Following our recent piece on Microsoft Teams we’ve come across this great infographic on the differences between Teams and Slack.
Credit to Techwyse
Following our recent piece on Microsoft Teams we’ve come across this great infographic on the differences between Teams and Slack.
Credit to Techwyse
With the release of Stream, organisations need to consider their use of Microsofts incumbent video platform, Office 365 Video. Take a look at my tour of Stream, and read my observations below. Subscribe to our YouTube channel for more.
Im talking about the use of video, for engagement and comms, at the IntraTeam Event Copenhagen in March details at the bottom.
Microsoft introduced Office 365 Video in late 2014; its a much better solution than merely uploading video files to SharePoint libraries, because SharePoint isnt designed to stream video. Office 365 Video allows employees to upload a video and have it converted to the right format automatically. The video can be streamed without needing video player software. Different video channels can be used to host different content, and people can search for videos by using keywords found in the titles, or descriptions of the video, and so on. All very much like an internal YouTube.
This wasnt new technology, as many third party video services were already available that could do these things and more but, importantly, Office 365 Video was a native app and included with the Office 365 Enterprise plans.
Unfortunately, Microsoft were a little slow in rolling out some must have features such as the ability to embed O365 videos in SharePoint pages, or view video from mobile devices. But, those features are now included and its a useful app.
So, with Office 365 video seemingly reaching a point where it was arguably a mature product, Microsoft then surprised everyone by announcing their new video baby Microsoft Stream.
Stream looks a lot like O365 video and Microsoft says that its based on the learnings from O365 video, but its a completely separate product and currently available to try as a preview version.
I notice there are a few things missing though:
No external sharing. Stream doesnt yet have the capability to share your internal videos with external partners. So only people in your organisation will be able to see the content. External sharing is apparently on the road map.
No speech transcription, yet. Now this is also something that the Stream product team are working on. Using speech recognition, Stream will allow you to search for key words that are mentioned in the audio of the video, even if those words arent in the video meta data like the title or description etc.
No editing tools. Trimming, cutting bits out, and adding chapter points is something you should do before upload.
No live streaming. Wouldnt it be great if you could live stream your town hall meeting to colleagues in other countries? Well you cant. At least not yet.
No advanced analytics. You can get some basic stats, like how many times a video has been viewed, but you cant get more detailed information like the percentage of users who watched all the way to the end, and which specific users watched a video.
No approval workflows. Ideally, it would be possible to subject videos to the same publishing processes as policies and SharePoint pages where a person or group of people get to review a draft version of a video before hitting the publish button. Unfortunately, thats not available yet and there is no word on when such a feature might be included.
Microsoft is keen to re-assure existing Office 365 customers that Office 365 Video and Stream will eventually merge and become the same thing probably keeping the features that currently exist in each product. But, should organisations use one, or both platforms right now?
In this blog update from August, Microsoft provided some details on the thinking behind launching a new video platform, and what it means for the future of Office 365 Video. One thing that was mentioned is that Office 365 Video will still see new features arriving in the next few months e.g. being able to tag people in videos. And, importantly, they are committed to automating the migration of existing videos and meta data into the new Stream service.
The main motivation for launching a new product is a desire to offer video services to customers who are not using Office 365. So expect to see Stream as a standalone service as well as integrated in Office 365.
Has video changed the enterprise or had any affect upon the intranet and digital comms?
Im talking about the use of video to inform, engage, and entertain on the 1st of March at the IntraTeam Event Copenhagen (surely one the largest digital workplace conferences in Europe).
Ill tackle the technical difficulties, and just what makes a good video.
Check the three-day programme; its well worth a flight.
Connect with me on LinkedIn and Twitter I like talking about SharePoint, intranets, and video.
We want the intranet to be the one stop shop, you say, not entirely comfortable with that phrase, we want a single source of truth.
But, not everyone likes to use the intranet, you say, we have to rely on mass emails for really important things.
Defining whats really important can be hard, especially during business change, and when there are a lot of business critical updates.
Frankly, by sending email newsletters of news that’s already appeared on the intranet were training people to expect communications to be spoon-fed to them, instead of enabling individuals to find the news that is actually relevant to them. Were demonstrating that if something is supposedly important, well email them. Were relying on push comms and relegating pull comms to, what? The canteen menu?
As the Intranetizens ironic article says:
Creating cast-iron reasons for someone to visit your intranet is a brilliant plan but please, undo your work by creating email digests of the same.
I remember being told that Virgin Trains would send a dozen emails to staff every day, before they got their Yammer ESN sorted. Is it ever right to send 60 emails a week to everyone in your company? Only central governance, supported by appropriate tools, can quash such a deluge.
Enter the weekly / twice-monthly e-newsletter. The newsletter promises stakeholders that their news will reach people, and persuades them not to send an all employee email.
More and more companies are ditching the standard text-only mass email and plumping for a reader-friendly magazine style newsletter. But Outlook can only cope with so much, and so internal comms focused services like Newsweaver and Bananatag provide a better look and feel, and importantly, metrics on open rate and click rate.
In general, newsletters can drive traffic to the intranet, and so that has to be a good thing. No need to write hundreds of words in a newsletter when a summary and link to the intranet article will do.
However, there are intranets out there that dont offer easy ways to schedule and manage news, that don’t offer blogs or social interaction, and where staff find it impossible (for whatever reason) to remember their log-on details.
So some newsletters end up presenting all the info maybe even in secondary newsletter pages rather than linking to the intranet. So heres the tension. We train people to expect all information to be sent to them, as if they are passive recipients of company sanctioned information, and we train people to avoid seeking information on the intranet. Then we blame the intranet for being a poor platform.
Of course, your intranet in its current form might well be a poor platform, but thats another matter (we build good intranets, by the way).
Reaching the right audience (rather than always ‘everyone’)
This is all about multi-channel internal communication; the intranet isnt one single channel the home page is only one way to reach people. Theres also the many professional and interest-based communities that the intranet should support, the enterprise social network, and blogs (that provide more personal, contextual views of the official news).
No one channel or platform can reach 100% of staff 100% of the time the key is to go where your audiences already are. The communities within your enterprise social network and intranet provide rich contact points, and your senior people should be genuinely engaged.
The intranet can target news at specific audiences like people within HR, or people working in Manchester as opposed to London. Audience targeting vastly reduces the noise and the information overload that people suffer. The home page does not have to be the same experience for every member of staff when news, views, and updates are perfectly relevant, people learn to trust the intranet.
Your strategic objective to keep the right people involved with the right topics must remain your focus, rather than the importance of the channel, but you have to match the channel to the message to the audience.
Newsletters should be part of the mix, and should signpost people to more information. Its problematic when newsletters hoard information inside themselves, because details often change, and emails can be difficult to reference in the future. News articles on the intranet, and reference pages, can be updated and shared across other channels. Yesterday’s newsletter is, well, yesterday’s news.
Most comms people want an appropriate channel mix, covering different audiences with mobile intranet access, apps, emails, text messages, and social, but surely we all benefit from reduced email interruptions and a trustworthy intranet.
Test out your intranet knowledge with our Christmas crossword. Download the PDF, print it out, complete the crossword and email it to dhawtrey@contentformula.com for your chance to win a bottle of Champagne! We will pick a winner from a hat on the 23rd December and announce it in our January newsletter. If you win you’ll hear about it before Christmas. Good luck!
Bots. Yet another technology buzzword that seems to be on peoples lips in recent months. The volume is getting louder and louder. Its tempting to ignore it, at least until the hype has passed and more sensible, grounded thinking starts to emerge. Think about Big Data – the hype around that was phenomenal and yet in reality it has still to make any difference to most businesses. However, with bots and in particular, intranet bots, I can think of three big reasons why intranet managers should sit up and pay attention now:
The first reason is the productivity gains offered by bots. At work we all waste time on tiresome tasks which have nothing to do with our reasons for being there. Booking meetings, travel, booking holiday, submitting expenses, etc. are things that can be fairly easily automated for bots to carry out. APIs and connectors to HR systems like Workday will make the job even easier and will offer a rich array of tasks to automate. If you want to see a list of ideas of of how bots can save time and money in the workplace I recommend Intranetizens post on 8 intranet bots that should exist. Also check out James Robertsons recent post containing crowdsourced ideas when he asked an audience the blue-sky question, imagine you can only talk to your digital workplace, what would you want to ask it?
Intranet managers understand that if you want to change habits and drive adoption of your intranet, you need to make life easier for employees. But as we all know building bulletproof user interfaces is difficult because users are an unpredictable bunch. They tend not to think in the same ordered way as intranet managers. Ive sat in intranet usability workshops and seen users demonstrate thought patterns that are really quite random if not totally chaotic, reducing the finest information architecture to an alien language. Bots give us a great opportunity to simplify interface design because they typically use just a straightforward chat interface. Most people are familiar with Facebook messenger, Skype or Whatsapp. The trick in good bot design will be anticipating the right terms and vocabularies that users will no doubt throw at the poor bot. Get me that deck I sent to Bill the other day.
The third reason why I believe intranet bots are likely to make a big and fairly quick impact in the digital workplace is because bot technology is not that complex to use and is really quite accessible. You can build your own bot in minutes by playing with some of the frameworks developed by the big software vendors. Whats more, some of these are free. If you have just half a head for code try using the Microsoft Bot Framework. If coding is not your thing then you can still play around at building a virtual agent using IBM’s Watson Bluemix demo. With many intranet technologies companies typically have to dig deep into their pockets not only to buy expensive software and hardware but also to fund big implementation projects. New technology projects are intimidating because they can feel rather like a big bang. The great thing about bots is that they lend themselves to be built in an iterative way. You dont have to boil the ocean. Once you have a bot framework set up you can start bot-ifying’ individual processes and tasks in the workplace one-by-one. This iterative approach feels inherently less risky to intranet managers and produces lots of quick wins to spur them on.
So whats the next step to accelerate your journey into bots? Based on my last paragraph it makes sense to just dip your toe in the water. Start with one of your organisation’s simpler processes or common tasks and try to bot-ify it. Dont get too bogged down in technology choice at this stage. Think of it more as a proof of concept. Were itching to work on a proper bot project so you could give us a call too 😉
Watch John Scott, one of our SharePoint and intranet experts, delivering his keynote at the Intranet Now conference, or read through the narrative. The slides are shared at the bottom.
There are two rules when conducting user research:
Rule number one: Listen to your users
Rule number two: Dont listen to your users
Let me explain…
Its 1898 and we are in New York City. The Empire State Building doesnt exist there are skyscrapers, but they are only about nine stories high. The Brooklyn bridge has already been open for 15 years and there are around 1.5 million inhabitants. But there are also a lot of something else: Horses! About 150,000 of them, in fact – practically filling the streets, ferrying people from A to B, transporting various goods up and down.
But not everyones happy with the way things are, and complaints have been coming from a few quarters. So the town planner starts doing some research.
He begins by asking a local businessman who owns a transport company.
Whats the problem? he asks
I want faster horses, says the business man
Right, right – faster horses
Next he speaks to a milkman.
I want bigger horses, to pull more milk, says the milkman
Ok, bigger horses…
Then he asks a road cleaner.
I want horses that dont shit, says the road cleaner
Hmmm, no… defecation… ok
Next the planner speaks to a shopkeeper
I want cows
Cows? Ok, well we have cows available, but horses are kinda… better? … well ok, cows
Finally, he had to wait a couple of months for an appointment, but he visits the Mayors office
I want higher taxes on horses, exclaims the mayor
Great suggestion, My Mayor!
So, the planner went away and prepared his recommendations. And this is what he came up with…
So, what did the planner learn from this research exercise:
And the next time the planner remembered not to ask people what they want but to ask them about what what they do and the issues they face and then understand these things in detail!
What we really want to do during user research is get to know them. Of course, I dont mean their dogs name and their favourite colour, but what they do and how they do it.
There are a lot of ways to conduct user research. Each have their own merits and are more or less useful in different scenarios. But, Im going to focus on the ones that we really must do and do well. These are the three techniques you should pick that will get you the most useful info for your average corporate intranet project. By average I mean the kind of intranet that covers a broad range of content and functionality. If you are looking at more specific scenarios, like a just-in-time buying portal for manufacturers, then other research techniques may be more important.
Interviews are good because they are efficient. You get an opportunity to really interrogate someone for around an hour and get all sorts of useful info. But its important to follow the correct line of enquiry, otherwise you end up with insights like I want horses that dont shit.
The point of interviews is to understand how different people in the business work. What are their common tasks, who do they interact with and how, what are the barriers that they come across? One of the things that you get from interviews is visibility of tasks or processes that are imperfect, and could be improved by an intranet. Another thing is a gradual build up of knowledge about the way the company works behind the scenes a general sense/awareness that is almost subconscious. Thirdly, a by-product of doing interviews is that you can make people feel involved and consulted this can have a powerful effect on adoption. Especially if you can bring the interviewees back in on the project at a later point.
Its tempting to select people who you know are interested or already heavily engaged with the intranet or other digital tools. You can select one or two or these people, but the main priority should be to:
Make sure youve got: Some who are junior, some who are middle management, some who are senior; Administrators, line of business workers; office based, field based, shop floor based; UK, France; Region role, country role etc. But that might still only be 10-20 users.
You wont prove them wrong on the interview, but you can do it in the longer term by really listening to their problems and finding a way to fix them. Its a win win to interview these detractors. At worst you wont fix their problems, but will at least make them feel consulted. At best, you will turn them in to a believer
When interviewing people, here are some things you should do, and things you should avoid:
Do:
Dont:
And, just to emphasise, the most important part of all of this:
Identify the tasks they complete frequently, or interactions that they have regularly.
And ask them to quantify these actions. How many times a day, how long does it take. And what value does it represent to the business?
In the interviews, we asked people about regular tasks and interactions. Task analysis is about going into the detail of those tasks. Mapping them out and hopefully identifying parts that can be made more efficient or easier.
To begin, we need to make a list of the tasks and interactions that came up across all of the interviews.
Then prioritise them based on which ones have a high frequency but also take a long time and what level of impact it has on the business. Theres no formula that I have for this. Just a general judgement on where it would have the biggest impact if the process was improved. You can also get a better sense of this by talking to managers and department heads Well talk about that more later.
Once you have that list, you can contact the interviewees again and set up a session with them to go through the tasks in more detail.
Ideally, you should organize a time when you can actually sit with the person as they perform the task essentially shadowing them. Just as if you were being trained to do the same job.
As you are doing this, make notes about what they do and the decisions they are making as they do it. Ask them to think out loud as much as possible. You want to understand the process, but also what they are thinking. You dont want to end up just documenting what the existing system does.
Heres an example process this is real, but the company name isnt:
Pipe Dreams is an engineering company that dig up roads and fix gas and water pipes all over the country
After youve gathered this info, turn your notes into a flow diagram. Like this diagram, below.
Sometimes a task or interaction wont happen within one continuous time frame. The user might start the task on one day and complete the next step a week later say, after input from another party if this is the case then just arrange to attend each step in the process, including the ones that involve someone else. If you cant be there physically then just jump on a call and use screen share software.
What you will end up with is a series of flow diagrams that show the process users go through to complete tasks or interactions. You also have an idea of how long each task and sub tasks take and the business impact of inefficiencies.
From this you can accurately identify problems that the user faces, or inefficiencies in the process. This is the basis for being able to come up with solutions that actually address real business issues.
What weve focused on so far is individual users and their tasks. But, we also want to get the bigger picture the view from the management level and above. This is important for a few reasons:
However, with these groups its not just about conducting user research. This is an opportunity to give them visibility of what other organisations do, what best practice looks like and the kind of things that are possible. Doing this will also help with their buy-in something that will be important throughout your research as well as the implementation phases.
A good structure for a stakeholder workshop is:
Depending on the size and make up of the business, and the scope of the intranet, it might be necessary to run several stakeholder workshop sessions. For example, one might be with heads of department, another might be with sales managers etc. Ideally you want to get good coverage across your research methods in terms of the functions, seniority, location etc of the roles.
Theres a problem with a lot of organisations in the way they approach intranets. The big bang cycle of intranet projects and launches. Do some research, build an intranet, wait 5 years, do it again.
The ideal way to break this cycle is to do user research continually. This is always the first step, so just make a start and get things moving. As an intranet manager, you are the person best equipped to start the ball rolling. There are always new people to talk to and changes to process or legislation to understand and optimize for The organisation will continue to evolve.
Continually having outputs and recommendations from user research is like a giant cattle prod for continuous development and evolution of intranets.
Its true that time or budget constraints may limit what can be done. However, a small amount of the right research is better than none. And also, think of it this way, investing in research leads to improvements being made in areas that actually matter where most can be gained. So, it really is a wise investment of an intranet teams time and budget.
But its easy to fall into the trap of simply evaluating the current intranet. Thats worthwhile too, but dont just ask people how they feel about the existing intranet. Pretend it doesnt exist and ask them about what they do.
Before you can start giving users what they need, you have to convince other people to back you. This is especially true of the HiPPO.
The HiPPO is The Highest Paid Persons Opinion.
The HiPPO can derail you if you let it.
There can be very strong views about what the intranet should and shouldnt do, and worse HOW it should do it (like, down to the level of what the buttons should look like). But, as clever as they may be, you have done the research and, on this subject at least, you know more! You are in a better position to advise on which decisions should be made and why. I dont suggest that you point that out, but I do suggest that you emit this message in the way that you present your ideas.
Getting the HiPPO onboard with your recommendations as well as other key stakeholders – is absolutely vital. The intranet will rely on their support for funding, but also promotion and culture shift.
When its time to approach the senior stakeholders, cap in hand, you should insist on a face to face meeting / presentation.
If you really cant get face time and have to submit a report, consider doing it as a set of presentation slides. Not a rambling word doc. Include the lengthy notes and analysis as appendices only.
The key thing is to present the findings from the user research in a way that tells a story take them on a journey through the research, but give them the highlights only.
If you can have a prep session with stakeholders individually and sound them out on some of the information you will present. This will allow you to prepare for any challenges. Just one stakeholder challenging you on one small part of your report, and having no response, can change everyone elses perspective on your credibility.
And, remember the Mayor of New York City? He was focused on the bottom line. So make an effort to include projections on money saved or earned. This can be difficult. However, it doesnt have to be a water tight forecast. For example, you can highlight some common processes uncovered during the research. Identify how long they take on average, and how many people do them. Assign a cost to that. Then give an estimate for how long the process will take with the improvements you are recommending. Viola a monetary figure that may convince them. And, also, a KPI measure how long it does take people as part of the testing and you know if you are achieving the target.
The annual Intranet Now conference took place on Friday 30th September 2016 in London. Run by our very own Wedge Black (@Wedge) and Brian Lamb (@blamb) and sponsored by Content Formula, Intranet Now is in its third year. It’s a great show with some really inspirational speakers and a down-to-earth but passionate crowd. Here are some tweets by us and by others that we thought you might find interesting.
The user experience changes dramatically when you come to work @IntranetNow#intranetpic.twitter.com/KxhnG39xR8
— ContentFormula (@ContentFormula) September 30, 2016
We were very glad to have @JohnRobertScott do the opening keynote for #IntranetNow. pic.twitter.com/uPldN2PkbJ
— IntranetNow (@IntranetNow) October 3, 2016
Hallelujah! The Long WOW. A lovely way of saying it. Don’t “launch your #intranet” in a Big Bang. Roll it out iteratively #IntranetNow
— Andrew Hesselden (@andrewhesselden) September 30, 2016
I once saw a company who made their collaboration tool so secure it cost more to train users than it saved in productivity #IntranetNow
— James Dellow (@chieftech) September 30, 2016
Giving employees access to intranet for 30 days before they start. Good idea. #IntranetNow
— Jonathan Phillips (@DigitalJonathan) September 30, 2016
CEO uses #Yammer and so everyone uses Yammer @ed_garcez on @CityWestminster #intranetnow #esn #ChangeManagement
— ContentFormula (@ContentFormula) September 30, 2016
BTW there is a great series of blog posts from @SWOOPAnalytics about the role of a CEO in a successful #yammer network #IntranetNow
— James Dellow (@chieftech) September 30, 2016
‘I am sorry but I am too busy to use people finder’ -title of CEO’s blog post helps drive adoption of new #intranet tool #IntranetNow
— ContentFormula (@ContentFormula) September 30, 2016
who uses #sharepoint at #IntranetNow ? 80% of the room raises hand @AGilleran #intranet
— ContentFormula (@ContentFormula) September 30, 2016
Our users don’t want news at the top @ernstdecsey @UNICEF #intranet #IntranetNow
— ContentFormula (@ContentFormula) September 30, 2016
We are listening intently to a screen reader. #accessibility #IntranetNow pic.twitter.com/iRu9DlSPHs
— Wedge (@Wedge) September 30, 2016
It’s easy to tick the #accessibility compliance box but have you tried your #intranet on a screen reader? @paulzimmerman #intranetnow
— ContentFormula (@ContentFormula) September 30, 2016
We want a $1bn product – how’s that for a #Yammer objective? @Shell @kevinaustin1980 #IntranetNow #intranet #internalcomms
— ContentFormula (@ContentFormula) September 30, 2016
What’s the value of communications? New CEOs can ask tough questions @jenniwheller #intranet @IntranetNow
— ContentFormula (@ContentFormula) September 30, 2016
Think of #internalcomms as efficiency not engagement…that’s how you put a value on it @jenniwheller @IntranetNow #intranet
— ContentFormula (@ContentFormula) September 30, 2016
I don’t like the new #intranet but will get used 2 it and then you’ll change it again – life as an intranet user @hannakarppi @IntranetNow
— ContentFormula (@ContentFormula) September 30, 2016
Superb #intranetnow event. It’s become a ‘must attend’ for the intranet community. Met a lot of new people and came away with two lightbulbs
— Martin White (@IntranetFocus) September 30, 2016
Faceted navigation is part of every major intranet search engine. In SharePoint, this feature is called Refiners, and the navigation panels name is Refinement Panel. It is responsible for allowing the users to access the search results filtered and organised according to a pre-defined classification system.
To create refiners on a SharePoint intranet (on-premises or online), there are several steps to follow. In this blog post, Im summarising these practical steps and also provide best practices.
Search refiners are always discrete properties of the content presented as search results. First, they can be metadata in the source system, which can be used as is. For example, the author of a document, project ID, etc.
In other cases, we have to prepare the metadata, by using an auto-classification system, for example. In this case, the metadata we need in search is not available in the source system, we have to extract it from the content. The extraction of the metadata can be done by a specific dictionary, or according to pre-defined rules. For example, location info, the topic of a document, etc. Which is not available as metadata in the source system but implicit included in the content.
Once the metadata is available (either as is, or generated automatically), we have to consider if any normalisation is needed. Normalisation might be required in the following cases:
Of course, these transformations might be combined as well. In SharePoint though, the capabilities are limited. Although we have a feature called entity extraction, this has a very limited functionality. In the majority of use cases, we need additional, third party solutions.
Content Metadata
Content Metadata is the set of properties, which the content has in the Source System (implicit or explicit). In most cases, different systems (and subsystems) have different set of properties, therefore normalising and unifying them is a critical step in every Enterprise Search implementation.
Search Metadata
Search Metadata is defined in the Search Schema, and consists of Crawled Properties and Managed Properties (see below). Search Metadata is essential for every Search Application, as it describes the results, can be used for filtering and sorting the results, refiners, and also display on the Result Set or Hover Panel.
Crawled Property
Crawled Properties are the representations of the Content Metadata in SharePoint and Office 365 Search Schema.
Managed Property
Managed Properties are the Search Properties which can be used on the User Interface, and in Search Applications. To define where to get their values from, they have to be mapped to the proper Crawled Properties.
Once the metadata is prepared and added to the search index, we can start using it on the user interface. In SharePoint, Refinement Panel is a Web Part available out-of-the-box, which can be customised in an easy way.
The Refinement Panel We Part has various data types to display as refiners (facets): numbers, text values as well as dates. Some configuration can be done in Display Templates, which describes how the refiners have to be displayed. For example, whether to display the item counts or not (see https://searchexplained.com/refiners-in-sharepoint-2013-search/).
We can also create (or purchase) custom developed refiners for advanced scenarios. For example, when we need charts or maps to be used as refiners, but also to create refiner hierarchies (for example, based on a taxonomy).
When planning refiners for faceted navigation, the primary thing to keep an eye on has to be the user needs and requirements. Driven by them, we have to plan the properties accordingly, as well as the user experience. In several cases, we have to use the out-of-the-box capabilities, which are powerful although limited. In other cases, its possible to extend these capabilities with custom and/or 3rd party tools, therefore, we have more freedom during the planning phase.
Whatever your situation is, planning refiners has to be a thorough process, as it is a major part of the overall user experience.