I wrote this in June 2005. The history of intranets is one of a slow burn of adoption (or innovation, if you like). But the pace of technology change is increasing, email is being challenged... is it time now to dust off the intranet imperative and think about about where we go next?

What exactly is an intranet?

The nature of intranets is changing. In fact the term intranet itself is rapidly losing meaning as the Internet interpenetrates organisations through a mixture of business-to-business marketing, extranets, hosted application services and of course personal use of the Web at work. The traditionalist view of intranets, one that concentrates on static information built around an impregnable information architecture, creates a risk for organisations that may be oblivious to the rise of collaborative and dynamic “application-nets” that connect users to people, places and things.

Consider for a moment - what exactly is an intranet? The most simple or basic definition defines it as a restricted, private computer network that uses TCP/IP (Internet) network protocols to facilitate data transmission and exchange within an organisation. But when we look at modern intranets (and extranets), this definition raises more questions than answers – for example:

• Restricted or private to whom – does this include business partners or even customers?
• What is the computer network - does it end at the PC on your desk, the mobile phone in your pocket or a kiosk on the shopfloor?
• Does data include self-service systems, rich media, access to Web - and video conferencing and business intelligence tools that empower staff to get their work done?

Clearly the potiential demands placed on intranets are moving well beyond their original scope of simple access to information and documents. In fact paralleling other changes in our working environments, intranets now need to support always on, always connected access and provide flexibility and interactivity on demand. The technologies to do this already exist and the key challenge for many organistions is how to manage the evolution of an intranet into a multifaceted application-net in a controlled manner.

Of course while you can choose to ignore this imperative, be aware that technology has a habit of winning. You may find your users taking the path of least resistance (like returning to the dreaded network drive) or they will pick their own user-driven tools that will ensure they can get the job done.

The Strategic View of Intranets

Organisations need to control how their intranets will evolve into application-nets. The right approach for achieving this control is a management response that starts with developing a strategic view of their intranet. This strategic perspective does not prescribe the exact future form of the intranet as an application-net, but it provides the basis for creating a system architecture that will facilitate it. The critical point of difference between this new architecture and the old approach is that the intranet imperative forces us to broaden our horizons in order to understand more fully the fit between people, places and things.

This new strategic view should be built from understanding four key elements:

1. People and Process - understand who the current and future users of system will be, where they are located and what work activities the system must support;
2. Content - not just documents and information, but the collection of applications and other data in the system;
3. Infrastructure - The basic technical structure or features of the system (e.g. servers, networks, content management software, etc) and also the human support functions (e.g. helpdesks, trainers, technicians, etc); and
4. Governance -– the management controls (standards, committees, etc) that deal with the form of the infrastructure and the nature of the content in the system to ensure it meets the needs of the organisation and its users.

But like any type of strategic planning, the application of this strategic view must take into account the overall context of the organisation. Steps for understanding the strategic context and incorporating it into the design of the new architecture include:

• Business and Technology Analysis - Develop a strategic understanding of the intranet and how this technology, at its most fundamental level, relates to the overall strategy objectives of the organisation;
• System Audit and Gap Analysis - Complete a review of the people, processes, technology and content that already exists within your organisation to identify the gap between where you are and where you want to be;
• Manage expectations - Negotiate performance outcomes with your stakeholders to link the evolution of the intranet to the organisation's objectives; and
• Innovation - Look outside the organisation to learn from leading practices, understand the different options that are available in the market, and emerging trends.

These steps take us beyond simply asking how users will contribute and access information in the intranet and instead make us focus on the bigger picture, resulting in an architecture that is better aligned to the needs of the organisation.

From imperative to action

The intranet imperative is driven by unstoppable technology advances that affect how people work with and use information technology in the workplace. These include:

• Blurred lines between people, places and things - the distinction between intranets, extranets and Internet sites is changing;
• Rich media and interactive content - the scope of content has expanded to includes more than static documents, text and images;
• Always on, always connected - the working environment and intranets need to be delivered through new channels, such as mobile phone, wireless PDAs, voice and kiosks on the shop floor;
• Next generation networks - awareness, presence and locality will be built in; and
• User-driven software - users will take the path of least resistance and will pick less sophisticated tools if they get the job done.

Unfortunately for the average intranet manager or management team these changes will of course increase the complexity of dealing with already existing document-centric challenges such as information architecture, effective search and content quality. For example, expert designed information architectures will need to co-exist with those created by user communities. In practice what this means is that we will see organisations embrace different degrees of control, standardisation and integration in order to align their application-nets with the strategic goals of the organisation. For example, centralised authoring will live along side self-publishing systems such as wikis and blogs because it makes business sense rather that isolated decision to choose one over the other.

What may be worse still for some teams is that the technology of the intranet will no longer be isolated from other parts of the organisation. Under these circumstances the system architecture becomes even more critical as both a plan but also as a process for engaging with the rest of the organisation, both in terms of needs but also to create the right operational linkages. So, applying strategic thinking and designing a system architecture for your next generation intranet represents more that just a nice theoretical step but is instead a critical success factor.

Summary

We now understand that the nature of intranets is changing. Unless you use strategic thinking to broaden your concept of what constitutes an "intranet” into a next generation application-net, then you risk losing control as technology leaps ahead without you. You can prepare for this challenge by:

• Understanding why the nature of intranets is changing;
• Analysing the strategic context of your intranet today and what will be needed moving forward; and
• Designing a new system architecture that will facilitate this change so it is progressive, evolutionary and beneficial rather than chaotic, revolutionary and disruptive.

In the last few years a movement towards a 'mobile first' approach for new Website design has appeared in response to the growing importance of the mobile Web (I don't need to give you stats on this stuff do I?). Typically the mobile version of a site is addressed after the desktop version has been built, but mobile first means that the focus is initially on designing the optimal experience for mobile users then the desktop (in practice, you can then build both at the same time - see responsive design).

The benefits of focusing on mobile first can be two fold. The obvious point is that the needs and constraints of the mobile Web experience get addressed without the legacy of an information architecture designed for the desktop. You aren't attempting to reverse engineer to fit a smartphone screen or touch-orientated tablet screen. However, the knock-on effect for the desktop experience is that it can also benefit from this focus. This doesn't mean that you are stuck with a mobile experience on a desktop, but rather its the fact that you have a better understanding of what is really important to users.

Personally, I think mobile first is a great Web development philosophy although I'd caution against blindly following any method. Its important to understand that not only is the mobile experience different in terms of screen resolution and interface, but that people may also be using mobile and desktop in completely different contexts. There are no hard and fast rules here, because there is no substitute for doing your research and following a design process to work out user needs.

That aside, lets address the main question here: is mobile first worth considering for internal enterprise systems?

Unfortunately, I think there are a couple of challenges:

• Legacy Web-based applications and intranets are going to be a major barrier to mobile first in the enterprise.
• Many mobile apps used in the enterprise are provided by vendors.
• Some tasks and activities are unlikely to work on mobile (e.g. anything that requires a large screen and fine control).

In reality there may be limited chance to design for mobile first (although you can still design for mobile around existing systems). But perhaps this is the wrong way of thinking about mobile first in the enterprise - focusing on the front-end design, as you would with a Website. Maybe a better way to thinking about this when designing for mobile first in the enterprise is the idea of 'designing for mobile work first'. This would mean identifying overall requirements for the user experience of staff and business processes using mobile devices first, not just how to fit the interface to the device.

The side effect of designing for mobile work first would be the chance to really understand and focus on what information, communication and activities really make a difference in an organisation. If you decide you don't need to replicate your 5,000 page intranet on the iPhone then perhaps you should ask, do we need that 5,000 page intranet at all?

I think I've worked out what the "digital workplace" is:

If you think an intranet is that internal Website you browse on your PC at work, where a small number of people publish stuff for everyone else inside your company or organisation then the digital workplace is that and more - this includes mobile and remote access, but also other Web-based tools that employees use to get their work done. Wouldn't it be great if this all worked together, in a useful and usable way?

This might be considered a more polite version of my 3 intranet truths ;-)

Alternatively:

If you don't define an intranet in such a narrow way, then really the digital workplace is just a fancy word for your enterprise information system*. For those with legacy IT or technology-driven architectures (rather than being user-centred), the digital workplace is just a concept to push you towards a more progressive IT environment for your users. If you are already on that journey, well done - nothing to see here :-)

Yes, I'm a digital workplace skeptic; but if all the digital workplace idea is about is a bit of clever change management to get some intranet managers to think more broadly then its mostly harmless and may even do some good. The reason I say this is that (based on what I've read so far), the digital workplace:

• Still lacks a business case or imperative.
• Doesn't address the capability or place within the organisational structure of traditional intranet managers to actually deliver the digital workplace (although this could be part of a strategy to raise the status of intranet managers?).
• Doesn't address the organisational, operational and fundamental workplace impact of what Headshift | Dachis Group describe as Social Business (Dion Hinchcliffe has been documenting trends and issues in this space for some time).

*A good introductory text to this topic is something like Information Systems Management in Practice or similar.