Table 7.
Macro-Task Facilitation Activities Within the Selected Initiatives
| Activity Name | Exemplary Action in TCL | Exemplary Action in PSM |
|---|---|---|
| Task Design | Decomposition of the purpose of the initiative into four sequential exercises, each consisting of one task | Decomposition of the purpose of the initiative into three exercises with a total of five tasks |
|
Task Communication |
Discussions about and adaptions of the task to be presented between the facilitator and the supporting team | Provision of exemplary contributions to underline the nature of desired contributions |
| Workflow Design & Selection | Selection of a four-phase workflow enabled by the platform to develop scenarios about how trust in healthcare or medicine could evolve until 2040 | Selection and design of a three-phase workflow (partially) supported by the platform to identify approaches for better pandemic resilience |
|
Worker Motivation |
Initial motivational mail that welcomes the workers and highlights the value of the workers’ expected contributions to society | User profile on the platform was prefilled with a short biography of the worker to value the workers’ participation |
|
Contribution Support |
Video tutorials and FAQs were designed and made available | Quick responses from the facilitators to questions that arose from the workers |
|
Performance Monitoring |
Bi-weekly manual report to track the current amount of workers‘ contributions | Automated AI-augmented dashboard to monitor the contribution upload frequency, most used keywords, and topics arising |
|
Tool Usage & Integration |
Usage of one generic online crowdsourcing platform that has been customized to suit the scenario development process | Integration of one AI tool to support the facilitation activities during and after each exercise |
| Crowd Moderation | Active participation by the supporting team in the discussions and contributions from the worker; reports to the facilitator | Hosting of live virtual events to catalyze conversations about the topics within the ongoing task among the workers |
|
Crowd Coordination |
Continuous facilitator notes (notification sent to the crowd) regarding the current and future steps | Creation of worker groups based on their professional background to coordinate parallel task execution in the first exercise; a merging of groups in the second exercise to support cross-fertilization of ideas among workers |
|
Participation Encouragement |
Sending targeted emails to workers who were not active on the platform | Weekly encouragement of the crowd via email to send feedback, which was regularly reflected and integrated by the facilitators |
|
Contribution Evaluation |
Iterative reviewing and selection of the contributions after each exercise; removal of duplicate contributions | Weekly discussions between the facilitator and the requestor about recent contributions from the workers |
|
Contribution Aggregation |
Initial semantical clustering of submitted contributions with manual adaptations | Application of different semantical clustering algorithms and manual refinements |
| Quality Control | Notifying workers about redundant contributions during the exercises | Continuous monitoring of the social network graph of the crowd to avoid topic biases |
| Decision Making | Creation of one final report in collaboration with the requestor of the initiative | One detailed report about the results was made publicly available and shared with the requestor |
| Goal Orientation | Raise discussion-stimulating questions to reach a broad range of sentiment | A small adjustment to one communicated task to cover issues of misunderstanding |
|
Culture Development |
General rules regarding behavioral and cultural expectations were made available | Reference to the Chatham House Rule to build an appreciative atmosphere |
| Risk Management | Test run of the crowdsourcing platform with 10 participants | Thorough testing of the AI tool with data from similar initiatives to ensure the functionality |