470 likes | 587 Views
Managing Boundaries : Social Media Use by Enterprise Employees. Jonathan Grudin Microsoft Research. Immovable Object. Human nature does not change Perceptual, cognitive, emotional, social behaviors. Irresistible Force. Human Nature and Technology Change. p relude: technology growth.
E N D
Managing Boundaries:Social Media Use by Enterprise Employees Jonathan Grudin Microsoft Research
Immovable Object Human nature does not change Perceptual, cognitive, emotional, social behaviors
Reasoning about Exponential Growth Even when aware of supralinear growth, we reason poorly about it. • Seeing data does not help! • When it has effects, we misattribute them.
Reasoning about Exponential Growth 107 70 106 60 105 50 104 40 103 30 102 20 10 10 4 8 12 16 20 24 28 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Ten Years of Moore’s Law 105 90 75 60 45 30 15 1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 0
20000000000 105 9000 18000000000 160000000 1200000 8000 90 16000000000 140000000 7000 1000000 75 14000000000 120000000 6000 12000000000 800000 60 100000000 5000 10000000000 80000000 4000 600000 45 8000000000 60000000 3000 6000000000 400000 30 40000000 2000 4000000000 15 200000 1000 20000000 2000000000 0 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010
I WAS HERE GUI 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010
Computer Graphics & HCI $10M TX-2 PDP 1, 7 $1M $100K Alto $10K Mac $1K GUI-capable machine Approximate costs in 2010 US$ $100 1955 1965 1975 1985 1995 2005
Computer Graphics & HCI $10M TX-2 PDP 1, 7 $1M SG Iris $100K Alto Star Lisa $10K Mac $1K GUI-capable machine Graphics research community Graphics focused on realism Graphics focused on interaction Approximate costs in 2010 US$ $100 1955 1965 1975 1985 1995 2005
Computer Graphics & HCI $10M TX-2 PDP 1, 7 $1M SG Iris $100K Alto Star Lisa $10K Altair PC Mac $1K GUI-capable machine Graphics research community Graphics focused on realism Graphics focused on interaction Human-computer interaction Approximate costs in 2010 US$ $100 1955 1965 1975 1985 1995 2005
GUI-capable machines $10M TX-2 $1M PDP 1, 7 $100K Alto $10K Mac $1K $100 1955 1965 1975 1985 1995 2005 2015
GUI-capable machines $10M TX-2 $1M PDP 1, 7 $100K Alto $10K Mac $1K $100 $10 1955 1965 1975 1985 1995 2005 2015
GUI-capable machines $10M TX-2 $1M PDP 1, 7 $100K Alto $10K Mac $1K $100 $10 $1 1955 1965 1975 1985 1995 2005 2015
?? !! GUI 1955 1965 1975 1985 1995 2005 2015
Impact of Hardware Changes Organizational& InstitutionalBehavior ConsumerBehavior UserInterfaceR&D SoftwareR&D HardwareR&D 19651975 1985 1995
Social Media – Consumers First New technologies • Messaging, microblogs • Wikis, weblogs, tagging • Real-time visualization, GPS, location-aware • Digital photos, music, video • Social networking & media New behaviors and skills • Multimedia authoring • Multi-tasking • Emotion & engagement • Search, browse, assess, synthesize Photo by moriza.Some rights reserved.
Social Media – Then Enterprise Adoption • Before the Web • Email • Shared calendars • Document repositories • Videoconferencing • Web and Web 2.0 • IM and texting • Weblogs • Wikis • Social networking sites • Productivity or serious games
Patterns 1. A new communication or collaboration technology disrupts existing group processes • Initial trials with new groups or activities • Separate requirements analyses, educate managers • Consider costs & benefits that indirectly affect productivity 2. Executive, manager, and individual contributor views do not align 3. Proving productivity gains is often impossible
enterprise adoption of communication technologies example: email and instant messaging
Email & Instant Messaging and today was evolving Email in 1985 • Used mostly by students • Used by everyone • Access limited to friends • Accessible to everyone • Clients not interoperable • Complete interoperability • Conversations ephemeral • Conversations saved • Chosen for informality • Became the formal option • Organizational distrust:Chit-chat? ROI? • Mission-critical technology IM in 2005 • Used mostly by students • Use spreading rapidly • Access limited to friends • Pressure to remove limits • Clients not interoperable • Pressure for interoperability • Conversations ephemeral • Recording is more common • Chosen for informality • Becoming more formal • Organizational distrust:Chit-chat? ROI? • Will be mission-critical!
IM: Major Consulting Reports August 2001Enterprises that fail to (develop and instill best practices) will quickly find IM to be a productivity drainand a communication quagmire. November 2002Prediction: IM misuse will threaten user productivity.Impact in 2003: IM misuse and overloadhas the potential to be worse than e-mail overload… Without due diligence, enterprises run the risk ofturning unmanaged, unsanctioned consumer IM into unmanaged, sanctioned EIM. February 2003There is no data securityand no enterprise management. October 2003Vendor marketing of IM will be at the Peak of Inflated Expectations on the Hype Cycle from the end of 1Q04 to at least 3Q04.
Wikis • Quantitative & qualitative • Surveyed thousands of wiki creators • 30+ interviews at large & small software, engineering, pharma Immense appeal, some successes, mostly dead wikis Once platform established, 3 challenges • Content organization and flexibility • Initial use easy for many, significant growing pains • Positioning in existing information ecology and culture • Can disrupt use of DLs, IM, authority/accountability structure • Aligning manager and individual contributor expectations • Priorities differ: Mintzberg analysis illuminates how, why
Managers & Individual Contributors Why managers like the wiki concept • Flexibly structured information • Potential for project management • Potential for knowledge management • Disappearing boomers • Attracting prospective hires Why individual contributors like wikis • Ad hoc, opportunistic communication
Mintzberg’s Typology of Organizations Strategic Apex Techno-structure Support Staff Middle Line Operating Core
Technology Use In Organizations Coordination All time in meetings Heavy task delegation Activity is very political Sharing Structured Information Many meetings Some delegation Efficacy/sensitivity tradeoff Communication Few meetings No delegation Not sensitive Executives Managers Individual Contributors
Wiki Use In Organizations Capture knowledge Locate expertise Recruit young employees Only recruitment seems realistic Project dashboard Find documents Handle disruptions Handle emerging challenges Ad hoc communication and problem solving Learn new skills Obtain recognition Executives Managers Individual Contributors
Social Networking at Microsoft How are employees using Facebook, LinkedIn, Twitter, etc.? What are the attitudes toward SNS use? Do these vary with age, role, level, geography, team collocation? How are attitudes and behaviors changing over time? Can social networking sites be: • Fun? • Useful for personal socializing/networking? • Useful for external professional networking? • Useful for networking within Microsoft? 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Survey sent to 1000 different randomly-selected employees
Use Daily: % of All Microsoft Employees 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Survey sent to 1000 different randomly-selected employees
Use At Least Occasionally 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 In 2012, Foursquare 10%, Pinterest & Google+ 7.5%, Instagram 2%
Churn (Level of Abandonment) Percent of employees who report they had a profile but are inactive
Social Networking Sites – Useful for? (+ or – is change in 2012 from 2008)
Managers and Individual Contributors Are social networking sites useful for internal networking?
Concerns Rising concerns may be countered by more sophisticated use.
Occasional or more frequent use. Boundary concerns of 2008 addressed 2008: 2012: • Some Results • Used (some) for work • Use is strongly age-correlated • FB tensions from transcending firewalls, relationship/status • Costs and benefits may be impossible to measure
Access Control and Boundary Concern Major Concerns Heavy Access Control
New concern: “Creepy”… but inevitable? In 2012, targeted marketing and advertising arose in interviews with surprising frequency. “I don’t know how Facebook is using my information. Somehow, whenever I type in something, the marketing ads on Facebook seem to match what I typed in, so that’s creepy…. If I’m in conversation with somebody and said ‘Oh yeah, I’m looking for a house,’ and then some random person back there comes up and says ‘I have five houses in that area,’ it’s super creepy..” People removed or avoided apps that demand info, but not Facebook. Even those holding out saw surrender ahead. “I do not like how much information they collect about people (and) I don’t need that kind of potential time sink. (But) Facebook I see as an inevitable thing. One day I will have to have a Facebook account. I am holding out as long as I can.”
Managing Boundaries • Social groups • Service providers • Governments The irresistible force and the immovable object
Managing Boundaries:Social Media Use by Enterprise Employees Jonathan Grudin Microsoft Research