Using wikis and blogs to improve collaboration and knowledge sharing

Judy Payne

Abstract Purpose Leading business thinkers agree that knowing how to collaborate is the key to effective knowledge creation and sharing, and to future business success. But collaboration is voluntary, and difcult to manage for hierarchical organizations accustomed to top-down control. This is reected in the difculties organizations typically encounter when trying to persuade people to use technology tools designed to support collaboration. Social software, such as wikis and blogs, appears to be different. Wikis and blogs have become established outside the business world in phenomena such as Wikipedia and are now moving into mainstream business practice. The purpose of this article is to explore the role of wikis and blogs in supporting collaboration. Design/methodology/approach The article explores the use of social software in organizations through three case studies produced as part of a Henley Knowledge Management Forum research project. Findings The ndings suggest that social software has the potential to help organizations develop collaboration capability, but the bottom-up features that make it attractive to users can also make it unattractive to groups of people with a stake in preserving existing organizational structures. Originality/value The paper suggests that the impact of social software in an organization depends on the nature of the existing hierarchy and bureaucracy, and that social software can help organizations break down traditional hierarchies that impede collaboration and knowledge sharing. Preliminary work to develop a framework for understanding and managing these interactions is also presented. Keywords Team working, Knowledge management, Internet Paper type Case study

Judy Payne is a director at Henley Management Colleges Knowledge Management Forum, Henley-on-Thames, UK.

eading business thinkers agree that knowing how to collaborate is the key to future business success. But collaboration is voluntary, and difcult to manage for hierarchical organizations accustomed to top-down control. This article discusses the ndings of research into the use of wikis and blogs to make collaboration more effective, using three case studies to show that introducing these tools can help break down traditional hierarchies and change the way people behave.

The aim of effective knowledge management is to enable everyone to gain from the intellect, imagination, potential and enthusiasm of people working in and with organizations (McKenzie and van Winkelen, 2004). Although there are philosophical arguments around whether knowledge can be managed at all, in practice most organizations attempt to manage knowledge creation and sharing through a mixture of people, process and technology tools and techniques designed to improve performance and add value. Yet most organizations nd knowledge management particularly the people and culture aspects difcult. Perhaps because it is easier to buy a software package than to create an environment in which people willingly share and create knowledge, the importance of technology to knowledge management is sometimes over-emphasized. According to Lee Bryant of the specialist social software consulting and development company Headshift:

DOI 10.1108/14754390810865757

VOL. 7 NO. 3 2008, pp. 5-12, Q Emerald Group Publishing Limited, ISSN 1475-4398

STRATEGIC HR REVIEW

PAGE 5

 It is widely accepted in knowledge management that organizations can only inuence knowledge creation and sharing . . .

. . . the knowledge management movement has been hijacked by (mainly US-based) software vendors with the result that much knowledge management IT infrastructure is woefully divorced from anything approaching normal human behavior and is hardly worthy of the name (Bryant, 2003).

Social software, such as wikis and blogs, appears to be different. People are using these tools outside work, in their own time, because they want to. What does this mean for the business world and strategic HR professionals?

Knowledge, collaboration and culture

Knowledge is not something that exists somewhere, waiting for us to nd it. It is more of an interpretation that groups of people give to what they see around them. Knowledge cannot exist without people. It is not a set of facts produced in a research center or university; it is produced in global teams by people with diverse skills and experiences, and is subject to social accountability and acceptability. It is widely accepted in knowledge management that organizations can only inuence knowledge creation and sharing, and the way to do this is to provide an appropriate environment and appropriate tools. Another way of looking at this is to recognize that for knowledge creation and transfer to take place, organizations need to know how to collaborate (Miles et al., 2000). Developing the ability to collaborate effectively is difcult, because collaboration is voluntary. People will not collaborate just because they are told to, so collaboration cannot be managed in a traditional hierarchical, command-and-control environment. Organizations therefore need to invest in creating conditions that will encourage collaboration an environment of trust, self-management, behavioral protocols, shared intent and equitable sharing of returns. These perspectives on knowledge and collaboration raise serious questions about how institutions and businesses need to change and develop the ways in which they produce knowledge and make it clear that there is a strategic HR role in creating an environment that supports and encourages knowledge sharing and collaboration.

The HR challenge
Effective knowledge sharing and collaboration means fewer mistakes are repeated, good practices are spread, valuable experience isnt lost when employees leave, and innovative ideas are developed. To promote effective knowledge sharing, many organizations use tools such as Microsoft SharePoint and Lotus Notes designed specically to help people share knowledge and work collaboratively. These tools are not without their problems, however. The overwhelming experience of Henley Knowledge Management Forum members is that the biggest hurdle to implementation is persuading people to use them. Why is this so? The concept of hierarchy is particularly relevant here. In organizations, hierarchy and formal authority are analogous to bureaucracy. Bureaucracy can affect organizations in two ways. The negative view is that bureaucratic organizations stie new ideas and demotivate employees; the positive view is that bureaucracy provides clarity over responsibilities and therefore reduces role stress. One way of resolving these opposing views is to acknowledge two types of bureaucracy: enabling (which helps employees in their work) and coercive (used by managers to command and control reluctant employees). The extent of

PAGE 6 STRATEGIC HR REVIEW VOL. 7 NO. 3 2008

bureaucracy in an organization does not itself lead to positive or negative effects; the important factor is the type of bureaucracy (Adler and Borys, 1996). So the challenge is to create enabling rather than coercive bureaucracies. Can social software help organizations do this? Andrew McAfee and Thomas Davenport discuss this question in their respective blogs (McAfee, 2007; Davenport, 2007). McAfee believes that social software is radically different from other collaborative tools, and is optimistic that it will help organizations become more collaborative and democratic. Davenport is more skeptical, and does not think such a Utopian vision can be achieved by new technology alone.

Social software tools

The language of social software is evolving and there are no xed denitions. Opinions differ on the types of software included under the heading, and even the term social software has alternatives. Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org) is a good source of up-to-date denitions. Most people agree that wikis, blogs and social networking sites and services are social. Social software is different from traditional collaborative tools. Applications such as Lotus Notes work from the top down, putting the group, organization or project rst. Social software is more bottom-up, and works best without imposed top-down control (see Figure 1). In this article we are concerned with wikis and blogs. A wiki (or wiki engine) is a computer software program that allows users to add, remove, edit and link content easily. Wikis are web-based, and the term is also used to refer to websites created using wiki engines. A blog (derived from web log) is an online journal that contains news and views on a particular subject or acts as the owners personal diary. Most blogs give readers the ability to comment and discuss the issues raised by the owner. The term blog is also used as a verb. Unlike other software tools used in business, wikis and blogs rst became established outside the business world. Sites such as the online encyclopedia Wikipedia launched in 2001 and perhaps the best-known wiki of all have hundreds of millions of users. In September 2007, the blog search engine Technorati claimed to be tracking more than 106 million blogs.

Figure 1 Traditional vs social software

VOL. 7 NO. 3 2008 STRATEGIC HR REVIEW PAGE 7

Using a wiki for collaborative authoring at Improvement-Org

Improvement-Org works with the statutory, voluntary and private sectors to make the best use of the full range of resources and expertise available to improve services. Its knowledge-related aims include sharing positive practice and learning about what works and what doesnt, passing on research ndings to organizations to help them improve services, and encouraging organizations to work in partnership across all sectors. Improvement-Org uses a wiki as a real time, collaborative authoring tool. For example, the wiki has been used to produce a 12-chapter e-book. The impetus for the book came from its authors, who wanted something more exible than a central editor co-ordinating text inputs from 12 people. Using the wiki meant that 12 authors could work on 12 chapters simultaneously. Everyone could see what everyone else was doing so all the authors acted as reviewers and gave instant feedback. The result was rapid completion of the book, and chapters that complement each other. There are administrators for the wiki, but there is no hierarchy of editing rights for its content. At rst there was a fear that the content might be low quality, but this is not the case in practice; standards for content and behavior have emerged. These standards are not written down or policed by administrators; they are owned and applied by users, and different groups of users produce collaboratively authored documents in different ways. Improvement-Org has found that trust between users contributes to their motivation to use the wiki. Other factors that contribute to the success of the wiki are the fact that it can be accessed over the Internet and its ease of use. Differences in professional status can hinder wiki use. Improvement-Org nds it difcult to get senior professionals to contribute, and has also found that some people do not contribute because they do not think they can add value. The technology itself can also be off-putting to users who are not comfortable with IT tools. Although the wiki is designed for use by existing networks of people or to complete existing tasks that need collaboration, the way it is set up has created new connections because users can see what others are doing. The most active and dynamic groups seem to hold a magnetic attraction for others and pull in new users.

Using wikis and blogs for project management at Consult-Co

Consult-Co is a specialist social software consulting and development company that works with organizations to create more effective online networks. The company has a at structure; staff work in teams around client projects that can be consultancy, software implementation, or both. Consult-Co has an internal wiki with blogging and comments functions, used primarily for projects. Each project has its own project space open to the client and all staff whether they are working directly on the project or not although this is subject to condentiality undertakings and robust permissions management. All staff use the wiki every day. Consult-Co describes the wiki as central to the way we work but stresses that the main internal communications route is face-to-face. The company is small and internal relationships are built face-to-face, the wiki just makes it easier to work together and with clients.

The wiki also makes it easy for new staff to nd out what is going on, and provides a mechanism for leavers to share their knowledge.

PAGE 8 STRATEGIC HR REVIEW VOL. 7 NO. 3 2008

Client project spaces are used to share documents, develop and write specications collaboratively with the client, and comment on project outputs. Clients contribute at each stage of a project, from proposal to implementation. This creates a shared common record of the whole project, and importantly helps create shared expectations. Because wikis allow previous versions to be recreated, they provide an audit trail of decision making and client sign-off. Compared with other ways of working with clients, the wiki saves time and therefore money. There is a strong shared understanding of how to use the Consult-Co wiki, even though nothing is written down to guide behavior. The wiki is seen very much as a work tool. Spaces belong to the people working on them. Others are encouraged to take an interest and contribute, but they do not interfere. If someone has a question or suggestion they think might be of interest or value to others then they post it onto the wiki, otherwise they communicate one-to-one. There is no need to police behavior and Consult-Co has never moderated content generated internally. It is far more likely for someone to say lets move this discussion off email and onto the wiki than dont use the wiki this way. Serious discussions take place face-to-face, even if they continue on the wiki. The wiki also makes it easy for new staff to nd out what is going on, and provides a mechanism for leavers to share their knowledge. A recent leaver voluntarily contributed some of his knowledge and experience by creating a space on the wiki. Consult-Co sees the wiki as a potential corporate memory in which both formal and informal ideas and discussions are captured.

Improving communications using blogs at Finance-Co

Finance-Co operates as a retailer of a broad range of personal nancial services products, including personal banking, mortgages and savings. It employs 16,500 people based in two central ofces and in retail outlets throughout the UK. Finance-Cos CEO started a blog in 2006 to share his thoughts and news about the organization. Known internally as The Blog, all staff can read and comment via Finance-Cos intranet there is no web access. The blog is popular with staff, and each of the weekly postings attracts 40 to 50 comments from named individuals. Anonymous contributions are not possible, as staff have to be logged onto the intranet to gain access. As well as regular weekly postings, the blog is used for special announcements. Staff who read the blog consider it a success; it creates better understanding of issues within the rm, makes the CEO appear more personable, and builds morale and staff motivation. There is a code of conduct for the blog that encourages constructive contributions and positive suggestions for improvements. There is also a moderator (anonymous) who can challenge contributions and delete comments if they do not conform to the rules. Staff generally accept the need for rules, recognizing that there cannot be complete freedom of speech in a nancial services organization. At rst the blog was sometimes too one-way; questions were raised and suggestions made without a visible response from the CEO. The blog has now become an executive team blog, giving all directors the opportunity to inform and engage with all staff. Already this has been effective, and the directors are providing more feedback to staff comments on the blog. This adds value and clarity and is improving communications between all divisional directors and staff across Finance-Co.

Social software seems to have the potential to help organizations build the capability of collaboration.

VOL. 7 NO. 3 2008 STRATEGIC HR REVIEW PAGE 9

Why does the impact of social software vary between organizations?

Our research suggests that the impact (and value) of social software for an organization is related to the nature of the organizations hierarchy, and whether the software implementation reects or contradicts this. There is a big unanswered question: is social software a set of useful tools that makes things easier for people who would collaborate anyway, or does it represent a radically different way of interacting with people that will transform organizations and make them more democratic and collaborative? Our case studies support both arguments. At Consult-Co, using a wiki internally makes collaboration more efcient, but the people would have collaborated anyway. At Improvement-Org, introducing a wiki has created collaboration where it did not exist before, but the hierarchy in the professions served by Improvement-Org persists and the most senior members of the network do not contribute. At Finance-Co, an executive blog seems to have made directors more responsive to staff comments. We have also found people using social software to bypass existing organizational structures and create new ways for individuals to connect with each other. In this case individuals desire to communicate and collaborate is greater than their loyalty to the organization and its processes. This is why social software is sometimes referred to as subversive.

How can social software help meet the HR challenge?

Social software seems to have the potential to help organizations build the capability of collaboration. In some contexts at least, social software is a catalyst for making organizations atter and more democratic in their behavior. If knowledge managers and HR managers understood the relationships between social software, organizational Figure 2 The likely effects of introducing a wiki in different contexts

PAGE 10 STRATEGIC HR REVIEW VOL. 7 NO. 3 2008

Table I Using a wiki to build collaboration capability

Coercive bureaucracy Peoples motivation and capability to connect and collaborate greater than motivation to preserve existing organizational structures Give people permission to collaborate creatively within guidelines that deliver benets to the organization as well as to the individuals. Ask people to identify uses for the wiki that will deliver organizational benets and support these uses as pilots Demonstrate the benets of bottom-up collaboration to the organization. Use the wiki for tasks that require collaboration between existing teams. Encourage motivated and capable individuals to support less motivated and capable individuals Build peoples motivation and capability for collaboration. Use the wiki for small, well-dened tasks that need to be done anyway. Choose tasks that are carried out by well-dened teams. Provide training and technical support Enabling bureaucracy Build the organizations ability for ongoing positive transformation. Use the wiki to develop radical new ideas and directions that satisfy organizational and individual needs Make existing collaboration more efcient and increase the scope of collaborative decision-making. Congure the wiki to reect existing organizational structures and use it for everything from writing agendas to setting strategy Build peoples motivation and capability for collaboration. Use the wiki for tasks that are important to individuals even if these tasks are not high priority for the organization. Provide training and technical support

Peoples motivation and capability to connect and collaborate equal to motivation to preserve organizational structures

Peoples motivation and capability to connect and collaborate less than motivation to preserve existing organizational structures

hierarchy and bureaucracy, and individual motivation, then we would be able to intervene in ways that support knowledge creation and sharing. Figure 2 shows what we believe would happen if a wiki was introduced to different organizations and people were free to use it as they wished. The framework can also be used to understand what intervention is needed to build the collaboration capability of individuals and organizations (Table I).

Concluding comments
Striving for effective collaboration in atter, more democratic organizations isnt the only reason for considering social software. People are using social software outside work to build their own networks. This is shaping their expectations of the knowledge-sharing tools available to them in a business environment, and shaping their expectations of the way they, as individuals, contribute to knowledge creation and sharing. If these expectations are not met by employers, the new generation of knowledge workers has the ability to create alternative organizational structures and the connections needed to switch organizations at will. Organizations simply cannot afford to ignore social software.

References
Adler, P. and Borys, B. (1996), Two types of bureaucracy: enabling and coercive, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 41 No. 1, pp. 61-89. Bryant, L. (2003), An introduction to online social software methodology, available at: www.headshift. com/moments/archive/sss2.html (accessed April 16, 2007). Davenport, T. (2007), Why Enterprise 2.0 wont transform organizations, blog, March 21, available at: http://discussionleader.hbsp.com/davenport/2007/03/why_enterprise_20_wont_transfo.html McAfee, A. (2007), blog, March 25, available at: http://blog.hbs.edu/faculty/amcafee/ McKenzie, J. and van Winkelen, C. (2004), Understanding the Knowledgeable Organization, Thomson Learning, London. Miles, E., Snow, C.C. and Miles, G. (2000), TheFuture.org, Long Range Planning, Vol. 33, pp. 300-21.

About the author

Judy Payne is a director of the Henley Knowledge Management Forum. She has been a musician, a scientist, an engineer and a construction industry research association director.

VOL. 7 NO. 3 2008 STRATEGIC HR REVIEW PAGE 11

She now specializes in knowledge management, collaboration and performance improvement and divides her time between academic and private consultancy work. Judy Payne can be contacted at: [email protected]

The Henley Knowledge Management Forum

The Henley Knowledge Management Forum is an internationally recognized center of excellence in KM based at Henley Management College. It is a member-based community with over 40 public, private and third sector members who collaborate to develop insights, understanding and practical guidance on KM issues. The research described in this article was carried out by a working group of Henley Knowledge Management Forum members. The ndings are based on a literature review, working group discussion, a survey of KM practitioners and case studies of three organizations with different experiences of using social software. The survey results and case studies were analyzed by the working group through discussion and by application of concepts from the literature review. The ndings were tested by KM Forum members in a workshop session of the Forums annual conference, held in June 2007.

To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: [email protected] Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints

PAGE 12 STRATEGIC HR REVIEW VOL. 7 NO. 3 2008