KAREN EYRE EPORTFOLIO



4304030-125984000Solution EvaluationA project to evaluate various solutions for a distributed team that needs to communicate, collaborate and share files.Unit CodeIFN612Unit TitleEmerging Technologies for Information PracticeStudentsDE PALO, Maria Antonia (Toni) (N9915281)DUNN, Ryan (N9886427)EYRE, Karen (N9758887)Due DateSunday, 10 June 2018Statement of OriginalityBy submitting this assignment, we are aware of the University rule that students must not act in a manner which constitutes academic dishonesty, as stated and explained in the QUT Manual of Policies and Procedures. We confirm that this work represents our effort; we have viewed the final version and it does not contain plagiarised material.Student NumberNameSignatureN9915281DE PALO,ToniN9886427DUNN,RyanN9758887EYRE,KarenExecutive SummaryKey FindingsIn order to enhance virtual team effectiveness and efficiency whilst collaborating on group projects in offices across Australia, the ATO needs to select a technology which focuses on communication, file sharing and collaborative and private spaces.Based upon the identified users, the solution must meet the following organisational and user requirements:Organisational RequirementsGroup conferencing, instant messaging and private forum platforms.Shared workspaces, calendars and to-do lists.Online meeting tools (visual and auditory).Information and content sharing, such as text, photographs or web displays.Negotiating, problem solving and team decision making.Privacy and security.User RequirementsSimplicity/IntuitivenessReliability Accessibility SecuritySpeed and Synchronicity Real or Near Time DataRecommendationRKT Consultants have evaluated eight market-leading communication and collaboration technologies. Based upon the ATO’s specific needs, it is recommended that Office 365 be selected as the recommended software. Extending the existing Microsoft Office enterprise installation to Office 365 will provide all required functionally (though additional, modular applications) at a marginal cost impact. Further, as Microsoft Office software is already used throughout the ATO, Office 365 will provide a familiar interface with which users should become quickly accustomed.Contents TOC \o "1-2" Introduction PAGEREF _Toc516423754 \h 1Background PAGEREF _Toc516423755 \h 2Context PAGEREF _Toc516423756 \h 2Problem Statement PAGEREF _Toc516423757 \h 3Implications PAGEREF _Toc516423758 \h 4Organisational Requirements PAGEREF _Toc516423759 \h 4User Requirements PAGEREF _Toc516423760 \h 5Discussion PAGEREF _Toc516423761 \h 6Collaboration PAGEREF _Toc516423762 \h 6Communication PAGEREF _Toc516423763 \h 9File Sharing PAGEREF _Toc516423764 \h 11Recommendation PAGEREF _Toc516423765 \h 13Conclusion PAGEREF _Toc516423766 \h 15References PAGEREF _Toc516423767 \h iAppendix A: User Persona 1 PAGEREF _Toc516423768 \h ivAppendix B: User Persona 2 PAGEREF _Toc516423769 \h vAppendix C: User Persona 3 PAGEREF _Toc516423770 \h viIntroductionNorbert Wiener (1988) stated that “we have modified our environment so radically that we must modify ourselves in order to exist in the new environment.” Technology, talent acquisition and the emergence of a global economy (Lepsinger & DeRosa, 2010) has changed the economic landscape. Globalisation has led to business operations acting as a homogenous worldwide market (Usmani, Hassan & Mahmood, 2017) with employees for these businesses no longer being confined to one geographical location. The removal of these geographic boundaries and the continuous emergence of new technology supporting this new environment has created new challenges for organisations. Creating and maintaining an efficient team now requires its own strategy underpinned by technology (Lepsinger & DeRosa, 2010).This report will provide evaluation, comparisons and recommendations about suitable technology that support the organisation in its daily activities. The report takes into consideration the dispersed workforce, emerging technologies and the specific areas of reduced efficiency and, through in-depth analysis, will provide a recommendation that will focus on:CommunicationFile SharingCollaborative and Private SpacesWhilst the report will discuss the analysis and comparison of technology in relation to the above focus areas, the overall recommendation will look at the most comprehensive and suitable solutions and compare these against a more singular solution. This report will provide options for consideration based on best practice, expandability and workforce capability. Financial conditions were considered in the evaluations however the organisation did not set a specified limit. Notwithstanding the unlimited budget and considering the organisation is a government agency, recommendations provided have considered the short and long term financial implications ensuing the technology recommended is sustainable and financially viable under public scrutiny.BackgroundContextRKT Consultants have been briefed to offer an inexpensive technology solution for trial by the Australian Taxation Office (“ATO”), who want to enhance virtual team effectiveness and efficiency whilst collaborating on group projects in offices across Australia.The project trial group will initially involve a distributed team of three members, located in Brisbane, Newcastle and Adelaide.Each team member has their own portfolio of work:Project Sponsor (located in Newcastle), responsible for high level strategy alignment, executive presentations, liaison with other dependant areas (IT as infrastructure is important in this project). Sponsor is also responsible for the management of the team, its deliverables and its cohesion.Project Coordinator (located in Brisbane), responsible for the project reporting, governance and documentation of the project. Secretariat for the Executive Level working group where all project stakeholders provide input and direction.Product Owner (located in Adelaide) responsible for working with the business to understand the problem, develop a set of corporately aligned high level stakeholder requirements and liaise with developers to build an appropriate solution. The Product owner refines the stakeholder requirements and in collaboration with multi-functional delivery teams, provide direction, guidance and governance on the product development.RKT Consultants have conducted an initial audit of the group and found the following:Each member has been provided with a desktop and an iPad by the ATO.Each member has remote virtual access, virtual private network (VPN) to the system to enable log in for any device and any location. This network is not always stable and access may be difficult during peak hours.Not every member has web camera on desktop (however, each iPad has a web camera).Each member is having many meetings in isolation from the team. As such, there is currently no effective way to communicate decisions, blockers or areas of concern that may impact others in the team.Teams are Agile and thereby adopt the practices and ceremonies of this methodology and require a visual capture of work on hand and its flow through.Security is imperative and any cloud based program will not allow tax file numbers or other client information to be stored.Software currently provided on company devices is Microsoft Window 10, Yammer through Office 365, and some areas have Jira and Confluence by Altassian.Problem StatementDuFrene & Lehman (2016) found that “workers spend approximately 80 percent of their time working collaboratively, often across 10 or more virtual teams” (p.8). Whilst the benefits of this mode of working are cost-saving and enable business to draw upon specialised labour, distributed teams across the world may face problems regarding culture and language barriers as well as time zone variations; on a technical level, they also need technology solutions that can help them collaborate efficiently and effectively.Efficiency problems may also be faced due to user perceptions about communication technology; Laitinen & Valo (2018) caution “that team members with high levels of communication technology anxiety can sometimes participate less, send fewer task-oriented messages, introduce fewer novel topics, and are even rated more poorly by other team members” (p.13). As such, it is crucial to understand the wants and needs of the distributed team members who will be using the communication technology, as well as the operational goals of the panies often base their decision making for communication use based on their immediate needs, what they have heard about (usually from marketing) or are already familiar with using. Usmani, Hassan & Mahmood (2017, p. 11) caution against rushing into a communication software solution and note some of the challenges faced when selecting tools for a distributed environment, being:Selection of inappropriate communication tools (synchronous and asynchronous).Problems with adopting and adjusting to suitable tools. Lack of coverage of such tools. Lack of data integration among different tools. Security and privacy issues. Lack of familiarity of tools appropriate for GSD environment.Lack of progress tracking.ImplicationsUsmani, Hassan & Mahmood (2017) note that for business “in most cases there is no proper procedure to select the best tool for the project” (p.16). Additionally, teams may be resistant to change.RKT Consultants will need to “evaluate technology on the communication trifecta: simplicity, reliability, and accessibility” (DuFrene & Lehman, 2016; p.26). Further, the technology solution “should allow teams members to get connected easily without complex setup time and steep learning curves, enable members to send messages [safely and securely] to their intended target, and provide accessibility to the entire team regardless of location and time zone. Collaborative technology must also archive messages for timely retrieval” (ibid).Organisational RequirementsDistributed teams need technology solutions for the following communication needs:Group conferencing, instant messaging and private forum platforms.Shared workspaces, calendars and to-do lists.Online meeting tools (visual and auditory).Information and content sharing, such as text, photographs or web displays.Negotiating, problem solving and team decision making.Privacy and security.Laitinen & Valo, (2018), further note that virtual communication platforms that offer these solutions assist efficiency and efficacy in a distributed team “because they provide auditory and/or visual connections between team members” (p.13). Given that team members are also working across geographical and time differences, the platform must also provide options for synchronous and asynchronous communication.User RequirementsUsing three persona profiles (refer to Appendix A, B and C for the Persona Posters of selected users) that are indicative of the users within the team the following requirements and preferences will form the basis for the recommendation and drive the evaluation to find the ‘best fit’:Simplicity/IntuitivenessReliability Accessibility SecuritySpeed and Synchronicity Real or Near Time DataDiscussionCollaborationAccording to the Oxford dictionary (Oxford University Press, 2018) collaboration is the action of working in collaboration with others to produce something. Whilst the definition remains unaltered the ‘action’ has transformed over the years as organisations turn to teams with multiple diverse factors including geography, cultural and generational attitudes (Bj?rn & Ngwenyama, 2009) and as such are required to use Information and Communication Technology (ICT) as the primary mode for interaction (Chuboda et. al., 2005). This practice reduces a teams’ ability to develop a shared meaning of context, the notion of common ground and a sense of normality which is usually built over time and personal interactions (Cramton, 2001 and Bj?rn, & Ngwenyama, 2009).This section of the report will provide an overview of existing technologies which embrace the collaboration requirements of the virtual team and will look to provide recommendations that best manage the multi-generational and temporal aspect of the team. Using the aforementioned personas as a user profile highlighting their needs and preferences, the following tools have been explored for consideration.As with any research, it is imperative to understand the problem and address the need. The problem statement highlighted the need for the team to have the following collaborative features:Synchronous collaboration – real time and immediate.Privacy and security – whole team or individual use.Visible management – use of Agile practices requires visual ‘kanban’ or work flow management tool that is viewable, and updatable. Must provide an audit trail.Accessible – multi device access with individual sign in details for traceability.Expandable – given the team numbers increase and decrease depending on the status of work, the need to add and reduce team members from the tool is imperative.Intuitive and easy to use –temporal nature of team requires tool to be ‘easy’ to use and intuitive enough to require limited pre-training.Given these specific user requirements and preferences, the following top-rated collaboration tools were evaluated (Carter, 2017 and Finance Online, 2018, Capterra Inc. n.d. and GetApp, 2018).The tables on the next page highlights collaboration that either meet the user requirements or take into consideration software and licenses already available within the organisation (denoted with an asterisk). Given that the pilot to implement new and best fit technology is tailored to the individual needs of a small group, the organisation itself is a large corporate enterprise. A best practice approach is to work in with natural and existing systems where possible rather than using bespoke technology to achieve the required future state.At first glance, the tables would indicate the Same Page as the most suitable technology to meet all the mandatory criteria needs of the users. This software is available on multiple devices, is cloud based and thereby portable. It allows for both collaboration through brainstorming and whiteboard functionality however also provides the users the private spaces though the audio / video conferencing features accompanied by a chat feature. The descriptions highlight the ability for expandability in users and there appears to be adequate support available. Security and privacy requirements would need to be investigated; however, given that it is a space for collaboration and synchronous knowledge sharing and not file storage, it meets the overall needs of the users.Other technologies meet the users brief however there are trade-offs in functionality and access that will need to be considered in the recommendations. Whilst the appetite of the team is known, the drivers of the organisation would need to be considered. The above table does highlight Yammer as not being a suitable option even though it is currently used by other areas of the organisation. This does highlight and reinforce the need to provide the team with a tool that specifically promotes group collaboration. A key factor to consider are the integration points with technology already in use so as to maximise on agreements such as licensing and subscriptions already in place. Additionally, it can be expected that a system is already in use all security and privacy requirements have also been considered and meet the standards of the organisation.In summary, whilst Same Page may appear to be the most appropriate tool it does not integrate with some of the organisation’s key applications such as Microsoft Outlook, though it does integrate with Jira which is quickly becoming a core application within the ATO.Table SEQ Table \* ARABIC 1: Comparison of Must Have RequirementsFeatureAsanaConfluence*Same PageTrello*Go MeetingOffice 365Yammer*Cicso Spark/WebEx*ScalabilityExpandable to EnterpriseDevice and PlatformCloudWindowsMacMobileiOSAndroidFeaturesCooperative WritingBrainstormingSynchronous EditingDiscussion BoardsAudio/VideoChat/MessagingIntegration with Other AppsTotal Number of Apps andSelected Apps used by ATO1385421187553307139OfficeOneDriveJiraOutlookSharePtJiraTrelloOneDriveJiraGoogleJiraGoogleOfficeOneDriveSharePtOfficeOneDriveSharePtOutlookSupportPhoneOnlineKnowledge BaseVideoTrainingOptionsDocsWebinarDocsWebinarDocsWebinarOnlineDocsOnlineOn-SiteAllDocsOnlineAllSecurityAuthenticationMultiMultiSingleMultiUnknownMultiAdminUnknownTable SEQ Table \* ARABIC 2: Comparison of Nice to Have RequirementsFeatureAsanaConfluence*Same PageTrello*Go MeetingOffice 365Yammer*Cicso Spark/WebEx*Document ManagementProject ManagementTask ManagementContent ManagementVersion ControlCommunicationDistributed team communication is predominately technology-mediated, and appropriate communication technologies as well as ways to use technology are essential for successful virtual team interaction (Laitinen & Valo, 2018). R?cker, (2012) notes that contemporary workforces are “communication intensive... [team members] have many, mostly informal, interactions with multiple individuals during the day in order to scan their environment, to exchange information, and to request or provide advice... Besides the goal-oriented exchange of task-related information, communication within the workplace serves also social purposes... the interpersonal exchange of messages, thoughts, and feelings, which is a compelling requirement for people working in teams” (p.1). Team communication can be either formal or informal, which have particular characteristics (Figure 1) that need to be considered when offering a technology solution.Figure SEQ Figure \* ARABIC 1: Communication Types and Characteristics for Consideration (R?cker, 2012)Both formal and informal communication are integral to collaboration, team efficiency and achieving task outcomes. Mabon (2017) notes that team efficiency is enhanced with media rich communication: “a media’s ability to communicate shared meaning and process information without distortion. Low richness referred to communication that takes place without physical presence; lacking social and visual cues such as body language and gestures” (p.18).Distributed teams also require both synchronous and asynchronous communication technology, to accommodate their differences in time and whether their communication need is formal or informal. Figure 2 outlines the media richness of communication methods required by the distributed team to ensure their communication is fit for purpose.Figure SEQ Figure \* ARABIC 2: Methods for Communication in Virtual EnvironmentsTo deliver on this theory, the proposed technology should deliver a communication solution like chat, voice conversation or video conferencing. In Table 1, communication is included in the Discussion Boards, Audio/Video and Chat/Messaging features. Of the selected technologies, only Same Page, Trello and Office 365 provide support for all three.File SharingWhilst briefly considered alongside other ‘must have’ requirements above, the nature of the work completed at the ATO, combined with the fact the organisation has a large physical presence in multiple different locations, mean that file sharing is a particularly critical functionality which ought to be given more weight when selecting a collaboration software solution. Accordingly, the following section will look at the file sharing capabilities of selected software in more details. In the interests of brevity, this section will only evaluate those solutions which substantially meet the ‘must have’ requirements presented above; solutions which fail to deliver two or more mandatory features will be excluded. Additionally, as the ATO recognises the importance of collaboration (considered in more detail above), potential solutions which cannot provide synchronous editing will also be excluded. Based on the analysis summarised in Table 1, the discussion here will therefore be limited to the Asana, Same Page and Office 365 platforms.At this point it is also useful to recall that the ATO, like most enterprises, operates a corporate network which already provides authenticated users access to file storage. Each user is provided networked hard-drive capacity for private use, as well as access to a common ‘shared’ drive. Both the user’s private and shared drives are accessible from any terminal connected to the network, either physically (in the office) or (remotely) via the VPN. The folder structure of the shared network storage device closely mirrors the organisational structure, with folder permissions strictly controlled by a user’s approved access group. These groups tend to be hierarchical rather than functional, meaning that sharing documents between cross-functional team is encumbered. Finally, due to the cascading nature of access groups (which if not carefully managed, may inadvertently give a user access to sensitive content beyond what was intended), the security protocols mean that project teams often find it tedious and difficult to navigate the IT requirements to established a ‘shared’ space for project work (not to mention that file sharing with an ad-hoc team is near impossible!). The ATO accordingly need a different solution to support file sharing between cross-functional, project teams.Table 3, on the following page, evaluates the file sharing functionality of each potential solution.Table SEQ Table \* ARABIC 3: File SharingFunctionality of Different TechnologiesFunctionalityAsanaSame PageOffice 365User Interface OS IntegrationWeb-Based AccessDrag-and-DropFolder UploadDocument ManagementCommenting/Mark-UpVersion HistoryData RecoverySharing OptionsShare-by-LinkRead and Read/WriteFolder PermissionsDocument PermissionsMiscellaneousDashboard Statistics Note: Asana and Same Page do not provide file sharing functionality as a native feature of the software; file sharing is facilitated via integration with other applications such as Google Docs or Dropbox.From the table, it is clear that Office 365 is the only technology which provides a native file sharing solution, though both Asana and Same Page can be integrated with other file sharing facilities. Given this, all three solutions can provide adequate functionality to meet ATO business requirements – though the native functionality of Office 365 is an advantage. Any decision should also be based on user requirements. Here the majority of user concerns are objective (i.e. reliability, security, synchronicity etc), with all offerings returning similar results. However, for the subjective/personal user requirements (specifically, simplicity/intuitiveness), comparing the different solutions with each other is difficult. However, RKT Consultants note that ATO staff are already familiar with Microsoft Office applications, thus giving the Office 365 solution a slight advantage in regards to user-friendliness.RecommendationFollowing from the discussion above, RKT Consultants recommends the selection of the Office 365 suite of applications to further support team communication and collaboration. With this solution, the ATO will gain access to a modular software suite, allowing the disparate business areas and diverse project teams to select the solution which is appropriate for their given requirements. Adoption of Office 365 will provide the ATO with the following products:Email Solutions (Outlook or Exchange)Document Creation (Word, Excel, PowerPoint, Sway, Publisher, Visio)Database Tools (Access, SharePoint)Productivity Tools (Planner, Project, To-Do)File Storage (OneDrive)File Sharing (SharePoint)Communication (Teams, Yammer, Skype)Reporting (MyAnalytics)The wide, and at times, overlapping, range of products will provide ATO project teams with options for various needs. For example, in the collaboration space, it may be sufficient for a team to provide informal revisions to a document via the ‘Review’ feature native to Word, or it may be necessary to move to full version control option similar to that provided by SharePoint. Similarly, the teams’ communication need may be that a video enabled meeting is required (via Skype), a troubleshooting Wiki page or discussion board be created (on SharePoint) or that wider stakeholder engagement and involvement be solicited (via Yammer). The power of Office 365 as a solution is that it offers multiple applications, providing different project teams flexibility to select the option which is appropriate for their specific need.From an organisational perspective, Office 365 also brings benefits. First, the user interface for each application is built around the familiar Ribbon menu. It is expected that the similar application design will empower users to quickly adapt to the new tools, improving take-up across the organisation. This familiar design will also enable Office 365 solutions to be adopted with minimal training. The lower costs is also the second major benefit of Office 365. Table 4, on the right, summarises the monthly user licence fee for the considered solutions. In addition to the lower user monthly licence fee, the actual cost to the ATO may be further mitigated by migrating existing Microsoft Office licences to Office 365.Table SEQ Table \* ARABIC 4: Monthly User Licence CostsAsanaSame PageOffice 365$8.33$7.00$6.00ConclusionTo assist the ATO enhance virtual team effectiveness and efficiency whilst collaborating on group projects in offices across Australia, RKT Consultants have completed an in-depth analysis of organisational and user requirements.Our analysis started with an overview of the operational requirements of the ATO. We then introduced a theoretical understanding of group-work and collaboration needs to inform the key organisational requirements of any technology solution. Next, we referenced user preferences (as documented in key Persona Posters prepared by the ATO) to identify user requirements. Then, in the discussion section of this report, RKT Consultants considered a number of leading technology solutions across the themes of communication, collaboration and file-sharing. A range of market-leading software options were evaluated against the functionality required. This then informed the recommendations made in the final section of the report.The proposed solution, Office 365, will provide the ATO with a modular solution, with different applications to target specific needs. Built with the familiar office ribbon style menu, users will also benefit from a familiar, easy-to-use interface – cutting down on training requirements, and improving take-up rate. Finally, by migrating existing Microsoft Office licences to the Office 365 product, the implementation costs can be minimised.RKT Consultants would like to thank the Australian Tax Office for the opportunity to prepare this report. We trust the analysis and recommendations provided by our team has added value to your organisation, and kindly ask you to consider our consulting service for future information projects.ReferencesBjorn, P., & Ngwenyama, O. (2009). Virtual team collaboration: building shared meaning, resolving breakdowns and creating translucence. Information Systems Journal, 19(3), 227-253.Carter, Beth. (2017). Online Collaboration tools for virtual teams. Clariant Creative. Retrieved from: , K., Wynn, E., Lu, M., & Watson‐Manheim, M. (2005). How virtual are we? Measuring virtuality and understanding its impact in a global organization. Information Systems Journal, 15(4), 279–306. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2575.2005.00200.xCramton, Catherine (2001). The mutual knowledge problem and its consequences for dispersed collaboration. Organization Science, 12(3), 346-371. Retrieved from ’Angelo, M. (2018). Microsoft Teams Vs. Slack: Which Is Right For Your Business? Business News Daily. Retrieved from Duffy, J. (2018). The Best Business Messaging Apps of 2018. PC Mag Australia. Retrieved from DuFrene, D. D., & Lehman, C. M. (2016). Managing Virtual Teams, Second Edition. New York, New York [222 East 46th Street, New York, NY 10017]: Business Expert Press. Farley, J. (2017). Microsoft Teams: The Good, The Bad, The ‘Is It Ready?’ CMS Wire. Retrieved from Finance Online (2018). Top 15 online collaboration tools virtual teams. (2018). GetApp Compare. Retrieved from: , N. (2018). Microsoft Teams: A Cheat Sheet. Tech Republic. Retrieved from Laitinen, K., & Valo, M. (2018). Meanings of communication technology in virtual team meetings: Framing technology-related interaction. International Journal of Human - Computer Studies, 111, 12–22. doi:10.1016/j.ijhcs.2017.10.012Lepsinger, R., & DeRosa, D. (2010). Virtual team success: a practical guide for working and leading from a distance. Retrieved from , A. (2017, January 1). A Systematic Literature Review to Identify Best Practices for Communication in Virtual Teams. ProQuest Dissertations Publishing. Retrieved from Oxford University Press (2018). Collaboration. Retrieved from: , C. (2012). Informal Communication and Awareness in Virtual Teams. Communications in Information Science and Management Engineering, 2(5), 1-15. Retrieved from Usmani, N., Hassan, R., & Mahmood, W. (2017). Impediments to requirement engineering in distributed team. International Journal of Information Engineering and Electronic Business, 9(6), 10. doi:, N. (1988). The human use of human beings?: cybernetics and society. New York, N.Y: Da Capo Press. Retrieved from: A: User Persona 1Appendix B: User Persona 2Appendix C: User Persona 3 ................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download