You may want to look at my book. It specifically deals with the transfer
issue. Following is a summary:
Collaborative Technologies: Hype vs. Reality
By: Robert E. Neilson
National Defense University
A new family of books are receiving increasing attention in academic
circles and executive suites. The business sector has classified this
family of books under the rubric * "intellectual capital". The human
resource folks and those who have a behavioral bent toward the study of
organizations are hot on the topic of "organizational learning" or
"learning organizations". Information techies, or more properly
identified as information technology professionals, have stakeout their
territory under the heading of "collaborative technologies" or
"groupware". What do all these folks have in common? They are all
dealing with the issue of identifying and transferring intellectual
materials and ideas around organizations to create a higher level
organizational asset.
Many of the new books are based on anecdotal evidence, stories, or
punditry. While books based on anecdotal evidence and stories make easy
airplane reading, they provide little substantiated evidence that
capitalizing on intellectual capital, organizational learning or fostering
the exchange of ideas through groupware really adds to organizational
performance. "Collaborative Technologies and Organizational Learning"
released by Idea Group Publishing, Hershey, PA
(http://www.idea-group.com), provides research findings from an
exploratory case study that go beyond the anecdotal evidence that
underlies much of the present day literature. The research is focused on
the central research question: How is organizational learning advanced by
transferring intellectual material via collaborative technologies?
Specifically, the case study explores how a collaborative technology
(Lotus Notesd) influences organizational learning. Dr. David A. Wilson's,
President and CEO of the Graduate Management Admission Council, review of
the book summaries major findings:
In the information era, the departure of an employee ensures the loss of
institutional wisdom and intellectual capital. In the 1990's, many
members of the corporate market place squandered considerable stores of
our intellectual and human capital. Robert Neilson's study is a cold
shower for those of us in management who believe that we can remedy the
deleterious consequences of excessive reductions in our knowledge work
force by throwing technology at the problem. The "Field of Dreams"
philosophy of life may work at the box office, but Neilson makes it
eminently clear that if you use a collaborative technology such as Lotus
Notes, don't bet much that they [employees] will come and use it
productively *.without a lot of other incentives. **His book is a wake-up
call. We need to do more than simply build groupware. Neilson pushed me
to consider if my own organization, in our feverish pursuit of denominator
management, staff reductions, and cost containment of the past decade,
perhaps severed the wrong human capital. *. Collaborative Technologies and
Organizational Learning provides valuable sound bites to executives in
search of advice and guidance as they implement*collaborative technologies
such as Lotus Notesd.
Based on a critical analysis of the organizational learning and
collaborative technology literature, five key questions were explored:
1. In an information age economy are organizations increasingly
dependent on information technology to transfer information and knowledge
(Huber, 1984; Drucker, 1994)?
2. Do information age organizations need to develop and transfer
intellectual material to survive (Badaracco, 1991; Peters, 1991; Drucker,
1994)?
3. Can organizations survive without continual learning (Garvin, 1993)?
4. Do collaborative technologies foster collaboration (Kling, 1991,
1993)?
5. How can organizations accelerate the process of converting individual
learning into organizational learning (Kim, 1993)?
Over a ten month period, Neilson tracked three separate groups. Each
group used a different approach to implement and use Lotus Notesd in an
attempt to promote organizational learning. The three approaches
included:
1. Field of Dreams - if you build it they will come.
2. Champion - group members other than the group leader play a pivotal
role in introducing and using Notes.
3. Business Reason - requires the use of Notes as an integral part of
everyday business practice.
His major findings or practice prescriptions as he calls
them include:
1. Having an a priori business reason to implement Notes
increases the likelihood of a successful Notes
implementation.
2. Relying solely on a Field of Dreams approach is courting
disaster.
3. Initial training in Notes does not guarantee success
over the long term.
4. Prior experience with IT applications is also no
guarantee that people will use Notes.
5. Peer pressure is not a factor in Notes use.
6. People will continue to "read" and "write" to Notes
databases as long as others do so.
7. Heavy contributors to Notes databases feel they learn
more than those who contribute little.
8. First impressions of Notes are lasting impressions, so
you better get it right the first time.
Collaborative Technologies and Organizational Learning debunks some of
the marketing hype associated with collaborative technologies that are
springing to life like "electronic mushrooms". Most importantly, it
provides a research basis to underpin its recommendations for practice.
[Dr. Robert E. Neilson is Chair of the Information Strategy
Department, Information Resources Management College,
National Defense University, Washington, DC.
Comments:neilson@ndu.edu]
--Bob BN Neilson <NEILSON@NDU.EDU>
Learning-org -- Hosted by Rick Karash <rkarash@karash.com> Public Dialog on Learning Organizations -- <http://www.learning-org.com>