Posts Tagged ‘in touch’

Top rapport Connected Professionals

Thursday, September 9th, 2010

Ons nieuwe toprapport “Connected Professionals” is hiermee online. Veel leesplezier!

Het rapport gaat in op belangrijke ICT gerelateerde uitdagingen voor de professional rondom “Het Nieuwe Werken” en biedt oplossingsrichtingen hoe organisaties hun medewerkers kunnen faciliteren met nieuwe werkvormen om toch “connected” te blijven met elkaar. Immers flexibilisering komt met een prijs. Collega’s weten steeds minder waar anderen mee bezig zijn. Informele kanalen veranderen of verdwijnen. Vertrouwensrelaties komen moeilijker tot stand, waardoor het delen van kennis wordt gehinderd. Het rapport gaat hier op in en biedt bovendien een innovatieve aanpak om met kleine interventies de verbondenheid tussen professionals te behouden en zelfs te activeren.

Een PDF-versie van het rapport is hier te downloaden. Wilt u liever een hardcopy, e-mail dan even.

Teams, communities and networks in terms of communication forms

Monday, February 8th, 2010

Cross-posted from Mathemagenic

Communication in co-located and distributed teamsWhile I came with the communication egg model to talk about things missing in distributed teams I feel that it could be useful in more contexts. In particularly to talk about the differences between different types of social constructions in the knowledge management context.

[At this point it makes sense to go and read Shrunken communication in distributed teams (the egg of communication :) ]

One of the things I came up when playing with different ideas was to position teams, communities and networks in respect to the most prevalent forms of communication in each case (in all cases the other forms of communication are there as well, but are not at the core of it).

Core communication types for teams, communities and networks

Team communication is heavily shaped by the shared goals and agreed communication formats/processes. It’s very much about getting things done together and strong ties that needed for it.

Communication in communities is a bit further from actual work, but still has lots of connection with it (e.g. Q&A mode, where one uses an opportunity of being together with other experts to ask for solutions for a problem). It’s usually a mix of stronger and weaker ties that help to open up and share local practices. There is enough commonality and trust to hold people together and enough diversity to support learning.

Network communication is more opportunity-based and informal. There is not much in terms of shared goals and recurrent conversations, the ties are weak or latent. However, there is enough connectivity and opportunities to communicate that result in cross-fertilisation and emergent ideas and practices.

I guess the things on the diagonal could be also about the types of communication that is supported by specific managerial practices (performance – knowledge management/professional development – informal learning/innovation) or social tools (groupware – community tools – social media).

You can also use this framework to think on what is needed in terms of moving between different types of social constructions: e.g. moving from network to community by picking shared interests and adding a bit of structure (rhyhm, roles) or community-born projects, where shared goals and even more structures (e.g. deadlines :) appear to make sure that things get done. In the opposite direction you might think of “usual” KM practice of spotting overlaps between teams and establishing semi-structured community spaces and processes to make sure that practices are shared across and going to networking events or sharing one’s traces online to create opportunities for informal interaction that brings new contacts and new ideas.

***

Does it make any sense? I’m actually more happy with the picture than we the text around it, but anyway all of this stuff is thinking in progress, so hopefully will eventually evolve into something more understandable.

Distributed Agile: communication and common ground

Friday, January 29th, 2010

Cross-posted from Mathemagenic

With the holidays I somewhat took a break from blogging on our work on the distributed Agile case, but there are still quite a few things there that I wanted to share to hear what do you think. This one is a bit scary since I picked up some ideas from linguistics without having a proper reading of the work behind it, but at times this is the price to pay* for sitting between research and practice.

Communication and common groundSo, the picture on the right is a simplified version of the work of Herbert H. Clark:

According to Clark, in order for one person to understand another, there must be a “common ground” of knowledge between them. He shows how people infer this “common ground” from their past conversations, their immediate surroundings, and their shared cultural background. [This is from a back of Clark's book "Arenas of language use"]

In my terms: communication is enabled by the common ground between the participants and, in turn, contributes to building more common ground over time. Taking it a bit further, it is useful to distinguish between two components of the common ground:

  • information that the participants share (not necessarily explicitly, as it is often assumed that others know about X because of shared cultural, educational or work background) – I talk about shared knowledge and awareness of the bigger picture here
  • relationships between the participants – knowledge about each other and trust

Now to the distributed Agile teams. At a starting point there is a big distance between the team members:

  • different locations that make it difficult to rely on team-building and ad-hoc interaction that naturally happens in a co-located team;
  • time differences that in some cases provide only a small window of opportunity for interactions;
  • different cultures, organisations and levels of technical expertise create difficulties of getting a team “on one page” needed for seamless work.

Communication and common groundDistance between team members across different locations creates a vicious circle:

  • lack of common ground, the need for using technology and addressing time issues make communication challenging
  • challenges in communication make it difficult to overcome initial differences between teams, to build relationships and shared understanding of the bigger picture behind work

This picture is not that far from what you can learn by reading about the challenges of distributed Agile and solutions to address them, but hopefully it can help to address the problems in a more systematic way: spending time on establishing shared understanding and relationships in the team (especially in the beginning) and finding ways to shape communication processes and tools that not only allow to get things done, but also contribute to growing awareness and relationships over time.

My personal “hobby horse” is around the last point. From what we have seen, the communication in distributed teams often shrinks to purely functional and, compared to face-to-face settings, there is much less unstructured informal interactions – this works for getting the work done (at some level), but seriously limits the opportunities to build awareness of the bigger picture and relationships. Most of the solutions in respect to building the common ground in distributed Agile teams still rely on making sure that there are opportunities to visit each other, while there is a lot of space for a technology-mediated ways to do so next to the f2f.

* The ideas behind this post are grounded in insights coming from research on computer-mediated communication and distributed teams, but I need more time to read papers and to integrate research ideas in a systematic way. Hope to blog about it soon.

Project Buzz Tracker

Monday, August 17th, 2009

buzz tracker spinSteven Haveman, Industrial Design Student at the University of Twente completed his master’s graduation assignment within FWS on a study towards new ways of working for system architects. This post is a roundup of the results obtained in this research project. It shows the general findings and the findings regarding the concepts that were developed.

Steven’s research project has been a study towards new ways of working for system architects. System architects are responsible for the architecture of complex systems, like printers, MRI-scanners or radar systems. A series of interviews has been conducted with system architects at Océ, Philips and Thales to discuss concepts and obtain insights. This resulted in Project Buzz Tracker, a tool that couples activity information to project and workflow planning. Persons frequently give an update on their actions, thus showing the Buzz in a project. By observing this overview, the system architect can see concentrations or a lack of Buzz. These can be indications of problematic issues. Project Buzz Tracker will further strengthen team cohesion, especially if distant workers are involved.
(more…)

Social media products

Friday, July 24th, 2009

connecting-professionalsBased on our experiences with doing workshops to discuss the social media landscape and facilitating experiments to gain hands-on experience with these tools inside organizations, we are now developing three concrete FWS products around social media:
(more…)

Business Twitter 101

Monday, July 13th, 2009

twitterIn her blogpost Twitter for Business FAQ, Meryl Evans discusses a range of questions people might have when starting with Twitter for business purposes. Unlike our focus on Twitter inside organizations, she focusses on using microblogging for communication with customers. Nevertheless, we see some similar questions pop up. For instance the question “Do you recommend having separate Twitter accounts for business and for personal use?” was raised in our experiment as well. And we provided a similarly ambivalent answer: in general, it seems better to use only one Twitter account to avoid fragmentation of conversations over multiple accounts and to increase the number of messages per account. However, when you are also microblogging on politics, religion, sports or other emotionally charged topics, it may be smart to separate that from your business account.

Concept Game Online

Monday, July 6th, 2009

Within Future Workspaces, many concept ideas have been developed. The Concept Pool page on this website shows some of them. To inspire knowledge workers and to gain more insight into what concepts or concept areas appeal to them, we have created the Concept Game.

The physical version of the Concept Game can be played individually or in a workshop. It is also possible to play the Concept Game online.

Click here to start playing the Concept Game online. You will be asked to select your favourite and least favourite concept ideas. Please also tell us why you have selected these concepts and submit your choices. It will help us to focus our future plans and concept development.

The online version of the Concept Game was developed by Steven Haveman.

» Start the Concept Game

Virtual Worlds to support the Nomadic Worker

Thursday, June 25th, 2009

During the projectday one workshop was used to discuss the feasibility of virtual worlds for nomadic working. We see a growing group of nomadic workers, as work is not fixed solely to the office anymore. Increasingly people are working from home or the customer. Besides organizational problems, like planning of resources and projects also personal problems for nomadic workers arise. For example, keeping in touch and in sync with your colleauges and team members becomes more complex. One possible way to deal with these complexities is by using virtual worlds. This workshop was used to play with two virtual world demonstrations and to discuss the merits and drawbacks of this type of technology for nomadic workers.

The participants of the workshop were divided into two groups. One group played with the Virtual Media Office demonstration, prepared by Sefan Burgers from Ericsson. The second group played with the Second Life demonstration, prepared by Bart van den Hooff of the VU.

The result was a nice discussion from which the following elements struck me:

  • Staying in touch with colleagues can be facilitated using virtual worlds however currently it cannot complete replace face to face contact. For example, drinking coffee at a coffee corner is still very valuable. Maybe a good virtual coffee machine could be a way to go.
  • Choosing (remote) team members using virtual worlds could become more objective as politics and personal aspects play a lesser role.
  • Virtual worlds (including avatars) could become a intuitive graphical interface on top of the resources of a worker.
  • A lot of workers use tools with a lot of (unintuitive) features (e.g. email), virtual worlds could provide a intuitive interface that discloses all these features in a more natural way, after a learning curve has been taken.
  • Not all tasks of a knowledge worker may be suitable to perform in a virtual world (e.g. editing excel).
  • The more important decisions become, the more face to face contact is needed to also grasp indirect communication aspects (e.g. body language). Current virtual worlds are less suitable to grasp indirect communications and hence may be less suitable for very important/delicate decisions.

Mike drawing ideas

Mike from Jam visualized outcomes of the discussion. More of the results (also from the other workshops) can be found here.

Evaluating Twitter in our expertise group

Thursday, April 9th, 2009

Exactly two months ago our expertise group started an experiment with Twitter to see how it could facilitate knowledge sharing in between the monthly group meetings, and to see how it could improve social cohesion in the group.
 
Some characteristics of the expertise group

  • 14 researchers with a shared interest in how ICT affects work, life, and society;
  • they are working in the same research institute, but located over various parts of the building;
  • they frequently work elsewhere, for instance during client visits, workshops, conferences;
  • they are all working on several different projects at a time;
  • they are well acquainted with one another, though not co-working on a daily basis;
  • they share a feeling that cohesion and knowledge sharing in the group could be improved. 

(more…)

Evaluating Twitter in a distributed department

Tuesday, February 3rd, 2009

twitter-postIn the Future Workspaces Projective case a group of volunteers is experimenting with social media. The objective of this experiment is to assess whether social media can support knowledge sharing and social cohesion within a dispersed department. (more…)

Communication is good, CommUnification is better

Wednesday, December 10th, 2008

CommUnification is a design concept conceived to address the In Sync and In Touch challenges faced by nomadic and highly mobile workers.

The project is an initiative by five User-System Interaction students at the Eindhoven University of Technology: Wil Rijnen, Brian Pagán, Ying Li, Zhihui Zhang, and Natalia Gredina. It is based on interview findings that nomadic and highly mobile workers are challenged by such problems as communication fragmentation (across multiple channels) and disregard for time zone differences. (more…)

Workshop on 7 skills of modern knowledge workers

Thursday, December 4th, 2008

Yesterday we did a workshop on the 7 skills of modern knowledge workers at the Innovatieproeftuin. After an introduction by Ruud about the challenges faced by modern knowledge workers, the audience (of about 80 people) was put to work: first they had to select what they considered the top issues modern knowledge workers are faced with. Based on the results, they then had to describe the key skills modern knowledge workers have to posses to deal with this. While many of these 80 people probably expected a session where they would sit back and hear about the 7 essential skills, it was great to see them actually working together in small groups. (more…)

Kom naar Future Workspaces tijdens de Innovatieproeftuin!

Friday, November 21st, 2008

Op woensdag 3 december vindt in de Van Nelle Ontwerpfabriek in Rotterdam het event “de Innovatieproeftuin” plaats. Het Future Workspaces team zal daar acte de présence geven met twee workshops (“No Hub, No Glory!” en “De Zeven Vaardigheden van de Moderne Kenniswerker”) en een studentenatelier (“Schrijven naar 2028″).  Meer informatie vindt u in deze uitnodiging en op de website van de Innovatieproeftuin.  Wij hopen u op 3 december in Rotterdam te zien!

Lessons learned: knowledge sharing in Rabobank Projective

Thursday, November 6th, 2008

Two goals that are high on the agenda of Rabobank Netherlands are improving the effectiveness of knowledge sharing, and stimulating new ways of work. Via the “Unplugged” change program, Rabobank is exploring ways to improve and facilitate location and time independent ways of work. In this practical case we investigated how knowledge sharing can be stimulated and facilitated within a department of highly autonomous project management professionals. A leaflet describing the main lessons learned is available here (in Dutch).

At your earliest convenience

Monday, November 3rd, 2008

“Schedule and forget”

Imagine you would like to discuss an important matter with a specific colleague. You walk into her room only to discover that she is not in. You pick up your mobile phone, search for the phone number and call her. However, she rejects the phone call. You waste precious time walking to her room, your matter is not discussed and possibly you are annoyed by the fact that your colleague did not react. On the other hand your colleague is, due to your call, interrupted from her current activity. (more…)

Challenges of the modern worker: element 4 “on top”

Thursday, October 23rd, 2008

Today, together with Ruud,  I dwelled further on the core challenges of the modern worker. We already introduced the core concepts of in sync, in touch and in flow, but we came up with a fourth called “in control” or maybe more appropriate “on top”. Key is that the concept of “on top” accounts for the needed craftmanship of the modern worker. As in the old times real craftsman knew their tools inside out, we think modern workers should be knowledgeable also on their tooling. (more…)

Challenges for the nomadic worker: Part 2: In Touch

Wednesday, September 10th, 2008

In the series of posts on the main challenges for the nomadic worker, this part focusses on the challenge to stay in touch with the people that are important to you in your personal and professional network.

What is being “In Touch”?
Being in touch is the affective version of being in sync. It is the sense of “being connected” both with people you know well (your strong relational ties) as well as with people you are acquinted with (your weak ties). Important aspects are reassurance of the well-being of significant others, and the ability to let someone else know you are thinking of him or her. (more…)

Challenges for the nomadic worker: Part 0: In Sync, In Touch, In Flow

Monday, September 1st, 2008

This post is a first in a series of posts on what we(*) consider to be the main challenges for the nomadic worker (or the Web Worker, as Om Malik from Web Worker Daily calls them). This nomadic worker is someone who reaches out beyond the office, cubicle, home workspace, train or wifi café to connect to and collaborate with others doing the same things. (more…)

Knowledge sharing @ Rabobank Projective

Friday, August 22nd, 2008

Introduction

Projective is a department of Rabobank Netherlands. Its 80 employees are professional project managers responsible for complex projects within the Rabobank organization. For the duration of their projects they are stationed elsewhere, for example at the Utrecht or Eindhoven headquarters, at affiliate organizations, or at local banks throughout The Netherlands. As such, they form a group of nomadic workers that is scattered throughout the organization and the country. As a consequence, and due to the constant influx and outflux of employees, Projective is facing the challenge of how to effectively organize knowledge sharing within the department. In this pilot case, we quickly discovered that social connectedness is a key prerequisite for informal knowledge sharing. (more…)

Blackout Friday

Wednesday, May 21st, 2008

Ever seen what happens inside an office when the power goes down? No longer tied to their computer screens, colleagues soon leave their offices and gather in the hallways and coffee corners. Nobody seems to know what to do. Is this just waisted, unproductive time? (more…)