Collaborative Technology Adoption: A Case Study of Success and Challenges

1
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

2
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

3
Complex Systems Are Built through Teamwork
4
Teamwork Across Major Boeing Sites Requires
Collaboration Technology
5
Collaboration Technology Supports Diverse
Collaboration Activities
Real time
Asynchronous

• AV conferencing
• Telephone
• Chat
• Broadcast video

• E-mail
• Voice mail
• FAX

Communication
Information sharing

• Whiteboards
• Application sharing
• Meeting facilitation
• Collaborative virtual environments (CVEs)

• Document management
• Threaded discussions
• Knowledge repositories
• Team workspaces
• Program repositories

• Floor control
• Session management

• Workflow management
• Case tools
• Project management
• Calendar scheduling

Coordination
6
Collaboration Occurs in, and Is Shaped by, a
Social Context
Team A group organized to work together
Organization A number of persons or groups
having specific responsibilities and united for a
specific purpose
Community A group or class having common
interests
Program / Project An undertaking requiring
concerted effort
7
Collaboration Technology Supports Diverse
Collaboration Activities
Teams
Real time
Asynchronous

• AV conferencing
• Telephone
• Chat
• Broadcast video

• E-mail
• Voice mail
• FAX

Communication
Information sharing

• Whiteboards
• Application sharing
• Meeting facilitation
• Collaborative virtual environments (CVEs)

• Document management
• Threaded discussions
• Knowledge repositories
• Team workspaces
• Program repositories

• Floor control
• Session management

• Workflow management
• Case tools
• Project management
• Calendar scheduling

Coordination
8
Collaboration Technology Supports Diverse
Collaboration Activities
Organizations
Teams
Real time
Asynchronous

• AV conferencing
• Telephone
• Chat
• Broadcast video

• E-mail
• Voice mail
• FAX

Communication
Information sharing

• Whiteboards
• Application sharing
• Meeting facilitation
• Collaborative virtual environments (CVEs)

• Document management
• Threaded discussions
• Knowledge repositories
• Team workspaces
• Program repositories

• Floor control
• Session management

• Workflow management
• Case tools
• Project management
• Calendar scheduling

Coordination
9
Collaboration Technology Supports Diverse
Collaboration Activities
Organizations
Teams
Communities
Real time
Asynchronous

• AV conferencing
• Telephone
• Chat
• Broadcast video

• E-mail
• Voice mail
• FAX

Communication
Information sharing

• Whiteboards
• Application sharing
• Meeting facilitation
• Collaborative virtual environments (CVEs)

• Document management
• Threaded discussions
• Knowledge repositories
• Team workspaces
• Program repositories

• Floor control
• Session management

• Workflow management
• Case tools
• Project management
• Calendar scheduling

Coordination
10
The Challenge of Collaboration Technology
Adoption

• Technology adoption is a slow, phased process
• Physical distance is an obstacle to adoption
• People learn from neighbors
• Organizational mandates have limited range
• Collaboration technologies require universal
  adoption but have inherent limiting properties
• Tragedy of the Commons
• Critical mass
• Difficulty of learning infrequent features
• Visibility of performance

Late adopters
Early adopters
Time
11
Data Conferencing Technology A Case Study

• Developed and piloted Boeings 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

12
Data Conferencing Infrastructure
Instructions Downloads
Directory Server
Conference Server
Public Internet
Corporate Intranet
SGI Meeting
MS NetMeeting
Sun Forum
HP Visualize
13
Conferences Hosted on Workstations
Instructions Downloads
Directory Server
Conference Server
Public Internet
Corporate Intranet
SGI Meeting
MS NetMeeting
Sun Forum
HP Visualize
14
Conferences Hosted on a Server
Instructions Downloads
Directory Server
Conference Server
Public Internet
Corporate Intranet
SGI Meeting
MS NetMeeting
Sun Forum
HP Visualize
15
Growth of Data Conference Use
16
Examples of Data Conferencing Uses at Boeing

• Overcoming distance
• Add distant participants to a face-to-face
  meeting
• Virtual meetings with no face-to-face
  participants
• In teams and small groups
• Team meetings to review progress
• Document collaboration
• Telecommuting from home or other sites

• In organizations
• Training
• Computer assistance
• Presentations
• In communities of practice
• Distributed meetings
• Presentations
• Demonstrations

17
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

18
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

19
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

20
Technology Enabled Greater Participation from
More Locations

• Barriers are diminished for some
• D at main site Does anyone in this room
  understand what hes saying?
• Remote site I do.
• D Youre not in this room.
• Remote site Im in the global room.
• Face-to-face or virtual is a choice for some
• Evolution face-to-face ? mixed ? virtual
• Scientific team collected data

21
Scientific Team Attendance
22
Number of Scientific Team Sites
23
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

24
Satisfaction FTF versus Distributed Meetings
25
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

26
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

27
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

28
One Site Required an Exception Process

• Managements concerns
• You might say, whats the harm in using it? On
  the surface, theres 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. Whats 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
  managements 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.

29
Surveyed 194 Data Conference Users in October
2000 February 2001
30
Frequency and Duration of Usage Are Independent
31
They Learned about It from Colleagues
32
They Told Many Others About Data Conferencing
Yeah, just as a course of doing business. You
ask them if they have NetMeeting. If theyd say
no, youd say, well you might want to get it
loaded on your PC so we can use it.
33
Reasons for Introduction
34
Remarkably Little Use of Most Features
35
Great Diversity in Conference Configuration
36
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

37
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

38
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

39
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

40
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