Report from the trenches

Firms weigh in on intranet deployment trends

by John Desborough

OUTLINE

• Background
• Digging Deeper
• Findings
• Reality Bites
• En fin ...

During my initial research into the technologies and applications deployed in intranets, for my book "Intranet Web Development" (New Riders, Sept 1996), I saw that there are typically t wo camps within organizations developing Intranets:

• the "techies" who put one together "because they could" with the toys and technologies of the Internet
• the "communicators" of the organization who sought to find a way to publish internal information more effectively and, more important, more economically

Intranets put in place by techies tend to include audio, video, and telephony applications "because they are neat technologies and we want to show people the capabilities of the system&qu ot;. Those put in place by the groups who tried to reduce or eliminate their printing and distribution costs were "plain Jane, not very graphic but has lots and lots of content", at least in their own words.

Significantly, in both cases, the usage and impact of the intranets failed to meet the expectations of the proponents.

Having left a full-time position to write the book and "dedicate my life to the intranet cause", it disturbed me that there was an imbalance between expectations and results. Following up with several other organizations on this theme, I was frequently asked what applications were being implemented and how (with which technologies).

The source of the question, business management or technologist, indicated that there was still a search for rationale and method by both sides of the equation for the "right intranet solution" ;. Having been a Type-A personality at one point in my life, I went looking for the answers, trying to find someone who, to pull from Monty Python's Life of Brian, was carrying "the pole with the sandal attached" -- leading the followers, in other words.

Over the last 8 months I have talked to the management teams and the technologists of more than 700 organizations about their intranets, their expectations and their results. I was surprised by the resu lts.

Before continuing, I apologize in advance if what you are about to read steps on your toes. You cant please everyone but I am only the messenger.

1. The technologists do not, in general, have a good grasp of the "business of the organization" within which they work
2. Management does not fully appreciate what technology can do in helping to create strategic/competitive advantage from "raw facts"
3. Regardless of what you may be reading in the press, IT managers are not yet integrated into the strategic planning team and process
4. Communications within organizations still "sucks."

Point number 4 has a lot to do with the other points.

With the rapid change in technology and the increasing demands upon staff to do more with less, technologists are facing more and more demands upon their time to maintain and support new versions of har dware, software and peopleware. "Techies" are hired for their technical skills, not their business acumen. Most organizations do a very poor job of communicating the "business" of the organization to staff not directly involved in the "business of the organization".

By contrast, business managers focused on the bottom line of their operational units have little time to spend researching new technologies, even those that might improve, innovate and support their pro cesses. I liken this to the following quote from Steven Covey's "The Seven Habits of Highly Successful People":

"I don't have time to sharpen the saw," the man says emphatically. "I'm too busy sawing" (p. 287).

Because of this situation, it is very difficult to convince all the parties that should be involved in the strategic planning process that they need to take their required places and perform the necessary roles that result in a cultural and organizational shift.

As the song says, "Communications is the problem to the answer" (10CC, The Things We Do For Love). If all parts of the organization could improve their communications with and among the mselves, many of the problems being experienced with intranets, and with networked computing in general, could be ameliorated.

Most of the organizations reviewed started along the intranet path by implementing an "IntraWeb" - an internal Web site where they located their internal documents. Starting with manuals and p olicies and moving to newsletters and notices, companies used the "IntraWeb" as part of their "push" strategy for communicating with staff. Instead of spending money on printing and distribution of paper documents that often found thei r way to the garbage/recycling bins, organizations have started placing documents onto the "IntraWeb" for employees to access - when and as required.

One quick review of the drivers behind this form of intranet and you notice that these areas are cost centres of the organization. While cost reductions in these areas do have an impact on the bottom line, they do not provide real growth or competitive advantage to the organization. However, these savings do provide a means of selling the intranet concept to senior management who are tend to base their investment decisions on Return on Inv estment analysis. The financial returns of this model/phase in the intranet development are limited to the extent that printing and distribution can be reduced. As well, this is still a one-way flow of information from the centre to the employees.< /P>

Few of the organizations reviewed have started their Intranets from within profit centres. The managers of these areas are "too busy sawing" and, to date, have been reluctant to spend money, time, and effort on determining how to develop Intranets that support their operations.

What has happened in most cases, is that the cost centres have "convinced" management that there is a business case for an intranet, through the ROI achieved in elimination of printed material s consumed internally. The profit centres have then jumped onto the bandwagon asking for applications to be developed that help them do their jobs more effectively and efficiently. The problem that faces most of these organizations is that the infrastruct ure of the intranet currently in place has only been designed, and planned, to deal with one way communications. The interactive requirements: access to data and text, discussion forums, workflow support, etc. had not been thought through by the "pub lishers" of the initial content.

In order to utilize an intranet properly in a profit centre, and in general throughout any organization, people must be able to interact with sources of information. These sources may be data- or text-b ases, people within their work group, or colleagues located in another branch or country. Facts unto themselves have no value. It is only when an individual examines a fact, with a context, that the fact is observed to have a value or is neutral. People c reate the context within which facts are reviewed. Allowing people to communicate among themselves, to discuss facts within various contexts (no two people will see a fact within the same contextual setting), permits the sharing of experiences and knowled ge and creates new contexts within which to review the facts. This is where value is added to the fact and competitive advantage occurs.

Smart organizations are very quickly to view an intranet as an investment not a cost. They have also understood that there is more to the intranet than just replacing paper publishing. Whi le most of these smart organizations started their Intranets by reducing their printing costs, they have re-invested those savings into providing the means for their employees to communicate in an interactive fashion, to facilitate work being done in the profit centres. They are building Intranets whose goals are "to get the right information to the right place at the right time" within the business processes of their organizations.

A number of these smart organizations have also opted to find a way to bring everyone in the organization into the strategic planning process, itself a mission-critical process (we hope), through the us e of the organizations intranet.

More details will follow in an upcoming edition of Intranet Journal.

John Desborough is an intranet consultant, specializing in helping companies align their strategic business processes and their intranets. He is also the author of Intranet Web Development (New Riders, September 1996), and his seminars on the topic are among the most popular in North America. John is a frequent contributor to the Intranet Exchange and can be reached at <jdesboro@intranomics.com>.