37
Essences of Interaction
The boundaries drawn by each player are based on the physical location of
their pieces, by their functional capability (and uses), and by the behavior of
the opponent either due to the physical and functional factors or in anticipation thereof. The functional boundaries of each piece extend beyond the
physical boundary of the one square in which the piece is located, while the
behavioral boundary due to the physical location and the functional capability are reflected in the immediacy that confronts the position through the
progression of pieces or in anticipation of what may occur as a consequence
of the moves seen as well as what could be forthcoming. The players can
control their own pieces and influence the opponent to move in certain ways.
In other words, those who draw boundaries can control only themselves
regardless of their intentions of exerting influence on the actions of others.
To better appreciate the difference in perspective when a boundary is defined
(or moved and redefined as in chess), view the game-play from the opponent’s side of the board. The game may appear remarkably different from
another perspective. The patterns that are clear from your initial viewpoint
may be discernable after considerable study. The strategy of moving pieces
to trap an opponent’s piece may appear to be problematic from that new
perspective. The different vantage point may reveal influences and strategies
that went unseen previously.
Drawing or declaring boundaries is sometimes deemed necessary, but at
the same time immobilizing. Scoping must be necessary and sufficient. It is
necessary to place limits on (i.e., bound) the concerns that in a practical manner cannot go infinitely in all directions for all factors. It is immobilizing to
be faced with a poor design and architecture that does not encompass all
that is necessary for effective operations once the product or service is used.
And it is wasteful not to scope the work effort (e.g., through the WBS) to
provide focus and intensity for the project team.
The planners, designers, makers, builders, and users of products or services must consider boundaries—all three boundaries: the physical, the
functional, and the behavioral aspects that define an object. Boundaries can
represent the primary domain of interest in which a product or service is
expected to affect or be affected by objects. The intent of a boundary is to
indicate the expected interactions that will occur with a product or service
once placed into operations.
Sometimes, boundaries are simply stated or declared by fiat. This being a
somewhat arbitrary designation, boundaries may not be perceived as affording the most propitious view of phenomena within the bounded domain.
Indeed, there may be altogether unnecessary and insufficient justification for
boundedness. That a boundary could be physical (e.g., road barrier that is
positioned physically between oppositely moving traffic), functional (e.g.,
prevent a vehicle from crashing head-on into oppositely moving traffic), or
behavioral (e.g., promoting closer scrutiny by the drivers of vehicles that
travel in the same direction of traffic, without having to be concerned about
appositively moving head-on vehicles)—attempts a sort of isolation by the
Essences of Interaction
The boundaries drawn by each player are based on the physical location of
their pieces, by their functional capability (and uses), and by the behavior of
the opponent either due to the physical and functional factors or in anticipation thereof. The functional boundaries of each piece extend beyond the
physical boundary of the one square in which the piece is located, while the
behavioral boundary due to the physical location and the functional capability are reflected in the immediacy that confronts the position through the
progression of pieces or in anticipation of what may occur as a consequence
of the moves seen as well as what could be forthcoming. The players can
control their own pieces and influence the opponent to move in certain ways.
In other words, those who draw boundaries can control only themselves
regardless of their intentions of exerting influence on the actions of others.
To better appreciate the difference in perspective when a boundary is defined
(or moved and redefined as in chess), view the game-play from the opponent’s side of the board. The game may appear remarkably different from
another perspective. The patterns that are clear from your initial viewpoint
may be discernable after considerable study. The strategy of moving pieces
to trap an opponent’s piece may appear to be problematic from that new
perspective. The different vantage point may reveal influences and strategies
that went unseen previously.
Drawing or declaring boundaries is sometimes deemed necessary, but at
the same time immobilizing. Scoping must be necessary and sufficient. It is
necessary to place limits on (i.e., bound) the concerns that in a practical manner cannot go infinitely in all directions for all factors. It is immobilizing to
be faced with a poor design and architecture that does not encompass all
that is necessary for effective operations once the product or service is used.
And it is wasteful not to scope the work effort (e.g., through the WBS) to
provide focus and intensity for the project team.
The planners, designers, makers, builders, and users of products or services must consider boundaries—all three boundaries: the physical, the
functional, and the behavioral aspects that define an object. Boundaries can
represent the primary domain of interest in which a product or service is
expected to affect or be affected by objects. The intent of a boundary is to
indicate the expected interactions that will occur with a product or service
once placed into operations.
Sometimes, boundaries are simply stated or declared by fiat. This being a
somewhat arbitrary designation, boundaries may not be perceived as affording the most propitious view of phenomena within the bounded domain.
Indeed, there may be altogether unnecessary and insufficient justification for
boundedness. That a boundary could be physical (e.g., road barrier that is
positioned physically between oppositely moving traffic), functional (e.g.,
prevent a vehicle from crashing head-on into oppositely moving traffic), or
behavioral (e.g., promoting closer scrutiny by the drivers of vehicles that
travel in the same direction of traffic, without having to be concerned about
appositively moving head-on vehicles)—attempts a sort of isolation by the