Opportunity and risk in social computing environments

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

2. 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)

3. 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

4. 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

5. 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

6. 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

7. 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

8. 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

9. 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

10. 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

11. 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

12. Research focus 2 Perceived opportunities: anticipated and actual • Literature review highlighted: • increased collaboration • improved productivity • enhanced IM practice • positive cultural change

13. 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

14. Research activities – 12 weeks summer 08 Literature review Weeks 1-2 • Design of data collection tools and data collection • Web-based survey • Focus groups • Telephone interviews Weeks 3-8 • Data analysis • Quantitative – Excel • Qualitative – manual Weeks 8-12 Weeks 10-12 Writing up

15. 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

16. Study contributions Survey majority from public sector organisations. Organisation size = median 725 employees. *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.

17. Data collected, recorded & analysed

18. Hazel and Shooresh based at Napier in Edinburgh Focus group held at IDOX offices in Glasgow (31/07/08) Respondents to web-based survey (07-14/07/08) and participants in telephone interviews (28/07 -01/08/08) based across the UK Melanie and Belinda based at TFPL in London Focus group held at IDOX/TFPL offices in London (23/07/08)

19. 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

20. 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

21. 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 “

22. 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

23. 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

24. 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.”

25. 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)

26. Top tools for IM and KM professionals

27. Tool availability & usefulness

28. Tool availability, usefulness & usage

29. Tool availability, usefulness & usage

30. Tool availability, usefulness & usage

31. Tool availability, usefulness & usage • 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…

32. 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

33. 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?

34. 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.”

35. 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

36. 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

37. “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

38. “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

39. Example

40. Dissemination