19
Web 2.0 and 3.0: A Community-Based Adoption Approach Brian Richardson, PMP

CETS 2010, Brian Richardson, Web 2.0 and 3.0: A Community-Based Adoption Approach

Embed Size (px)

DESCRIPTION

 

Citation preview

Page 1: CETS 2010, Brian Richardson, Web 2.0 and 3.0: A Community-Based Adoption Approach

Web 2.0 and 3.0: A Community-Based Adoption Approach

Brian Richardson, PMP

Page 2: CETS 2010, Brian Richardson, Web 2.0 and 3.0: A Community-Based Adoption Approach

Learning Objectives

• Describe Web 2.0/3.0 implementation using a Community-based approach

• Identify the process and deliverables involved in establishing a Community of Practice

• Initiate and plan a Community of Practice to meet strategic objectives

• Extract data from a case study to create a Community of Practice charter

Page 3: CETS 2010, Brian Richardson, Web 2.0 and 3.0: A Community-Based Adoption Approach

What is Web X.0?

Web 1.0 • Information delivery• Transactions• Entertainment

Web 2.0 • Social networking (Facebook, LinkedIn)• Collaboration (Wikipedia)• Applications and data storage (salesforce.com)• Data sharing/publishing (Twitter, blogs, YouTube)

Web 3.0???? • “Semantic Web” (machines talking to machines (Berners-Lee, 1999)• Intelligent agents that can reason, infer and learn based on (reliable)

metadata• Online world meets physical world• “Highly specialized information silos, moderated by a cult of personality,

validated by the community, and put into context with the inclusion of meta-data through widgets.” (howtosplitanatom.com)

Page 4: CETS 2010, Brian Richardson, Web 2.0 and 3.0: A Community-Based Adoption Approach

The promise of Web 2.0/3.0

Solutions that harness the relationship capital within social networks can address a number of critical business issues, including:

• Brand awareness, value, and reputation• Innovation capabilities• Customer relationship management (CRM)• Corporate social responsibility• Strategic talent, learning, and recruiting initiatives• Collaboration and knowledge management (KM) strategies

Page 5: CETS 2010, Brian Richardson, Web 2.0 and 3.0: A Community-Based Adoption Approach

Community-based approach

• In a 2008 McKinsey survey (McKinsey, 2008), 22% of executives voiced strong dissatisfaction with Web 2.0/3.0 tools and only 21% reported being satisfied overall with their use of these tools.

• For those organizations that consider their implementations successful, one of the most-commonly cited best practices (Burton Group, 2009) was the use of a managed community (vs. technology-centric) approach to implementation.

Page 6: CETS 2010, Brian Richardson, Web 2.0 and 3.0: A Community-Based Adoption Approach

Key Elements to Adoption

People and Process

Flexibility Governance

Page 7: CETS 2010, Brian Richardson, Web 2.0 and 3.0: A Community-Based Adoption Approach

What is a Community of Practice (CoP)?

A network of people who come together…

• A CoP defines itself in the doing, as members share experiences, insights, and best practices related to a topic or discipline using collective norms and processes

…to share information and knowledge…

• Exchange ideas, collaborate, and learn from one another in face-to-face and virtual environments

• Capture best practices, develop expertise, and steward bodies of knowledge

• Are able to access a constant flow of information to do their jobs better and more consistently across segments

• Develop a communal memory, so individuals do not have to remember everything themselves

…with a practice orientation.

• Clear ties to business objectives and organizational strategy• Balance between executive support and grassroots initiatives• Expert-led communities, which produce more reliable content• Strong objectives and focus to help integrate activities into

normal workflow vs. being “one more thing”

Page 8: CETS 2010, Brian Richardson, Web 2.0 and 3.0: A Community-Based Adoption Approach

Characteristics of CoPs

Domain

PracticeCommunity

Page 9: CETS 2010, Brian Richardson, Web 2.0 and 3.0: A Community-Based Adoption Approach

CoP Lifecycle

Initiation Planning Activation

ExecutionMonitor and ControlClosure

Page 10: CETS 2010, Brian Richardson, Web 2.0 and 3.0: A Community-Based Adoption Approach

Key Deliverables

Charter Initiative ListCommunication and Marketing

PlanGovernance

Plan

• What is our purpose?

• What are our goals?

• Who do we serve?

• What will we do?

• By when?• Who is

responsible?

• Who will we reach?

• What are our key messages?

• How will we reach them?

• Who will set and enforce policy?

• How will we measure success?

• How will we coordinate areas of the organization?

Page 11: CETS 2010, Brian Richardson, Web 2.0 and 3.0: A Community-Based Adoption Approach

Your Role = Process Expert

Page 12: CETS 2010, Brian Richardson, Web 2.0 and 3.0: A Community-Based Adoption Approach

Case Study

Page 13: CETS 2010, Brian Richardson, Web 2.0 and 3.0: A Community-Based Adoption Approach

Question? Contact us.

Brian Richardsonwww.richardsonconsultinggroup.com773-474-1834brian@richardsonconsultinggroup.comhttp://www.linkedin.com/in/briandrichardson

Page 14: CETS 2010, Brian Richardson, Web 2.0 and 3.0: A Community-Based Adoption Approach

Appendix

Page 15: CETS 2010, Brian Richardson, Web 2.0 and 3.0: A Community-Based Adoption Approach

References

• Common Technology Platforms– Jive Software– NewsGator– Wiki (various, including MediaWiki)– Sharepoint

• Additional CoP Resources– Online reference for CoPs: http://www.chris-

kimble.com/KNICOP/Chapters/Introduction.html– Free and fee-based resources: http://www.apqc.org– Academic Background and References

http://infed.org/biblio/communities_of_practice.htm– Dr. Etienne Wenger’s site: http://www.ewenger.com– Community of Practice Yahoo Group:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/com-prac/

Page 16: CETS 2010, Brian Richardson, Web 2.0 and 3.0: A Community-Based Adoption Approach

Types of Virtual Networks

Communities of Practice

Knowledge Centers

Communities of Interest

Informal Networks Inform Email, Instant Messaging, Blogs

Chat Discussion Groups with a Common Interest

Exchange Content Document Sharing, Some Threaded Discussion

Achieve Goals, Social Learning, Knowledge Transfer & Creation

Organizationally Managed to Goals, Managed Conversation, Content &

Community, Wiki & Web Conferencing

Adapted from Tissen, Andriessen, and Deprez, The Knowledge Dividend: Creating High-Performance Companies Through Value-Based Knowledge Management. London et al: Pearson Education Limited, 2000, and Benton and Giovagnoli, The Wisdom Network: An 8 Step Process for Identifying, Sharing and Leveraging Individual Expertise. New York et al: American Management Association, 2006.

Purpose Web Services

Page 17: CETS 2010, Brian Richardson, Web 2.0 and 3.0: A Community-Based Adoption Approach

Key Roles

Role DefinitionKnowledge Manager •Support and oversight role; not necessarily part of the CoP

•Helps set-up CoP, provides structure and guidance•Provides training on process and tools

Practice Area Owner •Provides strategic direction for practice areas•Determines which CoPs should be supported•Determines if CoP recommendations align with strategic vision•Provides input on related CoPs

CoP Sponsor •Reviews and approves key CoP deliverables•Responsible for membership and content•May or may not be Practice Area Owner

Moderator •Monitors content•Ensures compliance with company standards and governance•Ensures questions are being answered

Practice Area Expert •Provides input on activities and deliverables•Mentors other practitioners•Assists CoP Sponsors and Community Managers

Community Member (Practitioner)

•Shares information, knowledge, experiences, insights and best practices around shared goals•Is invited or applies to join CoP

Page 18: CETS 2010, Brian Richardson, Web 2.0 and 3.0: A Community-Based Adoption Approach

Key Roles, continued

Role DefinitionHuman Capital Partner •Business advisor who identifies, develops and implements Human Capital solutions

which contribute to achievement of business goals•Monitors business performance focusing on people-related metrics and trends •Aligns CoP activities to Human Capital strategy

Governance Board •Reviews CoP progress against goals•Determines synergistic opportunities•Identifies and promotes CoP accomplishments•Identifies duplication of efforts

Page 19: CETS 2010, Brian Richardson, Web 2.0 and 3.0: A Community-Based Adoption Approach

OverviewRole Initiation Planning Activation Execution Monitor Close

Practice Area Owner

Sponsor

Moderator

Expert

HCP

Members

GovernanceBoard

Knowledge Manager

•Complete request form•Go to training•Complete and submit charter

Review / approve charter

•Gather inputs•Identify leadership•Determine focus•Identify deliverables•Create initiative list•Create marketing / comm plan

Recruited/ apply

•Launch CoP •Kick-off key initiatives

•CoP

wor

ks to

war

d ac

hiev

ing

goal

s•E

stab

lish

men

torin

g re

latio

nshi

ps•C

reat

e an

d en

hanc

e so

cial

and

in

telle

ctua

l cap

ital

Assess goal achievement, time spend and satisfaction

•Fulfilled charter•Lost momentum•No longer aligned to strategy

SUPPORTS CoP