Opportunity and risk in social computing environments
description
Transcript of Opportunity and risk in social computing environments
Centre for Social Informatics, Edinburgh Napier University Dr Hazel Hall, Reader Shooresh Golzari, Intern
TFPL Ltd, London Melanie Goody, Director of Consultancy Belinda Blaswick, Consultant
Opportunity and risk in social computing environments
Centre for Social Informatics
Social informatics Design and use of information and communication technologies
taking into account institutional and cultural contexts
CSI focus Sociotechnical interaction at different levels of the organisation at
different stages of the system life-cycle
Staffing 8 members based at Edinburgh, plus associates Home to the International Teledemocracy Centre
Reputation 85% research output international/world class (RAE 2008)
Edinburgh Napier UniversityJohn Napier
C16th mathematician and philosopher Decimal point, logarithms Born 1550 Merchiston Tower
Craiglockhart 1916-1919 military hospital Meeting of Wilfred Owen and Siegfried
Sassoon 1917 Owen’s Anthem for Doomed Youth and
Dulce et Decorum Est
Today 13,500 students Research excellence in a number of areas
TFPL Ltd, London
Services Recruitment Consultancy Training
Including networks and events TFPL Connect, SharePoint Summits
Scope Knowledge management Information management Records management Content management Library and information services management
Edinburgh Napier – TFPL connection
Track record of joint research - TFPL
Royal Academy of Engineering secondment 2006 E-information roles (with Blaswick) – ASIS&T 06 Maximising value from communities consortium
Track record of joint research – Hall & Goody Outsourcing of research and information services (2005/6
LIRG/Elsevier Research Award) KPMG as case study for doctoral work
http://www.dcs.napier.ac.uk/~hazelh/esis/hazel_publications.html#phd
Room demographics
Who uses what for purposes of collaborative work? Blogs? Wikis? Social networking? Instant messaging? Microblogging?
Anyone think this is trivial? Scottish Falsetto Sock Puppet Theatre
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x7RrHXNyONc
Purposes of the study
Establish main opportunities and risks of social computing tools within organisations for collaborative work purposes, as perceived by information and knowledge management professionals
Meet general interest of TFPL’s client base Inform TFPL’s training and consultancy portfolio Serve as pilot for larger, externally-funded piece of work
Possible repeat study summer 2009
Purposes of the study
Establish main opportunities and risks of social computing tools within organisations for collaborative work purposes, as perceived by information and knowledge management professionals
Licensed collaborative work platforms SharePoint (Microsoft) Lotus Notes and Quickplace (IBM) E-rooms (Documentum)
“Mature” social software applications, e.g. instant messaging, blogs, wikis
Newer Web 2.0 applications, e.g. social networking, microblogging
Purposes of the study
Establish main opportunities and risks of social computing tools within organisations for collaborative work purposes, as perceived by information and knowledge management professionals
Focus to date mainly on freely available social software for personal use
Academic studies treat “older” applications in non-corporate environments, e.g. educational settings
Few studies on internal social computing environments Lack of extant literature on newer tools, e.g. social networking and
microblogging applications
Purposes of the study
Establish main opportunities and risks of social computing tools within organisations for collaborative work purposes, as perceived by information and knowledge management professionals
Rather than: Journalists, e.g. concern over vulnerable groups Educational researchers, e.g. goal of enhancement of classroom
environment Public relations professionals, e.g. efforts to improve corporate
communications
Research focus 1
Scale of implementation
Organisational uptake of social computing Levels of adoption Degree of access to tools
In general By tool By tool function
Attitudes of IM/KM staff to social computing In general By tool
Research focus 2
Perceived opportunities: anticipated and actual
Literature review highlighted:
increased collaboration improved productivity enhanced IM practice positive cultural change
Research focus 3
Perceived risks: feared and realised
Literature review highlighted:
lowered productivity - time-wasting erosion of IM practice, e.g. for archiving and accessing exchanges compromised security antisocial behaviour
Research activities – 12 weeks summer 08
Literature review
Data analysisQuantitative – ExcelQualitative – manual
Design of data collection tools and data collection
Web-based surveyFocus groupsTelephone interviews
Writing up
Weeks 1-2
Weeks 3-8
Weeks 8-12
Weeks 10-12
Data subjects
Population TFPL contacts
Direct, e.g. clients, attendees at SharePoint Summits Indirect, e.g. through the Scottish Information Network
Invitation to participate Face-to-face at TFPL Connect meeting June 2008 Survey and focus groups: by e-mail invitation
Possible to attend focus group, but not complete survey
Interviews: volunteers left contact details on survey
Study contributions
Data set Data derived from Number of contributions
1 Web-based survey 57
2 London focus group 13
3 Glasgow focus group 12
4 Interviews 14
96*
*It was possible to make more than one contribution to the research, e.g. all who were interviewed completed the survey (96-14=82); similarly it was possible to complete the survey anonymously and attend a focus group.
Survey majority from public sector organisations.
Organisation size = median 725 employees.
Data collected, recorded & analysed
Set Data collected Recording and analysis
1 Tool uptake within organisation; governance of tools; attitudes to opportunity and risk; challenges; demographic data
Excel for analysis of quantitative data.Qualitative data coded up and analysed manually.
2&3 Participant reactions to, and discussions of, preliminary results of web-based survey.
Recorded as Word files and content integrated into report under main themes as derived from analysis of survey data. Also posted to TFPL blog, e.g. http://blog.tfpl.com/tfpl/2008/07/index.html
3 Participant experience of implementation: as executed, planned or not yet undertaken
Recorded as Word files and content integrated into report under main themes as derived from analysis of survey data.
Focus group held at IDOX/TFPL offices in London (23/07/08)
Hazel and Shooresh based at Napier in EdinburghFocus group held at
IDOX offices in Glasgow (31/07/08)
Melanie and Belinda based at TFPL in London
Respondents to web-based survey (07-14/07/08) and participants in telephone interviews (28/07 -01/08/08) based across the UK
Uptake of social computing 1
Range in levels of adoption
From non-provision... ... to sophisticated implementations that integrate “consumer”
applications with licensed systems Sense that study may have come “too early”
High number of “don’t know” and “neutral” responses to survey questions
Two thirds of respondents who provided additional free text comments at end of survey noted impacts on social computing initiatives in their organisations were yet to be felt
Interviewees cautious in drawing firm conclusions
Uptake of social computing 2
Levels of access – survey respondents with access Higher levels in public sector (yet greater deployment in private) Licensed plus “consumer” tools: 57.7% Licensed system only: 31.7% “Consumer” tools only: 11.5% Organisations that restrict access: 24%
Encouragement to adopt social computing tools 26.5% “high” 32.4% “moderate” 41.2% “low”
Public sector organisations more enthusiastic than private
Enthusiasm amongst IM and KM staff 1
Levels of enthusiasm for social computing amongst IM and KM staff = high Increases collaboration and improves productivity in general
Facilitates knowledge and information sharing Connects individuals and groups Widens communication channels
Enhances IM practice More obvious and better organisation of resources Consolidation of material and reduction of silos 24 hour access
Induces positive cultural change (especially social networking) Widens employee choice retention (social networking) 55% involved in decision making around social computing tools
“
Enthusiasm amongst IM and KM staff 2
“Top” tools Wikis for information sharing
NB “information”
Blogs for connecting individuals and groups, and widening information channels
Unite physically separated team members Provide outlet for promotion of on-going work to a wide audience Open up conversations Route to feedback on activities
Social networking Culture Employee choice
Implementation concerns 1
Low organisational encouragement in the deployment of tools
41% “low” encouragement Few efforts in change management and training, even where there
has been heavy investment
Implementation concerns 2
Biggest risk Failure to capitalise on opportunities offered by social computing
tools due to poor implementation management Respondents familiar with this risk from earlier experiences, e.g.
intranet developments from mid-90s onwards This risk is not considered in the literature
“Like most things it’s about cultural change. A tool (however clever) can be used well/badly. Therefore usual considerations apply around what purpose does it serve, selling it to the business, understanding business benefits/risks, giving staff skills to use [it/them] properly, providing standards and guidance around use, encouraging good practice.”
Less prominent risks
IM problems Information sprawl (but not overload); archiving; means of
accessing archives; (version control and information quality)
Compromised security (Legal infringement and disrepute theoretically valid, though not
realised in practice); some leakage of confidential information
Lowered productivity Coping with IM problems; failure to adopt social computing tools “If employees are going to waste time, they do not need social
computing tools to do it”
(Anti-social behaviour)
Top tools for IM and KM professionals
Rank Tool Opportunities Risks posed
1 Wikis Information sharing; IM practice; productivity
Information quality in terms of wiki accuracy; leakage of confidential data
2 Blogs Connecting individuals & groups; widening communication channels
Disrepute; leakage of confidential data
3 Social networking
Positive cultural change & widened employee choice
Leakage of confidential data
Tool availability & usefulness
Availability Usefulness
Wikis Wikis
Blogging Blogging
Social networking Instant messaging
Instant messaging Social networking
Microblogging Microblogging
Tool availability, usefulness & usage
Availability Usefulness
Wikis Wikis
Blogging Blogging
Social networking Instant messaging
Instant messaging Social networking
Microblogging Microblogging
Usage
Social networking
Instant messaging
Wikis
Blogging
Microblogging
Tool availability, usefulness & usage
Availability Usefulness
Wikis Wikis
Blogging Blogging
Social networking Instant messaging
Instant messaging Social networking
Microblogging Microblogging
Usage
Social networking
Instant messaging
Wikis
Blogging
Microblogging
Tool availability, usefulness & usage
Availability Usefulness
Wikis Wikis
Blogging Blogging
Social networking Instant messaging
Instant messaging Social networking
Microblogging Microblogging
Usage
Social networking
Instant messaging
Wikis
Blogging
Microblogging
Tool availability, usefulness & usage
Availability Usefulness
Wikis Wikis
Blogging Blogging
Social networking Instant messaging
Instant messaging Social networking
Microblogging Microblogging
Usage
Social networking
Instant messaging
Wikis
Blogging
Microblogging
Ready availability of a tool does not guarantee popularity Under-exploitation of most valuable tools? “[All of the tools] support [collaboration] in different ways and are
limited mainly because of uptake rather than limitations of the tool itself”
Microblogging barely on the radar, yet consider its offerings…
Microblogging
Elements of social networking End user determines source of information flow based on “social
network” that he/she builds
Elements of instant messaging Interactions are brief and to the point, real time, “familiar” format
Elements of wiki Public nature of conversations encourages collaborative building of
new knowledge
Elements of blogging Microblog, with easy linking to other resources
Microblogging
Elements of social networking End user determines source of information flow based on “social
network” that he/she builds
Elements of instant messaging Interactions are brief and to the point, real time, “familiar” format
Elements of wiki Public nature of conversations encourages collaborative building of
new knowledge
Elements of blogging Microblog, with easy linking to other resources
Potential to meet needs of IM/KM professional and user preferences together?
5 stages of Twitter acceptancehttp://www.slideshare.net/minxuan/how-twitter-changed-my-life-presentation
1. Denial“I think Twitter sounds stupid. Why would anyone care what other people are doing right
now?”
2. Presence“OK, I don’t really get why people love it, but I guess I should at least create an account.”
3. Dumping“I’m on Twitter and use it for pasting links to my blog posts and pointing people to my
press releases.”
4. Conversing“I don’t always post useful stuff, but I do use Twitter to have authentic 1x1 conversations.”
5. Microblogging“I’m using Twitter to publish useful information that people read, and to converse 1x1
authentically.”
Reminder of context of findings
Findings align to priorities of information management roles: providing access to resources and information governance Wikis as open tools for the capture of knowledge made explicit in
the form of information are rated highest Collaborative value of social networking applications is less
“visible”
Other groups, other priorities e.g. in the same organisations Human Resources staff may see
greater evidence of inappropriate use of tools
Timing Microblogging not mainstream in summer 2008
Priorities of information and knowledge management professionals
Know the value of social computing Attendance at focus groups to enhance knowledge
Sell message on value to the organisation
Play an active role in implementation planning Choice of tools Management of roll-out Design of governance guidelines
Become mediators in social computing business environments
Explore microblogging
“Discussion” exercise part 1
1. Generate “Tweet fountain” for your table http://www.ukeig.org.uk/conf2009/index.html
Steps Individuals need Twitter user names: help invent names for those
who do not already have them (You are one another’s followers) As individuals write tweets on post-its: one 140 character tweet
(English or French) per post-it, including user name Observations/thoughts: “Going to check out Zotero after seminar” News/PR: “My organisation is doing X” Information delivery (current awareness): “Here’s a great resource…” Questions: “Does anyone know about Y?”
Arrange tweets on the wall in order of appearance
“Discussion” exercise part 2
Steps If you would like to respond to a tweet generated by one of the
people you “follow” (i.e. same table members), do so with post-its. Preface them with @username at the top so it’s clear to which tweet you are responding.
Switch tables (together) Check what the other tables have been “discussing”
See if there are individuals whose contributions are such that you would like to “follow” them
If appropriate (and not too chaotic), add responses to the tweet fountains of the other tables
Examplehazelh Learnt quite a bit about Zotero this morning
PB Concerned that life is too short to get involved with Twitter
Emilie Can anyone recommend a good X for doing Y in a small commercial library?
Pascal Looking for reference site for Yammer installation
David Anyone at SLA members’ day like to take same bus home after today’s session?
hazelh @PascalThink they use it at one of the big cell phone companies?
Dawn @DavidCan give you a lift if you’re heading north?
Dissemination