Group items tagged

The goal of many intranets is to centrally store corporate information so that all staff can share information across divisions, access it and use it to make work-based decisions. This article argues that while there are many organisational benefits that occur from introducing collaborative tools to an intranet, if they are not managed properly they can create information silos, and therefore become tools that support anti-knowledge sharing. The article says the strengths of collaborative tools can also become their weakness. It starts with staff forgetting to publish outcomes or finalised documents produced in a 'locked down' collaborative space to the published area of the intranet. This then potentially causes hundreds of small collaboration spaces containing important and useful corporate information that hasn't been shared with the wider group. It is this fragmentation which makes it hard to find anything. The article argues, "This is the lesson we didn't learn from Lotus Notes and we are repeating it now." (J. Robertson, 2007) Even though some documents might be published to a broader audience, those who don't have access to the full collaborative space they were produced in may lack the context to understand what they are reading and how to use it. That is, the project plan might be a working document held in a permission only collaborative space, but the change management plan might be published. Both need to be read together to provide the user with richer context. "By 'locking up' the knowledge in these spaces, organisations make knowledge sharing harder, not easier." (J. Robertson, 2007) As an intranet manager and member of a professional intranet peer group, I have witnessed this happen in many organisations. These organisations are now spending lots of money and lots of time untangling their collaborative tools. In an unmanaged environment, not only do teams create information silos, but because of the nature of the collaborative too

The article described collaboration tools obstruct knowledge sharing if organisations do not manage tools well. I am interesting in this article as theme of the article is an alert for me. There is an association between collaboration tools and knowledge sharing. They work as train and rail. The knowledge needs collaboration tools such as Intranet, Internet or other systems share them to most of user. Trains need rails for running. Thus collaboration tools are rails and Knowledge is trains. They cannot work appropriately once they miss each other. However, railway requires particular planning before it builds up and maintenance after railway is running. The planning ensures railway is working efficiency and safety. Collaboration tools also require particular planning. Robertson (2007) mentioned in his articles, collaboration tools can be anti-sharing once tools are without management, planning and maintenance. Suarez (2006) argue in his blog that e-mail is not a powerful collaboration tools. I think what he argued is about how people using e-mail tools. E-mail is not a powerful collaboration tools because no one performs collaboration function well from e-mail. This is the same logic as collaboration tools. Collaboration tools can be an issue of knowledge sharing once on one control or manage tools. We should make sure collaboration tools are not only store all the knowledge only. Reference Robertson, J. (2007). Collaboration tools are anti knowledge sharing? Retrieved from http://www.steptwo.com.au/papers/cmb_antiknowledgesharing/index.html Suarez, L. (2006). Email: The Good Enough Collaboration Tool - Is It Really? Retrieved from http://it.toolbox.com/blogs/elsua/email-the-good-enough-collaboration-tool-is-it-really-11473

This article emphasises some weaknesses of using collaboration tools in an organisation, such as unmanaged content misplaced in the system, a lack of organizational context for new staff, and irrelevance of search results for staff. This can link to one of my selected article - Sign of the times: manufacturing and e-business blend as a digital enterprise - which mentions another weakness that is the new solution may not integrate with the organisation's existing system and the existing organisational knowledge may fail to exploit. Long (2011) comments that both organizational teams and the nature of the collaboration tools can create information silos in an unmanaged environment. I agree that no collaboration tool is perfect but I also argue that such tools become a competitive necessity of most organizations because they provide powerful service to simplify business process and reduce cost. As Toole (2000) mentions, a trend for most enterprises is e-business which combines Internet and information technology to manage organizational information and process business geographically. I believe that with the continuous development of information technology, those collaboration tools can be improved and offer better services. Furthermore, organizations need to provide professional staff training on using those tools and make sure everyone follows the same procedure to process information in an effective way. Toole (2000) claims the bottom line of using collaboration tools is that they can deliver "better innovation and lower costs with higher quality products and services". Reference Toole, P. (2000). Sign of the times: manufacturing and e-business blend as a digital enterprise. Design Engineering, 46(8), 12. Retrieved from http://proquest.umi.com.dbgw.lis.curtin.edu.au/pqdweb?did=374775371&

In 2006, IBM was responsible for hosting possibly the largest online collaborative brainstorming session known as the IBM InnovationJam. The idea grew from earlier innovation jams held internally and hosted through their intranet. The first one held in 2003 focussed on the launch of new corporate values. The jams were driven by the IBM chairman "who personally participated by typing his thoughts into the jam forums and reading literally thousands of comments." (Transforming your intranet, 2008) This use of the tool and therefore public commitment from senior management to the jams would have undoubtedly helped with staff engagement and participation in the jam. Thousands of suggestions were received from staff covering IBM operations, workplace policies and how to improve relationships. Staff then voted for the best 35 ideas which were then implemented. (S. Musselwhite, 2007) The jamming sessions also sped up the implementation of ideas - partly because the consultation, staff buy-in and testing, and pre-socialisation have already been done. Interestingly, research showed IBM staff trusted the information on their intranet more than the information they got from their managers or even on the informal 'grapevine'. Similar to IKEA and their approach (see other article Inside IKEA's Human Intranet Approach), IBM used an already existing framework or business feature to help technology work. IBM capitalised on the trust in and use of intranet to host a 'jam' - a new medium IBMers created that went "beyond online communities, brainstorming sessions, or traditional suggestion systems." (A Global Innovation Jam, 2011) References: A Global Innovation Jam (2011) Retrieved from http://www.ibm.com/ibm100/us/en/icons/innovationjam/words/ Musselwhite, S (2007) Intranet Strategy and Management London: Ark Group Transforming your intranet (2008) Sydney: Melcrum Publishing

This article brings online collaboration to a new height. Without internet and intranet technology an event of this size spanning 104 countries would not have been possible. Imagine assembling 150,000 participants in a venue and being able to do something with all the information being passed back and forth. Not withstanding the cost to assemble an audience of this size, the level of moderation would slow the collaboration process down, thus reducing the effectiveness of the session. In contrast, the IBM Jam sessions are delivered via a web platform which allows for accountability through personalisation that self regulates what users will and will not post. It provides an audit trail and recognition of great ideas so even the most junior staff member can receive global recognition and kudos for an idea that might have otherwise been misrepresented. The Jams are an effective way of performing an organisation pulse check in a global setting in a very small amount of time as they move at such a rapid pace (Feder, 2001). Further they allow the employees to recognise and drive change from the bottom up instead of just top down as management recognises that you cannot force a "command and control" culture for a workforce. Reference Feder, B.J., (2001). I.B.M. Meets With 52,600, Virtually. Retrieved April 10, 2011 from http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9F06E4DD143CF93BA15756C0A9679C8B63&pagewanted=1

This article explores how a world-wide furnishing store (IKEA) used their already existing culture to guide the production and implementation of their intranet to ensure the technology was the right fit for them. With a very strong focus on teamwork, community and collaboration already recognised in the IKEA business-model, IKEA were well aware that a strong corporate culture does not guarantee user-acceptance of information systems. "Rather than forcing its corporate culture to bend to accommodate a technology-based system, IKEA used its firmly established culture as the foundation for its IT solutions." (P. Chin, 2009) And something must have worked. In 2008, IKEA Inside (their intranet) was listed in the world's ten best intranets by well-known user-experience research firm Nielsen Norman Group. IKEA were mindful of not letting the technology they introduce ruin an already well-established human focussed corporate culture. They said their culture gave them the framework to introduce new things to the business - including information systems and technology. As Beth Gleba, Internal Information Manager for IKEA North America points out, "Before, during and after [intranet implementation], our culture is our culture." In my experience as an intranet manager, I definitely agree that a company's already existing culture will influence the final state of a technology. In organisations that don't focus on people or put staff at the front, there will often be a "disconnect between the technology-based systems and the people they're meant to support." (P. Chin, 2009) It is because the people who've made the technology haven't taken into consideration the end-user, or worse, just don't care - and where that happens that attitude is often supported by the already existing corporate culture. Reference Chin, P (2009) Inside IKEA's Human Intranet Approach Retrieved from http://www.intranetjournal.com/articles/200908/ij_08_21_0

Thank you for this article. I leaned something very interesting. "I do a little, you do a little, and together we do a lot" (Chin, 2009) This could well be the mantra for IKEA. As a company with a strong brand identity and customer-focus, here we see how important it is for IKEA staff to have the right tools and platforms to allow them to find the information they need, quickly and easily. At the same time Beth Gleba, Information Manager of IKEA North America, is aware that tools are only part of the story. It is people who make IKEA what it is. It is a place where children are free to jump on the beds, while their parents browse. Part of the success of IKEA is it's strong brand focus and supporting charities is one very important way corporations are building on their social capital by bringing attention to issues close to the hearts of customers and staff alike. In one of my shared articles Mangold & Faulds (2010) point out "organisations can leverage emotional connections by embracing one or more causes that are important to their customers." Such practices give staff and customers a sense of 'belonging". Here IKEA goes one step further by not only providing products and issues to discuss but also provides them with the tools they need to do it. One interesting point I noticed was IKEAs use of Social Media tools to create employee profiles. This aids in fostering group cohesion and allow staff to get to know one another and feel a part of the IKEA family, which for a large firm, can be very difficult to do. They also make very nice meatballs! Reference: Mangold & Faulds (2009, July-August). Social media: The new hybrid element of the promotion mix in Business Horizons. 52(4) 357-365

Topic : How internet technology has shaped collaboration within organisations. How social networking increases collaboration at IBM http://proquest.umi.com.dbgw.lis.curtin.edu.au/pqdweb?did=1930082361&sid=1&Fmt=3&clientId=22212&RQT=309&VName=PQD This article is an extract taken from a 2009 Melcrum Research report. The article focuses on IBM and how a social networking application has increased collaboration for its 365,000 employees around the world through the use of an application called the BluePages which has been loosely modelled on MySpace and Facebook. The IBM BluePages are accessed six million times each day by staff and contain basic staff information which is pulled from IBM's HR records, and includes information about reporting lines and where people fit inside the organisation. Staff can update their photo, and add specific information about themselves through the use of tags (keywords). Tags connect staff to others who might be using the same tags, in addition colleagues can add tags to another individuals page which further builds a relevant database of expertise throughout the network. IBM's BluePages also take search to the next level, whereby if someone is searching on a tag (keyword) that has been used by an individual, all people that have that tag will also be returned in the search results. "This development opens up semantic contextual information to the wisdom of the crowd." [Ethan McCarty] IBM also has a collaborative application called ThinkPlace where anybody in the company can post an idea. If the idea has merit, others can comment on it until the idea has developed into something that requires action. Another use of ThinkPlace has more of a social conscience whereby one employee noticed

Like IBM, I manage the intranet for an organisation where a significant percentage of our workforce work from locations other than work. This Melcrum article concentrates largely on social tagging and social bookmarking. Ethan McCarty, editor in chief of IBM Intranet believes " 'tagging' will be one of the most significant things to have happened on the internet." I agree with much of what McCarty says. Our organisation is moving from a fairly one-way push of information on our intranet to a more collaborative and activity-based platform. I was interested to read about IBM's BluePages, which seems to be an extension of a normal phonebook but connects people with other people's knowledge through social tagging. We are about to launch a similar application on our intranet that also has a self-editing system. This is an important first step in getting our intranet to become a place of collaboration. Hopefully the launch of this tool will allow management to see staff can be trusted to use tools correctly and self-edit and that 'social' networking concepts used on the internet can be translated into valuable internal tools. Tagging through the contact directory is also a feature of social networking that our management and culture would be comfortable with as a first step. In a fairly risk-adverse culture, many senior managers believe the use of 'social networking' tools in the workplace would open up a Pandora's box of problems. This article however, demonstrates that collaborative and networking tools in the workplace obviously have a valuable role to play. I think the words 'social media' and 'social networking' scare a lot of managers off right from the start.

For IBM, the social networking site is not only works well internally. They also use SNS as a way to build relationship to consumer. I personally use IBM as an example of online collaboration. They use Tumblr as collaboration tools to create conversation between company and their audience and users. http://smartercities.tumblr.com/ I saw this Tumblelog as a corporate social responsibility project to give back to consumers. They are trying to engage consumer with the smart way of living (mainly by using IBM product). In this Tumblr, consumer can contribute by sending an email about their smart way of living. They also can like or reblog the post from IBM that indirectly lead them to viral marketing. Relate to your article, for a big company such as IBM social network may become the best way to communicate with all employees. They can get a fast information and suggestion about the company. But the criticism is, for example, if they join the company group in Facebook it means they need to be conscious with what they put online. Their private life also can be seen by the company. They can say bad things about company that will make them risk their job. Because I heard this kind of story where people get fired just because they forget they are friend with their boss in Facebook. This is only my criticism.

While web 2.0 technologies have been around for awhile now, many organisations are still in an experimental phase. There are all too often rare wins and rare examples of it being used correctly to fulfil a strong business need or solve a business problem. This article argues that organisational collaborative tools such as social intranets etc will not be embraced or used to their full potential if employees do not already communicate with each other - i.e. have a structure, management style or physical layout that supports them to communicate. As the article states, "The existence of collaborative tools does not automatically imply that people will collaborate or collaborate effectively." (A. Broomhall, 2009) This makes sense. In a working and professional environment, most staff are more guarded in their communication (depending on the culture of the organisation of course) and less reluctant to use collaborative tools like they might as strangers on the World Wide Web. If the fundamentals of communication are working well in an organisation and already exist (ie. people have met face to face, have already established communities, have trusted relationships where they share information) they are then more likely to collaborate online. There are several intranet features which can be used to strengthen these communication paths and employee relationships: - staff directory - news channels - social news sites. It is these types of technologies (available on most intranets) which can help encourage the development of communication networks, and in turn support the use of collaborative tools. Reference: Broomhall, A (2009) No collaboration without communications Retrieved from http://www.steptwo.com.au/papers/cmb_nocollaboration/index.html

Thanks for providing this article, Kristy. I agree with Broomhall that just because collaboration tools have been put in place, it does not guarantee that these tools will be utilised or even used in the manner in which they were intended. However I also don't agree that "if people are not already communicating with each other, then there is little chance they will feel comfortable enough to share their knowledge online." (Broomhall, 2009.) I think that Net 308's Blackboard discussion forums, although not extremely lively, are an example of strangers communicating with each other and sharing knowledge. Successful forums and even groups on Flickr are comprised of those that have not met in real life nor communicated with each other prior to utilising the collaboration tool they are part of. Although I will agree that successful collaboration required the right collaboration tool and proper facilitation of such, the main factor in success or failure of online collaboration comes down to common purpose or interest. Without that fundamental element, at least at the beginning, I believe success to be far fetched and difficult to achieve. I agree that a staff directory would aid in the success of collaboration in the organisation Broomhall refers to in this article. I feel that an ice breaker activity as outlined by Augar, Raitman and Zhou (2004.) of sorts would also benefit. References: Broomhall, A (2009) No collaboration without communications Retrieved from http://www.steptwo.com.au/papers/cmb_nocollaboration/index.html Augar, N., Raitman, R. & Zhou, W. (2004). Teaching and learning online with wikis. In R. Atkinson, C. McBeath, D. Jonas-Dwyer & R. Phillips (Eds), Beyond the comfort zone: Proceedings of the 21st ASCILITE Conference (pp. 95-104). Perth, 5-8 December. http://www.ascilite.org.au/conferences/perth04/procs/augar.html

This is an interesting article that brings up some great points on the importance of communication regarding collaboration. I totally agree with the author, communication within an organisation is vital in order to collaborate effectively. The main problem companies experience when implementing online collaboration tools, is the objections many employees have when introduced to these new tools (Foster, 2009). Fear, uncertainty, resistance and concerns are some of the issues companies have to deal with as employees are asked to go from being a passive consumer of online information to becoming a creator of content by posting discussions, comments etc. that anyone can view. Foster (2009) suggests that businesses should spend more time thinking about the impact of these changes on their employees. In order to deal with the different issues employees may have, Foster suggests organisational change management. Like Broomhall, Foster (2009) highlights communication as the common element whether the change is coming from the top of the organization or from the bottom. The article is a useful resource for this project as it focuses on the importance of communication when organisations are implementing collaborative tools. Broomhall (2009) argues that employees need information about internal changes and external influences which may impact their daily work. As Broomhall points out, the existence of collaborative tools does not automatically imply that people will collaborate. References Broomhall, A. (2009). No Collaboration without Communications. Retrieved from http://www.steptwo.com.au/papers/cmb_nocollaboration/index.html Foster, D. (2009). Collaboration Technology and Organisational Change. Retrieved from http://gigaom.com/collaboration/collaboration-technologies-and-organizational-change/

In today's competitive business environment the difficulties linked to keeping up with new and innovative technologies are momentous. 'ERA Real Estate Launches Technology offering that Mirrors Its Culture of Collaboration' article proves just that by demonstrating how a real estate company is using online technology to communicate and collaborate. The article introduces us to the launch of a new intranet solution by ERA Real Estate. The intranet as stated by the article provides significant corporate social networking functionality that links agents, brokers and companies across America and around the globe to collaborate and share knowledge of the 30,000 members they have so far. One of the features on the intranet is the ability to connect with colleagues within the same environment or different locations. The organisation must have other mobile collaborating tools such as smart phones to track or update listings, managing leads and other tasks commonly associated with Real Estate organisations. The new online intranet provides this functionality as well. This article is among a number of great examples of industries communicating and collaborating online as the means to share knowledge. The new organisation social media website by ERA Real Estate will no doubt open the gate to more innovation and the sharing of knowledge. Reference: ERA Real Estate Launches Technology Offering that Mirrors Its Culture of Collaboration. (2011). 1. Retrieved from RISMedia website: http://rismedia.com/2011-04-13/era-real-estate-launches-technology-offering-that-mirrors-its-culture-of-collaboration/