Upload
others
View
5
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
1
Author: Moellering, Christopher, L Title: Social Intranet Attitude Assessment The accompanying research report is submitted to the University of Wisconsin-Stout, Graduate School in partial
completion of the requirements for the
Graduate Degree/ Major: MS Technical and Professional Communication
Research Adviser: Matt Livesey, Ph.D.
Submission Term/Year: Spring, 2012
Number of Pages: 46
Style Manual Used: American Psychological Association, 6th edition
X I understand that this research report must be officially approved by the Graduate School and that an electronic copy of the approved version will be made available through the University Library website X I attest that the research report is my original work (that any copyrightable materials have been used with the permission of the original authors), and as such, it is automatically protected by the laws, rules, and regulations of the U.S. Copyright Office. X My research adviser has approved the content and quality of this paper.
STUDENT:
NAME Christopher L. Moellering DATE: May 9, 2012
ADVISER: (Committee Chair if MS Plan A or EdS Thesis or Field Project/Problem):
NAME Matt Livesey DATE: May 9, 2012
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----
This section for MS Plan A Thesis or EdS Thesis/Field Project papers only Committee members (other than your adviser who is listed in the section above) 1. CMTE MEMBER’S NAME: DATE:
2. CMTE MEMBER’S NAME: DATE:
3. CMTE MEMBER’S NAME: DATE:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- This section to be completed by the Graduate School This final research report has been approved by the Graduate School.
Director, Office of Graduate Studies: DATE:
2
Moellering, Christopher, L. Social Intranet Attitude Assessment
Abstract
The Social Intranet Attitude Assessment was performed to determine whether or not vice
presidents at a Midwestern non-profit financial services company are likely to support adding
social media features to the company intranet. The researcher wanted to know which social
media features interested them the most and which ones concerned them the most. In addition,
do the vice presidents understand the risks and benefits of adding social media features to the
company intranet? For this project, the vice presidents at the financial services company were
given a seven-question survey asking them about their attitudes towards and perception of
adding social media tools to the company intranet. In the end, the results of the survey were
surprising with an overwhelming amount of support from the vice presidents. Therefore, when
the company begins its intranet redesign project, it should consider adding social media features
for most or all employees to use.
3
Acknowledgments
I would like to acknowledge, in no particular order, the following for significantly
contributing to my graduate education: Giants Sunflower seeds, Stride gum, Mtn. Dew, Caribou
Coffee, Marlboro lights, the cast of MASH, XBOX, the Minnesota Wild, Matt Livesey’s
sarcasm, my car, my dogs, my fiancée, my mom and dad, my mortgage, my lawnmower, my
loud neighbors, my six years at Wal-Mart, Steve Buscemi, Steve Jobs, and Steve from the
Holiday station. Thank you all.
4
Table of contents
Abstract ........................................................................................................................................... 2
List of tables .................................................................................................................................... 5
Chapter 1: Introduction ................................................................................................................... 6
Chapter II: Literature Review ......................................................................................................... 7
Chapter III: Methodology ............................................................................................................. 19
Chapter IV: Interview Results ...................................................................................................... 21
Chapter V: Survey Results ............................................................................................................ 24
Chapter VI: Discussion ................................................................................................................. 31
Chapter VII: Recommendations ................................................................................................... 35
References ..................................................................................................................................... 37
Appendix A: Management Social Intranet Survey ....................................................................... 40
Appendix B: Intranet Questions for SAS Interview ..................................................................... 42
Appendix C: Complete Survey Results ........................................................................................ 43
5
List of tables
Table 1: Evolving to intranet 2.0 .......................................................................................................................9
Table 2: Breakdown of vice presidents’ interest in social media features .........................................................25
Table 3: Breakdown of vice presidents’ social media concerns ........................................................................26
Table 4: Vice presidents’ perceived risks ..........................................................................................................26
Table 5: Greatest perceived benefits ..................................................................................................................27
Table 6: Greatest challenges ..............................................................................................................................28
Table 7: Vice presidents’ likeliness to support social media features................................................................29
6
Chapter I: Introduction
One of the most important tools a company has is its intranet. In many cases, it houses all
the tools and resources employees need to perform their jobs effectively. In a way, it is like the
company’s phone system; it is a key tool needed to get the work done, but it is hardly ever
thought about because it is simply there.
The Internet has undergone an enormous change over the last eight to ten years—from
static pages of content meant for consumption to a fully collaborative and social space where the
users create the content, and the content is tailored to fit the individual’s wants and needs. The
company intranet, though late to the party, is now undergoing this same transformation. Unlike
the Internet, which underwent this change quite naturally, the company intranet faces many
challenges impeding its progress, such as executive support, employee adoption, and clear
business need.
This study addresses the executive support challenge. It seeks to find out if vice
presidents’ attitudes towards and perceptions of social media on a company intranet are
changing. Specifically, are they willing to support adding social media to a company intranet,
and if so, which social features interest and concern them the most?
There are a few limitations to this study. The first limitation is that it only looks at vice
presidents at one company, which happens to be in the financial services industry. The results of
the study can be applied to the financial services industry but not much more broadly than that.
The second limitation is that the study is not longitudinal. It would be more interesting to track
the vice presidents’ attitudes and perceptions over the course of a few years to see what, if any,
changes occur.
7
Chapter II: Literature Review
Over ten years of working in several different industries (retail, higher education, and
financial services), I have learned that most business processes have the same problem: poor
communication. And, ironically, most business process problems have the same solution: better
communication with a side of collaboration. Better communication and improved collaboration
is something companies are continually working towards. If a company communicates and
collaborates better they will in turn be more productive and create more revenue.
The latest trend to improve communication and collaboration involves adding social
media tools to company intranets. According to the Merriam-Webster online dictionary, social
media is defined as “Forms of electronic communications (as Web sites for social networking
and micro-blogging) through which users create online communities to share information, ideas,
personal messages, and other content (as videos).” Examples of social media tools include blogs,
wikis, and social networks.
When social media tools are added to a company intranet, the intranet becomes what
Ward, the founder and CEO of Prescient Digital Media, a leading intranet consulting firm, calls a
“social intranet.” Ward (2012) has defined a social intranet as “an intranet that features multiple
social media tools for most or all employees to use as collaboration vehicles for sharing
knowledge with other employees” (p. 3). The social intranet is the latest attempt to improve
communication and collaboration within companies. Ward (2012) has found, “Social media on
the intranet is a relatively new phenomena having only appeared behind the firewall in the past 4
or 5 years (with the exception of instant messaging and discussion forums which have been
around, in some form, since the late 1990s)” (p. 3).
8
Like the Internet, company intranets over the years have shifted from 1.0 technologies to
2.0 technologies that enable open communication and more collaboration. Ever since the Internet
started to take off in the early 1990s, it has steadily progressed towards a more collaborative
environment. In the early 1990s, web pages were static. A Webmaster would post content, and
visitors would consume it. Collaborative features were added to the Internet through the years.
There is a natural progression we can follow. This progression is detailed on the Webdesigner
Depot (2009) website. This is an outline of the progression:
Usenet
Online bulletin boards
Chat
Instant messaging
Discussion forums
Blogs
Wikis
Social networking
Media sharing
News sharing
Real-time updates
A similar progression is happening with company intranets as detailed in table 1 below.
9
Table 1: Evolving to intranet 2.0
Evolving to intranet 2.0 Intranet 1.0 Intranet 2.0 Corporate news Submit news Executives speech Executive blog Taxonomy Folksonomy Quick poll Discussion forums Annual employee broadcast Regular podcast CMS Wikis Directories (A-Z) Tagging Sticky content RSS
When implemented properly and used widely by a company, a social intranet can create
many benefits for a company. In an article for ReadWrite Enterprise, Fulton (2011) has found,
“A social organization is able to be more agile, produce better outcomes, and even develop
entirely new ways of operating that are only achievable through mobilizing the collective talent,
energy, ideas, and efforts of communities.”
The majority of companies have already turned their intranets into social intranets. Ward
(2011) has found that 61% of companies have at least one social media tool available to some or
all employees. Ward’s study examined social media use on corporate intranets and the
magnitude, use, and popularity of social media by employees and executives. The survey was
completed by 1,401 participants in small, medium, and large organizations in all types of
industries, from all corners of the globe. Sixty-one percent of companies having at least one
social media tool on their intranets is significant considering that social media has only existed
behind the firewall for the last four to five years.
Better communication, collaboration, and productivity starts with more employee
engagement, which can be achieved through the use of social intranets. In a 2012 study, McGrath
and Freed have found, “Organizations using blogs, wikis and social networking tools achieved
an average year-over-year improvement in employee engagement of 18%, compared with 1% for
10
organizations that do not use social networking tools” (p. 3). There are many reasons why a
social intranet can improve engagement. McGrath and Freed (2012) have found, “High levels of
employee engagement occur when employees feel respected, feel they can contribute
meaningfully, and when employees feel part of a community at work” (p. 20).
Social intranets enable employees to contribute to the conversations at work and create
communities by building and fostering connections between coworkers. When managers trust
employees to share their opinions and communicate freely at work, it gives employees a sense
that their managers respect them and their ideas. McGrath and Freed (2012) also noted that
Gallup research shows that when employees have a friend at work, they are more likely to be
engaged employees (p. 10). When employees connect around shared interests on the company
intranet it can create friendships. McGrath and Freed (2012) have found, “Just being able to have
conversations with people on forums, and connect to people with similar interests makes it more
likely you will find someone to bond with at work’” (p. 11).
There is no better example of a social intranet that aims to improve employee
engagement than the intranet at SAS, a leading provider of business analytics software and
services. Lai (2010) has found, “SAS’s intranet has been designed as a completely collaborative
environment promoting a culture of trust and employee engagement.” SAS’s successful social
intranet did not happen on accident. The company set in place well-defined strategies to foster
employee engagement. Lai (2010) has found that SAS’s strategies include the following:
Allow users to comment on intranet content
Develop internal thought leaders by encouraging employees to blog
Set a positive, encouraging tone on your intranet
11
Get employees comfortable sharing on the intranet with low key interactive elements
(e.g., polls, surveys, quizzes, and contests)
Allow employees to customize their intranet experience
Each of SAS’s strategies listed above focus on employees. Their strategies aim to get
employees to connect and communicate in healthy and positive ways to create more engaged
employees, which in turn will lead to higher employee satisfaction. Certainly, SAS’s culture of
trust and transparency has led to its continual number one ranking in Forbes Magazine’s list of
best companies for which to work. Their social intranet is a driving factor used to create that
culture of trust and transparency. McGrath and Freed (2012) found, “Companies with successful
social intranets see them become much more than simply one more enterprise technology or an
internal website: they become the online reflection of the company’s culture and activity, the
center of the company’s online ecosystem” (p. 21).
Andy Jankowski, founder of the consulting firm Enterprise Strategies and global director
at the Intranet Benchmarking Forum, is quoted in McGrath and Freed’s (2012) study as saying,
“It is very difficult, if not impossible, to have engaged employees who are not, at some level,
happy” (p. 5). McGrath and Freed (2012) have found, “Social intranets can and do have a
positive impact on employee happiness, and help build trust and social comfort in employees –
when they are well implemented” (p. 6). SAS’s intranet is certainly well implemented with over
12,000 employees spread worldwide accessing the intranet everyday as it is the central location
for all company communication (Lai, 2010).
In their 2012 study, McGrath and Freed note Gallup research on employee well-being
that suggests people need as much as six hours a day of social interaction to have strong feelings
of well-being (p. 16). It is awfully difficult to get six hours of meaningful social interaction a day
12
when 8 to 12 hours a day are spent in a cubicle—plus the time spent travelling to and from work
and the time spent decompressing and sleeping. We are lucky if we get two to four hours of
social interaction a day. Social intranets enable employees to have more social interactions
throughout the day, which can lead to stronger feelings of well-being. McGrath and Freed (2012)
have found, “The relationship building and knowledge growth that mature social intranets foster,
and the volunteerism inherent in sharing knowledge with others on the intranet materially
contributes to employees’ happiness” (p. 16). McGrath and Freed (2012) go on to say, “The
opportunity to author something others in the organization might find useful – and that might
bring recognition of one’s unique abilities – has enormous implications for well-being, and for
building trust and comfort with coworkers” (p. 17). Social intranets give employees the
opportunity to author and share content that others might find useful. Sharing information gives
employees the opportunity to learn. McGrath and Freed (2012) have found, “When we are
learning and growing, chemical changes occur in the brain that produce feelings of well-being”
(p. 16).
So what is the benefit of having happy and engaged employees? Happy and engaged
employees tend to be more productive, which results in more revenue. McGrath and Freed
(2012) have found, “Studies of happiness in the workplace—perhaps less rigorously scientific
than Gallup’s Q12 meta-analysis—do show, however, that happy employees are generally more
productive” (p. 5). McGovern (2010) has found, “Moving from average to exceptional employee
satisfaction levels result in a 3.8% increase in revenue growth.” A 3.8 percent increase in
revenue might not seem like a lot, but consider a company that has annual revenue of one million
dollars. Its revenue would increase by $38,000—still not a lot, but enough to hire another
employee or several interns. Or better yet, pay for the social intranet the company implemented.
13
Ward (2011) has found that 38% of organizations spend less than $10,000 on their social
intranets and 34% spend somewhere between $10,000 and $99,000 (p. 5).
Surely, happy and engaged employees do not magically become more productive, but the
connections made through social intranets do help improve employee productivity. McGrath and
Freed (2012) have found, “Traditional intranets lack connections. Content is anonymous and
shows no social context, no connection between pages and specific people” (p. 7). Social
intranets, on the other hand, put names and faces to content, which enable employees to connect
with the content owner if they have questions, comments, or concerns. In an article in the Public
Relations Tactic Journal, Radick (2011) has found, “The intranet used to be focused on
connecting people to information; it is now about connecting people to people.” Radick (2011)
has found that connecting people to people is important because as information evolves,
traditional intranets and other information repositories become outdated. People turn to
traditional communication channels such e-mail and personal networks. The same principle
applies outside of work. When Google does not return the search results we want, we turn to our
friends for advice. We ask our neighbors and family instead of hunting aimlessly for information.
Nielsen (2009) has found that social intranets have a “person-structured” information
architecture that is focused around individual users as well as other people on the intranet. The
person structure information architecture of social intranets helps employees connect with the
people they need when they need them.
When employees are able to find the information they need faster, it saves time, which in
turn saves the company money. The Ken Blanchard Companies (2009) have found, “Most
organizations are operating with a 5% to 10% productivity loss” (p. 2). There are many reasons
for productivity loss: overly complicated business processes, poor employee morale, difficulty
14
locating information, unproductive meetings, inappropriate systems and tools, and etc. In their
study, McGrath and Freed (2012) noted, “Gallup has estimated that lost productivity as a result
of employees being actively disengaged costs the US economy $370 billion annually” (p. 2).
Companies that have implemented social intranets have found that their employees’ productivity
has improved. Most of the improvement comes from saving time by providing employees with
quicker access to information. Burnham (2009) has found that for Avaya, an enterprise global
communications company, their social intranet “has been useful for onboarding new associates,
helping them make contacts more quickly and catch up on company news by searching through
past conversations.” It can sometimes take months for new employees to become comfortable
with their jobs and understand the company. The faster a company can get their new employees
working on their own, the more money they are going to save.
Motorola has found that their social intranet saves its salespeople time. In an article in
InformationWeek by Hoover (2007), Motorola has discovered that “Instead of developing a
different pitch for every client, salespeople can now reuse information that might be posted on a
wiki.” The Motorola social intranet is essentially a knowledge hub where employees can find the
information they need when they need it. Instead of duplicating work, employees can find and
reuse what others have already done, saving the company time and money.
The trick to increasing productivity with a social intranet is not to create an “online water
cooler,” but rather a place where people can get work done. Cavazza (2011), in an article in
Forbes, has found, “The best social intranet is not the one providing the most social features, but
the one which ties the most business processes and data to employee’s social behavior.”McGrath
and Freed (2012) echoed something very similar in their study. They have found, “In successful
intranets, social and business functions intertwine. Information starts to move laterally. Intranet
15
forums spring up to connect people in similar job functions or expertise areas but different
locations” (p. 13). In fact, in McGrath and Freed’s (2012) white paper the ThoughtFarmer Vice
President, Gordon Ross, is quoted as calling an intranet “‘an internal website that helps
employees get stuff done’, and a social intranet as ‘an intranet where all employees can author
content and connect easily’” (p. 6). It is the connecting that happens on social intranet that helps
employees “get stuff done,” which leads to increased productivity.
A social intranet enables employees to configure different elements to fit their own work
processes. For example, they can customize their homepage with tools and information they
access regularly. They can personalize their contacts, so they have faster access to people. Since
everything about a social intranet is tailored to fit the individual’s needs, it makes everything
they do faster. The more work employees get done; the more money the company makes either
through earned revenue or avoided costs.
There are many benefits to having a social intranet, but, of course, there also are several
challenges. There are three main challenges to implementing/operating a social intranet:
monitoring its usage, encouraging adoption, and managing change.
Nielsen (2009) has found, “Banning anonymity is one of the first governance steps that
all organizations should take when implementing social networking.” People are much less likely
to post negative comments if their name is attached to the post. In addition, Nielsen (2009) has
found, “When left to their own devices, communities police themselves, leaving very little need
for tight organizational control.” This is the “community watch” idea. Negative and positive
comments tend to even out and meet at a better place. A lot of negative comments happen simply
because people are not informed and do not have a clear understanding of what they complaining
16
about. With a social intranet, those that are informed and have the understanding can rein in
those that are not informed and lack understanding.
Of course a company’s intranet cannot become the “wild west” with absolutely no
oversight. The question is not really to govern or not to govern; but rather, how much oversight
is appropriate. Hoover (2007) has found, “A four person team manages Motorola’s entire blog,
wiki, and forum environment.” Hoover (2007) also points out that that number depends on
finding the right people such as an enterprise architect who understands information architecture.
On the other hand, Schillerwein (2010) found that the global bioscience company Chr. Hansen
A/S uses 130 editors from across the organization to manage the content of its social intranet.
But like Hoover’s article, Schillerwein (2010) has found, “Great care was taken not to just get
‘anyone’ appointed editors, but to really get the right people to contribute.” So basically,
monitoring social intranet usage is a balancing act between too much oversight and not enough
oversight. How each company decides to handle it is up to them and their company
demographics.
Of course, the success of a social intranet depends on people using it. A social intranet
that no one uses is essentially worthless. Unfortunately, lack of user adoption is fairly common.
Ward (2012) has found, “Often, 2.0 failures are simply a lack of use or adoption by users,
sometimes it is misuse of the tools – particularly blogs, discussion forums, and user comments;
but rarely is it the technology itself” (p. 14). There could be any number of reasons for lack of
user adoptions. Employees could perceive a social intranet as just another tool they are forced to
use. Maybe prior technology implementation put undue strain on employee productivity.
Employees may not completely understand how a social intranet could benefit them and the
17
organization. If that is the case, then it leads to the third challenge of implementing/operating a
social intranet: managing change.
Ward (2012) has found, “In short, intranet change management becomes an exercise in
‘selling’ or communicating not only the reason and purpose for the change, but especially
anticipating and directly addressing the spoken AND unspoken fears (or apathy) of employees”
(p. 12).” Employees need to be made aware of why the change is happening and how the change
will benefit them. It helps to show them how it will benefit them; as opposed to telling them.
It is not necessarily only the employees that need to change, but sometimes, management
and the whole organizational culture needs to change. Nielsen (2009) has found, “If people are
strongly committed to the ‘knowledge is power’ tenet and do not want to share, then sharing
technologies will obviously fail.” Organizations that are committed to this tenet need to shift
from a monologue culture where management just pushes information to staff to a dialogue
culture where management engages in conversations with staff. While management has to
change its attitudes, employees need to change their behavior. One of the hardest changes
Kemsley (2010) has found is that employees need to start seeing themselves as content creators,
not just content consumers. At first, employees might be uncomfortable contributing to a
company intranet because traditionally they have had information pushed to them. With the
social intranet they are expected to create the information to share. To help alleviate this
challenge, Nielsen (2009) has found, “You should design social tools that employees can easily
use without special training. In addition to following usability guidelines, you can achieve this
goal by emulating popular designs on the open Internet.” Basically, if the social intranet looks
and function like sites employees most likely use outside of work (e.g., Facebook, Twitter,
WordPress, etc.), chances are they will feel comfortable enough to use the internal tools.
18
Change is never easy. Changing a company culture that is decades old could be near
impossible. Ward (2012) has found, “The degree of change, and the required change
management, depends on the type and culture of the organization (e.g., union or non-union,
small or large, etc.) and the intended value and power of the intranet (e.g., self-service, executive
communications, etc.).”
There is a fourth challenge to implementing/operating a social intranet, but I left it off my
list because there has not been enough research done to effectively address it. The fourth and
greatest challenge all organizations implementing/operating a social intranet face is determining
its return on investment (ROI). Prescient Digital Media (2009) found, “Measuring the precise
value of an intranet or portal is likely impossible. It is, at best, an imperfect science.” The reason
measuring intranet ROI is an imperfect science is because it depends on the type of company and
the type of tools the company implements. For some companies, cost savings will come from
moving paper-based processes to the intranet, which would translate into lower printing costs.
Other companies may see a return on investment from their intranet due to employees get more
work done because they have faster access to the tools they need to perform their jobs. Some
companies may see savings from less employee turnover due to improved employee satisfaction.
So, it is not that there is not a way to measure intranet ROI, there simply is not one single way to
measure it because it varies by company.
All in all, social intranets have shown the ability to improve employee engagement,
enhance employee communication, foster collaboration, and increase employee productivity.
When those four things work together, organizations benefit. They may see increased revenues,
or they may simply have more satisfied employees. Both are positive.
19
Chapter III: Methodology
The Social Intranet Attitude Assessment was conducted in April 2012 at a non-profit
financial services company in the Midwestern United States. Thirteen vice presidents at the
financial services company participated in the study. Participants included seven males and six
females with ages ranging from 40s to 60s. The vice presidents represented several different
departments within the company, such as corporate communications, human resources, legal,
finance, information technology, and more.
This was a point-in-time, observational study that sought to answer a descriptive research
question, which was “What are the vice presidents’ attitudes towards and perceptions of adding
social media tools to the company intranet?” Since the study focused on attitudes and
perceptions, I primarily used qualitative research methods in the form of a survey. The survey
consisted of seven questions: Four ranking questions, one multiple choice question, one likert
scale question, and one open-ended question. For a copy of the survey, please see Appendix A:
Management Social Intranet Survey attached to the end of this report.
The survey was distributed to the vice presidents in paper form during a recurring
monthly meeting. Nine vice presidents attended the meeting in person and four attended via
telephone. I started the meeting by giving a short presentation on the topic of internal social
media, so the vice presidents could gain a high-level understanding of what the study was about.
The presentation was completely informational and in no way affected the results of the survey.
Once the presentation was finished, I explained the informed consent form to the
participants and had them sign it. Once receiving their consent to participate, I handed out the
survey and asked them to complete it. The participants generally completed the survey in two to
four minutes. The participants who attended the meeting via phone were emailed the informed
20
consent form to sign and a copy of the survey to complete. They were instructed to return the
survey to me at their earliest convenience with no identifiable information attached.
The results of the survey were completely anonymous. I had an intermediary collect the
surveys and deliver them to me when completed. Once I received the surveys, I tabulated the
results in a Microsoft Excel spreadsheet.
In addition to the surveys given to the 13 vice presidents, I also interviewed Becky
Graebe, intranet manager at SAS, an analytical software development company. SAS employs
roughly 12,000 people worldwide with only about 4,500 of them located at headquarters. I asked
Graebe to participate in the interview because I listened to her give a presentation about SAS’s
intranet for a Ragan Communication webinar. Her presentation was very educational, but left me
wanting more information, so I connected with her afterwards on Twitter of all places and asked
if she would be willing to be interviewed.
The interview was conducted over the phone. It lasted approximately a half hour and
consisted of ten questions. The questions focused on four categories: Implementing a social
intranet, benefits of a social intranet, managing and monitoring a social intranet, and technology
used to power a social intranet. For a copy of the interview questions, see Appendix B:Intranet
Questions for SAS Interview attached to the end of this report.
Before the interview took place, I emailed Graebe an informed consent form explaining
the study and her right to end her participation at any time and have her name withheld if
requested.
21
Chapter IV: Interview Results
Becky Graebe, intranet manager at SAS, was asked ten questions on the topic of social
intranets. The questions focused on implementation, benefits, challenges, and technology of
social intranets.
When asked what motivated SAS to implement a social intranet, Graebe said that they
felt it was the way the world was moving. She said that for them it was a valuable tool to help
recruit and retain employees. SAS wanted to attract employees who have been working in a
collaborative world most of their lives. SAS also faced the problem of having a dispersed
workforce with only about one-third of its staff located at headquarters. The social intranet
helped people connect no matter where they were located.
Graebe said that SAS has had a social intranet for six to seven years. It started as a
grassroots effort with several groups within the company using social media tools on their own.
She said that they took a “pieces and parts” approach in which they added different social
features to the intranet over the years. About four years ago they added the ability to comment on
news stories. When asked how they got company leaders to support the implementation of a
social intranet, Graebe said they would ask executives if they could pilot something for a few
months. From the pilot, they would find pieces that worked really well and present those
examples to the executives. Graebe explained that it did not take much to sell ideas to executives
since the SAS culture is one that is transparent and trusting.
As for getting staff to use the social media features, Graebe said they recruited active
bloggers to pilot and test the features. This approach helped create content and super users. In
addition, they would invite the executives to help pilot the tools, so they could see what the tools
had to offer. Since SAS already had groups using different social media tools in their individual
22
departments, they had to create an environment that was more attractive by offering better,
supported tools.
When asked what the most significant benefits the social intranet brings to SAS, Graebe
answered, “It helps people connect.” The social features enable employees to ask the crowd if
they do not know who to go to for help. In addition, Graebe said the social intranet has had a
huge impact on SAS’s employee retention rates, which are among the highest in the industry.
Graebe also mentioned that the social intranet actually makes employees more productive
because it gives them a mental break. She said to think about social intranets as an extension of
other well-being programs offered by the company, such exercise programs, at-work daycare,
and etc.
In reply to the assumption that social intranets will distract employees, Graebe said
“Employees are wasting time anyways. Anything employees can do on the intranet they can do
on their personal phones.”
When asked how many resources they need to manage the day-to-day operations of the
social intranet, Graebe said they have ten people on their internal communications team and two
people in the Information Technology (IT) department dedicated to the intranet. In addition, she
said they have a daily editor to find and monitor news; plus, one person dedicated to monitoring
the HUB, SAS’s social networking tool.
As for monitoring content, Graebe said they have the ability to turn off the commenting
feature but has never had to do so. They do not allow anonymous posting and have the ability to
check how much time people spend using the tools. Unless the employee has a performance
issue, they do not care how much time that employee spends on the intranet.
23
Graebe advised, “Allow people to be themselves.” The internal communication team gets
notified when someone comments on a news story. They have over 800 internal blogs that they
do not monitor. About a one-third of the groups on the HUB are personal interest groups. This
hands-off approach must be working because Graebe said, “I can count on one hand the number
of times I have had to ask someone to remove a post.”
When asked about the technology they use to power their social intranet, Graebe said that
for the most part they bought their tools or used free ones. For the HUB, they use an external tool
called SocialCast.
Towards the end of our conversation, I had time to ask Graebe one more question, which
was not one of my original ten. I wanted to know if she had any advice for me. She replied by
saying, “Be cautious of putting too many tools out there at once.” Clearly, she was advocating
for the “pieces and parts” approach that SAS took. In addition, she advised to find ways of
working the tools into the daily approach and to measure the overall impact of the tools, not bits
and pieces.
24
Chapter V: Survey Results
The survey was distributed to 13 company vice presidents in April 2012 and was
completed by 11 of them—a response rate of 85%. The vice presidents that did not complete the
survey were ones that did not attend the April meeting in person. They were emailed the survey
to complete and never returned it. They were sent multiple reminders and still never returned it.
The results of this study are based on the 11 vice presidents that returned the survey. Even with
only 11 vice presidents responding, the results revealed some trends.
The first question of the survey asked the vice presidents to choose three social media
features that interested them the most for the company intranet. They were asked to rank their
three choices most interested, second most interested, and third most interested. The social media
feature that interested the vice presidents the most was “customizable home pages.” Six out of 11
participants chose “customizable home pages” as one of the top three features that interested
them with an average choice of 2.17.
The social media feature that garnered the second most interest from the vice presidents
was “discussion boards.” It was chose by four out of 11 participants with an average choice of
two. The social media feature that garnered the third most interest was “wiki pages.” It was
chose by four out of 11 participants with an average choice of two.
There were three social media features that did not interest the vice presidents at all.
“Social networking (Facebook-like features),” “video sharing,” and “content rating” did not
receive any interest. For a breakdown of how all social media features ranked, see table two
below.
25
Table 2: Breakdown of vice presidents’ interest in social media features
Which three social media features interest you the most for your company’s intranet?
Most interested Second most Third most Honorable mention No interest
Customizable home pages
Discussion boards Wiki pages Employee profiles Social networking
Content recommendations
Video sharing
Commenting on news Content rating
Other
Job opportunity visibility
Blogs
The second question of the survey asked the vice presidents to choose three social media
features that concerned them the most for the company intranet. They were asked to rank their
three choices most concerning, second most concerning, and third most concerning. The social
media feature that concerned the vice presidents the most was “video sharing.” Eight out of 11
vice presidents chose “video sharing” as one of the most concerning social media features with
an average choice of 1.63. The second most concerning social media feature was “social
networking (Facebook-like features).” Six out of 11 vice presidents chose “social networking” as
one of the most concerning social media features with an average choice of 1.83. It is not
surprising that these two social media features were ranked one and two most concerning since
they also did not receive any interest from the vice presidents.
The third most concerning social media feature was “blogs” with four out of 11 vice
presidents choosing it as one of the most concerning. It had an average choice of 2.25. There
were three social media features that the vice presidents were not concerned about. “Content
recommendations,” “wikis,” and “commenting on content/news” were not chosen by any vice
presidents as a concern. For a complete breakdown of how all social media features ranked, see
table three below.
26
Table 3: Breakdown of vice presidents’ social media concerns
Which three social media features concern you most for your company’s intranet?
Most concerning Second most Third most Honorable mention Not concerned
Video sharing Social networking
Blogs Employee profiles Content recommendations
Custom homepages Wiki pages
Job opportunity visibility Commenting on content
Content rating
Discussion boards
The third question of the survey asked the vice presidents what they perceived as the
greatest risk to adding social media features to the company intranet. They were asked to only
choose one item. The risk that the vice presidents chose the most was “distracted employees”
with five out of 11 vice presidents choosing it. The second greatest risk the vice presidents chose
was “loss of information control” and “productivity loss” with two out of 11 choosing each. All
other risks were chosen once including an “other.” For the other, the vice president provided
his/her own risk, which was “management acceptance and the ability to capitalize on the
valuable input received from a social intranet.” For a complete breakdown of risks, see table four
below.
Table 4: Vice presidents’ perceived risks
What do you see as the greatest risk to having a social intranet?
Risk Participants Total
Productivity loss X X
2
Distracted employees X X X X X 5
Negative comments from employees
X 1
Loss of information control
X X 2
Other X (management acceptance and the ability to capitalize on the valuable input received from a social intranet)
1
27
The fourth questions of the survey asked the vice presidents to choose three ways social
media features on the company intranet would benefit the company. They were asked to rank
their choices greatest benefit, second greatest benefit, and third greatest benefit. The vice
presidents saw the greatest benefit of adding social media features to the company intranet as
“enhanced communications.” Eight out of 11 vice presidents chose “enhanced communications”
as one of the greatest benefits with an average choice of 1.13. The second greatest benefit that
the vice presidents chose was “improved collaboration.” Seven out of 11 vice presidents chose
“improved collaboration” as one of the greatest benefits with an average choice of 1.71. For the
third greatest benefit, the vice presidents chose “more knowledge sharing.” Eight out of 11 vice
presidents chose “more knowledge sharing” as a one of the greatest benefits with an average
choice of 2.50.
There were three items that the vice presidents did not see as benefits. None of the vice
presidents chose “improved business processes,” “elimination of silos,” or “improved ability to
recruit and retain employees” as benefits. For a complete breakdown of perceived benefits, see
table five below.
Table 5: Greatest perceived benefits
What do you see as the three greatest benefits to having a social intranet?
Greatest benefit Second greatest Third greatest Honorable mention None
Enhanced communication
Improved collaboration
More knowledge sharing
More transparency Improved business process
Improved employee relations
Elimination of silos
Recruit and retain employees
The fifth question of the survey asked vice presidents to choose the three greatest
challenges to implementing/operating social media features on the company intranet. They were
28
asked to rank their choices greatest challenge, second greatest challenge, and third greatest
challenge. The vice presidents saw the greatest challenge to adding social media features to the
company intranet as “allocating resources.” Six out of 11 vice presidents chose “allocating
resources” as one of the greatest challenges to adding social media features to the company
intranet with an average choice of 1.33. The second greatest challenge, as perceived by the vice
presidents, was “assuring quality.” Seven out of 11 vice presidents chose “assuring quality” as a
one of the greatest challenges with an average choice of 2.14. The third greatest challenge, as
perceived by the vice presidents, was “changing the company culture.” Five out of 11 vice
presidents chose “changing the company culture” as one of the greatest challenges but with an
average choice of 1.6.
There were three items that the vice presidents did not perceive as challenges to adding
social media features to the company intranet. “Getting people to use it” and “complying with
security policies” were both chosen once as the third greatest challenge. None of the vice
presidents saw “managing the costs” as a challenge. For a complete breakdown of the perceived
challenges, see table six below.
Table 6: Greatest challenges
What do you see as the three greatest challenges to implementing/operating a social intranet?
Greatest challenge
Second greatest
Third greatest Honorable mention None
Allocating resources
Assuring quality
Changing the company culture
Managing negative comments Managing costs
Getting people to use it
Monitoring usage
Managing the technical infrastructure
Complying with security policies
Finding a business need
29
Question six of the survey asked the vice presidents how likely they would be to support
adding social media features to the company intranet. They had five options to pick from:
“unlikely,” “somewhat unlikely,” “neutral,” “somewhat likely,” and “likely.” Seven out of 11
vice presidents chose “likely.” Two chose “neutral” and two chose “somewhat likely.” For a
complete breakdown of the vice presidents’ likeliness to support adding social media features to
the company intranet, see table seven below.
Table 7: Vice presidents’ likeliness to support social media features
How likely are you to support implementing one or more social media tools on your company’s
intranet?
Participants Total
Unlikely
Somewhat unlikely
Neutral X X 2
Somewhat likely X X 2
Likely X X X X X X X 7
Question seven of the survey was an open-ended question that asked the vice presidents
to share any thoughts they had about adding social media features to the company intranet. Six
out of 11 vice presidents chose to complete question seven. Below is a list of the comments they
had:
“Management acceptance; Using social media properly-with fresh content; mining
the information and data for company improvement; start slow and test acceptance”
“I really like the idea of being able to share information with staff and get their
feedback/input and being able to maintain an online record of the exchanges.”
“Very clear expectations of the use of social media need to be provided”
30
“I think there is an opportunity with the launch of the corporate culture employee
action team (focus on improving communication) to build some enthusiasm for social
networking and to have a direct line to employees for feedback.”
“We should take small incremental steps and not over analyze.”
“This is the last thing I ever thought we would do here.”
For all of the survey results, see Appendix C: Complete Survey Results attached to the end
of this report.
31
Chapter VI: Discussion
The results of the Social Intranet Attitude Assessment were actually quite interesting. The
vice presidents’ willingness to support a social intranet was much higher than I expected. If we
were to rank their willingness to support a social intranet on a scale of one to five with five being
the greatest, it would rank at 4.82. I expected more vice presidents to choose “neutral” when
asked about their willingness to support a social intranet because I figured they would need more
information before they could decide whether to support or not support the idea. This tells me
one of two things. Either the vice presidents understand the benefits of a social intranet and are
willing to accept the risks and challenges that come along with one, or they do not fully
understand the risks and challenges.
The vice presidents’ responses to the question regarding risks were pretty close to what I
expected with a few exceptions. I expected more vice presidents to choose “negative comments
from employees” and “productivity loss.” The low response to “productivity loss” can be
explained by vice presidents choosing “distracted employees” since distracted employees is a
form of productivity loss. As for “negative comments from employees,” perhaps the vice
presidents are willing to accept that negative comments on a social intranet simply come with the
territory.
While the responses to the question regarding risks were somewhat expected, the
responses to the question regarding challenges to implementing/operating a social intranet were
quite interesting. Not a single vice president chose “managing costs” as a challenge. Social
intranets can be fairly inexpensive to implement and operate; however, to have 11 vice
presidents not even consider managing costs as a minor challenge is staggering. Either they do
not fully understand the costs associated with implementing/operating a social intranet, or they
32
know there is money in the budget for an intranet project. Perhaps they feel that the money saved
through improved business processes and greater productivity will eventually even out the costs
of implementing/operating the social intranet.
Another surprising result in regards to challenges was that only one vice president chose
“complying with security policies” as a challenge. This comes as a shock because the company
that participated in the study is in the financial services industry and is very locked down in
regards to access to information. The company deals with a lot of personal identifiable
information (PII) such as Social Security and bank account numbers and has a very strict record
retention policy. These tight security measures do not really fit well with the openness and
information sharing ability of a social intranet. Again, maybe the vice presidents see the benefits
of having a social intranet outweigh the risks and challenges.
As for those benefits, the results of the survey were not surprising. Enhanced
communications, improved collaboration, and more knowledge sharing are precisely the benefits
that a social intranet can bring to an organization, and the vice presidents recognized that. The
only result that stood out is that none of the vice presidents chose “improved business processes”
as a benefit. Not entirely surprising though. Usually improved business process come from
moving paper-based processes to an electronic process (Prescient Digital Media, 2009). A lot of
the company’s business processes such as benefit enrollment and technology support have
already moved to electronic form. In addition, the benefits of enhanced communication,
improved collaboration, and more knowledge sharing lead to all the other benefits that were not
selected such as “improved employee relations,” “more transparency,” and “elimination of
silos.”
33
The results of the tool specific questions were somewhat surprising. “Customizable home
pages” was understandably the social media feature that garnered the most interest because of the
benefits it brings to employees by providing them with faster access to the tools and information
they need to perform their jobs. “Wiki pages” as the social media feature that garnered the third
most interest is not surprising either since it is a low-risk, low-cost collaborative tool that keeps
track of revisions. Its benefits are great with very low risk. The interest in discussion boards was
surprising because it also was one of the social media features that most concerned the vice
presidents. The lack of interest in employee profiles was surprising because the ability to have
profiles is basically what will make the social intranet function. Without employee profiles, there
is no way to know who is who—basically eliminating the social element of the intranet. This
shows a lack of basic understanding by the vice presidents about how a social intranet functions.
The vice presidents will need more education before proceeding with a social intranet
implementation. It very well could be possible that the vice presidents do understand the need for
employee profiles and did not choose it because they felt it was a requirement of the other social
media features. However, since vice presidents also were moderately concerned about employee
profiles that is most likely not the case.
The most interesting thing about the results of the tool specific questions is that the vice
presidents’ answers mirror the progression of the web that was mentioned in the literature
review. The vice presidents’ top choices were customizable home pages, discussion boards, and
wiki pages. These technologies are older and existed during the Web 1.0 era. The tools that
garnered some, but very little, interest such as employee profiles, content recommendations, and
blogs are getting a little newer and more social. But again, the vice presidents did not have much
interest in these tools. The tools that really power social intranets such as social networking,
34
video (media) sharing, and content ratings did not receive any interest. These results show that
the vice presidents are willing to move towards a more social intranet, but they are not willing to
take the leap towards a fully collaborative and social environment.
Other results in regards to tools that concerned the vice presidents also were interesting.
Their number one concern was video sharing. I am not sure what aspect of video sharing
concerns the vice presidents. It could be the content of the videos, the time spent watching
videos, the lack of business purpose, the time spent creating videos, or the server space required
to host videos. There is no clear answer since the vice presidents were not asked to explain their
choices. The other social media feature that concerns the vice presidents was blogs. This was
surprising because blogs were one of the social media features that garnered a moderate amount
of interest from the vice presidents. It could be the case that the vice presidents see the benefits
of blogs but also see the risks, and are not willing to support them without a well-defined risk
mitigation strategy.
The results of the open-ended question were fairly positive with a clear theme of “let’s
start small.” The positive results of the open-ended question echoed the vice presidents’
willingness to support the implementation and use of a social intranet. However, their “let’s start
small” attitude shows a slight bit of hesitation or at the very least a sense of caution. The open-
ended response that really stood out to me was the vice president that said, “This is the last thing
I ever thought we would do here.” That response I feel speaks to the company culture and the
amount of change it will need to undergo to make a social intranet successful.
35
Chapter VII: Recommendations
Based on the literature review, the interview with Becky Graebe, and the management
social intranet survey results there are several recommendations for implementing/operating a
social intranet.
Start small
Graebe and the survey participants both emphasized starting small. Instead of launching
an intranet loaded with social media features, it is best to pilot one or two social media features
at a time. Perhaps start with a president’s blog that allows employees to comment on the
president’s posts. Then move towards allowing employees to comment on all news stories posted
on the intranet. Start by building a foundation and let the employees get comfortable with the
features.
Monitor but do not control
It is important to monitor the usage, but it also is important not to restrict employees’
ability to communicate. Given the chance, employees will police themselves. The negative
comments and positive comments will balance out. Also, don’t allow anonymous postings.
When the people’s names are attached to their posts, they are less likely to post negative
comments. In addition, make sure the right people are monitoring the social intranet. A team of
four will suffice if they are the right four.
Do not worry about distracted employees
Employees are going to waste time whether they have a social intranet or not. The choice
becomes would you rather have them wasting time talking with coworkers or wasting time trying
to find the tools and information they need to do their jobs? They may be distracted employees,
but at least they are distracted employees who are well informed. Also, keep in mind that
36
distractions are not always bad. Like Graebe from SAS said, they treat their social intranet as a
part of their employee well-being program because it gives employees mental breaks, which
make them more productive. After all, increased productivity is the goal since it will lead to
increased revenues.
37
References
Burnham, K. (2009, December 1). Twitter alternatives that are all business. CIO. Retrieved from
http://www.cio.com/article/509425/Twitter_Alternatives_That_Are_All_Business?page=
1&taxonomyId=3000.
Cavazza, F. (2011, November 30). From social intranets to collaboration ecosystems. Forbes.
Retrieved from http://www.forbes.com/sites/fredcavazza/2011/11/30/from-social-
intranets-to-collaboration-ecosystems/.
Fulton, S. M. (2011, October 17). Capitalizing on social to prop up intranets. ReadWrite
Enterprise. Retrieved from
http://www.readwriteweb.com/enterprise/2011/10/capitalizing-on-social-to-prop.php.
Hoover, J.N. (2007, June 20). Motorola’s IT department takes on enterprise 2.0.
InformationWeek. Retrieved from http://www.informationweek.com/news/199905701.
Kemsley, S. (2010, March 22). Wiki Tuesday: Wikis at RBC. Enterprise Irregulars. Retrieved
from http://www.enterpriseirregulars.com/15171/wiki-tuesday-wikis-at-rbc/.
Lai, R. (2010). Intranet lessons from fortune’s #1 company to work for. Intranet Connections.
Retrieved from http://blogs.intranetconnections.com/best_practices/intranet-lessons-
from-fortune%E2%80%99s-1-company-to-work-for.
McGovern, G. (2010, May 9). Time is still money: Increasing employee productivity (part 1).
New Thinking. Retrieved from http://www.gerrymcgovern.com/nt/2010/nt-2010-05-09-
Time-is-money.htm.
McGrath, C. & Freed, E. (2012). Social intranets & employee engagement: An HR solution for
meaningful morale building. OpenRoad. Retrieved from
38
http://www.thoughtfarmer.com/blog/2012/02/07/white-paper-social-intranets-employee-
engagement.
Nielsen, J. (2009). Social networking on intranets. Jakob Nielsen’s Alertbox. Retrieved from
http://www.useit.com/alertbox/social-intranet-features.html.
Prescient Digital Media. (2009). Finding ROI: Measuring intranet investments. Retrieved from
http://www.prescientdigital.com/articles/finding-roi-white-paper.
Radick, S. (2011). The power of social networks: Reviving the intranet. Public Relations Tactics.
Retrieved from http://www.prsa.org/Intelligence/Tactics/Articles/view/6C-
011108/1025/The_Power_of_Social_Networks_Reviving_the_Intranet.
Schillerwein, S. (2010, March 18). Intranet case study: Chr. Hansen A/S. Intranet Matters.
Retrieved from http://intranet-matters.de/2010/03/18/intranet-case-study-chr-hansen-as/.
Social media. (n.d.). In Merriam-Webster’s online dictionary. Retrieved from
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/social%20media.
The Ken Blanchard Companies (2009). The high cost of doing nothing: Quantifying the impact
of leadership on the bottom line. Retrieved from
http://www.kenblanchard.com/img/pub/Blanchard_The_High_Cost_of_Doing_Nothing.p
df.
Ward, T. (2011). Social intranet study 2011: Business turns social. Prescient Digital Media.
Retrieved from http://www.prescientdigital.com/downloads/social-intranet-study-2011-
summary-report.
Ward, T. (2012). The social intranet: Key factors for intranet 2.0 success; social intranet success
matrix. Prescient Digital Media. Retrieved from
39
http://www.prescientdigital.com/downloads/social-intranet-whitepaper-prescient-digital-
feb2012.pdf.
Webdesigner Depot. (2009). The history and evolution of social media. Retrieved from
http://www.webdesignerdepot.com/2009/10/the-history-and-evolution-of-social-media.
40
Appendix A: Management Social Intranet Survey
Which three social media features interest you the most for your company’s intranet: (Order your three choices 1=most interested; 2=second most interested; 3=third most interested)
_ Blogs _ Employee profiles _ Social networking (Facebook-like features) _ Customizable homepages _ Content recommendations _ Job opportunity visibility _ Wiki pages _ Video sharing _ Commenting on content/news _ Rating content/news _ Discussion boards _ Other: _________________
Which three social media features concern you most for your company’s intranet: (Order your three choices 1=most concerning; 2=second most concerning; 3=third most concerning)
_ Blogs _ Employee profiles _ Social networking (Facebook-like features) _ Customizable homepages _ Content recommendations _ Job opportunity visibility _ Wiki pages _ Video sharing _ Commenting on content/news _ Rating content/news _ Discussion boards _ Other: _________________
What do you see as the greatest risk to having a social intranet?
O Productivity loss O Distracted employees O Negative comments from employees O Loss of information control O Other:__________________
41
What do you see as the three greatest benefits to having a social intranet? (Order your three choices 1=most beneficial; 2=second most beneficial; 3=third most beneficial)
_ Enhanced communication _ Improved collaboration _ More knowledge sharing _ Improved business processes _ Improved employee relations _ Elimination of silos _ More transparency _ Improved ability to recruit and retain employees _ Other: _____________
What do you see as the three greatest challenges to implementing/operating a social intranet? (Order your three choices 1=most challenging; 2=second most challenging; 3=third most challenging)
_ Finding a business need _ Monitoring the usage _ Managing negative comments _ Getting people to use it _ Changing the company culture _ Assuring quality _ Managing the technical infrastructure _ Managing costs _ Allocating resources to maintain it _ Complying with security policies _ Other: _______________
How likely are you to support implementing one or more social media tools on your company’s intranet? (1=Unlikely; 2=Somewhat unlikely; 3=Neutral; 4=Somewhat likely; 5=Likely) 1 2 3 4 5 Please share any thoughts or questions you may have about implementing internal social media tools:
42
Appendix B: Intranet Questions for SAS Interview
Implementation
1) What motivated your organization to implement a social intranet? Was there a business issue you were trying to solve? Was there employee demand for it? How did you know?
2) How long did it take to implement and how many resources were involved?
3) How did you get your company leadership to support the implementation of a social intranet?
4) Once you implemented, did you experience any change in the culture of your company? If so, what kind of changes did you experience? (Greater sense of community, more engaged, open and honest).
5) How much effort did it take to get employees to adopt/use the social intranet? Benefits
6) What are the most significant benefits the social intranet brings to your company?
7) We have identified several pros and cons to having a social intranet. Cons include Productivity loss, distraction, and place to complain. Have you experienced any of these or other cons?
Managing and Monitoring
8) How many resources does it take to manage the day-to-day operations of the social intranet?
9) How is the content of your social intranet monitored? Technology
10) Did you build your social intranet or buy a solution, and what drove your decision?
43
Appendix C: Complete Survey Results
Key In the participants column
Number one choices were given a score of 3 Number two choices were give a score of 2 Number three choices were given a score of 1
Total column = total after being scored Pre adjusted column = total before being scored (used to calculate the average choice) Rows highlighted green are positive results Rows highlighted red are negative results Which three social media features interest you the most for your company’sintranet?
Participants
Total
Pre adjust
ed Times chose
Average Choice
Times 1st
Times 2nd
Times 3rd
Blogs 3
3
1
7 5 3 1.67 2 0 1
Employee profiles 2
1
1
3 7 9 4 2.25 1 1 2 Social networking (Facebook-like features) 0 0 0 0.00 0 0 0
Customizable homepages 1 2 3 2 2 1 11 13 6 2.17 1 3 2
Content recommendations
1 1
3
1
6 10 4 2.50 1 0 3
Job opportunity visibility
3
2
2
7 5 3 1.67 1 2 0
Wiki pages 1 3 1 3 8 8 4 2.00 2 0 2
Video sharing 0 0 0 0.00 0 0 0 Commenting on content/news
2
3
5 3 2 1.50 1 1 0
Rating content/news 0 0 0 0.00 0 0 0
Discussion boards 1 3 1 3 2 10 10 5 2.00 2 1 2
Other:
2
2
4 4 2 2.00 0 2 0
44
Which three social media features concern you most for your company’s intranet?
Participants
Total
Pre adjust
ed Times chose
Average choice
Times 1st
Times 2nd
Times 3rd
Blogs 1 2 2 2 7 9 4 2.25 0 3 1
Employee profiles
3
1
4 4 2 2.00 1 0 1 Social networking (Facebook-like features) 2 3 1 3 3 1 13 11 6 1.83 3 1 2
Customizable homepages
3
3 1 1 1.00 1 0 0
Content recommendations 0 0 0 0.00 0 0 0
Job opportunity visibility
3
3 1 1 1.00 1 0 0
Wiki pages 0 0 0 0.00 0 0 0
Video sharing 3 3 2 1 3 2 2 3 19 13 8 1.63 4 3 1
Commenting on content/news 0 0 0 0.00 0 0 0
Rating content/news 2 1
1
4 8 3 2.67 0 1 2
Discussion boards
2
3 1
6 6 3 2 1 1 1
Other:
0 0 0 0.00 0 0 0 What do you see as the greatest risk to having a social intranet?
Participants Total
Productivity loss X X
2
Distracted employees X X X X X
5 Negative comments from employees X
1
Loss of information control
X X
2
Other X (management acceptance and the ability to capitalize on the valuable input received from a social intranet)
1
45
What do you see as the three greatest benefits to having a social intranet?
Participants
Total
Pre adjus
ted Times chose
Average choice
Times 1st
Times 2nd
Times 3rd
Enhanced communication 3 3 2 3 3 3 3 3 23 9 8 1.13 7 1 0
Improved collaboration 2 2 3 2 2 2 3 16 12 7 1.71 2 5 0
More knowledge sharing 1 3 1 2 1 1 2 1 12 20 8 2.50 1 2 5
Improved business processes 0 0 0 0.00 0 0 0
Improved employee relations 2
1
1
1
5 11 4 2.75 0 1 3
Elimination of silos 0 0 0 0.00 0 0 0
More transparency 1
3
1 2 7 9 4 2.25 1 1 2 Improved ability to recruit and retain employees 0 0 0 0.00 0 0 0
Other:
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 What do you see as the three greatest challenges to implementing/operating a social intranet?
Participants Total
Pre adjust
ed Times Chose
Average choice
Times 1st
Times 2nd
Times 3rd
Finding a business need
2
1
3 5 2 2.50 0 1 1
Monitoring the usage
3 3
3
2 11 5 4 1.25 3 1 0 Managing negative comments
1
2
1
4 8 3 2.67 0 1 2
Getting people to use it 1 1 2 6 2 3.00 0 0 2 Changing the company culture 3 2 3 2 2 12 8 5 1.60 2 3 0
Assuring quality 1 2 2 1 1 3 3 13 15 7 2.14 2 2 3 Managing the technical infrastructure
2
2 2 1 2.00 0 1 0
Managing costs 0 0 0 0.00 0 0 0 Allocating resources to maintain it 2 3 3 3 3 2 16 8 6 1.33 4 2 0 Complying with security policies 1 1 3 1 3.00 0 0 1
Other:
0 0 0 0.00 0 0 0
46
How likely are you to support implementing one or more social media tools to the company intranet?
Participants Total
Unlikely
Somewhat unlikely
Neutral
X
X 2
Somewhat likely
X
X 2
Likely X X X X X X X 7 Please share any thoughts or questions you may have about implementing internal social media tools:
“Management acceptance; Using social media properly-with fresh content; mining
the information and data for company improvement; start slow and test acceptance”
“I really like the idea of being able to share information with staff and get their
feedback/input and being able to maintain an online record of the exchanges.”
“Very clear expectations of the use of social media need to be provided”
“I think there is an opportunity with the launch of the corporate culture employee
action team (focus on improving communication) to build some enthusiasm for social
networking and to have a direct line to employees for feedback.”
“We should take small incremental steps and not over analyze.”
“This is the last thing I ever thought we would do here.”