders does become much larger this way, e.g. government, corporate funding.
  • Ethical issues need to be taken care of very well: the communities participating are not in a zoo! What are legitimate ways of involving them?
  • The communities being researched should get a permanent community representation within the overal C&T community, so that trust can be built, criticism can be seen and shared, lessons can be learnt, more legitimate and useful longitudinal research can be done. E.g. the communities could have their own space within the overall C& community space, where they can present themselves in multimedia ways, comment on the research being done with them etc.
  • Various types of conferences: E.g. thematic conferences with invited people from the issues being focused on with dedicated funding, the overall academic conference should not be overall thematically-focused.
  • Boundary-spanning activities between various communities would be very valuable as a research (conference) strategy.
  • The Community Informatics community is large and diverse enough by now to help out contributing at least time-wise. Represent many different communities, a great context to work with.
  • We need to work on a (communications & activity) commons around which the Communities & Technologies and Community Informatics communities start to find more common ground.

Expanding the Academic Research Community: Building Bridges into Society with the Internet

Below the slides of the honors lecture I just gave at the University of Alabama in Huntsville. The slides can be downloaded here.

The talk is based on a book chapter with the same title that will be published by Monash University Publishing in the fall.  A preprint of this chapter can be downloaded here. Thanks to the students for all your great questions. If there’s any more, feel free to post them here as comments.

Research Communities 2.0

Deze presentatie laat zien hoe research communities door goed gebruik te maken van Internet het academisch onderzoeksproces kunnen helpen hervormen. Ik heb deze gegeven in het kader van de Masterclass Research Support die het Avans Leer- en Innovatiecentrum op 20 juni jl. heeft georganiseerd. De presentatie is gebaseerd op een hoofdstuk voor een boek (“Expanding the Academic Research Community: Building Bridges Into Society with the Internet”) wat binnenkort door Monash University Publishing gepubliceerd zal worden. Binnenkort zal ik dit hoofdstuk via deze blog beschikbaar stellen. Ook zal ik op 29 augustus een bewerkte versie van de presentatie geven als Honors Lecture op de University of Alabama in Huntsville.

[NB This presentation is in Dutch. An English version will be presented as an Honors Lecture at the University of Alabama in Huntsville on August 29 and made available through this blog afterwards]

What’s up with the Pragmatic Web?

On September 1, I was a member of the Pragmatic Web track panel of the I-SEMANTICS 2010 conference in Graz, Austria, after having given the keynote earlier that day. The Pragmatic Web is a newly emerging field,  still in the process of being defined. Its main focus is not Web technology per se, but the contexts and communities in which these resources are developed and used to accomplish goals, develop mutual understanding, and create and realize commitments. For background see the Pragmatic Web community site, and my blog posts Patterns for the Pragmatic Web and The Growth of the Pragmatic Web.

The Pragmatic Web should not be seen as separate from, but instead as building on and feeding into the Semantic Web, which concentrates on knowledge representation and reasoning approaches. One can try to formally represent “everything necessary” in a context but (1) this overformalization often kills the necessary human interpretation of any situated context and (2) still does not answer what relevant context factors are. Mainstream Semantic Web research does not deal with the subtleties of communities, goal setting and negotiation, human interaction, and myriad other context factors. For this, you need research perspectives different from those provided by the Semantic Web field itself.  Of course, there is no precise dichotomy between the Semantic and the Pragmatic Web, instead there is a grey zone between the two fields, like the “Social Semantic Web”.

In the panel, we discussed the status and future of the Pragmatic Web. Other panel members included Alexandre Passant (DERI),  Hans Weigand (Tilburg University), and Adrian Paschke (Freie Universität Berlin).

Alexandre covered the budding field of the Social Semantic Web, which examines how social interactions on the Web lead to the creation of explicit and semantically rich knowledge representations. Hans discussed another  research area that is a major contributor to the Pragmatic Web, the Language/Action Perspective, as is its sibling Organisational Semiotics. Adrian focused on the Corporate Semantic Web, and the Pragmatic Agent Web, which represent some of the more applied research areas.

My own presentation was about what’s up with the Pragmatic Web as an area of research. I placed it in the Web 3.0 era we are entering, covered some of its fundamental questions and theories, and presented a socio-technical conversation context perspective that can be used to organize and position Pragmatic Web research (the framework is further explained in the paper and presentation of my invited talk.) I showed how the number of research publications addressing or referring to the Pragmatic Web is growing rapidly (with a small dip in last year’s number of publications). The high turnout at the panel discussion, especially given the competition of many high-quality parallel tracks, should also be a sign of the growing interest in the field. Finally, I positioned some contributing and related research fields shaping and being influenced by the Pragmatic Web. Core contributing fields in my view are Community Informatics, the Language/Action Perspective, Organisational Semiotics, Web 2.0/social media and the Semantic Web. See slide 7 of:

The discussion following the presentation, as well as many personal responses later, indicate that the Pragmatic Web as an area of research seems to be viable. One criticism is that much of the research is still very conceptual and needs to materialize much more into concrete applications and projects. This criticism is justified, but can be partially explained by the early stage the field is in and the still small number of researchers and organizations involved. However, there is also a more fundamental reason for this lack of applications: the Pragmatic Web studies context, and context by its very nature is extremely wide in scope and is always context of something else. Still, by fruitfully cooperating with more technology-driven and application-oriented R&D areas like the Social Semantic Web and Web 2.0, fundamental research insights about relevant contexts generated by the Pragmatic Web community should descend into the real world and become much more visible  in the years to come.

Collaboration Patterns as Building Blocks for Community Informatics

From 4-6 November 2009, the 6th CIRN Community Informatics Conference was held in Prato, Italy. As in previous years, the conference brought together an interesting mix of researchers and practitioners from North and South, discussing ways to effectively use information and communication technologies to foster community building. This year’s theme was “Empowering Communities: Learning from Community Informatics Practice”.

I gave a keynote address at the conference. Title of my talk and the accompanying paper was “Collaboration Patters as Building Blocks for Community Informatics”. Below the slides of the presentation and the abstract of the paper.

Abstract

Community Informatics is a wide-ranging field of inquiry and practice, with many paradigms, disciplines, and perspectives intersecting. Community informatics research and practice build on several methodological pillars: contexts/values, cases, process/methodology, and systems. Socio-technical patterns and pattern languages are the glue that help connect these pillars. Patterns define relatively stable solutions to recurring problems at the right level of abstraction, which means that they are concrete enough to be useful, while also sufficiently abstract to be reusable. The goal of this paper is to outline a practical approach to improve CI research and practice through collaboration patterns. This approach should help to strengthen the analysis, design, implementation, and evaluation of socio-technical community systems. The methodology is illustrated with examples from the ESSENCE (E-Science/Sensemaking/Climate Change) community.

Moving Community Informatics Research Forward

091001_movingCIThe latest issue of the Journal of Community Informatics contains my point of view on “Moving Community Informatics Research Forward”. In it, I argue that at least four aspects need to be taken into account when researching the interplay of communities and their technologies: contexts/values, cases, process/methodology, and systems. Furthermore, in order to move our research field forward, more systematic attention needs to be paid to the role of definitions, the identification of lessons learnt and the development of testbeds and collaboratories. The point of view is based on my conference summing up of the Prato 2008 Community Informatics & Development Informatics conference.

Libraries and Collaborative Research Communities

091001_TicerAlready a while ago, but still worth a post: on August 5, I was an invited speaker at  the Ticer Digital Libraries a la Carte 2009 summer school. In 2008, I attended their fascinating keynote summer school lecture by Stephen Abram. It was a privilege to be on the other side this year! Ticer stands for Tilburg Innovation Centre for Electronic Resources, and is a business unit of Tilburg University’s Library and IT Services. Every year, they organize a summer school, which is well attended by librarians, publishers, researchers, lecturers, and IT specialists interested in the latest developments in (digital) libraries.

My module concerned the Libraries and Collaborative Research Communities track. My co-speakers were John Butler (University of Minnesota), Judith Wusteman (University College Dublin), and Gary Olson (University of California, Irvine). We had a very stimulating day – with lots of questions from the audience -  in which we explored this lively and quickly evolving field from many different angles, including topics like virtual communities as catalysts for advancing scholarship, the role of librarians in virtual research environments, and critical success factors for science collaboratories.

My own talk was about how to activate research collaboratories with collaboration patterns. I really enjoyed discussing  this for me quite new field. It was good to see that many academic librarians agree  that a technical information retrieval focus by itself does not suffice anymore and that serious efforts need to made to integrate communities, communication, and collaboration in their library processes and systems. The worlds of digital libraries and community informatics are still far apart, but interesting connections are forming. A topic that surely will grow in scope and impact in the years to come.


Research consultancy: taking the plunge?

research_consultantOn February 18, SIKS, the Netherlands Research School for Information and Knowledge Systems, organized a career day for Ph.D. students, with the goal of making Ph.D. students think about what are the career opportunities after they finish. It was a very inspiring day, with many interesting presentations and interactions.

I was asked to present my perspective on how to set up and survive as a small (i.e. one-man) research consultancy company. In this post, a quick summary of the points I made in my talk.

As an (academic) research consultant, you are a linking pin between science and society. On the one hand, you translate academic ideas into concrete applications, such as projects, tools, systems, and procedures. However, just as important, you should feed back real-world insights into the scientific process. This way, combining rigor with relevance, you can help build bridges between the two worlds which, unfortunately, are often still so parallel instead of connected.

Pros and Cons

Some of the pros of being an independent research consultant instead of working at an academic institution include:

+ More freedom & control Being your own boss you are, well, your own boss. You have much more freedom and control about who you work for, when you work, and how you work (and even why you work). Of course, bills still need to be paid, boring tasks still need to be done, and annoying people cannot always be avoided, but in general, you can be much more selective. This sense of purpose, control, and fulfillment (and, sometimes, even a free weekend) is exhilirating and nourishing, especially for those who have been under many years of intense Ph.D., tenure track, or postdoc pressure.

+ More relevant research One of the curses of the academic system is the publish-or-perish culture. The pressure is enormous to focus on top journal publications, at the expense of research relevant to, say, society. In my own field, community informatics. hands-on testing of ideas through lots of trial and error is inevitable for getting meaningful results (and, I strongly believe, in the end good science). However, in academia spending too much time on this messy practice is discouraged, as it distracts from the Holy Grail of “The A Publication”. Having been relieved of the publication burden, you have more freedom as an independent researcher to focus on empirical, more relevant research.

+ More own research agenda Rather than having to adhere to an institutional research agenda, you can set and follow your own, personal research agenda, which you pursue in the context of your total portfolio of self-selected projects. This allows you to focus, for as long as you want and in many different settings, on the main research questions that fascinate you. In my case, one overarching question is the activation of online collaborative communities.

+ More diversity Being an advisor to many different organizations, networks, and communities on a very wide range of topics makes you grow, both intellectually and personally. You need to quickly analyze a rich set of practical problems, all somehow related to your expertise. It is very rewarding to try and see the patterns in initially seemingly very different real-world contexts and to formulate and apply lessons learnt. This theoretical sanity check sometimes leads to profound changes in your thinking, which can be most stimulating.

+ More satisfaction Your company is your baby. You still have to work very hard, and inevitably experience frustrating situations, but all of the above  can give a deep feeling of satisfaction when you see the ideas, connections, and impact of your work grow.

Of course, like everything in life, there are cons to being on your own as well:

- More risk Working by and for yourself exposes you to many more risks. You are no longer protected by an organization. No contracts means no income. Being in bed with the flu means no income. And, of course, there is nobody else in the organization to blame for errors and underperformance but yourself.

- Less (rigorous) research As your attention is scattered among more, shorter-term projects, and since you focus more on relevance instead of rigor, the research you do tends to be more case-based instead of methodologically deep. Also, in the general busi-ness associated with running your own company, it is easy to postpone doing and reflecting on your research. On the other hand, this situation is not really so different from the average  academic position where meetings, supervising, teaching, and travel also causes most serious research work to be postponed to evenings, weekends, and holidays…

- More goodbyes One of the nice aspects of working in an academic group for many years is that a real “sense of community” between its members develops. When being a consultant, you are literally “all over the place” and working more on a short-term contract basis. This often means that by the time you start to really like (some of) your colleagues, you have to move on again.

- Less beaches Probably the best perk of academia is the ability to go, and often stay and work for longer periods of time, in really amazing places. My academic life has taken me to many corners of the globe, resulting in many unforgettable impressions and experiences.

Do’s and Don’ts

So, how to go about starting your own one-(wo)man show? Following are some of my own lessons learnt.

- Be ready: PhD + postdoc is ideal It may seem that I discount the value of academia. Far from it, I think it’s the world’s greatest connector in terms of people and ideas (and largest travel agency!) Despite all its downsides, I have had a marvellous time, and it has shaped me professionally and personally in so many ways. So, I would not advise recent graduates to immediately start their own research consultancy. Ideally, you would have a PhD and at least a few years of postdoc experience. During your PhD, you learn the ropes, define your main ideas, and create your initial network. A postdoc is invaluable, as you learn project managament skills and (hopefully) how to descend a bit from the Ivory Tower. A postdoc forces you to learn the all-important skills of translating your Great Ideas that Will Change the World (but that, I know it hurts, nobody outside a tiny part of academia is interested in) into a more practical form that at least some members of the rest of the human race might be willing to pay for.

- Have (and keep!) a financial buffer (>1 yr) Continuing this point, one of the hardest things to do when starting your own research consultancy, is to prove that you have something practically valuable to offer. It is no use to advertise in the Yellow Pages and it may take a long time before you have enough paying contracts to break even. So, before you start, make sure to have enough savings for at least a year. This means you will not have to accept unacceptable offers and allows you to negotiate your contracts from a position of strength, not panic. Also, once you are finallly in business, make sure to refill the buffer as quickly as possible. Contracts never come at regular intervals, and you must be able to weather the next storm.

- Logo, website, blog Before you go public, make sure to have a professional logo and a well-designed and informative website. First impressions matter and the very first thing potential clients will do is to check out your site. The way you shape, structure and fill it with content says a lot about what you expertise is all about, so make sure to invest in this at the very beginning. Also, if you can, try to keep a blog. It doesn’t have to be a daily chore, but post at least once in a while so that potential clients can get a better idea about who you are and how you think and work.

- Network, network (and network!) Contrary to what many outsiders think, research is all about meeting people: fellow researchers, problem owners, potential clients, and just interesting fellow human beings. Networking is all-important, especially in our line of business. Go to anything that may seem remotely interesting: conferences and seminars, of course, but also meetings of the Chamber of Commerce, public lectures, etc. Also, start meeting up with contacts you haven’t seen in a long time and tell them about your ideas. A warning: don’t network and expect something to come out of it immediately. Don’t try to pressure people into giving you a contract, it won’t work. Just try to go and genuinely meet people for the fun of it. In fact, I find this one of the most interesting and rewarding parts of my work. Everybody has a story or two to tell. Listen and learn!

- Be pro-active Gone are the days that there was a professor or supervisor to tell you what to do (if those days were ever there). When running your own company, NOTHING happens by itself. You are your own boss, employee and secretary. Scan your environment for opportunities and go for them. Don’t wait for the world to come to you. It won’t.

- Don’t underestimate acquisition Acquiring a contract is hard work and can (and will) generally take a much longer time than you expect. Try to not put your research darlings first but represent the interest of your clients. What is their problem they want to have solved? Make a list of ten words that capture the key concepts and techniques of your research approach. Now can you formulate a solution without using any of these terms in the first 5 minutes of your presentation? If so, you may have a chance of landing a contract!  This advice is exaggerated, of course, but only just. Try to think and talk in terms of the client’s language, at home and in your publications you can wallow in all the scientific jargon that you want. Besides being able to frame the problem and solution in the client’s terms, be patient. Acquisition can sometimes take a very long time from the very first conversation to the actual signing of the contract. As stated above, you must have the financial capacity to afford the wait.

- Don’t set rates too low Coming straight out of academia, hourly consultancy rates seem sky-high. Clients know this, and may try to take advantage of it. However, don’t set your rates too low. Being a research consultant, you have many more unbillable hours than others as you have to invest in your research: the time to read the literature, scan the Web, attend conferences, travel, etc. Then there are the hours other freelancers also can’t charge: doing the administration, acquisition, travel to and from clients,  set up your office, and so on. There’s the investments: office, equipment, travel expenses, and so on. You have the full taxes and social insurance to cover, pension to take care of, risks to take. Taking all that into account, your average income may actually be less than what you earned before, definitely in the beginning. So, don’t set your rates too low initially. You may offer an introduction rate for a limited amount of time, but make sure to know and show your worth.

- Plan and track time Even more so than in academia, there is an overwhelming amount of short-term and long-term things-to-be-done. Establishing and running your company, keeping track of numerous projects and clients, and, oh yes, do some research reflection once in a while, forces you to be systematic. Your calendar and to do-list become your best friends. Also, meticulously keep track of time, assigned to specific activities. This is not only useful for billing purposes, but also for getting a feeling of where your time goes, and how to improve your ways of working. There are many different systems. I prefer them Web-based, using Google Calendar as my calendar, Remember The Milk for my to do-s (using Getting Things Done as the organizing methodology), and SlimTimer for keeping track of my time.

- Stay connected to research community One of the joys of academia is the continuous meeting of minds, the sharing of ideas, passions, and good times with kindred spirits. From a more down-to-earth point of view, being an active member of one or more research communities is essential for keeping on top of the state-of-the-art, of growing your ideas and building your reputation. Being a research consultant does not mean you should sever these all-important ties. Keep in touch, remain active in the field by visiting colleagues, attending seminars and conferences, participating on mailing lists, reviewing papers, and publishing.

- Invest in research time and places Set aside a minimum number of hours a week, and the occassional longer period of time for writing a paper or fundamental reflection. Don’t just do this from home, but travel as well, to meet up with research colleagues and friends. If possible, try to get invited as a speaker, which lets them take care of travel and accommodation and reconfirms your reputation as an active member of the field.

- Enjoy it! Last but not least, enjoy it! Setting up your own company, besides being hard work and somewhat risky, should be fun. It can provide you with a priceless sense of freedom, direction, and self-realization, getting yourself very high on Maslow’s pyramid…

Handbook of Research on Socio-Technical Design and Social Networking Systems

Handbook of Research on Socio-Technical Design and Social Networking Systems

090316_soctech_research_handbook1ISBN: 978-1-60566-264-0; 1,034 pp; March 2009

Published under the imprint Information Science Reference (formerly Idea Group Reference)

http://www.igi-global.com/reference/details.asp?ID=33019

Edited by: Brian Whitworth, Massey University, New Zealand and Aldo de Moor, CommunitySense, The Netherlands

DESCRIPTION

The focus of this book is not how to make technology more efficient, nor even how technology harms or helps society, but rather how to successfully combine society and technology into socio-technical performance.

The Handbook of Research on Socio-Technical Design and Social Networking Systems provides a state-of-the-art summary of knowledge in this evolving, multi-disciplinary field distinctive in its variety of international authors’ perspectives, depth and breadth of scholarship, and combination of practical and theoretical views. This noteworthy Handbook of Research extends a useful collection for anyone interested in modern socio-technincal systems where knowledge of social principles can mean the difference between success and failure.

****************************************

“Brian Whitworth and Aldo de Moor have gathered valuable material from an international panel of experts who guide readers through the analysis, design and implementation of socio-technical systems. It will be widely useful in defining issues in engineering, computing, management, organization, government policy, and ethics. The practical guidance and fresh theories can inspire a new generation of designers and researchers to catalyze even more potent forms of human collaboration.”

- Ben Shneiderman, University of Maryland, USA

****************************************

TOPICS COVERED

  • Agent-based collaborative e-learning
  • Anti-social networking
  • Community collective efficacy
  • Community network research and design
  • Cyber security
  • Cybercrime variants
  • Integrated teams in virtual environments
  • Organizational and software structure
  • Participation in online communities
  • Remote participation in research
  • Social derivation of technical systems
  • Social networking systems
  • Social study of computer science
  • Social support for online learning
  • Socio-technical communities
  • Socio-technical design
  • Virtual collaboration and community
  • Workflows in software development

For more information about Handbook of Research on Socio-Technical Design and Social Networking, you can view the title information sheet at http://www.igi-global.com/downloads/pdf/33019.pdf.
To view the Table of Contents and a complete list of contributors online go to http://www.igi-global.com/reference/details.asp?ID=33019&v=tableOfContents
You can also view the first chapter of the publication at http://www.igi-global.com/downloads/excerpts/33019.pdf

Researching with Communities

Researching with Communities: Grounded perspectives on engaging communities in research

Edited by Andy Williamson and Ruth DeSouza

Researching with communities presents a range of personal and grounded perspectives from academics, researchers and practitioners on undertaking research in ways that promote and privilege the voice of the community, is respectful of local or indigenous practices and is culturally safe.

Most definitely not a ‘tick list’ for approaching community-inclusive research, this book provides grounded exemplars, guides and discussion about the experiences of doing research respectfully and inclusively. It does this by drawing on the perspectives of researchers and community practitioners and by providing a range of reflective chapters that explore what community-based research means in a range of settings and for a range of people. Like the communities in which they are grounded, undertaking research in this way is always a unique experience.

This book is a valuable resource for researchers, evaluators, students, community practitioners and policy makers. The international authors cover disciplines from community ICT to health and refugee and asylum seekers to community development.

The book can be ordered online, priced at £24.95. For more information and to order your copy, please visit http://www.lulu.com/content/1550518.