Collaborationtools aalto 2-10-2012_slideshare

Collaboration and Co-operation Tools
@Aalto university 02.10.2012

Tero Peltola
Center for Innovation and Technology Research
Tampere University of Technology / Industrial Management

Main discussion threads

Motivation & Background
Collaboration & Co-operation tools

My Research

Tero Peltola / CITER 2.10.2012

Motivation & Background


Gartner Hype Cycle for Emerging
Technologies 2012

Source: http://joemurphylibraryfuture.com/gartner-2012-hype-cycle-for-emerging-technologies/


Forecasts: using social media in
companies
 Using social media technologies will be increased, as
only 5 out of 115 companies estimated that they will
not use them in future.
 In addition to marketing and PR, R&D process and
internal communication are considered to benefit
from social media technologies.
 Estimated to become more important tool for
internal communcation than for PR
 Over 81% IT professionals are motivated to
participate in online communities by the desire to
help peers solve problems.

Source: EVA_Sosiaalinen_media_yrityskäytössä_yhteenvetoraportti.pdf : published 14.2.2011
2011 Toolbox.com/PJA Social Media Index: Wave VII : IT Audience Results


“Our ambition
is to be a Zero
email company
within
3 years”

Thierry Breton, CEO
februari 2011

What we already have…

Polls & Surveys
Wikis
Media and file sharing
Crowdsourcing
Online mindmaps
Forums
Social Networks
Micro-blocking
Instant Messaging
Social bookmarking
Blogs


McKinsey 2012


Internal use of Web 2.0 applications has produced
measurable gains
% of respondents using Web 2.0 for internal purposes and reporting the following
benefits (avarage data from 2009, 2010, 2011)1


2007 524 357 426
2011 915 443 1173


End of motivation


Wrap up

There are lots of studies that indicate various benefits

It is not just for certain industry, but for all of them


Some example applications…


But first…

Variety of tools that can be grouped in many ways.

For example, by the frequency of use (Migdadi et al. 2008)
-Discussion forums
-Repositories
-Shared databases
-Workflow

I prefer to group them by the ”original” target


Two main paths…

Starting point

Cross-
Innovation
functional
process
communication

Updated version of Communication not
succestionboxes limited to new product
development


The other way round…

Online
collaboration

Cross-
Innovation
functional
process
communication

Updated version of Communication not
succestionboxes limited to new product
development


And now few examples applications…


Path of the innovation process

Examples:
Hyve AG (http://www.hyve.de/)
Orchidea Innovations Oy
(http://www.orchideainnovations.fi/)


Path of the innovation process

Applications are a bit closer to open innovation –type of
working methods (such as crowdsourcing) than
applications based on cross-functional communication

The same tool for open innovations might not fit (or is not
used) to all aspects of online collaboration inside the
company.


Path of cross-functional
communication

Examples
Streamwork (Streamwork.com)
Bluekiwi (www.bluekiwi-software.com/en/)
Jive (www.jivesoftware.com/)


Path of cross-functional
communication

The all benefits might be reached only if the size of the
company is big enough.


SAP StreamWork

People: Get everyone on the same page.

Information: Share documents and data all in plain view.

Methods: Provide structure with tools for brainstorming and decision-making.


Streamwork wrap up

Rather facebook-styled

Activities

Can invite persons also from other parties


bluekiwi


Bluekiwi wrap up


Spaces



jivesoftware


Jive wrap up


Streams



Innovation process vs. cross-functional communication

Example applications for
two paths discussed…


But there is always
the third path!


DIY Enterprise Social Network -application

Pros
Fully tailored solution, only the features that are required
UI can be made familiar to employers
Initial costs might be lower be lower
(seem to)

Cons
Fully tailored solution, only the features that are required
Providing organization might not be specialist to ESN
Maintanance also DIY

Some cases DIY is preferred, but as there are available so
many good applications why bother…


About the price

Not cheap applications
15…20k€ annually

Depends on many things: modularity?, amount of users?,
market penetration?, etc

Is it worth it?


Wrap up

There are lots of alternatives available

Applications are pretty similar

But one should recognize the main motivation for social
media technology adoption


Influence of social media technology to the initial phase of the new
product development


Performance of the New Product
Development

Importance of Fuzzy Front-End

Innovations are typically based on the existing knowledge

Collaboration and communication

© ATOS

Tero Peltola / www.tut.fi/citer 19.3.2012

The reseach in the nutshell


Case company selection criteria

Social media tool is irrelevant
Companies should have several organizations
Active tendency to find new knowledge and ideas
Should have interest to use social media technologies
company-wide
Case companies should be from wide spectrum of different
fields
Willingness to participate in the research


Cases / change

Case 1: Enterprise Social Network wider scale + mobile app
Case 2: Intranet + social media tool integration
Case 3: ESN roll-out wider scale
Case 4: Launcing business network & Linkedin group


Expectations

Individual level
Task complexity seems to be irrelevant
Depends on familiarity towards social media (not age)

Organizational level
The glory and glitter seems to be increased step by step in
upward direction


Challenges

Individual level
Group identity
Mutual trust

Organization level
Information transparency – confidental material
How to motivate sufficient amount of users


Wrap up

Organizations are still learning to find the new way of
working


Thank you

Further questions?

http://fi.linkedin.com/in/teropeltola


Collaborationtools aalto 2-10-2012_slideshare

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (13)

Viewers also liked

Viewers also liked (20)

Similar to Collaborationtools aalto 2-10-2012_slideshare

Similar to Collaborationtools aalto 2-10-2012_slideshare (20)

More from Tero Peltola

More from Tero Peltola (9)

Collaborationtools aalto 2-10-2012_slideshare