After you have developed a clear intranet strategy as explained in my post ‘How to develop an intranet strategy‘ you then need to follow this with an implementation plan, publishing standards and a governance framework.
While every intranet is different there are some common factors that need to be considered so your intranet supports your business requirements:
- The size of your organisation will affect how you manage your intranet. If it is based in one location and you know everyone by their first name then it is likely you can manage your intranet on your own. If it has many thousands of people in many locations you will need a different approach and involve other people to help you manage your intranet.
- The type of organisation will affect how you manage your intranet. Is it streamlined on administration, informal decision-making? Or is it more formalised, committee driven, when making decisions on how publishing standards and intranet roles and responsibilities?
- The culture of your organisation will affect how you manage your intranet. Is it a very top down, command and control, culture with feedback discouraged? Or is it more open, democratic and consensual? Whether it is either or a mix of both will influence your approach to managing your intranet.
My first-hand experience and from working with clients is that intranets can be managed well no matter what size, type or culture your organisation has. It is how you approach this which is the critical success factor!
You can out more information on how to manage your intranet to help you.
Posted in best practice, content management, governance, help, intranet, plan, publishing, standards, strategy, training, value
Tagged best practice, content, governance, help, intranet, plan, publishing, standards, strategy, usability standards, value
Recently I posted on how to develop an intranet strategy and how to develop a digital workplace strategy. I now want to cover SharePoint because it is used by so many organisations. I have covered in earlier post if SharePoint is good or bad and what organisations need to do to help decide if it is.
This post focuses on a strategy for using SharePoint. Note it is NOT a SharePoint strategy! This is a mistake organisations have made and it can have serious consequences. A strategy for SharePoint needs to consider far more than just implementing technology:
- Be afraid, very afraid, of implementing SharePoint without a clear set of business requirements. Make sure SharePoint is the best match for these requirements.
- Have clear priorities for what SharePoint needs to help with first. Without these how will you know what can requirements can be met first or have the biggest impact on your organisation?
- Make sure you have a robust governance framework in place before you start using SharePoint. You will need it! I find it is the most common reason for causing problems.
- Make sure you also have a clear structure, an information architecture, that is logical and predictable for people using SharePoint to find what they need.
- Consider the culture and wider behaviour that exists across your organisation before you start using SharePoint. They need to fit so the features can be used to their full benefit.
There are some key principles which you can apply to help you create a strategy for SharePoint to be good for your organisation. Find out more information about how to develop a strategy for SharePoint.
Posted in best practice, content management, digital workplace, governance, intranet, SharePoint, SharePoint 2010
Tagged best practice, digital workplace, governance, intranet, sharepoint, sharepoint 2010
I reviewed my predictions for 2013 and believe they are happening more as we move towards 2014. So what has 2014 got in store for us? Here are my five predictions:
Organisations will more seriously consider what approach will best meet their requirements. Factors that will need to be considered before a final decision is made are:
- How much will it save compared with the costs of keeping it within the firewall?
- Will you have better business resilience? Will it remove the single point of failure problem?
- What will be the levels of service?
- Who do you trust with your data?
- Will your content be secure?
I know a lot has been said about mobile and how it is driving the transformation of intranets towards digital workplaces. But how many employees still only use their smartphones for emails and texts? Organisations need to get serious about realising the benefits and consider:
- Increased productivity by people able to find information, complete tasks, share problems and knowledge when they need to without delay
- Save accommodation costs and reduced dedicated workspace so people share as and when they need it
- Support new ways of working with distributed teams and managers enabling and facilitating rather than controlling or limiting activity
- Fear of the unknown is not a good business reason to stop employees using mobiles for their work
- Bring your own device is a solvable problem when everyone wants to reach agreement over intellectual property, security and building trust and behaving sensibly
I am starting to see real examples of collaboration which showing through on business’ bottom line and getting the attention of senior manager. This will bring benefits as it is taking more seriously and investment decisions are easier but the pressure to continue delivering larger savings will also increase. Examples include:
- Project teams sharing and creating online documentation without having to meet face to face or email each other
- Solving problems more quickly using tools to find people with similar skills and experience
- Sharing knowledge that helps others to solve problem and the organisation’s culture increasingly supporting this way of working
Organisations are realising, especially if they are implementing SharePoint, that all the areas where content is published need to be managed. The problems of gaps in information managed and risks it can create are being recognised more. More robust frameworks are being developed and used. Examples include:
- Different types of content such as accredited e.g. policies, news articles, and collaborative e.g. comment in discussion group, blog post are being accepted
- All the different areas for content are being joined up e.g. content management, document management, project spaces, and news.
- A hierarchy which sets out roles and responsibilities help identify overlaps and gaps in managing information
- Publishing standards are being applied in smarter ways taking less time and effort with digital workplace teams
As intranets are transforming from their original purpose as communications tools towards digital workplaces that are critical business tools that people in that organisation increasingly need to rely on for their work, so their value is increasing and the need to measure that value. Examples are:
- Productivity savings are accepted in principle now even if the amount is not agreed by everyone
- The impact on property usage and type is becoming more linked to new ways of working
- The value an organisation places on a person’s digital assets e.g. knowledge in documents is starting to match that of any physical assets e.g. computer
- Business resilience is critical to organisations and along with plans to use the cloud are plans to benefit from a more distributed workforce that no longer has to be in just one location
This is my last post of 2013. I hope anyone reading this has had a great 2013, will have a relaxing break over the Christmas period, and be hoping for more success in 2014!
Posted in collaboration, communication, content management, digital workplace, governance, intranet, mobile, news, SharePoint, standards, value
Tagged blog, bt intranet, collaboration, communication, content, digital workplace, governance, intranet, mobile, publishing, sharepoint, standards, value
In my last two posts about the digital workplace I have covered an example of how field-based people use the digital workplace. I then covered how people’s perception of the digital workplace should be more than just considering it is for office-based people only.
But is the digital workplace the best term to describe the new ways of working that people are adopting? Is a term like ‘digital working’ a better description than ‘digital workplace’?
Firstly I don’t get too bothered about terms. As long as there is a common understanding between me and the people I am communicating and working with then that is fine with me. But it does help if that understanding can be easily achieved using a term that is meaningful.
I describe this simply as ‘Work is something you do, not a place you go to’. In a digital workplace you can:
- Work from any location or while mobile
- Have the same or similar online experience
- Collaborate, search, and complete tasks online
- Choose what tools you can use to do this
- Feel comfortable whenever you are using it
- Be confident you can use it when you need to
- Have a better work/life balance
There are other, more detailed, definitions that describe the digital workplace.
But isn’t that explained as well by the term ‘digital working’? It removes any ambiguity about it only referring to office-based rather than field-based or mobile people’s ways of working.
Is it better and maybe more meaningful to use the active term ‘working’ rather than something passive like ‘workplace’? Does the increasing use and influence of mobile working also mean we should consider using ‘digital working’ now?
What are your views on these terms? What best suits how your people in your organisation now work? Is it ‘digital workplace’ or ‘digital working’ that we should be using? I would love to hear from you.
Posted in collaboration, community, digital workplace, engagement, governance, intranet, mobile, search
Tagged collaboration, digital workplace, engagement, governance, mobile, search
What is it you can do for people to realise your content is of value, it is useful, reliable, and authoritative? In my previous posts in the series of ‘Showing the value of your information’ I help you to show to people how valuable it is.
Making sure your content is up to date so people using it can rely on it is vital to showing its value to everyone. There are two main types of content: accredited and collaborative. I will start with accredited in this post and cover collaborative in a future post.
Accredited content is authoritative and reliable. People will use it with confidence, knowing it is current and relevant. It is usually information that has a large audience. A limited number of people can edit the information with access controlled by permissions. Usually one person will have clear ownership.
Accredited content normally meets all of your publishing standards. Here are some features which help show people it is of value:
- Review date shown to reassure you the content is current and can be relied upon
- Last updated date to show it is actively being managed too
- Comply with your organisation’s Information Retention Policy
- Remove content that is no longer relevant or accurate
How to show its value
When a policy is no longer needed the normal method is to remove it so people are no longer using something which is out of date and not relevant. The best approach is to replace the content with an explanation of what has happened and a link to the most relevant content people should now use.
This shows the content was valued by the care taken to remove it, explain what has happened and help people find related information which will help them. This also helps the related information to retain its value because of this approach.
Posted in benefit, content management, governance, intranet, publishing, standards, value
Tagged benefit, best practice, content, governance, intranet, publishing, standards, value
In my post ‘Showing the value of your information’ I wanted to help you to show to people using your information how valuable it is. I asked ‘What is it you can do for people to realise your content is of value, it is useful, reliable, and authoritative?’ and what pitfalls should you avoid.
I want to show you how knowing who owns your content can help people realise how valuable it can be. When I was the BT Intranet manager there was a publishing standard which made it mandatory for all accredited content e.g. news article, company policy to show on every page who the owner was.
The smart part was to also link to the content owner’s contact details in the Directory, which were automatically updated, so you could easily choose the best way to contact the owner to seek further information or clarify anything.
If you don’t show the owner or editor of the content how can anyone feel they can rely on it.
For collaborative content e.g discussion groups, it isn’t so easy to show the owner. However it is possible to show who owns the community and any comments should have an owner that ideally is linked to their contact details. This allows for some communication to continue directly with the owner if more appropriate.
I don’t recommend anonymous postings to blog, micro blogging, or forums. If you have a comment to make you should feel confident that it will be accepted in the right spirit as long as it meets the terms and conditions e.g. no abusive content. The culture of your organisation should encourage sharing of ideas and problems and a mature debate on how to move forward with each one.
Lastly you need to have a good governance framework which covers roles and responsibilities for publishing and managing content. A publishing standard on how you show you own content will help too. Having a template for entering your details helps and a process for reminding when the content needs reviewing is essential.
Posted in best practice, collaboration, community, content management, governance, intranet, publishing, standards, value
Tagged best practice, collaboration, content, governance, intranet, publishing, standards, value