CTS 2003 by chenboying

VIEWS: 1 PAGES: 40

									Collaborative Technology Adoption:
         A Case Study of
      Success and Challenges
                Steven E. Poltrock
        Mathematics & Computing Technology
                  Phantom Works
              The Boeing Company

  Presentation to the 2003 International Symposium on
  Collaborative Technologies and Systems (CTS 2003)

                   January 22, 2003

                                                        1
                          Agenda

 Collaboration technology in a social context
 Case study: A data conferencing system
 Adoption rate and uses of data conferencing
 Studies of 5 early adoption teams
 A model of innovation diffusion (technology adoption)
 A survey of 194 data conference users
 Results and conclusion




                                                          2
Complex Systems Are Built through Teamwork




                                             3
Teamwork Across Major Boeing Sites Requires
        Collaboration Technology




                                              4
              Collaboration Technology Supports
               Diverse Collaboration Activities

                           Real time              Asynchronous
Communication      • AV conferencing         • E-mail
                   • Telephone               • Voice mail
                   • Chat                    • FAX
                   • Broadcast video
Information        • Whiteboards             • Document management
sharing            • Application sharing     • Threaded discussions
                   • Meeting facilitation    • Knowledge repositories
                   • Collaborative virtual   • Team workspaces
                     environments (CVEs)     • Program repositories
Coordination       • Floor control           • Workflow management
                   • Session management      • Case tools
                                             • Project management
                                             • Calendar & scheduling



                                                                        5
                      Collaboration Occurs in,
                 and Is Shaped by, a Social Context
Organization:                                Team:
A number of persons or groups having         A group organized to work together
specific responsibilities and united for a
specific purpose




Community:                                   Program / Project:
A group or class having common interests     An undertaking requiring concerted
                                             effort




                                                                                  6
              Collaboration Technology Supports
               Diverse Collaboration Activities
  Teams
                           Real time              Asynchronous
Communication      • AV conferencing         • E-mail
                   • Telephone               • Voice mail
                   • Chat                    • FAX
                   • Broadcast video
Information        • Whiteboards             • Document management
sharing            • Application sharing     • Threaded discussions
                   • Meeting facilitation    • Knowledge repositories
                   • Collaborative virtual   • Team workspaces
                     environments (CVEs)     • Program repositories
Coordination       • Floor control           • Workflow management
                   • Session management      • Case tools
                                             • Project management
                                             • Calendar & scheduling



                                                                        7
              Collaboration Technology Supports
               Diverse Collaboration Activities
 Teams                  Organizations
                           Real time              Asynchronous
Communication      • AV conferencing         • E-mail
                   • Telephone               • Voice mail
                   • Chat                    • FAX
                   • Broadcast video
Information        • Whiteboards             • Document management
sharing            • Application sharing     • Threaded discussions
                   • Meeting facilitation    • Knowledge repositories
                   • Collaborative virtual   • Team workspaces
                     environments (CVEs)     • Program repositories
Coordination       • Floor control           • Workflow management
                   • Session management      • Case tools
                                             • Project management
                                             • Calendar & scheduling



                                                                        8
              Collaboration Technology Supports
               Diverse Collaboration Activities
  Teams                 Organizations                       Communities
                           Real time              Asynchronous
Communication      • AV conferencing         • E-mail
                   • Telephone               • Voice mail
                   • Chat                    • FAX
                   • Broadcast video
Information        • Whiteboards             • Document management
sharing            • Application sharing     • Threaded discussions
                   • Meeting facilitation    • Knowledge repositories
                   • Collaborative virtual   • Team workspaces
                     environments (CVEs)     • Program repositories
Coordination       • Floor control           • Workflow management
                   • Session management      • Case tools
                                             • Project management
                                             • Calendar & scheduling



                                                                          9
                    The Challenge of
           Collaboration Technology Adoption
 Technology adoption is a slow, phased
  process                                                           Late
 Physical distance is an obstacle to adoption                    adopters
   – People learn from neighbors
   – Organizational mandates have limited
     range
 Collaboration technologies require universal
  adoption but have inherent limiting            Early
  properties                                    adopters
   – Tragedy of the Commons
   – Critical mass
   – Difficulty of learning infrequent features            Time
   – Visibility of performance



                                                                      10
   Data Conferencing Technology: A Case Study
 Developed and piloted Boeing’s data conferencing
 infrastructure in 1997
 Transitioned the technology to a support organization
 Studied its use by Boeing teams and provided feedback
 Evaluated new technologies as they emerged




                                                          11
              Data Conferencing Infrastructure

    Instructions      Directory   Conference
   & Downloads         Server       Server

                                                  Public
                                                 Internet

                      Corporate
                       Intranet



SGI Meeting
                       Sun Forum MS NetMeeting
       HP Visualize

                                                            12
              Conferences Hosted on Workstations

    Instructions      Directory   Conference
   & Downloads         Server       Server

                                                  Public
                                                 Internet

                      Corporate
                       Intranet



SGI Meeting

                       Sun Forum MS NetMeeting
       HP Visualize

                                                            13
               Conferences Hosted on a Server

    Instructions      Directory   Conference
   & Downloads         Server       Server

                                                  Public
                                                 Internet

                      Corporate
                       Intranet



SGI Meeting
                       Sun Forum MS NetMeeting
       HP Visualize

                                                            14
                                                          Figure 4. Estimated Data Conference Usage by Month
                                                        Growth of Data Conference Use
                                   80000

                                   70000
Estimaed conference participants




                                   60000

                                   50000

                                   40000

                                   30000

                                   20000

                                   10000

                                      0
                                      Jan-98   Jul-98    Feb-99 Aug-99 Mar-00        Oct-00   Apr-01 Nov-01 May-02 Dec-02
   Examples of Data Conferencing Uses at Boeing

 Overcoming distance                   In organizations
   –   Add distant participants to a      – Training
       face-to-face meeting               – Computer assistance
   –   Virtual meetings with no           – Presentations
       face-to-face participants
                                        In communities of practice
 In teams and small groups
                                          – Distributed meetings
   –   Team meetings to review
                                          – Presentations
       progress
                                          – Demonstrations
   –   Document collaboration
   –   Telecommuting from home or
       other sites




                                                                      16
    Observational and Experimental Studies
     of Early Adopter NetMeeting Usage

 In the first six months of deployment we observed 4
  teams that used similar approaches
   – NetMeeting to show and interact with information
   – Teleconferencing for voice
   – 2 meeting configurations
        Face-to-face meetings with remote participants at
         desktops
        Virtual meetings with no meeting room
 For a 5th team, we manipulated their physical and
  technology configurations


                                                             17
                 General Benefits and Problems
 Application-sharing was the most used feature and clearly added value
   – Audio-conferences alone were unsatisfactory
   – Access to last-minute changes, e.g. microphotograph
   – Shared reference improved efficiency of distributed teams
 Problems coordinating interactions
   – Meetings started late, technology use limited
   – Interaction hardest for remote members
   – Difficulty in knowing who was present, identifying remote speakers,
     coordinating participation
       “Are they pausing for a comma, or a period?”
   – Could not make sense of others’ on-line behaviors
   – Face-to-face meetings were markedly different: side-discussion, story-
     telling, spontaneity
       “I hear the voice, but there is a vacancy for the whole human being.”
 New roles emerged in successful team: meeting and technology
  facilitators

                                                                                18
             Use of Technology Was Minimal

 Some did not acquire NetMeeting in this early phase of deployment
   – Heterogeneous computing and support environments, little or no help,
     and resistance to learning new technologies
   – One heard that a lot of time would be wasted getting synchronized
 Mostly presentation mode
   – One person shared, others just observed
   – No instances of using collaboration, whiteboard, or file transfer
   – Chat used in one group
 Even this limited use was difficult
   – Frequent problems connecting to a session
   – Cannot find the shared window under the NetMeeting interface
   – When email or calendars were shared, others were surprised that this
     was possible


                                                                            19
     Technology Enabled Greater Participation
              from More Locations

 Barriers are diminished for some
  – D at main site: Does anyone in this room understand
    what he’s saying?
  – Remote site: I do.
  – D: You’re not in this room.
  – Remote site: I’m in the global room.
 Face-to-face or virtual is a choice for some
  – Evolution: face-to-face  mixed  virtual
  – Scientific team collected data



                                                          20
                                        Number of Attendees




                                0
                                    5
                                         10
                                              15
                                                   20
                                                        25
                                                             30
                                                                      35
                                                                                                  40
                     2.8.1995


                    2.10.1995


                    2.12.1995


                     2.2.1996


                     2.4.1996


                     2.6.1996


                     2.8.1996


                    2.10.1996


                    2.12.1996
                                                                           Face-to-face meeting




                     2.2.1997


                     2.4.1997


                     2.6.1997




     Meeting Date
                     2.8.1997


                    2.10.1997
                                                                     Audio
                                                                                                       Scientific Team Attendance




                    2.12.1997
                                                                  conferencing




                     2.2.1998


                     2.4.1998


                     2.6.1998
                                                                           NM




                     2.8.1998
21




                    2.10.1998
                                0
                                    1
                                        2
                                            3
                                                4
                                                    5
                                                        6
                                                            7
                                                                8
                                                                        9
                                                                                                 10
                     2.8.1995


                    2.10.1995


                    2.12.1995


                     2.2.1996


                     2.4.1996


                     2.6.1996


                     2.8.1996


                    2.10.1996
                                                                          Face-to-face meeting




                    2.12.1996


                     2.2.1997


                     2.4.1997


                     2.6.1997


                     2.8.1997




     Meeting Date
                                                                       Audio




                    2.10.1997
                                                                    conferencing




                    2.12.1997


                     2.2.1998
                                                                                                      Number of Scientific Team Sites




                     2.4.1998


                     2.6.1998
                                                                              NM




                     2.8.1998


                    2.10.1998
22
               Staff Meeting Experiment

 Weekly meeting held for years
 18-question post-meeting survey covering meeting
 productivity, process, technology use
 Meetings surveyed: 4 in room, 2 split between CRs, one
 with manager and OA in one room,others in CR
 Experimenters took notes on meeting process




                                                           23
      Satisfaction: FTF versus Distributed Meetings
5.0

4.5

4.0

3.5

3.0

2.5

2.0

1.5

1.0
       CR   CR-CR   CR-CR   CR   CR-Office   CR   CR-Office   CR


                                                                   24
     Given these Challenges, How Did Data
Conferencing Achieve Such Widespread Adoption?

 The typical drivers for adoption of innovations are:
  – Management mandate
  – Collocated colleagues
  – Opinion leaders or change agents
 What were the drivers at Boeing?
  – Management used it but few mandated its use
  – The IT organization provided it but did not advertise or
    advocate it




                                                               25
         Rogers’ Model of Innovation Diffusion

 Key properties of innovations
   – Compatibility: is it needed and does it fit existing work and systems?
   – Observability: how can people “observe” across distance?
   – Relative advantage: i.e. over other technologies in use?
 Five stages of adoption
   – knowledge of the innovation
   – persuasion to use it
   – decision to adopt it
   – implementation of the innovation
   – confirmation that adoption was appropriate
 Distance can be a barrier



                                                                              26
              Barriers to Early Adoption

 Barriers to decision, persuasion, and implementation
  – Lack of support from managers
  – Different platforms
  – Team participation was part-time
  – No local technical support
  – Lack of peer pressure
  – Discouragement at local site




                                                         27
          One Site Required an Exception Process

 Management’s concerns
   – “You might say, what‟s the harm in using it? On the surface, there‟s no harm, but the
      really damning thing of what happens is that people then begin to alter or implement
      new processes and procedures surrounding that capability on that product.”
   – “Somewhere, someone, would need to place a value on collaboration. What‟s the
      payback? What are you gonna get out of it to offset the costs?”
 Some thought that management could control its use
   – “Without approval, you will not be able to enter any meetings even if you have
      NetMeeting loaded.”
 A champion supported its adoption while accepting management’s limits
   – “I particularly find it rewarding to hear back from people when they are using the
      more powerful tools of NetMeeting to collaborate on documents together as I think
      this product can change the way we work together as a company.”
 Critical mass became a compelling force
   – “I was told yesterday that I was the only one who did not have NetMeeting.”




                                                                                             28
             Surveyed 194 Data Conference Users
               in October 2000 – February 2001

             30
             25
Percentage




             20
             15
             10
              5
              0
                  <3   3-6   6 - 12 12 - 18 18 - 24 over 24
                         Months since adoption

                                                              29
Frequency and Duration of Usage Are Independent
                       Infrequent    Frequent     Total
                          users        users
                       (less than    (2/week to
                      once a week)      daily)
   Late majority          11             9         20
   (6 mos or less)
   Early majority         13            16         29
   (7-18 months)
   Early adopter          14            17         31
   (19 mos or more)
   Total                  38            42         80




                                                          30
                                             10
                                             15
                                             20
                                             25
                                             30
                                             35




                                              0
                                              5
                          Fa
                            ce
                                  -fa
                 Di                     ce
                   str
                         ib
                           ut
                              e   d
                                      gr
                                         p
     2-                  Ne
       pe                     w
          r   so                  Te
                 n                   am
                     co
                       lla
                           bo
                             ra
                                  tio
                                      n

                           M
                            an
               Tr             ag
                  a             er
                      in
                        in
                          gs
                               es
                                  sio
                                      n
                         W
                            eb
                                  Pa
                                    ge


                                  O
                                                  They Learned about It from Colleagues




                                      th
                                        er
31
 They Told Many Others About Data Conferencing
    Frequency of Responses
                             14

                             12

                             10

                             8

                             6

                             4

                             2

                             0




                                                                   8

                                                                         6

                                                                               2
                                  0

                                      2

                                          4

                                              8




                                                                                     24

                                                                                     48

                                                                                     96
                                                  16

                                                       32

                                                            64

                                                                 12

                                                                       25

                                                                             51

                                                                                   10

                                                                                   20

                                                                                   40
                                                  Number of Introductions
“Yeah, just as a course of doing business. You ask them if they have
NetMeeting. If they‟d say no, you‟d say, „well you might want to get it loaded on
your PC so we can use it.‟”


                                                                                          32
              Reasons for Introduction
60
50
40
30
20
10
 0
     Distributed   Small    Staff    T raining   Other
      meeting      group   meeting


                                                         33
                                               Percentage




                                10
                                     20
                                          30
                                               40
                                                    50
                                                         60
                                                              70
                                                                   80
                                                                        90
                                                                             100




                            0
                W
                 at
                   ch


                 Sh
                   ar
                      e

               Co
                  nt
                     ro
                       l
     W
      hi
        te
          bo
            ar
              d


                  Ch
                     at
     Fi
          le
               tr a
                   ns
                      fe
                        r


                 Au
                   di
                      o
                                                                                   Remarkably Little Use of Most Features




                 Vi
                      de
                        o
34
Great Diversity in Conference Configuration

               80
               70
               60
  Percentage




               50
               40
               30
               20
               10
                0
                    Servers   Call   Host    Non-
                                            Boeing




                                                     35
     Rogers’ Model of Innovation Diffusion Again

 Key properties of innovations
   – Compatibility: is it needed and does it fit existing work and systems?
   – Observability: how can people “observe” across distance?
   – Relative advantage: i.e. over other technologies in use?
 Five stages of adoption
   – knowledge of the innovation
   – persuasion to use it
   – decision to adopt it
   – implementation of the innovation
   – confirmation that adoption was appropriate
 Distance can be a barrier



                                                                              36
          Reviewing Rogers’ Key Properties

 Compatibility
  – Well integrated in the IT infrastructure
  – Increasing geographic diversity created the need
 Observability
  – The results were immediately observable
  – Less observable features were rarely used
 Relative advantage
  – Telephone alone was insufficient
  – Other approaches were too expensive (video) or staying
    synchronized was too difficult


                                                             37
                   Reviewing Rogers’ Stages

 Knowledge
    – Learned about it from local and distant collaborators
   Persuasion
    – Necessary for participation in meetings
    – Opinion leaders were often at other sites
   Decision to adopt
    – Facilitated by ready availability at no cost
   Implementation
    – Some early adopters struggled
   Confirmation
    – Frequent participation in distributed events
    – But new problems emerge such as need for security



                                                              38
                              Summary

 A collaboration technology was widely adopted and heavily used
   – There were many barriers to adoption
   – There was no management mandate
   – The usual adoption paths were not open
   – Adoption was driven by working together across distance
 Adoption is a slow process even for a single person
   – People most frequently learned about it while attending meetings
   – Useful results are obtained by simply joining a meeting
   – Most people used few features
   – People misunderstood the system architecture and capabilities




                                                                        39
                           Conclusions

 Avoid collaboration technologies that require time or effort to learn
   – Ensure that some value is achievable with minimal effort
   – Few will invest the time required to learn an infrequently used
     technology
   – Complex features will be used by few people
 Important features must be visible
   – Users build mental models based on what they see
 Consider how one user will learn from others
   – Some users learned how to join meetings by watching
 Provide compelling value


                                                                          40

								
To top