Final bobcatsss 2012 rbats


Published on

poweroint présenté à bobcatsss 2012

Published in: Business, Technology
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Final bobcatsss 2012 rbats

  1. 1. Internal communication in libraries Are we organizations 2.0 ? Janvier 2012 Raphaëlle Bats, Enssib @knitandb Bobcatsss 2012
  2. 2. Bobcatsss 2012 <ul><li>Media 2.0 : participation, interaction, sociability. </li></ul><ul><li>2.0 = mix of genres </li></ul><ul><li>written communication (blogs, wikis) </li></ul><ul><li>conversational communication (Facebook, Twitter) </li></ul><ul><li>Is the chat a web 2.0 tool? </li></ul><ul><li>&quot;[a] brief overview of the origins of the chat allows us to observe the concomitant emergence of two distinct modes of articulation of the chat, a rather instrumental, self-centered and focused on efficiency - whose device type is instant messaging - and the other, more user-friendly and oriented toward sociability in a virtual place - on the model of the electronic forum.&quot;(Latzko-Toth, 2010, p74)1. </li></ul>Background and purpose : medias
  3. 3. Bobcatsss 2012 <ul><li>Internal communication : management and leadership. </li></ul><ul><li>Internal communication ? </li></ul><ul><li>Official communication </li></ul><ul><li>Informal communication </li></ul><ul><li>Written communication </li></ul><ul><li>Oral communication </li></ul><ul><li>… . </li></ul>Background and purpose : work <ul><li>project management </li></ul>&quot;What most characterize the current period and that is often overlooked by management is that the main vector of cooperation is precisely the direct communication at work (not just the organizational framework and managerial action).&quot;(Zarifian 2010, p 137).
  4. 4. Bobcatsss 2012 <ul><li>Have the roles of directors and leaders of libraries changed with these tools that claim to be equalitarian, transparent, to break boundaries, to spread the untold? </li></ul><ul><li>Is there or not an use of web 2.0 tools in internal communication in university libraries ? </li></ul>Background and purpose
  5. 5. Bobcatsss 2012 <ul><li>Survey with Limesurvey, hosted by Enssib </li></ul><ul><li>Diffusion : blog, twitter, ADBU, mailing </li></ul><ul><li>Dates : november 2011 </li></ul><ul><li>Items : Facebook, Twitter, chat, texting </li></ul><ul><li>Are they used in external communication ? </li></ul><ul><li>Are they used in internal communication ? </li></ul><ul><li>What directors think about qualities of these medias for communication ? </li></ul><ul><li>Target : universities libraries' directors </li></ul><ul><li>How they communicate with the direction team ? </li></ul>Materials and procedure : the survey
  6. 6. Bobcatsss 2012 <ul><li>66% of academic libraries have responded. </li></ul><ul><li>But a large part of incomplete answers. </li></ul><ul><li>25,42% of university libraries' directors give a complete responses </li></ul>Findings <ul><li>For increase the complete answer rate : </li></ul><ul><li>Changing some questions not enough clear </li></ul><ul><li>Contact each director personally to explain the project </li></ul>
  7. 7. Bobcatsss 2012 Findings : Texting <ul><li>37% of answering directors text with their teams </li></ul><ul><li>advice on contingency (33.33%), </li></ul><ul><li>give appointment (22.22%), </li></ul><ul><li>inform on presence or absence (18.52%), </li></ul><ul><li>sort out easy problems (18.52%) </li></ul><ul><li>Update and share knowledge (11.11%). </li></ul><ul><li>Personal phones are used more frequently than professional phones. </li></ul><ul><li>Out of the library </li></ul>
  8. 8. Bobcatsss 2012 Findings : Facebook <ul><li>No library director uses Facebook to communicate with their team. </li></ul>
  9. 9. Bobcatsss 2012 Findings : Twitter <ul><li>Only one director of university library uses Twitter for internal communication. </li></ul><ul><li>Inform about the unexpected, </li></ul><ul><li>sort out easy problems </li></ul><ul><li>Update and share knowledge </li></ul><ul><li>Professional or personal tools for twittering (telephones, computers, tablets). </li></ul><ul><li>Inside and outside the library </li></ul>
  10. 10. Bobcatsss 2012 Findings : chat <ul><li>Only one director uses the chat to communicate with the direction team </li></ul><ul><li>inform about the unexpected, </li></ul><ul><li>give appointments, </li></ul><ul><li>give notice of presence or absence, </li></ul><ul><li>sort out easy problems. </li></ul><ul><li>Professional or personal tools </li></ul><ul><li>Inside the library but out of his-her office </li></ul>
  11. 11. Bobcatsss 2012 Discussion Our university libraries are far from being 2.0 organizations. HYPOTHESIS : NOMADISM ? : The importance of using texting shows that the problem is not relying in the use of a nomadic and fast media but in the use of media that can be considered Web 2.0. NOVELTY ? : These media being no longer new and getting started being easy, the know-how to use them is widespread. CHANGE ? : The speed at which rise and fall of some media can explain a refusal to get involved. SERIOUSNESS ? : for some people, these tools are not that serious and are much more characterizing a trend, rather an adolescent communication. Such a feeling is hardly compatible with the seriousness expected of an internal communication. PUBLICITY  : the publicity of a conversation on twitter and facebook, compare to the privacy of a conversation with chat or texting. COLLABORATION : the main obstacle to these tools is maybe their participative and collaborative aspects .
  12. 12. Bobcatsss 2012 Discussion Management versus leadership ? &quot;Since they possessed equal rank and complementary roles, they created a shared leadership environment where each librarian shifted between leader and follower based on the circumstances and required expertize&quot; (Pan et al. 2011, p 348). The 2.0 : micro-business communities, recreate a corporate culture, be an internal community manager &quot;The contemporary thought considers corporate culture is built from the experience, knowledge and ways of thinking developed and shared socially. It consists mainly of micro cultures that ARE strengthened within groups of employees. These are forms of social relations and informal modes of behavior which are dynamic and have unique characteristics.&quot;(Massiera 2007, p 95) Medias 2.0 seem to offer us the opportunity of a such hybridity which the first step to a library 2.0. (CEFRIO 2011).
  13. 13. Bobcatsss 2012 Conclusion <ul><li>Just the beginning… </li></ul><ul><li>process all the results </li></ul><ul><li>launch the second survey to the direction teams </li></ul><ul><li>Propose the same survey in other countries and etablish a map of libraries as organizations 2.0 </li></ul><ul><li>Privassional / privessionnel </li></ul>To be year at Bobcatsss 2013?
  14. 14. Bobcatsss 2012 References CEFRIO, 2011. Livre blanc sur les nouveaux usages du Web 2.0 dans les organisations. From Latzko-Toth, G., 2010. Le chat est-il (encore) un média interactif? tic&société , Vol. 4, n° 1. From Massiera, B., 2007. Culture d’entreprise, l’échec d’un concept. Communication , Vol. 25/2. From Morillon, L., 2007. Nomadisme du modèle marketing, quelle appropriation dans les recherches actions en communication organisationnelle ? Communication et organisation , 31, (pp.214-227). Pan, D., Bradbeer, G. & Jurries, E., 2011. From communication to collaboration: blogging to troubleshoot e-resources. Electronic Library, The , 29(3), (pp.344-353). Zarifian, P., 2010. La communication dans le travail. Communication et organisation , 38, (pp.135-146).
  15. 15. Bobcatsss 2012 Questions ? @knitandb Thank you And thanks to Benoît (for presenting) and Philippe (for translating the paper) Raphaëlle Bats [email_address] [email_address]