To what extent are traditional behavioral approaches to collaboration useful in supporting effective collaboration in an Enterprise 2.0 environment? This is a question that I have been thinking about a lot. It raises the issue of whether a technological solution is sufficient in itself to ensure effective collaboration. If not, what else from what we know as traditional collaboration is necessary to support the technological solution to attain effective collaboration?
I recently read an article that I found on the Socialtext web site entitled Five Best Practices for Enterprise Collaboration Success. I found the article to be informative and well-thought out. I will use Socialtext as a test case for this post because Socialtext appears to be a strong collaboration solution and thereby creates a "best case" scenario.
The article sets out a number of what I consider to be principles for effective Enterprise 2.0 collaboration. These include:
- Get a rich picture of the people behind the work.
- Help people get to know each other.
- Discover others who could be valuable.
The article also covers guidelines for effective adoption as well as important functionalities of the Socialtext software such as an enterprise wiki, a blogging capability, social networking and plans for a distributed spreadsheet and social messaging.
What seems to me to be inherent in this article is the idea that "if you build it, they will come" as long as you build it to provide functionality that is important to people, an interface that is congruent with what they are familiar with and functionality and benefits that clearly appeal to their search for "what's in it for me." I do not mean to minimize the criteria in this caveat. I appreciate that these things are important and that accomplishing them goes a long way to supporting effective collaboration.
The key point I glean from this article is that people will be motivated to use the Socialtext software solution in a business context because Socialtext appeals to their desire to reach out, connect with and be social with others and to do their job well. It shows them that there is something in it for them. It also appeals through elements like photos, background and tags to their inherent curiosity while also building trust. I think all of this is an important aspect of this collaboration solution.
What I did not find in this article, was a reference to what I have known as the behavioral aspects of collaboration. These aspects of collaboration are both behaviors and skill sets that have in the past and certainly in my experience enabled effective collaboration to take place with in-person groups. These behavioral aspects are reflected in the following questions.
- Do people listen with understanding to each other - to the verbal or written word of the other?
- Do people articulate clearly what they are trying to communicate?
- Do people provide air time for others?
- Are people willing to share information with others because they believe that by doing so their own interests will not be undermined and/or will be advanced and their sharing will be reciprocated?
- Do people have the emotional intelligence to share or receive knowledge without worrying about the impact on their ego or identity of doing so and without being defensive?
- Can people make use of observable data that they share with others and receive from others without jumping to unwarranted conclusions, making unwarranted inferences or acting in unhelpful ways on this information?
- Do people have a shared approach or set of tools that they can use to analyze knowledge and reach solutions to problems or challenges?
- Are individuals aware of their personality styles and do they consciously try to make adjustments in their work with others?
In future posts, I will endeavor to answer the question that I posed at the beginning of this post that is reflected in these additional questions.
I welcome your comments.
Comments