Social collaboration

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Social Collaboration [ ˈsəʊʃəl kəˈlæbəreɪʃən ] ( English for joint and networked cooperation ), in the corporate context social business collaboration , less often e-collaboration or smart collaboration , refers to the general collaboration of people in projects, groups or teams with the help of the Internet and electronic media. Networked collaboration of this kind is not just about purely technical issues, such as the use of certain platforms or specific communication channels. Viewed as a process , it is also about a socio- cultural development of the communication behavior and working style of the people involved when working on joint projects. This can be seen particularly when introducing it in a company context. In this respect, the term also differs from that of an Enterprise 2.0 .

Concept history

Collaboration via computers and the Internet is not new. So-called "LAN parties" were organized very early on, at which people could network and, for example, play against each other or with each other.

A social collaboration initially stands for a wealth of measures for technology-supported collaboration between teams and groups that are separated in time and space . Above all, the so-called social media , such as wikis and blogs , are used as tools. The collaboration tools are usually used to work on a common task. Social collaboration also stands for the process or the change in the behavior of the individual participants. The most successful practice of social collaboration is collaboration in Wikipedia itself, if you don't just look at the pure technology of a wiki. Several other terms have also been established historically, such as unified communications or e-collaboration . As a rule, technical aspects of this process are mainly considered.

Unified Communications

From the perspective of real-time communication , the term Unified Communications approaches the topic of social collaboration. By merging all the communication services used, together with the integration of presence functions, “the accessibility of communication partners in distributed work” is to be improved.

E-collaboration

Since electronic means or so-called social media are predominantly used for social collaboration, the term e-collaboration was created . “E-Collaboration makes knowledge explicit and reflective, simplifies complexity and bridges space and time”. The emphasis here is on the advantages for team members or project employees who are spatially separated or who work asynchronously.

Smart collaboration

The term Smart Collaboration is a synonymous term for social collaboration or internal organizational collaboration within the framework of the social intranet . It also explicitly includes the framework conditions that must exist in companies, for example.

Enterprise 2.0

It has long been discussed that the advantages of networked and virtual collaboration can also be used in the corporate sector. There are also very different concepts of an Enterprise 2.0 for this. However, social collaboration goes far beyond the production and sales context.

The term Enterprise 2.0, which goes back to Andrew P. McAfee, primarily describes the use of social software in the context of a company for (supporting) organization of the cooperation of employees as well as for internal and external communication or knowledge management.

Techniques and Concepts

Web-based software and social media are also used for joint work in the private sector, e.g. B. for studies or in association work. In companies, social collaboration is understood as electronic and networked collaboration along the value chain. The tools used are specifically used to optimize the flow of information in the company. But also to communicate with customers or to run personnel development. In real applications, the private and professional areas often overlap, because employees bring their private working environment to the company - or use the company channels for private communication.

The concepts have developed in parallel over time. That is why there is a relatively large overlap here - also conceptually. The associated technology usually deals with individual problem areas. At the more theoretical and interdisciplinary research level, the Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW or computer-aided group work) deals with this topic. Here the connection between cooperation between people and their supportability by computers and technology is dealt with explicitly.

Socio-informatics also deals with this topic on a theoretical level, especially in relation to the interaction between social groups and software systems .

Accessibility and communication concepts

The example of Unified Communications shows that the first organizational and technical point was to ensure that the various team members could be reached. This follows on from the development of (virtual or distant) conference systems. In addition to the availability, it had to be clarified how the exchange, which is necessary in the context of the people working together, could be organized adequately and in a timely manner ( real-time communication ). The networking of communication also includes the question of the extent to which necessary documents can be made available.

Joint management of media and documents

SharePoint from Microsoft is an example of a very strongly document-oriented collaboration within groups and teams.

With Lotus Notes, a possibility was created very early on to use a distributed database system with a close e-mail connection, which was focused on documents of an organizational unit. With the introduction of wikis as an opportunity to work collaboratively on texts, the topic became virulent, as in general, media and documents can be made available within the framework of a joint collaboration across organizational boundaries. “Working in the cloud ” is a catchphrase here. Typical examples are Google Docs for documents or Dropbox for online storage of media in general. These can be shared and communicated if necessary.

Knowledge management concepts

The tagging and social collaboration in the context of " social tagging " is to organize a special form, data and information to be weighted. In the picture a so-called " Tag Cloud " as a graphic illustration.
E-learning platforms such as Moodle can certainly be viewed as pioneers of social collaboration, as they made many different learning tools accessible with a single access. Also for on the go. Above all, however, they make it possible to work and learn together in virtual space.

"E-collaboration makes knowledge explicit and reflective, simplifies complexity and bridges space and time ." Many of the technical instruments used are intended to enable so-called knowledge management . Here, however, the problem arises that the respective concept of knowledge used is mostly fuzzy. Often these concepts do not mean knowledge, but rather, relatively strictly adhered to the technical models, the storage of data or the information or documents generated from it.

In principle, however, the diverse learning platforms that have emerged in the field of e-learning , such as Moodle , are the model for social collaboration. By collecting different learning instruments via central access, they enable " social learning " - compared to pure computer or web-based training. The further development towards social collaboration in the sense of an extension to the exercise of competencies in the work context is only logical.

Social collaboration platforms

Only platforms such as Confluence , IBM Connections or even SharePoint combine all available technologies and bundle them technically into what is now called social (business) collaboration. This also applies to the mobile components or what is referred to as "cloud computing". For example, across company boundaries to users or customers.

application areas

In principle, social collaboration is conceivable or possible in all areas of human collaboration. However, especially in the field of business, certain fields of application and industries have emerged in which an application is regarded as extremely profitable. These are for example:

  • The use in the entire IK-T branch,
  • use in tool, vehicle and mechanical engineering,
  • Use in the capital goods industry,
  • a use in cooperation with customers and
  • a use in the internal cooperation of large companies.

In the area of ​​administration, services or handicrafts, or in general also for small businesses, an introduction has so far been too time-consuming. The special area of e-government can definitely build a bridge to social collaboration.

A profitable use is not only to be seen in monetary terms, but also includes more effective forms of cooperation and exchange. Nevertheless, social collaboration in the original sense is not yet widespread. This is the result of a study by BITKOM from 2012, according to which "many companies are still at the very beginning of social collaboration". Which has to do with the fact that most companies implement it in a technology-driven manner and understand it as a (purely) technological advancement. The new possibilities for use are often based on old concepts of cooperation. But only when the corporate cultural change that is necessary for social collaboration is actively taken up can networked collaboration function as a social practice. It becomes necessary to transfer the autonomy to the individual persons, the projects and teams in the individual application areas - or generally.

Social collaboration as a socio-cultural process

Under the motto "Social as a trailblazer for digital transformation", the question of the implications of social collaboration was asked at the Social Business Arena 2015 ( Cebit ). The picture shows a discussion on the question "Quo vadis Enterprise 2.0 and Social Collaboration?"

As shown in the history of the term, the focus of consideration lies with most of the concepts in the field of technology. Social collaboration is then understood as a tool or "artifact", i. H. in a broad sense as "equipment" or technical device with which one can now learn or work. "Social media trigger cultural change in companies", however, even the industry association BITKOM has announced in a press release. This makes it increasingly clear that social collaboration is not a (purely) technical procedure. In no case do technologies consist of artificial components, such as workstation computers or the intranet. For its active use, every technology always needs the associated social institutions mediated through it - also in companies. In other words: You cannot really understand the use of social business collaboration platforms or even make them meaningful if you do not also take into account the level of social practice that is necessary for this.

Technology and social practice

The social media under the keyword Web 2.0 are generally viewed as technologies that - at least potentially - can make participatory participation possible. This also applies to the employees affected by it and also to work processes, the workflow . The networking and information opportunities that arise via social collaboration platforms are all thanks to the interactive forms of participation and transparency in use. However, this is an area that is far beyond the technical requirements.

For example, to explain routines of technical use in companies or ways of dealing with artifacts or the real use of social media, the idea of ​​social practices is helpful. In a social collaboration, too, it is always about the questions of meaning and the production of meaning or, more generally, of the social in the sense of collective belonging in collaborative work. For Andreas Reckwitz "the media-using subject can now be analyzed as someone for whom the techniques of media use become 'techniques of the self', so that certain 'inner' competencies and dispositions are built up through the media practices".

The example of Wikipedia

The success of Wikipedia shows that certain conditions are required for social collaboration to work in practice. And that it can also be at home in a non-economic context.

Wikis now form an important basis, especially when the intention is to establish information and knowledge in a dialogue . "Due to the success of Wikipedia [...] in particular, wikis as a specific form of computer-based communication and as a collaborative web application have aroused greater public interest in recent years". That is why they are now widely used in the corporate context, for example in the context of knowledge management systems. Different perspectives can be introduced on the actual facts within the framework of a wiki. In the articles themselves, networking with neighboring areas of knowledge or other necessary information can easily be guaranteed. Above all, the comment functions in the wikis, which are available for each entry, make it possible to develop a dialogue about the knowledge. With the commentary and joint design, however, the way in which knowledge is generated and communicated about it also changes. The comment function is used differently for articles in the English language Wikipedia, especially more frequently, than in the German edition. Using the simple example "that the common software is used in different ways in the individual Wikipedia" can be shown that there is a culturally different approach to creating articles. But working with a wiki does even more on the socio-cultural level.

The collaboration on the different language Wikipedias is voluntary and largely "virtual" or in a networked context. Initially, or as a rule, this means that the authors have not previously seen or even got to know each other face to face. Since there are no financial incentives that drive this often very time-consuming voluntary work, there must be other conditions for networked collaboration on Wikipedia. Thus, formal structures (rules) and elements of control , such as administrators , quality control or the need for sightings, are also present in Wikipedia . However, this type of collaboration only works because the content is largely decentralized and autonomous by the users or created jointly within the framework of portals or editorial offices. Above all, the freedom of design and the variety of requirements when working on the articles are the incentives for social collaboration for many Wikipedia authors. You are intrinsically motivated to collaborate by the framework that Wikipedia specifies technically and socio-culturally . Success in particular shows that social collaboration can work when these special conditions are met. It can also be shown that such a practice first has to be established, i.e. developed and lived through active activity.

known problems

Two recurring problems with the implementation of a social (business) collaboration, i.e. especially when used in companies, are known to date:

  • A fundamental contradiction in the autonomy of people, groups and teams in relation to central bodies such as the ERP systems used
  • The introduction as a pure technology and therefore not as a participatory process

Fundamental contradiction to ERP systems

ERP ( Enterprise Resource Planning ) systems such as SAP have a fundamental contradiction to the socio-cultural process of social collaboration due to their centralized programming and execution. That is why there are usually enormous conflicts to deal with in operational practice.

There is a fundamental contradiction in the use of social collaboration in a corporate context: the participatory process, which relies heavily on decentralized, autonomous people and groups, systematically collides with enterprise resource planning ideas and systems ( ERP ) such as SAP . These map business processes, which sometimes differs significantly from the necessary work processes. The basic idea (and programming) of these systems, which originally largely originated in the 1970s, primarily require a centralized control, planning and monitoring unit as the final instance of a one best way . Which is based on a complete recording of the processes using key figures ( controlling ). In practice, it is precisely this contradiction that leads to enormous conflicts. If this is not resolved, then social collaboration remains as a process during the technical introduction of the platforms, i.e. it is not lived or feasible as a social practice. The corporate cultural change that has been set in motion must therefore primarily concern the question of the extent to which (excessive) controlling will be abolished or the necessary autonomy ensured. This also applies in a very direct sense to the socio-cultural practice of remuneration systems. It must be clarified here that the intrinsic motivation is not displaced by external incentives, such as bonuses for achieving a goal.

Introduction as pure technology

Another big problem area arises when a social (business) collaboration is only understood and introduced as a technology during implementation. This kind of introduction creates its own socio-cultural structure. However, in practice this also means that the various options are largely wasted. In order to successfully implement social collaboration as a process in the corporate context, the employees, their representatives, such as the works council , and the human resources departments must also be able to help shape and be included on an equal footing.

Considered only as a cultural change

But even considering it on the socio-cultural level alone is not helpful. With the selection of the platforms used, it is also technically determined which specific options there are for the work process. Above all in the sociology of work, a negation of the fundamentally also technically different possibilities of participation and social practice can often be found. Because "the technical level [...] cannot be separated from organizational dimensions". Of course, intra-organizational matters are also about power, autonomy and control. But also about whether the use of specific technology is tied to old models of a rational company concept or whether it is introduced on the basis of hierarchical technology. In other words: whether the desired openness of Web 2.0 applications actually leads technically into autonomous work processes.

Future forecasts

Just like the envisaged process, social collaboration platforms have a chance of being widely implemented if the socio-cultural changes are taken into account and shaped. Or. if the necessary prerequisites are made available in advance. This includes not least the limitation of control ideas or the abolition of power structures.

It is also important to create intrinsic motivation and a sense of belonging for the group. An important condition that is not necessarily compatible with projects such as crowdsourcing or crowd working . Here, the further development will show which central prerequisites are indispensable for a social practice of social collaboration.

See also

literature

Quotes and individual references

  1. ↑ Richter et al. 2012
  2. ^ Richter & Klier 2013
  3. ↑ Gross & Koch 2007
  4. ↑ E-Collaboration
  5. ↑ Tobias Arns in a press release from BITKOM at http://www.digitalewelt.org/content/viele-unternehmen-bei-social-collaboration-noch-ganz-am-anfang ( Memento from February 15, 2015 in the Internet Archive )
  6. ↑ BITKOM press release on March 27, 2013. Available at: www.bitkom.org/de/presse/8477_75642.aspx ( Memento from January 15, 2014 in the Internet Archive )
  7. ↑ On this, Rammert 2006, p. 6
  8. ↑ On social practice, see Reckwitz 2003.
  9. ↑ Reckwitz 2003, p. 286
  10. ↑ Westermayer 2007, p. 2
  11. ↑ Hammwöhner 2007, p. 3
  12. ↑ Critical on this: Sabine Pfeiffer (2003): SAP R / 3 & Co. Integrated business management systems as the silent helpers of Lego capitalism. (PDF; 277 kB) Published in: FIfF-Kommunikation 3/03, pp. 9–13.
  13. ↑ See Richter 2013 using the example of gamefication. Conversely, this does not mean or should mean that safe working conditions and fair wages are not important.
  14. ↑ See Klier & Lautenbacher 2013.
  15. ^ Pfeiffer, Schütt & Wühr 2012, p. 60

Quotes:

  1. ↑ Social Collaboration "becomes an internal, social platform, a place where employees can exchange their knowledge and which facilitates collaboration across department and location boundaries" (BITKOM 2012, p. 3)
  2. ↑ "What is hardly to be found is a knowledge of: the decentralization and openness, the decidedly non-hierarchical way of communication of the Web 2.0 technologies and the options for use that become possible in the first place, which enable direct collaboration, feedback and mutual reference through departmental Hierarchy and disciplinary boundaries. " (Pfeiffer, Schütt & Wühr 2012, p. 56).
  3. ↑ An artifact is understood to mean "a product or phenomenon that has arisen through human or technical influence, as opposed to the uninfluenced or natural phenomenon" (Wiktionary: artefact).
  4. ↑ See Klier & Lautenbacher 2013: "For the successful implementation of social business collaboration platforms, for example, it is important to provide all project employees with all information in one place. This applies even more to the effective operation of the platforms".
  5. ↑ For him it is also about an implicit "sense of 'what you actually want' ',' what it is about 'and what would be' unthinkable '" (Reckwitz 2003, p. 292).
  6. ↑ This creates "the possibility of discussion linked to every wiki entry [...] meta-forums for communicating questions and opinions on the topic" (Brombach 2007, p. 3).
  7. ↑ No longer through reading or lecturing alone, but through a discourse and sometimes an argument about it. See also the WikiWar Monitor.
  8. ↑ "It is noticeable that in the German Wikipedia only about a third of all articles are assigned a discussion, while in the English Wikipedia this is the case for about two thirds of all articles" (Hammwöhner 2007, p. 3)
  9. ^ "Wikis enable learning approaches in many ways that would not be possible face-to-face" (Brombach 2007, p. 2).
  10. ↑ Although there are real meetings and offers for mutual exchange via the portals or editorial offices. If so, these are usually noticed afterwards.
  11. ↑ Technicians "create social relationships between man and machine with the respective form of the technical system and disrupt well-established social relationships such as hierarchies, professional competence arrangements and social division of labor with every technical innovation" (Rammert 2003, p. 20).
  12. ↑ "The process of customizing is to be interpreted as an adaptation of the company's real processes to the logic of the system and less as an adaptation of the software to the specific company requirements" (p. 10). Sabine Pfeiffer (2003): SAP R / 3 & Co. Integrated business management systems as silent helpers of Lego capitalism. (PDF; 277 kB)

Web links

Commons : Social Collaboration  - collection of pictures, videos and audio files