Collaboration Tools – web conferencing software

Christine Harrell asked:




There are numerous examples of organizations that have implemented online collaboration tools such as SharePoint and Basecamp and have been surprised when they aren’t adopted and used. Breaking the e-mail habit and encouraging people to adopt new ways of working is very difficult.

Many organizations are exploring the benefits of using online collaboration tools to manage knowledge and coordinate large projects. They often do a good job evaluating different technologies (and there are lots of great tools out there), but a poor job thinking through and planning how to get busy people to actually use and adopt them. The truth is that changing individuals’ personal work habits is very hard and deserves as much attention and planning as picking the right technology platform.

This article summarizes some best practices for focusing on the “people part” of online collaboration.

Get Employee Input Before Choosing the Platform

One source of employee resistance is the feeling that a new project workspace or other collaborative tool is being imposed on them against their will. This can be overcome by involving team members before the platform has been implemented.

Ask employees what they are looking for in an online collaboration tool. Don’t limit yourself by the products that are out there. Instead, have employees come up with a list of “points of pain” in their daily work and a wish list of potential online tools and services – such as online task management, document libraries, team blogs, wikis, etc. Even if their list contains elements that are not implemented in the first phase, this activity will illustrate what is important to employees and other users.

Not only does this make the employee part of the implementation process, but often they have insight that managers may lack. People from different parts of the organization or project may have unique needs that the decision-makers might not have considered.

Find the Right Online Collaboration Tool

Improving employee participation starts with the selection of the proper tool or software. There are a number of online collaboration tools around and not all of them are created equal.
An online collaboration tool with more features doesn’t necessarily mean it’s a better product. Lots of unnecessary bells and whistles make the software confusing and hard to learn which will increase employee resistance.

Often, during the process of evaluating different technology options, groups will identify lots of different features they “absolutely need,” but after launching the tool they only use one or two key features. Consider developing some criteria to prioritize functions and features, and making clear the trade-off between too many features and usability. Experience shows that simplicity and an intuitive interface is by far the most important feature of any collaboration tool.

Understanding Incentives

There are two ways to motivate users to collaborate online. Users will either 1) log in and access or share information because it provides a valuable service to them personally, or 2) they will log in and use it because they are expected to by someone in a position of authority.

To encourage “voluntary” use, the tool must provide valuable services to its users. If the content and functionality helps busy users access information they need or accomplish a task – they will log in and use the tool voluntarily. In addition, recognizing users who make valuable contributions can boost their incentives to proactively participate.

In other cases where volunteerism and peer recognition is not enough, organizations must set clear expectations and guidelines for members and reinforce them often. The incentive, then, is simply the desire to do what is asked. This may be another obvious-sounding recommendation, but it also tends to be lost in the rush to do other, higher-profile activities. In some cases, responsibilities requiring a significant contribution of time should be incorporated into individuals’ job descriptions.

User types

Experience shows that there are stark differences in online behavior in participation within different user groups, and therefore it is useful to plan around these different types of users. These are outlined below.

-Super Users – Super Users are highly active community participants that not only contribute content but also take ownership and work to promote it and make it successful. The will, for instance, help police content for appropriateness and, properly guided, informally train users on expectations and norms. They will also welcome new users and help them understand the community and its role in their work. There will likely be few Super Users, but they have enormous importance for the community.

-Regulars – Regulars are more typical “good” users. They login regularly and contribute content of various kinds with some frequency. While not as active as Super Users, there are somewhat more of them and thus in aggregate they form an important active layer of the community.

-Contributors – Many users will come to the site with some frequency, but will contribute to it only once in a while. While they do not give much to the community, they are still demonstrating a level of interest that suggests they are learning from it. Additional support and incentives may convert some to Regulars.

-Browsers – Another large segment will visit the site periodically but never – or rarely – contribute to it. These users represent possible Contributors but are in need of further promotion, additional incentives, and, perhaps, more training.

-No-shows – There will be a group of potential users who never catch on to the community. Periodic efforts to convert these users would be valuable, but you should not expend great effort on them. It would, however, be valuable to discuss why these users are not active and understand if there are systematic disincentives within the community.

Announce the new Platform

When an organization is ready to roll out a collaboration tool, they should prepare and send an announcement to all potential users. The announcement should be brief but should clearly articulate:

-The goals for the organization
-The “selling points” – the value it will provide and the incentives that will be in place
-An overview of the services it will contain – both content and functionality
-A summary of guidelines and expectations for use
-A timetable for when they can expect to be able to use it
-A schedule for training

Lead By Example

Lastly, employees are never going to adopt an online collaboration tool unless they see management using it. Let team leaders be the guinea pigs that ensure the application works as advertised and let them inspire other team members to start using it.

Don’t convert the entire organization to the new system overnight. Start out small with individual project teams to pilot test the tool. This allows the application to be tested and any problems solved. It also allows team members to dip a toe in and see that the water is fine.

Finally, offer training and technical support. Structured training eases the learning curve and the frustration of implementing a new product. Knowledgeable super users and technical support personnel can fix user problems quickly, again reducing the aggravation of adopting a new system. A well-designed implementation plan can have your new online collaboration tool, whether it is an online task management system or a knowledge management tool, operating smoothly within weeks, backed by the full support of the entire team.

Tanya

lexisnexisnetwork asked:

Chuck Staudenmaier, Community Manager for LexisNexis discusses law enforcement’s need to move from one-to-one communication tools to social networking one-to-many solutions like the LexisNexis Investigators Network, to connect and share information faster.

Minnie

Sabrina McOwen asked:




In today’s stiff business competition, it has been a vital requirement to keep up with the fast pace of modern online tools and means to better prolong any business’ communication and management necessities. And this is where reliable online collaboration software comes into view serving as a great platform for many making communication a whole lot easier and faster.

Web-based collaboration gives way to wider business interactions and communication functionality. Not only these, it also opened doors to contemporary collaboration solutions which answer every organization requirement there is.

A good online collaboration tool is capable of covering interaction, conferencing and management done online all at the same time which is why it plays a very significant role in any business organization. In fact, well thought out collaboration tools come with various useful and easy-to-use applications which are very well-designed and functional.

A few to cite are video and data conferencing and application sharing. Such features make sharing and exchanging of ideas effortless, transmission of information trouble-free and contact with business groups and divisions on real-time basis.

There are hundreds or maybe thousands of web-based collaboration tools today making it painless to choose which one you prefer that best fits your needs. Even major search engines like Google and Yahoo provide their own-designed communication tools which are made available for everyone to use and enjoy. This has become very beneficial to many businesses and individuals especially to those who are into internet marketing and the likes.

As time goes by and everything around the globe is evolving and becomes modernized, it’s good to know there are new tools to utilize so no one gets left behind. It all just boils down to smartly choosing which is best among the rest and properly using them to your advantage.

Darryl

VeriShowLive asked:

Real-world scenarios for using VeriShow ( www.verishow.com ) and ShowDocument ( http ) that include customer support, sales and real-time collaboration. Both collaboration tools are FREE, try them out!

Marvin

Miriam Scurrah asked:




Collaboration

‘More than 97 percent of senior leaders believed collaboration is essential to success. However, only 30 percent of respondents and 47 percent of senior leaders believed leaders in their organization are actually skilled in collaboration. Results indicate leaders must learn to work across boundaries to collaborate effectively in the coming years.’ (Centre for Creative Leadership, 2007)

Collaboration is a process of participation through which people, groups and organizations work together to achieve desired results. Common factors and characteristics have been identified by research as influencing the collaborative process, including the skills of leadership, communication, sustainability, unity, participation, and a history of successful accomplishments (Hogue, et al, 1995; Keith et.al, 1993). Borden (1997) has identified four factors: internal communication, external communication, membership, and goal setting.

Borden & Perkins (1999) identified and defined the following factors in the development of a simple self evaluation tool. This tool can be used by groups to stimulate discussion after self rating the collaborative effort for each key area. It can also provide an overview of the key factors necessary for success in a collaborative project.

• Communication – clear and open with an established process.

• Sustainability – there is a plan for sustaining participation and resources throughout the project including guidelines in regards to the replacement of members.

• Research and Evaluation – a needs assessment has been conducted, goals are clear and there are measurement processes in place to collect data and review those goals.

• Political Climate – there exists positive history and environment surrounding power and decision making. Political climate may be within the group as a whole, systems within the group or networks of people;

• Resources – there is access to the required resources. Resources refer to four types of capital: environmental, in-kind, financial, and human;

• Catalysts – the collaboration was commenced due to the existence of problem(s) or the reason(s) for collaboration to exist required a comprehensive approach;

• Policies/Laws/Regulations – the collaboration can function effectively under the existing policies, laws, and/or regulations or these can be altered or created

• History – the group has a history of working cooperatively and solving problems;

• Connectedness – members are connected and have established informal and formal communication networks at all levels;

• Leadership – there are leaders who promote, facilitates and support team building, and who can capitalise on diversity and individual, group and organizational strengths;

• Group Development – this collaboration was mobilized to address important issues. There is a communication system and formal information channels that permit the exploration of issues, goals and objectives; and,

• Understanding Stakeholders – the collaboration understands the stakeholders, including the people, cultures, values and habits.

Using the factors outlined above as a focus of discussion may reduce fragmentation within the group and move group conversation from generic discussion to focused dialogue leading to sound decision making, and action. Open and honest communication within the group can increase group effectiveness and commitment. It also assists with viewing issues and problems in a holistic manner. Open and honest communication within the collaboration and with stakeholders is critical to success.

Another key area to be addressed is the setting of direction and focus for the collaboration. Ensuring a clear and understood direction and focus between all parties for a collaboration defines the purpose of the collaboration as what its members seek to create. Setting the direction and focus begins with establishing the vision, mission, values, and principles. Defining the outcome(s) further establishes identity and fundamental purpose. Activities also need to be aggregated to provide value to the collaborative group and to stakeholders. Multiple activities with similar focuses can confuse. Task/role clarity can create greater involvement, dialogue and understanding. Applying the range of factors above to the processes and contexts of the collaboration results in a greater shared understanding of what the collaboration stands for, where it’s going, the internal and external environment, and how it intends to make its outcomes a reality.

Collaboration as a Continuum Collaboration often means different things to different people, it is useful to think about collaboration as a continuum. Parties may consider themselves in relationships that vary from lower-intensity exchanges, in which the groups are more independent, to higher-intensity relationships, in which they are more interdependent. In one model (Kaplan, 1991), these differences in intensity are reflected in four common terms: networking, cooperation, coordination, and collaboration.

Networking Cooperation Coordination Collaboration Lower-intensity’ Higher-intensity Independence’ Interdependence

1. Networking Organizations have a networking relationship when they exchange information in order to help each organization do a better job.
2. Coordination Organizations have a coordinating relationship when they modify their activities so that together, they provide better services to their constituents.
3. Cooperation When organizations cooperate, they not only share information and make adjustments in their services – they share resources to help each other do a better job.
4. Collaboration In a collaborative relationship, organizations help each other expand or enhance their capacities to do their jobs. (Axner, 2007)

Trust and Collaboration The development of trust in nurturing collaborative relationships is a vital skill for leaders (Tschannen-Moran, 2001). Trust is built on perception and history. How our motives and activities are perceived determines if others will trust us. If we trust, we share. If not, we don’t. How other’s perceive us is their reality -outside of our own motives. If we are perceived as promoting our own agenda or trying to create our own “empire”, others are reluctant to become involved and to share. This applies to organizations and individuals.

Affect- based trust are feelings of emotional involvement and sincere caring for each others welfare. Cognition-based trust is the belief that others are competent and responsible. Both of these forms of trust are the foundations for collaboration in organisations (McAllister, 1995). Interpersonal trust is also viewed as a key to facilitating and enabling coordinated social interactions (Coleman, 1988).

Learning to Lead Collaboration People can tend not to collaborate, this may be caused by issues of understanding, time, our work environments or politics. Collaboration is a relatively new concept and is unfamiliar to many people. We were taught in school to compete and that the world is survival of the fittest. Collaboration can seem to run contrary to what we were taught to do and be. If people are used to seeing knowledge as a scarce resource (and through ownership of knowledge it can create increased power for the individual or group) people may be less inclined to engage in open idea exchange and collaboration.

Innovation needs to occur in an environment of experimentation. However, if innovative ideas are to be effective, they need some structure to allow for consistency. The environment should foster both innovation and standardization.

Politics and bureaucracy also need to be addressed and understood within the organisational context and the context of the collaborative effort. Good ideas aren’t always the ones that are implemented. Ideas that are connected to the right people in the right positions can often gain acceptance quickly and easily. Who has power? Influence on key decisions sometimes rests outside of formal processes. Sometimes, people on the “outside” have a profound impact on key decision makers. Ignoring other stakeholders can sink new ideas and innovations.

Tools for Collaboration The IT industry has recognised that collaboration and social networking is the way of the future and there is a strong move to create products which seek to improve productivity by virtualizing communications and business processes. People and organisations are looking at ways to connect with each other virtually and Web 2.0 products are being designed to fill those needs. However we already have easy access to tools such as video and tele conferencing, chat, bulletin boards and email – simple tools which enable groups to communicate. Many tools are readily available as open source software or at low cost making them accessible to all sectors. There are also more advanced products such as secure instant messaging, screen sharing and other groupware tools. These types of tools enable geographically dispersed teams to come together for virtual meetings allowing for time and cost savings, less travel, and improved communications flow.

Conclusion Trust, collaboration, sharing, freedom of ideas, are expressions of belief systems and culture. When we debate the role of collaboration in an organization, we are debating our views of how the organisation as a whole should be organized, power distributed, diversity allowed, and decisions made. Collaboration reflects a point of view: that by working together partners, formal or informal, can bring different perspectives to bear to solve a problem and bring about change. In order for collaboration to occur successfully within an organisation there needs to be a supportive culture and work environment, encouragement from senior managers and a rewards system which reflects the importance of collaborative practices. For collaboration to be successful between organisations there must be clarity, direction and dialogue.

Resources For more information about collaborative software go to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collaborative_software

References

Axner, M. 2007, Promoting Coordination, Cooperative Agreements, and Collaborative Agreements Among Agencies. The Community Toolbox accessed 17/12/07 at [http://ctb.ku.edu/tools/en/sub_section_main_1229.htm]

Borden, L. M. 1997, Community collaboration: When the whole is greater than the sum of parts. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign, Illinois. (Quoted in Borden & Perkins, 1999)

Borden, L.M & Perkins, D.F. 1999, Assessing Your Collaboration: A Self Evaluation Tool. Journal of Extension, accessed 17/12/07 at http://www.joe.org/joe/1999april/tt1.html

Centre for Creative Leadership, 2007, What’s Next? The 2007 Changing Nature of Leadership Survey, accessed 17/12/07 at http://www.ccl.org/leadership/pdf/research/WhatsNext.pdf

Coleman, J.S. 1988, Social capital in the creation of human capital. American Journal of Sociology 94 (Supplement). 95-120.

Hogue, T. Perkins, D. Clark, R. Bergstrum, A. Slinski, M. & Associates, 1995, Collaboration framework: Addressing community capacity. Columbus, OH: National Network for Collaboration.

Kagan, S. L. 1991, United we stand: Collaboration for childcare and early education services. New York: Teachers College Press, Columbia University, 1-3.

Keith, J. G., Perkins, D. F., Zhou, Z., Clifford, M. C., Gilmore, B., & Townsend, M. Z. 1993, Building and maintaining community coalitions on behalf of children, youth and families. Michigan Agricultural Experiment Station Research Report (529). East Lansing, MI: Institute for Children, Youth, and Families.

McAllister, D.J. 1995, Affect and cognition – based trust as foundations for interpersonal cooperation in organisations. Journal of Occupational and Organisational Psychology Journal, 38: 24-59

Tschannen-Moran, M. 2001, Collaboration and the need for trust, Journal of Educational Administration, Vol. 39 Iss. 4.

Kimberly

Grace X Kang asked:




Have you ever noticed a bit of resistance from users when introducing new team collaboration tools that they were never consulted about? The simple way to avoid this resistance is to involve your team members in the decision-making process. This simple move will go a long way toward your team members “buying into” the software choice.

Ask for Member Opinions

Welcome opinions from prospective project members about their choices for online collaboration tools. In fact, steer clear from inserting your own opinion during discussions about what is available, allowing members to develop a “pain point” list of tasks they wished addressed by a potential online team collaboration tool. You’ll likely find requests for different project activity management features, as well as document library access, team blogging, using wikis and much more. You will also find employee input provides you with invaluable information about what the major users of the prospective system are need to streamline their daily chores. Users of software often have deep, brilliant insights about their needs that decision makers do not.

Choosing the Appropriate Online Team Collaboration Tool

Creating greater acceptance and participation in the software system you purchase begins by involving users from the start. There are varying degrees of quality associated with different online team collaboration tools. Even though one may have a ton more features than another, that alone does not make it a superior product. Many manufacturers of online team collaboration tools unfortunately infuse unnecessary features that actually make use of the product confusing, and cause the need for long training hours just to gain a basic grasp of system operations. Overly complicated and complex tools do more to develop user resistance rather than welcomed participation.

Prioritize your Software Needs

Depending upon the type and depth of your project needs, you will find disparate member “groups” presenting a “must have” priority list for software features. However, once the system is launched, it’s common that these “absolutely must have” features are used only occasionally. Therefore, during the information gathering process prior to purchase, it’s important you develop priorities for the “necessary” functions and features so you aren’t making a trade-off between features and intuitive usability. You will learn from seasoned users of online team collaboration tools is that a simple, intuitive interface is the most ideal and helpful for team adoption.

How You Get Your Team Onboard

There are only two methods you can employ to help generate user acceptance of a new online team collaboration tool – 1) Provide a system that makes their every work day easier and more enjoyable; 2) Order them to use it. Obviously, encouraging voluntary acceptance and use of the new tool is the preferred method. This can only be accomplished if the tool produces tangible and valuable services for each user.

Allison

usinstituteofpeace asked:

Jason Dechant, Strategy, Forces and Resources Division, Institute for Defense Analyses On July 16, 2009, USIP’s Center of Innovation for Science, Technology and Peacebuilding hosted a full-day multimedia showcase of state-of-the-art simulation and “serious gaming” tools that promise to transform the way that peacebuilding organizations train, plan and collaborate. The “Smart Tools for Smart Power” event featured presentations from such innovators as IBM, the Army War College, EBay, Lockheed Martin, Second Life, and USIP’s own Education and Training Center. US Deputy Chief Technology Officer Beth Noveck presented the keynote address, in which she noted that the Obama administration sees “serious” games as an important, largely untapped way to enable innovation in government and civic engagement. The event explored how the latest online and scenario-driven simulations and 3D virtual environments can be applied to sharpen decision-making skills and lay the foundation for more effective peace operations, negotiation, and cooperation. Attendees at USIP’s Washington, DC headquarters were given hands-on demonstrations of state-of-the-art tools, some with current application to conflict management and some to inspire new ideas for the peacebuilding community. The event also engaged more than 300 online participants from 24 countries as varied as Kenya, Spain, Mauritania, Israel, and Brazil using various online social media. Many of them participated in an active parallel …

Deborah

salesforce asked:

Discover how Chatter leaves yesterdays collaboration tools in the dust. See how every app you build on Force.com can now automatically include: Real-time feed updates to stay on top of what matters, Current user profiles to build teamwork and collaboration, Instant, dynamic interactivity between people and groups and Built-in collaboration without coding.

Yvonne

Christine Harrell asked:




Even small companies find themselves operating on a global scale. It is becoming less common for everyone on a team to be in the same building. One team member might be working in another company office across the country. A second could be a contractor working on another continent. A third could be working from home.

As worker locations become more widespread and worker schedules become more disparate, project collaboration becomes harder. Today’s managers must use all of the communication technologies available to keep their team on track.

Use the Right Communication Tool

Email, telephone, instant messaging and other methods of communication have their advantages and disadvantages in project collaboration. Each will be appropriate depending on your team members and the task at hand.

Email allows recipients to respond at their own convenience. That makes it easy for workers to integrate into their own schedules. Response time is slower because even someone who is on the clock isn’t checking email every two minutes.

Telephone is the most immediate communication method, but there is the risk that the person being called isn’t “working” at the moment so may not be able to help or will even resent the intrusion. This in turn is frustrating to the caller who may not know when it’s okay to call.

Instant messaging allows people to see who’s online and therefore who is currently working, but some employees don’t like it for exactly that reason. It has the immediacy of the telephone but can be more intrusive.

Organizing Meetings

There are times that project collaboration requires that the entire team meet to discuss the status of tasks and future plans. This can be hard to coordinate with team members from outside the office.

Home workers can be encouraged, or even required, to attend meetings in person. This “face time” helps build the team and remind everyone who is involved on the project.

More remote workers can teleconference or, if the company budget permits, videoconference into the meeting. They maintain a presence and feel like part of the group.

Truly remote workers run into difficulties because of time zones. A morning meeting for everyone else might be a late night meeting for one worker. Careful project coordination will be required to respect everyone’s schedule.

Online Project Management

One of the best tools for project collaboration of a widespread team is an online workspace such as an extranet.

Individual calendars and project schedules are available to anyone who needs to see them no matter where they are or what time it is.

Online file sharing makes important documents accessible. Several workers contributing to the same document or project work from a central source are less likely to create duplicate versions.

Managers can see where each member of the team is and how the project is progressing in comparison to the schedule. Team members can understand how their efforts contribute to the success of the project as a whole.

Louis

SuzanneMinassian asked:

This is the first in a series of demo videos on IBM Lotus Connections. Connections is social networking software that consists of five services – Activities, Blogs, Communities, Dogear, and Profiles. In this video, you will view a demonstration of the Activities service. Here is some background on all the services: Activities are collaboration tools for collecting, organizing, sharing, and reusing work that is related to a goal. Blogs are online journals that you can use to deliver timely information with a personal touch. Communities are sites that you create so that people who share a common interest can interact with one another and share resources. Dogear is a social bookmarking tool that you can use to save, organize, and share Internet and intranet bookmarks. Profiles show an online directory of the people in your organization that includes the information you need to form and encourage effective networks.

Jeanette