I've previously mentioned Kai's research work looking at enterprise microblogging with Yammer in companies like Cap Gemini and Deloitte. Kai has now developed a model, called the Social Network Emergence Process which he describes in this post. There is also a link to a more detailed working paper and overview presentation.

Claudio Ciborra’s “From Thinking to Tinkering: The Grassroots of Strategic Information Systems” (in The Information Society 8: 297-309) is still (or even more) relevant today, as it was in 1992. Here are some of his ideas:

• Cherish local knowledge and everyday experience
• Value open experimentation, prototyping by end-users and design tinkering
• Establish systematic serendipity, don’t aim for sequential execution in systems design
• Strive on emergence, except failure

Sounds still familiar, right?

Yes.

We typically view microblogging as the posting of short status updates. And indeed that is what happens most on Twitter, as well as in many cases of Enterprise Microblogging. On Twitter, people mostly post about themselves, or they post links to interesting stuff on the web. In a corporate context, some of our early research has shown that microblogging is useful for people to signal task progress or share resources (Riemer/Richter 2010).

But recently we have started investigated how Yammer is used in large enterprises. The first case we analysed is Capgemini and their use of Yammer internally. Capgemini has adopted Yammer quite early in 2008 and the user community has been growing strongly ever since. Now, what is so special about this case?

Well, what we found in our analysis of a sample of about 1000 posts from July 2010 is that microblogging turns out to be very interactive. Of course people share links and resources or post their status. But the vast majority of posts is part of a conversation, e.g. a communication thread (around 75%).

We have further analysed the various types of postings and the contents of conversations. It turns out that microblogging as a communication channel is a useful medium to facilitate brainstorming, context building and actual knowledge work, not just information sharing.

Read more and see figures regarding distribution of communication categories in our full report, which is available online (Riemer et al 2011).

References

Riemer K and Richter A 2010 ‘Tweet Inside: Microblogging in a Corporate Context (Winner of The Bled Outstanding Paper Award)’, Proceedings of the 23rd Bled eConference 2010 – “eTrust: Implications for the Individual, Enterprises and Society”, Bled, Slovenia, 23rd June 2010, get pdf online.

Riemer K, Richter A, Diederich S and Scifleet S ‘Tweet Talking – Exploring The Nature Of Microblogging At Capgemini Yammer’, BIS Working Paper, ISSN: 1837-1744, http://ses.library.usyd.edu.au/handle/2123/7226

I'm at the 2011Enterprise 2.0 Exchange Symposium today, part of ACIS 2011 at Sydney University. Just listened to Kai Riemer's overview of his research into how an enterprise microblogging tool (Yammer) is being used in a variety of organisations.

Above is a report that looked specifically at its use in one organisation. In his presentation he highlighted the different patterns of use across these different organisations.

Enterprise 2.0 is a hot topic as business executives and IT leaders seek ways to bring social technologies into their business. But hype aside, are we close to seeing a social revolution in business? Not so fast. According to our recent survey of 4,985 US information workers, we find that we're still at the very beginning of social software use in business. The employees currently using the technology are early adopters of technology — individuals with high incomes and positive attitudes about technology — who are mostly testing the waters at this point. Thus, content and collaboration professionals rolling out enterprise 2.0 strategies and technologies need to understand how social tools are currently being used before they map out their long-range plans. This report outlines who is using enterprise 2.0 technologies, how they're using them, and the policies businesses need to put into place to support them.

Interesting survey results from Forrester. I've been reviewing some the details shared in coverage on RRW, CMSWire and CIO Asia.

Forrester aren't exactly saying don't bother, but rather the message is that only a few groups of savvy users are seeing the benefits. Interestingly, these standout groups include Generation X and also the the busiest people within a company. In fact, while on one hand Forrester's data suggests social business software isn't critical to users, those users are more productive than non-users. Perhaps they aren't considered critical because critical mass hasn't yet been achieved in the surveyed organisations.

I'm also encouraged by this advice:

Forrester says that while it's good to provide a range of social tools that give workers flexibility, it's more important to find the tools that best address the needs of your workforce. Be sure to evaluate vendors based on how well their technologies address these issues instead of the size of their offering.

This reflects my own opinion that wide spread viral adoption inside organisations is very rare. In fact, I'm talking to more and more organisations where viral adoption has stalled with a group of early adopters - while this is often seen as demonstrating the potential, it doesn't actual help them to move forward to get that all important critical mass.

I also believe that getting social business right can also be a source of competitive advantage, while other organisations continue to experiment (and even fail). The uneven adoption of enterprise social software can therefore be treated as an opportunity at this point.

Anyway, how well does Forrester's survey reflect your experiences?

According to the lead researcher, Dr Christina Boedker, high-performing workplaces are up to 12 per cent more productive and three times more profitable.

...

The management practices that do best, according to the study, are being highly responsive to changes in customers' and suppliers' circumstances, encouraging high employee participation in decision-making, achieving on-the-job learning through mentoring and job rotation, making effective use of information and technology and attracting and retaining high quality people.

Ross Gittins, Australia's respected and clear thinking economics columnist for the SMH, reports on the government sponsored research into productivity by the Society of Knowledge Economics (SKE).

Ross notes that only 15 per cent of the research sample exhibit the characteristics of such "enlightened" business practices. I imagine that the other 85% are still waiting for bottom line ROI on the minutiae of individual practices, tools or technologies to be proved - symptom or cause do you think?

UPDATE: Here is the actual report. Hat tip to Nicky.

The commonly held belief that the internet is turning an entire generation into solitary web-junkies is a myth, according to new research. The findings may offer succour to parents worried that social networking sites such as Facebook are reducing their children's participation in school sports and cultural activities.

In a paper to be presented to a gathering of Nobel prize winners later this month, three influential economists claim their work demonstrates the internet is actually making us more socially active.

Stefan Bauernschuster, Oliver Falck and Ludger Woessmann of the Ifo Institute in Munich reject the claim that the internet isolates people socially and erodes the traditional foundations of society. "There are no indications whatsoever that the internet makes people lonely," Bauernschuster said. He explained that their study revealed that a broadband connection at home positively influences the social activities of adults as well as children.

More research supporting the positives of being online.

A study has found that the hustle and bustle of modern offices can lead to a 32% drop in workers well being and reduce their productivity by 15%.

They have found that open plan offices create unwanted activity in the brains of workers that can get in the way of them doing the task at hand.

Open plan offices were first introduced in the 1950s and quickly became a popular as a way of laying out offices.

Having a clean and sterile desk can also leave employees with smaller brains, scientists claim.

The findings are revealed in a programme made for Channel 4, The Secret Life of Buildings, to be broadcast on Monday.

This type of research, IMHO, has implications for both our online and physical workplaces. Implementing a sterile, impersonal intranet is probably as bad as a clean desk policy.

But for physical workspaces at least, why does it always have to be one or other - open plan OR individual offices, work from the office OR work from home?

THE anonymity afforded by the internet makes it hard to know for sure who is driving online public opinion. But one thing can be said about this surfing, tweeting, blogging community busy putting links and comments up on their Facebook pages: it is made up of people with nothing better to do.

An interesting argument to discredit the value of online opinion: most people are participating online in company time because they are bored and cranky, so their opinion is skewed and unrepresentative (and clearly, they are of bad character by slacking off).

Curiously, no mention of the online popularity of the ABC's #qanda and SBS's refugee 'reality' documentary. I'm pretty sure those shows play outside of normal business hours - perhaps they were only popular with shift workers?

And there is plenty of other local research that challenges the mythology of cyberslacking too.

But based on the overall negatively I often see coming from the traditional Australian media about anything to do with the Web (e.g. social media, the National Broadband Network) I can only conclude its the result of widespread boredom in the industry itself.

What do you think? (Comments to be submitted outside working hours only, please)

For more information on this, see my post on the Headshift Asia Pacific blog. Also, read about the story behind the creation of the infographic.

Facebook may not be the black hole of workplace productivity many consider it to be, as research conducted by Swinburne University of Technology with web security company MailGuard shows.

The research partnership between MailGuard and Dr Rajesh Vasa, a lecturer in the Faculty of Information and Communication Technologies, has revealed that the average employee spends between 30 and 60 minutes online for personal reasons each day.

Although 40 per cent of people in the sample of approximately 50,000 used Facebook in the six-month period analysed, the average time spent on the site was just a few minutes.

While other studies have drawn on consumer data and qualitative research, this is the first to scrutinise individual behaviour over an extended period.

The uses of internet for personal reasons tend to be comparatively banal: people check the news, weather and transport timetables. Sports news sites are particularly popular and online shopping is rising.

Only 20 per cent of staff were classified by the researchers as ‘heavy explorers’, exceeding a baseline of ‘normal’ that was set at 200 websites a month. It’s at this level that staff productivity is considered to deteriorate.

Dr Vasa’s primary research at the faculty focuses on the behaviour of computer programmers when they build software. He helps companies who subcontract computer work to assess whether billing is correct and if the project is being managed at the declared pace. But the methodology easily transfers to web usage.

“I study how people use tools to build software and the browser is just another piece of software. The data that we store and the maths we use for analysis are identical. It’s the same maths that economists use to detect whether people are getting richer or poorer,” Dr Vasa says.

The anonymous data, provided with the consent of client companies, tracked staff browsing habits from 2009.
MailGuard CEO Craig McDonald expects the usage patterns to continue to evolve. Twitter was used by just 2.6 per cent of individuals in January 2009, but that had grown to 17.1 per cent by year’s end.

Mr McDonald does not believe the information warrants employers tightening the screws on their staff:
“How do you harness the experiences of heavy explorers who also achieve high productivity for the benefit of the business? It’s about working smartly in the new terrain, rather than banning social media and frustrating some of your best performers because one or two employees are misusing Facebook.”

The only hole I would pick in this research is that it only looks at personal use of the Web using their employers Internet connection; it doesn't account for people's personal mobile Internet access, so its conceivable that people are spending more time online than is visible in the data used. However, its good to see some data (and Australian research too) that challenges the assumptions about personal use of the Web at work.

The sentiment of McDonald's conclusions are correct too, which is what we should be talking about.

Of course, for the companies who are building businesses out social media FUD I'm sure this data won't be seen so positively. Its a real shame they get more coverage in the media and this news barely made a ripple.