Transcript Slide 1
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
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 University
John 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
Weeks 1-2
Design of data collection
tools and data collection
Weeks 3-8
Web-based survey
Focus groups
Telephone interviews
Data analysis
Weeks 8-12
Quantitative – Excel
Qualitative – manual
Weeks 10-12
Writing up
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
Survey majority
from public sector
organisations.
Organisation size =
median 725
employees.
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.
Data collected, recorded & analysed
Set Data collected
1
Tool uptake within
organisation; governance of
tools; attitudes to opportunity
and risk; challenges;
demographic data
2&3 Participant reactions to, and
discussions of, preliminary
results of web-based survey.
3
Recording and analysis
Excel for analysis of quantitative data.
Qualitative data coded up and analysed
manually.
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.htm
l
Participant experience of
Recorded as Word files and content
implementation: as executed, integrated into report under main themes
planned or not yet undertaken as derived from analysis of survey data.
Focus group held at
IDOX offices in Glasgow
(31/07/08)
Respondents to webbased survey (0714/07/08) and
participants in telephone
interviews (28/07 01/08/08) based across
the UK
Hazel and Shooresh based at
Napier in Edinburgh
Melanie and Belinda based at
TFPL in London
Focus group held at
IDOX/TFPL offices in London
(23/07/08)
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
Usage
Wikis
Wikis
Social networking
Blogging
Blogging
Instant messaging
Social networking
Instant messaging
Wikis
Instant messaging
Social networking
Blogging
Microblogging
Microblogging
Microblogging
Tool availability, usefulness & usage
Availability
Usefulness
Usage
Wikis
Wikis
Social networking
Blogging
Blogging
Instant messaging
Social networking
Instant messaging
Wikis
Instant messaging
Social networking
Blogging
Microblogging
Microblogging
Microblogging
Tool availability, usefulness & usage
Availability
Usefulness
Usage
Wikis
Wikis
Social networking
Blogging
Blogging
Instant messaging
Social networking
Instant messaging
Wikis
Instant messaging
Social networking
Blogging
Microblogging
Microblogging
Microblogging
Tool availability, usefulness & usage
Availability
Usefulness
Usage
Wikis
Wikis
Social networking
Blogging
Blogging
Instant messaging
Social networking
Instant messaging
Wikis
Instant messaging
Social networking
Blogging
Microblogging
Microblogging
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 acceptance
http://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
Example
hazelh
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
@Pascal
Think they use it at one of the big cell phone
companies?
Dawn
@David
Can give you a lift if you’re heading north?
Dissemination