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.

I stumbled across this recent Webinar aimed at government folks in the US about Yammer, which outlines how Deloitte's went about launching it to its global user base (Yammer originally started in Deloitte Digital, in their Australian practice). Deloitte is one of Yammer's high profile success stories and its one I've been tracking for a while.

Formally launched globally within Deloitte on 11/11/11, they followed a 90 day plan to implement Yammer:

Only yesterday I was talking about Yammer governance on the Headshift Asia Pacific blog, so its interesting to see the elements that Deloitte included in its plan:

• Communications;
• Training;
• Technology;
• Risk/Governance;
• Policy;
• End User Advocates; and
• Progam Management.

You will also note they distinguish between the activities required to launch and achieving a "steady state".

By following this process, Deloitte report in these slides that:

the Deloitte Global Yammer network now exceeds 43,000 members.

This is about a quarter of their employees (~180,000 in total).

The impact of the physical workplace on how we organise is a fascinating topic. For example the transformation of factories thanks to electricity and electric light changed how they operated. Modern offices, in the shape of skyscrapers, are an example of another development that has also affected how we manage. However, both the modernisation of factories and the creation of the modern office primarily depended on overcoming physical constraints to create physical structures. This in turn helped to define structures for work that we became familiar with in the developed world during the last century (lets call them 2nd Generation Organisations).

As the digital era continues, my impression is that intangible features are playing a greater role in defining the workplace environment and creating what I would call 3rd Generation Organisations. One trend that is starting to show what a 3rd Generation Organisation looks like is the shift towards Activity Based Workplaces (ABW):

As the name suggests the work space is organized by spaces designed to support specific activities… This loosely structured physical workplace is supported by work practices that facilitate it.

Note the relationship between space design and how work happens - this is more than simply creating a pleasant office space to work in and shouldn't be confused with hot desking or hoteling either. I recently had the opportunity to see Commonwealth Bank's Activity Based Workplace, built out on the edge of Sydney CBD. Its interesting to see how in practice IT plays a defining rather than supporting role in making their Activity Based Workplace possible.  In fact, urban planning consultants Urbis advise that:

During the 1990s, wi-fi didn’t exist, so flexibility was limited. Now, a successful [Activity Based] workplace must consider the IT environment to deliver productivity gains. ABW is fundamentally linked to technology and any ABW project will require significant investment in IT as well as the fitout.

The benefits of ABW appear to be a combination of soft and hard benefits:

• Employee engagement (better collaboration and productivity).
• Savings from more efficient use of space, less use of paper and lower building running costs.

Of course implementing an ABW is no easy task for a large organisation - it requires capital and motivation to make the change. Yet at the small end of town co-working spaces are becoming popular too, like Hub Melbourne. Just like their larger enterprise counterparts they are also enabled by access to mobile, social, Web-based and cloud information technologies.

It is easy to doubt the transformational impact of information technology in the workplace - including social software - but equally we shouldn't ignore the symbiotic relationship to the physical workspace. It is the combination of the two that will actualy create a deeper systemic change to how we organise and will allow 3rd Generation Organisations to emerge.

The Reserve Bank of Australia has been critical this last week about the depressed attitude in industry towards the state of the Australian economy. Like the rest of the developed world, there is obviously no way Australia can entirely avoid the competition of cheap labour overseas or the impact of global financial markets. But there is also a risk that Australian businesses use this as an excuse - research published last year highlighted that only a small proportion of Australian businesses are employing progressive management practices. This wasn't some wonky marketing survey, but a piece of serious research highlighting that:

"high-performing workplaces are up to 12 per cent more productive and three times more profitable"

In a related piece of work, my Dachis Group colleague Dave Gray has been looking at what characteristics define long-lived, successful companies. He was shocked to find that the life expectancy of large companies has fallen from 75 years in the 1930s to only an average of only 15 years. Dave's conclusion is that these companies are collapsing under their only dysfunctional weight. Right now, the logical reaction in some businesses to this "weight" problem is to downsize and outsource. Others on the other hand are embracing this challenge (that 12%).

I come into contact with some of those progressive organisations primarily from a technology perspective, although some are also attacking it from a broader social business level. What is interesting for me in this process is to observe that here in Australia, unlike say the US, our issue or need for concepts like Enterprise 2.0 isn't so much about overcoming dominant command and control structures; rather we need to embrace social technologies so we can:

• Use them as a force multiplier that allows local companies to punch well above their weight in a global economy (social technologies are fantastic levellers).
• Enable these companies to turn ideas, insight and innovation into action more effectively (great idea, but what are you going to do with it?).
• Engage staff so that they voluntarily maximise their own productivity and professional development (carrot, not stick).
• Deliver better products and more personalised levels of customer service (get people to buy Australian because its simply better).

In our government too there is an opportunity that has been mostly missed to date in the Government 2.0 conversation about enabling those inside government and those involved with service delivery to use these same technologies to also work more progressively. This is a missing piece in a puzzle that has spent more time focusing only on the veneer of citizen engagement through social media.

Of course, I'm not claiming that social business tools like software for workforce collaboration and social intranets trump the global and local financial and economic factors faced by Australian businesses. I'm simply saying don't ignore the evidence about how to be more productive and profitable. When wrapped up with the right implementation approach, these tools provide a critical technology platform for helping this to happen.