Investigating Virtual Social Networking in the Context of ...
Transcript of Investigating Virtual Social Networking in the Context of ...
DEFENCE DÉFENSE&
Defence R&D Canada – Atlantic
Copy No. _____
Defence Research andDevelopment Canada
Recherche et développementpour la défense Canada
Investigating Virtual Social Networking in the
Context of Military Interoperability
Year 3 Report and Overall Three Year Summary
Jacquelyn CrebolderTania RandallAren HunterDRDC Atlantic
Curtis CoatesGerard TorenvlietCMC Esterline|Electronics
Technical Report
DRDC Atlantic TR 2012-255
August 2013
This page intentionally left blank.
Investigating Virtual Social Networking in the Context of Military Interoperability Year 3 Report and Overall Three Year Summary
Jacquelyn Crebolder Tania Randall Aren Hunter DRDC Atlantic Curtis Coates Gerard Torenvliet CMC Esterline|Electronics
Defence R&D Canada – Atlantic
Technical Report
DRDC Atlantic TR 2012-255
August 2013
Principal Author
Original signed by Jacquelyn Crebolder
Jacquelyn Crebolder
Defence Scientist
Approved by
Original signed by Francine Desharnais
Francine Desharnais
Head Maritime Decision Support Section
Approved for release by
Original signed by Calvin Hyatt
Leon Cheng
Chair DRP
In conducting the research described in this report, the investigators adhered to the policies and procedures
set out in the Tri-Council Policy Statement: Ethical conduct for research involving humans, National
Council on Ethics in Human Research, Ottawa, 1998 as issued jointly by the Canadian Institutes of Health
Research, the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada and the Social Sciences and
Humanities Research Council of Canada.
© Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada, as represented by the Minister of National Defence, 2013
© Sa Majesté la Reine (en droit du Canada), telle que représentée par le ministre de la Défense nationale,
2013
DRDC Atlantic TR 2012-255 i
Abstract ……..
Over a three-year research program, Defence Research and Development Canada – Atlantic
investigated social networking technology with the aim of understanding this relatively new
collaboration tool. The technology was assessed for potential benefits and issues within the
context of information sharing, finding expertise, and team building for the Canadian Forces
(CF). A requirements analysis was conducted on a number of military groups in Year 1, and an
in-depth analysis was administered to a select group, the Training Development Officers (TDO),
in Year 2. In Year 3 the TDO community was provided with an enterprise-level social networking
platform (SABA People Cloud) in order to examine how the social networking technology was
used, what features were important, and what issues, if any, existed. A number of data collection
methods were employed including, questionnaire, experimentation, workshop, observation, and
visual analytics. The results were compared to similar data collected from the publicly available
Facebook social networking site (Facebook.com), where the TDOs had created their own Group
and where they had become increasingly active. This report summarizes Years 1 and 2 of the
program, and describes in detail the final year, Year 3. The work overall emphasizes the
importance of ease of use and accessibility of social networking tools and suggests that this
technology can be a viable and useful support to the CF.
Résumé ….....
Par un programme de recherche de trois ans, Recherche et développement pour la défense Canada
– Atlantique a étudié les nouvelles technologies que constituent les réseaux sociaux afin de mieux
comprendre ces nouveaux outils de collaboration. Nous avons évalué les avantages et
inconvénients potentiels du réseautage social dans le contexte du partage d’information, du
repérage d’experts et la promotion du travail d’équipe au sein des Forces canadiennes (FC). La
première année, nous avons effectué une analyse des besoins de plusieurs groupes de militaires et,
l’année suivante, une analyse approfondie a été faite sur l’un de ces groupes : les officiers du
développement de l’instruction (ODI). La troisième année, la collectivité des CDI a pu utiliser
une plateforme de réseautage social d’entreprise (SABA People Cloud); et nous avons pu
observer comment cette technologie a été utilisée, quelles fonctions ont été les plus importantes et
le cas échéant quels problèmes se sont manifestés. Nous avons pour cela fait appel à plusieurs
méthodes de collecte de données, notamment des questionnaires, des expériences, des ateliers et
des observations ainsi que l’analytique visuelle. Nous avons comparé les résultats obtenus à des
données semblables recueillies sur le site public de réseautage social Facebook (facebook.com),
car les CDI y avaient créé leur propre groupe et y étaient de plus en plus actifs. Le rapport résume
les deux premières années du programme d’étude, et décrit la troisième en détail. Ces travaux
soulignent en règle générale l’importance de la convivialité et de l’accessibilité des outils de
réseautage social, et appuient l’idée que cette technologie peut servir d’appui utile aux activités
des FC.
ii DRDC Atlantic TR 2012-255
This page intentionally left blank.
DRDC Atlantic TR 2012-255 iii
Executive summary
Investigating Virtual Social Networking in the Context of Military Interoperability
Jacquelyn Crebolder; Tania Randall; Aren Hunter; Curtis Coates; Gerard Torenvliet; DRDC Atlantic TR 2012-255; Defence R&D Canada – Atlantic; August 2013.
Introduction: With the rapid adoption and popularity of social networking sites many
organizations are replacing traditional methods of communicating with enterprise-level social
networking platforms. Defence Research and Development Canada (DRDC) examined the use of
this kind of technology for the Canadian Forces (CF), with a focus on how social networking
tools might support finding expertise and sharing information amongst groups, particularly those
whose members are not working face-to-face. This report deals in detail with the final Year 3 of
the research program with a summary of Years 1 and 2 included1.
Through a requirements analysis conducted in Year 1, Training Development Officers (TDO)
were identified as a suitable community for more in-depth analysis of use and requirements for a
virtual social networking platform. TDOs are distributed across Canada and are responsible for
coordinating and advising on CF training and education. The community was provided with an
enterprise-level social networking platform called SABA People Cloud, and use of the platform
was analyzed. A comparison was made to a publicly available social networking website
(Facebook).
Results: Data were collected through interviews, surveys, on-line experimentation, and direct
observation of activity on the two social networking web-sites. Overall the number of data points
was small but nevertheless, results emphasized the importance of seamless deployment of the
platform, ease of use requiring little training, and rapid adoption based on a quickly recognized
improvement in workflow by the user. The Facebook platform met all these goals, thereby
progressively boosting activity on the site and resulting in a vibrant and active on-line community
where people could meet, converse, and share. The SABA site on the other hand struggled for a
number of reasons, most of them technical, and after a short period of use eventually went
unused.
Significance: These results show that virtual social networking can be viable and useful within
the CF for members who are distributed and also for those in close proximity to one another. The
most important considerations are that:
The technology has to be easy to use and quick to learn, and it must complement and
integrate seamlessly with current work practices;
Virtual social networking is not so much about file storage and sharing as it is about
people meeting and interacting. As such, a social networking technology should have
1 Full reports of Years 1 and 2 can be found in Torenvliet, Euerby, Scott, & Histon, 2011, [DRDC Atlantic
CR 2010-308]; and Torenvliet & Leal, 2011, [DRDC Atlantic CR 2011-155], respectively.
iv DRDC Atlantic TR 2012-255
features that support on-line community-building and participation. Those features
include: individual profiles preferably with the capability to attach a self-portrait photo,
an easy to read and easy to navigate conversation zone, widespread broadcasting of posts
and comments to the entire community, and not least, a climate that is welcoming, active,
and easy going;
Support by upper management must be demonstrated by their use of the technology;
Full support and commitment from the information technology (IT) sector is required;
and
The deployment strategy must include ongoing interaction with the community,
highlighting benefits of the platform and promoting adoption.
Incorporating this kind of tool into the right military groups could significantly change the way of
doing business, increasing community amongst members not only within the military but
extending to include other organizations.
Future plans: This study examined a community where the workday tempo is relatively steady.
Future research should investigate the feasibility of this kind of technology within a fast-paced
operational environment where other variables may impede use of the tool or where other uses
might be discovered.
DRDC Atlantic TR 2012-255 v
Sommaire .....
Investigating Virtual Social Networking in the Context of Military Interoperability
Jacquelyn Crebolder; Tania Randall; Aren Hunter; Curtis Coates; Gerard Torenvliet; DRDC Atlantic TR 2012-255; R & D pour la défense Canada – Atlantique; août 2013.
Introduction : Vu l’adoption rapide et la popularité des sites de réseautage social, nombre
d’organisations remplacent les méthodes de communication habituelles par des plates-formes de
réseautage social d’entreprise. Recherche et développement pour la défense Canada (RDDC) a
étudié l’utilité de ce genre de technologies pour les Forces canadiennes (FC); plus précisément,
comment les outils de réseautage social peuvent appuyer le repérage d’experts et l’échange
d’information dans un groupe, particulièrement ceux dont les membres ne travaillent pas
ensemble en personne. Le rapport traite de la troisième et dernière année du programme de
recherche, mais il comprend un résumé des deux premières années2.
Une analyse des besoins effectuée la première année a révélé que les officiers de développement
de l’instruction (ODI) seraient une collectivité se prêtant bien à une analyse plus poussée de
l’utilisation et des besoins entourant une plate-forme de réseautage social. Les ODI se trouvent
aux quatre coins du pays; ils coordonnent l’instruction et l’éducation des FC et conseillent à ce
sujet. Nous avons donné aux ODI l’accès à une plate-forme de réseautage social d’entreprise
nommée SABA People Cloud, puis nous avons analysé comment ils l’ont utilisé. Nous avons
aussi comparé cette utilisation à celle d’un site Web de réseautage social grand public,
c’est-à-dire Facebook.
Résultats : Nous avons colligé les données à l’aide d’entrevues, de sondages, d’expériences en
ligne et d’observations directes de l’activité sur SABA et Facebook. Les données recueillies,
quoique limitées en nombre, ont tout de même indiqué clairement l’importance d’un déploiement
transparent de la plate-forme, d’une grande convivialité (ce qui réduit ainsi les besoins en
instruction) et d’une adoption rapide découlant d’avantages clairement perçus par l’utilisateur.
Facebook respecte tous ces critères; par conséquent, l’activité sur ce site a graduellement
augmenté jusqu’à donner une communauté virtuelle dynamique et active où les gens pouvaient se
rencontrer, dialoguer et partager. SABA, par contre, a éprouvé des difficultés pour plusieurs
raisons (souvent d’ordre technique), et après une courte période d’activité, ce site a
essentiellement été ignoré.
Importance : Cette étude démontre que le réseautage social virtuel peut servir d’appui utile au
sein des FC, particulièrement pour les membres géographiquement éloignés, mais aussi pour ceux
qui travaillent ensemble. Voici les grandes conclusions qui se dégagent de cette étude :
2 Vous trouverez le rapport complet des première et deuxième années respectivement dans Torenvliet,
Euerby, Scott et Histon, 2010, [DRDC Atlantic CR 2010-308] et Torenvliet et Leal, 2011, [DRDC Atlantic
CR 2011-155].
vi DRDC Atlantic TR 2012-255
la technologie adoptée doit être facile à apprendre et à utiliser, et elle doit s’intégrer de
façon transparente aux pratiques de travail actuelles;
plus que le stockage et le partage de documents, le réseautage social est surtout axé sur la
rencontre et l’interaction. Par conséquent, toute technologie de réseautage social doit
favoriser la création de communautés virtuelles et la participation à celles-ci. Parmi ces
caractéristiques, mentionnons un profil personnel auquel on devrait pouvoir joindre une
photo personnelle, un espace de conversation de lecture facile et où la navigation est
simple, une large diffusion des messages et commentaires à l’ensemble de la
communauté, et, la dernière mais non la moindre, un environnement accueillant, actif et
décontracté;
les cadres supérieurs doivent, par leur participation, démontrer qu’ils appuient ces
technologies;
il est vital d’obtenir l’appui et l’engagement ferme des responsables de la TI; and
la stratégie de déploiement doit impérativement comprendre une interaction continuelle
avec les utilisateurs afin de souligner les avantages de la plate-forme et en encourager
l’adoption.
Intégrer ce type d’outils aux groupes militaires les plus susceptibles d’en profiter peut
révolutionner leurs pratiques et renforcer la cohésion des membres, non seulement au sein des
Forces, mais aussi dans d’autres organisations.
Perspectives : L’étude a porté sur une communauté dont le rythme de travail est assez régulier. Il
serait bon, dans les études suivantes, d’évaluer le cas échéant la faisabilité de ces technologies
dans un environnement opérationnel fébrile; car d’autres variables risquent d’empêcher
l’utilisation de ces outils, ou encore, pourraient s’y dégager des applications insoupçonnées.
DRDC Atlantic TR 2012-255 vii
Table of contents
Abstract …….. ................................................................................................................................. i
Résumé …..... ................................................................................................................................... i
Executive summary ........................................................................................................................ iii
Sommaire ..... ................................................................................................................................... v
Table of contents ........................................................................................................................... vii
List of figures ................................................................................................................................. ix
List of tables .................................................................................................................................... x
Acknowledgements ........................................................................................................................ xi
1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 1
1.1 Background.................................................................................................................... 1
1.2 Research Overview and Objectives ............................................................................... 1
2 Research Program ..................................................................................................................... 5
2.1 Year 1 (December 2009 – March 2010) ........................................................................ 5
2.1.1 Requirements Analysis.................................................................................... 5
2.1.2 Technology Watch .......................................................................................... 6
2.2 Year 2 (April 2010 – March 2011) ................................................................................ 7
2.2.1 In-depth Requirement Analysis ....................................................................... 7
2.2.2 Interdepartmental workshop ............................................................................ 8
2.3 Year 3 (April 2011 – March 2012) .............................................................................. 10
2.3.1 Selection and tailoring of a social networking platform ............................... 10
2.3.2 Installation and Deployment ......................................................................... 11
2.3.3 Pre-SABA People Cloud Deployment Survey .............................................. 12
2.3.3.1 Pre-SABA People Cloud Survey Results ................................... 12
2.3.4 An alternative to an enterprise-level social networking site ......................... 13
2.3.5 Facebook and SABA People Cloud deployment experience ........................ 13
2.3.5.1 SABA People Cloud ................................................................... 13
2.3.5.2 Facebook TDO Group ................................................................ 14
2.3.5.3 Summary of comparison of deployment strategies .................... 15
2.3.6 Data collection .............................................................................................. 15
2.3.6.1 Post-SABA People Cloud Deployment Survey .......................... 16
2.3.7 Symposium .................................................................................................... 23
2.3.7.1 Structured Interview ................................................................... 23
2.3.7.2 Experiment ................................................................................. 25
2.3.8 Social networking platform user data analysis .............................................. 28
2.3.8.1 Data analysis – visualization using HanDles .............................. 29
2.3.8.2 Data analysis – Observation ....................................................... 32
2.3.8.3 Results ........................................................................................ 33
viii DRDC Atlantic TR 2012-255
3 Discussion ............................................................................................................................... 39
4 References ..... ......................................................................................................................... 41
Annex A .. Technology Steward Introduction Letter ..................................................................... 43
Annex B ... Community Introduction Email ................................................................................... 45
Annex C ... Post-SABA Survey ...................................................................................................... 47
Annex D .. TDO Symposium Interview......................................................................................... 59
Annex E ... SABA Platform “How-To” ......................................................................................... 69
Annex F ... Facebook data extraction and preparation ................................................................... 77
List of symbols/abbreviations/acronyms/initialisms ..................................................................... 84
DRDC Atlantic TR 2012-255 ix
List of figures
Figure 1: Visualization of the subsets of the TDO community referred to throughout Table 6. ... 23
Figure 2: A screen shot of HanDles in response to the query ‘George Clooney’.......................... 30
Figure 3: HanDles column titles. ................................................................................................... 31
Figure 4: Visual of 5 months of activity on the SABA site for the top generated handles.
Note initial and final activity rates. ............................................................................. 34
Figure 5: Visual of 4 years of activity on the Facebook TDO Group page for the top
generated handles. Note the increasing activity in July 2011 as the experience with
SABA began. ............................................................................................................... 34
Figure 6: Number of 'likes' over a 2 year period of activity on the Facebook TDO Group
page. ............................................................................................................................ 35
Figure 7: Basic post output excerpt. .............................................................................................. 78
Figure 8: Microsoft Office Excel macro........................................................................................ 80
Figure 9: Organization of Facebook data. ..................................................................................... 81
Figure 10: Separate HanDLes files. ............................................................................................... 81
Figure 11: Separate HanDles documents. ...................................................................................... 82
Figure 12: HanDles comments linked together. ............................................................................ 83
x DRDC Atlantic TR 2012-255
List of tables
Table 1: Pre-SABA survey results – overall average score of familiarity with other TDOs......... 13
Table 2: Deployment strategy. ...................................................................................................... 15
Table 3: Summary of post-SABA survey results. ......................................................................... 17
Table 4: Summary of responses to open-ended post-SABA survey questions.............................. 20
Table 5: Post-SABA network analysis – overall average score of familiarity with other TDOs. . 21
Table 6: Comparison between pre- and post-SABA network analysis – familiarity with other
TDOs ........................................................................................................................... 22
Table 7: Description of headings. .................................................................................................. 78
DRDC Atlantic TR 2012-255 xi
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to acknowledge the assistance of the Training Development Officer
community from within the Canadian Forces. Many thanks to all those who participated in this
research project.
xii DRDC Atlantic TR 2012-255
This page intentionally left blank.
DRDC Atlantic TR 2012-255 1
1 Introduction
1.1 Background
In the first few years of the 21st century a new class of internet-enabled software applications has
gained prominence. These applications are built on familiar models from email and informational
websites, so they are accessible and have been adopted quickly. Even though they seemed
familiar, there was an important difference from what had come before. These new applications
allow large networks of people (even the entire user population of the internet) to contribute to
and participate in conversations about the information that is posted. Blogs, for example, have
become a major force in news dissemination and commentary, not just because they allow experts
(or, would-be experts) to publish their thoughts, but because they allow anyone to express
agreement with, or improve, or detract from the original, by means of adjoining comments.
At the time of writing, the internet has changed dramatically from what it was just a few years
ago. News websites, while still built on a backbone of news stories, now solicit and publish user
comments, so that the conversations about stories is a source of important additional meaning.
Fully co-creatable websites called Wikis have emerged and entered the mainstream, and the
volunteer-powered Wikipedia (an on-line encyclopedia) is the web’s premier reference source.
Email, the application that powered the emergence of the internet into the mainstream, is at risk
of being eclipsed in importance and usage by social networking sites like Facebook, Twitter, and
LinkedIn. This change in the internet is not just a change in the applications available, but a
fundamental change in their nature and how they can be used. These new applications harness the
power of network effects (O'Reilly, 2005) to make the information and functions they provide
more valuable as more people use them (McAfee, 2009). Moreover, most of these new websites
do not typically have a static imposed structure, but rather use an aggregation of individual-level
input (called a Folksonomy) to allow categories, importance, and expertise to emerge
dynamically. More than ever before, the changes in the internet allow groups of people that are
networked together to act as a collective, easily accessing and working from thoughts developed
by others (Bingham & Conner, 2010).
This changed internet is often called Web 2.0, and the social network applications are often called
social media. While both of these terms are accurate, they are easily misinterpreted. Web 2.0
conveys the sense that the revolution has been all about the public internet, and social media
conveys the sense that somehow this is about socializing, and not real work. However, large
organizations have applied Web 2.0 and social media with significant benefits. Instead of these
terms, McAfee (2009) favours the noun Enterprise 2.0 and the adjective collaborative. These
more formal terms do a better job of conveying that the revolution is also relevant to large,
modern organizations and that it is all about bringing people together for better work outcomes.
1.2 Research Overview and Objectives
Defence Research and Development Canada (DRDC) realized that these new collaborative tools
have strong potential to support the work and operations of the Canadian Forces (CF). There are
potential benefits in at least the following three areas:
2 DRDC Atlantic TR 2012-255
– Networking with familiar and unfamiliar contacts. Like any large and diverse
organization, the CF is composed of groups, where members are strongly connected to one
another (for example, soldiers within a specific unit). In the social networking literature,
these close connections are sometimes referred to as strong ties (Granovetter, 1973).
Individuals in specific groups can also be less closely linked to individuals in other
communities (for example, members who have trained with, served with on foreign
deployment, or worked with on a recent posting). These more distant links, or weak ties,
include connections less frequently in touch, or who may never connect at all, or who, in
fact, may be people an individual is not aware of directly. Acquaintances, friends of friends,
non-co-located colleagues, and other, more distant connections, are examples of
connections that fall into the category of weak ties. While it is relatively easy to stay in
touch with people within a current group, especially if in contact face to face, a virtual
social networking tool for the CF could help members maintain contact with those weaker
ties found in other groups and with members who are not co-located. Virtual social
networking can also be used to tap into network membership (making weak ties stronger)
and to make use of networks to collaborate with members they do not already know
(making weak ties where no ties previously existed). Since weak ties are a critical conduit
for new ideas to spread through an organization (Granovetter, 1973; Hansen, 1999) the CF
stands to benefit significantly if a tool can be found to help CF members form and use these
ties.
– Sharing information. McAfee (2009) reports that it is typical for employees in large
organizations to experience difficulty in finding information on their corporate intranet.
Feedback from CF members indicates that the CF is no different in this regard (Torenvliet
& Leal, 2011; Torenvliet, Euerby, Scott, & Histon, 2011). Virtual social networking can
help in sharing of information in three ways. First, as people’s networks of contacts grow,
the size of the group of people to which specific questions can be posed and shared
increases. On publicly available social networking sites, like Twitter and Facebook for
example, people can use their status updates and tweets to broach questions to their network
or to share insights. This idea shows promise to allow CF members to share information.
Second, as CF members view content on the intranet, it could be possible for them to tag it
with a self-defined category, rate it, or add a bookmark to the content. These tags, ratings,
and bookmarks are ways for records of meaning (from a consumer’s point of view, rather
than the author’s) to be developed, and they allow others to be informed about searches for
information. Third, it may be possible for members to post or store information on their
profile (in a file store, or on a blog) from where it can be shared with others.
– Locating sources of expertise. CF members have increasingly diverse sets of expertise
commensurate with the increasing diversity of operations the CF has participated in; the
increasing diversity and complexity of technology employed; and, the increased
opportunities for participating in exchanges with ABCA3 countries. As a result, a typical
CF member’s expertise is far richer than recorded on a service record. Because the actual
dimensions of members’ expertise are not recorded, the way to find experts is typically
through word of mouth. Word of mouth strictly limits the breadth of dissemination.
Compounding this problem is the limited availability of experts since most often, experts in
a given area are already tasked to important projects. The result is that the best expert that
can be spared, rather than the best expert possible, is obtainable. Virtual social networking
3 America, Britain, Canada, and Australia.
DRDC Atlantic TR 2012-255 3
tools show promise to help with both of these problems. For example, by providing CF
members with a profile on an enterprise-level social networking platform, individuals could
record and market their expertise using their profile, thereby advancing the data on their
service record. Even for members who do not take the time to record their expertise, other
artefacts related to their profile (e.g., bookmarks, stored files, etc.) would be available
indicators of their interests and expertise, that would be revealed in expertise searches.
These benefits are all related to military interoperability and, if realized, they could increase the
CF’s capability in general, particularly in distributed team, joint and coalition force, networked
environments where CF members could benefit from the ability to develop and explore
professional connection networks with other CF members.
The objective of DRDC’s research programme was to provide an enterprise-level social
networking tool to be used for collaboration and communication in the military domain. The
research aimed to understand the human performance aspects of social networking technologies.
The work focused on determining appropriate individuals and groups who were already using
social media in their work, or to whom social media might be useful, and to gain an
understanding of the benefits that could be realized, and the challenges encountered using this
kind of technology. While the research dealt with a new class of technologies, its focus was not
on the technologies themselves, but on the user’s interaction with the tools provided.
The research programme consisted of three phases realized over three years. Following are
sections providing research objectives, methods, and findings for each year, although Year 3 is
addressed in more detail than Years 1 and 2. Separate, comprehensive reports for Years 1 and 2
can be found in Torenvliet, Euerby, Scott, & Histon, 2011; and Torenvliet & Leal, 2011,
respectively. A discussion of the collective findings closes the report.
4 DRDC Atlantic TR 2012-255
This page intentionally left blank.
DRDC Atlantic TR 2012-255 5
2 Research Program
2.1 Year 1 (December 2009 – March 2010)
2.1.1 Requirements Analysis
In the first year of the research programme a broad requirements analysis was conducted to gain
an understanding of the tasks and the collaborative work conducted by groups within the CF and
the potential for work to be supported by a virtual social networking platform. The research
involved interviewing 8 military communities to discuss their roles and tasks and the problems
that they might be facing in collaboration with other groups or team members who are not co-
located. The interviewed individuals belonged to the following communities: Regional Joint
Operations Center (RJOC); Land Forces Atlantic Area (LFAA), Web Development; Land Forces
Atlantic Area (LFAA), Operations; CF Naval Operations School (CFNOS), Training
Development; Her Majesty's Canadian Ship (HMCS) Trinity; Halifax & Region Military Families
Resource Center (HRMFRC); CF Psychological Operations (PsyOps).
In summary, the analysis revealed a broad requirement for social networking tools across the
groups interviewed, focusing primarily on a need to find and share expertise. Information sharing
was a secondary focus, but it was tightly linked to expertise sharing. On the other hand, finding
and making use of weak links, in other words, social networking as such, is not a current part of
formal CF practices. Other findings from the analysis included the observation that individuals
will only show interest in adopting a social networking system if it does not involve extra work,
and new recruits and those of the future expect these kinds of tools in the workplace.
Through the process of conducting the requirements analysis, three of the interviewed
communities were identified as showing the largest number of requirements for social
networking. They were: RJOC, CFNOS Training Development, and HMCS Trinity. Of these the
CFNOS Training Development Officers (TDO) were selected as the military group best suited for
the research and more in-depth analysis. Further research would also include providing the group
with a web-based social networking platform and observing network development and use of the
platform. The original plan was to work with the TDOs and then extend the work to the RJOC
and HMCS Trinity. However, time became limited as the project progressed, and the work was
restricted to analysing and observing one group, the TDOs.
There were a number of reasons why this group was chosen. First, the community is distributed
and members are often required to seek out individuals with specific expertise, meaning that a
virtual social networking platform might serve them well for connecting and collaborating, and
for making, finding, and maintaining contacts. Second, the group is large enough to support the
development and growth of a virtual social network. Small groups do not usually have the need to
reach out and build a social network. Third, TDOs do not typically work in an operational
environment that is frequently changing and high-paced. The tempo of their workday is relatively
steady and risk-free and is therefore conducive to observation and data collection.
Further to this, the TDOs have a vested interest in social media since these technologies can
provide means for supporting their tasks, such as delivering instruction and training, and
6 DRDC Atlantic TR 2012-255
conducting writing boards. The community had unsuccessfully attempted in the past to establish
virtual social networking through other means (e.g., GC Connect, a government of Canada
on-line community). The group was interested in learning about why previous attempts had
failed, and they were hopeful that the enterprise-level platform to be provided to them through the
DRDC research project would be successfully embraced and utilized by the community.
Approximately 150 Training Development Officers serve in the CF across Canada. Their role is
to promote, guide, and coordinate training and education in the CF. To that end, TDOs identify
needs and requirements as well as solutions to support and enhance job performance. One of their
primary tasks is developing courses and conducting working groups and writing boards for
qualification standards (QSWB) and training plans (TPWB), for which they frequently need to
seek out expertise and information from within and beyond the CF.
2.1.2 Technology Watch
Part of the first year’s work included a technology watch to monitor developments in social
networking technologies, and particularly developments that might point to new and beneficial
ways for collaborating within the CF. The technology watch built on earlier work that evaluated
social networking technologies as of 2009 (Pronovost & Lai, 2009), and, apart from gathering
knowledge about progressive technologies, the technology watch was used to inform the choice
of candidate enterprise-level social networking platforms that could be used as a test platform in
the next two years of the project.
This activity included use of a closed-access team social network developed in the freely
available tool, Ning. The Ning site was used by the research team, who were distributed at
various locations across Canada, and the site proved to be a useful way for the team to gain direct
experience in sharing and collaborating on-line using blogs and discussion forums. In addition to
the Ning site, the team gained exposure and experience with as many Enterprise 2.0 technologies
as possible. A key collaboration environment was the IBM4 collaboration toolkit. Lotus
Sametime, Quickr, and Connections, was hosted at DRDC Atlantic and available to a number of
DRDC Atlantic staff including members of the research team. The intention was to obtain
hands-on experience using the numerous social media features on this platform, to observe how
different components and features of the toolset were used, and to monitor the development of
individuals’ social networks in this virtual environment.
To expand a social network naturally, it must be free of boundaries or restrictions in connecting
with others. Social networking is not typically restricted to a small segment but, rather, is able to
reach out and grow naturally. It is by this process that the network builds its character of strong
and weak links. Thus, our intention was to make the IBM platform available to all DRDC offices
across the country, and, as importantly, to other individuals and groups, such as military, industry,
and academic collaborators. It is only by opening up access to the IBM site that the real
development of virtual social networks could be observed accurately and understood.
Unfortunately, security concerns from DRDC IT prevented this from happening and hands-on use
of the IBM platform was limited to a relatively small pool within the walls of DRDC Atlantic.
4 International Business Machines Corporation.
DRDC Atlantic TR 2012-255 7
Other commercially available platforms were also trialed or investigated, such as Mango,
Yammer, LinkedIn, Facebook, Igloo, Jive, Microsoft Sharepoint 2010 as well as the option to
design a platform from scratch. With respect to the latter option, while developing a grassroots,
useable social networking test platform for a CF test group might be a viable solution, upon
further investigation the research team decided that the time required to execute this endeavour
exceeded a reasonable timeframe within the project. As a result, we decided to continue to
evaluate the marketplace for commercially available tools that would be suitable for use as a test
platform. The evaluation and research on web-based collaborative tools conducted through
Year 1 highlighted several points about introducing new technology into the workplace.
First the technology must be easily integrated into an individual’s work flow;
Second, it must be easy to use and easy to adopt, not only from an individual’s
perspective but also from an organizational, information technology and security basis;
and
Thirdly, developing a deployment strategy that includes ongoing interaction with the test
community, and that highlights the benefits of the test platform and promotes adoption, is
essential.
The Technology Watch was initiated in Year 1 of the project and continued over Years 2 and 3.
For a full report on Year 1 see Torenvliet, Euerby, Scott, and Histon, 2011.
2.2 Year 2 (April 2010 – March 2011)
2.2.1 In-depth Requirement Analysis
Further to the findings from the technology watch, a particular technology can only be selected in
response to understanding the human requirements that need to be fulfilled and supported by that
technology. Consequently, following the general requirements activity and collaborative tool
evaluation of Year 1, a set of detailed requirements were developed for the TDO test community
in order to ensure they would be provided with appropriate work-supporting features on an
enterprise-level social networking platform. Data to define this activity were collected via an
on-line survey distributed to all TDOs. The objective of the questionnaire was to gather a picture
of the community and its members with respect to demographics and their use and familiarity
with social media tools. The researchers were also interested in gathering knowledge as to the
tasks that TDOs are required to perform and the specific individual and group need that might be
supported by a social networking platform. Of particular interest was how the TDOs structure
their work with respect to the three main research areas of interest: finding expertise, information
sharing, and building inter-personal networks.
The response rate to the questionnaire was approximately 50%. Responses showed that most of
the TDOs were officers with many years served in the CF, although typically less than five as a
TDO. Many, but not all, of the respondents indicated that they were familiar with social media
technologies in their personal lives, and with social networking websites, like Linkedin,
Facebook, and Twitter. Messaging (email) and viewing and posting text and photos to social
networking sites were the activities performed most often. The primary way for TDOs to
communicate at work was via email, and about 25% used a Blackberry.
8 DRDC Atlantic TR 2012-255
While TDOs have a number of specialized work processes, much of their work fits into categories
that are generic to all knowledge work. This suggests that social networking tools proven
successful in other work domains are likely to fit well with the TDO community.
Management and providing guidance is an especially important task, and seems to take up a lot of
this community’s time. Social networking tools would give workers more direct access to
information and individuals without needing to work through their managers. A social computing
tool could be made more useful to many TDOs if it included workflow support for conducting
Qualification Standard Writing Boards (QSWB) and Training Plan Writing Boards (TPWB).
A social networking platform could also support mentoring, sharing of lessons learned, and
sharing of experiences. In the CF where individuals are regularly posted from/to a position this
kind of support could be really beneficial in the transfer of responsibility, which is typically done
through sharing of documents, contact lists, and other information shared in one or a series of
meetings at the time of transfer. Once the transfer has occurred, there is little on-going support
from the person transferring out to the person transferring in. As far as we were aware, at the time
of writing, other than face-to-face contact, TDOs had no way to share their informal experiences
and lessons learned. This is an especially challenging problem for many TDOs who work in
relative isolation. Social computing tools provide ways to increase the documentation of the
context of work, providing a trail of information and context that other personnel can refer to.
Furthermore, social computing tools designed to encourage informal contributions of expertise
(blog posts, discussions, etc.) allow informal training materials to be developed as problems are
encountered, and not only when a transfer is imminent.
The survey responses reinforced that TDOs were a good choice as a test group. In short, the
composition of this community, the nature of their work, and the challenges they face, led the
research team to believe that the TDO community would gain quick and important benefits from
the use of social computing tools designed to support their work.
2.2.2 Interdepartmental workshop
Part of the research involved learning about what other groups had done, or were doing, as far as
supporting communities through the use and development of collaborative web-based social
networking environments. A number of examples existed within the Government of Canada
(GoC) itself and so it seemed a valuable pursuit to exploit this resource by bringing representative
together to share and discuss experiences.
The research team hosted an interdepartmental workshop in Ottawa, Ontario in November 2010,
where invited GoC groups met to share experiences such as problems, successes, and lessons
learned around the use and implementation of social networking toolsets and technologies for
large distributed communities. Attendees included:
Treasury Board of Canada – who provided detail on the Government of Canada
Wikipedia-like website, GCPedia, noting that the site has morphed into somewhat of a
social networking site filling a void for this kind of tool.
Library Archives Canada – provided a summary of pointers for implementing and using
social media in the workplace based on their current and past experiences.
DRDC Atlantic TR 2012-255 9
Communication, Foreign Affairs – discussed their work on developing government
websites through listening to the community of users so that the sites are improved to
meet the needs of the reader and answer their questions effectively.
Canadian Army – gave an overview of the Army Collaborative Information Management
System (ACIMS) with respect to the stage and status of development and plans for the
future. The ACIMS includes capabilities that break down into four main areas, file
sharing, collaboration (Microsoft Office Sharepoint Server (MOSS)), an information
gateway, and knowledge creation (e.g., wiki).
Centre for Security Science (CSS) – discussed their work with the Royal Canadian
Mounted Police (RCMP) in developing a Major Event Security Framework that
facilitates collaborative planning across a number of different agencies and organizations.
Human Resources Skills and Development (HRSD) Canada – talked about how the
department is reaching out using social media tools, and is gathering together ‘bits’ of
information all over the internet into one concise user-friendly web place. Several pros
and cons for using social networking sites like Facebook as a social media tool in
government were provided.
Individual Training and Modernization, Canadian Defence Academy (CDA) – talked in
general about the use of social media tools and provided pointers for how to support users
throughout implementation of social media in the workplace.
DRDC Toronto – discussed the development of a Web 2.0 hardware and software
architecture forming the testbed, Collaborative Knowledge Management and Platform.
The package was being developed using Open Source software and it contained a wide
selection of collaborative and social media tools.
Formal presentations were followed by round-table discussion in the afternoon segment of the
program. The findings from the workshop supported the DRDC research team’s own
understanding of strategies, issues, and challenges in the use and implementation of collaborative
tools like social networking in the workplace. The knowledge gained was of significant value to
the research program as it moved toward applying and observing the use of these kinds of
technologies in military groups within the Canadian Forces.
Some of the common observations were:
Clear and well-articulated organizational reasons and goals are necessary when applying
social media in the workplace;
Community guidelines and management are required;
Social media is eroding hierarchical structure, particularly for middle management;
Organizational silos and stovepipes are barriers to social media;
Satisfied employees where social media is accessible versus attrition where it is not; and
Reverse mentoring is apparent.
10 DRDC Atlantic TR 2012-255
2.3 Year 3 (April 2011 – March 2012)
2.3.1 Selection and tailoring of a social networking platform
Having identified detailed requirements the next step was selection of a social networking
platform. The plan was to develop a platform or take a commercially available platform and
modify it so that it fit with the specific requirements of the TDO group. The intention was to
conduct usability tests on the tailored test platform with a small group in order to validate the
design before full deployment to the TDO community. As stated earlier, it was decided early on
that the best approach would be to use a commercial platform rather than developing one from
scratch.
The survey of technologies over Years 1 and 2 helped inform the selection of a test platform and
provided an understanding of the ways in which some industries make use of social networking
tools. Based on the features of these platforms in relation to the TDO requirement and the
research objectives, and despite the outreach implementation issues during the test period within
DRDC, the research team selected the enterprise-level IBM social computing platform as the best
choice. The IBM Lotus toolset is a mature collaborative environment that provides a high quality
blend of productivity solutions that could support the TDOs’ workflow (e.g., document sharing)
with social networking features (e.g., member profiles, community sharing, the ability to search
for expertise).
The aim was to actually implement and deploy a technology so that the community could use it in
their day to day work. As such, it was not only essential that the platform meet the needs of the
test community and the research objective, but that it also was consistent with the restrictions and
requirements of security and information technology (IT) standards, as well as being generally
accepted by senior officials of the Canadian Defence Academy, which is the organization that
oversees the TDOs. Acquiring the various levels of approval took a considerable amount of time,
often following a pattern whereby agreement for using, for example, the IBM platform, was
obtained at the point of contact level but subsequently denied at a more senior management level.
Likely because the research team was not co-located with the CDA community, issues identified
by CDA were not always communicated, so it was difficult for the research team to understand
the delays and potentially address the problems. Such was the case with the IBM platform. After
initial verbal agreement with CDA on selection of the IBM toolset, final endorsement was slow in
coming and, coupled with setbacks in DRDC procurement (IBM called for revisions to legal
wording within the procurement documents) and at the DRDC information technology level, the
project schedule slipped. As it turned out the IBM suite of collaborative tools was eventually not
chosen by CDA senior management, and all in all, final selection of a platform took considerably
longer than originally estimated.
The process of platform selection in this situation where it was necessary that the user
organization be completely engaged was not helped by frequent replacements of the point of
contact within the organization. Indeed, over the entire course of the three year project, changes
in personnel and points of contact were an ongoing challenge. At one point DRDC rotated
through three CDA/TDO contact personnel in less than a month, in addition to a change in the
contractor’s lead human factors engineer to the project at about the same time. Postings are
routine in the CF but in this circumstance where numerous major and minor changes to the
DRDC Atlantic TR 2012-255 11
research plan were necessary, the changeover in contact personnel resulted in fragile continuity in
the history behind those changes and an unclear understanding of the objective and mandate of
the project by the participating community.
In July 2011, a decision was reached by CDA approving a SABA® product, SABA People Cloud,
as the platform to be provided to the TDO community for the purpose of this research.
SABA People Cloud, still in beta version, was demonstrated via webinar to the DRDC research
team and judged to be a suitable environment that would meet the needs of the research
objectives. Features of the platform included individual profiles, a personal configurable
homepage, file sharing, the ability to ‘follow’ other members, RSS feed for notification of
updates, the ability to create groups, and to flag and tag documents and bookmarks, video sharing
in a feature called ‘channels’ as well as the functionality of real-time communication, and a web
meeting feature for holding on-line meetings and desktop sharing. All in all, the SABA People
Cloud was an excellent candidate with a robust set of Web 2.0 tools.
SABA People Cloud was selected by CDA for a number of reasons. The primary motivation was
that SABA is the backbone of the Royal Canadian Air Force Integrated Information Learning
Environment (AFILE), a project launched in 2008 as a means to standardize the accessibility and
management of training programs. AFILE is eventually to be available to the CF as a whole.
SABA People Cloud is an additional module to AFILE and, as such, CDA and DND in general,
were interested in understanding the value of adding the social aspect to the existing AFILE
environment. Furthermore, the CDA technical team who would be responsible for implementing
SABA People Cloud were already familiar with the underlying technology. Branding and
configuration of the platform was performed by CDA, who also performed the duties of system
administrators.
An important consideration to the TDO community and to the research was whether the platform
would continue to be available to users when the project ended and the research team stepped
away. As such, the SABA People Cloud platform was more likely than any other to stand the test
of time. However, having the platform available also means that there needs to be someone
assigned to administrative duties and to technical support.
2.3.2 Installation and Deployment
Beyond the technology itself and the requirements of the user, social networking tools foster a
new and different set of work practices, which means that the process of implementation should
follow a strategy to help nurture adoption and change. The SABA People Cloud platform was
provided to CDA by SABA in August 2011 and access was initially limited to a select group of
TDOs who were assigned as technology stewards and chosen for their general interest and their
experience and motivation in using social media technologies. The concept of technology
stewards is well defined in Wegner (2009), the idea being that a small group populates and
participates in the online community and assists as required to create and maintain a healthy and
active environment. When necessary the stewards also provide technical support on how to use
the site as well as acting as gardeners, maintaining the content of the site. A total of 15 TDOs
were identified by CDA and approached to be technology stewards for the planned SABA People
Cloud site. Technology stewards were provided with an information package (Annex A) and
began using the site in late September 2011.
12 DRDC Atlantic TR 2012-255
SABA People Cloud was deployed to the entire TDO community in October 2011. Members
were invited to join by an email (Annex B) that included a hyperlink to an initial survey to be
completed before access was provided to the social networking platform (via a link at the end of
the survey). It was important that participants complete the survey prior to using the platform so
that baseline data could be gathered before using SABA for comparison to data to be collected
after using SABA.
2.3.3 Pre-SABA People Cloud Deployment Survey
The primary objective of the survey, which was piloted by the technology stewards, was to obtain
an idea of each TDO’s individual social network of professionals and to determine whether there
was any impact on the size of the network through using the SABA virtual social network toolset.
This information was important to understand for the selection of an appropriate social
networking platform for the community. An online survey program, FluidSurveys5, was used to
deliver the questionnaire. It included a list of all 146 TDOs and asked individuals to rank their
familiarity with each of the TDO’s based on skills, expertise, and experience. On a scale of 0 to 3,
a score of 0 indicated that the individual did not know a particular TDO at all, while a score of 3
implied that they knew the TDO very well. This indicator was used to gather a picture of each
individual’s contact network and the strength of the ties within that network. To reduce the
chance of response biasing due to order, the list of names of the TDOs was randomly ordered
across respondents.
With the late start date, five months were available for the community to use the site, become
familiar with it, and possibly connect or reconnect with TDOs with whom they were not familiar
or had lost touch. This is a short time span for developing social networks and consequently the
data represents a very limited collection window.
2.3.3.1 Pre-SABA People Cloud Survey Results
Forty-nine TDOs completed the entire survey. To ensure survey data were collected, individuals
were instructed to complete a questionnaire before gaining access to the SABA People Cloud site.
However, it turned out that not all members joined via the email survey hyperlink. As
membership increased on the SABA site some members used a feature on the site to send a
message and invite others to join, thereby bypassing the email hyperlink to the survey. This fact
emerged by comparing the number of people who accessed the survey against the number of
members on SABA. Failing to complete the survey was a concern for data collection since the
invitation email was constructed specifically to maximize survey participation by introducing the
survey before access to the SABA platform was gained. However, the fact that SABA members
were inviting their colleagues to join points favourably to the social linking capability of social
networks and an individual desire for others to join the virtual community.
5 Survey Monkey was the original choice for delivery of the questionnaire, but was problematic because the
Canadian Department of National Defence (DND) requires that data be stored in Canada and Survey
Monkey uses US data storage locations.
DRDC Atlantic TR 2012-255 13
Network analysis data
Familiarity based on skills, expertise, and experience that each TDO self-reported with all other
TDOs was calculated by averaging across the mean of each individual`s scores (0-3). The average
overall score was 1.10 out of a maximum score of 3. The results from this analysis, shown in
Table 1, will be used as baseline data for comparison with the same ranking task after the SABA
platform has been installed and used.
Table 1: Pre-SABA survey results – overall average score of familiarity with other TDOs.
Number of completed surveys 49
Average score (out of 3) 1.10
Standard Deviation 0.43
These figures represent a baseline against which a comparison will be made after the SABA
People Cloud platform has been used. The question addresses whether or not a virtual social
networking platform aids in building contact networks and familiarity with contacts.
2.3.4 An alternative to an enterprise-level social networking site
At about the same time that the SABA People Cloud site was being approved and finalized the
research team discovered that the TDOs had created their own virtual social networking place on
a publicly and freely available site, Facebook (www.facebook.com). The Facebook TDO Group
had been created several years earlier by a few TDOs who obviously recognized the need for this
kind of collaborative environment within their work community. The site was relatively dormant
with a handful of participants but the number of members increased dramatically just before and
during deployment of the SABA People Cloud platform. Whether timing of the increase in
membership was coincidental or whether it was spurred by community interest and discussion
around virtual social networking related to this research program is not known, or important for
that matter, but the unanticipated discovery of the site provided the research team with an
opportunity to compare two different social networking platforms that became available to the
same community at about the same time – one being an enterprise-level site, the other a publicly
available social networking site. The circumstance also allowed for a comparison of deployment
approaches – one official, structured, and promoted internally by the organization, the other
unstructured and entirely voluntary.
2.3.5 Facebook and SABA People Cloud deployment experience
2.3.5.1 SABA People Cloud
The SABA People Cloud platform met with many technical difficulties when it was first
deployed and users experienced continuing problems and frustrations throughout the research
period. Most of the issues were related to a few key problems: users initially having difficulty
logging on; the software was not fully compatible with the workplace Defence intranet (Defence
Wide Area Network (DWAN)) used by the majority of TDOs; and the version of SABA People
Cloud deployed to the community was not as rich, comprising fewer features and less capability
14 DRDC Atlantic TR 2012-255
than the version previously demonstrated by SABA to the research team (e.g., chat, and RSS,
were not features available in the deployed version).
A solution for the more general login problem was provided (through exploration by one of the
TDOs) but it required individuals to download a software application and reconfigure their
system- a step that many were, understandably, unwilling to take because of time investment.
The DWAN on which the platform was run, was not a friendly environment for the SABA
platform and it often resulted in sluggish response to commands, and features that should have
worked easily sometimes failed or were slow. Automatic logout after a very short idle time was
also a constant frustration. When SABA People Cloud was identified as the preferred platform,
the CDA technical authorities were under the impression that the TDOs would access SABA
through GPNET (a DND approved general purpose internet connection) which most did not have
access to at their desks, or that users would work at home using their personal internet service.
The researchers on the other hand, understood that the tool would be used at work and
consequently that it would be available to the TDOs at their work station, served by the DWAN.
The research team was aware, however, that uploading files to the SABA site was not possible
using the DWAN and that individuals would have to use another network, such as finding a
GPNET served computer, to perform that particular task. There was no apparent resolution to this
problem and it was deemed an acceptable limitation.
It is difficult to pinpoint where the misunderstanding regarding the network and compatibility
with the SABA toolset stemmed. At least in part, it may have been indirectly a result of the fact
that parties were geographically distributed. Not only was dialogue carried on between CDA in
Ontario (Kingston) and DRDC Atlantic in Nova Scotia (Dartmouth), but information had to be
shared and discussed with other members of the research team who were dispersed across the
country, including DRDC Toronto (Toronto, ON), the University of Waterloo (Waterloo, ON),
and the human factors engineering contracting firm, CMC Esterline|Electronics (Ottawa, ON),
working on behalf of DRDC. The authors also note that there may have been an issue with use of
the word ‘internet’. For some, the term referred to any source of networking capability other than
the DWAN, which an intranet. For others, the DWAN was the internet – that is, just another
means to access the internet. Consequently, when talking about the internet in the context of
SABA implementation there may have been a bit of confusion.
2.3.5.2 Facebook TDO Group
The Facebook TDO Group was originally created by a member of the TDO community and was
quickly joined by a handful of other members who obviously recognized the usefulness and
benefit of using social media, like a virtual social networking platform, within their community.
As such there was no official invitation to join and word of mouth was the primary way of
hearing about the site. Because of the mechanism of information dissemination underlying
Facebook, individuals might also have learnt of the TDO Group if they were using Facebook for
other reasons. A request to, and approval by, an existing member was required to join, and full
membership was obtained immediately. Usually a new member was introduced and welcomed
after joining. As far as we are aware there were no technical difficulties experienced and the
process of joining was relatively quick and easy.
DRDC Atlantic TR 2012-255 15
2.3.5.3 Summary of comparison of deployment strategies
Comparisons between the method of deployment for SABA People Cloud platform and Facebook
are shown in Table 2.
Table 2: Deployment strategy.
SABA People Cloud Facebook TDO Group
Officially sanctioned TDO group created by themselves for
themselves
Officially announced via CDA email Aware of Group through word of mouth or
by using Facebook for other reasons
Instructed to complete a questionnaire that
was required in order to join (a few people
bypassed this step because they were invited
by others already on the site)
No preliminary required
Encouraged to join by CDA email Through postings on the site, existing
members were encouraged to increase
membership
Technical issues – initial and on-going Technical issues – none
Network access – not smooth functionality
on DWAN; not accessible on mobile
smartphone
Network access – accessible anywhere with
internet including DWAN, and mobile
smartphone
2.3.6 Data collection
Further to the initial on-line survey, data were collected in several ways. The objective of the
surveys was two-fold. First, surveys were designed to gain an understanding of individual social
networks and to compare those networks for number and strength of connections before and after
the social networking sites became available. Secondly, the data would capture how the different
platforms were used and whether there were differences in activity level and use of features on
the two sites. Methods used for collecting data were as follows:
Pre-SABA deployment (as described above) and Post-SABA deployment surveys. Unlike
the initial survey, the Post-SABA survey included questions related to views on SABA
and Facebook;
Structured interview with community members;
A distributed experiment where TDO members utilized SABA;
Observation – researchers were members of both sites for the purpose of observing the
level of activity and content; and
16 DRDC Atlantic TR 2012-255
Content analysis – data from both the SABA and Facebook sites were analyzed for
activity level and content using the HanDles visualization tool, developed by DRDC
Toronto and Ohio State University (Kwantes, 2011).
Detailed methodology and the results from each method are described in the following sections,
followed by a summary of the findings.
2.3.6.1 Post-SABA People Cloud Deployment Survey
In late September 2011 a second survey was delivered via email to all TDOs (about 150).
Forty-six, or about one third of the TDO community completed the survey. As in the first survey,
each TDO was asked to rate their level of familiarity with all other active TDOs on a scale of 0 to
3, 0 being ‘do not know this person at all’ and 3 being ‘know this person’s experience and
expertise very well’.
This survey also included questions that focused on use and experience with each of the two
platforms. For example, which platform, if any, individuals were using; how often they used the
platform; whether or not they migrated from one site to the other; what features were useful and
what they were used for; and which ones, if any, were unnecessary; whether or not any features
or functions that the TDOs might find useful were missing in the toolset; and whether or not there
was a sense that the TDO community was better off through using virtual social networking, and
particularly whether individuals considered the community to have stronger ties since having
access to a virtual social site. The response type varied and included a rating scale (e.g., ‘strongly
agree’ to ‘strongly disagree’), selection from a list of response options, and open ended answers
and comments. The survey can be found in Annex C (note that individuals' names are not
included).
2.3.6.1.1 Results – Post-SABA People Cloud deployment survey
At the end of the research period 98 people had joined the SABA site with 150 in the Facebook
Group. More detailed observations on the joining process are discussed fully in 2.3.8.3.1.
Table 3 contains a summary of the final survey results. Note that absolute values are quite small
because the survey branched into 4 possible versions based on the answer to the initial question of
“Please indicate which of the following tools you have used in a work context” where
respondents could select:
1. Both Facebook and SABA
2. Only Facebook
3. Only SABA
4. Neither Facebook nor SABA for work purposes.
Within options 1, 2, and 3 some of the questions were similar in which case responses were
combined for analysis purposes.
Keeping in mind that the data are based on individual subjective response and the number of
respondents is relatively small, the following observations were made.
DRDC Atlantic TR 2012-255 17
Quantitative and Qualitative data
Table 3 shows a summary of post-SABA survey results.
Table 3: Summary of post-SABA survey results.
Platform used - 39% used neither SABA or Facebook
- 22% used SABA and Facebook
- 26% used only Facebook
- 13% used only SABA
- 61% joined at least one of the sites
The data shows that many respondents did not use Facebook or SABA, and
the data also showed that slightly more than half of those do not use social
networking sites at home either. The primary reason given for not joining a
social networking site for work was that respondents were too busy and did
not have the time for social networking on-line.
Facebook was used by the largest number of people (23) and SABA-only the
smallest, but most people who joined the Facebook TDO Group were already
using Facebook for other reasons. For those using both Facebook and SABA,
most of them joined Facebook first, or were using that site already, and then
joined SABA.
Invitation ....to SABA
- 6% joined when a colleague told them about it
- 75% joined through DRDC email
- 0% saw reference to SABA on Facebook
- 19% were introduced by ‘other’
....to Facebook
- 42% joined when a colleague told them about the Facebook TDO Group
- 39% were using Facebook already and saw postings on Facebook about
the TDO Group
- 0% saw reference to Facebook on the SABA site
- 19% were introduced by ‘other’
For the TDO Facebook Group, most people joined when another TDO told
them about the Group, while those using SABA said they were informed by
the DRDC email. Most of those who did not use SABA had heard about the
site but chose not to join.
90% of respondents were on Facebook already and some of those joined the
TDO Group after seeing a Group posting on Facebook. Although a small
number (stemming from the overall small number of survey respondents),
this observation points to the networking and communicating strengths of
this social network platform.
No one was introduced by seeing reference to SABA on Facebook. That is
not to say that they there were no such references on Facebook, but only that
no one reported that there were swayed to join SABA through that means.
18 DRDC Atlantic TR 2012-255
Both Facebook and SABA were introduced to 19% of users in 'other' ways.
There is no way of knowing what specific means were experienced but
examples might have been introductions from people other than colleagues,
hearsay, and reference made in documents, emails, etc.
The data suggest that Facebook was generally joined because there was a
personal desire to become part of the on-line community, brought on by the
fact that other people were talking about the site, either vocally or virtually.
SABA, on the other hand, was joined because an official invitation arrived
(email) that included encouragement for TDOs to join the site to support the
research project.
That being said, we know through observation that, even though it is not
showing up in this data set, some SABA members had bypassed the
hyperlink to the survey contained in the initial email because they had been
invited to join by TDOs who were already members. Some of those
invitations were conducted using the invite feature on the site while others
might have been through verbal exchange.
Migration
between sites
One person said that they gave up on the SABA platform and moved to
Facebook, and their reasoning was that people were more connected on
Facebook, and Facebook had a better interface and less technical issues than
SABA, and was generally more user-friendly.
Accessibility According to the responses, 91% of the TDOs who completed the survey had
internet access at work.
As mentioned before, the wording in this question might have been
confusing because of the possibility that the definition of the word ‘internet’
was different for different people. For some, ‘internet’ may have meant any
network access other than the DWAN, while for others it may have referred
to any means of connecting to the world wide web.
24% of respondents accessed at least one of the social networking sites at
work using a mobile device. However, none of the SABA-only users used a
mobile device for this purpose so it is likely that it was only Facebook that
was accessed this way.
Community - 70% using both SABA and Facebook felt that the community was closer
- 75% using Facebook only
- 0% using SABA only
Although not all Facebook users experienced a greater sense of community,
most thought that the TDO community was more closely connected now that
they were members of a common Group on Facebook. None of the
SABA-only users rated the question that way.
Login
Frequency
As an approximate estimate of how much time users were spending on the
social networking sites the survey asked how often individuals logged on.
DRDC Atlantic TR 2012-255 19
SABA users checked the site less than once a week, whereas Facebook users
were split between checking less than once a week, and checking once a day
or more.
Bearing in mind that this survey was administered at the end of the research
period, after both sites had been experienced, responses may have been
different had they been gathered at earlier times in the research window. That
being said, it is the long-term value that we are interested in, not the effect of
new and novel tools.
Usage According to responses to the survey, Facebook was used to request,
respond, and very often to obtain information through passive reception
(60%). On SABA, 57% of users responded to a posted request by another
member, but only one person stated that they had obtained information
passively, that is, without actively seeking it.
One of the greatest strengths of social networking platforms like Facebook
and SABA is their ability to distribute material to the entire community
making it possible for information to be found without asking. At times such
information might be important.
Preferred
Features
To support their work people liked the discussion thread feature of the sites
most, followed by:
Facebook – media (photo) sharing, news feed, user profiles, private
messaging, and groups (note that chat and notifications were not the
highest score).
SABA – notifications and groups (all other features were scored 0).
Some people increased the privacy level on their Facebook accounts (~50%)
as a result of joining the TDO Facebook Group, and about 75% changed the
way they use Facebook (although the specifics or how that might be were not
captured).
The majority of users (~76%) are comfortable saying they are on Facebook,
believe TDOs are more connected since Facebook, and would be sorry if the
site went down. Overall, Facebook seems to be quite well integrated into
most people’s work day.
The majority of users on SABA (60%) will not be disappointed if the site
goes down and they do not believe that SABA is part of their daily routine,
or that it makes their activities more efficient. Users (61%) feel very
comfortable about telling CF colleagues they are on SABA.
About 75% of all users feel that having a social networking site could make
getting to know someone met on-line easier. Interestingly, all the SABA-only
users agree with this statement (even though they reported that they generally
did not like SABA).
Social Networking – what is of value:
Most people did not think that finding new people was of greatest
importance, but for SABA-only users 40% thought it was.
20 DRDC Atlantic TR 2012-255
Of importance was reconnecting with people with whom they had
lost contact.
Seeing what is on status updates was important.
And the continuous dialogue on the sites was the most important
feature for everyone.
Being concerned about the stigma of being on a social networking site was
not a factor for most.
Table 4 shows a summary of the responses to open-ended questions in the survey. Questions are
in italics, responses in regular text.
Table 4: Summary of responses to open-ended post-SABA survey questions.
Are there features or characteristics missing from Facebook that could help you do your work?
- Document sharing; VTC via Facebook (GoToMeeting features); more professional
look; more interactive rating based system (like Stack Exchange); save discussion
posts; organize/reference posts; TDO directory.
Are there features missing from SABA that could help you do your work?
- Chat; as well as more general ease of use, accessibility, participation.
Comments, issues or concerns that affect your use of Facebook at work?
- Facebook privacy concerns
- Facebook stigma while at work
- Only use with people already friends with. Would not pose questions to larger TDO
group that included people not known
- Security issues (will not use at work or for work-related things)
- Can easily use on other devices (Black Berry, Smartphone, Playbook)
- Know some colleagues better, can reach out with questions
- Useful material posted relevant to CF
- Q&A repository, reputation reviews
- Accessible inside and out of DND – means can tap into larger community
- French-English language barrier, mostly because acronyms and sloppy spelling/writing
- Easy to use
- Good place to meet and chat
- Is a time waster
Issues or concerns that affect your use of SABA at work?
- Accessibility
- Not user friendly
- Too slow, cumbersome, was frustrating
- Lack of activity
- Annoying emails
- No user presence
What general comments do you have regarding the use of social networking in the workplace?
- Lack of time for social networking, yet the usefulness is understood
- Frustrated by too many tools, constant starting over
- Need for integrated tool
- Repeat conversations that are discussed in email threads are replicated on line
- Not everyone is involved
DRDC Atlantic TR 2012-255 21
- Chain of Command needed
- Needs guidance (more structure needed)
- Is the intent for informal learning or work?
- Needs to be a reason to participate
- Security
- Email, phone, or face to face is good enough
- No time for using this kind of tool
- Professional information/work should happen inside work during work hours on secure
network
If you have any general comments about social networking in the workplace or about
Facebook or SABA in particular, please add them here.
- Notifications – Facebook to personal email, SABA to work email; no user presence on
SABA
- Already comfortable with Facebook so was easy to use
- Can keep track of contacts
- Social networking tool in general is powerful professional development tool
- Privacy – open forum can be hostile and non-welcoming, not free to express opinion
- There has to be a reason for using a tool
- Suggestions – chat that works across DND firewall
Network analysis data
The last section of the post-SABA survey was identical to the initial survey in which
intra-member familiarity was evaluated. Again, the intent was to gather information on how well
the respondents knew other TDOs based on skills, expertise, and experience, on a scale from 0 to
3. The analysis took the average of each individual`s mean score. An overview of the results from
this section of the survey is shown in Table 5.
Table 5: Post-SABA network analysis – overall average score of familiarity with other TDOs.
Number of completed surveys 44
Average score (out of 3) 1.11
Standard Deviation 0.43
2.3.6.1.2 Pre- Post-SABA network analysis data comparison
The results from the pre- and post-SABA survey question on the knowledge of other TDOs were
compared. Results are detailed in Table 6. Since there are numerous subsets of the TDO
community referred to in Table 6, Figure 1 is provided to help visualize the relationship between
the represented sets of people. The alphabetic references in Table 6 are associated with Figure 1
where a visualization of the data is provided.
22 DRDC Atlantic TR 2012-255
Table 6: Comparison between pre- and post-SABA network
analysis – familiarity with other TDOs
Response rate/
Use of social
networking sites
19 respondents (a) answered both the initial and final surveys; 14 of
these reported that they used social networking sites (Facebook and/or
SABA) for work; 5 did not use social networking sites for work.
Average rating Looking at all the responses from the beginning survey, the average
rating across all 147 assessed TDOs (b) for the 49 (complete) survey
responders is 1.10 on a scale of 0-3. Looking at all the responses from
the final survey, the average rating across all 147 assessed TDOs (b)
for the 44 (complete) responses (d) is 1.11 on the same scale.
Change over time i) The familiarity level of the 14 TDOs using social networking, changed
on average by +0.13 (4.4%); for those not using social networks, the
change was slightly less (+0.11, or 3.6%).
Change over time ii) Focusing only on the TDOs who were members of the TDO Facebook
group for at least 3 months (i.e., for whom changes due to social
networking might be expected), the group being assessed reduces from
147 to 55 (e) (since you cannot attribute changes to social networking
usage if the person being rated was not using social networking). Nine
(f) of the 19 respondents (a) that answered both surveys also fell into
this category. Their assessment of the 55 TDOs (e) also using the
group for at least three months, showed a network change of +0.21
(+7.1%). For those not using any social networking tool, their
assessment of those same 55 people amounted to only +0.11 (+3.8%).
Subjective view of
familiarity over time
– users of social
networking sites
The 9 respondents (f) who completed both surveys and used social
networking for at least 3 months assessed only 5 of 55 people (e) as
being better known by at least +0.5 (on a scale of 0-3) after using the
social networking sites.
Subjective view of
familiarity over time
– non-users of social
networking sites
In contrast, the 5 responders not using social networking assessed 8 of
the same 55 people as being better known by at least +0.5 (on the scale
of 0-3). None of the 8 people deemed as better known overlap with the
5 people identified as better known by those using social networking.
One point to note in the data is the increase in familiarity with other TDOs in individuals who
were using neither of the social networking sites.
Figure 1 shows a visualization of the subsets of the TDO community referred to in Table 6.
DRDC Atlantic TR 2012-255 23
Figure 1: Visualization of the subsets of the TDO community referred to throughout Table 6.
2.3.7 Symposium
In mid-November 2011 the research team was invited to conduct a syndicate session during the
Canadian Defence Academy (CDA) TDO symposium held in early December in Kingston,
Ontario. This event provided a welcome venue for collecting additional data from the TDOs and
over the next three weeks the team prepared a structured interview format (2.3.7.1) and an on-line
experiment (2.3.7.2) designed to investigate the use of social networking tools. The purpose of
the interview was to progress the team’s understanding of how TDOs, as professionals, use
virtual social networks and Web 2.0 tools, and to gather their opinions about using such tools in
their working environment. We wanted to understand from the TDOs’ perspective what their
opinions were about using the Facebook and SABA People Cloud platforms that had been
provided to them, as well as their views on using social networking at work in general. The team
was also asked for their viewpoint on the concept of Technology Stewards. The purpose of the
experiment was to use the SABA platform as a means of assessing the usefulness of social
networking for finding expertise and sharing information across distributed teams.
Ten TDOs, selected by CDA, participated in the syndicate session (2 Lt(N); 2 LCdr; 5 Capt; 1
Maj). They were randomly divided into two groups of five, with one group (Group A)
participating in the experiment first followed by the interview session, and the other group
(Group B) participating in the interview first and then the experiment. The syndicate ran for one
and a half days. The interview and experiment were conducted on Day 1 and a round table
discussion was held in the morning of Day 2. The interview and the experiment were reviewed
and approved for data collection by the DRDC Human Research Ethics Committee (HREC).
2.3.7.1 Structured Interview
The interview questions and response notes are listed in Annex D. The questions were used to
lead discussions but the interview sessions were by no means directed completely by the
questions. For the most part, once a discussion began, the interviewer let it run its natural course,
( b ) 147 TDOs were rated in Survey 1 and
Survey 2
( c ) 49 TDOs completed Survey 1
( d ) 44 TDOs completed
Survey 2
4
9
6
1
( e ) 55 of the 147 TDOs rated in
Survey 1 and Survey 2 used SN for > = 3
months
( a ) 19 TDOs answered both surveys
9
( f ) 9 TDOs completed both surveys AND used
SN for > = 3 months
24 DRDC Atlantic TR 2012-255
stepping in to ask pertinent questions for more detail when necessary, or to request the opinion of
less vocal members. Along with the primary interviewer, two members of the research team took
notes during the sessions. After the interviews, the notes were collated and summarized. The
following section provides a synopsis of the findings from the interview sessions.
2.3.7.1.1 Data analysis
Overall the syndicate participants were savvy social network users; only two had no experience
with any social networking tools and seven considered themselves experienced on Facebook. The
experienced users averaged 4 years on Facebook and generally interacted with Facebook daily as
part of their personal lives.
With respect to using social networking as a professional tool they preferred Facebook as it had a
more familiar and easier to use interface. The few who did use SABA site were dissatisfied with
the interface, the slow speed of the network connection to the site, and the issue of being logged
off when inactive on the site.
As a group they felt that a number of Web 2.0 features, not available in social networking sites,
would be of benefit to professional work. These features are the ability to manage documents,
organize information into folders by subject, and thread conversations.
Generally TDOs were familiar with social networking and with other Web 2.0 tools and they
think of themselves as early adopters and embrace the idea of social media at work. Through
discussion the following features were identified as required by TDOs in order to use social
networking to support work: email prompts, threaded discussions, subject search, persistent data,
folder structure, and the ability to open and keep documents open. To enhance professional
relationships the following features are required: professional chat (with presence awareness),
user resume (experience, degrees, past employment), and audio and video feeds.
Overall the TDOs felt that the largest issue with the usage of social media at work was the stigma
of being on a ‘social’ site during the work day. This point was discussed at length and the
individuals being interviewed felt that it was of significant concern.
The participants felt that shepherding new users and site maintenance would require a large
effort, on top of an individual’s already high workload, and would likely be seen by managers as
an additional task and one that might take away from a TDO’s primary responsibilities. Thus, it
was generally agreed that it would be beneficial if technology stewards were self-identifying and
that, with the amount or work required to be an effective technology steward, the job should be
classed as a primary responsibility. The TDOs see themselves as change agents and as suitable
candidates for technology stewards. To be effective they felt that the role of technology steward
would need to be empowered to act as moderators for discussions (threads) and blogs. They also
felt that direct access to technical support would be a necessity.
Overall the TDO’s felt that social networking will add to the sense of community and increase the
sharing of professional knowledge and also that this kind of tool could be used to capture
knowledge from the experienced TDOs who are about to retire. On this thought they felt that
recently retired TDOs should be given access to the professional site used by the TDO
community, even if it is hosted on the DWAN, so that they can remain connected to the
DRDC Atlantic TR 2012-255 25
community and be able to provide their viewpoint and advice if needed. Whatever form a social
networking site takes it should be the single repository for data; the site must be associated with a
reactive Community of Practice. Site structure is required including a set time when online
forums will meet. The site would require a dedicated worker / champion / technology steward and
support from the TDO / CDA leadership is a must in order to overcome the stigma of working on
a social networking site during the work day.
2.3.7.2 Experiment
An experiment using the SABA platform was created to evaluate how social networking enables
information sharing and finding experts across individuals that are distributed and differ in the
knowledge they hold. The intent was to better understand the benefits and issues related to on-line
collaboration and information sharing. The experiment required team members to use the SABA
People Cloud platform to connect with experts, gather information from experts, and disseminate
facts to team members, with the objective of solving a collective problem. The nature of virtual
social networking is that communication between members is made visible to all other members.
It was hypothesized that actions carried out and information gathered on-line by one member
could potentially be of use to other members in the group, thus speeding up the process of
gathering information relevant to the problem-solving task.
2.3.7.2.1 Experimental Task
In order to emulate a real-world social network, the SABA platform was populated with volunteer
confederates with whom the syndicate participants had to find, connect, and interact with, to
gather information. To facilitate the need for information sharing and finding expertise a problem
solving task was developed for the syndicate participants. Syndicate participants were told of an
impending terrorist attack and their task was to search for information that would help uncover
certain elements of the attack – namely, who is attacking; what country is being attacked; what
the target is; and when the attack is supposed to take place. Each of the confederates held certain
facts that needed to be retrieved in order to figure out these details of the terrorist attack6.
Confederates were strategically assigned facts based on information listed in their SABA profiles
that were available to the participants. Syndicate participants were given the following
information to determine who they should contact to find certain facts:
– A person might have date information about the terrorist attack if their year of birth is listed
in their profile.
– A person might have target information about the terrorist attack if they listed where they
went to school in their profile.
– A person might have information about ‘the Tiger’ (a hired gun, basically) if they have
where they are from listed in their profile.
– A person might have information about the countries under attack if they have where they
live listed in their profile.
– Finally, all confederates could have group information.
6 The scenario was a modified version of that found in DRDC Human Research Ethics Committee (HREC)
Protocol L-704, Understanding Competitive and Co-operative Problem Solving Behaviour in Meta-Team
Situations, Filardo, 2009.
26 DRDC Atlantic TR 2012-255
The assignment of facts to confederates was not mutually exclusive, therefore a confederate could
have information about both when and where the attack could take place. The number of facts
held by each confederate varied. Confederates were instructed to provide facts only when asked a
question by a syndicate participant. The confederates were asked to answer truthfully (e.g.,
'I know that the Tiger will not work with locals' or 'I don’t have any information about the Tiger').
If they were asked a question that they did not have the information for, but they knew who might
have the information, they were instructed to direct the participant to that person (confederate).
The experimental task was designed to last for 3 hours with Group A participating in the first
1.5 hours and Group B participating in the last 1.5 hours. Group A was told to document their
findings in such a way that they could easily hand-off the information to Group B. The intent was
that Group B would pick up where Group A left off and use the connections and facts that they
developed to continue on.
2.3.7.2.2 Participants
Participants. There were ten TDO syndicate participants in total; five participants in Group A and
five participants in Group B. With the exception of one participant that had no social networking
knowledge, all of the other participants had used a social networking platform before (mostly
Facebook).
Confederates. There were 12 confederates. Confederates were volunteers from DRDC Toronto
and DRDC Atlantic. Knowledge of SABA was similar across individuals.
It should be noted that not all profiles listed in the SABA platform were confederate profiles.
SABA was released to the TDO community for a trial phase, and at that time a number of TDO’s
joined SABA to try it out.
2.3.7.2.3 Procedure
Prior to the syndicate, participants and confederates were asked to login to the SABA social
platform to populate their profile with information and to get a “feel” for how SABA works. A
SABA “how-to” PowerPoint slide deck was provided to the confederates via email and to the
syndicate participants as a presentation to facilitate the use of SABA. Syndicate participants were
asked to read and sign a DRDC HREC informed consent form prior to beginning the task.
The syndicate session took place at the Royal Military College (RMC) in Kingston, Ontario. A
laptop computer was provided to each of the syndicate participants for use during the experiment.
All of the laptop computers were networked to the DWAN. Syndicate participants were required
to login to the DWAN and access the SABA social platform. The syndicate participants sat
around one large table. They also had access to a computer with a projector and a flipchart.
Once the syndicate participants were presented with the task and provided with the instructions
they were left alone to develop their own strategies and collaborations. They were allowed to talk
amongst themselves and to take notes in order to keep track of information found and experts
identified in the on-line confederate community. Two researchers were in the room during the
session to answer technical questions and address problems as they arose during the session. The
DRDC Atlantic TR 2012-255 27
researchers were also documenting behaviours, communications and difficulties that surfaced
during the experiment.
2.3.7.2.4 Results and Discussion
The results from the SABA platform experiment are qualitative in nature and are based on
observations noted by the research team during the experimental session.
Most of the participants had not familiarized themselves with SABA as instructed prior to the
experiment.
Technical Issues and Usability Problems
The SABA login and set-up time took longer than expected (approx. 30 min) which left less time
for the actual fact finding task. Most of the syndicate participants had not had time to join and
become familiar with SABA prior to the experiment day. There were also some technical issues
during the session, mainly with computers requiring a restart as a result of security scans. In both
groups much of the conversation during the session was related to usability issues in the SABA
platform – How do I…? ; Where did you see...?; Do you know where...? While participants were
given a “how-to” tutorial immediately before the experiment, it appeared as though the platform
was not intuitive or easy to use. In particular, information seemed to be easily lost and not easily
shared amongst other members of the group. For instance, one syndicate participant noted that
while he was receiving notifications about confederate replies via email notification on his
BlackBerry he was unable to find where they had been posted in SABA. Similarly, participants in
Group B were telling each other when they or someone else received a message, suggesting that
SABA was not efficient at notifying people when they receive messages/posts. A number of
participants made mention of the fact that it was difficult to find things and information seemed to
get “lost” once they had posted it. It was also noted by syndicate participants that there was a lot
of irrelevant information included in the SABA platform, such as "who was following who",
making it difficult to find valuable factual information about the terrorist attack.
Group A: Collaboration Concerns and Strategies
Collaboration and networking were key to successfully determine the – who, what, when, where,
why and how of the terrorist attack. Participants were told that confederates were likely people
they did not know so that “adding all contacts” was the best way to connect with potential
confederates and view comment threads. In light of this, syndicate participants were notably timid
to reach out and connect with individuals they did not know. A significant amount of the session
was spent trying to decide which of the individuals on SABA were most likely to be confederates.
Being unfamiliar with the individuals seemed to be of concern, as was soliciting information in a
'cold-call' manner. Comments about 'bugging' people that may not be confederates were made
multiple times. Eventually they narrowed down the list of potential confederates by looking at
who had recently posted on the SABA wall or for people that were recently added to SABA.
Syndicate participants also expressed concern about the number of emails they (and those they
were connecting with) would have to weed through as a result of the SABA default to send email
updates when contacts were added. This may have created some reluctance to connect with
everyone.
28 DRDC Atlantic TR 2012-255
Information began to flow between confederates and participants once the group built a sufficient
network. Syndicate participants tried to set up a dedicated Group in SABA to coordinate and
share information, but unfortunately a technical issue in SABA would not allow them to create a
group. As a result, participants verbally announced to everyone in the room when they contacted
someone, and when they received information about the attack. Once facts were being received
with some regularity, and therefore becoming difficult to keep track of, a member of the
syndicate session began logging them on a piece of paper. The method of reaching out for
information differed where some chose to reach out directly to potential confederates while others
decided to broadcast their questions as part of their status, therefore leaving the question open for
any confederate to answer.
Transition from Group A to Group B
A member of Group A provided a verbal handoff to all members of Group B. An explanation of
the task, the status of the task, and the paper copy of the collected facts were provided to Group B
during this time. At this time, the PowerPoint SABA “how-to” and instructions discussed above
were also presented to Group B.
Group B: Collaboration Concerns and Strategies
Group B’s first strategy was to compile all facts into the “Idea” area in the SABA platform so that
all members had access to the facts that had already been collected. Even with the facts compiled
in one central area the syndicate participants used a flipchart to strategize and determine how/if
the information was coming together in way that would allow them to solve the problem. Overall,
Group B seemed to be more tactical in their approach and with the type of questions they were
asking. They spent more time reading into the information, asking elaborate questions and
creating theories about the scenario.
Group B seemed to pick-up the task and develop strategies quite quickly. Having said that, it can
be speculated that Group B was quicker in picking up the task because the network was already
developed, therefore allowing them to dive into the task without having to consider who was a
confederate. It should also be noted that Group B did not expand their network of confederates;
instead they relied on the network developed by Group A.
2.3.7.2.5 Conclusion
Overall, syndicate participants in both groups enjoyed the task and found it engaging. While there
were some technical and usability issues related to the use of SABA we found the task to be
useful in determining how information is shared and how the social networking platform can be a
useful tool in finding experts who are not co-located. Participants had obvious concerns about
contacting people they did not know and bothering people that were not involved in the task. In
this case we were forcing participants to develop a network which may have made the “cold-call”
feeling more prominent than a network that evolves over time.
2.3.8 Social networking platform user data analysis
The two virtual social networking sites were analyzed for activity level and content by data
extraction and analysis (2.3.8.1) as well as by direct observation (2.3.8.2). For the former, a data
DRDC Atlantic TR 2012-255 29
visualization tool was used and for the latter, research team members observed activity on the two
sites through membership on each site.
The objective of analyzing activity level and content was to understand several aspects of
communication and collaboration in a distributed community using an on-line platform, such as,
whether the site was busy with conversation, and if so was the activity on-going or intermittent;
what kinds of topics were being discussed and which topics stimulated conversation; whether
there were a handful of contributors or whether many were participating; how many were being
proactive and posting initial dialogue, and how many were simply responding to existing posts
but not initiating posts themselves, as well as how many were silent7. In other words, how was the
platform being used and for what purpose.
2.3.8.1 Data analysis – visualization using HanDles
A data analysis tool, HanDles (Kwantes, 2011), was used to visualize the data collected from the
two social networking sites. HanDles is designed to provide a visual representation of semantic
relationships between documents and their content. HanDles assesses and displays the content of
the documents, or web-site activity in this case, as points on a scatterplot. The more semantically
similar, the closer the points. The analysis puts documents sharing a query term in close
proximity to each other but it also identifies concepts, called ‘handles’, that help the analyst
understand what topics are being discussed and which ones are common between documents.
‘HanDles’ can show which topics are being discussed frequently in the documents and, as such,
provides the analyst with an in-depth picture of content. As an example of a visual representation,
below in Figure 2 is the output for the query “George Clooney” presented to 17000 articles from
the Internet Movie Database (Kwantes, 2011).
7 It is not possible to tell whether those who were silent were observing but not actively contributing or
absent altogether.
30 DRDC Atlantic TR 2012-255
Figure 2: A screen shot of HanDles in response to the query ‘George Clooney’.
Documents are typically built on a number of different topics and the relationship between one
document and another will change depending on the topic of interest. The advantage of HanDles
over other data visualization tools is that the HanDles software allows documents and ‘handles’ to
be interactive. Dragging a ‘handle’ (using the mouse cursor) from one location on the screen to
another will move other documents and other ‘handles’ that are related to that one particular
‘handle’, while those that are not related remain still. This feature allows the user to manipulate
the semantic organization of the documents that have been returned by a query and consequently
to gain a more in-depth understanding of the topic or concept of interest. It is also possible to find
all related documents containing a specific ‘handle’ (by clicking on that particular ‘handle’).
Figure 3 contains a list of the column titles recognized by HanDles (from the HanDles help
documentation).
DRDC Atlantic TR 2012-255 31
Figure 3: HanDles column titles.
Of relevance to the current research were fields that provided information about the kind of
material being posted, the number of people posting and commenting, and the different ways
people were engaged in use of the site. Although specific names of contributors were not of direct
interest, valuable information was obtained from knowing how many unique initiators of posts
(that is, the number of people who started post threads), and how many unique contributors there
were (that is, the number of people who contributed to an existing post by commenting on it).
These data were important for understanding how the site was being used, for what kinds of
information and tasks, and for providing indices of the number of people actively using the site
and the different ways they were contributing. Of interest to the research was the way networks
operate and particularly how activity initiated by one member is disseminated throughout the
network. That action of dissemination and passive reception of information is an important one
because it has the effect of exposing information to all network members and opening up the lines
of communication and collaboration that otherwise may not have existed had the information
been shared with a limited group selected by the user.
One of the features on the Facebook platform is the ability to favourably tag a post or comment
using a ‘Like’ tab (displayed under each individual post or comment entry)8. The number of times
an entry was ‘liked’ was used as another measure of the number of contributors.
The date of the post was also required to understand the timeline and to determine whether the
level of activity changed across time. Changes across time could give an indication of consistency
of use of the platform. For example, heavy initial use that tapered off considerably across time
might be indicative of a novelty factor.
8 This feature was not available on the SABA People Cloud platform.
Title: A title for the document.
Fulltext: Full text is the body of text contained in the document.
Handles: Handles or keywords must be entered as a semi-colon separated string.
Authors: Authors are formatted in a semi-colon separated string. For example: "Laurel, S;
Hardy, O"
Locations: Similar to handles and authors, locations are also given as a semi-colon separated
string: "London; England"
Dates: The format for dates is more complex, a "String" with YYYYMMDD is currently used,
however this will be extended to YYYYMMDDHHMMSS in the near future and you are
welcome to use this extended format now.
Longitude: These coordinates need to be in decimal format using negative for West.
Latitude: These coordinates need to be in decimal format using negative for South.
32 DRDC Atlantic TR 2012-255
2.3.8.1.1 Data extraction for analysis
HanDles was originally designed for document analysis and so it was modified for this research
to analyze text in the form of users’ posts and comments from the SABA and Facebook TDO
Group social networking sites. A post is defined here as an initial parent entry whereas comments
are responses to that entry. In order to conduct the analysis, the data from the two sites were
extracted and prepared in a HanDles acceptable format.
Two different methods were used to extract the data from the two sites. The work was conducted
by CMC Esterline|Electronics under contract to DRDC Atlantic.
Data extraction SABA People Cloud
With SABA People Cloud the data collection window ran from October 2011 to February 2012.
A first attempt was made to import the data from a *.dmp file provided by SABA. However the
file was very large, containing much more data than required for the analysis, such as system
tables, and the contractor estimated that the task of extracting relevant data from this file would
take a significant amount of time. Since the SABA data contained a relatively small number of
posts and comments it was deemed more efficient to manually copy the data into an Excel
spreadsheet, formatted like the Facebook data spreadsheet. This meant the same script could be
used to convert both the Facebook and the SABA spreadsheet into the Handles-specific *.xml
format.
Data extraction Facebook TDO Group
The Facebook data collection window ran from November 2007 until February 2012. Data
extraction for Facebook was a multi-stage process, that included i) detailing a method of
extraction; ii) extracting the data using Facebook API; and iii) developing a Microsoft Excel
macro. The data were then further formatted for use in the HanDles program. The full process is
described in more detail in Annex F.
2.3.8.2 Data analysis – Observation
The project team members joined the Facebook and Saba People sites and were able to gather a
general picture of the amount and kind of activity going on by passively observing the sites and
noting the frequency of postings and comments and the topics that were being discussed or
shared. Observation on both sites began when SABA People Cloud was provided to the TDO
community at large and continued until five months later. A longer observation period of ten
months was originally planned but the delay in identifying an appropriate platform for the TDOs
reduced the amount of time available since the project was scheduled to end in March 2012. The
findings from the observation data are reported in 2.3.8.3.1.
DRDC Atlantic TR 2012-255 33
2.3.8.3 Results
2.3.8.3.1 Quantitative and Qualitative results
Looking at the visualization data first, the analysis is at a higher, less detailed level, than the
HanDles software merits because the sample size and number of resulting data points are small.
Capturing a more comprehensive data set might have been possible if there had been more time
for data collection but even if that were the case, the limited number of participants would have
constrained the output. Despite the small data set the HanDles software proved very valuable for
the analysis and in providing a means to visualize the data.
The data showed that 98 people joined the SABA site and that, apart from the technology
stewards who had access earlier, the majority joined within the first month of the platform being
available. At the start of the data collection period, when the SABA People Cloud platform was
first deployed, there were less than 50 members in the TDO Facebook Group, and by the end of
the five month data collection window there were 150 members.
In total, 16 posts and 39 comments, for a total of 55 entries, were made on the SABA People
Cloud platform within a 5 month period (October 2011 to February 2012); and 273 posts with
892 comments, totalling 1165 entries were made on the Facebook TDO Group page between
January 2008 and February 2012 (January 2008 being the approximate timeframe in which the
Facebook Group was created). Limiting data collection on Facebook to the 5 month window in
which SABA was monitored, the number of posts was 166 with 568 comments, totalling
734 entries. Although the Facebook time window for overall use is much larger than SABA`s it is
clear from the data that the majority of entries on Facebook were made just before, or after the
introduction of the SABA People Cloud platform. In fact, one post on Facebook in April 2011
asks members for feedback as to what an appropriate virtual social networking tool might be for
the TDO community and 26 comments make up an on-going discussion on the subject. As
previously stated, the number of members tripled over the 5 month data collection period. The
increase in membership and activity on Facebook just before and after the SABA platform arrived
signified to the research team that the platform was new to the majority of the community and
that making comparisons to the similarly new SABA People Cloud platform was fair and the
results valid.
Figure 4 shows a timeline for the summary of SABA activity, and Figure 5 the same for
Facebook. The different coloured lines are not relevant for this phase of the analysis but each one
represents a different handle generated automatically by the HanDles program from the content of
the posts and comments.
34 DRDC Atlantic TR 2012-255
Figure 4: Visual of 5 months of activity on the SABA site for the top generated handles.
Note initial and final activity rates.
Figure 5: Visual of 4 years of activity on the Facebook TDO Group page for the top generated
handles. Note the increasing activity in July 2011 as the experience with SABA began.
Engagement and level of activity was also measured by the number of `likes` entered on the
Facebook site. As shown in Figure 6, activity, as measured by `like`, increased around September
2011, just as the SABA platform was about to be deployed to the community. Unfortunately the
`like` feature was not available on the SABA site so it is not possible to use this measure for
comparison purposes.
DRDC Atlantic TR 2012-255 35
Figure 6: Number of 'likes' over a 2 year period of activity on the Facebook TDO Group page.
Looking at membership activity and the content of the contributions to the sites in more detail, on
the SABA site, of the 98 members, 22% (22) contributed. Important to note is, of those 22, seven
were members of the DRDC research team organizing and participating in an on-line experiment
conducted in collaboration with CDA in November 2011 (2.3.7.2). Of the 56 total entries on the
site, 59% (33) were on work-related topics, 12 (21%) posts and comments were associated with
the on-line experiment, and the remainder (23%) were devoted to problem-solving and queries on
the functionality and usability of the platform.
For the purpose of comparison, this part of the Facebook analysis is limited to data collected
between October 2011 and February 2012. Of the 150 Facebook members, 74 (50%) actively
contributed to the TDO Group by posting or commenting, and 41 (55%) of those were initiators
of posts. The level of activity for those who contributed varied on an individual basis and so,
there were 13 primary contributors (8.6% of the total membership population), defined as having
made 10 or more entries over the course of the data collection period. Two of those (1.3%) were
heavy contributors with 103 and 175 entries respectively during the 5 month window. These data
fit with the generally observed pattern of behaviour in on-line communities, such as Wikipedia
and YouTube, where member activity tends to fall into one of three categories. Often referred to
as the 90-9-1 rule (McConnell & Huba, 2006) where 90% of members observe but do not
contribute, 9% contribute on occasion, and 1% contribute heavily and thus account for most of
the site activity. Looking at SABA, the overall amount of activity is small resulting in very low
power. Nevertheless, the results showed that no member showed a particularly heavy contribution
rate but 1person (1%) contributed more than the rest with 5 entries, 22 (16%) contributed on
occasion, leaving about 83% as non-active. As pointed out previously, it is not possible to
determine whether the non-active members were passive observers or simply not logged on. The
results also do not include the `likes` on Facebook, of which there were 402. Those people might
be counted in the non-active group when in fact they were active.
It is not clear if the 90-9-1 rule applies to all kinds of on-line communities in the same way. For
example, is there a difference in sites like Wikipedia, that are more about sharing and viewing
36 DRDC Atlantic TR 2012-255
and less about conversation and dialogue, compared to social networking sites, like Facebook and
SABA, that are designed to promote collaboration and communication amongst members in
many ways. Furthermore, what prompts people to contribute and actively participate is a question
worth investigating.
On the Facebook site, during the period October to February, only two topics appeared that were
not work-related, and those were the welcoming of new members, and reporting on the number of
current members as membership increased. On occasion comments included encouragement to
try to reach the next goal with respect to number of members. The majority of posts and
comments revolved around the general categories of: questions, opinions, discussion on specific
topics, reporting on events, reporting on current work assignments, and requests for information.
A couple of posts used Facebook as a platform to discuss SABA. One questioned the
functionality of SABA with regards to whether it could be accessed on a smartphone, and one
individual commented that they were coming back to Facebook because SABA was problematic.
Some individuals expressed their sentiment on having the community available on Facebook, all
of which were positive posts, such as how good it was to be connected and how information
broadcast via Facebook would otherwise not have been known. Of interest too were numerous
tweet-like9 `status updates` commenting in real-time about presentations and activities during the
TDO Annual Conference in December 2011.
To get a broader feel for this social networking site, we examined activity and content on the
whole Facebook data set from 2008 to February 2012. The general topic categories were the same
as in the five month window data. Over the whole data set there were 273 posts with 892
comments and the average number of comments on a post was five. Significant deviations from
that average were present for a few posts and at least two of those were discussing social media
tools, the role of virtual social networking for TDOs, and the best choice of platform that would
fulfil the community`s needs. Both of those discussions happened in April 2011 as the decision
for a research platform for the TDOs was being made, indicating that the group was using the
social networking tools that they already had at their disposal and suggesting that this kind of tool
was a strong requirement for the community. As an indication of the kinds of topics that
prompted group discussion, the posts with the largest number of comments were:
– Asking for ideas on the most cost effective way to conduct review boards with distributed
participants and which collaborative toolsets might fit the bill (31 comments; April 2011).
– Asking for feedback on virtual social networking for the CF Training Development
Community and what might be the best platform to use (26 comments; April 2011).
– Discussion on course terminology (25 comments; October 2011).
– Asking for experience with a particular performance measurement tool used in the army
(24 comments; September 2011).
– Seeking out who is the TDO at a particular location (18 comments; January 2012).
According to the findings from the survey data, interviews, and content analysis, the most
attractive benefits to using the Facebook TDO Group were reconnecting with people with whom
a member had lost contact, and the continuous dialogue (in the form of posts and comments) that
9 A `tweet` is a text-based limited character message sent and received on-line. The term originates from
the on-line microblogging service, Twitter.
DRDC Atlantic TR 2012-255 37
was on-going within the community. The TDOs found this to be a valuable asset because
dialogue on a platform like Facebook is visible and available to all, which means everyone can be
part of the conversation and everyone is aware of the information being posted and shared.
Conversations on Facebook often focused on bettering the working environment and the need for
social media and collaborative tools in the TDOs` workplace, but much of the dialogue
acknowledged that tools themselves are not the solution. Refreshingly, TDOs as a group appear to
recognize the importance of the human component in technology and their hope is to supplement
the user and support their roles with appropriate technologies. A considerable amount of
discussion followed this line of thinking as members offered suggestions and options. Many of
the other topics addressed, not surprisingly, revolved around terms associated with learning.
Despite the positive comments about the Facebook environment, many commented that it was not
a 100% solution. Some of the TDOs said that they would prefer a more professional look, and
some had concerns with privacy and security while using the site for work. Having the ability to
organize and save discussion posts was a feature on the TDO wish list, as well as having real-time
chat that works across the workplace firewall. Having the site integrated with a TDO directory,
and the capability for virtual teleconferencing were other desired attributes. All in all, an
integrated toolset was an important concern, so that all essentials are in one place working
together. Another desirable feature was the inclusion of an interactive rating-based system where
posts and comments from members could be rated for relevance and importance by peers. This
process would bring the most beneficial information to the top so that other searchers acquire
access to the best references quickly, and are assured by the confidence ratings of their cohort.
Based on users’ comments on the SABA site, it was clear from the start that the SABA interface
was difficult to use with features that are useful in a social tool missing (e.g., real-time chat).
Learning how to use the technology took time, something few professionals have room for in
their busy days, as well as a significant amount of effort. Achieving tasks using the platform was
often difficult and cumbersome, or proved unsatisfactory. In addition, the computer network and
connection were slow and sometimes erratic, and the software exhibited irritating characteristics
such as automated logout after a short time, requiring the user to re-login several times a day.
Some of this was related to the DWAN that most TDOs were using at work, but many of the
problems were also experienced on other network connections, such as DRDC`s Defence
Research Establishment Network (DRENet). Much of the content activity on the SABA site early
on was related to questions and comments about technical issues and discussion about possible
workarounds. A series of comments and posts revolved around the `chat` feature which was
expected to be functional but was not. Something like the IBM`s Sametime chat application was a
feature the TDOs clearly wanted in their workplace environment.
In comparison, the Facebook Group site was immediately and easily available with no
deployment or technical problems. Individuals, if not Facebook users already, simply had to
register and join the TDO Group through a request to the site administrator that was responded to
promptly. The interface was relatively easy to use, having been progressively developed and
improved on since the platform was launched several years earlier, and the features and functions
were varied, integrated, and working, regardless of the network (DWAN, DRENet, or other)
connected to.
The majority of users felt that TDOs are more connected as a community since becoming
members of a social networking site, although none of the SABA-only users felt this way.
38 DRDC Atlantic TR 2012-255
Facebook TDO Group members said that they would be sorry if the site went down (this was not
true for most of the SABA users), and that they were comfortable saying they were on Facebook
at work, as were most SABA users. This latter point was gathered in the survey data but it is in
contrast to commentary at the interview sessions, where TDOs clearly acknowledged a stigma at
work to being on any social networking site, in spite of the activity being work-related.
DRDC Atlantic TR 2012-255 39
3 Discussion
Over the course of a three year research program the usefulness, feasibility and impact of
providing virtual social networking to CF groups was examined using quantitative and qualitative
measures. Much of the work was based on collecting data from military groups and particularly
from a test group, the TDOs, who were selected for more in-depth analysis based on the dispersed
nature, the size of the community, and the work that they do. An enterprise-level social
networking platform, SABA People Cloud, was provided to the group and a number of aspects
pertaining to use and implementation were compared to a free and publicly available platform,
Facebook, that the test community had set up themselves and were using independently.
Variables of interest to the research included, level of activity and content on the sites as well as
the effect the social networking tool may have had on the ability of the users to build contact
networks and become more familiar with their counterparts, especially those who were not
co-located. Also of interest was understanding, from the users` perspective, viewpoints about
using the platforms provided to them, as well as their opinion on using social networking at work
in general. We were also interested in the functionality and usability of both these platforms –
what tasks and activities did this collaborative tool lend itself to, and whether or not it met the
needs of the community. Finally, we wanted to explore content to learn about the kinds of
material discussed and shared on the sites.
First and foremost it is important to point out that the TDO community, which was our primary
focus, had initiated use of virtual social networking, through Facebook, on their own, independent
of the DRDC research project. This fact in itself clearly points to a need within the community
and a desire amongst its members to improve the collaborative space in their work environment.
To fulfil the purpose the community chose the freely available Facebook which, based on our
data, proved to be a rich environment, where the community conversed about work-related topics
and where questions, answers, and information were shared freely and easily. Of interest to note
is that Facebook was one of the first recommendations put forward by DRDC as a platform for
the test group to use that would meet the needs of the community as well as the research program.
As reported, the SABA People Cloud platform met with many difficulties including technical
problems and usability issues. In the end the platform died a natural death, no doubt because the
problems and effort were more than they were worth. That is not to say that the SABA
technology is sub-standard when used in other environments. Within a receptive computer
network domain the platform is undoubtedly a sophisticated high-level collaborative toolset. In
this particular instance though, the firewalled network and the lack of functionality in the beta
version delivered (as compared to the version initially demonstrated) brought on-going challenges
both in implementation and overall use and adoption.
Introducing new technology into an existing workflow is a challenge at the best of times,
requiring a comprehensive requirements analysis and a well thought out, streamlined
implementation and integration process around a technology that is easy to use right from the
start. Today`s social media consumers have no time for problem-solving (neither literally or
figuratively) the technology that is supposed to be providing them benefit. For adoption to be
successful new technologies must provide the user with clear and immediate benefit over existing
practices. In this comparison study it appears that the Facebook TDO Group did just that, by
40 DRDC Atlantic TR 2012-255
supporting the community through an open environment that fostered conversation and a sense of
community along with providing the necessary tools and platform for sharing.
A key criterion for the successful launch of new technology into an established community is
support of upper-level management, not only in verbal backing but in actual use of the
technology. We do not believe that the introduction of the enterprise social networking tool
suffered from lack of management support. That being said, explicit direction or promotion from
senior staff after the site was up and running may have been minimal. Whether this ultimately
affected the experience of using SABA is unlikely as the Facebook site became successful
without any particular push from management or senior staff. The Facebook Group was initiated
by TDOs and subsequently populated by TDOs and the data in fact show that senior officers were
members of the Facebook TDO Group10
, using the platform just like other members. No
hierarchical structure appeared to exist on the site, nor were management identified as site
promoters. The advocates of the Facebook TDO Group were, and continue to be, the TDO
members themselves.
The research also served to highlight security and information technology hurdles and the levels
of approval required when attempting to implement new software into a secure defence domain.
These were major stumbling blocks not only within the military, but as much in the DRDC
research establishment where the research team tried to test out and learn about social networking
platforms in order to increase their own knowledge of the technology. Our goal of learning about
different social networking applications and what they were capable of, as well as gathering an
understanding of how social networking might be used in a multi-organization project-oriented
setting, was severely curtailed by IT boundaries and restrictions.
The research conducted over a three year period showed that virtual social networking can be a
useful tool to members of the Canadian Forces. Most notable observations from the use of the
Facebook site were: that the social networking members were able to connect with others who
were not co-located; that members were able to find and share information with the appropriate
people as needed; and that a sense of community developed in this virtual environment. These
findings could be generalized to groups that are similar in composition and structure to the TDOs,
being distributed with a moderately paced workflow. Whether or not the tool would be as useful
in a high intensity operational environment cannot be determined without a dedicated
requirements analysis because the benefits provided by technology in one environment cannot be
assumed to transfer to others, and this is particularly true for social media technologies where
their effectiveness is environment and task specific. However, it is highly conceivable that such a
platform could be very beneficial in a high paced operational situation if an individual`s social
contact network was already established. Such a tool would not only be valuable for connecting
within one`s own community but also, and just as importantly, with other groups and
organizations. The social network framework forms an indispensable contact database and a
platform where information is broadly distributed amongst a widespread and diverse population,
thereby making visible all active members, information about them, and all content exchanged.
The complete package allows for quickly finding specific people or expertise and being able to
relay and share information with the right people at the right time.
10
A post of the Facebook TDO Group in November 2011 pointed out that a number of Lieutenant Colonels
were using the site.
DRDC Atlantic TR 2012-255 41
4 References .....
Bingham, T., and Conner, M. (2010). The new social learning: A guide to transforming
organizations through social media [Kindle Edition]. Alexandria, VA: ASTD Press.
Granovetter, M. S. (1973). The strength of weak ties. The American Journal of Sociology, 78(6),
1360-1380.
Hansen, M. T. (1999). The search-transfer problem: The role of weak ties in sharing knowledge
across organization subunits. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44(1), 82-111.
Kwantes, P. (2011). A document visualization tool customized to explore DRDC reports.
DRDC Toronto TR 2011-131.
McAfee, A. P. (2009). Enterprise 2.0: New collaborative tools for your organization's toughest
challenges. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business Press.
McConnell, B., Huba, J. (2006). The 1% Rule: Charting citizen participation. Retrieved
May 13, 2011, from: http://www.churchofthecustomer.com/blog/2006/05/charting_wiki_p.html
O'Reilly, T. (2005). What is web 2.0: Design patterns and business models for the next generation
of software. Retrieved July 9, 2011, from:
http://oreilly.com/pub/a/web2/archive/what-is-web-20.html.
Torenvliet, G. L., Euerby, A., Scott, S. D., and Histon, J. (2011). Investigating virtual social
networking in the context of military interoperability: Year 1 Report. Defence Research and
Development Canada – Atlantic CR 2010-308.
Torenvliet, G. L., and Leal, J. (2011). Investingating virtual social networking in the context of
military interoperability: Year 2 Report. Defence Research and Development Canada – Atlantic
CR 2011-155.
42 DRDC Atlantic TR 2012-255
This page intentionally left blank.
DRDC Atlantic TR 2012-255 43
Annex A Technology Steward Introduction Letter
<Name>,
We are writing to request your help with an upcoming CF Learning Technologies initiative. You
may have heard that we are planning on deploying a new Learning Management System and
Learning Content Management, called Saba. As a part of this deployment, we are also planning
on making a related professional social networking platform, called Saba Live, available to the
CF TDO community. We’re hoping that this platform will help us to do a better job of working
together as a community, and that using it will:
Help each of us to maintain a larger network within our community and use that network
more effectively.
Make it easier for us to share our experiences and benefit from others’ experiences
through status updates and blog posts.
Increase our ability to find information and experts related to our jobs.
This new platform is a social platform, so for it to be useful it’s important that people actually use
it in their interactions with others. To this end, we would like to enlist your help in fostering good
use of this platform by asking you to serve as a Technology Steward. This sounds complicated,
but it isn’t. A Technology Steward is just someone who takes a special interest in using, and
championing the use of, technology for the sake of their community. At the most basic level, this
means acting as an early adopter and working with the tool to populate your profile, post your
status, and start following colleagues that you know or think might have something interesting to
say. As use of the tool matures, acting as a technology steward means encouraging your
colleagues to use the tool, thoughtfully assessing how it is being used, and encouraging more and
better use in whatever way you think is best.
We hope you’re able to accept this job, and that you will find it enjoyable and useful. If you do,
here’s what we’re expecting in more detail:
Being an early adopter. We plan to deploy the tool to a select pool of early adopters in late June,
and we would like you to work with and live in the tool as much as possible. We want to deploy
to the overall community in early September, and we’re hoping that if the tool looks lived-in, the
deployment will be more successful. During this period, you may find issues with the system, and
we’ll want to work with you to make sure that those issues are identified and resolved before
launching to the whole community.
Stewarding use. Once the tool has been deployed, we would like you to take ownership of it and
do what you can to help the TDO community’s experience with this tool to be productive. This
means continuing to use it in your everyday work, but also observing how your colleagues and
other TDOs are using it, and encouraging them (by example, and by solicitation) to make better
use of it where necessary.
Collaborating with other technology stewards. We hope to develop a healthy group of
technology stewards across the TDO community, and we would like you to collaborate with them
periodically to share best practices and experiences. Part of this collaboration will happen on the
social platform, but we’re also hoping to bring you all together for a number of discussion
sessions.
We expect that this deployment will provide some important benefits to the TDO community, and
we’re hoping to capture our experiences with the Saba Live platform for the benefit of the rest of
the CF. To help with this, a team of researchers led out of Defence Research and Development
44 DRDC Atlantic TR 2012-255
Canada (DRDC) will be observing our use of the Saba Live platform. If you sign up as a
technology steward, you will also be a partner in their research. They are ready to help you in
your role as technology steward, and will want to hear from you about your experiences. This will
involve participating in a handful of interviews, and perhaps filling out a few questionnaires. The
DRDC researchers will also be watching how use of the Saba Live platform develops, and will
listen to and participate in the interactions that you tech stewards engage in together.
If you are interested or would like more information, please contact the undersigned.
Thanks for your time!
DRDC Atlantic TR 2012-255 45
Annex B Community Introduction Email
<Name>,
We are writing to request your help with an upcoming CF Learning Technologies initiative
investigating the use of social media in the workplace. As a part of this study a professional social
networking platform, called SABA Social, is being made available to the CF TDO community.
As an indication of the importance of this project to the community one of the TDO champions of
this project is LCol Gilles Emond. We are hoping that this platform will help us to do a better job
of working together as a community, and that using it will:
Help each of us to build and maintain a larger network of contacts within our community and
enable us to use that network more effectively.
Make it easier for us to share our experiences and benefit from others’ experiences through status
updates and blog posts.
Increase our ability to find information and experts related to our jobs.
This SABA software is a social platform, so for it to be useful it is important that people actually
use it in their interactions with others. To this end, if you need help getting started or have
questions, Technology Stewards will be available to help you. The Technology Stewards are a
small group of TDOs that have had access to the site for the past month or so, and they will be
able to provide help, as needed, in using the tool. The Technology Stewards are: (provide a list).
We expect that this deployment will provide some important benefits to the TDO community, and
we’re hoping to capture our experiences with the SABA Social platform for the benefit of the rest
of the CF. To help with this, a team of researchers led out of Defence Research and Development
Canada (DRDC) will be observing our use of the SABA Social platform. Your involvement will
include filling out a questionnaire at the beginning of the project and one at the end. It may also
involve participating in a handful of interviews. The DRDC researchers will also be watching
how use of the SABA Social platform develops, and will listen to and participate in the
interactions that you engage in.
Please complete the consent form – required by DRDC for this study – and the questionnaire. On
completion you will be provided a link to the site.
Thanks for your time!
46 DRDC Atlantic TR 2012-255
This page intentionally left blank.
DRDC Atlantic TR 2012-255 47
Annex C Post-SABA Survey
There are three versions of the same questionnaire based on the response to Question 1 (which of
the following tools have you used in a work context).
Final Virtual Social Networking Questionnaire
DRDC Consent Form
Protocol Number: L-740 Amendment 2 Research Project: Understanding requirements for virtual
social networking in the Canadian Forces Principal Investigator: Dr. Jacquelyn Crebolder,
DRDC Atlantic Co-Investigators: Tania Randall and Dr. Aren Hunter, DRDC Atlantic Research
Associates: Curtis Coates, CMC Esterline|Electronics; Dr. Jonathan Histon and Anson Ho,
University of Waterloo. I hereby volunteer to be a participant in the study ‘Understanding
requirements for virtual social networking in the Canadian Forces’. I may obtain information
about the research by contacting Jacqui Crebolder at 902-426-3100 x296, jacqui.crebolder@drdc-
rddc.gc.ca. My participation in this study involves participating in a short online questionnaire. I
understand that the research findings resulting from my participation may be used for publication
or commercialization purposes. I understand my identity will remain anonymous and my
participation confidential. I understand that I will not receive remuneration for my participation in
this research. I understand that by providing consent I have not waived any legal rights I may
have as a result of any harm to me occasioned by my participation in this research project beyond
all risks I have assumed. My name is:
None
and I hereby volunteer to participate in this study and I have read and understood the above
information.
Yes
No
Page 1 of 3
Please indicate which of the following tools you have used in a work context:
Both Facebook and SABA
Only Facebook
Only SABA
Neither Facebook or SABA for work purposes
Page 2 of 3
Do you have internet access on your computer at work?
Yes
No
Do you access the Facebook TDO Group or the SABA site from a mobile device at work?
Yes
No
48 DRDC Atlantic TR 2012-255
Do you feel the TDO community is more closely connected in general since using the
Facebook TDO Group and/or SABA?
Yes
No
How were you introduced to the SABA site?
I got a DRDC email about it asking me to join
A colleague told me about it
I saw reference to SABA on Facebook
Other ______________________
How were you introduced to the Facebook TDO Group?
I was using Facebook already and saw postings about the TDO Group
A colleague told me about it
I saw reference to the Facebook TDO Group on SABA
Other ______________________
In what order did you join SABA and the TDO Facebook Group?
TDO Facebook Group first
SABA first
Both at about the same time
Were you already using Facebook before joining the TDO Facebook Group?
Yes
No
Have you migrated from one platform to the other?
Yes – from SABA to Facebook
Yes – from Facebook to SABA
No, I have not migrated from one to the other
If you have migrated from one platform to the other, what was the primary factor(s) that
made you move? (select all that apply)
privacy issues
more people to connect with
easier/more intuitive interface
more functionality – such as, ______________________
easier to access
DRDC Atlantic TR 2012-255 49
speed of connectivity
less technical difficulties
Other, please specify: ______________________
How often do you check the following (for work purposes)? Please select the closest answer.
less than 1x per
week
1x per
week
a couple times per
week
1x per
day
more than 1x per
day
SABA
Did you personalize your SABA home page?
Yes
No
What features have you found useful in each social networking platform for the purpose of
supporting your work? (select all that apply)
Facebook SABA
photos / media sharing
news feed
event scheduler
user profiles
chat
private messaging
notifications
groups
discussion/comment threads
presence awareness (knowing who's online)
Are there features missing from Facebook that could help you do your work?
None
Are there features missing from SABA that could help you do your work?
None
Which, if any, apply to your usage of Facebook? Through this tool:
I have requested information from the TDO community at large
I have responded to another member's post/request for information
50 DRDC Atlantic TR 2012-255
I have obtained information relevant to my work duties without actively seeking it (e.g., by
reading a news feed)
Which, if any, apply to your usage of SABA? Through this tool:
I have requested information from the TDO community at large
I have responded to another member's post/request for information
I have obtained information relevant to my work duties without actively seeking it (e.g., by
reading a news feed)
Have you changed the way you use Facebook in your personal life as a result of your
membership in the TDO Facebook group? Check all that apply. I have:
increased the privacy level of my account
chosen my profile pictures more cautiously
written my status updates more cautiously
deleted something that friends wrote on my wall
restricted access to specific content (e.g., albums, tagged photos, etc)
Other, please specify: ______________________
Rate your level of agreement with the following statements with respect to the TDO
Facebook Group:
Strongly
Disagree
Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly
Agree
Facebook makes my everyday activities
more efficient
I feel out of touch with my colleagues
when I haven't logged onto the TDO
Facebook group in a while
I am comfortable telling colleagues in
the CF I’m on Facebook
Facebook has become part of my daily
work routine
I feel more connected to the TDO
community than I would have without
the TDO Facebook group
I would be disappointed if the TDO
Facebook group shut down
Rate your level of agreement with the following statements with respect to SABA:
Strongly
Disagree
Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly
Agree
SABA makes my everyday activities
more efficient
DRDC Atlantic TR 2012-255 51
I feel out of touch with my colleagues
when I haven't logged onto SABA in a
while
I am comfortable telling colleagues in
the CF I’m on SABA
SABA has become part of my daily
work routine
I feel more connected to the TDO
community than I would have without
SABA
I will be disappointed when the SABA
TDO site shuts down
Do you think a social networking tool could help you get to know a colleague you met
online?
Yes
No
How important are the following uses of social networking tools to you?
Not
important at
all
Not
important
Neither
important or not
important
Important Very
Important
Finding new people.
Reconnecting with
people I've lost contact
with.
Seeing what people
have put as their
'status'.
The continuous updates
and dialogue.
If you have any general comments about social networking in the workplace, or about
Facebook or SABA in particular, please add them here.
None
52 DRDC Atlantic TR 2012-255
Page 2 of 3
Do you have internet access on your computer at work?
Yes
No
Do you access the Facebook TDO Group from a mobile device at work?
Yes
No
How were you introduced to the Facebook TDO Group?
I was using Facebook already and saw postings about the TDO Group
A colleague told me about it
Other ______________________
Do you feel the TDO community is more closely connected in general since using Facebook?
Yes
No
Were you already using Facebook before joining the Facebook TDO Group?
Yes
No
Which of the following best describes your reason for not being on SABA?
I don't know what SABA is
I heard of SABA but chose not to join
I joined SABA but didn't find it useful
I joined SABA but found it difficult to use
I didn't want to invest time into a product that was only available temporarily
Other, please specify: ______________________
How often do you check Facebook for work purposes? Please select the closest answer.
less than 1x per week
1x per week
a couple times per week
1x per day
more than 1x per day
What features have you found useful in Facebook for the purpose of supporting your work?
(select all that apply)
photos / media sharing
DRDC Atlantic TR 2012-255 53
news feed
event scheduler
user profiles
chat
private messaging
notifications
groups
discussion/comment threads
presence awareness (knowing who's online)
Are there features missing from Facebook that could help you do your work?
None
Which, if any, apply to your usage of Facebook? Through this tool:
I have requested information from the TDO community at large
I have responded to another member's post/request for information
I have obtained information relevant to my work duties without actively seeking it (e.g., by
reading a news feed)
Have you changed the way you use Facebook in your personal life as a result of your
membership in the TDO Facebook group? Check all that apply. I have:
increased the privacy level of my account
chosen my profile pictures more cautiously
written my status updates more cautiously
deleted something that friends wrote on my wall
restricted access to specific content (e.g., albums, tagged photos, etc)
Other, please specify: ______________________
Rate your level of agreement with the following statements:
Strongly
Disagree
Disagree Neither
Agree or
Disagree
Agree Strongly
Agree
Facebook makes my everyday
activities more efficient
I feel out of touch with my
colleagues when I haven't logged
onto the TDO Facebook group in a
while
54 DRDC Atlantic TR 2012-255
I am comfortable telling colleagues
in the CF I’m on Facebook
Facebook has become part of my
daily work routine
I feel more connected to the TDO
community than I would have
without the TDO Facebook group
I would be disappointed if the TDO
Facebook group shut down
Do you think a social networking tool could help you get to know a colleague you met
online?
Yes
No
How important are the following uses of Facebook to you?
Not
important at
all
Not
important
Neither
important or not
important
Important Very
Important
Finding new people.
Reconnecting with
people I've lost contact
with.
Seeing what people
have put as their
'status'.
The continuous updates
and dialogue.
If you have any general comments about social networking in the workplace or about
Facebook or SABA in particular, please add them here.
None
DRDC Atlantic TR 2012-255 55
Page 2 of 3
Do you have internet access on your computer at work?
Yes
No
Do you access the SABA site from a mobile device at work?
Yes
No
How were you introduced to the SABA TDO site?
I got a DRDC email asking me to join?
A colleague told me about it.
Other ______________________
Do you feel the TDO community is more closely connected in general since using SABA?
Yes
No
Which of the following best describes your reason for not being part of the Facebook TDO
Group?
I don't use Facebook at all
I didn't know this group existed
I am aware of the group but chose not to join
I joined this group but didn't find it useful
I am uncomfortable using Facebook in a work environment
Other, please specify: ______________________
Do you use Facebook for purposes other than work (i.e., in your personal life)?
Yes
No
How often did you check the SABA site? Please select the closest answer.
less than 1x per week
1x per week
a couple times per week
1x per day
more than 1x per day
Did you personalize your SABA home page?
Yes
56 DRDC Atlantic TR 2012-255
No
What features did you find useful in SABA for the purpose of supporting your work? (select
all that apply)
photos / media sharing
news feed
event scheduler
user profiles
private messaging
notifications
groups
discussion/comment threads
Are there features missing from SABA that could help you do your work?
None
Which, if any, apply to your usage of SABA? Through this tool:
I have requested information from the TDO community at large
I have responded to another member's post/request for information
I have obtained information relevant to my work duties without actively seeking it (e.g., by
reading a news feed)
Rate your level of agreement with the following statements:
Strongly
Disagree
Disagree Neither Agree
or Disagree
Agree Strongly
Agree
SABA makes my everyday
activities more efficient
I feel out of touch with my
colleagues when I haven't logged
onto SABA in a while
I am comfortable telling
colleagues in the CF I’m on
SABA
SABA has become part of my
daily work routine
I feel more connected to the TDO
community than I would have
without SABA
I will be disappointed when the
SABA TDO site shuts down
DRDC Atlantic TR 2012-255 57
Do you think a social networking tool could help you get to know a colleague you met
online?
Yes
No
How important are the following uses of SABA to you?
Not
important at
all
Not
important
Neither
important or not
important
Important Very
Important
Finding new people.
Reconnecting with
people I’ve lost contact
with.
Seeing what people
have as their 'status'.
The continuous updates
and dialogue.
If you have any general comments about social networking in the workplace or about
Facebook or SABA in particular, please add them here.
None
Page 2 of 3
Please rate your agreement with the following statements. I do not use Facebook or SABA
for work purposes because:
Strongly
Disagree
Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly
Agree
I do not perceive any benefit to being
'online' with my colleagues
I am too busy at work to use a social
networking tool
I am concerned about the stigma of
being on Facebook or a similar social
platform
I am concerned about security issues
Are there additional factors that prevented your usage of these tools? If yes, please explain:
None
58 DRDC Atlantic TR 2012-255
Do you use social networking sites (Facebook, LinkedIn, MySpace for example) outside of
work?
Yes
No
Page 3 of 3
The following survey is a continuation of information captured in a similar survey distributed in
September 2011; therefore it is possible that not all TDOs are listed. Even if you did not answer
the initial survey in the fall, we are interested in your response to this final question set.
We are interested in how well you know people at work. Please indicate how well you know each
of the people in the list below by clicking in the appropriate column, where:(0) indicates that you
do not know this person at all(1) indicates that you know of this person, but know nothing about
their skills, experience, or expertise(2) indicates that you somewhat know about this person’s
skills, experience, or expertise(3) indicates that you know a lot about this person’s skills,
experience, or expertise You should base your ratings on how well you know these people at the
current time. Please refrain from looking people up (e.g., on a central database or a web search)
while you complete this questionnaire. (If your name appears on the list, please leave that answer
blank).
List of names 0 1 2 3
XXX XXXX
DRDC Atlantic TR 2012-255 59
Annex D TDO Symposium Interview
The syndicate work conducted as part of a TDO Annual Conference consisted of two parts – i)
structured interviews and ii) an on-line experiment using the SABA People Cloud platform.
Interview Questions
The questions for the structured interview follow:
Have you been using either the SABA or TDO Facebook site?
a) Which did you use first?
b) What were you hoping to get from the sites?
c) Why one over the other if applicable?
Have you found most useful in a social networking platform for the purpose of supporting your
work duties?
a) photos / media sharing
b) news feed
c) being able to schedule events
d) others
What features are useful in a social networking platform for the purpose of supporting your work
relationships? (select all that apply)
a) photos / media sharing
b) news feed
c) being able to schedule events
d) others
What functions/features do you find most useful in Facebook?
What functions/features do you find lacking in Facebook? Are there features from SABA that you
find yourself missing?
What are the most important features that help you build trust in a colleague known only through
the Facebook environment?
Rate your level of agreement with the following statements
Facebook makes my everyday activities more efficient
1(Strongly disagree) 2 3 4 5(Strongly agree)
I am proud to tell colleagues in the CF I’m on Facebook
1(Strongly disagree) 2 3 4 5(Strongly agree)
Facebook has become part of my daily routine
1(Strongly disagree) 2 3 4 5(Strongly agree)
60 DRDC Atlantic TR 2012-255
I feel out of touch with my colleagues when I haven’t logged onto the CDA Facebook group for a
while
1(Strongly disagree) 2 3 4 5(Strongly agree)
I would be sorry if the CDA Facebook group shut down
1(Strongly disagree) 2 3 4 5(Strongly agree)
How important are these factors to you for a social network environment at work?
Privacy (having control over who can see your profile, content you post, etc.)
1(not important at all) 2 3 4 5(very important)
Customizable controls (having the ability to express convey your own views)
1(not important at all) 2 3 4 5(very important)
Simplicity (having a simple user interface, perhaps sacrificing some customization)
1(not important at all) 2 3 4 5(very important)
Rich content experience (the site provides a range of media (text, images, video, etc.)
1(not important at all) 2 3 4 5(very important)
Contacts/peers
1(not important at all) 2 3 4 5(very important)
How important are the following uses of Facebook to you personally?
Chatting to people I otherwise would have lost contact with
1(not important at all) 2 3 4 5(very important)
Virtual people-watching.
1(not important at all) 2 3 4 5(very important)
Reconnecting with people I’ve lost contact with
1(not important at all) 2 3 4 5(very important)
Finding people you haven't seen for a while
1(not important at all) 2 3 4 5(very important)
Seeing what people have put as their 'status'
1(not important at all) 2 3 4 5(very important)
The continuous updates
1(not important at all) 2 3 4 5(very important)
DRDC Atlantic TR 2012-255 61
Interview Notes
The following are structured interview notes transcribed directly from the syndicate proceedings.
Day 1 –December 8th 2011
Syndicate Participants and profiles:
Participant Org Social Media Usage Profile
1 CFNES Experience with Facebook, Twitter, SABA
Daily use both professional and personal
Find VSN useful
Uses SABA to follow links
Accesses VSN through smartphone
2 CFTDC Personal use of Facebook, Twitter, and Linkedin – does not use SABA
Uses approximately every 3 days
Visits TDO Facebook group about once a week – does not post
Is aware of who is posting the most
3 CFTDC Personal use of Facebook, Twitter, and SABA
Uses daily – not SABA
Does not post to TDO Facebook group
Feels there is a stigma to viewing social network sites at work.
Uses a smartphone
4 ADM MAT Early digital adopter
Personal use of Facebook and IRC for post graduate work at Royal
Roads
Does not post to TDO Facebook group
Feels there is a stigma to viewing social network sites at work.
Uses a smartphone
5 Uses SharePoint to manage project data
6 ADM MAT Facebook user for 5 years; SharePoint for 2 years; wiki, skype, go
to meeting, SABA – just signed up, Lotus notes
Understands there is a stigma to using Facebook at work
7 DGPR –
NESOPS
Facebook usage for a couple of years, both personal and the TDO
group
Just signed into SABA – not a user
Uses Wikis and the TDO community of practice (Group Owner)
8 Public
Affairs
School
Power user of Facebook since 2005, uses it to keep in touch with
colleagues
Uses TDO Facebook group – posts information
VSN at Athabasca University
SABA active user
Linkedin, Twitter, SharePoint
9 DGPR No Facebook or virtual social network usage
10 CDA –
R&D
Facebook user since 2007, personal usage and in the TDO group –
not an active participant
Blackboarding
SABA
Chat application
62 DRDC Atlantic TR 2012-255
Questions and answers:
Which VSN site, Facebook or SABA did you use first? Why? How do you use the sites?
- Just joined Facebook a week ago – does not use SABA
- Driven to Facebook by email updates
- Interested in what is going on
- General makes a good review of the wall once a week
- TDO Facebook works better than SABA
- Facebook first- the TDO site is good for professional discussions, however it would be
beneficial to keep it inside the DWAN firewall
- Facebook is far more user friendly than SABA
What features do you like with respect to work and the online communities?
- Directed to open SharePoint daily – work news updates and announcements are posted
- Schedules on SharePoint
- Blogs on SharePoint
- Email is still a priority
- Sites need better categories for discussions and threaded discussions
- Current workload is a deterrent to using the sites at work (KLS)
- The technology needs a history feature
- Needs infrastructure to support it
- Needs cultural acceptance
- Use of chat once a personal relationship has been developed
- Linkedin type data that shows professional history
- Experience capturing area – University degrees etc.
- List of key positions / jobs held
- Linkedin type information
- Audio or video feed – immediate feedback
- Skype
- Facebook type chat feature
- Instant messenger
- Threaded discussions
- Social presence, something that makes the work enjoyable
- Chat
- Email alerts
- Asynchronous communications
- There is a feeling that a Facebook post needs an immediate response
What functions/features do you find most useful in virtual social sites to support work
relationships?
- Maintaining acquaintances made face to face
- Keeping up some regular contact – annual/monthly/weekly
- It does take work to keep online relationships alive
- Knowing someone’s specialty, their education
- Currently there is no critical mass in the TDO community so some method to achieve
increased use
- Site would need the convenience of Facebook – to go from one group to another in the
same app
DRDC Atlantic TR 2012-255 63
What functions/features do you find most useful in Facebook?
- Being able to hide a conversation
- Filter out what you don’t want to see
- Email alerts
- Personalization
- News feeds
- Tidy interface
- Links
- Knowing the data is persistent
- User friendly – loads quickly
- Group forming
- Event announcement
What features / functions do you find lacking in Facebook?
- Video capability
- Mandatory field such as year in job, work experience, education, specialty, previous
employment
- File sharing and file management such as folders, similar to SharePoint
How many people, professional colleagues or personal, do you know only through Facebook or
SABA?
- Distant relatives
- Learned about an early Facebook user through the TDO group
- TDOs with the branch through the site
- The following discussions were about the Technology Steward concept.
- Technology Steward is already a secondary job for many TDOs.
- Formal coursing would not be required.
- There has to be an interest in the digital community before it is embraced.
- The community must have a draw to get participation.
- A LCdr is effectively the Technology Steward for the Facebook group.
- Technology Stewards are change agents – TDO already do this. They lead by example.
- Need to have expertise similar to e-learning – TDOs do this.
- The schools will pull the resource to do something else if they are posted as a Technology
Steward.
- Not a primary job.
- Will have to be someone that wants to do the job.
- Difficult to determine if the technology needs a steward.
- Tech Steward would need a focus – would need to be named the champion – primary job
- Tutorials for the technology would be required.
- There is always an expert in the unit – whether they are willing or able is another issue.
Other points
- Feel no need to use a social media as he is on a computer all day.
- Sites must avoid too many changes – a static interface is important.
- A work related site must be quick and must be intuitive – no time to learn yet another app.
- Online chat may take away from the usefulness or purpose of the app.
64 DRDC Atlantic TR 2012-255
Group A Interview: 4 participants – SABA/Facebook usage / experience.
- has Facebook/Twitter/SABA – Facebook for TDO Group and use for personal – is new
and finds the Facebook Group very helpful – links, docs, etc.
- SABA worked well at home but not on DWAN.
Not on Facebook at work – doesn’t like the ‘stigma’ – trying to promote use but not
overuse – where do you draw the line. Is probably task specific.
- Facebook – TDO Group – on 3 x week – skims through topics. Joined Twitter because of
one interaction but not on there. On LinkedIn – but doesn’t check. Got SABA email to
log in but is too busy teaching – e.g., if email is not clearly relevant to the course then has
no time to check.
- has Facebook checks daily – and is member of TDO Group on Facebook and uses it for
personal as well – l has Twitter – has iphone. Doesn’t use Facebook at work because of
‘stigma’.
- Created SABA account – not logged in thought because of problems with SABA and
other things to do.
- ADM(MAT) major projects – early digital immigrant – using various systems. Has a work
BB – so not on Twitter. On SABA but not much used. Facebook and TDO group – not at
work because of ‘stigma’. Job keeps away from desk so uses phone a lot rather than on
line. Can catch people that way.
Facebook TDO Group – do you go on for something specific or just go on the check?
- Get email when someone makes a change – if it’s interesting will look further.
- Question – is SABA used for business, so people aren’t on Facebook?
- None that they know of.
- Relationships are built better on the phone or face to face.
- If links are made on Facebook there’s Chat – as long as you know the person.
What are the best features to support duties?
- Sharepoint is mandated when you log on – which means everyone is on the same page at
a time, which is good. But problem is it’s not used very often and needs to be refreshed to
see new stuff.
- A hash tag on Twitter might be good – that way we’d all be talking about a specific topic.
- There is an age difference in use of these tools – fear factor for older people.
- Things to consider when implementing technology:
o Is the infrastructure there?
o Is there cultural acceptance?
- SM could allow for informal learning – would prefer chat room on line rather than
random postings so that everyone would be talking about the same topic.
- Forum chat has advantages and synchronous chat does too – depends on the rate of work
and the need.
- Also Skype-like feature would be nice.
DRDC Atlantic TR 2012-255 65
- Audio-Visual is important – especially for immediate feedback
- Those on Facebook use the Chat feature.
- Issue is to know the TDOs area of expertise – so names are in database.
- LinkedIn type platform is good for this.
What is the most useful feature?
- ‘Hide’ – shrinking down what’s not relevant.
- Only checks to get email – doesn’t read it all. Depends if it’s
- New in the trade so can check stuff out in case it’s relevant, now or later.
Is there info shared on Facebook that brings you closer?
- Distant relative introduced through 3rd
party
- Yes, has introduced himself in person because saw someone on Facebook.
Many of those interviewed said that they are not on SABA because of trouble with the platform
and the timing of the Facebook TDO Group (note that the group was formed a couple of years
earlier but had few members until more recently).
Questions on Technology Stewardship
If assigned as a tech steward would it be a primary or secondary job?
- We are doing that already (KHAN Academy]) – there are a few TDOs exposing
tools/technologies (the TDO fills that role because of the kind of job they have already
which is to facilitate learning).
Should there be formal training?
- But there has to be interest in the digital community. Show by example – TDOs already do
that.
- Change is driven by the needs of the group.
- But formal doesn’t work – fades.
- Formal Tech Steward – given to someone and it has nothing to do with their training –
higher ranks would say you should be using the person for something better.
- Has to be passionate person – not told.
Group B Interview: 5 participants – SABA/Facebook usage / experience
- Facebook 5 years – for personal use, not in TDO Group (and not going on because things
can be discussed on there that shouldn’t be), Sharepoint, Wikis, COPS (DND forum
website). SABA – just signed up
- [with reference to openness of Facebook Group] – but is accessed to information
- Access to information would be through proper channels.
- Some pilot sites (404) are ok but it’s the trace – but where‘s the line
- Used Facebook 2 yrs – member of TDO Group, is on SABA and checks sometimes. Wiki
use – group involved has one (COPS).
66 DRDC Atlantic TR 2012-255
- Facebook 6 years – TDO Group – on SABA but no action so not inspired. But Facebook is
fabulous – her work place is just her as TDO – has posted on Facebook and got loads of
responses and can get to know colleagues because sees their posts.
- New and alone and can reach out through Facebook.
- Is on Twitter – follows but doesn’t post. Is on LinkedIn and Sharepoint
- Uses Facebook at work for TDO Group but is cautious. It’s convenient though.
- Not on Facebook or Sharepoint. Not on Facebook or anything because doesn’t need for
work and on computer all day so don’t like to be on after work.
- Facebook 4 years – early member of TDO Group – but inactive there because uses
Facebook for private, not work. Uses another app for long distance chat so no need for
chat on Facebook.
- Is on SABA.
What features are needed to support your work duties?
- A platform for dynamic discussion is needed
- And should be a threaded discussion – so that comments are linked and don’t get lost
- Who’s on line (social presence) + Chat on line
- What happened to good old email?
- I used to like instant manager
- I like to phone people
- Same
- Email vs Social networking – you always have to have your eye on the SN – or you might
miss something.
- Hierarchy doesn’t understand how younger people use these tools.
- Likes putting names to face.
Building – maintaining relationships at work….
- Be good to see specialities and work experience – as on LinkedIn but there you don’t get
that community interaction experience – would need all TDOs to be on there.
What about a Group on LinkedIn?
- Being able to form a Group is important. It’s easy on Facebook – but maybe need more
control on who can join. And needs more profile information added.
- Chat is important.
- Profile – with job, specialites, previous employment
- File sharing
- Has to be accessible on DWAN and on Internet.
Do you have friends on Facebook that you only know on Facebook.
- Yes – and you feel like you know them – because of status updates.
Should Technology Steward be primary or secondary role?
- What if Tech Steward gets posted?
- Too many tools out there and we don’t have a champion for any. Have enough trouble
getting AFILE and DLN up.
- Need policy in place first
DRDC Atlantic TR 2012-255 67
- Has to come from the top.
Would a wiki be useful?
- Yes – but there are so many – difficult to know who’s on where.
- Existing platforms are COP and Blackboard.
Day 2 – December 9th 2011
Day two was a round table with TDOs summing up their views and opinions on social media in
the work place. The conversation points are not attributed to any particular individuals but are a
general summary of the comments provided by the group.
- Overall the TDOs are familiar with virtual social networking and Web 2.0 tools
- TDOs who self-designate as early adopters embrace the idea of social media at work
- Facebook was embraced by the majority
- In order to conduct business the following features are required:
- Email prompts (email is the primary online communication tool)
- Threaded discussions
- Subject search
- Persistent data
- Folder structure
- Ability to open and keep documents open
- In order to enhance business relationships the following features are required:
- Professional chat – with presence indication (who is online0
- User C.V. with experience, degrees, past employment
- Audio and video feeds
- The largest issue is the stigma of the usage of social media at work.
With respect to Technology Stewards:
- Shepherding and site maintenance is seen as a large effort
- Must be self-identifying
- TDOS are already change agents therefore would be suitable candidates as Technology
Stewards
- Must be able to act as moderators for discussions (threads)
What can TDO’s take away from the use of Virtual Social Networking sites:
- Sharing
- Community
- Use of VSN to capture knowledge as a large personnel turnover is coming
- Make VSN open to retired TDO’s and to personnel outside the TDO MOSID
- Need a single repository for data
- Need to create the reactive Community of Practice – expand to allies an retirees
- Need to structure interaction, a set time when an online forum will meet
- CDA or the Training Development Centre in Borden must show leadership
- Need a dedicated worker / champion / Technology Steward
- Need to force change
- Transfer discussions to wikis once a discussion is done
68 DRDC Atlantic TR 2012-255
This page intentionally left blank.
DRDC Atlantic TR 2012-255 69
Annex E SABA Platform “How-To”
70 DRDC Atlantic TR 2012-255
DRDC Atlantic TR 2012-255 71
72 DRDC Atlantic TR 2012-255
DRDC Atlantic TR 2012-255 73
74 DRDC Atlantic TR 2012-255
DRDC Atlantic TR 2012-255 75
76 DRDC Atlantic TR 2012-255
DRDC Atlantic TR 2012-255 77
Annex F Facebook data extraction and preparation
Data extraction for Facebook was a multi-stage process, that included i) detailing a method of
extraction; ii) extracting the data using Facebook API; iii) and developing a Microsoft Excel
macro. The data were then further formatted for use in the HanDles program.
Determining a method of extracting Facebook data
As a first step the best method for extracting the posts and comments from the ‘TDO Network –
Training Development Officer Facebook Group’ was identified. Three methods were explored:
Direct copy and paste from the Facebook page;
Copy and paste each comment individually; and
Run a primary script on the Facebook API.
Methods 1 and 2 posed a problem with regards to formatting and extracting exact dates. Both
methods appeared to be more time consuming than Method 3 because of the manual extraction
aspect. Method 3 required a deeper understanding of the Facebook API in order to effectively
extract the data but it seemed to be the most effective of the three methods and ultimately was
selected as the best way forward.
Data extraction using Facebook API
In order to extract data using the Facebook API, a series of steps had to be performed to gain
access to the postings and comments. Through membership in the Facebook TDO Group access
was gained to the website:
https://developers.facebook.com/tools/explorer?method=GET&path=505782733, which was the
Graph API Explorer webpage. The following procedure was then conducted:
- “Get Access Token” was selected;
- The desired user groups were selected;
- “Get Access Token” selected a second time.
On the resulting page, under “Connections”:
- “Groups” was selected;
- The “TDO Network – Training Development Officer” Group was selected;
- “Feed” was selected.
This procedure resulted in a list of all postings and comments to date made to the TDO Group on
Facebook. Figure 7 is an excerpt of the output of a basic post.
78 DRDC Atlantic TR 2012-255
{
"id": "[Removed for anonymity]",
"from": {
"name": "[Removed for anonymity]",
"id": "[Removed for anonymity]"
},
"message": "You can send it to me at my DWAN address.",
"created_time": "2012-03-22T11:01:32+0000"
}
Figure 7: Basic post output excerpt.
4.1.1.1.1.1 Phase 3: Excel Macro (Formatting)
Excel Macro (Formatting)
The HanDles software program can read Microsoft Excel files (*.xml), so the data for the
Facebook TDO Group at this point was manually copied and pasted into an Excel spreadsheet. A
Microsoft Excel macro was developed to remove the unnecessary data fields from the Facebook
API output, leaving only the relevant fields described in Table 7. The macro deleted all lines from
the Facebook API that did not contain the relevant objects' names. For the Excel Macro refer to
Figure 8.
Table 7: Description of headings.
Heading Description
Title Generated using the combination of post number and comment number.
For example: Post number 10 comment 3 will have a title of “10_3”
Author Author of the post
Body Content of the post
Date Date of the post in the format of: YYYYMMDDHHMMSS. For example:
A post on 1:51:06pm on the 25 of December 2010 will have a value of
"20101225135106"
Website Website link if a link was posted
Likes Number of likes
Pictures A number 1 represents a user posting a picture, while a 0 represents no
photo was posted
Mobile A number 1 represents a user posting to the site from a mobile device,
while a 0 represents a user posting from a computer
Location Location of post
DRDC Atlantic TR 2012-255 79
Heading Description
Post/Comment Contains the value of a post or comment. A high level or parent message
is known as a post, while its children are known as comments
Post Number Value of the post number
Comment Number Value of the comment number
Response to If a message is a post, the value will be its own title. If a message is a
comment the value will be to the previous post’s title
80 DRDC Atlantic TR 2012-255
Sub ExtractingData()
Dim Rng As Range
Dim X As Long
Dim i As Integer
Dim n As Integer
Dim row As Integer
row = 1
Set Rng = Range("A1:A" & Range("A65536").End(xlUp).row)
'Facebook API code is placed on Column A
'Search for all relevant post and do not delete
'Delete all irrelevant post
For X = Rng.Rows.Count To 1 Step -1
If InStr(Rng.Cells(X, 1).Value, "likes") < 0 Or InStr(Rng.Cells(X, 1).Value, "message") < 0
Or InStr(Rng.Cells(X, 1).Value, "count") < 0 Then
Rng.Cells(X, 1).EntireRow.Delete
End If
If InStr(1, Rng.Cells(X, 1).Value, "Like") > 0 Then
If InStr(1, Rng.Cells(X + 3, 1).Value, "name") > 0 Then
Rng.Cells(X + 2, 1).EntireRow.Delete
End If
Rng.Cells(X, 1).EntireRow.Delete
End If
Next X
'Delete all Facebook links
For X = Rng.Rows.Count To 1 Step -1
If InStr(Rng.Cells(X, 1).Value, "facebook.com") > 0 Then
Rng.Cells(X, 1).EntireRow.Delete
End If
Next X
End Sub
Figure 8: Microsoft Office Excel macro.
DRDC Atlantic TR 2012-255 81
A second macro was used to format and sort all the objects into a 13 column table as shown in
Figure 9.
Figure 9: Organization of Facebook data.
Tit
le
Auth
or
Bo
dy
Dat
e
Websi
te
Lik
es
Pictu
re
Mobi
le
Locati
on
Post/
Comm
ent
Po
st
#
Comm
ent #
Respon
se To
All other formatting was performed manually, such as highlighting of all posts.
Data preparation for analysis
Once in Excel the SABA and Facebook data were further formatted for use in the HanDles
software program. The process is described in the following subsections.
Further refinement removed extra columns, such as Mobile or Pictures that would not be used in
this data analysis. Also the format did not allow for posts and comments to be linked together and
as a result it was decided to use a Lua script to parse and reorganize the data. Three different file
formats were created for this purpose.
The files were first created as separate files, each containing the following, shown in Figure 10.
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<article>
<title> Post or comment title </title>
<author> Author name </author>
<fulltext> Text of the post – including a website address if one was posted </fulltext>
<Date> 200711316323 </Date>
<Location> Location, if available </Location>
<Handles> Handles include each post’s own title, and if a comment, the original post’s
title. It also includes Likes, Mobile and Picture if the post was liked, posted from a mobile phone,
or included a picture; Facebook post also had the handle Facebook, and SABA posts, SABA
</Handles>
</article>
Figure 10: Separate HanDLes files.
A drawback to creating each post or comment as separate *.xml files emerged when attempting to
upload the files to HanDles. It was thought that all of the *.xml files could be compressed into a
*.zip file and uploaded in a single step, however, HanDles could only upload file type Portable
Document Format (PDF) files as part of a *.zip file. As a solution a second format was created
82 DRDC Atlantic TR 2012-255
where all the posts and comments were in one *.xml file, but were defined as different documents
(see Figure 11).
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<corpus>
<document>
<title> Post or comment title </title>
<author> Author name </author>
<fulltext> Text of the post – including a website address if one was posted </fulltext>
<Date> 200711316323 </Date>
<Location> Location, if available </Location>
<Handles> Handles include each post’s own title, and if a comment, the original post’s
title. It also includes Likes, Mobile and Picture if the post was liked, posted from a mobile phone,
or included a picture</Handles>
</document>
<document>
<title> Post or comment title </title>
<author> Author name </author>
<fulltext> Text of the post – including a website address if one was posted </fulltext>
<Date> 200711316323 </Date>
<Location> Location, if available </Location>
<Handles> Handles include each post’s own title, and if a comment, the original post’s
title. It also includes Likes, Mobile and Picture if the post was liked, posted from a mobile phone,
or included a picture</Handles>
</document>
<document>
…
</document>
</corpus>
Figure 11: Separate HanDles documents.
HanDles recognized this file format as containing separate documents11
, and the approach
satisfied the task of uploading the data, but the link between posts and comments was not strong
enough for them to appear related when doing HanDles searches.
11
A document in this case is defined as an item (a post or a comment).
DRDC Atlantic TR 2012-255 83
The final revision to the format consisted of a single *.xml file, where comments were included in
the text of the post as shown in Figure 12. This format lost some data, such as the date and title of
the comments, but it allowed for a better link between posts and comments.
<document>
<title> Title of top post </title>
<author> Author of top post </author>
<fulltext> Full text of top post
Comment 1: Full text of first comment
Comment 2: Full text of second comment
…
Comment n: Full text of lastcomment
</fulltext>
<Date> Date of top post </Date>
<Handles> Has the same handles as previous formats, plus all the names of the
comment authors, formatted as follows: First_Last </Handles>
</document>
Figure 12: HanDles comments linked together.
84 DRDC Atlantic TR 2012-255
List of symbols/abbreviations/acronyms/initialisms
ABCA America, Britain, Canada, Australia
ACIMS Army Collaborative Information System
AFILE Airforce Integrated Information Learning Environment
CDA Canadian Defence Academy
CF Canadian Forces
CFNOS Canadian Forces Naval Operations School
CSS Center for Security Science
DND Department of National Defence
DRDC Defence Research and Development Canada
DRENet Defence Research Establishment Network
DWAN Defence Wide Area Network
GoC Government of Canada
GPNET General Purpose Network
HMCS Her Majesty's Canadian Ship
HRMFRC Halifax and Region Military Family Resource Center
HRSD Human Resources Skills Development
IT Information Technology
LFAA Land Force Atlantic Area
Q&A Question and Answer
QSWB Qualification Standard Writing Board
PsyOps Psychological Operations
R&D Research and Development
RCMP Royal Canadian Mounted Police
RJOC Regional Joint Operations Center
TDO Training Development Officer
TPWB Training Plan Writing Board
VTC Video Teleconferencing
DOCUMENT CONTROL DATA (Security markings for the title, abstract and indexing annotation must be entered when the document is Classified or Designated)
1. ORIGINATOR (The name and address of the organization preparing the document.
Organizations for whom the document was prepared, e.g. Centre sponsoring a
contractor's report, or tasking agency, are entered in section 8.)
Defence R&D Canada – Atlantic, 9 Grove Street, P.O. Box 1012, Dartmouth, Nova Scotia, B2Y 3Z7
2a. SECURITY MARKING (Overall security marking of the document including
special supplemental markings if applicable.)
UNCLASSIFIED
2b. CONTROLLED GOODS
(NON-CONTROLLED GOODS) DMC A REVIEW: GCEC JUNE 2010
3. TITLE (The complete document title as indicated on the title page. Its classification should be indicated by the appropriate abbreviation (S, C or U)
in parentheses after the title.)
Investigating Virtual Social Networking in the Context of Military Interoperability: Year 3 Report and Overall Three Year Summary
4. AUTHORS (last name, followed by initials – ranks, titles, etc. not to be used)
Crebolder, J.; Randall, T.; Hunter, A.; Coates, C.; Torenvliet, G.
5. DATE OF PUBLICATION (Month and year of publication of document.)
August 2013
6a. NO. OF PAGES
(Total containing information,
including Annexes, Appendices,
etc.)
100
6b. NO. OF REFS
(Total cited in document.)
9
7. DESCRIPTIVE NOTES (The category of the document, e.g. technical report, technical note or memorandum. If appropriate, enter the type of report,
e.g. interim, progress, summary, annual or final. Give the inclusive dates when a specific reporting period is covered.)
Technical Report
8. SPONSORING ACTIVITY (The name of the department project office or laboratory sponsoring the research and development – include address.)
Defence R&D Canada – Atlantic 9 Grove Street P.O. Box 1012 Dartmouth, Nova Scotia B2Y 3Z7
9a. PROJECT OR GRANT NO. (If appropriate, the applicable research
and development project or grant number under which the document
was written. Please specify whether project or grant.)
14dl
9b. CONTRACT NO. (If appropriate, the applicable number under
which the document was written.)
10a. ORIGINATOR'S DOCUMENT NUMBER (The official document
number by which the document is identified by the originating
activity. This number must be unique to this document.)
DRDC Atlantic TR 2012-255
10b. OTHER DOCUMENT NO(s). (Any other numbers which may be
assigned this document either by the originator or by the sponsor.)
11. DOCUMENT AVAILABILITY (Any limitations on further dissemination of the document, other than those imposed by security classification.)
Unlimited
12. DOCUMENT ANNOUNCEMENT (Any limitation to the bibliographic announcement of this document. This will normally correspond to the
Document Availability (11). However, where further distribution (beyond the audience specified in (11) is possible, a wider announcement
audience may be selected.))
Unlimited
13. ABSTRACT (A brief and factual summary of the document. It may also appear elsewhere in the body of the document itself. It is highly desirable
that the abstract of classified documents be unclassified. Each paragraph of the abstract shall begin with an indication of the security classification
of the information in the paragraph (unless the document itself is unclassified) represented as (S), (C), (R), or (U). It is not necessary to include
here abstracts in both official languages unless the text is bilingual.)
Over a three-year research program, Defence Research and Development Canada – Atlantic
investigated social networking technology with the aim of understanding this relatively new
collaboration tool. The technology was assessed for potential benefits and issues within the
context of information sharing, finding expertise, and team building for the Canadian Forces
(CF). A requirements analysis was conducted on a number of military groups in Year 1, and an
in-depth analysis was administered to a select group, the Training Development Officers (TDO),
in Year 2. In Year 3 the TDO community was provided with an enterprise-level social
networking platform (SABA People Cloud) in order to examine how the social networking
technology was used, what features were important, and what issues, if any, existed. A number
of data collection methods were employed including, questionnaire, experimentation, workshop,
observation, and visual analytics. The results were compared to similar data collected from the
publicly available Facebook social networking site (Facebook.com), where the TDOs had
created their own Group and where they had become increasingly active. This report
summarizes Years 1 and 2 of the program, and describes in detail the final year, Year 3. The
work overall emphasizes the importance of ease of use and accessibility of social networking
tools and suggests that this technology can be a viable and useful support to the CF.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Par un programme de recherche de trois ans, Recherche et développement pour la défense
Canada – Atlantique a étudié les nouvelles technologies que constituent les réseaux sociaux afin
de mieux comprendre ces nouveaux outils de collaboration. Nous avons évalué les avantages et
inconvénients potentiels du réseautage social dans le contexte du partage d’information, du
repérage d’experts et la promotion du travail d’équipe au sein des Forces canadiennes (FC). La
première année, nous avons effectué une analyse des besoins de plusieurs groupes de militaires
et, l’année suivante, une analyse approfondie a été faite sur l’un de ces groupes : les officiers du
développement de l’instruction (ODI). La troisième année, la collectivité des CDI a pu utiliser
une plateforme de réseautage social d’entreprise (SABA People Cloud); et nous avons pu
observer comment cette technologie a été utilisée, quelles fonctions ont été les plus importantes
et le cas échéant quels problèmes se sont manifestés. Nous avons pour cela fait appel à plusieurs
méthodes de collecte de données, notamment des questionnaires, des expériences, des ateliers et
des observations ainsi que l’analytique visuelle. Nous avons comparé les résultats obtenus à des
données semblables recueillies sur le site public de réseautage social Facebook (facebook.com),
car les CDI y avaient créé leur propre groupe et y étaient de plus en plus actifs. Le rapport
résume les deux premières années du programme d’étude, et décrit la troisième en détail. Ces
travaux soulignent en règle générale l’importance de la convivialité et de l’accessibilité des
outils de réseautage social, et appuient l’idée que cette technologie peut servir d’appui utile aux
activités des FC.
14. KEYWORDS, DESCRIPTORS or IDENTIFIERS (Technically meaningful terms or short phrases that characterize a document and could be
helpful in cataloguing the document. They should be selected so that no security classification is required. Identifiers, such as equipment model
designation, trade name, military project code name, geographic location may also be included. If possible keywords should be selected from a
published thesaurus, e.g. Thesaurus of Engineering and Scientific Terms (TEST) and that thesaurus identified. If it is not possible to select
indexing terms which are Unclassified, the classification of each should be indicated as with the title.)
social, network, collaboration, distributed teams, connecting
This page intentionally left blank.