 |
This article has multiple issues. Please help improve it or discuss these issues on the talk page. (Learn how and when to remove these template messages)
|
Collaborative workflow is the convergence of social software with service management (workflow) software. As the definition implies, collaborative workflow is derived from both workflow software and social software such as chat, instant messaging, and document collaboration.
To define collaborative workflow, we can examine the definitions of its components: workflow and collaboration objects.
Workflow is a set of activities (service requests, tasks) and the rules that govern their behavior as they move from one service provider to the next until a project is completed.
Collaboration objects include web-based meetings, instant messaging, knowledge management wikis, documents (ECM), and shared calendars.
The goal of collaborative workflow is to provide synergetic efficiency gains to its constituents (social communication and service management) by:
Ideally, collaborative workflow is a collection of parallel and sequential tasks that rely on communication and coordination to achieve a desired outcome.
Prior to the 1980s all IT operations were performed at the data center. Often perceived as faceless and monolithic, the data center was a corporate division housing fields of mainframe computers humming softly in locked rooms with raised floors. Workers regarded this insulated, air-conditioned computer room as an unresponsive ivory tower ruled by corporate information gatekeepers.
The introduction of the IBM PC in the early 1980s sparked a renaissance in computing.[1] The personal computer ushered in a power shift from the data center to the knowledge workers (the people who used the data to provide services throughout the company). This radical change led to the democratization of computing, but in the short run led to a period of chaos. [citation needed]
The democratization of computing resources and the empowerment of knowledge workers was an exciting development, and little notice was initially paid to the havoc it was causing in the workplace. The new model lacked standards, was fraught with trial and error, and required an ever growing level of support. This support came not only from the computer department, but increasingly from fellow team members. Peer support, although not explicitly shown in financial statements, led to an alarming drop in worker productivity. [citation needed]
By the early 1990s, studies published by respected consulting groups stated that organizations were spending a shocking amount of money on peer and informal technical support – about three times the amount that was spent on hardware (when a typical IBM PC cost about $5000). Many managers felt that the PC revolution had gotten out of control.[citation needed]
It was against this backdrop, and especially when companies started implementing local area networks, that the modern help desk was born. The corporate data center had disappeared and the resulting power vacuum needed to be filled. Many corporations resolved their data management issues by standardizing and automating processes.
In the United Kingdom, the Office of Government Commerce created ITIL. ITIL promoted standard practices in the deployment and management of IT resources.
The early help desks of the 1980s incorporated simple workflow models: problems were reported, dispatched, routed to a technician, resolved, and then closed. As decentralized computing matured, customized workflow solutions such as change management, configuration management, and problem management, enabled the IT department to focus on its primary objectives – resolving problems, and rolling out new applications faster, more reliably, and with greater ease.[2]
Workflow applications brought to the modern enterprise what Henry Ford's assembly line brought to manufacturing: improved efficiency, uniform outcomes, and greater throughput.[3]
As with all new technologies, social software went through a lengthy gestation period. Even before the widespread adoption of the Internet, social software was maturing and gaining a foothold with outfits like CompuServe and America Online. Before long, people were contributing to interest groups, using email and bulletin boards, and hanging out in chat rooms.
The latest generation of decision makers has embraced the social communication and collaboration media that grew from popular developments such as interest groups and Wikipedia. For this reason, enterprises have recognized the collaborative value of social software, and have begun using it within their existing IT structures.
The attributes of a collaborative workflow management system include:
The fundamental difference between social collaboration software and collaborative workflow software is that collaborative workflow is characterized by well-defined goals, activities, and outcomes. Collaborative workflow, while incorporating many of the tools that comprise social collaboration, also relies on:
Collaborative workflow involves:[5]
With collaborative workflow, managers can oversee an entire project using both traditional methods (project design, reports, and dashboards) as well as collaboration tools (web-based chat, instant messaging, document management, alerts, and shared calendars). Supported by role-based access control (RBAC), ad hoc teams can collaborate on special projects within traditional departmental structures.[citation needed]
The phases of implementing collaborative workflows include:
Team members communicate online with each other via social software, with the help of document management and shared calendaring facilities.
Social collaboration software tools have yet to prove their worth, because they are not structured or goal oriented. They need the constraints of stated goals, commitments, timelines, and performance measurements, so they can align with the productivity goals of workflow components. Until these constraints are adopted at the enterprise level, the benefits of social media will remain anecdotal.[citation needed]
Industrialized economies have a massive service sector component. Each year, the Fortune 500 list of service-based companies continues to grow while the list of manufacturing companies shrinks.
Manufacturing firms are now maintaining sizable service components such as marketing, customer service, technical service, and legal support. Companies are manufacturing the physical stuff abroad, and developing the services back home. By bundling services with products, companies have realized huge profits, offering packages such as protection plans for television sets, or two-year phone contracts that come with free smart phones. Consumers have expressed mixed opinions on the value of these bundled services.
In every political season, we hear a lot about bringing manufacturing back to America. Rhetoric notwithstanding, the higher value-add is no longer in products but in services (except for highly specialized and technical manufacturing). Therefore, organizations will gain a competitive edge by continuing to manufacture offshore, while producing complementary services back home.
Ultimately, all organizations are service-providers for one another. To gain and maintain a global competitive advantage, businesses need to provide better services that cost less. In a technologically complex world, this means employing both collaborative tools and a procedural framework to deliver greater value at a competitive price.
To be effective, the enterprise collaborative workflow solution should include:
Collaborative workflow promises to enhance business processes through the integration of collaboration tools. Used properly, it has the potential to improve service, productivity, and efficiency by reducing information silos and lessening the conventional business friction points of time, space, and organizational structure.
Authority control databases: National  |
|
|---|
