Making sense of the enterprise social network
Anne van Uden 10201149
Corporate Communication
Master’s Thesis Communication Science
L.A. van Oortmerssen
Graduate School of Communication University of Amsterdam
Abstract
Organizations are made up of relations between people. The enterprise social network is a tool that is aimed at fostering these relations within the organization. It is an interactive, social medium platform where employees can engage in two-way dialogical communication. However, the enterprise social network does not yet meet its full potential as managers lack knowledge on how to achieve organization-wide user adoption. In addition, the enterprise social network is understudied and little academic attention has been given to employees’ sensemaking processes in social and cultural context(s) that influence user adoption of technology. Taking on a qualitative research approach, it was studied how attitude and participative behavior on the enterprise social network are shaped by organizational actors’ sensemaking of the enterprise social network within the social context(s) of the organization. Eleven participants of three organizations from the public domain were interviewed about their attitude towards and behavior on the enterprise social network. It was found that the implementation of the enterprise social network rarely
triggered sensemaking. Rather, participants applied an existing schema of what an intranet is, e.g. an information source. Although participants recognized and valued possibilities for collaboration and community, it was not used as such in practice. An important influencing factor of adoption of the enterprise social network was organizational culture. If the enterprise social network is to live up to its potential, organizational values must be aligned with the values underlying the enterprise social network. This requires a change in an organization’s communication culture.
Introduction
Organizations are made up of relations between people. Internal communication is aimed at fostering these relations within organizations (Elving, 2005). One tool for this, is the intranet. Once an outdated channel employed by management to send their messages, the intranet is making a comeback as an interactive, social medium platform where employees can engage in two-way dialogical communication (Boerma, 2015). This new type of intranet comes with a new name that better fits its social nature: the enterprise social network (DiMicco, Geyer, Millen, Dugan, & Brownholtz, 2009). Among both managers and scholars, there is an increasing awareness that an enterprise social network facilitates the embedding of knowledge within the organization which, in turn, increases an organization’s innovation, flexibility and adaptability (Cranefield & Yoong, 2009; Tredinnick, 2006).
However, many organizations do not (yet) use their intranet to its fullest potential. The Digital Workplace Maturity Scale is an instrument that measures the maturity of an intranet (McConnell, n.d.). The scale runs from phase one (unmanaged) to five (proactive). The vast majority of the organizations can be placed in the second phase (McConnell, n.d.). In this phase, several forms of social networking within the organization exist and the organization is starting to recognize the potential of a single enterprise social network. McConnell’s (n.d.) finding that most organizations are only just starting to recognize the possibility of an
enterprise social network is supported by results from the Dutch Intranet Monitor 2014 (Postma & Hylkema, 2014). Results from the Dutch Intranet Monitor 2014 show that a majority of Dutch organizations has plans to develop their intranet. Making the intranet more social by increasing social interaction on the intranet is mentioned as one of the key points for the future. However, very few organizations have come up with a specific roadmap that can guide the development of such an enterprise social network. Apparently, managers believe in the benefits of an enterprise social network but lack the practical knowledge to develop and implement such a platform.
One of the main challenges in developing an enterprise social network, is to get employees involved. After all, without active user participation, an enterprise social network fails to meet its potential to stimulate knowledge sharing and innovation. In fact, low user adoption is one of the main reasons why many intranet initiatives fail (Young & Hinesly, 2014). Because the concept of enterprise social networking is relatively new, there has been little empirical research into this specific phenomenon (Leonardi, Huysman, & Steinfield, 2013). There has been research on the development and implementation of other technologies within organizations. These studies have shown that organizational culture strongly influences user adoption of technology (Huang, Baptista, & Galliers, 2013). When the values and beliefs within the organization are aligned with the values and beliefs
underlying the new technology, the implementation of this technology has a higher chance of being successful. When these values and beliefs are not aligned, the implementation of the technology requires organizational change (Huang et al., 2013). Users’ adoption of the technologies’ values is a prerequisite of adoption of the technology itself.
Much of the research on technology implementation therefore focuses on the effects of change management on technology adoption. This managerial perspective neglects the ways in which employees give meaning to the technology. Yet in order to understand employee involvement with a technology, such as the enterprise social network, it is
necessary to understand how employees make sense of the technology. Sensemaking is a social process, as the real-life social world that employees belong to affects their behavior in an online, virtual community such as an enterprise social network (Lippert, 2013). Emotions are an important aspect of sensemaking, as they trigger and influence the sensemaking process (Maitlis, Vogus, & Lawrence, 2013). Yet the role of emotions in sensemaking is understudied.
Thus, the relatively new phenomenon of the enterprise social network is believed to improve internal communications. Yet the enterprise social network does not meet its full potential in practice, because managers lack the knowledge on how to achieve organization-wide user adoption of the enterprise social network. In addition, the enterprise social network is an understudied topic and little academic attention has been devoted to employees’ sensemaking processes in social and cultural context(s) that influences user adoption. To fill these knowledge gaps and to support managers in establishing a flourishing enterprise social network, the following research question is addressed: How are attitude towards and
participative behavior on an enterprise social network shaped by organizational actors’ sensemaking of the enterprise social network within the social context(s) of the organization?
Theoretical framework
The intranet: a tool for knowledge sharing
An intranet is a “private computing network, internal to an organization, allowing access only to authorized users” (Curry & Stancich, 2000, p. 250). Every intranet has three layers: the technical infrastructural layer that shapes how information is displayed, the infostructure layer consisting of rules regarding the use of the intranet and the infocultural layer that impacts employees’ behavior and the organizational structure (Baptista, Newell, & Currie, 2010). Yet at the same time, employees’ behavior and organizational structure also influence the intranet. Structuration theory calls this mutual influence of the intranet
technology on the on hand and employee behavior and organizational structure on the other hand the duality of structure (Yates & Orlikowski, 1992).
One of the main purposes of intranets is to manage organizational knowledge. The intranet can be perceived as a shared space in which knowledge is created and collected (Nonaka & Konno, 1998). However, the challenge of knowledge management is that
knowledge resides in people and not in online databases (Beverly, 2010; Tredinnick, 2006). In recent years, there has been a shift from a technology-centered approach of knowledge management to a more people-centered approach (Hamadani Janes, Patrick, & Dotsika, 2014). According to this people-centered approach, the creation and sharing of knowledge is first and foremost a social practice. It is constructed in social interactions and thus requires interpersonal contact (Nonaka & Konno, 1998; Tredinnick, 2006). This contact can either be physical or virtual. If knowledge resides in people, the question becomes what motivates individuals to engage in knowledge sharing. Because knowledge sharing is a social practice, it requires the development of social relations and community building (Chiu, Hsu, & Wang, 2006). One of the relational dimensions that affects knowledge sharing is trust. Trust does not have a direct effect on knowledge sharing (Chiu et al., 2006). Rather, the influence of trust on knowledge sharing is mediated by the quality of cooperative relationships (Chiu et al., 2006). That is, trust positively influences the development and maintenance of
cooperative relationships and these relationships affect an individual’s willingness to share knowledge.
The inability of many intranets to connect individuals with each other is one of its major weaknesses (Beverly, 2010). The lack of connections between employees means knowledge gets lost (Young & Hinesly, 2014). An enterprise social network which integrates web 2.0 technologies within the content management system might be the solution to this problem, as such features are specifically designed to connect individuals with each other and create social networks. In addition, the conversational technologies of web 2.0
technologies also support knowledge sharing (Cranefield & Yoong, 2009).
The added value of an enterprise social network
Social capital refers to the networks of relationships between people in a particular system. Within the organization, social capital is made up of the relations between all
organizational members. These networks of organizational members enable the organization to function effectively, among others because it fosters knowledge sharing (Van den Hooff & Huysman, 2009). The added value of an enterprise social network over more traditional intranets is that it is a social medium that enables the creation of online social networks. Rather than functioning as a channel for communication – as is the case with the intranet – the enterprise social network is a digital platform where communication occurs (Leonardi et al., 2013).
The enterprise social network is a social medium that allows for the creation of social networks. A medium is regarded as a social medium when it offers “applications that allow for the creation and exchange of user-generated content” (Young & Hinesly, 2014, p. 427). Social networks can be defined as “online communities of people who share interests and/or activities, or who are interested in exploring the interests and activities of others” (Bennett et al., 2010, p. 140). These social networks are based on trust as trust creates relationships and builds community (Lai & Turban, 2008). In addition, social networks provide possibilities for interaction. A specific type of social networks are communities of practice. These
communities are a social network in which the group members interact on a regular basis with the aim on learning from each other (Cranefield & Yoong, 2009).
The benefits of social networks fall in three main categories (Lange, Mitchell, Stewart-Weeks, & Vila, 2008). The first is community, which refers to creating a community of
likeminded people. The second category is collaboration: a social network fosters
collaboration by connecting people, expertise and resources. The third and final category is contribution, or an individuals’ ability to contribute their own knowledge and ideas to the community. One of the main benefits of social networks, is that social networks make it easier to connect with so-called weak ties (Bennett et al., 2010). A weak tie exists between two people who are connected with each other but who are not part of the same social groups. When knowledge is shared with weak ties the impact is greater than when knowledge is shared with strong ties. More people can be reached through weak ties because the knowledge that is shared is not limited to one social group, but is shared within multiple social groups (Granovetter, 1973).
Aligning organizational and technological values
User participation is intrinsic to an enterprise social network (Tredinnick, 2006). The success or failure of an enterprise social network can be determined by the degree of activity on the platform. The mere availability of an enterprise social network does not guarantee active user participation. In fact, most intranet and social media projects fail due to low technology adoption (Young & Hinesly, 2014). Over the years numerous studies on the factors that influence technology adoption have been performed (Legris, Ingham, &
Collorette, 2003). This lead to a long list of predicting factors. The Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) was developed to narrow this list down. According to TAM, there are two main factors that explain technology acceptance: perception of ease of use and perception of usefulness. The initial model has been extended with the addition of the subjective norm and the factor of time (TAM2). The model was developed from a technological perspective, which is its main flaw: the technology is regarded as a neutral object that is independent of the social dynamics within the organization (Legris et al., 2003). However, technology is not
neutral, because every technology is built on certain values (Bennett et al., 2010). For example, personal control is a value that underlies social media technology. In addition, technology acceptance is influenced by interdependent relationships between technology, social context and change management aspects (Orlikowski & Hofman, 1997).
The successful implementation of an intranet is not solely dependent on technical aspects, but on organizational and social aspects as well (Kim, 2010). These social aspects are especially important for the implementation of an enterprise social network because of its social nature. A technology that requires social contact and collaboration also requires that certain social aspects such as trust and networking are met (Cheikrouhou, Pouly, Huber, & Choudhary, 2011; Hamadani Janes et al., 2014).
Organizational culture, with its norms, values and assumptions, affects attitude towards and behavior on an enterprise social network (e.g. Huang et al., 2013; Stenmark, 2006). And as argued before, the enterprise social network has certain values of its own (Bennett et al., 2010). These values of the enterprise social network must be aligned with the values of the organization. To be specific, managers need to let go of control and the idea that an intranet should be managed, because the absence of central control and hierarchical structures are the main principles behind the technology (Stenmark, 2006). And because a social network is characterized by user-generated content, employees must turn into active contributors rather than remaining passive receivers. They have to feel responsible and take ownership of the enterprise social network and its content (Curry & Stancich, 2000). This requires a culture of trust in which employees feel free to share their knowledge (Tredinnick, 2006). In addition, the organizational culture must value networking and knowledge sharing (Curry & Stancich, 2000). An organizational culture which lacks values of trust, networking and knowledge sharing will function as a barrier against employees’ adoption of the
enterprise social network (Mark & Poltrock, 2003). To remove this barrier, the implementation of an enterprise social network must be accompanied by organizational change aimed at implementing trust, networking and knowledge sharing as values.
Implementation requires organizational change
Most studies on the implementation of new technologies within organizations and the organizational change that this requires have a managerial perspective (e.g. Butler, 2003; Martini, Corso, & Pellegrini, 2009). The main thought behind this perspective is that change management is essential for the successful implementation of a new technology. However, although leadership does influence the successful implementation of a new technology, a managerial perspective is also limited because it neglects the ways in which employees make sense of the technology (Hamadani Janes et al., 2014). Yet understanding employee
sensemaking of a technology is essential for the successful implementation of the technology.
Sensemaking influences behavior (Orlikowski & Gash, 1994), and the meaning of a technology is determined by its actual usage and not by management vision (Stenmark, 2006). Although a technology provides users with certain structures that encourage certain types of usage, adaptive structuration theory states that individuals adopt technology to their work needs (DeSanctis & Poole, 1994). This explains why user behavior can be different from management intentions, and also why individuals can differ in their usage. When
structuration theory is applied to the sensemaking of a new social intranet platform, duality of structure means that user participation on the platform is shaped by the social structures within the organization and at the same time user participation shapes and redefines these structures.
The duality of structure changes over time. When a new technology is implemented, its meaning is more shaped by the social structures within the organization (Scheepers & Damsgaard, 1997). This is what is meant by the emergent nature of enterprise social networks: the enterprise social network takes on different meanings depending on how it is used in practice by different communities (Baptista et al., 2010). Thus, what lacks in most research on the implementation of information systems is attention to the formative context in which attitudes and behaviors are created (Ciborra & Lanzara, 1994). Therefore, this
research has a constructivist rather than a managerial perspective to the organizational change regarding the implementation of an enterprise social network.
A postmodernist-constructivist perspective sees reality as being interpreted,
constructed and enacted through social interactions. The constructivist perspective reasons that organizations are networks of conversations (Ford, Ford, & McNamara, 2002). The enterprise social network and the attitudes and behaviors regarding this network are socially constructed in the conversations that take place within the organization. The explicit
conversations that construct the meaning of an object occur against so-called background conversations (Ford et al., 2002). These background conversations are implicit and form the contexts in which the explicit conversations take place. The background conversations consist of the underlying assumptions of the organizational culture. Assumptions are the basic beliefs that influence perception, thought processes, attitudes and behavior (Schein, 1990). Within the context of the organization, multiple background conversations may occur. In terms of organizational culture this means that within the organizational context multiple subcultures can occur. As a consequence, multiple constructed realities regarding the enterprise social network may exist. Thus, in order to understand attitude towards and behavior on an enterprise social network, it is necessary to understand how users make sense of this enterprise social network in the social context(s) of the organization.
Sensemaking in the social context(s) of the organization The influence of sensemaking on attitude and behavior
The development of a new technology such as an enterprise social network is only fully complete when it is embedded in the daily practices of employees (Gephart, 2004). The implementation of a social enterprise network is thus only successful when employees adopt the technology in work practices. And as reasoned above, technology adoption requires sensemaking.
Sensemaking is “the process through which individuals and groups attempt to explain novel, unexpected or confusing events” (Maitlis et al., 2013, p. 58). It is egocentric in nature because it answers the question: “what does this mean to me?” (Harris, 1994, p. 315). During sensemaking, cues of the event are connected to cognitive knowledge schemas (Maitlis et al., 2013). The sensemaking process results in frames of interpretations. These technology frames consist of assumptions, expectations and knowledge regarding the technology. These frames shape the way individuals use the technology (Orlikowski & Gash, 1994). It is possible that a frame is inconsistent. In the case of the enterprise social network, for example, a frame might be that the network will increase knowledge sharing as all others will make use of the interaction features of the network (Orlikowski & Gash, 1994). In such a case, the frame does not lead to personal action.
Sensemaking: an individual process
For sensemaking to occur, an individual has to hold the opinion that the “novel, unexpected or confusing event” (Maitlis et al., 2013) cannot be understood by using existing interpretations of the world. When an individual gives meaning to the novelty by using existing interpretations, sensemaking does not occur. In the case of an enterprise social network, employees can either perceive the network as something entirely different that requires the construction of meaning, or they can interpret the network by using their prior knowledge and already existing schemas of, for example, what an intranet is.
The question then becomes why certain events do lead to sensemaking and others do not. This can be explained by the role that emotions play in the sensemaking process. Sensemaking takes effort. Therefore an individual needs to be energized in order to engage in the sensemaking process and emotions (Maitlis et al., 2013). This is what emotion can do. A novel event leads to an emotional reaction. The valence and intensity of the felt emotion influence whether sensemaking is triggered. More specifically, it is proposed by Maitlis et al. (2013) that sensemaking occurs when the event stirs negative and moderately intense emotions. For example, because it negatively affects personal goals.
Sensemaking: a social process
Although sensemaking is something that occurs in the individual mind, it is a social process in nature. When a new technology is implemented within the organization, its
meaning is shaped by social structures (Fulk, Steinfeld, Schmitz, & Power, 1987; Scheepers & Damsgaard, 1997). Within an organization, several social worlds exist. These social worlds consist of individual group members who have their own individual interpretations, but who also share core beliefs and assumptions (Orlikowski & Gash, 1994). The social worlds influence an individual’s behavior through the process of intersubjectivity (Gephart, 2004). Intersubjectivity is “the process through which one knows the subjective meanings of others” (Gephart, 2004, p. 481). It is the result of shared experiences and shared exposure to meanings and interpretations of group members (Harris, 1994). However, when group members have too different opinions and meanings of an object, conflict may occur within the social world (Mark & Poltrock, 2003). Conflict that results from different interpretations will especially occur in those situations in which collaboration is required.
Sensemaking: a cultural process
The influence of organizational (sub)culture on an individual’s sensemaking becomes apparent in the organizational schemas that are applied during the sensemaking process (Harris, 1994). A schema is a “cognitive knowledge structure” (Harris, 1994) regarding a certain object, e.g. an enterprise social network. The schema is used to interpret and make sense of the technology. Although schemas are individually hold, social communication between organizational members can lead to an overlap in the content and salience of schemas (Harris, 1994). A schema is regarded as a shared schema when the core elements are similar (Orlikowski & Gash, 1994). In other words, a shared schema exists when there is congruence in the individually hold schemas of organizational members.
Although some shared schemas are organization-wide, within different organization subcultures different schemas may exist. Each social world constructs its own interpretation of the enterprise social network. Variations in characteristics of the groups (such as purpose, context, and power) lead to these different interpretations (Orlikowski & Gash, 1994). This is due to the interpretive flexibility of sensemaking (Gephart, 2004). Interpretive flexibility is a flexibility in the attitudes and behaviors regarding the enterprise social network. In other words, multiple attitudes and behaviors regarding the enterprise social network can occur within the organization, as a result of different views of what the enterprise social network means.
The schemas that exist within subgroups are often more specific, well-defined and generally shared than organization-wide schemas (Harris, 1994). When there is
the organization will be more difficult and might lead to tension and conflict (Orlikowski & Gash, 1994). Yet it is also possible that groups share a schema that allows for different interpretations and practices (Mazmanian, 2013).
Method
Qualitative approach
The starting point for this research is that attitude towards and participative behavior on an enterprise social network are social constructs. Both are embedded in the social context (Curry & Stancich, 2000). The ways in which an enterprise social network is perceived and used, is not just based on objective, technological features but on social aspects as well. The main research object is thus a social phenomenon and the study of this phenomenon requires a qualitative, interpretivist research approach (Butler, 2003). The goal was to understand and interpret how employees give meaning to the enterprise social network within the social context(s) of the organization. More specifically, this qualitative study is comparative in nature, as it was expected that different social groups would develop different attitudes and behaviors regarding an enterprise social network (Flick, 2009).
The second motivation for taking on a qualitative research approach is the fact that enterprise social networks are a new phenomenon. Although there has been research on the implementation of new technologies, enterprise social networks differ from other
technologies because of their social nature (Kim, 2010). The study of a new phenomenon requires an explorative research approach and a qualitative method is the designated approach for this (‘t Hart, Boeije, & Hox, 2009).
Sampling and selection
The organizations and the participants were selected through purposive sampling. To get a full understanding of how employees’ sensemaking shaped their attitude towards and behavior on the enterprise social network, this research attempted to find variations in attitudes and behaviors across different organizational and social settings (Fulk et al., 1987). Maximal variation was thus the purposive sampling strategy that was applied (‘t Hart et al., 2009).
Three different organizations were selected: the municipality of Zeist, ZonMw and Reinier de Graaf. These organizations were selected based on their differences in
organizational culture, as it was expected that these differences would affect the meaning employees would give to the enterprise social network. Knowledge sharing was part of the core business of ZonMw, while for the municipality of Zeist and Reinier de Graaf this was not the case. In addition, as it was expected that trust would be an essential feature for a
successful implementation of an enterprise social network, the organizations varied in their stated values. Trust was one of the stated core values of the municipality of Zeist, whereas it was not a stated value of ZonMw and Reinier de Graaf. To be able to make valid
comparisons between the three organizations, all three organizations were similar in the sense that they were all selected from the public domain.
Within every organization, three (at ZonMw) to four (at the municipality of Zeist and Reinier de Graaf) employees were selected as participants based on their attitude towards and participation on the enterprise social network. Within every organization, at least one participant had been enthusiastic about the enterprise social network from the beginning and at least one participant had shown or still showed some forms of resistance to the enterprise social network. The third and fourth participant could be placed anywhere within the range of innovator to laggard. To select participants at ZonMw and Reinier de Graaf, the researcher briefed her contact persons within the organization and they selected the participants. To select participants at the municipality of Zeist, the researcher put an announcement on the enterprise social network. Employees who signed up to participate were asked to briefly describe their attitude towards and degree of activity on the enterprise social network. The researcher then selected participants who varied in their attitude and behavior regarding the enterprise social network.
For all three organizations, participants came from different teams. Because of this, it was expected that different team cultures were represented. This allowed to study
sensemaking of the enterprise social network within different subcultures.
Cases
To gain a better understanding of the cases, a brief case description is provided for all three organizations. First, some general information about the organization and the
organizational culture are discussed. Next, the development and implementation of the organization’s enterprise social network is described. Finally, a short description about the design and possibilities of the enterprise social network is given.
Case 1: Municipality of Zeist
The municipality of Zeist has a vision of daring to be small and unobtrusive (S. Stuurman, personal communication, April 21, 2015). This requires that responsibility is given to the community. To the municipality of Zeist, the community is the focus point. The
municipality believes that governing means to let the community excel in what it is good at. It is the task of the municipality to connect stakeholders with each other. The stated core values of the municipality are trust, proximity, openness and innovation.
Prior to the enterprise social network @Zeist, the municipality already had an intranet that was filled by web editors and that was sender-biased (S. Stuurman, personal
communication, April 21, 2015). However, while the municipality had developed and implemented new ways of working, the intranet lagged behind. Thus, the municipality was confronted with an intranet that was no longer of use. The enterprise social network @Zeist was developed with two aims: to make it easier for employees to find each other, and to provide employees with a platform for collaboration. In addition, one of the demands was that the enterprise social network would be user-friendly. During the orientation phase,
employees were given the opportunity to visit other organizations with enterprise social networks and to attend presentations of suppliers. In addition, a test team was set up which consisted of enthusiastic as well as critical employees. The municipality choose Malengo Embrace as their social business software. @Zeist went live in November 2014 (S.
Stuurman, personal communication, April 21, 2015). Because the test team had already filled @Zeist with content prior to when it went live, a culture quickly emerged at the intranet: 80% of the content is work-related. At the time of the interviews, 67,1% of all users was active.
The homepage of @Zeist consists of three corporate news items and a personalized timeline that contains updates from all groups to which a user is enrolled. Interaction is made possible in the form of liking and reacting. The group pages have a similar lay-out as the homepage: the first tab consists of a timeline with updates from group members. In addition, groups have a second tab to upload and work on documents, and a third tab to create Wiki-like pages. Every user can create a group, and groups can either be work-related or ‘fun’. All users have a profile that contained mainly their contact information.
Case 2: ZonMw
ZonMw is a small Dutch organization with around 250 employees that aims to improve health and healthcare. It is their belief that improvement in this field is achieved by knowledge and the implementation of knowledge in practice (ZonMw, n.d.). ZonMw’s core business is stimulating healthcare research and healthcare innovation within the entire knowledge chain: from research to implementation. ZonMw thus finances health care research and stimulates the implementation of the knowledge that is gained in research through subsidy programs. Its two main clients are the Dutch Ministry of Public Health, Welfare and Sport (VWS) and the Dutch Organization for Scientific Research (NWO). Based on the requests of clients, ZonMw sets up research and implementation programs.
Researchers, healthcare providers and healthcare organizations can apply for subsidies for their research and innovation projects that fit with these programs.
ZonMw launched its enterprise social network ZonMw intranet in September 2012 (I. de Lange, personal communication, April 29, 2015). Although there was an intranet prior to
the enterprise social network, that intranet was insufficient as it was outdated and lacked possibilities for interaction, collaboration and knowledge sharing. It was decided in 2011 that a new type of intranet was needed. Research was conducted to investigate the needs and wishes of ZonMw’s employees regarding the intranet which led to a clear-stated vision: “The intranet supports the informing of ZonMw and fosters knowledge sharing within ZonMw, so that every employee can perform his or her work in an effective and efficient manner” (I. de Lange, personal communication, April 29, 2015). Employees were involved during the entire development process. A group of ambassadors was formed, consisting of representatives from within the organization. This group functioned in two ways: first, group members provided input from the organization, and second, they kept the other employees up to date about the development of the intranet.
ZonMw intranet uses Wordpress as its content management system. Much of the intranet can be customized to the specific needs of a single user. For example, the items on the homepage can be arranged and users can choose which categories of organizational news they want to see. Every user has an extended profile which contains amongst others a profile picture, contact information, and groups in which the user is enrolled. The enterprise social network has several functions. First, there is a news function. Employees can send their news items to the intranet editors who then post the news items on ZonMw intranet. In addition, users can share messages themselves on their profile or within groups in which they are enrolled. There is also a blog function, which employees can use to create their own blog. Interaction in the form of likes and reactions is possible for all these types of messages. Within groups, users can place messages and share documents.
Case 3: Reinier de Graaf
Reinier de Graaf is a Dutch top clinical teaching hospital which employs over 3.500 health care professionals in 37 specialisms. The hospital is highly specialized in several treatments. As a teaching hospital offering medical trainings, Reinier de Graaf’s ambition is to gain and spread knowledge. To improve hospital care, collaboration with healthcare professionals within as well as outside the organization is valued. Reinier de Graaf values connectedness, as it believes that connectedness will lead to improvement of healthcare. In fact, the hospital aims to become the most connected hospital of the Netherlands.
The enterprise social network ReinierNet was developed as a means to achieve connectedness (M. Hoogland, personal communication, April 30, 2015). There was an intranet before ReinierNet, but that intranet was sender-biased and focused on spreading information. The possibility for connectedness on ReinierNet is achieved by information sharing, collaboration and social networking. ReinierNet was implemented in the course of 2013 in a user-driven way. ReinierNet was first made available to 50 ambassadors within the
organization. These ambassadors actively helped develop the enterprise social network and started filling it with content. In a gradual process, more and more employees were given access and in May 2013 ReinierNet was fully implemented within the organization. Of all users, 20% was active at the time of the interviews. This relatively low user participation is argued to be due to characteristics of the target groups. The three target groups are medical specialists, nursing staff and supporting staff. The nursing staff is the largest group
(consisting of more than 800 employees), yet they rarely have access to computers. Encouraging employees to embed ReinierNet in their work practices remains a point of attention.
On ReinierNet, every user has a profile, containing a profile picture and contact information. In addition, users can add keywords in which they are specialized and through which they can be found. Every user can create a group. At the time of the interviews, there were over 400 groups. These groups can either be closed or open, and can be work-related or ‘fun’. The content of the groups is customizable. The main page of ReinierNet consists of the following elements: corporate news (six items that are posted by the communications department), organization-wide news that is posted by users (including possibilities to interact and to use hashtags), announcements by the supporting staff, blogs and an agenda with activities. The main page is not necessarily the homepage, as users can set any page (for example, a group page) as their homepage.
Data collection
The data were collected through in-depth interviews with eleven participants from the three organizations mentioned above. The interviews were topic-interviews as the enterprise social network was the topic that was discussed. In addition, the interviews were semi-structured. Prior to the interviews an interview guide was created. The full interview guide can be found in appendix I. The interview guide included the main questions and sensitizing concepts. During the interviews, participants were asked about their attitude towards and behavior on the enterprise social network. They were also asked how their attitude and behavior were shaped by the social context(s) in which they functioned within the organization. Besides the items in the interview guide, the interviews were open.
All data were collected in three weeks during April 2015. Prior to the interviews with the participants, the researcher met with the contact persons of the selected organizations to take a look at the enterprise social network and to get a full understanding of the organization and the development and implementation of the enterprise social network. Within one to two weeks after an interview had taken place, it was transcribed.
Before the interviews took place, all participants received written information on the nature of the study. In addition, they were told that participation was on voluntary basis, that
withdrawal was possible at any time during as well as after the interview, and that the their anonymity was guaranteed as their names would not be mentioned in the research report. After receiving this information, all participants signed an informed consent form.
Data analysis
The data were analyzed with Atlas.ti. Thematic coding was applied, as thematic coding allows to make comparisons between different cases (Flick, 2009). First, a short participant description was formulated for every case. The participant descriptions can be found in appendix II. Next, every single case was analyzed in depth through open coding and then selective coding. During open coding, the interview transcript was closely read and analyzed line by line. Codes were assigned based on the sensitizing concepts and themes that emerged during the interview. These sensitizing concepts are: community of practice, connectedness, collaboration, knowledge sharing, trust, (resistance to) change, culture, sensemaking, and existing interpretation. During selective coding, similar open codes assigned to the cases were grouped together in families. The aim was to discover themes and categories across the interviews.
Results
Making sense of the enterprise social network
Sensemaking is triggered by events that are novel, unexpected or confusing. The introduction of the enterprise social network rarely caused sensemaking. Participants were not surprised or confused by the introduction of the enterprise social network. Also, most participants did not regard the enterprise social network as a novelty. To them, the enterprise social network was an intranet just as the one there was before, as the quote below from participant 5 illustrates. (Note that all quotes have been translated from Dutch).
“We have the new intranet, but we already had an intranet before that. It was always intranet” (participant 5).
This indicated that these participants interpreted the enterprise social network by using their existing schema of what an intranet is. In addition, for these participants the enterprise social network did not lead to strong emotional responses that could also cause sensemaking. The initial attitude of participant 3 was common:
These participants seemed to keep their distance. This skeptical attitude was caused by previous experiences with other failed organizational change initiatives and management expectations that sounded too good to be true. The lack of involvement these participants showed, might have been indicative of a passive form of resistance. The few participants who were actively involved with the enterprise social network from the very beginning (the early adopters) related this to their personal characteristics. They described themselves as curious and valued keeping up with developments. In addition, involvement was caused when participants already experienced a need for an online social network.
There were, of course, a few exceptions. First, the enterprise social network was a novel event for a few participants. The sensemaking process that followed from this, was egocentric in nature:
“I had no idea what an enterprise social network is. What will it look like, what is my role in this, how can I use it” (participant 2).
Second, some participants also interpreted the enterprise social network by using their schema of social media. This caused a strong negative emotion: fear of misuse. It was feared that usage of the enterprise social network would be personal and ‘fun’ rather than work-related. This fear was based on previous negative experiences with social media and negative assumptions about social media (e.g. social media is not social at all). Fear either caused resistance to the enterprise social network or triggered sensemaking.
In the few case in which sensemaking did occur, differences were found between participants from the different organizations. For participants of the municipality of Zeist, sensemaking was an individual affair. Sense was made through actual usage. Through usage, participants realized that the enterprise social network was not such a novelty after all, but similar to the previous intranet. Thus, the outcome was the same: to interpret the enterprise social network an existing scheme of what an intranet is, was applied. At Reinier de Graaf, the team had a prominent role during sensemaking. Sense was made during an explicit conversation with team members during which norms were discussed top-down:
“I was afraid it would be misused. That people would post their vacation photos. That it would become like social media. I discussed it with my team, that I didn’t want that kind of behavior in our group” (participant 9).
These differences related to the organizational cultures. At the municipality of Zeist, heterogeneous practices were valued and usage of the enterprise social network was desired, but not compulsory. Reinier de Graaf introduced their enterprise social network as
the primary communication channel for the organization, which pointed to a desire for homogeneous practices.
There was consensus on the interpretation participants gave to the meaning the enterprise social network had for the organization. The enterprise social network functioned as an addition to real human interaction. It could and should never replace such interaction, as was illustrated by participant 5:
“I hope it will not go too far, that we will never meet up with each other. The enterprise social network must be a tool and not a replacement of normal contacts”.
At most, the enterprise social network had a supporting role within the organization. It was found important to incorporate certain values such as connectedness, openness and
knowledge sharing within the organization, rather than just implementing an enterprise social network. Technology cannot create a social network. Rather, an organization that is a social network can use technology to enhance its potential. Participant 6 expressed this as follows:
“The enterprise social network is more social than the previous intranet and in that regard it is an improvement (…) But whether that is the result of organizational processes in combination with the technical possibility, or just the technical possibility… I think the first.”
Users’ behavior on the enterprise social network An inconsistent frame
Although the enterprise social network’s possibilities for community and collaboration were recognized and valued by some, in practice participants used the enterprise social network mainly as information source. There was thus a discrepancy between what some participants said and what they did; between their attitude and their behavior. Participant 3 experienced this as well:
“We [members of a community of practice] exploratory discussed how we can better find each other and well, eventually this [the enterprise social network] came out of it. (…) But I notice that usage varies a lot. I feel like my other co-workers are not active.”
This discrepancy was likely the result of the application of the existing schema of what an intranet is: an information source. Despite participants’ knowledge of the additional possibilities of the enterprise social network, their actual behavior corresponded with the schema of intranet. And this schema had not (yet) been complemented with the new features of the enterprise social network. It is no surprise then, that participants had not experienced a
change in their work practices since the implementation of the enterprise social network. After all, they used the enterprise social network in the same way they used the previous intranet. In fact, the only difference was that participants now had more personal control because of the ability to share their information themselves.
User-generated content in practice
User-generated content and personal control were valued. Participants were positive about the possibility to post messages themselves, because it was easy and time-saving. However, the drawback of user-generated content was that participants experienced an information overload because of it. Information disappeared quickly from the first page as a lot of messages were being posted. In addition, there was no distinction between relevant and irrelevant information. As a consequence, participants easily missed important
information. The information overload caused a negative attitude and sometimes even decreased usage, as is the case for participant 10:
“When the enterprise social network was first here, we were enthusiastic. But after a while I was like, what a tangle of messages. I thought, I’m done with this. So then I dropped out.”
The information overload posed a serious threat as it could turn into a negative spiral. The information overload decreased usage, thus less people checked the enterprise social network. And because less people checked the enterprise social network, others posted less messages. After all, there was no one to read them. Usage further decreased.
The question became how to overcome information overload. Participants did not want a solution that would decrease their personal control, such as appointing a team of intranet editors who would select and post messages. Participants suggested to improve the enterprise social network with a filter function in the technique that would filter the relevant and the irrelevant messages for them. However participant 3 pointed out that the problem of the information overload was not necessarily the result of the technique, but rather of the usage:
“To me, the beauty of the enterprise social network is that you can work with groups which allow for directed communication. But I see that 90% of all messages is posted in the general posting and then it becomes a collection of everything. And the risk is that it will become less appealing.”
Although the groups on the enterprise social network can serve as a filter function as it enables users to select the right audience for their messages, in practice this was not the
case. Some participants were member of too many groups because they were afraid to miss out on important information. The paradox was that because they tried to keep up to date with all information, they missed information. Other participants applied their existing schema of what an intranet is (e.g. a source for sharing organization-wide messages) and used the enterprise social network in a similar way. Messages were intentionally shared on the general posting.
Factors that influence adoption of the enterprise social network
Participants described that the enterprise social network was new and interesting when it was first implemented. This led to an increase in usage. However the risk is that this initial enthusiasm might fade over time. The implementation of the enterprise social network is only successful when it is adopted throughout the organization. Very few participants fully embedded the enterprise social network in their work practices. Factors that appeared to influence adoption of the enterprise social network were organizational culture, dependence, job characteristics, personal characteristics, and time.
Organizational culture
The embedding of the enterprise social network within the organization required a change in organizational culture. First, participants at ZonMw stated that certain values and processes within the organization made the organization more of a social network
organization. For example, at ZonMw there were organization-wide explicit conversations about the value of knowledge sharing and the use and potential of the enterprise social network. These explicit conversations and the organizational processes behind the scenes were regarded as more important in creating a networking organization than the technology of the enterprise social network:
“It is an improvement, but whether it’s the system or the process behind it… I think the last. People are more actively engaged” (participant 6).
Second, the embedding of the enterprise social network required a change in the way organizational members thought about communication. The enterprise social network was perceived as being well-suited for communication about processes rather than results:
“On the enterprise social network you don’t communicate about the end products, but about the process. Like we’re here right now and we’re going there and in April we’ll be done” (participant 8).
The change in communication culture also required that organizational members perceived communication as part of their job:
“People have to experience it [communication] as part of their work practices. Communication both about what you’re up to, but also the process” (participant 8).
Many participants experienced this shift (although slowly) from communication about results to communication about processes. In addition, they were positive about this change.
Because of communication about processes, they felt they were more up to date about what happened within the organization and what other organizational members were working on:
“In potential it can give more than just very matter of fact information, because you get to know other co-workers. Then I think, oh he is working on that, she is working on that, nice”
(participant 4).
Finally, organization-wide participation was recognized as a prerequisite for the enterprise social network to fulfill its potential. The enterprise social network is regarded as an effective tool within the organization only when all organizational members collaborate. Or, as participant 2 formulated it:
“We have to do it together.”
Dependence
The degree to which participants were dependent on the enterprise social network for their team communication and information influenced their adoption of the enterprise social network. Some participants stated a need for a social network before the enterprise social network was implemented. These participants easily adopted the enterprise social network and relied on it to communicate with geographically dispersed team members. Other participants were dependent on the enterprise social network for their information. Even when there was some resistance regarding the enterprise social network, dependency eventually led to adoption of the enterprise social network. Other participants were already satisfied with their work methods and the internal communication channels that were embedded in their work practices before the enterprise social network was implemented:
“We already have our own work methods. Perhaps if we use the enterprise social network it appears to be convenient, but there is no need for it. Everything works fine the way it is going now” (participant 4).
These participants felt no need to change and found their way around the enterprise social network. When the enterprise social network was implemented, they held on to their already embedded work practices. They continued to rely on social interaction and other
communication channels for their information.
Dependence on the enterprise social network was sometimes enforced. Some participants at Reinier de Graaf stimulated user participation by making their group the primary communication channel for all team affairs. This enforced dependence was accompanied by a strong behavioral norm: using the enterprise social network was
compulsory. When people did not use the enterprise social network, they were called on their behavior:
“My own team members are obliged to check the enterprise social network. And here, people are quickly being called on their mistakes. It has been announced on the enterprise social network so you should know it. You are called on it if you are not up to date” (participant 11).
Although usage increased, it also created a culture of fear among team members in which members are afraid to ask questions:
“They often hesitate to ask and then it is said, ‘it has been announced’” (participant 11).
In addition, usage was not the same as involvement. When users were made dependent on the enterprise social network for their information, their usage might have increased but it was restricted to information sharing within the own team.
Job characteristics
Characteristics of the job either enhanced or discouraged adoption of the enterprise social network. First, because of their job, some participants simply had limited access to computers which made adoption of the enterprise social network difficult. This held true for nurses at Reinier de Graaf and employees who worked outside of the office at the
municipality of Zeist. Also, some jobs (e.g. technicians, receptionists) had more of a supporting role within the organization. These participants were not involved with the core business of the organization which made participation and collaboration at the enterprise social network less relevant for them.
In addition, perceived job characteristics influenced user adoption. As for the nurses at Reinier de Graaf, the characteristics of their job that prevented participation were
accompanied by a narrow focus on work and a culture in which work was done at work and not at home. Second, some participants did not perceive the enterprise social network as
part of their job. Instead, it was regarded as something extra. This perception limited their usage of the enterprise social network. Participants indicated they did not have the time and were not willing to make the time for the enterprise social network, because their job had more priority. Active usage would have been at the expense of performing the job.
“Of course I could make time for it. Then my work would move. But I just go do my job” (participant 10).
Personal characteristics
For some employees, characteristics of their job seemed to align well with the enterprise social network. Yet this did not guarantee adoption of the enterprise social network. Personal characteristics such as openness to change affected whether or not participants were willing to embed the enterprise social network into their work practices:
“I guess that [openness to change] is just a part of me. I’m very curious, I’m impatient, and I like change” (participant 5).
Time
Finally, adoption of the enterprise social network took time. ZonMw launched the enterprise social network in April, 2012, Reinier de Graaf in May, 2013 and the municipality of Zeist in November, 2014. Yet the enterprise social network had not been fully embedded in the work practices of employees in any of these organizations. For example, at Reinier de Graaf, some participants were just starting to use the enterprise social network, two years after its implementation:
“Since two weeks, we’ve finished our own website [group] on the intranet” (participant 9).
Conclusion and discussion
The aim of this research is to understand how sensemaking of the enterprise social network within the social context(s) of the organization shapes attitude towards and
participative behavior on the enterprise social network. It has become clear that most
participants make sense of the enterprise social network by applying their existing schema of what an intranet is. This causes a discrepancy between participants’ attitude and behavior. Although the enterprise social network’s potential for community and collaboration is
recognized and valued, in practice it is used as an information source. The application of the existing schema of the previous intranet does not align well with the enterprise social
network. One of the key characteristics of the enterprise social network is user-generated content. When the existing schema is combined with user-generated content, an information overload is the result. This information overload leads to a negative attitude and sometimes even decreases usage. The enterprise social network loses its potential. Although it is not tested in this study, perhaps the information overload and the resulting loss of potential makes embedding the enterprise social network in the work practice difficult. Other identified factors that influence technology adoption are organizational culture, dependence, job characteristics, personal characteristics, and time.
Theoretical implications
The results of this study confirm that a novel event will not lead to sensemaking when an individual believes the event can be understood in terms of existing interpretations; even when this is not the case (Maitlis et al., 2003). Although the enterprise social network
required sensemaking, it did not occur because participants believed it was just another type of intranet and not something fundamentally different. Thus, implementation of an enterprise social network requires organizational change. It is necessary that employees do regard the enterprise social network as something new and that they change their work practices accordingly. This research focused on organizational change from the perspective of
employees, but the results indicate the importance of change management. Managers might have a crucial role in organizational change when employees do not engage in the
organizational change processes themselves. Although this does not necessarily need to be a leading role. Managers might also for example support organizational-wide explicit
conversations as was the case at ZonMw.
These results also confirm that the enterprise social network is not a neutral object, but a social construct (Orlikowski & Hofman, 1997). The technology behind the enterprise social network allows for information sharing, community and collaboration. Yet not only the technology itself, but social dynamics as well influence how the enterprise social network is used. Teams at Reinier de Graaf have developed behavioral norms regarding what is considered to be acceptable and unacceptable behavior on the enterprise social network. Also, there is a subculture of nurses who strongly believe that the enterprise social network is not part of their job. An important value of the municipality of Zeist seems to be freedom, which might explain why its employees desire heterogeneous practices and seem to have an individual orientation towards the enterprise social network. And at ZonMw, explicit
organization-wide conversations on knowledge sharing and the enterprise social network are taking place, through which meaning of the enterprise social network is constructed.
There is partially support for adaptive structuration theory. First, the proposition that an individual’s technology usage is influenced by its needs rather than by the structures of
the technology is confirmed. Second, according to structuration theory, participation on the enterprise social network is shaped by social structures within the organization and at the same time participation redefines these structures. It is argued that when the enterprise social network is introduced, its meaning is shaped more by social structures within the organization. It remains to be seen whether or not over time participation on the enterprise social network will change social structures within the organization. There have been no signs of this in this study, even though ZonMw has launched its enterprise social network three years ago. Perhaps the enterprise social network in theory has the potential of
redefining social structures within the organization, but in practice is used in a functional way. Finally, this study demonstrates the importance of cultural aspects regarding the adoption of technology (Huang et a., 2013). Values such as trust, openness, collaboration and knowledge sharing are often described as essential to the enterprise social network. In addition to these cultural aspects, the results of this study show that communication culture is especially important for the enterprise social network. The enterprise social network requires a shift in the way organizational members think about communication: from communication about results to communication about processes.
Practical implications
The results of this study all come down to one single yet complicated practical advice for managers who wish to implement an enterprise social network within their organization: align the organizational values with the values that underlie the enterprise social network. Make sure that trust, openness, collaboration and knowledge sharing are rooted in the organizational culture before an enterprise social network is implemented. If not, do not expect that an enterprise social network will live up to its potential. Rather, expect that the enterprise social network will function in a similar way as the previous intranet, with the added risk of an information overload.
Before implementing an enterprise social network, managers must consider what they aim for with the enterprise social network. An enterprise social network is a platform for information sharing, community building and collaboration. It is a practical tool to become a networking organization. In addition, the enterprise social network is not an end in itself. It is always a means to an end and managers must consider if it is the right means for the right end.
Managers should determine whether the enterprise social network fits within their organization and with the needs of their employees. The enterprise social network has potential for organizations that consist of communities of practice and communities that are geographically dispersed. But for organizations where the majority of the employees have
limited access to computers, the enterprise social network might not be the most strategic communication tool.
When the enterprise social network is considered to be the appropriate tool to
become a networking organization, the implementation of the enterprise social network must be accompanied by change management. Change management is necessary to make sure that trust, openness, collaboration and knowledge sharing become part of the organizational culture. In addition, there needs to be a shift in the organization’s communication culture. Managers can set the right example by incorporating trust and openness values during the change management process. They should facilitate structures that allow for
self-organization rather than imposing the enterprise social network top-down (Burnes, 2005). Common social activities can contribute to the development of relational aspects such as trust (Cheikrouhou et al., 2011). Managers must also engage in the sensemaking process to prevent that employees interpret the enterprise social network solely as an information source. Explicit organization-wide conversations should be held to give meaning to the enterprise social network and its supporting role within the organization.
Limitations and directions for future research
Qualitative research aims at understanding how individuals give meaning to a social object. The ability to study an object in-depth in its context goes at the expense of the generalizability of the results. The findings in this study are context-bound. Thus, it is not possible to generalize these findings to other contexts. In addition it is even difficult to generalize these findings to the three cases, as only a small number of participants was selected for every case. However, the results do hint at certain themes and factors that emerge when individuals make sense of the implementation of an enterprise social network. The results in this study can therefore function as a starting point for future research into the sensemaking processes that underlie the implementation of an enterprise social network.
A second limitation relates to the differences between the enterprise social networks of the selected cases. This study aimed to find variations between the cases and therefore three different cases were selected. However all three cases had a different enterprise social network. The consequence is that attitude and behavior regarding three different types of enterprise social networks is studied. Although the enterprise social networks have the same underlying values, it might be expected differences in design, features and usability also influence attitude and behavior. Future comparative research should limit the confounding effect of differences in the enterprise social network by studying enterprise social networks that are as similar as possible.
Finally, the in-depth interviews provided insight into participants’ attitude towards and participative behavior on the enterprise social network. It proved more difficult to detect
during these interviews how attitude and behavior were shaped by sensemaking.
Sensemaking is inherently a social process and the complexity of social processes makes it difficult to study sensemaking in interviews. Future research should therefore complement in-depth interviews with observational methods. Preferably, the method of observation would be applied in a longitudinal study. A longitudinal study will give a more thorough understanding of the social sensemaking processes that underlie the development, implementation and adoption of an enterprise social network. In addition, it would shed light on the assumption of structuration theory that participation on the enterprise social network can redefine social structures within the organization. Finally, it might be expected that an enterprise social network will always be the primary communication channel within an organization. But only time will tell whether or not the enterprise social network will live up to the expectations of it becoming a flourishing communication platform for community building, collaboration and knowledge sharing.
References
Allen, J., Jimmieson, N. L., Bordia, P., & Irmer, B. E. (2007). Uncertainty during
organizational change: Managing perceptions through communication. Journal of Change Management, 7(2), 187-210.
Baptista, J., Newell, S., & Currie, W. (2010). Paradoxical effects of institutionalization on the strategic awareness of technology in organisations. Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 19(3), 171-183.
Bennett, J., Owers, M., Pitt, M., & Tucker, M. (2010). Workplace impact of social networking. Property Management, 28(3), 138-148.
Beverly, T. (2010). Real-world intranets in 2010: SWOT analysis. Business Information Review, 27(2), 85-93.
Boerma, H. (2015). Intranet maakt een comeback: Dit zijn de trends van 2015. Retrieved on March 8, 2015 from http://www.frankwatching.com/archive/2015/01/02/intranet-maakt-een-comeback-dit-zijn-de-trends-van-2015/
Burnes, B. (2005). Complexity theories and organizational change. International Journal of Management Reviews, 7(2), 73-90.
Butler, T. (2003). An institutional perspective on developing and implementing intranet- and internet-based information systems. Information Systems Journal, 13(3), 209-231. Cheikrouhou, N., Pouly, M., Huber, C., & Choudhary, A. (2011). An empirical study on
human and information technology aspects in collaborative enterprise networks. Journal of Universal Computer Science, 17(2), 203-223.
