Breaking free from the old structures holding back online KM
•
3 gostaram•1,236 visualizações
This slideshow, created for presentation in November of 2011 to the Systems Integrators & Knowledge Management (SIKM) Leaders group, delves into the "Shared Drive Problem" and the "SharePoint Architecture Trap" - problems many teams encounter when trying to build social intranets with collaborative features.
Recomendados
Mais conteúdo relacionado
Destaque
Destaque (9)
Último
Último (20)
Breaking free from the old structures holding back online KM
- 1. Breaking free from the old structures holding back online KM 1. The Shared Drive workspace problem 2. The SharePoint architecture trap
- 2. About Ephraim: Name Q: “What’s your name and how do you cook your fish?” A: “Eh-fry-em”
- 3. About Ephraim: • Confidential, members-only • Fortune 1,000 • Evaluation/benchmarking • Research & best practices • My role: Community Manager – See many intranets – Talk to intranet managers
- 4. About Ephraim: • Social Intranet Software • Turnkey • User friendly • My role: Marketing & implementation – Social media presence – Blogging – New client services
- 5. Previous life: • Global nonprofit • Fighting poverty & injustice • Boston HQ • My role: Intranet Manager – Launched social intranet • KM & learning • Internal communications • Culture & community
- 6. Agenda: Topics 1. Shared Drive workspace problem – Why they don’t work – Findability issue – Social solution 2. SharePoint architecture trap – Fractured perspective – How collaboration should integrate
- 7. Why this presentation? Rise of: Yet still, lots of failure.
- 8. The myth Enterprise 2.0 is organic! • Not true / not accurate • Organic chaotic • Structure is important • Still dealing with information management 8
- 9. Why this presentation? In reality: = Just the modern incarnation.
- 10. Shared Drive Problem #1 New technology Old people processes
- 11. Case study: Shared Drive Success • Team excelled w/network drives – Shared expectations – Consistent processes – Committed leader • General team dynamics – Small group – Focused & strategic • Not social intranet pilot candidate – If it ain’t broke!
- 12. Case study: Shared Drive Sprawl • Desperate for better collaboration – Messy Shared Drives – Too much info – Trouble coordinating • General team dynamics – Large, matrixed – Consensus decisions – Broad scope • Pilot candidate! – Result: Sprawling online workspace
- 13. Shared Drive Problem #2 Desktop vs. Online Folders vs. Search
- 14. Example: Folder path Folder path provides complete context Simple file name
- 15. Example: Intranet search results Same title, but no context in search results
- 16. Shared Drive problem distilled • People dynamics prevail • Rules of web require new roles • Collaboration: Means ARE the ends
- 17. Succeeding: What’s required? Committed leader + Team-based approach = Mutual accountability + Shared expectations
- 18. Addressing Shared Drive Problem Team-based approach: – Brainstorm using K-J Technique • Structured collaboration • Series of steps • Minimize politics • Optimize intellectual power • Shared ownership – Barn raising • Build together
- 19. Brainstorming steps • Problems (why change?) • Goals (where are we going?) • Activities (what we do) • Info (our material) • Barn Raising (build new)
- 20. End results • New workspace: – Structure – Content • Shared: – Ownership – Understanding – Expectations – Accountability
- 21. End result
- 22. SharePoint Architecture Trap Fractured perspective
- 23. Separate pieces Intranet Team Sites My Sites
- 24. Resulting Issues • General: – Inconsistent branding – “Global navigation” isn’t – No search across groups – Homepage not personalized • Specific examples: – 2 people search boxes – Re-authentication
- 25. Options SharePoint perspective vs. broader vision
- 26. Example: Integrated homepage Team Sites on Global Nav homepage Edit profile
- 27. Example: Integrated homepage Surface activity from groups
- 28. Example: Integrated search Search entire site, for people, for groups, within a section
- 29. Example: People search Group membership as a search filter
- 30. Example: Profile pages Group membership shows on profile Aggregation of activity from across site
- 31. Different pieces & perspectives Expertise location KM & learning Collaboration Intranet
- 32. Integrated & unified: Greater value Expertise location KM & learning Collaboration Intranet
- 33. The End Breaking free from the old structures holding back online KM 1. The Shared Drive workspace problem 2. The SharePoint architecture trap
Notas do Editor
- THE MYTH Enterprise 2.0 tools or social tools or collaboration tools can grow organically. Not true This myth simply isn’t true. Or rather, it’s innacurate.People often think that collaboration is organic. But organic growth doesn’t mean chaotic growth.Look at a tree: It’s growth is organic, but it has baked into its DNA a bunch of parameters, limitations and structures. StructureStructure is important for collaboration. There is a myth about structure hurting collaboration, conversations, innovation and creativity. But actually, structure can be applied to all of these areas of work to make them MORE effective. Information management And no matter what, we’re still talking about information management. Information needs structure to be navigable and findable. It’s just that we’re talking about information within a social and collaborative context. But it still needs structure
- This is an example of a group workspace from Oxfam America’s intranet You’ll see there is no “Document library” This workspace setup was based on a similar process to the one I described The team has been pretty successful at using this on an ongoing basis and fitting a lot of new content within the existing structure. If you look closely, you’ll see that the navigation structures tend to align with activities and projects. And if you drill down you’ll see that specific pages have links to information on other parts of the group workspace and the whole site that are related to common activities and tasks.