1 / 19

Exploring Factual and Perceived Use and Benefits of a Web 2.0-based Knowledge Management Application: The Siemens Ca

I-KNOW 2013, Graz, Austria, September 4 th , 2013. Exploring Factual and Perceived Use and Benefits of a Web 2.0-based Knowledge Management Application: The Siemens Case References+. Alexander Stocker Virtual Vehicle Research Center Information & Process Management Graz, Austria.

ezhno
Download Presentation

Exploring Factual and Perceived Use and Benefits of a Web 2.0-based Knowledge Management Application: The Siemens Ca

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. I-KNOW 2013, Graz, Austria, September 4th, 2013 Exploring Factual and Perceived Use and Benefits of aWeb 2.0-based Knowledge Management Application:The Siemens Case References+ Alexander StockerVirtual Vehicle Research CenterInformation & Process Management Graz, Austria Johannes MüllerSiemens Switzerland Ltd.Building Technologies Division Zug, Switzerland

  2. Siemens Sectors and Divisionswith Current Focus User Groups Industry Sector DriveTechnologies CustomerServices Metal Technologies IndustryAutomation Current References+Focus Groups Infrastructure & Cities Sector Smart Grid Building Technologies Rail Systems Mobility andLogistics Low and Me-dium Voltage Healthcare Sector Imaging&The- rapy Systems ClinicalProducts Diagnostics CustomerSolutions AudiologySolutions Energy Sector Fossil Power Generation Wind Power Solar & Hydro Oil & Gas EnergyService PowerTransmission Corporate, Siemens-Wide and Cross-Sector Departments

  3. References+ ... • is a Web 2.0 platform for the global exchange of business-related knowledge, experiences and best-practices, • is a 'Social Networking' tool, which networks colleagues and animates themto communicate to each other, • is intended for internal use (by Siemens members) only and thus available within the Siemens intranet, • contains knowledge references (customer projects, solution/service concepts, etc.) and suitable documents, • contains several discussion forums (Urgent Requests, etc.) and a microblog section, • considers its users as global community(~ 10,000 members located in 79 countries) supporting each other.

  4. Content in References+Networking both Knowledge and People Content in References+ • Knowledge References • Customer Projects • Solution/Service Concepts • Technology Information • Market Information • External Awards • Business Excellence Cases • Lessons Learned • Forum Postings • Urgent Requests • Solution Talk • News, Trends, Innovations • Fairs and Conferences • BT Academy International • Quality Management • etc. Microblog Postings structured by free tagging ("Folksonomy") • Member Pages • Name • Portrait Picture • 'About me' Text • Phone Numbers • e-Mail Address • Availability Status • Personal Network withfeedbacks posts question contributes reads knowledge and information sharing people networking

  5. User Survey 2009:Several User Ratings Period: 3 weeks in September/October 2009Participation: 1070 responders 36% frequent users 64% occasional users Ø 2.63 Ø 1.96 Ø 1.89 Ø 1.86 more or less helpful for 88% very helpful predomin. helpful partially helpful not helpful 714 saved days several days one day several hours no time savings

  6. User Survey 2009:Correlation of Perceived Benefit & Usage Frequency higher benefit for higher usage frequency Selectable Options: * very good (3), good (2), average (1), insufficient (0) ** very helpful (3), predominantly helpful (2), partially helpful (1), not helpful (0) *** several days (3), one day (1), several hours (0.5), nothing (0)

  7. User Survey 2011:Survey Questions • Which organizational unit are you working for? • (list of selected Siemens units) • How often do you use References+? • almost daily • min. one time weekly • min. one time monthly • less than monthly • How helpful is References+ in your daily work? • very helpful • predominantly helpful • partially helpful • not helpful • How much working time did you save (in the last 365 days) by using information found in References+? • several days saved • one day saved • one or several hours saved • no time savings • How much money did you save (in the last 365 days) by using information found in References+? • more than €10,000 saved • €1,000 … €10,000 saved • €0 … €1,000 saved • no money savings • How much additional business turnover did you generate (in the last 365 days) by using information found in References+? • more than €1 million in additional turnover • €100,000 … €1 million in additional turnover • €10,000 … €100,000 in additional turnover • €0 … €10,000 in additional turnover • no additional turnover • I cannot directly influence turnover • How many additional customers did you attract (in the last 365 days) by using information found in References+? • 3 or more additional customers • 2 additional customers • 1 additional customer • no additional customers • I don’t have direct contact with customers • What is your overall rating for References+ and the related administration team? • very good • good • average • insufficient • I don’t want to give a rating. Feel free to share any comment related to References+ (optional). • (free text input)

  8. User Survey 2011:Survey Results Period: 4 weeks in September 2011Participation: 1479 responders Accumulated annual figuresfor these 1479 responders: 731 saved days (minimum calculation) € 190,000 saved money (minimum calculation) 361 new customers € 5.3 mio. additional turn-over rating average: good (1.95)

  9. User Survey 2011:Research Question • How do survey results on perceived use and benefits of a Web 2.0-based knowledge management platform match the factual use of this platform? user (account)data (objective, factual) correlation ?? surveyreplies (subjective, perceived) platform (usagedata) (objective, factual) correlation ??

  10. Available User andUsage Data • Present status of user and user account (as of March 2013): • office location (city, country) • organizational unit • date of registration in References+ • date of last visit • account active (true/false) • photo uploaded (true/false) • number of characters in “About me” field • number of other internal Social Media platforms, where user is registered • Usage data (during April 2010 – September 2011): • number of days with access to References+ • numberof visited Knowledge References • numberof contributions(i.e. Knowledge References, feedbacks, forum postings, microblog postings) • numberof followers and followed colleagues

  11. CorrelationofUsage Data and Survey ResultsPerceived vs. FactualUsage Perceived "Usage frequency" daily weekly monthly seldom # respondents 140 341 371 627 Ø activity days 33.18 29.77 17.44 13.07 Ø visited KRs 21.11 16.74 8.78 3.01 Ø contributions 3.11 3.26 1.05 0.56 Ø followers 2.19 1.82 1.18 0.74 • Respondents with a perceived high usage frequency are exhibiting higher factual usage, but are not necessarily the most active factual contributors. Higher factualuseforhigherperceiveduse

  12. CorrelationofUsage Data and Survey ResultsHelpfulness vs. FactualUsage Perceived "Helpfulness" very predom. partially not helpful helpful helpful helpful 146 222 805 306 # respondents 26.53 27.39 19.07 13.59 Ø activity days 25.88 20.39 5.90 2.45 Ø visited KRs 4.41 2.41 1.20 0.46 Ø contributions 2.10 1.47 1.23 0.66 Ø followers • Respondents with a perceived high helpfulnessof References+ are exhibiting higher factual usage, i.e. they visit more Knowledge References, generate more content, and have more followers. Higher factualuseforhigherperceivedhelpfulness

  13. CorrelationofUsage Data and Survey ResultsType ofBenfits vs. FactualUsage • Respondents with perceivedhigh time savings and perceived high money savings are not necessarily the most factual active users. • Respondents with perceived high generation of turnover visit more knowledge references. • Employees with perceived higher number of customers have more activity days and visit more knowledge references.

  14. CorrelationofUsage Data and Survey ResultsOverall Rating vs. FactualUsage Perceived "Overall rating" very good good average insufficient # respondents 281 610 231 57 Ø activity days 29.96 22.11 13.29 10.05 Ø visited KRs 15.51 11.79 6.19 2.93 Ø contributions 4.69 1.13 0.76 0.44 Ø followers 2.60 1.10 0.83 0.67 • Respondents with a high overallratingof References+ have more average activity days, visit more Knowledge References, make more contributions, and have more followers. Higher factualuseforhigheroverallrating

  15. Conclusion and Discussion (1)Research Scope • Whether and how do survey results on perceived use and benefits of a Web 2.0-based knowledge management platform match data on factual use of the platform? • References+ users with perceived higher benefits (i.e. helpfulness, saved time, saved money, new turnover, new customers) are by trend factual Reference+ users. Study results show a relationship between perceived benefitsof References+ and factual use of References+.

  16. Conclusion and Discussion (2)Suggestions for practice • Users with high intrinsic motivation use Web 2.0 platforms more often than less motivated colleagues. • Hence, the probability of perceiving any related benefit might be higher for frequent users since they are more active and thus able to explore a higher number of potentially positive aspects of the platform. • Therefore, factual and perceived benefits are among the most important and sustainable motivation factors for using a Web 2.0-based platform such as References+. The authors suggest provision of immediate benefits for usersas most crucial success factor for an Enterprise 2.0 initiative.

  17. Conclusion and Discussion (3)Contribution • Survey results reflect the subjective views of the respondents. By using a high number of survey replies, a tendency can be derived by calculating average or median values. • User surveys can be very helpful and effective in developing user-centered IT features and community coverage: The results show the basic needs of the user community, which helps avoid fundamentally undesirable developments. In addition, the results help clarify questions such as the following: • Why are employees motivated to participate and contribute in online communities? • What do employees expect from Web 2.0-based platforms? What do they miss in the currently available platform? • Is there any correlation between objective use or contribution frequency and subjectively perceived individual benefits?

  18. More Information about References+ Would you like to learn moreabout References+? Feel free to visit the presentation at the I-KNOW Poster & Demo Session. Thursday, September 5th, 3:30-5:30 pm (German or English spoken on demand)

  19. Contact for Questions and Feedback Dr. Alexander Stocker • Virtual Vehicle Research CenterInformation & Process ManagementGraz, Austria e-Mail: alexander.stocker@v2c2.at https://www.xing.com/profile/Alexander_Stocker • Dr. Johannes Müller • Siemens Switzerland Ltd.Building Technologies Division • Zug, Switzerland • e-Mail: j-mueller@siemens.com • https://www.xing.com/profile/Johannes_Mueller47

More Related