Skip to main content

Home/ CurtinNet308/ Group items tagged technology

Rss Feed Group items tagged

JoelMo Joel

Mobile technologies as interfaces of hybrid spaces. Space & Culture - 8 views

This is a very interesting paper that tackles both the evolution of our definitions of interaction, collaboration and mobility, and the change in our conception of space and time. De Souza has inte...

FARNAZ SHAMS

Digital enterprise technology-defining perspectives and research priorities - 3 views

Rapid product and process realization are major elements of competitiveness for the manufacturing industry, so efforts must focused on early stage of product development, where the product lifecycl...

started by FARNAZ SHAMS on 15 Apr 11 no follow-up yet
Kaye England

Factiva - 2 views

  • Novel way for using technology. By PETER LELONG, VINCE SUMMERS. 500 words31 July 2002Hobart MercuryMRCURY26English(c) 2002 Davies Brothers Limited STUDENTS in years 5 to 8 are helping to write a great online novel called Billy Bathtub. As confidence grows in the use of online learning technologies, we are seeing the range of activities made available for students continue to develop. The adventures of Billy Bathtub, supported by the Department of Education, is a topical case in point. Author Damian Morgan is currently engaged in writing a novel, online, in collaboration with Tasmanian students during second term. A teacher and writer for many years, Damian has been working with students from around the state in recent weeks. On the completion of the novel in August, Erica Wagner, a publisher with Allen & Unwin, will be editing the novel for publication. The contributions of the students who participated in developing the story will be acknowledged. The partnership of writer and editor in an online collaborative project with schools around Tasmania is certainly a new and innovative way of engaging students from years 5 to 8 in the writing process. With the completion of four drafts of chapter one completed, the author posted a number of questions on the forum to engage students to take an active part in writing the story with him. "I know this is the story of Will Reynes, but do I call him Will or do I call him I?" Morgan asks. One of the many responses which he received: "I think if the story is going to be written in the present tense it should be written in the third person, but if it is in the past tense, the first person. I personally find stories easier to read if they are written like that." The story revolves around the adventures of Will Reynes, who we first meet in chapter one as he tries to rescue his window-cleaning mother from a high-rise building, where she has become entangled in her safety harness. In chapter two, Will, is with his father in a frantic rush to the airport, to meet an important scientist who comes complete with a large ceramic elephant. Students involve themselves in the writing of the novel by submitting ideas through the Discover Education online forum. The author responds to the suggestions from the students. This interaction between author and reader in the development of a novel demonstrates a very good use of the technology. Schools can also engage in online chat sessions with the author by booking time with him over the web. Alternatively they can invite him to visit their classroom. The Discover web site provides a link to download the software, Microsoft Comic Chat, for the online chat segment of the project. Once configured this program provides a secure online environment for students to communicate with the author. The story will continue to unfold with contributions from students until the end of August. To take part visit the Discover web site at http://www.discover.tased.edu.au/ billybathtub/. Document mrcury0020020730dy7v000nc
  •  
    Even though this article from The Mercury (Hobart) is nearly 9 years old, I believe that it is very interesting, and the first time that I have been aware of an online collaboration to write a children's novel. It also shows that online collaboration need not be complicated. Sometimes we overlook the simple in order to engage in the latest popular online trend or something that is seen to be technologically complex. This article shows how sometimes a simple online collaboration tool works best. The collaboration involved students from grades 5 to 8 and was coordinated by author Damian Morgan. Damian received a grant from the Tasmanian government to undertake the collaboration project. Collaboration for the project was undertaken in an online forum and through online chat sessions. Over a period of time students contributed and collaborated with Damian in order to write the novel. Collaboration can take many forms and often we don't realize that we are engaged in it, I suspect that the children in this project were having fun, learning and collaborating all at the same time and had little notion of it! It is interesting that access to the forum is still available and in fact it details the collaborative conversations between students and Damian. The forum is still available at the following URL: http://forum.education.tas.gov.au/webforum/student/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=forum;f=97 Final and draft versions of the novel are available at the following URL: http://odi.statelibrary.tas.gov.au/Resources/Framer.asp?URL=%2F2002%2F2%2F010%2Fdefault.htm&ID=00215534 References: Lelong, P. (2002, July 31). Novel way for using technology. The Mercury (Hobart), p. 26. Retrieved from http://global.factiva.com
  • ...2 more comments...
  •  
    This resource directly links to my topic of crowdsourcing as it discusses a crowdsourcing project which involved young students having the ability to write a novel in a collaborative manner. Students were part of the process of writing 'The adventures of Billy Bathtub'. The article highlights some of the key benefits of crowd sourcing: non-professionals can make important contributions. Anyone can contribute, in this case, despite their age, their input was deemed valuable. It is important to consider that this project occurred in 2002; the nature of the online context was vastly different to today, and we can see this with the design/appearance of the project's online forum. In http://www.wired.com/techbiz/media/news/2007/07/creative_crowdwriting Gorski (2007) explored two popular examples of collaborative novel writing using crowdsourcing. 'A million Penguins' and 'These Wicked Games' also allowed a group of people to write the novel. However unlike 'The Adventures of BillyBathtub' they did not rely on a forum, but rather wiki technology and were also very open and allowed anyone to make edits. Due to this chaotic structure, i believe 'The Adventures of Billy BathTub' was more successful because it was more controlled and restricted. 'A million Penguins' and 'These Wicked Games' faced many issues including vandalism. Many contributors were also contributing content to chapters without bothering to read what was happening in the narrative. However as stated by Jeremy Ettinghausen (publisher of 'A million Penguins') the project was mainly a experiment to see what would happen if anyone could edit and write a novel (A Million Penguins - The More the Merrier, 2007). This article suggests that collaborative narrative writing can be successful if organizers implement some degree of crowd control and impose certain restrictions to avoid chaos, spam, and vandalism.
  •  
    References: A Million Penguins - The More the Merrier.(2007, February 1). Retrieved from http://thepenguinblog.typepad.com/the_penguin_blog/2007/02/a_million_pengu.html Gorski, K. (September 7, 2007). Creative crowdwriting: the open book. Wired Online. Retrieved from http://www.wired.com/techbiz/media/news/2007/07/creative_crowdwriting
  •  
    Hi Kaye, thank you for your interesting article and comments. Following is mine: This article is a good example of how people use internet to communicate and collaborate, which is similar to one of my readings: The American Pain Foundation (APF) and The HealthCentral Network Collaborate to Develop Enhanced Internet Resources for People with Pain. Both articles explain how people are connected by Internet to share ideas, gain information, and interact with each other through a website. Both websites mentioned in these two articles are open for general users, such as year 5-8 students and patients with pain, who may not have professional skills on Internet, so these websites are designed to be simple and user-friendly. Such websites let users easily focus on gaining information and collaboration without technical issues. As Kaye (2011) claims, "a simple online collaboration tool works best". In addition, this article shows the trend of using Internet to improve learning efficiency and allows communication and collaboration after school. As students' contribution will be available to view once they enter it to the website, Internet not only makes collaboration across time and geographical boundaries by global networking but also encourages students to contribute to their projects with more flexibility. Furthermore, as students normally access to Internet at home, this makes learning in a more relax and intimate environment. As Pelton (1996) mentions, online learning allows students to move from a passive learning to an active learning mode. In short, online collaboration helps student to achieve learning goals more efficiently with powerful and user-friendly features. Reference: England, K. (2011). Comment on Novel way for using technology. Retrieved from http://groups.diigo.com/group/curtin_net308 Pelton, J. N. (1996). Cyberlearning vs. the university: An irresisti
  •  
    Thanks Jiawin and Cathy for your comments. It was a very interesting project wasn't it and I agree with you Cathy that one of the reasons that it was successful was probably due to the way it was controlled and organised - not like some of the examples in your readings (which were very interesting by the way). Jiawin - I read your articles too with much interest and would agree that the Internet is a powerful tool as it allows the sharing of ideas and information. Sometimes I think that people are afraid of engaging in some of these new online collaboration tools - but there is much to be gained by simply 'having a go'!! Thanks, Kaye
Michael Nycyk

Undergraduate perceptions of the usefulness of Web 2.0 in higher education: Survey Deve... - 5 views

  •  
    Kumar's work has a reasonable amount to offer in terms of a resource; his research gives more clues to the perceived effectiveness of Google Docs users have towards it as a collaborative tool. He has chosen to use the effective research method focus groups with semi-structured questions. Perhaps the useful part of investigating Google Docs as a collaborative tool is how he selected students at the university site who were in many disciplines. Thus he was able to elicit some good insights into why Google Docs is so praised as a collaborative educational tool. One finding was that students preferred Google Docs as a time saving tool where no formal meetings took place. Although the students were on campus, it was surprising that they felt they would rather use Google Docs then all meet to work on a project. The other finding was that the acceptance of this Web 2.0 collaborative technology was greater amongst students that had previous experience with Google Docs or other similar software. Another major advantage found by Kumar (2009) was that overall using such collaborative tools increased interest in the subject matter of their particular discipline. The concept that new technologies add value to existing practice was also interesting. Although Kumar was not clear on this concept, what students indicated this was the case, such a statement suggests that using Google Docs is linked to increased interest in a subject and in turn a desire to succeed. The weakness of this resource is Kumar is not clear of this link; however, as an article to show that Google Docs is of value equating collaboration tools with increased productivity shows how potentially valuable using them can be.
  • ...4 more comments...
  •  
    References Kumar, S. (2009). Undergraduate perceptions of the usefulness of Web 2.0 in higher education: Survey development. In D. Remenyi (Ed.) Proceedings of 8th European Conference on E-learning, Italy, 308-314. Retrieved April 13, 2011, from http://web2integration.pbworks.com/f/Undergraduate+Perceptions+of+the+Usefulness+of+Web+2.0+in+Higher+Education.pdf
  •  
    I was interested in this article as I work in an academic institution (75% of our students are external) and it is a very topical subject for us at the moment. It was of interest to note that many students "expect to learn with new technologies and because higher education should prepare students for the workplace of the future" (Kumar , 2009, p.308). In terms of the use of Google Docs as a collaborative tool in academic institutions I think that we are only just beginning to see the benefits of this type of online collaboration. Google Docs, as stated by Edwards & Baker (2010, p.836) "can be used to save valuable time that would be otherwise spent e-mailing, revising, saving, e-mailing back etc.". Google Docs is a relatively new collaborative tool but the benefits to both lecturers and students are very evident, as anything that saves time and engages students is worth using. It was interesting that Kumar (2009) said that the use of Wikis was not a popular online collaborative tool - although it was easy to see the possibilities of its use. In one of my resources I looked at the positive use of wikis in educational settings as they "assist students in learning new content and support them in connecting new knowledge with personal experiences" (Deters, Cutherell & Stapleton, 2010, Discussion section, para.2). Successful online collaborative work is not necessarily a time saver or a short cut but approached positively and with good planning and leadership I believe that it will become an efficient and well used educational tool. References: Deters, F., Cuthrell, K. & Stapleton, J. (2010). Why Wikis? Student Perceptions of Using Wikis in Online Coursework . Journal of Online Teaching and Learning 6(1). Retrieved from http://jolt.merlot.org/vol6no1/deters_0310.htm Edwards, J. T., & Baker, C. (2010) A Case Study: Google Collaboration
  •  
    My reading of it Kaye is that Kumar found that was the case at the time the study was done, but I am sure if he redid the study that would be less of an issue. I see Wikis are being quite popular now. Also I agree with your point, it is not always about time saving but if one spends the time learning it, it can be a useful tool for education. Our experiences in this course with Ning last year and the online conference proved that.
  •  
    This article is interesting as it highlights the benefits of using collaborative tools in higher education for teaching and learning. Although, it is also interesting how the article mentions wikis as one of the collaborative tools and then Kumar (2009, p. 6) then omits wikis as part of the group focus discussion as the students involved in the focus group had not used wikis in their personal life nor on campus. What is more interesting about this reasoning by Kumar (2009) is that it was not explained to students about the use of Wikipedia. Wikipedia is a very popular wiki used as a reference tool both in studies and personal life, so it is hard to comprehend that the students in this focus group did not draw any correlation to Wikipedia and the use of wikis. This article also supports the benefits in using a wiki for both, organisations and for teaching and learning as Kumar (2009) highlights how a wiki "improves students writing" (Kumar, 2009, p. 3) and also engages students to collaborate across disciplines (Kumar, 2009, p. 3). The majority of articles supporting wiki use as a collaborative tool have highlighted how the ease of use allows for communication and collaboration, whilst also focusing on the culture of sharing within these two groups. Therefore, wikis are a great collaborative tool, although it is important to also create a sharing culture and provide guidelines when implementing the use of a wiki so, that the participates will use it to support the organisational culture or teaching and learning outcomes in collaborating and communicating with fellow peers or colleagues. References: Kumar, S. (2009). Undergraduate perceptions of the usefulness of Web 2.0 in higher education: Survey Development. In Proceedings of 8th European Conference on E-learning (ECEL), Italy, retrieved from http://web2integration.pbworks.com/f/Undergraduate+Perceptions+of+the+Usefulness+of+Web+2.0+in+Higher+Education.pdf
  •  
    Yes Michael - I agree - things are constantly changing and evolving on the Internet and as you say if Kumar did the study again it would be a different outcome. Cheers, Kaye
  •  
    This paper articulates through research and data analysis from although relatively small focus group the effectiveness of using new technologies 2.0 to enhance learning of students from different background in their respective disciplines. This is as same topic as one of my discussions with article Art Education, Collaboration and the Internet. It talks about internet technology integrates into contemporary education. New generation communicates and shares information differently in current technological society. Computer literate generation are different from earlier generations who rely mainly on books and printed materials. Collaborative online activity as an educational endeavor is involving people from different areas to work together.(Harris, 1999). Internet is also being used in region of high education that adopts Web2.0 to help students learning for their self-study and group projects and leverage strategies. (Kumar, n.d). Not only for undergraduate students, but also those students from high schools and colleges, all gained the benefits of new technologies across disciplines in order to achieving their teaching and learning purposes of education. For high education, I completely agree with that Google Documents is very popular among the students for collaborative projects or assignments, because I often use Google document for my topic research and reference as well. I also believe that the internet generation's familiarity with new media undoubtedly will make this way easier for teachers to craft effective learning experiences and to use such tools to engage students. Reference: Harris, J. (1999). First steps in telecollaboration. Learning and leading with technology. 27(3),54-57. Roland, A. (2003). Art Education, Collaboration and the Internet. Retrieved from http://www.artjunction.org/articles/arted_collab_internet.pdf Kumar, S. (n.d). Undergraduate Perceptions of the Usefulness of Web 2.0 in Higher Education: Survey Development. Re
Kristy Long

Inside IKEA's Human Intranet Approach - 0 views

  •  
    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
Kristy Long

Collaboration tools are anti-knowledge sharing? - 7 views

  •  
    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
  • ...4 more comments...
  •  
    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&Fmt=7&clientId=22212&RQT=309&VName=PQD Long, K. (2011). Comments on Collaboration tools are anti-knowledge sharing? Retrieved from http://groups.diigo.com/group/c
  •  
    This article highlights the fact that whilst an organisation can implement collaboration tools there is more to collaborating that just implementing the technical solution and letting the staff collaborate without governance or guidelines (Till, 2005). The article raises that without leadership and guidance the tools that are designed to assist the business can actually work against it with multiple silos of content occurring, often with duplicate information which is not managed appropriately. For example the same piece of content could appear in more than one silo and be different as different teams are managing each of the sites (silos). Further, staff who are unfamiliar with a particular site are likely to create another instance of a site to avoid a conflict of an existing site. The article raises the issue of knowledge management at the corporate level being neglected and business risk that becomes a side effect of poor knowledge management. For many organisations, the intranet search engine is the quick win to locate information amongst multiple team sites however that is only masking the issue at hand (Brauns, 2004) and the information architecture of the intranet or sites needs to be addressed from an organisational wide approach and identify which information needs to be keep separate and implement a solution to meet the business needs. Reference Brauns, M. (2004). Moving Beyond Search. EContent, 27(7/8), S8-S9. Retrieved April 10, 2011, from ABI/INFORM Global database Till, J.G., (2005). Don't blame the technology. Information World Review, (213), 28. Retrieved April 10, 2011, from ABI/INFORM Global database..
  •  
    The article argues that it exists some disadvantages with using those collaboration tools, while collaboration tools were introduced to an intranet of organization. The article argues that it could cause the unmanaged content misplaced, lacking of context, and create information silos as it is not widely used, and therefore, at the end the article gave the conclusion is that collaborate tools can result in anti-knowledge sharing during the daily collaborative work. In fact, when providing team members with some effective e-business collaboration tools and spaces to manage organizational information and communicate each other, team members are also provided with professional knowledge about how to use those tools and spaces in an effective way.(Toole,2000). Team members need actively know how to use the collaboration tools within the group of organization, and learn how to find the important information in the "shared context" and catch up with what's going on with updated context in collaboration spaces before members started using these tools and spaces.(J. Robertson, 2007) I don't agree with that collaboration tools are anti knowledge sharing. Each technological product has its own disadvantages a certain extent, but updated technologies have been improving better services. So, users need find ways to solve the problem with using those collaborative tools in effective ways, in order to achieve the successful collaborative communication among members in the group. Minimize the risk and maximizes the benefits are the key points in the organizations for a better collaborative results. Reference: Robertson, J. (2007). Collaboration tools are anti knowledge sharing? Retrieved from http://www.steptwo.com.au/papers/cmb_antiknowledgesharing/index.html Toole, P. (2000). Sign of the times: manufacturing and e-business blen
  •  
    Kristy I was taken aback by the article but it also reminded me of my time working in a construction company. Many large-scale huge projects require the joining together of organisations (designers, architects, constructors) and professionals who previously competed for construction work. That is why there is much hype around creating a knowledge-sharing culture. This is described as making knowledge sharing a 'norm' (Gurteen, 1999), which means it is an accepted and agreed upon practice in the collaboration of any kind that things are disclosed and not hidden. We know this of course sometimes for politics or self-gain does not work. However, as construction clients do demand many firms to complete a project, knowledge sharing tools must not be anti-knowledge sharing. I will give you an example, which is in the public domain, of an example. I found on one project the issue of context that Robertson (2007) talks about in his article to be important for the sharing of records. The project I did ended up being published, but the situation was the sharing of important construction data. Each manager kept records of materials used on their own laptops and PC's as spreadsheets. No wonder there was confusion when they were told to merge them to share what had been done. They referred to it as 'Spreadsheet Culture' (Nycyk, 2008). They simply did not want to share how much material was being used. Although that suggests a culture issue, Excel can be a collaborative tool but it is obviously anti-knowledge sharing if every manager uses it differently. This is what they did, hence why the simple use of this tool in the wrong way prevented not only a sharing culture to develop but resulted in top management writing into their duty statements they had to use the new central database. References Gurteen, D. (1999). Creating a knowledge sharing culture. Gurteen, Retrieved April 15, 2011 from http://www.gurteen.com/gurteen/gurteen.nsf/id/ksculture Nycyk, Michael (200
  •  
    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&
Sheila Bonsu

Real Estate Launches Technology Offering that Mirrors Its Culture of Collaboration - 2 views

  •  
    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/
Ran An

Art Education, Collaboration and the Internet - 1 views

  •  
    The article elaborates how Internet operates and applies successfully step by step in contemporary art educational field. The article explicitly explained how the Australian Art schools and teachers teach and guide their art students to use online information and different of websites to learn and share their discussions and opinions. Internet education has playing an important role in schools and universities since Internet widely entered to our society and life. In order to achieving their study goal, lots of adult students choose online education in contemporary technological society. In this article, Art online education is a successful example in domain of internet education. As Harris (1999) described a telecollaborative activity as an educational endeavor that is involving people from different areas to work together by using internet tools and resources.The biggest challenge for current art education is how to help students to live this digital communication age. When internet and new technologies provide us with unique opportunities in the life, the thing need to be worried about is how to study and utilize these communication technologies. However, to students, utilizing internet technology to think, to imagine, to create is the significant aspect for catching up this networking era.(Roland, 2003). To young generation, it is not a big issue to learn how to read and gather information from internet, and it is not a problem either to know how to communicate with others by online chatting tools. I think only internet knowledge they need to catch up for their online education is how to use special software to finish their online projects. The topics about internet collaboration and internet education will continue permeating into our society in this technological and digital era. This is an inevitable trend of technological progress and development. Reference: Harris, J. (1999). First steps in telecollaboration. Learning and le
Rosanna Candler

Repression, Alienation, Information and Communication: the Liberating Effects of Commun... - 3 views

  •  
    At first glance, Michael Rosenberg's paper is merely another insect in the swarm of academic opinion following Egypt's January revolution. But it is not. Published in September of 2010, Rosenberg unknowingly produced a fascinating body of work. Written mere months before Egypt's first political upheaval in 30 years; the research paper gives an honest and unaffected assessment of the influence of communication technologies in a country which was gearing up to undergo a groundbreaking Internet-charged revolution. The Guardian analyst Hossam el-Hamalawy asserts that, rather than coming from the blue on January 25, the Egyptian revolution is "a result of a process that has been brewing over the past decade- a chain reaction to the autumn 2000 protests" (el-Hamalawy, 2011). He believes that the 'key to it all' was the visual transmission of the protest to such a wide audience. A consideration with which Rosenberg would certainly agree. Perhaps many Australians saw the speed and mass delivery of the Egyptian revolution as a surprise on the front page of their morning newspaper; however Rosenberg's assessment of Egypt's history and present "environment of repression and alienation" shows us that the "aura of impending revolution" was long-standing. The 'snow-balling' social movements are due to the "ride and proliferation of information and communication technologies" (Rosenberg, 2010) such as the immergence of the Egyptian Movement for Change. In her book, R. Kelly Garrett analyses the role of information communication technologies in protest, concluding that they are "changing the ways in which activists communicate, collaborate and demonstrate" (Garratt, 2006). Rosenberg applies this technological shift to his incredibly accurate prediction that (with the exponential increase of internet users since 2000), "Things are finally looking up for the Egyptian people...the spirit of the masses finally has the power and the op
Rosanna Candler

How the Internet brought down a dictator - 4 views

  •  
    Contrasting the prominent role the internet played with political revolutions in both the Arab and Western worlds (Dutta, 2008) the striking notion is how significant the Internet and subsequent social medias are in empowering ordinary citisens. For the first time in history the minorities of society have a place to establish equal-footing, share information and as Conley (2011) notes destabilize the old guard and oppressing political regimes. As we see internet inspired revolutions spreading across the globe the idea championed by Ghonim that "the best way to liberate a society is to give them the Internet (Smith 2011)" is becoming increasingly relevant. There's also an underlying theme throughout this news report that this political collaboration was strengthened by the inept tactics adopted by the Mubarak government. As well as the significant costs to the Egyptian economy and businesses through unplugging the Internet, it only served to advance the cause of the protesters elevating personal political stories to a global audience and invoking internet users and organizations from around the world to partake and assist in this online collaboration. A pressing issue for me is the evolution of this collaboration, the grassroots movement can be traced back to 2008 (Egypt's opposition pushes demands as protests continue, 2011) and since then the underground and organized techniques employed by the protesters online, were crucial in not only this political movement going undetected by an oppressive regime but also the successful outcome of this collaboration. While briefly touching on the potential negative aspects of the greater utilization of social media, this source clearly demonstrates how the internet and particularly social networks have assisted in the liberation of the Egyptian society. Although it remains to be seen whether similar internet revolutions will occur, evidenced here is a political collaboration build online and as Cowie (2011) docume
  •  
    In a media environment where opinion tends to incline toward black or white extremes, MSNBC's technology blogger Wilson Rothman clearly and diplomatically maps out Egypt's January conflict. Performing a simple online search of 'Egypt revolution' will deliver thousands of arguments for two sides of the coin: those reinforcing a dedicated belief that social media conceived and sustained the revolution, and those (such as Mayton, 2011) who consider this estimation a gross discredit to the majority of activists with no online access. Most refreshingly, Rothman refuses to bow to broad and antagonistic statements- preferring instead to present the chain of events and their professional commentary- providing his reader with the means to determine their own position. In light of Wikileaks tracing the seeds of activism from 2008, Facebook and Twitter was used to mobilise numbers for the January 25 demonstration. This is the function for which many consider the Government 'turned off' Internet in Egypt for, however Philip Howard regards the ability to document (photograph and video) and post online the violent police response as a far greater threat and 'kill-switch justification' for the Government. During this time, the leaked media (i.e. SpeakToTweet) were "rendered more uplifting and powerful by their illicit nature" (Rothman, 2011). Journalist John Guardiano has gone as far to say that "Mubarak resigned really because of the pressure imposed on him by CNN, Fox, MSNBC, Al-Jazeera, Al-Arabiya, Twitter, Facebook and the Internet" completely disregarding the Tahrir Square protesters and igniting the online comment "You bring your hyper partisan lens to bear on events you know little about" (Guardiano, 2011). Rothman's article reminds us that although Egypt's Revolution was 'Internet-fuelled' and gave individuals the capacity to "tell the story...and making sure someone is there to hear the story" (Rothman, 2011), it is
Bianca F

Innovative technologies for education and learning: education and knowledge-oriented ap... - 0 views

  •  
    In this article Hsu discusses the importance of keeping up to date with the changes and innovation in online learning and teaching through collaboration tools. He emphasizes that many of the first online collaboration tools were not designed as such, but were initially personal use technologies such as instant messaging and email. Hsu mentions that these "conversational technologies" and "constructivist learning tools" (2008, pg. 63.) encourage users to create their own content and to participate in a more interactive and collaborative way. This is especially true as we move from a more "print based" education method to a more "digitally based" method of education delivery. (Hsu, 2008, pg. 63.) The progression of these online collaboration tools means more tools are now available, evolution from email and forums to instant messaging, blogs and wikis (2008, pg. 70). In 2011 we also see online collaboration occurring through other tools not originally designed as a specific online collaboration and educational websites, such as Twitter and Facebook. Hsu emphasizes that online collaboration in education enhances the experience for students and provides teachers with more methods in which to deliver material to their students. Participation and student satisfaction increase in a "collaborative community" (2008, pg. 72.) Reference: Hsu, J.. (2008). Innovative Technologies for Education and Learning: Education and Knowledge-Oriented Applications of Blogs, Wikis, Podcasts, and More. International Journal of Web - Based Learning and Teaching Technologies, 3(3), 62-81. Retrieved April 15, 2011, from ProQuest Computing. (Document ID: 1525792171). (Retrieved from Curtin Library Catalogue)
Kelly Kerr

Intranets Nurture Companies from the Inside - 22 views

Hi Kristy, I really enjoyed researching for this subject as I too work on an intranet for a large corporate. It was a bit of an eye opener seeing some of the technology that we are still trying t...

internet collaboration intranet personalisation IBM

Michael Nycyk

How organisations collect, manage and share resources through Internet and other Techno... - 41 views

Yes you do post comments on here but it has been made very difficult because there are two groups but just ignore that and post here.

collaborate; collaboration; collect; manage; information; internet; resources;organisation;

JoelMo Joel

Dissolution and the Industry of Culture: The History of the Flash mob - 0 views

  •  
    This paper does a great job in critically analysing how Flash Mobs, a new socio-cultural phenomenon, are in fact final products born from a complex human collaboration and use of the technological revolution that is the Internet. It clearly explains their specificity as being totally socially mediated on, by and through online digital tools (blogs, social media, forums, instant messaging) that are used as collaborative spaces to virtually organise and create a real-life upcoming interaction between people (Nicholson, 2005). What's more, the paper brings some ideas about how the Internet can also be used to "hijack" and reverse the original essence of Flash Mob philosophy, thereby turning its main assets - instantaneity, virtual proximity, massive audience reach, networks, costless operation - into potential factors for bringing chaos, as when Philadelphia experienced a very violent wave of riots (Wagner & Buzi, 2010), or when a political protest flash mob was organised in Belarus in 2006 (Peterson, 2009). Garland demonstrates the importance of cooperation and participation between network users for Flash Mobs and cites Rheingold's thesis, with which I strongly agree, that states that they are "a type of social engagement that may be created and organised by interacting with the technology of shared networks or the technologies that allow the shared networks to interact [within an event program]" (2002). Yet, this reading highlights the differences between Flash Mobs and Smart Mobs even though both can be considered as the technology itself and the use of that technology (Rheingold, 2002). In the end, The History of Flash Mobs raises larger concepts from which this phenomenon grew out of, such as communication, social or cultural studies, thus emphasising the importance of Internet as a new way for human beings to interact and collaborate in real life. REFERENCES Buzi, J. & Wagner, A. (2010) Flash Mobs: A New Social Phenomenon Philadelphia N
  •  
    REFERENCES (continue): Buzi, J. & Wagner, A. (2010) Flash Mobs: A New Social Phenomenon Philadelphia Neighbors. sct.temple.edu. Accessible from http://sct.temple.edu/blogs/murl/2010/03/30/flash-mobs-a-new-socialphenomenon/ (accessed on 11th April, 2011) Nicholson, J. A. (2005) 'Flash! Mobs in the Age of Mobile Connectivity' The Fibreculture Journal, Iss.6 December. Accessible from http://six.fibreculturejournal.org/fcj-030-flash-mobs-in-the-age-of-mobile-connectivity/print/ (accessed on 11th April, 2011) Peterson, N. (2009) Flash Mobs - The New Political Dissent. Accessible from http://www.neilpeterson.com/index.php/2009/11/flash-mobs-the-new-political-dissent (accessed on 12th April, 2011) Rheingold, H. (2002) Smart Mobs: The Next Social Revolution. New-York: Basic Books.
Kristy Long

No collaboration without communications - 7 views

  •  
    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
  • ...4 more comments...
  •  
    This was a very thought-provoking article and I was especially interested in how the author stated "The existence of collaborative tools does not automatically imply that people will collaborate or collaborate effectively" (Broomhall, 2009, para. 5). In one of the articles that I posted on wikis in education by Deters, Cuthrell, & Stapleton, J. (2010) they noted that without proper preparation of students and specific guidelines that the success of the wiki would be in doubt. I believe that this can be related to this article by Broomhall. Without proper preparation and planning online collaboration can fall flat and fail. I don't fully agree with Broomhall (2009, para.6) when she says "It is a simple concept, but if people are not already communicating with each other, then there is little chance they will feel comfortable enough to share their knowledge online." I believe that there are many instances where online collaboration between strangers can take place most effectively (not least of which is this exercise in learning on DIIGO!). Waltonen-Moore, Stuart, Newton, Oswald & Veronis (2006) concluded in their study on an online learning environment that it is possible for virtual strangers to collaborate and successfully complete their work. I would agree that it comes down to good planning, facilitation and monitoring of any online collaborative environment in order to make it successful. References: Broomhall, A (2009) No collaboration without communications Retrieved from http://www.steptwo.com.au/papers/cmb_nocollaboration/index.html Deters, F., Cuthrell, K. & Stapleton, J. (2010). Why Wikis? Student Perceptions of Using Wikis in Online Coursework . Journal of Online Teaching and Learning 6(1). Retrieved from http://jolt.me
  •  
    This article by Broomhall (2009) also explores the notion that, simply implementing collaborative software into an organisation does not necessarily mean that it will be used. Collaborative tools like wikis may seem easy to use by those that use wikis like Wikipedia, although it does not mean that everyone within the organisation will have the confidence or skills to use the wiki or understand the purpose of using the wiki for collaboration or communication within the organisation. This article is a small and easily understood article that is relevant to explain the main issues that may arise in an organisation that is using collaborative tools like wikis in content management and communication. This article compliments the articles like Clarke's article (2007) "Collaborative authorship with Atlassian Confluence" and Stackpole's article (2008) "Wikis that work: Four IT departments get it right" about wikis as it ensures, that when implementing a wiki the organisation understands the importance of ensuring that "the basics of communication are established" (Broomhall, 2009) and that "staff share a common understanding of the organisation, its functions, organisational structure and its role in the broader industry" (Broomhall, 2009). Staff that have an understanding of the role of the company will be more likely to understand how open collaboration can assist the organisation and how their use, can assist in creating communication between other departments and staff from other locations, thus breaking down silos that may exist and enable the promotion of a sharing culture within the organisation. References: Broomhall, A (2009) No collaboration without communications Retrieved from http://www.steptwo.com.au/papers/cmb_nocollaboration/index.html
  •  
    References: Clarke, R. (2007). Collaborative Authorship with Atlassian Confluence. GlinTech. Retrieved from http://www.glintech.com/downloads/Collaborative%20Authorship%20with%20Atlassian%20ConflueCon.pdf Stackpole, B. (2008). Wikis that work: Four IT departments get it right. Computer World: the voice of IT management Retrieved 13 April, 2011, from http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9118878/Wikis_that_work_Four_IT_departmdepa_get_it_right
  •  
    Thanks Kristy for your article. When we talk about collaborations tools in organisations, we pay more attention on the collaboration tools more than human factor. What I found in my articles are focus on tools. My comments think about how to choose appropriate tools, how to develop and manage tools. However, we should not ignore the origin of knowledge sharing. It is base on people's communication. I agree with Broomhall (2009), if people are not already communicate with other, they do not feel comfortable share the knowledge online. It is like we do not borrow our money to stranger. Therefore, collaboration tools should work as communication tools at the same time. Tools are something which need human's practice, especially collaboration tools. If no one uses collaboration tools, we cannot see any collaborative activities inside. Tools are not collaboration tools anymore. Broomhall (2009) noted some channel of communication, such as intranet, staff directory. The channel which I am interested is social site. Social site is not a communication channel. I found that in my research is informal sharing place an important role in organisations. Organisations not only benefit from formal records or information. They can get more benefit from informal channel. Informal sharing should be part of collaboration tools have to concern. 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/
Mandy Burke

Managing the Digital Enterprise in Digital Markets through the internet - 12 views

I think you are correct in saying that there have been great advantages (and many disadvantages) brought upon by the introduction of the Internet to society. For businesses it has made selling and ...

peter stanier

Text messaging for protest swarms - 7 views

Having focused on the impact that online political collaboration had in deciding the 2008 Presidential election, the gulf in class between the methods employed in protests regarding the conventions...

FARNAZ SHAMS

Article 4: Sign of the times: manufacturing and e-business blend as a digital enterprise - 13 views

ofcourese the advantages of e-business can overcome to its disadvantages and now most of the educated people prefer to as it as a beneficial thing.

collaboration; globel; network; enterprise; online; Net308_508; Internet; e-business; digital enterprises

Kelly Kerr

How internet technology has shaped collaboration within organisations. Analyzing colla... - 1 views

  •  
    Topic : How internet technology has shaped collaboration within organisations. Analyzing collaborative networks emerging in Enterprise 2.0: the Taolin Platform http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/B9853-524PR0D-G/2/30d3637587514757e7ea1c6dbb1afcae This working paper was presented at the 4th and 5th UK Social Networks Conference and was a summary of a study whose goal was to identify how online interactions between users changed with the introduction of the social networking platform in a commercial environment. It reviews the deployment of an Enterprise 2.0 piece of Open Source software (Taolin) into Fondazione Bruno Kessler (FBK), a research organisation (FBK) with 400 staff and discusses how the technology was used by the research staff and the communications patterns that developed throughout the study. In addition the paper identifies the different types of ties or relationships an individual user could have, and points out that if these ties were more visible it would enable people to tap into a much larger network than their immediate peers or basic social network. Given there were so many discreet groups of researchers at FBK the plan was to try and leverage off learnings that could be applied to more than one research area. From a technology perspective FBK always stated that the Taolin platform was in beta, meaning that it was never finished or as others might comment, constantly being improved. The platform was rolled out to a group that was approximately 10% of the organisation, and usage increased with each release through the involvement of champions who recruited more champions through word of mouth, instead of going with a top down approach from management. The paper concludes with learnings from the study stating that further research needs to be completed in certain areas to continue to improve the progressive enhancement of the Taolin social networking platform. Reference
Steffi Jones

A Million Heads is Better Than One - 2 views

  •  
    This article focuses on the web 2.0 term "wisdom of crowds" within crowd sourcing, in which Catone explains as meaning "two heads are better than one, and that still more heads will yield even better results." The "Wisdom of crowds" looks at how crowds determine popularity and accuracy on the internet because they are the actions of millions of people. Wikipedia is an example of this concept as it is formed by the collaboration of thousands of users. This article states that according to studies Wikipedia is as accurate as encyclopaedia volumes such as Britannica. This theory comes from the fact that although crowd sourcing enables millions of people to participate, on websites such as Wikipedia it is usually just a few thousand people that contribute. Although it is possible for anyone to edit the website, it is monitored for changes and incorrect information is seen as the exception rather than the rule (Goodin 2005). "Crowdsourcing can be looked at as an application of the wisdom of crowds concept, in which the knowledge and talents of a group of people is leveraged to create content and solve problems." The wisdom of crowds concept can be seen differently when applied to websites such as www.StumbleUpon.com. StumbleUpon allows for users to rate and share web pages. Within a category users can rate with a 'thumbs up' or 'thumbs down' on the page they are given. The ratings not only determine what web pages you are referred to in future, but they allow for others who browse the same category as yourself to see the most relevant (most voted for) pages. As crowd sourcing enables for crowds to put forward their concepts, strategies and problem solving solutions in to practice in one place, the 'wisdom of crowds' concept refers to the way in which the large input from crowds enables particular websites on the internet to function in a way more relevant to its users. Goodin, D. (2005, December 14). 'Nature': Wikipedia is accurate. Retrieve
  •  
    Crowdsourcing is changing some industries as revealed in 'Business Crowdsourcing: Why the Power of the Crowd is driving the Future of Business' by Jeff Howe. The phenomenon is a threat to organisations that sell what the crowd will do much more cheaply (Howe, 2008). Thank You Steffi for this article as I found it very interesting and insightful. Collective intelligence I believe is essential to the growth of knowledge especially within organisations, relating to my topic of Organization collaborative tools. Companies benefit from crowdsourcing, not only from the ideas they generate through collaboration, but also from the publicity they attract ("Crowdsourcing just got Simpler, Faster and Less Expensive," 2009). Crowdsourcing is vital as pointed out in the article. By stating that Wikipedia is as accurate as Encyclopaedias, I welcome this shift from one point of opinion to a community based perceptive view. The Cambrian House example was perhaps a wonderful representation of crowdsourcing in the form of community collaboration. Cambrian House as a crowdsourcing community using the wisdom of crowd based approach to discover new business and technology ideas is laudable ("Doors more than open at Cambrian House; Cambrian House delivers "crowdsourcing technology in a box" and evolves its focus to developing its crowdsourced product portfolio," 2008). A million heads is truly better than one. Reference: Crowdsourcing just got Simpler, Faster and Less Expensive. (2009). PR Newswire. Retrieved from http://proquest.umi.com.dbgw.lis.curtin.edu.au/pqdweb?index=0&did=1670123411&SrchMode=1&sid=1&Fmt=3&VInst=PROD&VType=PQD&RQT=309&VName=PQD&TS=1303038199&clientId=22212 Doors more than open at Cambrian House; Cambrian House delivers "crowdsourcing technology in a box" and evolves its focus to developing its crowdsourced product portfolio. (2008). PR Newswire. Retrieved from http://proquest.umi.com.dbgw.lis.curtin
1 - 20 of 57 Next › Last »
Showing 20 items per page